Share This Episode
Sekulow Radio Show Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow Logo

Did Biden Cut Video Feed To Keep China Happy?

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
The Truth Network Radio
December 13, 2021 12:00 pm

Did Biden Cut Video Feed To Keep China Happy?

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 1046 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.


December 13, 2021 12:00 pm

During President Biden's Democracy Summit, a Taiwanese minister showed a map where Taiwan was displayed in a different color than China. Shortly thereafter the video feed was mysteriously cut out while the Taiwanese minister was speaking. This leads many to wonder if the feed was intentionally cut by the Biden's State Department in order to appease China. Jay, Jordan, and the rest of the Sekulow team give their analysis on the matter, as the ACLJ considers filing a FOIA request to get to the bottom of it. ​This and more today on Sekulow.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
The Todd Starnes Show
Todd Starnes
What's Right What's Left
Pastor Ernie Sanders

Today on Sekulow, did Biden and his State Department cut the video feed from Taiwan at their Democracy Summit to keep, you guessed it, China happy? We'll talk about that more today on Sekulow. And now, your host, Jordan Sekulow. Hey, welcome to Sekulow. We are taking your calls too as well at 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. First of all, a couple of guests will be joining us today on the broadcast. Team members, Rick Grenell, he'll be talking about what we're just about to talk to you about right now, which is a situation involving Taiwan and the Summit for Democracy that the White House and President Biden have been hosting.

Virtually. Then we're going to get into some issues just in this first half hour on another life case we are working on at the American Center for Law and Justice. Jeff Surtees, a senior counsel with the ACLJ, will be joining us there as well. But during the Summit for Democracy last week, and it's been continuing, it's sometimes daily, sometimes every few days, you'll see the President and he'll host another speaker or someone that represents another government on building up democracies. The idea itself, it doesn't sound bad, but it has already caused problems.

It's caused problems that seem like they could have been fixed from the beginning. This first problem is by they allowed the representative from Taiwan to participate. Now, that's great. That actually shows a lot of strength towards China if you're going to allow them to participate. It says, hey, we're not afraid of letting the elected government of Taiwan to present in this Summit for Democracy.

But here's the problem. When that elected leader came on to talk to President Biden and participate in the Summit, they had a map. And the map was really showing how they were surrounded by countries that were not democratic and that they were like the red. And Taiwan was the green because it was a pro-democracy state. Can we show the map for people about what appeared at the Summit?

Okay, so that's what happened. She's speaking at the Summit and you'll see on the map a tiny green dot, Taiwan. The rest of it goes from very dark red, that means very closed, and North Korea and places like that, to the countries that are kind of somewhere in between in the orange, but that Taiwan is open. But then she came back to speak and the video was dropped. And the reporting is that the video was dropped because she singled out Taiwan as separate from China. Except the State Department says that there was confusion over screen sharing resulted in her video feed being dropped, calling it, quote, and that's the State Department calling it an honest mistake. Now, we've been through this rodeo before, and it was involving Iran. And what happened there? It was about the nuclear deal, and it was on the timing of the nuclear deal.

And guess what happened? They flash edited that one. So, Fan, we've already got our team looking at this from a Freedom of Information Act request standpoint. Yeah, Jay, first of all, they've got to be straightforward with the American people. When it was talking about the Iran video, they came out and said it was a glitch. We now know it was not a glitch because of the investigation, the FOIA response that we gave.

Jay, that's got to take place in this as well. They want to say this is a technical problem. All signs to me, Jay, point that this was, you know, a version of viewpoint discrimination. They put up something the White House didn't agree with.

And look, maybe it wasn't cleared. Either way, they need to tell us the truth. They don't need to take the American people. They need to give the American people the truth, Jay. Well, they're saying that there was a communication from the national security, the NSA, saying that they want this gone. I mean, this is kind of what the approach they wanted. They didn't like this being up there. So, the point is they invited Taiwan and then stifled Taiwan.

Right. Which hurts Taiwan globally because if the superpower of the world as it stands right now, the United States invites them but says, but don't single yourself out from China. Well, then why is Taiwan even there? It should just be, no one should be there if we just consider them part of China. They would be one of those red countries and they wouldn't be participating in the summit. So, I think that what the Biden administration has learned, you can't have it both ways here. You have to take a strong stance against China. And they were kind of doing that by having Taiwan participate and then they fumbled, they crumbled, if you will. We'll be back taking your phone calls.

How big is the threat of China to the US, do you believe? 1-800-684-3110. We'll be right back. For that, we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's Matching Challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes $100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support.

Take part in our Matching Challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases. How we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life. Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. All right, welcome back to Secular.

So can we play that video for folks? I just want people to understand. So you know that President Biden's been hosting the Summit for Democracy because the White House, the current administration, believes that there's this problem with democracies around the world.

