On today's show, Tulsi Gabbard pulls security clearance from the Deep State, 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. We are taking your calls and questions and comments.
1-800-684-3110. Get your comments in the chat as well if you're watching on YouTube or rumble or Facebook, wherever you're watching us on X. If we're back up today on X after yesterday's big kind of cyber attack, hopefully we are back up broadcasting live there today. So welcome to the broadcast. We do have some great news for a lot of people.
I don't know if you think it's great. Actually, I wanted to get your thoughts on this. As our friend, former colleague Tulsi Gabbard, now Director of National Intelligence, made some pretty historic moves and threw a post on X last night. Posted per the President's directive, I have revoked security clearance and barred access to classified information from Anthony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, Lisa Monaco, Mark Zay, Norman Eisen, Letitia James, Alvin Bragg, Andrew Weissman, along with the 51 signers of the Hunter Biden disinformation letter. The President's Daily Brief is no longer being provided to former President Biden. So she wanted to clear up this and clearly they're going through and they're kind of clearing the rolls, if you will.
That's right. So this announcement is what many had hoped for or looked for based off of those that have used their security clearance in a way that could be seen as weaponizing or politicizing that entire process. So you have the former Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, who was the architect of the 51 signers of that Hunter Biden laptop letter before he was Secretary of State, Jake Sullivan, former National Security Advisor to President Biden, deep state creature, Lisa Monaco, former Deputy Attorney General. You have Norm Eisman, who worked on the first impeachment of President Trump for the Democrats in Congress. You have Letitia James and Alvin Bragg, obviously famous for their lawfare against President Trump in the lead up to this past election, 2024. And then you have Andrew Weissman, who was a part of the Bob Mueller team who investigated the Russia hoax in the first President's term. And then you have the 51 signers of the Hunter Biden disinformation letter. Those were the national security or former intelligence members of that community that said this is Russian disinformation. And they leaned on their expertise as being part of the intel community and having security clearance that you must trust us. This is Russian disinformation. We all know that that was false and was meant to sway an election in 2020.
And to some degree, it did have an effect on the way that election turned out. But I think this move by Tulsi Gabbard is also showing that the overclassification of U.S. secrets, which is something we will talk about with Rick coming up, as well as how many security clearances there are out there, give an opportunity for people to monetize their security clearance. And these people have used their credentials as having security clearances to get jobs at large defense contractors, at think tanks, or to be able to try to give credibility to a letter they put out when they're trying to sway a voter's mind about an election. This is holding them accountable. And many of them, it is holding them accountable fiscally with their pocketbooks by saying you're no longer going to use your security clearance to either interfere with our elections and or profit off of past government service.
Phone lines are open for you. I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. It may be unprecedented, but you feel like this is a good thing that needs to be done. Again, like I said, just sort of cleaning up the list on who has security clearance, I want to hear from you. 1-800-684-3110, as Will said, Rick Grenell is going to be joining us, former director of national intelligence. He can give us sort of a breakdown on how this all works. And again, we're able to do that because incredible people like you support the ACLJ, support this broadcast, and because you do that, we're able to bring on people like Rick Grenell. We're also going to be joined later on by Jeff Balaban from ACLJ Jerusalem, as there have been some major moves in the war in Gaza, including the US holding some direct talks with Hamas. They're doing that now to try to get the hostages free. What do you think about that, having to have conversations with these organizations like Hamas? I know it's pretty controversial. 1-800-684-3110, make your donation today.
All donations are matched. We do have some phone lines open for you at 1-800-684-3110 to see a lot of great feedback right now for Tulsi Gabbard's decision to pull security clearances from some of those top Biden names. Again, it's not necessarily that crazy, but it is a bit different this early in an administration to see these kinds of things happen. But it's the decision of the President.
It's the decision of the administration on who gets to be or gets to have these security clearances, who gets to be briefed. And in this moment right now, they feel like because of the situation that happened with Hunter Biden and the disinformation letter, that these are not people that should be trusted with our national secrets. And I think that's what people voted for. Well, and I think what's rich is this is from NBC News, because obviously the left is going to be outraged at this.
How dare he? And there's got to be a stark contrast for people to realize there's a difference between what's the law and allowed and what is norm and tradition. The President's allowed to do this. Other Presidents could have done this, but we have this fake idea of that every President has to be bound by specific tradition and not use some of their authority that they're allowed to do just because the person before you didn't do it. And I think that can be seen throughout the entirety of this administration. That is what people voted for.
They were tired of the same old, same old. And so now you're seeing a President that is willing to be like, listen, these people weaponized their security clearance and their credentials against a political opponent. But this is how NBC News decided to phrase it. The decision is the latest example of the Trump administration's unprecedented use of security clearances to go after perceived political opponents. But what they didn't also say is that this is a direct response to 51 signers of the Hunter Biden disinformation letter that in an unprecedented use of security clearance went after perceived political opponents.
