INSANITY: DOJ Argues Terrorists Have ‘Immunity’

Today, the Justice Department argues in court that terrorists have immunity. Keeping you informed and engaged. Now, more than ever, this is Sekulow. We want to hear from you.

Share and post your comments. Or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome to Sekulow.

This is Logan Sekulow. As that announcer said, Will Haines is joining me, executive producer of Sekulow. Logan Sekulow is joining me, executive producer in studio as well. We got a packed show. Harry Hutchison is joining us. Mike Pompeo is joining us.

And Rick Grenell later on in the broadcast. So make sure you stay tuned. Phone lines are open for your calls at 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. So we're talking about another ridiculous development that comes out of the situation. Obviously, the ongoing war in Israel that's happening. We take us back to, you may remember last year, we discussed the fact that UNRRA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, we found out that many, many, and according to Israel, maybe even the majority, 100 plus of their workers, of their aid relief workers, were actually Hamas terrorists. That was a big deal.

You saw that the tunnels that were built underneath UNRRA, all of these things were happening. And October 6 victims, families, filed a lawsuit. The Department of Justice responded. And the UN responded.

And they said, hey, no, no, no, it doesn't matter. We have ultimate immunity because UNRRA, based on a law from 1946, has every form of legal immunity, even though they admitted that they are likely or very likely participants in the October 7 massacre. The Israeli government insists that this is merely the tip of the iceberg. If you keep reading this article that came out, some of the breaking news that came out, it's really horrifying that we're at a point where you can't even say that terrorists are terrorists. Now it's, oh, no, they get absolute immunity.

That's right. We've heard about absolute immunity a lot this year, but not normally about terrorists. And yes, we understand that the UN would maybe try to protect themselves from a lawsuit. But when you have the Department of Justice writing in a brief in this case, it says, because the UN has not waived immunity in this case, its subsidiary, UNRRA, retains full immunity. And the lawsuit against UNRRA should be dismissed due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction. That is your Department of Justice, folks. That is your tax dollars writing this brief, arguing to a U.S. court that the victims of October 7th, more than 100 of them that have filed this lawsuit, have no jurisdiction to bring it against the terrorists that perpetrated this against them because the UN and its subsidiaries and its officials and everyone involved has full and absolute immunity. I never thought I'd be hearing the DOJ writing a brief asking and trying to prove that someone has absolute immunity. But that's what we're seeing today. Yep. And this is coming from this article that said, Israel has told its top donor countries that hundreds of UNRRA local staff are active Hamas or 13,000 local staff are active Hamas terrorists, including school teachers.

And this is a quote that came out. We provided much evidence that UNRRA works hand in hand with Hamas. They are useless at aid distribution, useless education, except for glorifying suicide bombers, encouraging Jew killing. And Israel sees no rule, no role whatsoever for UNRRA in Gaza after this war ends.

But of course, we are there. Sadly, the government seems to be wanting to defend them, but that's why the ACLJ exists. That is why the ACLJ exists, that we can actually engage the UN in a direct way. Be a part of that. Be a part of that organization right now. Be a part of what we're doing today. Become an ACLJ champion. Go to ACLJ.org.

Your gift will be doubled. We also have some other breaking news from the ACLJ world. We're going to talk about that coming up in the next segment. Harry Hutchison is going to join us. How do you feel about this? Are you even shocked at this point that this is what we're doing here?

We're talking about immunity, but of course, we're talking about immunity for Hamas terrorists. Give us a call. 1-800-684-3110. 1-800-684-3110 to have your voice heard on the air.

Today again, Rick Grenell, Mike Pompeo, and Harry Hutchison joining us in the next segment. We'll be right back. Give us a call.

1-800-684-3110. Welcome back to Sekulow. Again, we are taking your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110, Harry Hutchison joining us in studio. We need to reset a little bit for those who are just joining us right now. And if you are just joining us on YouTube or on Rumble, I encourage you to not only hit that subscribe button so you know when we broadcast each and every day, but also hit that thumbs up.

That really helps out. I know that sounds ridiculous sometimes when I say it, but it really does help get this word spread. We are creating media that is definitely alternative and different than what's going on in the mainstream media. You're not hearing this today. You're not hearing this breaking news. And again, this breaking news, the United Nations has argued in a U.S. federal court that staffers who participated, and by participated they mean led massacres in the October 7th attack that killed, of course, over 1,200 Israeli citizens and American citizens. They enjoy absolute legal immunity, a position supported by who? The United States Department of Justice will.

