MASSIVE FAIL: Schumer Can’t Recover from This

Today on the show, Chuck Schumer goes on a damage control tour and it's failing in real time. 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. You have more chaos happening in Washington, D.C. As Chuck Schumer on his book tour has had to clean up the mess that he got himself in by doing what? Voting on the continuing resolution, the CR, which made a lot of the liberal fanboys very upset. The social media sphere was not happy with him and so much so that he had to cancel his book tour when it came to the public event.

Still doing media as he's trying to clean up and he shows up on The View and makes a few statements. And of course, even the hosts of The View have a problem now with Chuck Schumer. Now, does it feel orchestrated?

Yes. Does it feel like this is the time where they are trying to strike Chuck Schumer down? Yes, it feels very much like they did with Joe Biden. This is starting to have a lot of similarities in terms of the way the Democrat machine works to push out people that they don't feel are relevant to the conversation anymore. Now, Chuck Schumer has changed over the last few years. At one point, he was probably the strongest supporter of Israel in the entire, maybe entire Washington, D.C. Now, he has had to move and change as his party has, and that's been unfortunate because at least I would always say, you know, at least we have Chuck Schumer in terms of Israel. He wouldn't necessarily vote on party lines, but that has moved. But he showed up on The View yesterday and they decided, let's lecture him.

That's right. Now, it does seem to be very much what happened to President Biden, where President Biden said he was staying in the race. Everyone said he's fine. And then all of a sudden everyone turns on him. You have this Politico headline this morning. Schumer bashing has gone mainstream. Now, he was trying to do some sort of of crisis damage management tour instead of his book tour by going on what should be friendly programs like The View, like MSNBC.

But he had to sit there and be lectured by hosts like Sonny Hostin. Let's take Byte 2 for an example. We've got a lot of these folks.

You're not going to want to miss them. Let's roll Byte 2. Ann Caprara has said the following. The fight going on in the Democratic Party right now is not between hard left, right and moderate. It's between those who want to fight and those who want to cave. And it gives me no pleasure to say this to you because we are friends, but I think you caved. I think you and nine other Democrats caved. I don't think you showed the fight that this party needs right now because you're playing with by a rule book where the other party has thrown that rule book away.

True. And so in my view, what you did really was in supporting that GOP partisan bill that Democrats had no input in, you cleared the way for Donald Trump and Elon Musk to gut Social Security, to gut Medicare, to gut Medicaid. Why did you lead Democratic senators to play by that book that the Republicans are not playing by? Okay, first I'd say, Sonny, no one wants to fight more than me and no one fights more than me.

You got to fight smart. I mean, I actually don't necessarily disagree with Chuck Schumer's way he went about deciding to vote for it. I think it was actually well thought out, but it was so against the narrative. Because I'm not saying I agree with his position because position was we need to have stop gaps for President Trump and Elon Musk. He's not wrong from his point of view, from the Democratic point of view, but he does this and just the pure act, the one act of saying, yeah, let's push this through. So we are protected somewhat was enough for his entire party to now have the opportunity to go after him. And of course, this comes from years of them probably being annoyed by him, but it has now given them an opportunity to go after him.

That's right. And Chuck Schumer of anyone in the Democrat party knows how to play the political game better than anyone else they have currently elected. But that wasn't good enough for their party. And so now they're trying to almost depose him as the leader of the Senate Democrats. I don't know how that's going to play out for them. Probably not how they'd expect. I'm here to watch it.

Yep. We got a packed show coming up. Harry Hutchison's joining us and Rick Grenell, and we're going to be talking about what we're doing worldwide. You're going to see a good chunk of what we were doing at the UN. You're going to really enjoy that.

Stay tuned for that. Give us a call. Also, if you have thoughts, 1-800-684-3110 is Chuck Schumer just becoming the next Joe Biden. 1-800-684-3110. We are in the final two weeks of our March Life and Liberty drive and our legal team need your support.

Go to ACLJ.org and have your gifts doubled right now. As the fight for power continues in Washington, D.C., it's now gone to the Democrats who are trying to push out Chuck Schumer. Now, I was talking to Will in the break saying, well, what does that look like? Are they trying to get him resigned? Are they trying to get him to not run? Are they trying to get him to step down? And your thought process is they'd like at least for him to be out of leadership, not unlike what happened with Nancy Pelosi.

That's right. Nancy Pelosi is still a member of Congress, but she stepped away from being the Democrat Party leader. She actually left all leadership roles, but she still has a very influential voice within the party. If you'll remember, she was the one who everyone knew the tide was turning when the pressure on Joe Biden was mounting after that first debate with President Trump. When she went on TV and she said, I support President Biden, but I'll let him make up his mind and I will support that decision. And that was after he had come out and said, I'm not going anywhere.