It's this works both ways. I mean, when you have names like Anthony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, Letitia James, Alvin Bragg, these are not Andrew Wiseman. These are not names that are unfamiliar to people who follow this broadcast, follow the news, what's going on.
I think there's a pretty easy to to jump to understanding. And she even says, along with the other 51 signers of the Hunter Biden disinformation letter. So specifically aiming at that. And of course, she said the President's daily brief is no longer being provided to former President Biden, probably something that people didn't realize even still would have been happening right once someone leaves office. Well, in many times a former President, especially if they are younger, maybe more active, a lot of times that briefing is still given to a former President because a President will sometimes call the former President and seek advice. Many Presidents have done that. I know that George W. Bush did give some advice to President Obama at times. One that was famous for people not wanting his advice was the late Jimmy Carter. He actually got those briefings and tried to weigh in.
He would call the White House and try to give advice. And it was not well received by not just the Reagan administration, the Bush administration, the Clinton administration, the Obama administration. But that is something that does traditionally happen because they say it's the loneliest job in the world being President. And it's an exclusive club that sometimes you are facing decisions, especially about national security, that only a handful of living people have ever faced. And so there is that kind of camaraderie historically, not with this President. And it's nothing in the Constitution or law that says you have to be good buddies with your predecessor. Right.
It may be standard practice, maybe what's happening, but it's not something legally that has to continue. We are going to shift focus a little bit, but don't worry, we're going to get right back to this topic. So stay tuned. Give us a call still if you want to talk about it. I want to hear from you. 1-800-684-3110 or get your comments in on YouTube or rumble and make sure you're subscribing to our YouTube channel or however you get us. Make sure you're following along.
But I wanted to shift a little bit. Well, there's some work the ACLJ is doing. I saw this come across yesterday and thought we got to make sure we talk about this on the air, because these are the situations where the ACLJ gets involved. You may hear about us in Washington, D.C. and think, OK, these guys, they've represented Presidents of the United States with their legal battles. But we're also talking about churches that are meeting in California on the beach. They've been doing it for decades and, of course, are running into some trouble right now. And C.C.
Hiles joining us right now. And C.C., you filed in this or submitted in this. And we wanted to kind of get a bit of a back story in history of this specific instance, because people are seeing it on social media. They're starting to see this story pop up and it is an ACLJ case.
Yeah. You know, I think sometimes we forget that religious discrimination still happens in the United States. And this is a case in California in Redondo Beach. There has been a church that has met on the beach public forum for 18 years. And just this year, the church receives notice when they're filling out their annual permit that they get notice from the Los Angeles Department of Beaches and Harbors that, oh, guess what? This year, the department has decided that they're going to limit groups that have religious activities. So only groups that take on religious activities, they're going to be limited to only six permits a year, not the annual permit like they used to have. Every weekend they would have service there. They are only limited that now they can only have six services per year. And again, this policy only applies to religious services, which is completely unconstitutional.
I have a lot of friends in California, and this is not uncommon that a church would be held outside or in a public park or on a beach because, well, you have the weather really on your side for most of the time of the year. So of course, instead of having to have a building or having to have any of that, and it's a great outreach tool, but there are moments where they get shut down and this happens and the ACLJ can get involved. Look, this is someone we believe just came through our website, reached out and said, hey, I'm having problems. You may hear us talk about that all the time on ACLJ.org slash help and wonder, does that even happen?
Do people do it? They do it every day. And there are moments like this where we get to get involved and really represent, because when you look at it, this is purely religious discrimination.
It's not even close. And Logan, I think one point here is that, is there a coincidence that it happened this year after 18 years? It's what we've warned you about, is that these localities that have a lot of power are going to push back against a Christian and conservative swing in the national body politic. And you're going to see things like this where there's no problem for 18 years, but then all of a sudden, it's not everybody. It's not like we're limiting this.
And the places that you can get that permit, it also, there's only four locations now, not even the one that they had been at. And it shows a lot of things. It shows a misunderstanding of ministry by these city officials and that they are specifically wanting to target a church. One of our rumble ranters, Comfort, has actually attended this church, she said.
Oh, wow, that's great. The church on the beach. We've learned the church on the beach, yeah, for sure.
You've seen, you've probably seen them. What's interesting though, with this one in particular, is these were not people causing problems, these were not distraction. You know, you could see how, I could see how a police officer and a pro-life activist on the street corner with bullhorn, how they could have some tension. But this is a church service, been held for 19 years. They've been accommodating in the past. If, hey, we need to use the beach this week for, like you said, a 5K or something like that.