That's right. And Professor Hutchison, I wanted to bring up the irony a little bit here that the Department of Justice is arguing this in court, in federal court here, that these UNRWA employees are enjoying absolute immunity because UNRWA and the U.N. haven't waived this immunity. Meanwhile, this is the same Department of Justice that went all the way to the Supreme Court arguing against immunity for a former President saying no one is above the law. I'm confused about their legal philosophy here when the former U.S. President can't have immunity for official acts while he's President. And we've heard from every single Democrat, I believe, that that made him a king, that he has immunity from official acts. But yet we have this international body that now can escape justice for literally committing terrorism and massacring Israelis at a music festival.

Because of a treaty from 1946 where they were granted absolute and full immunity? Well, it is a bit ironic, but it's also important to keep in mind that the Biden administration has generally favored foreign citizens over American citizens. So the Biden administration is quite willing to contest Donald Trump's assertion of immunity with respect to criminal cases in the United States. Joe Biden has said that no one is above the law. But apparently the Biden administration is quite willing to support the United Nations even when the United Nations hires staffers who participate in a massacre, they participate in murder, they participate in rape. That is apparently all right with the Biden administration. So this is, in my view, a bombshell development because it informs the American people that the Biden administration prefers to go after U.S. citizens and prefers to allow foreign citizens or those individuals that are employed by the United Nations to escape liability. Keep in mind, UNRWA has a staff of 13,000 at least. And according to some reports, hundreds of those operatives are engaged in terror and in support of terror. And the United States government is sending or has sent funds to UNRWA.

So indirectly, the United States is supporting terror campaigns against Israel and then saying, oh, if you participate in these terror campaigns, we will assist the United Nations in claiming absolute immunity. It is highly ironic, but it's also important to keep in mind this this is in keeping with the Biden administration's approach to life. The Biden administration is often incoherent. You'd hope this is a wake up call for people. And we don't try to just go on here and fearmonger and tell you what's going on, how horrible things are. But when you wake up to news like this, it's kind of hard to not read it and go, I can't believe what I'm reading.

It's so shocking that we're saying, hey. And again, this case that was filed was by families of victims. This isn't like it was some random government trial back and forth. This is families of victims of the massacre saying we want some we want some response because our family was killed and our government was somewhat indirectly, like you said, funding it because we are funding the United Nations and funding UNRWA, their relief aid organization within Gaza. And again, like I said before, even the UN has said, because they did an internal probe, that likely or very likely their own people participated in the October 7th massacre. And the Israeli government said, yeah, we've we've pretty much guaranteed that. But the fact they're admitting that, but then they're still saying we still should have no accountability.

That's right. And there is a according to this convention on the privileges and immunities of the United Nations that was adopted in 1946. They do have the right and duty to waive their immunity in certain circumstances. This, I think, is a pretty clear circumstances where immunity should be waived. However, they are doubling down and arguing they have this immunity before the court in the US. The DOJ is supporting that. You would at least think the Department of Justice would say, hey, you know what, maybe, yes, you have it. But this is one of those instances where you should waive it.

No. Instead, they are arguing before a US court that there is no case here. Throw the lawsuit out because the UN has immunity.

And then you also have to take this in another context. The UN is arguing we have immunity, but yet they are using the ICJ, which is a tool of the UN, as well as the International Criminal Court, which is not a UN body, but in the same city and very similar bedfellows, if you'd say. But they're using those instruments of world legal authority to go after Israel. The ICJ has that entire program brought by South Africa to go after Israel, saying that they're committing genocide and that this is a violation of international law, responding to the October 7th attack. The ICC, we know, is trying to go after Bibi Netanyahu and Defense Minister Gallant over their participation in defending Israel and responding to these terror attacks. So even the UN is trying to have it both ways here.

Absolutely. And the US government wants to have it both ways. So the Biden administration's position is that the victims of terror and their families are not entitled to justice. Meanwhile, the Biden administration continues to fund the United Nations. So one of the things that the Biden administration could do is withdraw funding of the United Nations in response to the United Nations unwillingness to waive its immunity in this particular case. And Will, you're absolutely right. The UN has basically collaborated with a number of international agencies to go after Israel.