Right. The interviewer said he's already made up his mind. He said he's not going anywhere. And she goes, when he makes up his mind, I'll support that decision. It was very much like gaslighting the President of the United States saying, you think you made up your mind, but you haven't made the right decision yet.

So I'll wait till you make that. But then she at a town hall event had this to say, which is starting to get those vibes of when they pushed Biden aside from being the leader of their party. Are they trying to actively get Chuck Schumer to step aside, much like in the Republican Party, Mitch McConnell did.

He still, at least until the end of this term in the Senate, however, he is no longer the Senate majority leader. But listen to what Nancy Pelosi said by five and see if it gives you any sort of deja vu about how she handled the Biden crisis during just the early part of last year. Well, I'm concerned about the next time. I'm concerned about the future. What happened last week was last week. We're going into the future.

And this morning, Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer joined in this kind of an event in New York where Hakeem said that he had confidence in Chuck Schumer. So we're to the next stage on this now. But your question, it is about what comes next. I myself don't give away anything for nothing. I think that's what happened the other day. Yeah, that's what happened the other day.

Giving away. Again, I want to reiterate because you confuse me a little, Will. I thought I was seeing a flashback bite. I thought I was seeing a bite from a year ago until she said Chuck Schumer is oddly similar. It is very reminiscent of pushing out Joe Biden, because when you hear this is happening now, you've got to look at it from a few different points of view.

Have they been wanting to do this for a long time? Have they just waited for a moment to get Chuck Schumer out of here? Why do they want Chuck Schumer out here? Is it just because he didn't fit their political narrative in this one moment? It can't be just that. They feel like it's time for a change, even if, by the way, we look at the poll numbers and the poll numbers say the new squad, if you will, and not just including the squad, the new squad and all this is not bringing people back to the party.

Well, that's right. When you look at the approval ratings for Democrats, overall approval rating from that NBC poll was that only 27% of people approve of the job the party's doing with only 7% strongly approving. So it's a wide net and that is historic lows of approval ratings for the Democrat Party. So you could say to some degree that is the voters or potential voters saying we want to see change. However, I think the left wing of the party, the extreme left wing, the whole party's left wing is taking this as a time to say, let's push and go further left.

Let's make someone like Bernie Sanders or AOC our party leader. When I don't think that they're reading really what the voter base is thinking. I think that's very clear from the 2020 2024 election that the party wasn't energized by going extreme far left.

They were wanting more moderating views. What Chuck Schumer did, even though he is a very far leftist in all of the policies and all the things he votes for was say, I think it would be more radical to shut down the government and us own that because that didn't work out for Republicans. Republicans wore that badge of those that shut down the government in elections and it hurt them in the way that it drove people to the polls. He's looking at history and saying, that's not going to help us in the midterms. If we want to have any semblance of power in a check on the Trump administration, which right now he has the presidency, the House and the Senate, then we have to be smart about this.

And so let's not shut down the government because if they shut down the government, they can really lay waste to this. So this is him thinking through how they can be a check on the Trump administration. The far left didn't even understand that, that that was him trying to push back and they're trying to oust him. I think it is proof that their party shambles and for them to make gains in the midterms, they have to have real soul searching. But right now it seems like we are on the cusp of them kicking out another leader of their party in under a year when they got rid of their, their President, sitting President who was also their nominee for President.

And they got rid of him. I don't know how they reorganize and restructure when this is the game plan. Do you really care? That's the question. No, I'm curious about our audience here.

I'm not talking to you. I'm glad I have your answer, but no, that's what I'm asking. Do you care what's going on in the Democratic party? Or do you look at what the Republicans did last year and said, we're going to get people like Tulsi Gabbard, RFK Jr. We're going to have Elon Musk. We're going to have a new group, an Avengers level group is what they kept saying.

They were bringing in people from all walks of life. You're talking about billionaires, you're talking about Democrats, Republicans, Independents to create a new style of government. Do you really care what's going on on the Democrat side?

Are you going to let them implode? Let me hear from you. 1-800-684-3110.

1-800-684-3110. And look, if you're kind of sick of this topic, we're going to have other topics we're going to go through. The next segment, we're going to have Harry Hutchison joining us, and we're going to be talking about those judges. The judges that you've heard over and over again, who are now are stepping in every time. President Trump seems to be making some sort of move. There is a judge somewhere in the country that somehow can push forward. Of course, Chief Justice Roberts even responded. We're going to have Harry Hutchison in the next segment to really break down why this is a thing, why it can be done, how it's legal, why maybe it should be legal or shouldn't be legal. Because now it's starting to get aggressive, where it feels like it's not just controversial ones. Now it feels like there is a judge ready to stop the Trump administration from practically doing anything.

