Bizarre Details of Georgia Special Grand Jury on Trump Revealed

Breaking news today on Sekulow as the unredacted Trump special grand jury report has been released. 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. We're taking your calls to 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110.

A kind of bizarre move. There's been a report released by the special grand jury that convened in Georgia in 2021. This was a grand jury that was focusing on the phone call. Remember, that was the whole impetus at the beginning of this Fannie Willis investigation was that phone call with the Secretary of State in Georgia that Donald Trump was on was the crime. And then when you look at what she actually indicted on, it had nothing to do with the phone call anymore. And so the players on that were not part of the indictment. Now we know from that special grand jury, there were 20 additional people that the special grand jury recommended be indicted to Fannie Willis. And she decided for these 20 people not to indict because she moved away, obviously, as you can tell from the indictments, from the phone call being kind of the source of the crime and moved instead to this RICO idea of trying to, you know, and the electors moved to that issue instead.

So when you look through a list of some pretty high profile people here, including one current US Senator Lindsey Graham, two former US Senators, both from Georgia, David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler. I mean, this is an unprecedented move because even though they weren't indicted, it includes also a very close advisor to President Trump to this day, Boris Epstein. I mean, so these people did not get charged, but now it's like they're feeling almost like it dirties them up.

Well, what you're not supposed to do, and this is like in the federal system. So if a grand jury does not return an indictment against an accused, you don't say they didn't return an indictment against Joan Smith. They say nothing, okay? Or the case has been closed.

They would say something like this, this is a very unusual procedure. And this is an attack on the entire Georgia GOP. That's what Fawnee Willis has done here. And when it's interesting, you pointed out that they're not, the phone call did not make it to Fawnee's indictments, which took a whole group of people out just on the phone call, which included Lindsey Graham on phone calls and, and, and yeah. So it was interesting that did not justify it. And I think that it doesn't justify any kind of legal action.

However, you look at what they've charged, how they charge these people and what they charge them with. It's just a very bizarre report and put a unbelievable strain on the judicial system in my view in Georgia. I think this is tainted already, a disaster, and it's just more of the same pile on. You know, we were talking about for the last two days, the 14th amendment and this trying to disqualify a candidate, not from a judicial proceeding, but, you know, because the secretary of state thinks so, that this person shouldn't be on the ballot and giving them this kind of authority. And then you got this indictment with the special grand jury.

I would have never released this report. They shouldn't have never done that, but McBurney, the judge did. And the idea that they're doing this and it does, like you say, it taints all these people that weren't indicted and it puts these other people that have been indicted in a very bizarre posture. Yeah.

I mean, just think about it. You didn't get indicted. You know, there was no charges filed against you. And now your name is out there somewhere that the grand jury thought should be indicted, that you were a criminal and you committed some crimes that should be tried in court. So again, this entire system, even when they don't bring the charges and decide that's not a strong case or that they didn't have a case, which I think is true with all of these that have been filed, these are kind of made up cases as they go in a made up RICO charge.

But in this matter, it still hurts your name. And we live in a process, you know, you're innocent until proven guilty. And the case before the grand jury is if they don't decide to indict you, there's no public interest, in my opinion, in releasing that information. No, because those people, the prosecutor decided, their conduct did not rise to a level that she believed needed to be prosecuted as a crime in the court.

So 1-800-684-3110. So just to understand, even though it's good that some of these people weren't indicted, in a sense, she's indicting them in the public sphere. Yes. And certainly in causing their name disrepute.

Right. So their names are all over TV right now. And everybody's talking about, well, the grand jury wanted to indict Lindsey Graham.

The grand jury wanted to indict Loeffler and Perdue. We got a lot to talk about here. We'll be right back. All right, welcome back to Sekulow.

We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. So this again, kind of unprecedented special grand jury report released that includes the names of individuals who were not indicted by the Georgia DA Fannie Willis. There's 20 individuals, 39 total. We know 19 were indicted, 20 were not. But now their names are out there. Some are very high profile. Some are names that you would not know. Some of them were the people who were the named electors that were filed that they believe didn't rise to a level, again, to prosecute.

But the fact that it was even released and you've got all these names alone, that's what's the news. And now it gives this kind of talking point to the left about, see, how horrible all these Republicans are. That grand jury in Georgia wanted to put more of them behind bars. Yeah, and it added Lindsey Graham.

It had Kelly Loeffler. It had other people that weren't indicted. And in the federal system, Andy, you don't do that.

You cannot do that. There is a rule in the US Attorney's Manual that you cannot name unindicted co-conspirators by name. You either charge them or you don't name them. But you don't charge someone, but you don't name someone as an unindicted co-conspirator as a ghost name. If you are charged, your name is in the indictment and that gives you an opportunity to come in and to defend against the allegations that are made. So here these people don't get a chance to defend themselves.