No problems. This is not anything that they're having issues with, but of course, because it is religious or in this case a Christian moment that's happening every week, we're going to figure out not how to shut it down completely, but to essentially shut down your church when it is church on the beach. Yeah, and it's funny because over the phone our client was told that the county views churches as not needing the beach because churches can meet in a building. Well, here's the problem with that is that's not what the Constitution requires.
It's unlawful to treat religious groups differently than non-religious groups with regard to access to public forums. It doesn't have anything, literally on the phone our client was literally told that, that, hey, we've decided that churches don't need access to the beach because they can actually meet in a building. So that is where you just have misinformation, disinformation, and we're hopeful we sent off a demand letter. We've given them a time to respond. If they don't, we will pursue this in court because this is an absolute, on its face, unconstitutional change to this permit. You wonder some of the times who these people are that make these statements, like, well, they could meet in a building, so therefore they don't need the beach, you know, they don't need public land. But you're glad they say these things because then CC, you send the demand letter, and because of all of you that support the ACLJ, we're able to do this for this church at no cost. That's right.
They get a very strong legal team, they get CC Heil signing the letter going out, but if they don't respond, now we have some backup if we have to take this to court. It's like, here's exactly how it's discrimination. Right, absolutely.
That statement is golden because we can say, look, this is just a misconception. Clearly, let's just try to fix it. Let's fix it.
Quickly fix it. I mean, I'm looking in one of the comments, one guy said, hey, I was baptized at Pirates Cove for Calvary Chapel. Like, think about that when there's thousands, how many thousands of people have you seen do that? Of course, if they come in and go, you know what, guys, you've been doing this for decades, but I don't think so because it's religious. How would you feel about that? Give us a call.
I'd love to hear from you. 1-800-684-3110. In the next segment, Rick Rinnell is going to be joining us. We're going to talk a bit more about those security clearances. And hey, he's a California guy.
He'll probably have to weigh in on this topic as well. But I want to encourage you to support the work of the ACLJ. We're not able to take on cases like that church on the beach without people like you, because we're able to do that for them at zero cost. You can't do that.
You can't have the best and the brightest without the funds to do it. So I encourage you right now, make your donation at ACLJ.org. Welcome back to Sekulow.
Phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110. We are kind of getting back. Though the last segment, we spent a lot of time in California.
Now we're going to go to our friend Rick Rinnell, who always is joining us and a proud Californian. But we were talking about a church in California meets on the beach. It's currently being restricted after 19 years of serving there on the beach in Redondo Beach and now being told, hey, you only can do that five or six times a year. We're going to limit it just because it's religious speech and the ACLJ is getting involved. But we're going to get involved.
We're going to take care of that for that church. But for you, Rick, I want to get your opinion on the news this morning or last night that broke from Tulsi Gabbard, who is current director of national intelligence. You, of course, are former director of national intelligence, saying, hey, we've revoked security clearances for a lot of top names that you may know. Anthony Blinken, Jake Sullivan, some of your favorites, Rick, Alvin Bragg, Letitia James and saying, you know what, it's time for the security clearances to end and time to quit briefing these people, specifically if they were involved in things like the Hunter Biden disinformation letter.
Now, of course, the left is crying, hey, this is unprecedented. This is what we do here. But I want to get your feedback and thoughts on this and sort of the move from the Trump administration to not be afraid to break those, I guess, political norms. Well, first of all, let me just say that beach church is so important in Southern California. So thank you for getting involved. It's an amazing idea.
It works. And, you know, the beaches are public access. So there should be no reason why people can't gather on a Sunday and praise and worship and hear someone speak. It's what we do on the beach is is socialize with people in our community. So thank you for getting involved. ACLJ is always at the forefront and I love it.
The beach that's right next to me. So that's great. Look, when it comes to what Tulsi is doing, I think this is just another common sense approach to being accountable to to the people. The people were outraged that this group abused their access to classified information by pretending that something was true when they knew it wasn't.
And let me be specific. Most of these individuals never had a briefing on the Hunter Biden laptop and whether or not the Intel services thought it was, you know, misinformation or Russian information. There was never a briefing on that.
There was never any raw intelligence pointing to that. This was a political calculation by these individuals and their political calculations were wrapped in their access to classified information. They say things like, oh, I can't tell you, but trust me because I have access to classified information. They abused their position by getting involved in politics and pretending that they knew something.
There are a couple of other people that do that regularly. Adam Schiff is one of them. And I think that it's important to hold these people to account if you're going to have access to classified information. Don't go into the public sphere and pretend something is true when it's not.