Why? Because Israel has responded to a terror campaign launched in a surprise attack on October the 7th, 2023. Well, Israel, according to the United Nations, if you put it all together, is at fault. In other words, they allowed themselves to be attacked. Hence, they are to blame. Ultimately, this makes no sense.

And I think the American people should understand that and they should support the withdrawal of funding of UNRWA. It was like when the rocket attacks happened on Israel and none landed or 99.9 percent didn't land. And they're like, we'll see.

I mean, it doesn't really matter. It's you know, they don't need to respond because they were successfully able to defend themselves. And that's what the Biden administration said. And that's where we are. Let's go and take a phone call real quick. Let's go to Bill, who's calling in Connecticut on line three. Bill, you're on the air.

Hey, how are you guys doing today? I think you're right by saying it's not fear mongering. I think people need to wake up and kind of do their own homework and see really where this administration has been for the last three and a half years. And they have, like you said, everybody else's foreigners, at least everybody else's foreign needs before ours. And that's whether it's the border coming in and allowing all these people to just cross and take all this money from us and from the taxpayers and things like that. Or it's just, you know, the people that they're going to give immunity to. And that goes for, like I said, even the foreigners that are coming in and they're hitting cops and everything else and getting the easy pass.

But yet we're putting our former President on trial for things that we can't even they're made up. Bill, I think that you bring up an interesting point, which is they can use the sort of with the border. They're now admitting that it is obviously a crisis and there's a lot of issues going on right there. But they could use some sort of American heart in that story saying, you know what, these are people seeking a better life.

These are people seeking refugee status because they are coming from really bad situations. And sure, there is a percentage of that that I'm sure that's true, but it's a smaller percentage than they'd like to admit. But you can use that. You can use that with the American people because we have hearts. But when you say, hey, we're actually searching for absolute immunity for people who committed murder, mass murder, terrorism. I would hope the American people will open their eyes. It's not the same.

It is not the same. But sadly, you are right that it puts us in a very similar position. We're going to be there for Israel. You're going to be there with us. I'm going to encourage you right now to support the work of the ACLJ. This is not just a broadcast. It's not just a radio show.

It's not just a podcast. We have incredible people like Professor Hutchinson here who are going to go on. We're going to take this to court. We're going to support Israel however we can. We have status at the U.N. that we can obviously invoke when needed. Be a part of it right now.

Become an ACLJ champion. And your first gift is doubled. And that's through the end of this week.

So do it today. We'll be right back with Mike Pompeo. Welcome back to Secular. We are joined by Mike Pompeo.

And look, we're going to continue this conversation going on. As I stated earlier, Secretary Pompeo, the DOJ is arguing that UNRWA employees, that's United Nations relief, if you want to put that in quotes, organization employees charged for their help in the October 7th attacks by Hamas. Obviously, they were acting as essentially as Hamas and being a part of the mass genocide, mass murders that happened that day on October 7th. But they should be immune from prosecution. Meanwhile, we still have Americans who are still held as hostages. But why does it feel like our Department of Justice is going to bat for these terrorists?

It's truly remarkable. And indeed, I find it abhorrent that they're doing precisely that. But there's a long legal tradition where UN workers, diplomats have immunity.

But that's only so long as they're doing their proper function. When a when a diplomat commits a crime, when a UN worker acts outside of the scope of duties, they're no longer immune. And these were people acting as terrorists, providing material support.

Indeed, that's the charge. Material support to terrorism. It is it is confounding to me that our DOJ wouldn't understand that and wouldn't prosecute these people who have not only killed the Israelis and worked alongside others who have committed terror acts, but they are continuing to hold and threaten American lives. We denied in the Trump administration. We took money away from Iran. We told them. I think we lost Secretary Pompeo.

We'll try to reconnect. This administration had restored that funding and has really put America in a bad place. Mr. Secretary, you talk about the things that the Biden administration has undone, whether that be the hold on the UNRE funding, which they reinstated, but also the great work that was occurring under the Abraham Accords.

That momentum was surely going to continue. And when the new administration came in, all that seemed to stop. President Biden today spoke at the UN. It'll be his final General Assembly speech. And he did mention the topic of Gaza and Israel quite a bit in that speech.

But he said that we need to work towards a two state solution where the world a world where Israel enjoys security and peace in full recognition and normalized relations with all its neighbors. And it struck me as an interesting thing for him to bring up because that was indeed what the trajectory was until his foreign policy became the foreign policy of the United States. Am I missing something?