That's the problem. I think Judge McBurney was wrong to release this report because what it does is it casts shadow of criminality on two former United States Senators, Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue. Burt Jones, who the way no one has mentioned, is currently the Lieutenant Governor of Georgia, has announced that he's running for governor after Governor Kemp. Michael Flynn, who we know, Boris Epstein, Lynwood, Cleta Mitchell, respected lawyer, Cleta Mitchell, a good friend of us and of ACLJ. But you name them and you say that these people, and you give the vote. Well, this was the votes in favor of charging them with probable cause to commit crimes. This is wrong.

You should not do this. If you're going to indict, indict and let them come into court and show them, give their defense and you prove their guilt. But this whole process, Jordan, and going back to the 14th Amendment stuff where they're in Colorado, which is becoming a major issue right now, where this group crew files a lawsuit and says, you know, even though Trump has not been charged with insurrection in the federal indictments, we think that he did commit insurrection. Therefore, what we're doing is we're going to try to get him removed from the ballot, which effectively disenfranchises his entire voting block. They actually forced the Secretary of State's hand there, who welcomed this because they're a Democrat. They're happy to do this.

So you've got that issue. I also want to just bring people back because this special grand jury started in 2021 and you might've forgotten the foreperson, Emily Kors, who'd made a media tour, which was totally unprecedented. And again, I think almost was a reason to throw away the entire special grand jury's findings when they did this, because you're not supposed to go on a press tour about what happened in the grand jury room and give and tell the public what occurred. But remember she did. And let's play the video from it.

You'll hear audio if you're listening, if you're listening without the video, take a listen. Everyone wants to know about is former President Trump. Of course. Did you recommend charges against Donald Trump? I really don't want to share something that the judge made a conscious decision not to share. I will tell you that it was a process where we heard his name a lot.

We definitely heard a lot about former President Trump and we definitely discussed him a lot in the room. And I will say that when this list comes out, you wouldn't, there are no major plot twists waiting for you. Okay. Well, let me give you a plot twist, okay? This entire process is a plot. This is disgusting.

And every time I see that, I'll give you a plot twist. In the United States of America in the year 2023, we've got organizations filing lawsuits thinking they can remove candidates that may be the nominee for their party. In other words, they may have won in their party to be put on a ballot. And there's been no adjudication at this point of criminal activity. In fact, there's not even been a charge of insurrection, which would be the basis for the 14th amendment removal provision.

Okay? Yet you've got conservative scholars on both sides of this issue, some saying, oh, yes, it's self-executing. Self-executing makes, this is what self-executing means if it's the 14th amendment.

I go back to that for a moment. You're judge, juror, and executioner. The 14th amendment is all about due process and equal protection.

So this would be the opposite of what the main core of the 14th amendment would be eviscerated by this provision. I read an article that was written by two supposedly- They are, Calabresi and Paulson. No, no, no.

Baugh and Paulson. They're very well respected. And they say, well, listen, it's an insurrection. And they go to the word in surgo and they say in surgo and they go to Webster's dictionary and they say, here's an insurrection.

And therefore, it's self-executing. It's an insurrection. Therefore, no first amendment, no due process, no equal protection, no trial, no conviction, no appeal, no nothing. If you say that something has happened and it's an insurrection, that's sufficient to preclude you from being a candidate or on the ballot in the United States to be President of the United States or any other officer. So you got that going on right now in Colorado, which by the way, is going to affect the rest of the country because if you've got one suit, you're going to have 26 suits.

So this is going to be gigantic. Then you've got this nonsense going on in Georgia, okay, where they are besmirching people that aren't indicted, then coming up with the theory of an indictment that basically takes the political process and criminalizes it. When you talk to people that are involved in the political process right now, party chairs, state reps, they are working now in a situation, Jordan, where they are looking at criminality just by doing what politicians do.

And we just came out of our life in Liberty Drive. We talked about the core of liberty. You have no free speech. You have no due process. You don't have freedom or religion if you can't keep the republic operating, okay? So we got to keep the republic operating and this sure cuts against it.

It does. We want to take your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110 to talk to us on the air. That's 1-800-684-3110. These moves again. When I see that special grand jury, no disrespect, but making a joke about this with those expressions she was doing, like this is some kind of joke. You know, we know some of these defendants, okay? I know Bob Chealy. He's been practicing law in Atlanta for 45 years, that excellent lawyer.

You know David Shafer, okay? We know these people. These are good people. And the idea that they've now criminalized their activity to this point with a RICO charge and then let this special grand jury of who they did not charge, but who they were investigating public, it's an embarrassment to a free country.

That's right. I mean, again, these are individuals that volunteer to enter the political process. So they become county chairs, they become state party chairs. Shafer was also a state senator for a time period.