Don't abuse your positions. They did. And Tulsi Gabbard is holding them to account and taking away that access to classified information. Rick, one question I'm seeing on on both Rumble and on YouTube that are coming here, and I think it speaks to a broader issue, one that you've addressed on this broadcast many times with the overclassification of information. But people are asking, why would someone like Letitia James and Alvin Bragg, who aren't federal employees, they're within the state of New York, why would they have a security clearance? And so I think that, one, people just need to kind of know how this process works and maybe how many security clearances are actually out there. Well, first of all, the security clearance process is abused and too many people pretend like they have full access.
I can guarantee you that Letitia James only had compartmentalized information. She was probably restricted on what would relate to her job and probably through terrorism and terrorist threats. And I could make the case that prosecutors need to have access about the threats around them, but they certainly don't need access to the President's daily briefing and and to have access to information that we know that they would then abuse.
And that's the issue here. When you abuse your position and pretend like you know something that you don't, then I think you should have your clearance taken away and you should suffer the consequences of not having access to appropriate information. I will say, though, when prosecutors abuse this process, it's really indicative of who they are. And you have to wonder what else are they abusing with the power that they have? Is there a need also for people like this to have this kind of clearance post administration?
I think there's probably a lot of our audience and I see in the comments going, I didn't even understand. I thought, you know, the day the administration changed over, you know, it changed over. I mean, but there are some needs occasionally for people to retain their clearances or to not have to go through this process again. But again, if you've done something that clearly the American people are voting against, then that should be taken care of.
But what about the instances where, again, just to sort of inform our audience why that even happens? Well, first of all, a lot of former government officials are good people and they're trying to help the U.S. government in ways that they can be helpful. We want a bipartisan approach to some of these issues.
Let me just give you an example. When I negotiated the Kosovo-Serbia deal in the Trump administration, it was a very good deal negotiated by both parties in the Oval Office. And it was really going to move the Balkans forward. When I left and when President Trump left the first administration and Joe Biden took over, his White House did an evaluation. They asked me to brief them on the situation in the Balkans.
I briefed them. They did an evaluation and they decided that they were going to use this agreement and this policy as official U.S. government policy under Joe Biden. They embraced the Trump work that we did. Now, they didn't call it the same thing.
Instead of the Trump agreement, they called it the Washington agreement, which was fine. But there were times when in the Balkans during the Biden administration that violence was breaking out. There was the situation where there were hostages taking.
You know, people don't like it when I use that word, but I think it's an appropriate word. People were taken, law enforcement officials in the northern part of Kosovo, and it was not a good thing. And they needed someone to go and try to resolve this. They recognized, the Biden team recognized that I had credibility there.
So I went to the northern part of Kosovo. I briefed the Biden team. I briefed the White House. I had access to classified information because I was helping them in that situation.
They recognized that I could do good work there. And so there are times when the current administration wants to utilize some players. I can think of Bill Richardson. Remember, Bill Richardson was used on the outside numerous times to negotiate for the release of hostages, whether it was in North Korea and multiple administrations used Bill Richardson because he had credibility. We need to get back to that point where you can utilize back channels or other people to further your U.S. policy, to further the policy. But when these individuals abuse their positions, that's when they should be cut off. And that's exactly what took place.
Joining us today, I appreciate it. I really wanted to know that. I think our audience is well off now knowing, better off knowing why this even happens. I think we can get lost in the headline and not understand the situations.
But we have great people like you on our team to help explain all that. And I appreciate it. We got a second half hour coming up on Sekulow. Go to ACLJ.org right now. We only got a one minute break, but it's a perfect time to make a donation during our Life and Liberty drive.
Do it right now. All donations are doubled right now. And again, if you don't get the full hour, join us on ACLJ.org or social media.
Keeping you informed and engaged. Now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Logan Sekulow.
Welcome back to Sekulow. Second half hour of the broadcast. If you missed the first half, join us later on. You can catch the replay of this at any time on ACLJ.org, on the ACLJ app, on YouTube, on Rumble, Facebook.
You can find us always there. So if you don't get the full hour, if you weren't able to hear it live while we're doing it, you can always go back and do it. Of course, you can also watch us live each and every day on the Salem News Channel, which is available on Pluto TV, Samsung Plus, a lot of great options.
Of course, the Salem News Channel website as well, where you have to see a pretty stacked lineup of hosts that are on that show or on that network. So we appreciate you all joining us from all the different realms, if you will. We are keeping the discussion going. And we're going to be joined in the next segment by Jeff Balaban.
Jeff is the head of ACLJ Jerusalem. We're going to give you an update of what's going on in Israel, including the U.S. having talks with Hamas, direct talks. It's going to happen in Qatar about the release of the hostages and ending the war.