It's also self-hating, by the way. They think there's a problem with their own country that he's the commander-in-chief of. But they're bringing in representatives from democracies around the world to talk through issues. Now, one of their most bold moves, you could say, was to bring in a minister, so a ministerial-level person from Taiwan, which we know is extremely disputed.

Some of us have predicted—I know Wes Smith has predicted that if things go the way they're going right now, Taiwan is going to be invaded by China in the new year, maybe early in the new year. So they allow this Taiwanese representative on. He's got the map behind him, and what the map does is show the countries they're surrounded by and how they really stick out as the only truly democratic territory, state, whatever you want to call Taiwan, the only democracy functioning in that region of the world that we consider a green light. Go, democracy. So I want you to see what it first looked like when they were participating in this summit for democracy.

The human rights organization Civicus, with around 20 regional partners, conduct research about freedom and civic space. And Taiwan has been rated as completely open for three consecutive years, where the only Asian country was that distinction and the sole Asian green light on this year's Civicus monitor. I'm hoping you can offer just a few more thoughts on where we are.

Maybe you can come right here. Okay, so go back to me. You saw on that map, we showed it before earlier, the green dot is Taiwan. So what they were trying to indicate is that we are the only country or territory, this whole region of the world that has been rated by this outside group as being a democratic, open society that has no issues with major democratic ideas like people voting and participating in government. And this is an independent, that's important for people to understand. This was not just ranked by the United States. No, this comes from outside. It's outside, so it's reviewed in an outside perspective. But, you know, this caught the National Security Council and the National Security Advisor off guard.

It's reported at the Biden team. So after flashing that video and say, oh, we're standing strong with democracy, look at Taiwan. They're surrounded by non-democratic actors, some of the worst with North Korea and China. But then when they go back to that minister, guess what's gone?

Take a look. Just like reliable infrastructure and making our life safer and more convenient. Public infrastructure. And the map is gone, which means they didn't believe that they could even trust the minister not to use the map if they didn't want to, but also it shows the weakness. They're so scared about the Chinese having to fit diplomatically over a green dot on a map because it's a country they want to invade. So the Biden administration invites Taiwan.

That's a good thing, okay? Number two, and we have some military arrangements with Taiwan, but we'll get into that, Wes. But the reports are that the National Security Council angrily contacted, okay, this is what's coming out, the State Department, concerned that it appeared to show Taiwan as a distinct country.

Now, we invited them to, the United States invited them to participate in this event, Wes. Yeah, and what's ironic about this, and there are so many ironies in the Biden administration, but this was not a map about national boundaries and nor was it a summit about nations. It was a summit for which parts of the world in Asia are free and democratic and which parts are not. This map simply showed that Taiwan is a democracy and that is actually the truth. They're one of the few democracies in that part of the world. And so the whole discussion was about which parts of Asia are free and democratic, which parts are not. That irony is lost on the Biden administration because the whole purpose of the summit was a summit for what?

Democracies. We need to be clear on this. The United States invited Taiwan fan to participate in this. We said come in and give a presentation in a symposium that's called a Summit for Democracy. And it's anything but surprising that this is Taiwan's view, Jay.

I mean, of course, if you're going to invite Taiwan, this is the view that they're going to express and look, I think it would have been perfectly appropriate for the United States in advance to say this is going to be an airing of various views on the topic. And look, here's my second concern with this, Jay. No matter the issue, no matter the issue we talk about in Washington, D.C., when something goes against the narrative of this administration, censorship seems to be what they jump to, and that's what they jump to in this case. That is why, Jay, you talked about the flurry of emails that has reportedly took place once this image was taken down. Jay, we want to know who took those images down. We want to know why they were taken down. We want to know who authorized the taking down of those images. And maybe most importantly, Jay, we want to know if they stand by that decision because if you think back to the Iran glitch over that video, the story that we heard in the days to follow, Jay, that was ultimately not the truth. Oh, and we found that out, of course, through our Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, which, believe me, they fought us, the Obama administration fought us very aggressively on, as you can imagine, and then we got the information, and of course, someone ordered the edit.

Yeah. And then you got this email flurry from the NSC, so you know what's going on here. Yeah, they were scrambling to not disrupt completely the conference, but they didn't lose the video feed, and in fact, when the video started from the minister from Taiwan, the map wasn't there.

It was part of their tech presentation. The map came up like you would if you were watching the news into a digital screen. You would have thought that if they had issues with that, they could have said, okay, when you come back, take that map down, because it started that way, because that might hurt your position as much as ours, but it shows weakness. If you can't have a summit for democracy, shouldn't it upset the totalitarians? Shouldn't it upset the Chinese Communist Party? Shouldn't it upset the North Koreans to participate? No, because they're not a democracy. But isn't that part of these submits is to isolate them and make them feel like they're bad?