Very well respected. And they do this, and again, especially at the state level, it's really not, you know, you're not making a lot of money. You're doing this to- Look who they go after. What did they go after in this thing? Rudy Giuliani, because he was representing the President, okay?

Some of the people were just, just because they were involved- Or Jenna Ellis, she just showed up in Georgia and helped Rudy Giuliani carry a bag, basically. Didn't even say a word. But that's enough. But being there was enough. And again- Presence was enough.

And they won at 39. And what was interesting here is, remember, it's kind of like the Ukraine phone call. These phone calls, they always start with the phone call, but it ends up, they never, the phone call is never the problem. President Trump is actually usually right with the fact that these phone calls have nothing wrong in them. Like we said, I mean, it was, again, they make a big deal. How much did you hear about that phone call? I mean, there were- Yeah, but they never indicted on it. Press conferences in Georgia, it was like, this is going to be the reason why Donald Trump goes to jail.

And even Fannie Willis decided to exclude that entirely from her indictment. Let me say this, I'm watching our social media feeds and right now they are growing exponentially as we're discussing this. So if you're watching on any of our social media applications, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Rumble, of course, we encourage you to share it with your friends, make sure you're hitting, that you're getting notifications, subscribe, but also share this with your friends, some more people in the conversation. When we come back, we're going to take some phone calls. Rick Grinnell is going to be joining us and he's going to sit tight, I think, right here to get through this next segment because I think we got to really get into this.

And we are taking your calls at 800-684-3110. Folks, if there was ever a time for the ACLJ, remember we started that campaign two years ago, now more than ever? I don't think any, and listen, we handle, the three lawyers sitting on this table right now, we handle some pretty bizarre stuff, okay? An impeachment, a special counsel, a Ukraine phone call, I mean, we handle the complex stuff for the former President. This thing has reached a level of absurdity that I didn't ever think we would see.

Well, you know, our producer Will Haynes said something that I think was very prescient before we got on. He said, you know, every time that you have an election, you're seeking to unseat the government. You don't want the government of Joe Biden.

You want the government of Donald Trump, let's say. Does that make you a racketeer? Evidently. In Georgia, it does. That's an outrageous allegation to make that. I don't want this government.

I want another government in there. And therefore that makes me a racketeer. That makes me a criminal. I want you to go to ACLJ.org. We've got a petition up right now about this 14th Amendment issue and trying to disqualify Presidential nominees by the states. We've got over 30,000 signatures. My goal is 100,000.

I want to get there next week. And I want representation from all 50 states. So let me encourage you right now, if you're listening to this broadcast, go to ACLJ.org and fill out that petition. It takes moments to do that at ACLJ.org. And of course, when you're there, if you can make a donation to the ACLJ to allow us to continue this work, we've got a major announcement next week on a case at ACLJ.org. But we got to keep this going because, Jordan, the reality is what's happening is a total outrage.

That's right. Folks, so go to ACLJ.org. Support the work of the ACLJ. You can donate online at ACLJ.org. You can also continue to sign that petition on the 14th Amendment. We want to build numbers up on that petition. It's very important that we do that.

ACLJ.org. We'll be right back. All right.

Welcome back to Secular. Take your calls to 1-800-684-3110. Our senior advisor, Rick Rinnell, is also joining us. And we'll go to him.

I do want to take a phone call, 1-800-684-3110. Let's go to Henry in California, online for... Hey, Henry. Hey, how are you? We're good. Good.

I got a real simple thing, and it'll be plain as the nose in your face. If you kick Trump out, if these 10 states are able to kick Trump out with really no evidence of he actually committed the crimes, but they're still, you know, suing for that, can't you do the same thing with Joe Biden? Because he hasn't been convicted or even tried of anything either.

So what's good for the goose is good for the gander if you throw... Here's the difference. We actually are the party of the rule of law. So we wouldn't do that. We wouldn't say, well, we don't like his policy, so therefore, we think that's an insurrection or a rebellion or... And without adjudication, and go to Colorado, let's say, which is now where the litigation is, and say, okay, he doesn't get to be on the ballot. And the secretary of state says, well, you know, I'm just the secretary of state, so I'll just do what they say.

That's the problem. We're not going to do that because we believe in the rule of law. But Rick, I think we've now reached the level of absurdity here.

And I said this earlier, we played that sound from... Can we do this again? This is that special grand jury forewoman, because now that they've released this report... And I am outraged about this because, my goodness, I never thought we'd see this kind of stuff being played out, where people's liberty is at stake. Good people's liberty are at stake here. Listen to this. Everyone wants to know about is former President Trump.

Of course. Did you recommend charges against Donald Trump? I really don't want to share something that the judge made a conscious decision not to share. I will tell you that it was a process where we heard his name a lot. We definitely heard a lot about former President Trump, and we definitely discussed him a lot in the room. And I will say that when this list comes out, you wouldn't...