You have it largely right. Those remarks were a fantasy land. I don't know what it means. I don't know who the second state and this is in the two state solution is Hamas, the leader of that is that the Palestinian Authority and other organization controlled by terrorists, and to demand a ceasefire while Israelis still can't live in their homes is both antithetical to the United States relationship with Israel and really dangerous for the United States. The Iranian regime has now broken up because broken up the piece that we had delivered with the Abraham Accords because of the very failed leadership of this administration and for President Biden to suggest somehow that if Israel would just stand down, everything would be good is fantasy land.

It's not living in the reality of the region. And it's not in America's best interest to demand that Israel conduct a ceasefire while these threats remain. And you bring up the Iranians as well that the United States is sending more military assets to the Middle East. We see the escalation between Hezbollah and Israel that happened over the weekend. How do you think Iran will react to what's going on with probably their strongest proxy Hezbollah?

So I think two things. One, I think they do worry that Hezbollah will be eliminated. It's proved a very powerful piece of leverage for them over the decades that Hezbollah has remained armed there in Lebanon. But second, I think the Iranians also enjoy this because the Israelis aren't firing at the Iranians. There's no Iranians that are under threat today. It is these knuckleheads in Lebanon and in the Gaza Strip that are fighting a proxy war. So while Israelis are fighting and losing their lives, the Iranians are not. And this is where the United States has to come in. We need to, alongside our Israeli friends, impose real costs on the Iranians and the Iranian regime. And until we do, this is going to keep happening. This will only escalate until the United States engages in a serious way and confronts the Iranian terror that these proxies are engaged in wreaking the havoc that they're wreaking on the region today.

For sure. For the U.S., though, to get involved, the question is, you know, we're only 40-ish days away from the general election, but we still have another months of the Biden-Harris administration guaranteed, at least through the beginning of next year. How much influence in that time can that administration even have over conflicts in the Middle East when these are the kind of statements that we're making? No, if these are the kind of statements you're going to make, you have given up. And I think that's what the Biden administration has done, too. They're now suing for peace under threat from the Iranians. So I agree with you. I doubt very much that the Biden administration will change, frankly, what they've continued for the eight years of President Obama and now their four years, which is to appease, to pay the Iranians, give them $6 billion to get some American hostages home.

I think that will be the model for the remaining months. And it is a very dangerous time period where it's not clear who's making U.S. decisions at the most senior levels. And second, an administration that has proven feckless when it comes to protecting our ally and supporting our ally in the nation of Israel. Thank you so much, Secretary Pompeo, for joining us again. I want to say thank you to the Senior Council for Global Affairs here at the ACLJ. That's why you should work with the ACLJ, which by doing that, you can become an ACLJ champion and make sure you support what we do here. And we are your voice, whether that is at the U.N., whether that is in Washington, D.C., whether that's in the media, we can be there for you. Sorry.

Be there for you. Your first gift is doubled. ACLJ champion between now and Friday, that's the deadline, is on Friday. Your first gift is effectively matched and doubled by an incredible ACLJ donor who's decided to do that. So it gets unlocked when you make that decision. I encourage you right now to do that.

Go to ACLJ.org or scan that QR code. Let's go ahead and take a phone call real quick before we go to break. Let's go to Henry, who is in Texas on Line 5. Henry, you're on the air.

Hi, how are you doing? This is Henry from Baytown, Texas. I love y'all's show. I love what y'all are doing. Thank you. And I wish that I could contribute.

I just recently came out of the hospital, so I'm not able to. Hey, just calling in is good enough for me. Thanks for calling, Henry.

Go ahead. But I think that this administration that we've got in office right now, I mean, they're supposed to be smart people, but they're some of the dumbest smart people in the world. I mean... It's hard, Henry. It's hard to wake up to news like this. Like we said, the situation where our own government, our own Department of Justice arguing for immunity of terrorists, it's hard to not feel that way. Like I said earlier, you can conflate a lot of situations. There's sort of the liberal response to a lot of this, which is, you know, using your heart, being good to people. All of that is what they claim. A lot of times that is not what it is, but that's what they can claim.

But in this situation, it's not about heart. It's about protecting the wrong side, protecting those who have committed mass murder. It's really unfathomable that this is where we're at. And again, I hate to be that sort of hopeless fear monger, and I'm not that. I really don't feel that way. But there are moments like this where you can't even believe what you're reading.