What can we do to fight back against that? We're going to discuss all of that coming up. And then later in the broadcast, former Director of National Intelligence Rick Grenell is going to be joining us. We're going to talk about the release of the JFK files, which did come out last night. Hundreds of thousands of documents. People are still trying to comb through what's in it, what it says. Of course, much like all of these, it wasn't like a, here's a summary of the stuff that you've always wanted to know.

You have to comb through it and really go through what you really want to know from it. There's some interesting facts that have certainly come out. But again, another promise that was kept in President Trump today is talking with Zelensky after a marathon call with Vladimir Putin yesterday, which led to a somewhat of a ceasefire opportunity. So we're going to discuss that coming up. Phone lines are jamming up right now, but keep calling at 1-800-684-3110. And we are in those final two weeks right now of our March Life and Liberty Drive, and our legal team needs your support.

The window to have your gifts doubled is closing soon for the month of March, and these are important times to do it. You've heard us engaging in the media and the courts here in the US, but we're also on the global stage. And at the end of the show, I'm going to show you really what's happening live in Europe today. Really amazing work that's happening for our legal team at the ECLJ and CC Heil, who you know from this broadcast. The ECLJ, of course, is the European Center for Law and Justice, which we have as a partner with the ECLJ. And when you support the work of the ECLJ, you're also supporting the worldwide efforts of the ECLJ, which includes the ECLJ, ECLJ Jerusalem. And you can find out so much more about them on our website on ECLJ.org, because I think it's important to know that we are there fighting for your values and your rights all over the world. While it's easy to get stuck in sort of this America reality, because look, I think it's important. I think America will always be our number one concern. But there's also real Christian persecution happening, whether that we've heard what happened in Congo, we've heard what's happening all over the world, where Christians are still being executed for their faith.

Now, that is not what, you know, Christian, I guess you'd say, quote unquote, persecution looks like in America. But it's still happening and the ECLJ and the ECLJ team need to be there. Phone lines are again, one line is still open, but keep calling because some of those will not make it through at 1-800-684-3110. Again, Harry Hutchison is going to be joining us in the next segment, really talk about those judges. That's right. That's something that we know that you're concerned about. Many of us are concerned about the way that it seems that district court judges around the country are able to issue nationwide injunctions to stop basically every move that the Trump administration is trying to do. Now, we'll talk with Harry Hutchison. He's a professor of law and he will kind of go through some of the history, but also kind of where we're at.

Was this ever what was envisioned by the court system structurally in the Constitution, as well as from the landmark case Marbury versus Madison, which set up the concept of judicial review. And also what some senators are speaking out, like Senator Mike Lee, about all of this. You won't want to miss this because I know it's on a lot of your minds.

It's on my mind as you read the news and see every single day something new coming out. So we're going to get you up to speed on that as well. But as Logan said, now is the perfect time to support the work of the ACLJ as we educate you through this broadcast, as we fight for persecuted Christians abroad. And as we go to courts to support those of you and protect your constitutional rights here, go to ACLJ.org today. Welcome back to Secular.

Phone lines are still jamming up at 1-800-684-3110. Harry Hutchison is joining us in studio. We are still talking about what happened with Chuck Schumer, but we're also now going to move on and talk a bit about the situation that you may have been following where judges, it seems like, are getting involved in every time the Trump administration has something to do, something new to say, something new to try to get pushed through. And somehow, in what feels like a very unprecedented way, it's not just one time a judge steps in, it feels like it's every time. And a lot of people are just being exposed to what is happening right now, that this could even be a thing.

That's right. And Professor Hutchison, what we're seeing is that district court judges are issuing nationwide injunctions, sometimes in perpetuity, not just a temporary restraining order with the time running out. And it's causing concern because we understand that a law being passed can be reviewed and sometimes actions by a President can be reviewed when it comes to how they interpret a law. But this all began in the early 1800s with Marbury versus Madison. It seems the left, you know, they're fine when it's judicial precedent from 1808, but if it's using a law from 1798, that's too old.

But what are we seeing here? And out of that Supreme Court decision, that landmark decision, was it ever imagined necessarily that district court judges would have this kind of power when it comes to judicial review? You ask a very precise and important question. Number one, district court judges lacked the authority of the United States Supreme Court, so it's firstly important to note that Marbury versus Madison was a Supreme Court case. In that particular case, just to provide some background, the Supreme Court had to decide the constitutionality of the actions of at least one of the other branches of government, the executive branch.