There are no major plot twists waiting for you. Because they recommended 39 people be indicted, 19 were, but now they've released the names of the other 20, so their names have been besmirched, and they can't even defend themselves. I mean, look, the judge has got to be able to step in and clean this up.

This is such a joke. It is something so outrageous that I want to see Democrat lawyers, people who care about the legal process, who care about America, step up and say, this is unacceptable. This is not the way that America puts forward our due process. This is a clown show. I mean, to say that three senators should be indicted, this is the forewoman, I guess you call it the foreman, and she is representing the entire grand jury.

It looks like a total joke. Where are the moderates, the independents, the Democrats, who say, we got to take this partisanship out of our legal system, because it's literally ruined our country? Where's the ACLU, Andy?

I said, where are the civil libertarians saying, this is absurd. You're accusing people of committing a crime, okay? And then they're not indicted, but you've now accused them of committing a crime, so they don't get to defend themselves in court. I'm sure they're glad they didn't get indicted, but it just leaves them in limbo. No, I think this is a very bad move.

And I don't think it's a bad move. When I laid at the feet of the superior court judge who allowed the report to go out, Judge McBurney made a wrong ruling in this case, but it's a ruling that really affects the reputation of innocent people. No one in this country is guilty until they are proven to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. You should not name people as having committed crimes who are innocent unless they can come into court and defend themselves. They are trying to remove Rick Trump from the ballot in Colorado based on an insurrection rebellion charge that has not even been indicted by the grand jury in Washington.

It's not even a charge he's facing. And yet they think they could march into a civil court and say, hey, Secretary of State, we think it's an insurrection, therefore take this guy off the ballot. Well, they think they can march in because they can, because we do not have a media pushing back. There is no check and balance on these people. So it's getting worse. It's getting to the point where they are just politically taking over every single aspect of government, weaponizing it. No one is pushing back from the media.

There's no independence group that is pushing back. And so they're getting away with it, Jay. And let me just say this.

The caller from California had a really good point. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Now, I know we want to make sure that we're fine. Let me assure you this, Rick, before we'll get right back to you. They're going to get pushed back. I cannot announce it yet, but trust me, pushback is coming. But go ahead.

Good. Because I think we're all getting impatient. Those of us who are outside of Washington watching this process and we see what they're doing, I'm sympathetic with the caller that says what's good for the goose is good for the gander. We've got to start fighting fire with fire, obviously legally, but the Republicans have to start using their power.

If they don't use their power, they can't come back to us and ask us to help them get reelected. I want to go back to the phones because I want Rick to respond to this. I think we're seeing this across the country.

I'm hearing it from a lot of people. Ralph in Louisiana on Line 3. Hey, Ralph, welcome to the show. Hey, I'm that pushback that you were talking about because I'm an independent voter, neither Democrat nor Republican, but I know this much. Anyone that the establishment or deep state hates this much, as much as Donald Trump, he must be the right man for the job.

He must be the right man. They hate that man too much. Well, Rick, this goes to that point where they say Donald Trump can't get voters that are independent, and as Ralph just said, to them, it's like, okay, it shows if Washington hates you this much, and it kind of takes it out of just Republican, Democrat, if Washington elites despise you so much, they'll go to any extent possible to even let you on the ballot for the people to choose, that you probably are. It kind of says you're the right person to take on the Washington swamp. Look, I just got chills when Ralph called in and said that because that is exactly true.

He said it best. Ralph is clearly a very smart guy because he's been able to decipher what the left is trying to do, what the media is trying to do, and he sees it very clearly. I actually think Ralph is like every American right now. Outside of newsrooms, people are seeing that 91 charges against the guy is way overboard. I think that the left is really trumpeting the message that Donald Trump is somebody who's going to clean up the swamp because they keep coming at him with new charges, new charges, and it's why people in the real world are looking at it and saying, hey, why are they really after this guy? What is he doing that is so antithesis, the antithesis of what they want?

And so if you want to clean up Washington, send Donald Trump. Rick, as always, we appreciate you joining us on the broadcast and being part of our team. And I think, too, we're going to take more of your calls, folks.

1-800-684-3110. I know people have a lot to say. I can't believe the first half hour is gone.

All of these matters, yeah. First half hour is up. Tulsa Gabbard will be joining us in the second half hour of the broadcast as well. We'll continue to take your phone calls. So stay on the line. If you're on the line, we're going to get to you at 1-800-684-3110. I want to encourage you to support the work of the ACLJ today at ACLJ.org.

You can make your donation online. It's quick. It's easy. Also, sign that 14th Amendment petition.

That doesn't cost a thing. Send that petition around to your friends and family. Get them to sign. It affects you in every state.

It's not just what's happening in Colorado right now because then that would, again, it would make your vote not count and certainly weaken your vote in a state. So make sure you sign the petition. And if you can, donate ACLJ.org. Share the broadcast with your friends and family. We'll be right back. Second half hour. Sekulow coming up.