So I'd love to hear from you, your thoughts on this. Look, this is President Trump's way of doing it. I think sometimes when you hear about negotiating with people like Hamas and organizations like Hamas, you can have a bit of an easy feeling. But again, he did this with Kim Jong Un.
He's done this with other leaders that are not necessarily the most savory and sometimes with great results. So it's tough. Part of me doesn't like it.
Part of me totally understands why you try. That's right, Logan. And it's historically been the case that the policy of the United States is we don't negotiate with terrorists. What you see here is a break from the norm. It's very similar to what we talked about with the security clearances, is that it's a break from the norm and tradition of people having, maintaining their security clearance after they leave government service. But that doesn't mean it's against the law. It doesn't mean that it's against the Constitution.
It's just the way that things have been done. And when you see sometimes that no results were gotten by the Biden administration of getting Americans home, and specifically there is one Israeli American still believed to be alive in captivity of Hamas. There are four, unfortunately, bodies that are controlled by Hamas right now of hostages that were killed as a result of Hamas's actions on October 7th. And if the previous administration had zero movement on getting an American home and the remains of Americans home so their families can have proper burial and mourning, then maybe you do something different.
And I don't know if it sets a policy for every terrorist organization or if it sets a different change going forward, but you at least have to give credit where credit's due that when the same tired ideas aren't working, are getting you nowhere, if you're the most powerful country in the world, maybe you should try something different. We're going to continue that conversation coming up in the next segment with Jeff Balabon from ACLJ Jerusalem. We're also going to continue to take your calls. If you're on hold right now, stay on hold. We will get to you.
Call us at 1-800-684-3110. We're continuing the conversation also about Tulsi Gabbard, revoking the security clearances of some of those top deep state names, if you will. Sort of the classic names from the Biden administration, including Tisha James, Alvin Bragg, Anthony Blinken, all of those names that you probably don't want Jake Sullivan, you don't want to hear again. But here we are hearing them again. But of course, maybe this is for better reasons. We only got a minute left in this segment. I just want to encourage you right now.
I haven't done a big pitch today and here it is. I want you to support the work of the ACLJ. You heard about what we're doing for that church on the beach in California. You've heard about what we're doing now in Israel. You've heard from Rick Grinnell, former director of national intelligence. You've heard from Will and I for the last 40 minutes or so.
But I need your support. We don't just protect life, liberty and faith here. We do it around the world.
It's not just here in the U.S. So that's why we're going to go to Israel in the next segment. We have offices from Tennessee to Washington, D.C., Virginia, Jerusalem, Strasbourg, France, Pakistan, all over the world, the ACLJ is there. We're at the Supreme Court, we're at the UN, we're at the International Criminal Court.
We can't do that without your support. And we're in court today. As we speak, there are cases happening right now. So do it right now. Go to ACLJ.org because all donations are doubled right now. So if you give $10, there's another person who said, I will unlock $10.
If you give $1,000, there's a person saying, I will unlock $1,000. So do it right now. Welcome back to Secula. We are going to take your calls in the next segment at 1-800-684-3110. We've got three lines open right now.
So stay on hold if you're on hold or give us a call if you'd like to chat. Jeff Balaban is joining us right now, head of ACLJ Jerusalem. There have been some updates, Jeff, in the war in Gaza, one of which, though, is that the U.S. has been pretty much said they're going to be holding direct talks with Hamas on the hostage situation.
They'll be doing that in Qatar. Mixed feelings, I think, for a lot of people when you start talking about having diplomatic meetings with Hamas. I want to get your feedback because, look, I mean, maybe it's that we're trying something different here. We're actually trying to see how we can finish this progress and get the rest of the hostages released and their remains released for those who are no longer with us. But I wanted to get your thoughts on this strategy of meeting potentially, not even potentially, meeting with Hamas to hold these direct talks. Well, there is a lot of confusion here, and there were certainly voices here expressing alarm and concern about a U.S. negotiator dealing directly with Hamas.
There does seem to be a step back, meaning that they said this was a one off trying to negotiate. However, Marco Rubio, secretary of state, said it was worth trying. And here's the thing. You know, Israel generally does trust President Trump. And I think that President Trump seems to be maintaining a very tight ship and people, you know, if they're drifting from what he intends, you know, there will be a change. And that said, look, none of this is pleasant.
This is all very painful. And I think it really depends on the nature of the conversations. The notion of negotiating with Hamas or indeed with any Palestinian leadership group, they are all terrorists. I mean, every one of them is no exception to this, is I wouldn't say it's tasteless. I think it's unsavory. It's unlikely to ever succeed. And many times it's immoral. But sometimes when those negotiations are actually threats, that's actually necessary and good. So I think that if it's a negotiation pleading and asking for things, well, I don't think it's Donald Trump's way.