So in Marbury, outgoing President Adams issued a William Marbury commission as a justice of the peace. Not a particularly exciting issue, but the new Secretary of State refused to deliver the commission, so Marbury sued. So what did the Supreme Court decide? It decided that it had authority to decide the merits of the case, but it lacked the authority to issue an order requiring that the executive branch, Madison, sorry, actually issue the commission. But what's really important and what's really imperative is this set us in motion so that now district courts have assumed the same authority as the Supreme Court, and this may provoke a constitutional crisis. But what's really imperative for listeners to note is that in reality, many of the district court judges failed to actually read statutory and constitutional language.

And so let me give you a couple of examples. So if you look at Justice Chang's decision in Maryland, he relied on social media posts as evidence to claim that Elon Musk has unconstitutionally eliminated the U.S. aid agency. Judge Chang said that Elon Musk unconstitutionally harmed an agency created by Congress. Well, Musk has done no such thing in part because U.S. aid was created by an executive order of President Kennedy. And so what did President Kennedy do? He exercised his Article 2 powers, and so what Trump is doing is exercising his Article 2 powers to eliminate U.S. aid. And I could go on with other examples.

Right. I mean, there was that one where they quoted Hamilton instead of the Declaration of Independence, one of the judges, the play, not Alexander Hamilton himself. But what we're also seeing is this concern, one, is that it's going beyond interpretation of law and now interfering with potentially like the role of the commander in chief. When we talk about separation of powers, it means that there are separate powers to the separate branches. That is a distinct issue than checks and balances, which I think is conflated many times in the media. However, there's also this issue where there have been calls within Republicans within Congress, as well as the President of the United States mentioned about maybe some of these judges should be impeached, which would be a process of removal. There have been judges removed from the bench in history, federal judges. But then we saw a very unusual move where the chief justice issued a statement and said it's not an appropriate response to a disagreement with a judge to bring up impeachment. And Senator Mike Lee brought up a very interesting point. I want to get your take on this, is that while they're saying the chief justice thing is not appropriate, leave our branch alone, Mike Lee brings up the impeachment is non-justiciable political question assigned by the Constitution to Congress, one of the two political branches of the U.S. government and not the courts. Frankly, I'm surprised that Chief Justice Roberts is publicly opining on such matters. It seems that we are in uncharted territory about who's allowed to say what about what branch of government and it seems messy.

Is there a way out of this? Well, there is a way and that is by reading the law, reading the Constitution and understanding the Constitution. And it's very possible that Senator Mike Lee's understanding of the Constitution and the constitutional process is to be preferred to that of Chief Justice Roberts, particularly in this particular case. It's also important to note that there is a federal rule of civil procedure, section 65C, which says that judges may issue a preliminary injunction if the requesting party posts a bond covering the costs sustained by any party wrongfully enjoined. In most of these cases, the federal judges are failing to follow their own procedure. So I think at the end of the day, the American people are very right to be frustrated with this process because the judges seem to follow some rules when they want to and they decide not to follow other rules, which they perhaps dislike. And so at the end of the day, you have a federal judge saying that terrorists shipped from the borders of the United States to El Salvador must be returned to the United States so that they can rape and murder American citizens. I just saw a comment that came in and said, Breaking news, a federal judge in California just issued an order that the astronauts must return to space until they see if Trump had the authority to bring them home.

So good job. That was a great comment. It feels like that, though, to some degree.

Anything that President Trump does, it feels like is being hit with an injunction or a temporary restraining order. Absolutely. And look, if you want to know if I read the comments, clearly I do. One line's open, 1-800-684-3110. But we're heading into the second half hour. Some of you lose us if you listen on terrestrial radio, some don't. If you do, find us broadcasting live right now, 12 to 1 p.m. Eastern time each and every day on ACLJ.org. We can also support the work of the ACLJ, of course, on YouTube, Rumble, Facebook, X.

We're on all those platforms live. You can catch us later on on the podcast feeds or on YouTube replay. But right now, we are in the final two weeks, if we do lose you here, of the Life and Liberty Drive. This is the time to support the work of the ACLJ. You just had incredible analysis from Harry Hutchinson. And you're going to hear from Rick Grenell coming up in the next few minutes. And then we're going to go to Europe and you're going to hear what the ACLJ and see what the ACLJ is doing around the world.

Go to ACLJ.org right now and have your donations doubled. Keeping you informed and engaged. Now, more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Logan Sekulow.