Keeping you informed and engaged. Now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow.

All right, welcome back to Sekulow. So we've got a new report that was released this morning. The special grand jury that was convened in Georgia in 2021 in Fulton County by DA Fannie Willis. And we got now their full report on who they wanted to indict. And there were an additional 20 individuals, some which are names you would know, others are names you would not know, who did not get indicted but are listed in this. And in fact, they're listed in what they wanted them to be indicted for. So what these grand jurors voted and believe that they were criminally culpable and should be charged in court. Now, a lot of these were individuals Fannie Willis decided not to charge because that whole issue over the phone call to the Georgia Secretary of State plays such a minor or no role in the indictment that she ultimately brought against 19 people in Georgia, which that number again is kind of absurd in itself. But what this does to those individuals who even Fannie Willis decided that their conduct, even though the grand jury thought it rose to the level of criminality, did not rise, so she didn't bring charges, but you released their names. It's an attack on the conservative movement and it's an attack on our liberty and freedom.

It's an attack on Republicans. And it kind of scares everyone because you realize that even if you were investigated, they find out you did nothing wrong. You run a business, you've got a company, your name's now out there as someone that a grand jury thought you were a criminal. That's the damage that gets done. Well, now they thought you were a criminal, recommended that they bring criminal charges against you. To put you behind bars, literally.

And that's what I do want to reiterate this. There are really good people on that list of people in the indictment, but some of them practicing law in Atlanta for 30, 40, 50 years. They did their job as lawyers and their crime here is Fannie Willis bringing charges and then releasing this to the other 10 people they didn't indict, but having their names besmirched now publicly is outrageous. It's no different though than a group like CREW filing a lawsuit in Colorado saying, I know that Jack Smith hasn't charged the former President with insurrection, but we think he engaged in an insurrection. And as Andy said, they used the Webster dictionary definition of Webster of insurrection.

No trial, no evidence, no cross-examination, no witnesses, no due process. We said it, thus it is, and it's self-executing, so remove him from the ballot. They will march and try to do that in every blue state. Yeah.

All right. So folks, we're going to, again, we're going to take your calls. We'll do it in the red states too. Yeah, I think so. I think that, again, they're going to start in friendly territory or more friendly territory. They think it's more friendly than if they can, they'll continue on.

I don't think this will be the end. I think it's the beginning of their fight. And as Rick said, it's this idea that when you go this hard to get someone and you kind of bring the entire kitchen sink, it's like, is Washington that afraid of you?

Yes. Those Washington bureaucrats and the elite who don't leave, who are unelected bureaucrats, who think they run these agencies and run the policy of the United States, even though that's supposed to be the people we elect, they are afraid because they lose their influence when people like Donald Trump come in and say, I don't care about the fact that for 25 years, you've said until the Palestinian issue is decided, we can't figure out how to deal with other Gulf States and Israel, or we can't recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel because there's going to be some massive blowback. And yet you do, and guess what?

Then you can open up peace plans with the entire Gulf. But it went against all of their thinking. It proved them wrong. Their stale policies didn't work. So again, we come back, take more of your phone calls, 1-800-684-3110. Tulsi Gabbard is going to be joining us, but stay on the line.

We will continue to take your phone calls as well on all of these issues that we had throughout the broadcast. And let me encourage you, sign that 14th Amendment petition we've got at ACLJ.org. We really need to grow that petition quickly because it affects you in every single state. Regardless if you're in Colorado or not, it'll affect your vote.

If the left gets what they want, which is Donald Trump off the ballot, even if he meets all of the standards of the state Republican party to be, this is just on the primary ballot, the primary ballot. So sign that petition. That doesn't cost a thing and share it with your friends and family at ACLJ.org.

And if you can donate to the ACLJ, of course, we appreciate your support so we can continue to do the work that we do and expand on that work at ACLJ.org. Share the show, share the petition. We'll be right back with Tulsi Gabbard. All right, folks, a lot to talk about. We've got a lot of your phone calls too, and we're going to get to your calls too. So hang on.

1-800-684-3110. Tulsi Gabbard, Cedar, analyst with us on the secular broadcast is joining us now. There's a lot to get to. Tulsi, so we've got this, you know, I'm going to try to tie in the global and the domestic. So, you know, the United States is supposed to be hosting the G20 and China doesn't show up. Meanwhile, we've got grand juries releasing the names of people that were not indicted, but that they thought should have been indicted. So their names are besmirched. We've got a case in Colorado where a group says, oh, we think there was an insurrection, even though there wasn't never been a charge for insurrection, thus take this particular candidate off the ballot if he is the nominee, Donald Trump.