That's right. And I also feel like, unfortunately, this is a signal to the world, too, that if you're a member of the UN, you get a lot of leeway with what kind of terror and havoc you can wreak around the world. That's an unfortunate part of what we're living in right now. If you want to be a legal terrorist, join the run.

I mean, it's really sadly where we're at. Phone lines are open for your calls at 1-800-684-3110. We've got a second half hour of this broadcast coming up. If you don't get it on your local station, find us broadcasting live each and every day from noon to 1 p.m. Eastern on YouTube, rumbleaclj.org. Or wherever you get your podcasts, we are there. Make sure you join us again each and every day. We'll be right back. Rick Grenell's joining us in the next half hour, and we're taking all your calls. Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Logan Sekulow. Welcome back to Sekulow. We've got a second half hour of this broadcast right now.

I encourage you to give us a call at 1-800-684-3110. Again, we're continuing the discussion about the UNRWA situation. That's the UN's relief work agency that, of course, we all knew this. We've known it for the last year. We're acting, many of the members, we're acting as terrorists for Hamas.

We're part of the massacre in October. Families, victims' families filed a lawsuit against them. And our Department of Justice, as well as the UN, said, no, no, no, due to some rule that we've had since the 40s, our members have absolute immunity. Even if they're terrorists.

Now, they could waive that immunity, but they've decided, no, why would we? This is when you wake up and you're not sure what side of the world you're living in right now. And it's really troubling.

It's really concerning. We're going to have Rick Grenell joining us in the next segment to kind of break it all down. And we have a lot of calls of you that are calling in right now.

Let's go ahead and take one. Let's go to Martin, who's calling in North Carolina online to watch it on YouTube, which I encourage you are watching on YouTube. We just saw a number spike of people watching and you're brand new.

We know about half the people that watch each and every day are brand new. Hit that subscribe button. It really helps us out. Over 432,000 of you join us on YouTube. Martin, you're on the air. Thank you, sir.

I have two parts that go together here. I've had quite a few members of my family in the military. And this decision, so to speak, has got to be a gut punch to those people that defended this nation and put their lives on the line and took an oath as the government officials have. And I don't know about DOG to protect this nation from foreign and domestic terror. We need to remember where this administration is come November 5th, because this this is this is why we're weak. This is why we are looking at things so lopsided. Why would people want to join the military when this is for? They're not really.

I'm going to let everybody in. I'm going to let them bypass whatever acts they do. And it doesn't matter. And Martin, honestly, the point you raise is a good one, because, one, we have to remember this this ideology that Hamas has and Hezbollah, it all stems from the Iranian toxic globalist, jihadist vision of the world. And that is what many of our members of the military are still fighting, contrary to what Kamala Harris said in the debate of us not having any members of the military in conflict zones around the world. We know that we have members in Iraq, in Syria, that base in Jordan that was hit by Iranian proxies that injured service members. Our men and women in uniform are still around the world fighting this toxic, evil, jihadist ideology. And when our Department of Justice goes to federal court and argues on behalf of immunity for members of UNRRA that engaged in this very same ideology and massacred American citizens on October 7th, American citizens were taken hostage on October 7th, that was what these members of UNRRA were working to support and to realize that that's what our DOJ would would argue in federal court. And I'm sure that they could list some, you know, platitude about it being upholding the tradition of the treaties that we've signed instead of arguing, hey, you win, you can, you know, waive your immunity here, you should. They decide to fight for the immunity in federal court.

It shows you where the priorities of this administration lie, when they will go after the immunity of official acts of a former President, and yet say nothing to see here when it comes to the immunity granted to a global body that is not American. Hey, phone lines are open right now. We have one line open, 1-800-684-3110. Two lines open now. So there you go. Lucky you. They're open right now for your calls.

Give us a call. Go to ACLJ.org right now. Thanks to our donors and champions, we're able to fight some of the most important issues of the day to protect constitutional rights and freedoms of the people of this nation. That includes you and the rights of people around the globe. That includes some of you. I see some of your posts from international viewers who watch online. Go to ACLJ.org right now.

Your tax-deductible gift, your first gift, is doubled if you become a champion. Rick Grinnell joins us in the next segment. Welcome back to Sekulow. Rick Grinnell joins us. Rick, I know you're on the road. It's been a busy time for you.

We've seen clips of you really on the road doing your thing. Right now, we are only about 41 days away from the election. I wanted to get your perspective on where things stand right now as you've been visiting key swing states, you've been in Pennsylvania, you've been all over the place.