And I hope it's not his administration's way. And no one here really thinks it is. But no one should be at all confused about this. No one is suggesting, at least no one believes that the highest levels of the Trump administration, that the people in Hamas, as far as we can tell, are people you can actually do deals with because they're reasonable people. This is all about a terrible, terrible crisis of hostages, really brutal and emotional and painful, including Americans, obviously. And so Donald Trump and his people are trying everything. There are those who have grave concerns, those who are cheering it on. But overall, as I say, they said it's a one off. And bottom line, it is my hope and I believe that if it's coming from the top down, this is more in the nation of ultimatum and threat rather than pleading and negotiating.
Well, and Jeff, I think that's a very good point, especially the way even U.S. media is categorizing it. New York Times is saying they hold direct talks. That's that's a very specific word instead of negotiations. When you read President Trump's truth social posts, those aren't negotiating words.
Those are demands. So once again, I defer to you as well that, you know, we have seen the talk from President Trump. We know how he has dealt with places like North Korea and has secured the release of Americans from places like North Korea in the first term, from Russia in this term.
And in those situations, it didn't seem like the U.S. gave up anything to the foreign power or the adversary. So I do think that is a very good point. People should look at is even the way it's being reported is that the special envoy, Adam Bowler, was holding direct talks and engaging this group. That is very different than it being reported as negotiations over a hostage.
Yeah, I would actually I think that's a very valid point, William. And I also would add that if you look at the top officials in this and obviously Donald Trump is the top official. But if you look at his secretary of state, Marco Rubio, you look at, you know, who he's having as ambassador, Mike Huckabee. There is no question that every one of them understands that Hamas is pure evil. And more than that, Donald Trump himself in the last few days has gone on record talking about not just Hamas, which is one particular head of, you know, of these this multi-headed snake. He's talked about the Palestinian, the entire Palestinian culture as being one that really cannot continue because it is a culture, a culture that grooms generations to be an anti-Semitic, genocidal death cult.
And it must stop. And so he's not limiting it as many people have, as most people do. Say the problem is Hamas, we don't want to deal with the real issue. He has openly dealt and morally and truly with clarity dealt with the fact that it is the entire Palestinian enterprise that has raised generations of children to be, I'm sorry, monsters. People whose greatest wish in life is to kill Jews.
And it's got to stop. And Trump's been very clear about that. So I think someone who understands that is not really about to give Hamas, one particularly evil head of that snake that people know about, much benefit of any doubt.
And indeed will be more making ultimata than than asking for favors. And you saw that as he posted sort of the final warning last week in the sort of moment where now we don't know what that resulted in or may result in now moving forward. Obviously, there looks like they're going to hold some sort of direct talks. But you have that moment also where President Trump, he can be an emotional guy in the sense of reacting how a lot of us have reacted, which was he met with the hostages. And when you hear the stories from the people that were actually living it, who had to go through it and are still going through it or just recently released, your mood shifts pretty dramatically from one of trying to reason with war and how this works to just wanting to go in and finish the job, if you will. That's a good point that I think that some of the criticism because it was alarm really more people who trust Donald Trump, but some of the criticism from some of the voices that you heard here is because no one here needs to be reminded of that. Everyone here lives with that raw emotional reality every moment of every day since October 7th.
And so if people are alarmed, you have to factor that in. But again, I think there's a great deal of trust. I was actually in meetings today at the foreign ministry discussing the moves that America is making and again, playing our role here often, which is understanding both sides of the equation and trying to help each and really understand with more clarity what the other side is perceiving. Israel and America, incredibly close allies, incredibly close cultural similarities, nonetheless, different nations in dramatically different settings. And so to help bridge that gap and understand is precisely what ACLJ Jerusalem exists to do.
Yeah, I'm excited that you're able to keep that going and really build upon that. Now, one of the things over the weekend, and I mentioned it yesterday, I got a lot of feedback from it, is this push it feels like pretty recently. I mean, it's been happening, it's been bubbling up for a while, but I feel like over the weekend, it really exploded from a lot of conservative influencers who have decided that Israel is no longer one of their issues, that they are no longer supportive, they are no longer on the side of Israel. And some of these are pretty prominent names.
I don't want to give them any more clout than they already have, but you're not talking about people who our audience wouldn't be familiar with. There has been this sort of tide turn on social media that really concerns me because at least we had that, at least there was for the Jewish people, and it really is very anti-Semitic rhetoric. It's tying everything back to Jeffrey Epstein, it's tying everything back to conspiracy theories, and it's coming from prominent conservative names. Now, they've become a little more fringe, but it's a concerning thing to me.