That's why they're in red. You're pointing them out, and like I said, the United States didn't do this much. We would, of course, come to the same conclusion, but this was done independently. All the Taiwan representative was doing was showing what was already the reality, but Wes, this shows you the problem that we are going to be looking at post the Olympics in China. Right, and our official policy towards Taiwan is what is called strategic ambiguity, and yet it seems that there's not only- Can you explain that? Yeah, it means that ever since the 1970s when Nixon reached out to China and we established an official relationship with them, they wanted us to adopt a one-China policy, that there is one Chinese people, one Chinese government, and so we embraced the one-China policy- Which included Taiwan. It includes Taiwan, but here again, it becomes ambiguous because we embrace a one-China policy, and yet we also recognize the right of Taiwan to be an independent democratic territory of China.

So it's not only ambiguous, Jay, it's confusing. And President Biden has, quite frankly, added to this. He is the first President in 40 years who actually invited the Taiwanese government to attend his inauguration. In August, he was asked about Taiwan. He said, we have a sacred commitment to the Taiwanese people. Two months later, in October, he was asked point blank, does this mean that we would come to their aid and defend them if they were attacked by China, to which President Biden said yes. Then the White House had to walk that back because that's not our policy. What we have is strategic ambiguity. What we need, Jay, regarding Taiwan is strategic clarity, not only with Taiwan, but with Ukraine and Russia, with Iran, with so many areas. There's a lot of this, and it affects our domestic politics, too. We're taking your calls at 1-800-684-3110. Your view on this, we want to hear what you have to say about this situation, and was this an intentional act?

1-800-684-3110. You know, Jory, I'm trying to look at this domestically, politically. I mean, the idea that you had Taiwan come was a good thing. Sure. But then censoring them and ending them is a big mistake.

Well, it's better not to invite them, or to think through it as you're having these summits, which are ongoing virtual summits, think through, do a better job. You know, instead of, there's a blame game going on now between two democracies. One is saying, oh, Taiwan, you didn't show us that video, and we ran through this. The other is saying, yeah, we did. It was there. You just weren't paying attention.

And then we've been cut out, and they weren't even allowed to have a video feed anymore. So if this is how we treat our Democrat allies, okay, then why are our enemies going to be concerned? That's my question. What enemy looks at this, and they say, another bubble by Joe Biden, another joke by his administration, they can't get a win, they can't get a victory, that's why his approval is at 30-something percent. He is the most disliked President we've seen in our country's history, especially, this was a guy who said, I can work across the aisle.

I know the whole world. I'll tell you what this wasn't. This was not America First.

I'll tell you that. Well, they don't like America First. And they're making it, and the administration's making that crystal clear. We want to hear your, what do you think this does for the United States? What do you think this does, would you rather see America First policies? You invite the Taiwanese government in, and then we edit them. 1-800-684-3110. Van, really quick, on Capitol Hill, what kind of reaction are we getting to this?

Or is it too early to tell? Well, not a lot yet, Jay, but I predict that Senator Cotton, Senator Graham, Senator Cruz, you're going to hear from them on this. And Jay, here's what I think they're going to say first of all. Look, there's no pacifying China on this, so why are you trying? I mean, this is a country that is committing genocide. It's a country with very little individual liberty, Jay. China hates democracy. So of course they're going to hate a summit on democracy. You shouldn't be trying to pacify them. I predict that's the response you'll get.

Yeah, I mean, this is, again, it's a tenuous situation there because we're already concerned, and we'll talk about it later, with China invading Taiwan in the new year. We'll talk about that with Wes Smith. Now we come back with an update on an ACLJ case on life. We'll be joined by senior counsel Jeff Surtees from the ACLJ to talk through us about our latest filing.

This is in Pennsylvania. Give us a call. 1-800-684-3110. Do you believe the Biden administration is competent enough to even host a summit for democracy? Virtually. Virtually.

Because, Lord knows, could you imagine if they were trying to do it in person? 1-800-684-3110. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, play on parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life. Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. Whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith, uncovering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy, and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress, the ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support.

For that, we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's Matching Challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes $100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support. Take part in our Matching Challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family.

Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. Do you believe that this administration, which is just a bungling issue after issue, summit after summit, virtual summits they can't get right? Remember the conversation with Putin?

Couldn't get the button pushed right? The imagery there looked horrible. I mean, it's just embarrassing to be an American. It's embarrassing to be the leading democracy in the world and treat another democracy like Taiwan, who is so reliant on the United States, like that, because we bow down to China. But not the U.S. bows down to no one. But it's clear the Biden administration, taking kind of similar to President Obama, who loved to bend down and kiss the ring, that's not what the Trump administration did when it came to the Saudis. We were treated as equals.

Our elected leaders were treated as equals to the clear king. That's how you act when you're the superpower. You don't bow down. And you don't edit your allies. And this is bowing down just virtually.