Welcome back to Sekulow. Second half hour coming up. Rick Grenell is going to be joining us in the next segment. We're going to take your calls and comments as well. And in the final segment, we're going to head over to Europe, to Geneva. You're going to hear from our team at the ACLJ.

Really incredible piece. You're going to see what it looks like when they are out there doing the good work in the fight for Christians who are being persecuted. When we say persecuted, we mean really persecuted around the world.

They're not talking about even, look, I think Americans have a lot of issues. They have to always stay vigilant on what's going on to make sure we support the church, make sure we support what's happening for Christians. Whether that is as small as it seems as a church that's meeting on a beach in California being told they can't do it anymore. But then we go over to somewhere like the Republic of Congo, and you have massive murder of Christians that's happening in real time. And that is why the ACLJ exists as well.

Sure, they handle those kind of smaller cases too that you would say, and I put quote unquote small, none are small, maybe less life threatening cases. But they also handle these big ones and make sure we're there at the UN. Which I know you go, why are we at the UN? We're at the UN because a voice has to be there. A voice like yours has to be there.

If not, you just get run right over and no one's there and that group of people just have no checks and balances without groups like the ACLJ there. Let's go ahead and take some phone calls. Let's go to Phil's calling in Pennsylvania. He's talking, I believe, about the Schumer situation. Phil, you're on the air in Pennsylvania.

Hey, thanks for taking my call. President Trump's first term was Russia, Russia, Russia, Ukraine impeachment. This second term is nothing short of a judicial oligarchy. That's all it is, well placed judges. Now, how do we battle this?

It's my suggestion, and you guys are the brains. But with every executive order, he's got to file suit against the Biden administration for anti-American whatever and get an order saying that this executive order that he's issuing is fine. And if anybody wants to do that 200 times in ruby red states and let them come at us. But we will have an order from a judge in a ruby red state that says what he's doing is fine. Well, part of the problem, Phil, is that he's, I like your concept, but many times when you're the President, it's the executive order is overturning something. This is executive function. This isn't something that he can then sue if he's already overturned it.

There's no harm. And the justice department, I think one would be, they would be thrown out because they're saying there's no merits. You overturned it in those states because the judges would point out properly that there's no standing here on something that you've done. You can't also then sue to defend yourself preemptively. And that's part of the problem. Also go into those states, those judges would then follow the law and be like, why are you filing this? This has nothing to do here.

But it is, it is a problem. I agree with you. It was Russia, Russia, Russia. That was their game plan. This time they've honed their lawfare in many ways throughout the election season in the four years that they had a break from President Trump by trying to get him thrown in jail.

And you're seeing now that they are the, the, the people like the ACLU, the groups that know where to file are going to the right places because they know where the judges are that are going to give them these extreme nationwide injunctions. Let's go to Louis now. Thanks, Phil.

Louis in Colorado, before we had to break, get to Rick Renell. Louis, you're on the air. Thanks for taking my call. This is all a continuation. And you just mentioned it about him, keeping him in court and keeping him away from the campaign.

Now they're just carrying it on to this court issue where they're trying to block him from having any, any action. It feels a way, I'm only cutting you off because we were running out of time here in this segment. I wanted to make sure we got to your call because I think you're right. I think that this is just taking that strategy and trying to replicate it.

But you know what? There's groups like ours that are there to make sure we get to fight back and we are going to be there when needed. So right now, I'm going to encourage you to support the work of the ACLJ. I'll bring this up also with Rick Renell if we can in the next segment to talk about how we can combat what's happening right now. Be a part of that movement right now.

Be a part of the team. These fights, they require immense resources and we need your support. I'm going to go through what we're doing also in Europe, the ACLJ and the worldwide push from the American Center for Law and Justice.

It's not just what happens inside our United States. So right now, scan the QR code. We've got a short break coming up right now and then Rick Renell is going to join us. Talk to JFK. Welcome back to Secula. Rick Renell is going to be joining us in a moment. We're having a little bit of a connection issue, but we'll get to him. Let's go ahead and off the bat take a phone call and then we will try to get back to Rick. Let's go to Chris who's calling in Nevada on Line 1. Chris, watch it on YouTube, which we appreciate. If you're watching on YouTube right now, we know about half the people that watch don't subscribe. Hit that subscribe button. We're about to hit 470,000 people just on our YouTube channel, which is amazing.

So go ahead and do that. Chris, you're on the air. Hi, how come nobody brings up that these cases are being forum shopped into states that are favorable to those positions?

I think we do. Chris, we've been talking about that and no offense to you because I understand we do a lot of shows here, but we have been talking about that. We've been talking about the fact that they are finding, the ACLU is going out there a lot of times in finding a judge that they know is going to vote in their favor.