I'm going through my feed and really starting to, I mean, it kind of gave me a little bit of a panic because it's like, okay, well now if you start losing both sides, this is where it gets nerve-wracking. We've got to be able to figure out how to combat that with the truth. Yeah, look, there's been this bubbling up for quite a while, and I will give you two specific reasons for it. One is, you know, Logan, almost better than anybody that we bring on to talk about things, that the social media itself, if your economics is on social media, which is it depends on clicks and likes, et cetera, et cetera, and how many followers you have, well, unfortunately, the algorithms dictate that you will do better by being an enemy of the Jews than by being their friends. It's just a fact that there are more people out there in the world who support genocide against the Jews, and they're therefore economic interests, and there's nothing to do with telling the truth. That's just one reality. More than that, by the way, there's actually lots of studies now about how, because of AI, there's so much going into sort of exponentially growing, that's still in the anti-Semitism, because of the machine learning is being warped by people intentionally doing this. But the other reality is that there is, America's going through its own cultural and faith war right now, I would say, on the Christian side, which is, those who say, well, America was founded by white European Christian males, and everyone else is an outsider and our enemy.
Well, you know, that's not true. Actually, America was founded by people who were running from that mentality, came to America from those countries which call themselves Christian, but many of them were fighting against each other and killing each other for centuries, and they came running here for religious liberties, for religious freedoms, exactly what we represent, because they're embodied in our Constitution, and so there seems to be an internal war now on what's called the conservative side by people who want to just use Christianity or conservatism or rhetoric to cover up a very different agenda. And it's a very hostile agenda, not just to Jews, but to America's very Judeo-Christian founding, to the very values that come from the Bible, and we are seeing that now, and I will tell you that I believe this is going to happen more and more over the next few months.
I also think that Donald Trump himself has great moral clarity on these particular issues, and there's going to come a time, if a choice has to be made, he will side with the right people. Thank you so much for joining us, Jeff. Again, Jeff Balbon, head of ACLJ Jerusalem, support the work of ACLJ, which supports the work of ACLJ Jerusalem, the ECLJ, all of our worldwide efforts at ACLJ.org during our Life and Liberty drive. We've got three lines open right now. I want to hear from you. 1-800-684-3110, 1-800-684-3110.
I'd love to hear from you. Call in right now and donate if you can. Welcome back to Sekulow. Time to take your phone calls. We still have time to get a few more up, so 1-800-684-3110, 1-800-684-3110. Let's go to Paul, who's calling in Washington on line two, who is watching on Rebel. Oh, someone just dropped. I think we accidentally dropped somebody on line one. If you are that person, call right back. We'll get you up there.
Hold for like half an hour. Sorry. Paul from Washington, you're on the air.
Well, hi. I was wondering about the security clearance with you. You know, for high-ranking government officials like the secretaries and the people that are in the security spaces, why would they maintain their same security clearance once creating service? I was in the military in a security clearance. Once you leave that job, that security clearance is gone. You'd have to re-get it.
You definitely go back, and we talked about this with Rick, and he gave us pretty good ideas of why sometimes it's good to have at will. Well, and sometimes they have to re-up the security clearance. It doesn't mean it's just a blanket forever, but security clearances are available to people outside of the government. But yes, Paul, many people do monetize it. Maybe they're working for a defense contractor or a think tank or many other places where it's valuable to have that security clearance.
If you're working for, you know, Lockheed or one of these other defense contractors that's making sensitive weapons for the government, many of those people working on that have to have a security clearance to even be able to do the work they do. But as Rick pointed out, and I encourage everyone, if you missed the segment with Rick, it's about 20 minutes into this broadcast if you're watching it after the fact. Go to that because Rick lays it out of there are many times it is useful to have people outside of the current government with that, even how he used it at the request of the White House during the Biden administration. Someone who publicly the Biden administration, many of those people, Jake Sullivan in the lot, would say that Rick Rinnell was a terrible person. He was bad for the country.
He was radical, but they would use him to do their bidding when they needed someone who was trustworthy, smart, knows the issues to do negotiations in places like Kosovo and Serbia. So sometimes don't believe everything you read in the headlines because they know that someone is smart, capable and competent like Rick Rinnell. A lot of times it's just politics. It's just show. That's what happens in Washington, D.C. It's why I honestly have a distaste for a lot of it is because a lot of it is professional wrestling.
A lot of it is showing you something. But in reality, we know what's going on backstage. And it's unfortunate truth that happens in Washington. I say the Trump administration bucks those norms. So sometimes it's not as the fact that the President is a member of the WWE Hall of Fame. Sometimes I feel like his speeches and the stuff he says is actually less pro wrestling because he'll shoot straight. He'll tell you what's going on.