Where are we at? Look, I think that this election is boiling down to the obvious issues that we all see, which is two escalating wars. They're not getting better.

They're getting worse. Gas prices, the economy, and the border. And Kamala Harris is really struggling to show that while she's in office, she can do anything about any of this. And Rick, as you continue through these swing states and the campaign trail, one issue that I think is in the forefront of everyone's mind is foreign policy. And we're seeing how the Biden foreign policy is playing out. We saw him arguing at the UN this morning basically for the Abraham Accords.

He said, you know, Israel needs to have full recognition and normalization with its neighbors, something that I feel like had the momentum and was on the way there until he got involved with the foreign policy. We see Ukraine escalating. We see Israel escalating with Hezbollah to the north. Do you think that the American voter is paying attention to what's going on in the foreign policy realm, or is it really all domestic politics at this point? Well, I think it's mostly domestic politics. Certainly people are going to vote on how they feel.

But both wars, the war in Ukraine and the war in Israel, are kind of front and center for everybody. They're feeling it. They're seeing it.

The coverage is certainly prominent in the mainstream media, legacy media for all of their activism with Democrats and their preference for Kamala Harris. They're still covering these wars. I mean, we have the war in Israel is getting worse, not better.

We have an escalation in the north. We see now Hezbollah really having the means to fight back against Israel. And what that means is for regular Americans, they're confused as to why a terrorist organization is flush with cash. Why does Hezbollah have the ability to strike and launch a war? And I think the answer is because of Kamala Harris and Joe Biden, they funded this, there is a clear direct link to the policies of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris in giving hundreds of billions of dollars to Iran.

He turns around and gives it to the proxies, Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis. And so I do think that this is something that the American people are witnessing, outraged by, and also scared by because we know we have an open border. We know that we have individuals in this country that want to do us harm that have made it across the southern border. And many people are wondering if World War Three is going to break out.

Are we going to get hit? These are emotional issues that regular Americans are very concerned about. Yeah, Rick, and I think that that happened this morning also, or last night, a lot of us saw these articles coming out that showed that the DOJ, the Department of Justice, was saying that the UNRWA employees who took part in the terror attacks in Israel now have immunity, absolute immunity from prosecution. These are ones where the families of victims tried to take it to court and say they wanted some justice. And they said, no, no, no, they have absolute immunity because we have a deal. The UN has a deal back from the 40s.

We can waive it, but we're not going to waive it today. And the Department of Justice backs it up. Of course, this is the same Department of Justice who argued that a sitting President would have no immunity. Yeah, look, I think this is, you know, backwards.

We certainly have lost common sense in America on so many issues. There should never be immunity for any individual who's helping a terrorist. And I don't care what the justification is. You're not supposed to give aid and comfort to a terrorist or a terrorist organization and then somehow turn around and say, Yeah, but I work for the United Nations and, you know, we care about all people. The reality is, is we as the West, we as people with common sense can easily distinguish between an aid worker giving aid to individuals who are in need and giving aid and comfort or a secret space or a strategy to terrorists who want to attack Israel.

I think this is an easy case to figure out. I don't understand why we would just have blanket immunity for anyone who works for UNRWA. And Rick, final question here. But yesterday, as a result of some filings against the attempted assassin against President Trump, the Department of Justice released that he had a manifesto and really a bounty that he had placed. And there's been a lot of criticism. We see many times when there is a mass shooter or some other sort of almost domestic terror incident, the media will refuse to publish names. They won't say they won't release manifestos.

They won't release motives. But here we see the media running wild with these claims of a bounty that if he were to fail, that he would offer up for someone to finish the job. How can our media take themselves seriously when they are so freely publishing this? Yeah, it's very reckless.

It's dangerous. We used to have in this country kind of a thoughtful process about what we're doing to promote individuals and and promote the actions of killers or people who, you know, commit mass murderers, mass murderers, or people in the situation of wanting to kill someone. And these are such a serious moment that I don't understand how the their political activism in the media somehow comes into this case. Again, we have to be able to bring back common sense when you promote someone's ideology and their desire to have a another person come behind them if they failed, or to give the motivation, almost aid and comfort through money and sources like this. It's very concerning to me that within our newsrooms across the United States, there seems to be a total desire to help the Democrats at all costs and a justification for all the actions because to stop Donald Trump is the ultimate goal for so many people. And so they're, they're doing by any means necessary. How do we stop Trump?