Yeah, but they were editing. We're going to get to the pro-life situation in Pennsylvania, but just to follow up on that, we are bowing down. We're inviting the Taiwanese government in. We invited them to the summit. And then when we have them there, and they are ranked as an open and free society, we let them get edited because the National Security Council is, oh, the Chinese are going to get upset. Like, we shouldn't be a little upset with the Chinese government over a couple of things, like a pandemic.

I mean, this is what's so absurd about the, when you don't have America First as a policy, this is what you end up with. But let's go to Pennsylvania. Jeff Certiz is joining us right now. And we just filed a brief, Jeff, in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Tell us what the case is about.

Absolutely, Jay. Yeah, we're filing an amicus brief with the Pennsylvania Supreme Court on behalf of members of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives in defense of an important Pennsylvania law that bars state funding of abortion through its medical assistance program, which, by the way, was upheld by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in 1985. Well, the challengers of this law, Planned Parenthood and a group of abortion providers, they're arguing that this abortion funding ban violates not the US Constitution, but the Pennsylvania State Constitution, which they claim provides greater protection to Pennsylvania citizens than the US Constitution does. Well, we make two arguments in this brief. First, that the abortion providers, they don't have legal standing to press their challenge here, because the only women allegedly harmed here are a subclass of pregnant women. It's not the abortionists.

They are not harmed by this law. The second point we make in this brief, Jay, is that because the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has held, repeatedly so, that it looks to the US Supreme Court for interpretive guidance on how it understands its state constitution. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court should reject this challenge by Planned Parenthood and the abortion fighters on its marriage, just as the United States Supreme Court has done so when those have challenged federal Medicaid restrictions on abortion funding. So, yeah, it's a great brief. It's an important case, and this case reflects what if the United States Supreme Court sends these issues back to the states, we're going to see all this fighting, and not just in the legislatures, but in the state judiciaries as well.

So that's exactly what I wanted to get to, Jeff, and I'm glad you brought that up. We are ahead of this, because you've had the Dobbs case has now been argued. I think it's pretty clear that the Mississippi law is going to be held constitutional.

You never go by an oral argument. Whether there's five votes for Roe vs. Wade to be overturned, it's hard to say, but I think this will do a significant rollback to the states to give them authority. But in that decision on the order that came out on Friday from the Supreme Court, John Roberts clearly signing with the liberals, not wanting to overturn Roe, I think is, Jeff, how I read it. But the other five seem to me, I think it may be a 5-4 decision coming in Mississippi. I think we are going to get a 5-4 decision coming in Mississippi, and there's a chance we actually might even get Chief Justice Roberts giving us six votes there.

On the Mississippi law, yes. On the rollback of Roe, I don't know if he will go there. I don't know if he's going to go back there either, but you know what, if he wants to preserve the institution of the Supreme Court, better for a decision reversing Casey and Roe to be by a supermajority instead of a 5-4 majority. What I wanted to say was we are taking it to the next level already by dealing with it at the state level.

Jeff, that's what's important here. That's exactly right, because if the abortion fight goes back to the states, it's not just going to go back to state legislatures, it's going to go to state judiciaries as well. Will state supreme courts hold that according to their state constitution, there is a fundamental right to abortion? So it's going to be a fight not just in the legislatures, by a majority vote and by a governor signing a bill, it's also going to be fought in the courts. Whether or not state constitutions provide a greater protection of privacy than the United States Constitution.

Jeff, one thing we've been talking about to our audience is that we always prepare for every option, but in the best case scenario with Dobbs, which would either mean, to me I think there's two good scenarios. One that's great would be the overturning of Roe and Casey and the law in Mississippi standing, which gives some clear guidance to states. But also if the Mississippi law stands and somehow Roe is basically gutted but it's still on the books, it will allow the ACLJ, and we're already doing this work defensively, but to offensively send our experts, people like you Jeff on the life issue and others, to go into state legislatures and work on the correct law. So we're not just defending, we're not just advising, and we're going to be launching some new initiatives with the ACLJ that will allow us to do it at the federal level and the state level to get right in there.

So that we're not just brought in to defend laws or just some advice, but we can actually be helping legislators at the federal and state level draft them. You know, I was just going to ask that to Than because the truth of the matter is, as we've seen, we have worked tirelessly on the life issue for really 40 years. I mean, think about Pat Monahan, who's been involved in this issue since the 70s. But, you know, Than, on the federal level too, the ACLJ has been fully engaged. So as Jeff was saying, returning it to the states doesn't mean you ignore the federal side of this either.

Well, we've seen this day coming, Jay. I mean, we've been proactively engaged in the states. I mean, I think just recently about Oklahoma, South Dakota, Maryland, sending people to testify in front of the legislators, actually drafting some of the bills that they've considered. And then, as Jeff mentioned, also helping them defend measures in court.

Jay, you mentioned that federal nexus, though. I'm telling you, here's what's going to happen if we get a good ruling in Dobbs. As states begin to do what we've been asking them to do over the past several decades, there's going to be a move on the federal level. It's already underway. The House of Representatives has already passed it to actually codify Roe and Jay, eviscerate all state restrictions on abortion. So we're going to have to double team this on both the federal level.