And that's now in federal court because it's been moved from the state court system to the federal court system while we're trying to host, you know, international trade negotiations globally. So, you know, we look like Venezuela here. Maybe that's not fair to Venezuela. I mean, it's, I mean, you know, you've been in politics a long time. You understand national security. Well, how do you read the situation and how do you think we're being perceived globally right now? Well, Jay, when you look at all of the different things that you just cited, both on the domestic front, as well as on the global front, the common thread that I see there throughout is we have people in positions of power in the Democrat elite right now who don't care about the American people. They don't care about our constitution or our democracy. And they don't care about our country, our national security interests, our economic interests. They are prioritizing their own selfish interests and their own political power above all else. And they are willing to do anything and everything to try to maintain that or grow that power.

And that is the most alarming thing here. So when you look at a lot of the decisions that they're making on a foreign policy front, for example, they are very reactive. They lack any kind of foresight. And they are more focused on saying, well, how do we punish this country or that country or this dictator or that dictator without caring for what the consequences of their policies are doing to the American people and our national security? And in many instances, you can look at these different foreign policy actions, these different, you know, quote unquote punishment actions that they're taking against other countries or other countries' leaders. Those actions themselves are directly undermining either our national security interests or our economic interests. So you take the G20, this big meeting hosted by India, and you look, and there's one glaring missing individual, and it's Chairman Xi of China, the world's second largest economy for the first time in 12 years.

He doesn't show up. He's making deals with Russians. He's not afraid, you know, to host Russians or go to Moscow or have them in Beijing, but he decides to send a deputy leader and not be there with those world leaders. That is a calculated decision, and it also is a calculated decision for China to at least project that we don't even need to take this group as seriously as we would before. Well, you look at the other world leader who is not going to be present, which is Putin, and you look at the tensions that are increasing between the United States, Russia, and the United States and China, the other two nuclear armed powers in the world, and the lack of true diplomacy, you know, leadership through diplomacy by the United States government to try to de-escalate tensions, deal with the issues that are very real that exist, but also recognize that continuing to escalate tensions with these two countries in particular does not serve the interests of the American people. You know, lately we've been hearing the Biden administration, they're saying, oh my gosh, you know, warning, warning, warning. It looks like Russia and North Korea are going to start working together. North Korea may start providing Russia with different arms and weaponry and so on and so forth that can be used against Ukraine.

Watch out. This is so bad, but they're not being honest with themselves or the American people about how this came to be. Even Jake Sullivan, President Biden's national security advisor, he said, and I quote, we have continued to squeeze Russia's defense industrial base, and they are now going about looking to whatever source they can find. So these things that are happening, they're not showing up to G20.

There are very few of any diplomatic channels that remain open. You have the direct effect of sanctions we're seeing now that's bringing Russia and North Korea closer together. These things don't happen in a vacuum and our leaders are failing us because they are not exercising the foresight to look at what are the consequences of these policies and how are they harming the interests of the American people and our national security. And unfortunately, as you pointed out, Jay, this is exactly what's happening right here at home. And it's not just happening by the Biden administration, the Democrat elite in Washington. We're seeing local and state level leaders as well, trying to get in on the action and directly undermine our democracy.

It's unbelievable when you think about it. I said earlier, I never thought I would see this kind of situation. I look at it twofold.

It's interesting what you said, that Jake Sullivan says, well, they're going to go to any source they can find to find these weapons, which guess what, they'll get them. Okay. Here's the problem with that. That's not how you have detente. I mean, that's not how you have the status quo ante, right? I mean, it's this idea that you push a country into a no choice situation. You know, Churchill and Benjamin Disraeli, both British prime ministers had the same general thought that diplomacy if done properly is as powerful as war, if done properly, but you've got to, you know, it's got to be done properly. Here, we see this axis now of Iran and Russia and all these, China, that they're going to coalesce with each other, North Korea, if we isolate everybody out.

And then, as you said, our domestic situation, we look like the joke. They're not doing, listen, the fact that you could have these kinds of actions going against people and besmirching people that were investigated, recommended for indictment, but then not indicted so they don't get to defend themselves. But they, you know, it's just repulsive, but what's the end game here? It's not good for democracy.

We all know that, but why are they doing it? That's what I'm trying to, what is in it for them, for those people that are pushing this agenda through? And I don't think it's Republican Democrat.