Right. And many times that is based off, one, there has to be also some sort of way to bring that action, but they are taking it to federal court in places where they know that the judges are going to be more friendly. And that is the practice and you may have concerns with it.

We do, we know, but that is 100% what is happening here. They're not going to Alabama and saying, hey, we're going to bring our federal claim here. Why are you going to make it to Alabama, Will?

I'm sorry, because I feel it'd be a lot more favorable than Washington State. Let's continue on. We'll take another call as we are connecting with Rick. Let's go to Robert in Maryland online too.

Robert, you're on the air. I wanted to ask several questions or, uh, first of all, has President Trump made a definitive decision as to whether or not he's going to label the Muslim brotherhood upon terrorist organization? Second question I had is that I found out that district court judges can't issue the injunctions against the executive orders. And as a result, what they're doing is basically unconstitutional and because it's unconstitutional district courts judge doing it as opposed to justices on the Supreme court.

What actions could we bring against those judges to prevent them from doing it? All right, let's start with the back half of that and then we'll move on. The Muslim brotherhood is not currently a foreign terrorist organization designated.

They have a long history of the tentacles with throughout the Muslim world and even in the United States. I remember in 2019 when President Trump was up for reelection, he was mentioning it. He was mentioning it as well as there have been members of Congress that have tried to bring bills for it. We don't know what he's decided and have not seen any movement on that, but it is a good question. On the second part, Robert, and then we're going to get to Rick Grinnell, I think this already is something that probably should be fast tracked to the Supreme court. Figuring out what the limits of these things are and I think that may be the first question that gets to the Supreme court.

Not even if these executive actions are legal or not, but whether or not the injunctions themselves are something that is able to be upheld by these district court judges. Yeah, but Rick Grinnell is joining us, I believe by phone, is that right? Rick Grinnell is joining us by phone. We had some video connections, which is unfortunate. I like the light fixture that was behind Rick.

I have very similar light fixtures, so I was hoping to talk about that, but it's okay. Rick Grinnell is joining us. And of course there's a lot going on Rick and as a former director of national intelligence, you saw yesterday the JFK files finally released after decades of conversation happening. I just want to get your thoughts on this process as people, you know, maybe we're expecting, I think it's funny cause it's almost like you're expecting a five page summary, but instead you get dropped 90,000 pages or whatever it may be.

I just want to get your thoughts. Look, I think transparency is important, especially right now. We have an electorate, we have taxpayers, we have Americans who are really interested in making sure that the US government is telling the truth, being open and honest, not hiding information and certainly not spinning information. The government is for the people and the people want to see certain things. And so I think you're going to see President Trump be very transparent about not only the decision making process. We've certainly seen cameras inside meetings like the Zelensky meeting. President Trump is extremely focused on making sure that we are authentic inside the government.

Sometimes we make mistakes. Sometimes the government's making messy decisions. We want the public to see all of this in the JFK files. I think the Epstein files, all of this just needs to be released as unredacted as possible.

Maybe leaving out telephone numbers or email addresses or more important on the JFK files specific names to people who are still living and maybe were a part of the process. I leave that to DOJ to decide, but having this information out there is exactly what should have been done years ago. Rick, based off of all the judicial activity I've seen, I'm almost surprised that a judge somewhere didn't decide to block the release because President Trump was making a move to fulfill a campaign process. But I did want to ask you about that as someone who has worked in Washington a long time understands this. We see the continuation of the lawfare that happened under the campaign where they tried to keep him out of campaigning by having him in court all the time. Now we see judges trying to block every single action the President has done and a lot of our listeners and members at the ACLJ are frustrated by this process. One, I just wanted to ask you, give them some hope in the way that this works out and the tenacity of the President to continue doing what's right for the people of America. Look, I'm sympathetic to the argument that we have separate branches of government and there needs to be checks and balances.

Of course, we all know that that's true. But I think it's a very legitimate time to talk about lawfare and the politicization of the courts because we now have judges who are very left-leaning, who are looking for opportunities. It seems to be the same crowd that constantly just throws up barriers to what the executive branch is doing. That is not the role of the courts.

I'm very sympathetic, again, to having a check and a balance. But it seems to me that there's too many left-wing judges that are trying to undermine the process by pretending we didn't have an election. Their job is not to agree with every decision that the executive branch puts forward. Their job is to say, is this something that is legally allowed? And we are seeing case after case, judges just coming up with ridiculous arguments, political arguments within the courts to stop the political process. And that's where I say that this is not what founding fathers intended. This is not the mission of the courts. But we have an incredible problem with the activism of left-leaning judges.