We're going to have to hold that restriction back. And then on the state level, we're going to have to continue the work that we've been doing for decades now, helping states push those restrictions forward. Again, it will open up an entire new area of work for the ACLJ, again, so that if you have to defend them, which we've been doing at the state level forever, that's not the new part. But it's going in there, and sometimes states do ask us for advice, but it's going there draft word for word. We're representing South Dakota right now at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, a state approach to informed consent on abortion, a novel approach, I think totally constitutional.

I think in light of Dobbs, it will be even more so. So we're already at the appellate level there, and Jeff, like you said, we're at the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania on this one, correct? Yes, we are, absolutely correct, Jay, and we're hoping for a victory in this decision.

There you go. So Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Supreme Court of the United States, Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in South Dakota, ACLJ front and center. Yeah, all these life issues and preparing for the future, and what we've been able to do is to support our work at ACLJ Matching Challenge throughout the month of December, which is our most important month of the year when it comes to fundraising and getting prepared. ACLJ.org, donate today, double the impact year donation with our Matching Challenge. That's ACLJ.org, second half hour coming up.

At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's Matching Challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes $100. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. I'm talking about freedom. I'm talking about freedom. We will fight for the right to live in freedom. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow.

We'll start it out with this. Maria on Facebook just wrote in, it feels like our country has already been sold out to China and these summits are just a facade. If you're just joining us, you may have seen these democracy summits that President Biden has been hosting virtually from the White House with various world leaders and experts in democracy, so you get academics as well. The one that has caused controversy is a brilliant minister from Taiwan. And they came in, they did the presentation, and their presentation really showed a map. It showed where Taiwan was, which I think is helpful for any Americans who are actually paying attention to this. They've been able to pinpoint Taiwan. There's a lot of islands around there to know exactly where that is. So there's Taiwan.

It's green. They're giving their presentation. The moment that person is done talking, and then President Biden is allowed to re-engage, when they come back up, no more video. The President Biden was re-engaging it, so at that point, President Biden was re-engaging. Is that correct?

A moderator was engaged at that point. So then they bring it back. And what's back? No picture.

Audio only. Let's show it for people what it looks like. No, that's not what it looks like.

It didn't have the map. Okay. So, yeah. So if you look at the minister, Andrei Teng-Taiwan, that's all that came up. They shut the video off. They took the face of the minister on. And, of course, what they were trying to show, which is where they are and who they're surrounded by, which is they're surrounded by a lot of bad actors when it comes to democracy ratings. Human rights. I'll tell them the worst.

It's a pretty good explanatory map if you were just tuning into that summit. And then who took it down? Well, it appears it's clear that it was the U.S. government.

Yes. What is not clear 100 percent yet is they love to blame technical errors. But there is a lot of chatter between the – apparently, we're going to find out because we're going to get these emails. There's a lot of chatter between the National Security Council, the White House, contacting the State Department, concerned it appeared to show Taiwan west as a distinct country. And that is – that's really not the case. If the context of this summit for democracies was talking about national boundaries in which countries support democracy and which do not, that would be different. But this was a summit for democracies in which they were trying to explain which parts of Asia are democracy and which parts are not. And that chart was completely accurate. You know, Taiwan is a democracy. China is not. And that's really all the chart was presenting.

You know, when you think about this for a moment, it's something you said earlier, Jordan. We – this summit for democracies, we, the United States, invited Taiwan in. We said come in and participate. And then we edited them. We censored them, basically. Not edited because it was live, but censored them. Which hurts their position as a democracy.

Oh, terrible. I mean, it shows that they are – we're not willing to stand for them against China, which is – the only reason to take down that video is because you're worried about Chinese repercussions. At what point in time was America really ever concerned about Chinese repercussions? We're not talking about war.

This is not war. We're talking about diplomatic repercussions. They're already having a tough enough time. You know, with the Olympics and things like that, they're supposed to have. But the idea that we're so scared, you know, of China now is the weakness of the Biden administration.

And by the way, I like to say this clearly. It's because that Biden family has gotten rich over their contacts with China. They got the sun, you know, selling his artwork and stakes in Chinese companies for millions and millions of dollars. Tens of millions.

He was not a painter before, and now he's gotten into that market, which could lead to some very questionable transactions because of how inflated the art market is right now. So this is a family, the Biden family, which is very reliant on China for their wealth. So you ask yourself this question. Do you think this administration is putting America first when it comes to dealing with China? Let's put it right to where it's supposed to be.

Do you think that the Biden administration is putting America first when it comes to dealings with China? We're going to ask that question to Rick Renell coming up in the next segment. We want your calls and comments on this too. 1-800-684-3110. That's 800-684-3110. Is America being put first in dealing with China?

Or are we already equivocating? 1-800-684-3110. Don't forget ACLJ.org for the matching challenge.