Well, it doesn't matter. Just stop him. This is indicative of what we're witnessing in the media when we highlight language that partisans are having to call Donald Trump a threat to democracy or a Nazi sympathizer or a Nazi supporter.

This is terrible language because what you're really signaling is to unstable people that they should by any means necessary stop Donald Trump. Rick, thank you so much for joining us always. And I know you're on the road, so we hopefully will get in touch with you soon and have another visit with you and hopefully get you on camera so people can see what you're up to right now, because it is a busy time for all of us.

And it's going to continue to be busy over for the rest of the year. Phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110 in the next segment. If you're on hold, stay on hold. But in the next segment, I'm going to take as many calls as possible. So 1-800-684-3110 will. There is a bit of ACLJ news we want to hit before we get to those calls.

That's right. And we have filed a lawsuit today in federal court on behalf of our colleagues over in power oversight. That's the great organization that we've worked with to help fight for whistleblowers that have been retaliated against by their agencies, whether it be the FBI or many others, the Department of Justice, when they have engaged in protected whistleblower activity. One of those was when Agent O'Boyle and others and Marcus Allen were testifying before Congress, the Department of Justice and FBI leaked information to the Democrats on the oversight committee that would help them discredit or be harmful to the testimony of those whistleblowers.

In power for oversight, it filed a FOIA request and was stonewalled by the agencies. We are representing them in a brand new lawsuit filing today, getting to the bottom of what those communications looked like, who was telling who what to those Democrats on the oversight committee and who was leaking private personnel information to the Democrats on the oversight committee to try and discredit these whistleblowers that were so brave to come forward. That's right. You can help defeat this corruption that's happening in our own government and be a part of it right now. What you can do is support the work of the ACLJ. And today, if you become an ACLJ champion, you get your first donation matched and doubled. Become an ACLJ champion. That's a recurring donor. Scan the QR code right now and set up your critical monthly donation. Become a champion today. We'll be right back with your calls.

Welcome back to Sekulow. We are going to take your phone calls now, and we do have two lines open. Couple calls didn't make it through. So 1-800-684-3110.

Always be kind to your phone screeners. 1-800-684-3110. Let's go ahead and let's go to Patty, who's calling in Missouri on line four, watching on YouTube. Patty, you're on the air.

Oh, okay. Well, I'm calling because this administration has turned our country into a joke. Yeah, Patty, I think when you hear these stories and when we come up here each and every day, and I always think I can't be surprised, and then I just am, and I'm surprised by moments like this.

And this one's no laughing matter because it is really the root, I'd say. It's those moments where you feel like the corruption is so strong because we're defending not just a political wrong side. It's not like a, hey, I disagree with you.

You're not arguing with somebody who's a Democrat and a Republican, and they're having discussions and conversations. This is a good versus evil when it comes to actual terrorists and asking for immunity for terrorism because they happen to work for the UN and our own Department of Justice saying we side with you. Those are those moments where you wake up and go this current administration does feel like a joke. And honestly, I feel like this story, I'm very fired up about it. I feel like it should be front page news. I feel like every media organization should see this and latch onto it and see the irony and hypocrisy of the Department of Justice doing this, filing this at the same time that they fought so long, wasted so much taxpayer money to get all the way to the Supreme Court, arguing that there is no immunity for a former President over official acts while he was in office. It's astounding to me that they are making the two opposite arguments here. But one is against a former U.S. President that they are trying to prosecute. The other is in favor of the terrorists that committed a massacre on October 7th. And honestly, I kind of wish that they would shift Jack Smith to the person filing in this lawsuit because then I know that the government would probably lose the case. And therefore, the victims of the October 7th massacre could move forward with this lawsuit. But I don't think that's going to happen. Well, the media responds in a way that's different as well because a lot of these articles came out of Israeli media.

You're not seeing this as a big number one story right now. And that's why we need to exist. It's why legacy media sometimes is talking down to their audience. They're giving you the low hanging fruit, the thing that's easy to understand. This gets a little complicated because you kind of go, OK, so who is UNRWA?

UNRWA is the UN Relief Work Association. Why did that have to do with the attack on October 6th? And why does our Department of Justice getting involved? But we know that our listeners and our viewers, those who watch this podcast or broadcast or however you take in this content, know a bit more than your average viewer. That's why we don't necessarily sit around and explain everything in detail. We don't have to break down a lot of this for you because we know if you're watching our show, you're a bit more engaged on what's happening in this world. They know on the mainstream legacy media, people have it on in the background, something they're watching casually. It's there. They're looking for breaking news or something salacious.