And we've got to solve it. I don't know what the answer is, but we have to be able to recognize that they are the ones that are abusing the system. I don't buy any of this baloney that they're doing their job as the judicial branch. They're actually acting like politicians.

They're acting as part of the political movement, and they are unable to accept the will of the people that there is going to be different policies because we elected a different President. Yeah, Rick, it definitely feels politically motivated. And we at the ACLJ are trying to see what we can do and what our next movement could be.

I did want to quickly shift. We're running out of time a little bit here, Rick. But there were calls today. Yesterday, obviously, we talked about the calls of President Trump and Putin. And today, it looks like they were fruitful calls. And today, President Trump's having calls with Zelensky. Do you think that this is a good progress?

It looks like it. Yeah, talking is always a good idea. We've had a President in Joe Biden that was unwilling to pick up the phone and talk to Vladimir Putin for years. I watched MSNBC for a little while, and they were melting down that President Trump was talking to Putin. And I thought, wow, we cannot have a political system where you think not talking to someone benefits the United States of America. You've got to go in.

You've got to talk to them. You've got to represent America. And I think this is a messy process. Trying to find peace is not easy.

It's sometimes harder than war. All right, Rick, thank you so much for joining us today. We always appreciate your insights.

And thanks to all of our supporters for letting us have people like Rick Grenell on our team. Some phone lines are open for you at 1-800-684-3110. In the next segment, we're going to take you to the ACLJ currently in Geneva. You're going to be able to see what we're doing there, but we'll also take some phone calls.

That won't take up the whole segment. So if you have a question or comment related to any of the topics we brought up today, whether that is Chuck Schumer, whether that is the judges, whether that's the JFK files, we can talk a lot about that coming up in the next segment. But of course, we're in the final two weeks of our March Life and Liberty Drive, and our legal teams need your support. The window to have your gift doubled is closing soon, and we don't just engage in the media here, and we don't even just only engage in the courts. We do both here in the U.S. and around the world on the global stage on some of our biggest issues. Our legal team led by C.C.

Heil was over in Geneva. You hear her on the broadcast every week, but now she's at the U.N., and we're going to see some of that coming up. Today we hosted a major event at the U.N. defending the plight of persecuted Christians in India.

That's what you're going to see some of. And tomorrow we are making a critical oral intervention to defend Israel before one of the most anti-Israel government bodies, the U.N. Human Rights Council. But we are there to make sure your voice is heard. And Friday, we're planning to make another oral intervention for Christians facing execution in Pakistan.

These fights require immense resources. We need your help. We need your support. Frankly, we're a little behind and really could use your support.

So scan that QR code right now and have your tax deductible gift doubled or go directly to ACLJ.org. We'll be right back. Welcome back to Secula. We are going to spend a little bit of time showing you what's going on in the ECLJ currently in Geneva. Should we go ahead and take calls before this or what do you think we should do? Yeah, let's take one call and then we'll go to that segment and then we can follow up at the end. Alright, let's go to Ronald in South Carolina who's watching on Rumble. Ronald, you're on the air. Thanks for taking my call. Yeah, I just wanted to comment on how the Democrats seem to be imploding in the fact that I think that your brother Jordan said something about a few months back about if they'd only admitted the fact that they were wrong about doing certain things and admit the fact that it did not work and help the country and it more or less hurt the country. I think that America as a whole would have been more accepted of their earnestness and just seeing now how narcissistic they are and just in denial and saying, nope, nope, just listen to us. We know what we're doing.

You just sit back and watch. Ronald, these were a lot of conversations I had with Tulsi Gabbard when we were talking with her a lot. She was on this broadcast, but also just in regular life, which is people just wanted truth and honesty. They didn't even necessarily care if they agreed with you. They just wanted people to feel like they were telling them the truth. And I think what you had was a loss of trust because you weren't being told the truth, whether that was about President Biden's health. And of course, now they're writing books about that.

Jake Tapper's out there writing a book about how, you know, the big ruse that he was doing fine. People just want authenticity and they just want honesty. Sure, they want people that are going to respect their views and values, but I think number one, what they want is at least to believe that the people saying it also believe it. And that is such a huge part of what's going on with the political world right now. That was what President Trump's new administration, putting together that team of Tulsi Gabbard, of Elon Musk, of all of this group, RFK, came together from different walks of life. Because it was what the American people wanted, which was just honesty.