Back with more in just a moment. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. Whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith, uncovering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy, and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress, the ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support.

For that, we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes $100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support.

Take part in our matching challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, the Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life.

Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. The ACLJ senior advisor for national security and foreign policy, the four acting director of national intelligence, ambassador to Germany, Rick Grenell is joining us now. And Rick, we've been focusing in on this summit for democracy.

President Biden kicked off last week. But then there's already been some issues because a minister from Taiwan was asked to participate. We all thought, you know, off the bat, that's a good sign that we're allowing someone from Taiwan to speak directly in this summit. But they came with a map. And their map was pretty generic because it was just showing that they're based on the report that was already issued, a report that showed that they're kind of surrounded by either the red level, there's no democracy countries or orange level, which are pretty much pretty much no democracy countries. And they're kind of alone sitting there as this island in green that is a, quote, go green democracy. And that map, it appeared during the first time the speaker from Taiwan was participating.

And then suddenly the map was gone, the video was gone, and it was audio only. And now the White House in Taiwan, it's a back and forth on who was responsible for what. But what it does appear is that it was intentionally taken down by the Biden team. Look, the woke culture has infiltrated into the Pentagon and into the State Department and to our foreign policy. And I think that's shameful. Of course, we have a one China policy.

Everybody knows that. But we shouldn't be in the position of censoring people and telling other countries that they can't bring up certain diplomatic points. I mean, we would never do this. And I think historically we would never do this, but we're doing it now. And I think that it's really indicative of what the progressives want to see, which is a silencing of debate and an inability to hear other people's point of views.

I grew up in a world where my dad always said there are two sides to every story. We should be listening to two sides. So one of the things that's interesting here, Rick, and this is very familiar to you because of your role as director of national intelligence. So apparently while this was going on, the National Security Council and the White House office angrily contacted the State Department, concerned that it appeared to show Taiwan as a distinct country, when all it did was show Taiwan on the map green, which is what the report indicated, as a country that was open, which they are, and surrounded by a lot of countries that are not open at all. So it was just reflective of what the report said, but we invited them in. Of course, this is highly political, very young and inexperienced staffers at the White House who are panicking because somehow the woke culture has got to them and they want to have diplomacy without debate. And that's the problem that I have is that whatever the reason is that Taiwan wanted to bring it up, I don't care what the reason is. Why are we silencing people in a debate?

Why are we trying to make sure that the conversation is cooked and that everybody just shows up and performs like an actor and we already know the outcome? You know where that happens? In places like China and Russia. It shouldn't be happening in Washington, D.C. Jordan said this earlier and it is true. This is a virtual summit. Could you imagine what this would be like if this was actually a summit live in country? I mean, I can't even imagine. They can't even get the buttons to work on their video when they're doing reports.

Yeah, I don't understand. Rick, the issue here is that you're going to invite Taiwan. You know what the issue with Taiwan is? They're surrounded by an especially one country which is not democratic at all that we've all talked about could be invaded.

Taiwan sometime in the new year. And that's not just like hypothesizing. It's getting real chatter about that. And then suddenly, you know, we're not strong enough to let their speaker at least just say their piece and educate the people who are tuning in, which I don't know how many people were, but the people who are tuning in so that they even know where Taiwan is, where it exists on the map and who it's surrounded by.

It was educational. Look, I think this is a new low point for the Biden administration and for Secretary of State Blinken. To have diplomacy without debate is a joke. It certainly should not be happening in America. And telling our allies and our friends and others around the world what to say when they show up at a multilateral or bilateral conversation is unacceptable.

People need to call this out and Joe Biden himself needs to speak very clearly that we are not going to forge diplomacy without debate. Yeah, you know, Rick, the other thing that I think this is reflective of, though, is sort of corporate America writ large and the NBA and other institutions like that because it seems like everyone is bowing and scraping to China. We're afraid to criticize China because they'll not let you sell your products there. Already they're trying to edit Walt Disney's movies that play in China. And it seems like every time China threatens to cut someone off or to restrict their trade activity or whatever, that the knee jerk reaction is to bow to China and let them have their way.

Do you see it similar to that? I think that's a great point, and certainly we need to be highlighting all of these different angles where people are afraid to speak up and somehow are intimidated by the Chinese. Look, it's time to admit that when we let the Chinese into the World Trade Organization 20 years ago, that it has not worked. It has not made the rule of law stronger. It has not made human rights stronger. Capitalism has not flourished. The idea that we're engaging with China to bring them into the international community, that was the whole idea.

It failed. And we should recognize that the Communist Party of China is not interested in debate and not interested in capitalism, human rights or the rule of law. Yeah, so interesting, Rick. Reuters is reporting this. So Reuters is saying that this is what happened, that this is a second source, they said, that was directly involved in the summit.

And this is what they said. They said that the video booth operator acted on the White House explicit instructions. It was clearly policy concerns.