But when the real salacious news should be this, that your Department of Justice is defending, not just like the suspected terrorist, you're talking about even the UN saying, yes, we know at least some of our people were involved in this. Let's go ahead and continue on phone calls. Let's go to Bill who's calling on line two, who is an ACLJ champion.

If you're an ACLJ champion, one of the perks you get put up to the top of the list. So, Bill, you're on the air. Hi, guys. I heard you talking to Rick Grinnell about the leak with the bounty on Trump's head. Yeah, the letter that came out from the second assassin.

Exactly. My question is, why did the Justice Department even leak that when they know it's going to harm Trump, put him more in the bullseye? And Bill, so the reason why it became public was the Department of Justice was using that as evidence why they wanted to keep him in custody instead of him being released on bond. So it was a part of an evidentiary hearing.

And so it was published in that way. Typically, a court doesn't redact things. So when you file something publicly, it is going to kind of be in the public space. Now, most individuals aren't going through court documents, not going through, you know, the docket and looking at everything.

You wouldn't expect that it could reach the mass audience the way it did. So the the mouthpiece on this has been the media that put it out there, showed the letter, described everything. Even the headlines were saying the amount like they ran with it as much as they could. So I don't necessarily fault the DOJ for filing this because they are trying to keep him in custody on these minor charges while they say they expect the attempted assassination charge imminently. They've been building the case. So this one I don't think is on the DOJ for leaking it or getting it out there.

They were trying to keep someone they think is still a threat in custody. Yeah, Bill, I think there is that sort of situation where it's like, how much transparency do you want? I think we fight for pretty much ultimate transparency with our government. And sometimes that comes with unfortunate. Now, that doesn't isn't always the case and does feel like it got out there faster than normal. Sure. But there are moments where I feel like we do want transparency from our government.

That's part of it. Let's go ahead, try to take these last two calls. Boyd's calling on Line 1.

Boyd, watch it on Rumble. You're on the air. Immunity for the President only for acts of or duties of office as per the United States Supreme Court was recently stated. Why would the Department of Justice not recognize the same interpretation of immunity for UNRRA? I don't believe terrorism is part of UNRRA's duties. Well, unfortunately, the Department of Justice is taking the words of this agreement, this treaty, if you will, from 1946, I believe, that was establishing the conditions of the United Nations. And it says in it, it says the Convention on Privileges and Immunities United Nations adopted by the General Assembly on February 13th, 1946, that they talk about the United Nations shall enjoy immunity from every form of legal process, insofar as in any particular case is expressly waived its immunity, it shall extend to any particular case. So they're going by the words of the treaty and that does have the expressly waived its immunity language in there, of which I feel like the Department of Justice should have filed a amicus or some sort of brief stating instead, hey, the language is in there, you need to expressly waive your immunity here because of what happened. So they're not, is it an apples to apples comparison of what the Presidential case was because it was about a U.S. President? And taking the law there, that wouldn't extend in the same way, but the irony still exists. Yeah, the irony still exists and it is also like a cop out.

You know, it's a way to let them ignore this and pretend it's not happening. Let's go ahead and go to Tom, who's calling on Line 6. Tom, last call of the day. Go ahead. Appreciate it.

Real quick question. Why in the world does the American people and the world people not wake up to how we are being so conned and distorted by the media? And there needs to be a tightening up of laws of some sort, although I'm a big Bill of Rights fan. Yeah, Bill or Tom, that's tough to do, to really start. I don't know if you really want that because, you know, it's going to come back and bite you. But I understand the feeling where you're getting biased media, media that's not honest with you. What I've always said about this broadcast is we are always honest with you.

And there are some times where that's to our detriment because you don't like it and you'll log off online. You'll all get mad at me about what I'm telling you. But what I'm always going to tell you is the truth. At least listen to what we have to say, because we are going to give you that.

We're not just trying to placate some major sponsors because they don't exist. How we support this show or how you support this show is by giving to the ACLJ. So do it right now. Become an ACLJ champion, become a champion of life, liberty, freedom. And your first gift is doubled if you do it by this Friday.

Scan that QR code, go to ACLJ.org. Talk to you tomorrow.