Even if you don't agree with them, you wanted their honest opinion. All right, I think we should take it over to the ECLJ. Will, why don't you set up a bit of what this is? This was an event the ECLJ was holding as we are at the UN in Geneva right now. That's right. This was an event called, titled Human Rights in India, Anti-Conversion Laws and Persecution of Christians in India. And it was hosted by the ECLJ, both members of that team from Strasbourg, France, as well as some of our attorneys from here in the United States, C.C.

Heil, as well as Shehary R. Gill. And this was a panel. It wasn't just one of the oral interventions that you see where we have a specific slot to speak. We hosted this. It was in a room at the UN. And there was a presentation, some video presentation, as well as Q&A. So we're going to go ahead and watch a little bit of this that just happened today in Geneva, Switzerland at the UN. Thank you for this opportunity.

I'm Nisha Puris from Mass Association Culture, Galtamoel, France in Paris. In both India and Sri Lanka, religious minorities, including Christians, face increasing persecution. In India, anti-conversion laws and mob violence have been used to suppress Christian communities, while in Sri Lanka, extremist Buddhist nationalist groups have attacked churches and clergy with impunity. Despite international human rights commitments, both governments have failed to ensure accountability.

What strategies can the international community adopt to address these parallel patterns of persecution and push for stronger protections for religious minorities in South Asia? Thank you. So I think we can answer both questions. We are related. Shaya, would you like to? Yes.

Thank you so much for your questions. First, I think two questions relate to mechanisms, really. I think the first responsibility is on the state to do something about it. The state legislature in India, various states that have enacted these laws, they have the first responsibility.

The Indian federal government has the first responsibility to encourage the states to repeal these laws. My question is not about the anti-conversion. It's about the laws that reigns in the name of national unity under a lot of concern. But it's eventually up against the liberalized, religious minorities.

Correct. So the laws that encourage national unity, they are basically misused. So if they weren't misused, then we wouldn't have anti-conversion laws. So again, the responsibility, even the United Nations would encourage the Indian government to take the first responsibility, to take the first step under its commitments that it has made under international law, the ICCPR under the UDHR. So international human rights that are fundamental in every nation, India has an obligation, not just a simple responsibility. It has a legal obligation to repeal these laws and to enforce laws that are what's present in its constitution already. It provides for fair trials.

If it provides for equality, why can't we apply those in the name of national unity instead of applying these laws? So that's my, I think my advice or hope is that the United Nations, the Human Rights Council would start a discussion with India to promote its own constitution and promote, abide by its obligations that are under the international law. I just want to add too, like Shahariar said in the beginning, it seems like India gets a pass on this. We focus on a lot of nations that, you know, we say are doing terrible things and yet India is doing worse. And I think they get a pass on that. So I think there would be some benefit for some international pressure instead of us all turning, you know, a blind eye to, Oh, India is great. They're democratic.

Everything's fine in India. We need to hold them accountable. And I think again, changing the laws inside.

Yes, that's great. But we've seen from the very top from Prime Minister Modi and his ties to the RSS and the BJP, they have that Hindu nationalist agenda. And they're the ones that are in charge. And that's not going to change, I think, until the world starts putting pressure on them to say, we know what's going on here.

You can't just pretend it's not. And you need to change and you need to hold to your constitution and to the things that Prime Minister Modi has said that there is religious freedom in India. Well, then let's see that happen. So I think really international pressure is what's going to have to happen because inside India, we don't see any indication that they're willing to change.

All right. So that was what it looked like to be there live, seeing the ECLJ in action and understand why that's needed so much. There will be no voices in the room without our team at the ECLJ.

And of course, we can send over people like C.C. Heil, and you heard other members of our team, whether it was Grigor, Shahariyar, you've heard a big group of people being told what's going on with Christians around the world. Because again, the silence can be deafening coming out of the UN. So we want to make sure we are there and we're only there because people like you support the work and understand the global impact that the ECLJ can have. That it's not just about what's going on in your home city, in your home state. Those are incredibly important. We got to be there for you.

We will always be there for you. But we also have to make sure that we are around the world because the persecution of Christians around the world is very different than what you say, quote unquote, persecution of Christians in America. And they need to be heard just as much, if not more. So I encourage you right now, when you support the work of the ECLJ, when you make a donation during our Life and Liberty drive and your donation is doubled, that is going also to support the work of the ECLJ. It's also going to support the work of the ECLJ Jerusalem, because those are incredibly important parts of what we do here.

Have your tax deductible gift doubled right now by just going to ACLJ.org and scanning the QR code if you're watching. Because these fights, they require immense resources. To put on this show requires immense resources. These are a big fundraising months. And right now, this is the Life and Liberty drive for the month of March, and we're over halfway through. So do it today. Talk to you tomorrow.