I think it's just like almost anarchy and they're not anarchists, but it's just this idea of unfettered, do whatever we want to do legally, it doesn't matter, no boundaries, and whatever happens, happens. That's not how the republic survives. It's about power, Jay, and you're right. This is not limited to the Democrat elite. You know, I would not be surprised if Chris Christie were to come out and stand up as a stated Republican and stand up in strong support of all of these actions that they are taking. Whatever people believe or feel about Donald Trump, my message to the American people is this is so much bigger than this one individual, because the actions that they are taking in their own minds, they care only about power. They care only about power, and so the end justifies the means. If they are able to keep Donald Trump off the ballot, they're terrified that he may actually win, that the American people may choose him over President Biden or whoever else the Democrats put up, so they are willing to do anything, anything to try to prevent us, the American people, from exercising our right to vote. This will have far-reaching consequences beyond the 2024 election, and it will set that precedent of the United States becoming a banana republic where those in power can weaponize and politicize all of the tools available to them to go after, destroy, and eliminate whoever their political opposition may be. That's the consequence of what we're seeing. So it's the criminal, you criminalize, I mean, you served as a member of Congress, distinguished member of Congress, but they are criminalizing, criminalizing basic political discourse, because I think Jordan said it earlier, you know, when you vote for one party out of office, that's your reason to get rid of a party.

I mean, is that now a crime? If you don't vote with the majority, you're a criminal. If you don't vote with the majority, if you dare to question things like, you know, the integrity of an election, if you dare to question whatever the accepted political narrative is of the day, you are immediately labeled or smeared or canceled, or as we are dangerously seeing now, subject to prosecution based on what they're digging up all of these laws and things that have very rarely if ever been used before before to prosecute someone and finding the crime to suit the person that they're already committed to destroying.

I would say this, we got about a minute left here. Donald Trump, like you said, he's the test case because he's kind of easy to demonize by the left. And so they think he's easy to demonize. He's a big name and everyone knows him, but if they're successful in going after him and anybody associated with him or willing to speak on his behalf, then it will happen to the next person they don't like. And again, this is the test case for our entire Republic and our legal system.

It's true. I mean, they're doing this through the legal system with Donald Trump. They've used their smear tactics, their cancel culture, their coordination through the propaganda arms and the mainstream media and big tech to go after and destroy their political, anyone they find to be unacceptable. I felt it and experienced this in 2020 when I ran for President, they're doing the very same thing to RFK.

Now he just put out a statement talking about the barriers that they are putting before him to even be considered by Democrat voters in the primary and that he's looking at what other options he may have. They don't care about our democracy. They don't care about the people. They are lying to us about their supposed altruistic motives. They only care about power and we have to defeat them. We have to defeat them. As always, thanks for being part of the team. This is a sad day for America.

This whole week has been just one colossal disaster after another, I think legally and politically, but I appreciate your insight. Hey folks, you've been holding on. We're going to get to your calls as soon as we come back from the break.

Thanks, Tulsi. All right, welcome back to Sekulow. So we're going to get right to your calls. 1-800-684-3110. There's one phone line open. You have to call in now because our last segment of the broadcast, but I want to get to Susan first out of Maryland who's been holding on. Hey, Susan, welcome to Sekulow. You're on the air.

Thank you so much. I have two questions I hope I can ask both of them. Is this judge who must have lost all reality during COVID isolation trying to give Mel Brooks absurd material for follow-up to the producers is the first question. And the second question is, what does it take to propel the GOP elected officials who control the House, don't blame the Democrats, to take their suit jackets off in 90 degree weather to stand on the Capitol steps declaring tyranny and witch hunt? Are they all masked up and deprived of oxygen? They need to wake up. Let me respond to your Mel Brooks comment first as a big fan of Mel Brooks, and I am a big fan of Mel Brooks.

I had the pleasure of meeting Mel Brooks. You think this is stuff you'd be making up, but we've been talking about this last 54 minutes. But the truth is, this is for real. So that's number one. As far as the Republicans go, they're in a very difficult spot. They control the House by five votes.

That's it. They don't control the Senate. They don't control the White House.

So they could take their workouts off and act real tough. But at the end of the day, here's the problem. You lose five votes on an impeachment, let's say, and you didn't even, you started a process you can't complete. That's the, I hate to be this way, that's the political reality of what we have. Yeah, I think you've got people like Jim Jordan who are fighting it out to get as much info as they can possible. But I mean, that's what they can do right now.

At ACLJ, we get them as much info as we can through our FOIA work and through that. But you do have to deal with what you've got to deal with, which is you've got an entire executive branch against you. You've got half the Congress against you as well. So when you've got those two functions, again, where the Senate is under Democratic control, you've got this slim majority in the House, so you're trying to keep that group herded together. And again, so the limits are there as well. And I think if you actually look at what the House Republicans have done, it's about as much as they can do.

I mean, you might want more of them to be a little bit more out there. It would be nice to see some new names willing to kind of take their jacket off like Jim Jordan and join the battle because, again, they do have allies, and sometimes it's because he is the leader, he's the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. So he does have his allies. But I think that this, it underscores the importance of elections, both the general elections and Presidential elections, but also those midterm elections. And the midterm elections, remember, were a flop for Republicans, a major flop. And it was thought of, this red wave was coming from the House and even the Senate, and we end up not taking back the Senate, and we end up also having just this narrow, we did take back the House, barely.