He'll have you go against the norms. In Washington, D.C., for decades, it was always about just sticking to the task. Nothing actually ever gets done. Campaign promises are never made or never actually accomplished. And it was like, OK, that's part of the normal deal that we were supposed to deal with.
But I think the Trump administration changed a lot of that. Let's continue on. Deborah's calling in Pennsylvania on Line 3. She's watching on ACLJ.org, which is a great place, easy place to watch.
Of course, a great place to support the work. Deborah, you're on the air. Thank you. I want to make a comment on the revoking of the security clearances. And we'll mention something about the precedent. Joe Biden took all of the briefing away from Donald Trump four years ago when he came into office.
That's right, Deborah. You actually are correct that this precedent wasn't a norm broken by President Trump. This was actually Joe Biden set that precedent. You're right.
In twenty twenty one early when he took office and we actually have a flashback bite from that when Joe Biden was on with Noro O'Donnell talking about why he didn't believe that President Trump should have it anymore. Let's go and roll by four. They'll receive intelligence briefings. I think not. Why not? Because of his erratic behavior unrelated to the insurrection. I mean, you've called him an existential threat. You've called him dangerous. You've called him reckless.
Yeah, I have and I believe it. What's your worst fear if he continues to get these intelligence briefings? I'd rather not speculate out loud. I just think that there is no need for him to have that intelligence briefing. What value is giving him an intelligence briefing? What impact does he have at all, other than the fact he might slip and say something?
I just want to say something also. This was twenty twenty one very early in the Biden administration. And you didn't think after hearing that that maybe the guy wasn't going to be able to run three years later. It was erratic behavior unrelated to insurrection.
I mean, just was already having it. I mean, I don't want to belabor it because but I look back on what the Democrats did and did to Joe Biden. It's absurd when you look at these throwback clips that we were all supposed to just accept that he was doing OK. This was a few months into his presidency. This was now at this point four years ago. But you know what? The American people voted and the Democrats aren't to blame for that.
When I look at those kind of things like no wonder it went the way it went. And I do want to key in on one thing. He did say pretty clearly that I think is the exact reason why Joe Biden is no longer getting an intelligence briefing, as he said.
I just think that there's no need for him to have that. The intelligence briefing. What value is giving him an intelligence briefing? That is the reason what value is giving Joe Biden an intelligence briefing at this point, knowing what we know and and knowing the people around him, how they weaponize intelligence all the time.
What's the value? There's your reason right there. No more for the former President. All right. Let's continue on. One more call, at least for the day. Ronald's calling in South Carolina.
Watch it on Rebel. You're on the air. Yeah. Thanks for taking my call.
Yes. One thing about the good thing that Tulsi Gabbard did in revoking some of these security clearances, because I think for one thing, you may actually have double agents working in the government. And one of the references is for after the Obama administration, when Trump was an office cop, he was having these sanctions against Iran. And yet there are those of the Obama administration who's working behind the scene in trying to make another deal with Iran.
We saw sitting President. Ronald, we saw that even with the statements that came out after the firings, the initial firings from Doge, when that was all starting to get what happens to those double agents who who now will go and give our national secrets away. You fired them.
And now they're going to go take it to China or to Russia. And you go, well, they're the wrong people for the job. Right. It's same thing of tell us five things you did this week. And no, why not?
Because you're the wrong person for the job. There are little. I think Elon said in that moment was just to make sure these people were even real people. Right.
Because a lot of them were not. All right. That's going to do it for the show today. I'm going to take this last minute again to tell you to support the life and liberty drive.
I did not have as much time on the air to do it today as I did yesterday. So understand, we require a large team here. We have the best in class attorneys, government affairs experts, entire media team in this facility that brings you this program and a stream of continual new unique content for our website, for social media feeds.
It takes a lot to keep our teams running financially, whether that's our studios worldwide or our offices. I was in December back at our ECLJ offices, European Center, which is doing amazing work. We've got to focus and show you guys some of that if you're interested, if you're more interested in what we're doing worldwide.
There's a lot of great resources on our website. Let me know in the chat, too. Do you like hearing about the work of the ECLJ worldwide, the ECLJ, the ECLJ Jerusalem?
Let me know. We have a lot of cases going on right now. We're in court today defending a group of Christians criminally charged for carrying a cross along a roadside. Today, we're also firing federal appeals court to allow Doge to eliminate some federal DEI programs. Tomorrow, we're going to file at the Supreme Court to defend religious liberty in a major school choice case and so much more. And that's just what's happening today and tomorrow. So much more is happening.
We'll be back on the show tomorrow. But scan that QR code. Go to ACLJ.org. Donations are matched.