This was completely an internal overreaction. We saw this in a case that we brought against the Obama administration on Iran where they edited, again, seems to be their method of operation, they edited a video on the Iran situation, which showed the real timeline. Then, in fact, we were engaged with the predecessor, who was even a worse President than the supposed one that we dealt with, that this had been going on for a year. And they edited it out with a flash, said it was a glitch, and then, of course, when we did the FOIA litigation, we found out it was a specific instruction. But here we invited the government of Taiwan in, and all they did was show a map that showed these countries that were based on the report where they were not open or open, red, green, yellow, they had different highlighted colors. And that is what, but the Biden administration invited Taiwan to participate, and as Catherine on YouTube said, it's as if he invited them in so then we could then insult them. Look, transparency is going to be our friend, and maybe we should think about doing a FOIA request, not to pile on as to who did this.

That's not my point. But I think being transparent as to who is responsible for instructing to take this down. I want to know if it was a manager, if it was somebody low level, have the managers come forward at the White House to say that was a mistake, we overreacted, we're going to fix it next time. But knowing who did it, what their title is, and what instructions they were given is the way that we fix this for the future so it doesn't happen again. And transparency is our friend, it's not political, and maybe we should go after and find out exactly who did this and what their title was. Some of this to me, Rick, are the Democracy Summit, or the Summit for Democracy, seems to be a bit self-hating in that I feel like the administration is really trying to bring back the attention to the U.S. and be able to complain about how bad we are, and that we're no longer the democracy once were because of the politics of the previous administration they just didn't like the politics of, so suddenly that's not democracy anymore to them. I feel like they're doing this all so that they could attack America. Well, look, one of the criteria of being a democracy is having an open debate, is not being afraid to actually have difference of opinions publicly debated, and shutting down Taiwan when they're trying to raise some concerns is not one of the reflections of a democracy.

That's just the fact. If we saw this happen in another country, I can tell you from my 11 years experience at the State Department, we would call it out and say don't do that. You need to have debates, and don't be afraid of another participant disagreeing with you. Have these debates.

And clearly the overreaction from the White House, from some staffers at the White House, is to shut down debates and to have diplomacy without debate. I think we've got to fix this. I think this is a real problem, and it better not happen again. It would be like $10 for the ACLJ. That $500 donation would be like $1,000 for the ACLJ, because we have a group of donors that will match those donations that come through the month of December. Support our work at ACLJ.org. Make that donation if you can.

We'll be right back on Sekulow. Music Only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable and voiceless deserve to be protected is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice to defend the right to life. We've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn.

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, play on parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life. Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad, whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith, uncovering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy, and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress, the ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support.

For that we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's Matching Challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

A $50 gift becomes $100. This is a critical time for the ACLJ. The work we do simply would not occur without your generous support. Take part in our Matching Challenge today. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family.

Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. It's as if Biden invited Taiwan just to insult them. It certainly doesn't help them when they are facing serious threats from China, who is flying fighter jets over there. It appears all likelihood that China is making this move to annex, just like Russia did under the Obama years. They annexed Crimea. That was one of their top places that they wanted back under Russian control. This is number one when it comes to China under getting it back under control.

It's Taiwan. And you can imagine that this is a very real scenario that could be happening within less than a month. You know, Ken on YouTube asks a really good question, Ken, and that is, does the threat of China invading Taiwan and Russia invading, possibly invading Ukraine, does that put us closer to a more global conflict? I think the answer is no, because I don't think these administrations are going to do anything.

They have no penalty to that. They haven't sold the country on that. I mean, to build up to that scale war, you'd be talking about it every day for the last four or five months.

Getting it ready. Getting people, and also Americans bought in on the loss of life. I don't think they would. You're talking about this world war three style loss of life. Yeah, I think this is why you've got to be clear on what we're dealing with.

And that's what we're going to just shoot straight. We're not going to get into a war with Russia and China. But West Smith, Colonel Smith has an article up at ACLJ.org saying, China is a complex national security threat.

What you need to know. China is aggressive. And as General John Hyten, who just recently retired as the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said, not only militarily, but economically and geopolitically, they are outpacing the United States of America.

And I'll give you some examples of that. Not only the Taiwan issue, which of course is front and center because of the Olympics, and probably they will invade Taiwan after the Olympics because China has said they will use military force if necessary to bring them back to the mainland. But they've also violated the agreements with the people of Hong Kong and the United Kingdom.

That agreement said that for 50 years, Hong Kong would be free and democratic. Now they're under Chinese law. They are arresting and imprisoning demonstrators who are pro-democracy. You've got the military buildup in the South China Sea. China has troops on the Indian border. They're also in conflict over territorial disputes with India. Last week, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs had to visit Vietnam because China is also invading the coastal waters of Vietnam like they do with Taiwan. Economically, they're intent on trade dominance because of slave labor. And now we've discovered that not only are they buying influence in places like Africa and Afghanistan, but they are now constructing their first naval base on the Atlantic Ocean, which is our part of the world. China is aggressive. They're moving forward.