And when you do it barely, guess what? All those Republicans aren't conservatives. They might be Republican, but they're not necessarily conservatives.

I want to go, put in a great phone call, I want to go back to the phones. And Christie in Oklahoma on Line 3. Hey, Christie.

Hey, I kind of have a two-part question. If they're successful in removing Trump from the ballot in, say, 10 states, does that disqualify him from being the chosen Republican candidate? And if not, then is there not going to be a Republican option for the people in the states that he's removed from?

It's a fascinating... So let's assume he is the nominee, the assumption that he's the nominee. If he's the nominee in Colorado in this lawsuit by CREW, if they were to succeed... Well, they don't have to be in the primary. Right. He would not even be in the primary.

Correct. They would get him off before the primary. So he would not be the nominee in... Now, he could still be the nominee for the general election, but then they would move to have him removed from the general election as well. In fact, if you read the complaint, they're already saying that. They're saying he cannot serve because of insurrection. But I note that insurrection has not been charged by Jack Smith in his grand jury investigation. It just has not happened.

No, and I think that... But again, it underscores, it does affect every other state. I think you'll see these in multiple states too. We gotta be prepared, folks, for a battle on this one, a battle royale. It's gonna be big.

These are huge organizations like CREW. Oh, yeah. When they get involved like this... They're playing for keeps.

Yeah. Like you said, it's playing to win. And they want to win before we even get to an election. They wanna win before you can even cast your vote in the primary. They want to determine who Republicans get to decide they want their nominee to be and say, well, let's make sure that Donald Trump isn't even one person you can consider to be your nominee. And if they do it in enough states, even if he's on the ballot and let's say, can he get the enough primary votes or just... How all this works, they are working strategically. This isn't just random. It's not out of the blue. It was something they've prepared, just like all the legal challenges, both in state courts and federal courts.

And again, of course, it's about Donald Trump, but long-term, bigger than Donald Trump. Like I said to Tulsi Gabbard, he is the test case. A hundred percent, but they will use this in other states. It's not gonna just be Colorado.

And against other politicians in the future if this becomes the norm. Let's go back to the phones. Yep. We'll go right to it. Let's go to Greg at Georgia Online 6. Hey, Greg. Hey, Jay. How's it going? Great. Look, I've been a follower ever since, back in the days when you were representing Trump in the...

When your podcast started, been long-term follower. But look, my question is, all these 20 people that they did not get indicted, but yet they were put out on a list. I mean, don't they have the opportunity for a lawsuit on that? No, because it's... No, there's no civil action. Here's the problem.

Andy economist said this earlier and he's a hundred percent correct. In the federal system, you don't do that. You either indict or you do not.

And that's it. And if it leaks that there's an investigation and the investigation closed, then they come out and say, the investigation has been closed with no findings of liability. That's not what happened here. You published a 21-page report saying, the special grand jury finds these 39 people guilty of felonies.

And then she only indicts 19 because she doesn't think she can prove it as to the other 20, but their names have been besmirched and their recourse is basically nothing. That's the problem. Yep. All right. Let's go to the phones again. AG in California online 2. Hey, AG. Hello, guys. Just to let you know, I did sign the petition.

My question is... You're welcome. Can the Supreme Court step in before it goes through the appeals process, if they see that there's some injustices going on, the constitution is being sort of shredded when it comes to President Trump? They can't just step in what's called sui sponte. They can't just go in on their own motion, but here's what's going to happen, I think, in Colorado. Because you have a short timeframe, that is the primary is March 5th, it's Super Tuesday, this is going to move on an expedited basis. So what happens now, remove the case to federal court in Colorado. There'll be a number of parties in there. They will take it up to the US Court of Appeals for the 10... First the district court, then to the 10th Circuit, and then immediately to the circuit justice, which is Justice Gorsuch for the 10th Circuit, if there is an emergency stay, and then to the full court for disposition on an expedited basis.

That's what I think is going to happen here. And I think this case is destined for the Supreme Court very quickly. When I say very quickly in Supreme Court time, very quickly is six months, that's really quick.

Yeah, it is very quick. All right, we need people to sign on that petition on the 14th Amendment. We do, folks. So go to ACLJ.org. It does not cost you a thing to sign that petition, and we really do.

You'll learn why next week. It's even that much more important for you to get on this, but we can't announce it today. But we can tell you, please, if you've already signed it, get it to your friends and family, as many as you can.

And again, it doesn't cost anybody a thing. Sign that petition to ACLJ.org. And if you are able to, donate to the ACLJ, continue to us. So we have the resources to fight these battles. Remember, we don't just talk about them here. We're not just commentating on these issues. We are fighting these battles in the courts.

Go to ACLJ.org today. Sign that petition. Share it with your friends and family. Donate if you can. We'll talk to you next week.