And here's the thing, Jay. We are doing little or nothing to counter their aggressive moves. Yeah, and look, we saw them in our work in Africa. You saw them, Jordan. China was all over Africa.

Everywhere. And the difference then is they were not really exporting ideology. They were just there to strip mine, basically, and pay off leaders there. Now it's ideology. Now it's to support.

That's what ideology is. We're the power you can rely on. We're going to build your port. We don't care about your corruption laws.

We don't have those laws in our country. So you're going to get rich. We're going to build ports that'll help you, but they're also going to help us because they're going to have a military component of those ports. That's the shift that we've seen around the world. It went from China going to buy diamonds and things that you need for cell phones and all those ships to actually implementing long-term bases, if you want to call them that, all over the world. Yeah, so the countering of that, of China's aggressiveness then, is something that on a federal level, that's where federal authority, the federal government actually has its strongest role, foreign policy. No question about it, Jay, and you look at all of those situations that you talked about, and most of them, I would say maybe even all of them, Jay, the United States did not create it.

But let me tell you what is complicating every one of those situations. U.S. weakness. I mean, Jay, that is one of the biggest benefits of U.S. leadership around the world.

When we show strength, these situations tend to not get out of control. And Jay, I was thinking back to the conversation you had with Rick, and I really do think the richest irony of the issue that we're talking about today and the fact that this censorship happened at a democracy summit. We're supposed to celebrate free speech.

We're supposed to be an example of free and open debate. Jay, look, I mean, even in a worst case scenario, let's say one of the invited countries in this situation, Taiwan, said something that the United States disagreed with. You know what would be the proper demonstration of a democracy? The United States could have come up and said, look, we have a different view.

We're going to air our different view, and then we're going to judge them on the merits. That's the kind of strength and leadership that the United States has to show around the world. But Jay, we certainly have to show it in a summit that we put on.

We failed to do that in this situation. But like Jordan said, could you imagine if this was a live summit with actually in country, where it was in country and our government leaders were there and this was going on? Well, this is why the Biden administration is probably not competent enough to even get to that live summit right now and organize it.

But no, they would be, again, they're not able to do this digitally and virtually. They knew they were going to bring on a country like Taiwan that was going to be controversial to China. So then why punish the Taiwanese speaker by having to go to voice only? It's the typical administration of, oh, there were some technical problems.

There were no technical problems. They didn't like that map. That map was the problem.

We know that because there are already a flurry of emails. Oh, my word, they're showing Taiwan is somehow separate. And all Taiwan was trying to show is this is the only green go democracy where they are in the world. They're surrounded by the reds and the dark orange places that are not democratic at all. And yet they couldn't even make that point to the other participates in this summit for democracy, which is a joke, because I believe this summit for democracy is really just an attack on us. It's an attack on America because the premise is our democracy is somehow weaker. And when you start telling everyone around the world that, you know what they hear? They don't care about your democracy being weaker. They hear your country's weaker. And that's why China or Russia, they're not really afraid of taking steps to potentially invade, whether it's Taiwan or Ukraine. And it's not clear that any of those sanctions threats that were made against the Russians will change anything in that region. Time will tell on that.

But I just encourage you as well, George on YouTube, he wrote in, thank you ACLJ, we need some light in the darkness. You know, I feel for those individuals who are in Taiwan, who are trying to speak to the world before their country is invaded by the Chinese communist hardliner party, who've just enshrined their President as like a leader for life. President Xi, he's not even leaving China really anymore these days because he has gone full on a dictator and they've got one little island who's able to speak up and stand up for it.

And we shut them down so that people don't even know where it is. And Wes, what do you think the risk that Taiwan faces right now from China? Seriously?

Grave risk. I mean, China has made it really clear. We have to deal with reality. China has said they will use military force as necessary. They are also intent, Jay, on displacing the United States as the world's only remaining superpower. We need to acknowledge that threat and that reality and start doing things to counter it.

I want to encourage you folks. You see the depth of what we've got here. I mean, in Washington, D.C. with fans team, Rick Rinnell, former director of national intelligence, our ability to give you in-depth analysis. And then right to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania on an abortion case as we're dealing with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in South Dakota on a life issue.

All of these issues and then bringing you this broadcast every single day, five days a week during the week is a production. And there's a lot of people involved in it. Your support of the ACLJ makes all that possible. We have a matching challenge right now at ACLJ.org.

That's ACLJ.org. You can double the impact of your donation if you go there now throughout the month of December. So if you're financially able to do so, it's a great time to double the impact of your contribution at ACLJ.org.

We'll talk to you tomorrow. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20. A $50 gift becomes $100. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-07-09 13:44:26 / 2023-07-09 14:08:02 / 24

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime