VP Harris, Jen Psaki Have Some Explaining to do on Airstrikes

Today on Sekulow, Vice President Harris, Jen Psaki, as well as Joe Biden himself, have a little bit of explaining to do on the latest US airstrikes in Syria. We'll talk about that and more today on Sekulow. All right, welcome to Sekulow Radio. You know, it's not getting a ton of attention in the news, which is interesting because I'm sure if it was President Trump who sent airstrikes into Syria, specifically to not send them into Iraq, even though that's where the US troops were attacked by Iranian-backed militias.

They sent the airstrikes into a supposedly a place those militias use that are actually across the border from Iraq in Syria because they don't want to upset the Iranians too much. I mean, I'll read the exact quote from Admiral Kirby, who's back at the Department of Defense as a spokesperson yet again. Right. I mean, you know, it's been only four years since he had that role. He's right back again. He went to CNN.

He's back there. But what we're focusing on is not yet whether or not these were the right strikes. I mean, obviously we had the US was hit by Iranian-backed militias. It injured some US National Guard.

It killed a contractor working with us. So you were going to respond. The question is, do you respond in a way that tries to appease the Iranians?

Is that the best way to come out swinging? And then also to point out the hypocrisy. When President Trump said, you know what, you've crossed that red line, Syria, with the use of chemical weapons, we're going to show you what we'll do if you do it again. Here's 100 Tomahawk missiles coming right at you. And then, you know what Kamala Harris at the time wrote to that?

I've got the tweet in my hand we can put up on the screen for people on Facebook and Periscope. I strongly support our men and women in uniform and believe we must hold Assad accountable for his unconscionable use of chemical weapons. But I'm deeply concerned about the legal rationale of last night's strikes. The President that's about Trump needs to lay out a comprehensive strategy in Syria in consultation with Congress. He needs to do it now. She also wrote, yesterday my colleagues and I introduced the No War Against Iran Act, which would deny funds for unauthorized military action in Iran. Congress must act quickly so Trump doesn't unilaterally take our country into another war. That was just from the killing of Soleimani, a targeted attack on the terrorist leader of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

Jen Psaki, what is the legal authority for strikes? Assad is a brutal dictator but Syria is a sovereign country. Now I'm going to stop at that one right now, Deb, because these strikes purposely were done, if you believe what Kirby says, in Syria so our Iraqi allies who are not so great would not be upset because actually this group is based out of Iraq.

Correct. So what legal justification was there to hit in Syria when the group is based in Iraq? And they say it's right on the border, they use these buildings.

Maybe they have it, maybe they don't. But this is hypocrisy. I think the biggest thing is not whether the action taken, the military action taken was appropriate. It may well have been.

I have no problem with knocking these out. We heard Secretary Pompeo say he hopes it wasn't just a bunch of bombs in the desert. Yeah, he hopes it wasn't bombs in the desert that actually took something out. The hypocrisy, however, which is so prevalent here, is that you have a situation where exactly what President Trump did, President Biden basically did, and Biden's people, including Jen Psaki, were saying what is the authority to do all of this? And I think it just shows you the nature of the hypocrisy. But the President is the commander-in-chief, Andy.

I've only got a minute here. And commander-in-chief has authority. Yeah, I don't have any doubt the commander-in-chief has the authority, and I support that authority. But the question is the hypocrisy that you mentioned that is outstanding. President Trump is criticized for what he did when he made these strikes, the question about Syrian sovereignty and so forth. But now it's okay when Biden orders the strike of seven 500-pound bombs in the desert, as Secretary Pompeo says, on what was Psaki called the sovereign country.

So which is it going to be? Is it going to be hypocrisy or is it going to be appeasement of Iran? There's also reports Kamala Harris had no idea about this and was not happy about it because she doesn't like these strikes. So maybe she's not as hypocritical as her tweets suggest. But this is the part I can't stand the most. Mr. Kirby said the American retaliation was meant to punish the perpetrators but not to escalate hostilities with Iran. Even though these are Iranian-backed elections.

How gross is that? That's bad. The challenges facing Americans are substantial. At a time when our values, our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack, it's more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines protecting your freedoms, defending your rights in courts, in Congress and in the public arena. And we have an exceptional track record of success.

But here's the bottom line. We could not do our work without your support. We remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms.

That remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life-changing work.

Become a member today. 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, playing 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. Welcome to Sekulow. And folks, this is something I think that troubles me the most about these strikes. We might find out that the strikes were great. That they were the right target and they sent the right message, but it seems like it was, one, trying to appease. Because it's exactly what Mr. Kirby, John Kirby, Admiral Kirby, who's now back again as Department of Defense press secretary. Mr. Kirby said that the American retaliation was meant to punish the perpetrators of the rocket attack, which are Iranian-backed militias, but not to escalate hostilities with Iran, with which the Biden administration has sought to renew talks on a nuclear deal that President Donald J. Trump had shelved. Quote, we have acted in a deliberate manner that aims to de-escalate the overall situation in eastern Syria and Iraq. One, I'm not sure whenever a US air strike de-escalates anything, but number two, I cannot stand this language of we know that they were Iranian-backed groups. They say that, the Department of Defense.

They're not trying to hide that part. But yet, we're trying to do it in a way that doesn't upset Iran because we want so badly Iran to come back to the table for us. This is, again, it points to what we've been discussing with Grinnell, with Pompeo, this idea of almost begging the Iranians to come back to the table, and it just makes America look weak. I don't know why we have this, such a significant desire to increase the level of friendship between the Iranian regime, that's what I'm talking about, not the people, the regime, and the United States. The military action that was taken by President Biden was because of what? Action that was taken by Iranian surrogates, troops, against the Americans. When the United States went in under President Trump to Syria, we were going after Syria. Now, no question Syria is a proxy for Iran.

I mean, nobody questions that. But I think we have to be really clear and very real as to what is actually going on here. And from a policy perspective, what they've got to get down, Harry, is what is the policy for the United States in engagement with Iran? Because it is kind of bizarre to say we want to reduce hostilities, so we just did a small missile attack.

Absolutely. So I think it's important to note that the Democrats and the Democrat-controlled media claims that the strikes were highly calibrated and were aimed at de-escalating future conflicts. This means that the Biden administration, in my opinion, has not learned the lesson well of deterrence. Translation, the strikes were justified, in my opinion. But in reality, Biden wants to continue Obama's policy of appeasing Iran.

That's the bottom line. Our new Senior Counsel for Global Affairs, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, was on our broadcast, of course, Monday when we made that announcement. He had joined the ACLJ. We talked about the attack on the U.S. National Guard and the troops by these Iranian-backed groups and how the Trump administration would have responded. This was before there was any response from the Biden administration.

Take a listen. We made a decision early on in the administration. We made a communication to the Iranians that said we are not going to allow you to get away with using proxies. What do we mean by that? If an Iraqi Shia militiamen, underwritten by the Iranians, attacks an American soldier in Iraq were coming to Iran to impose costs on you, that is hard to do, but we made clear that's what we're going to do.

This week you saw this. You saw what looks to have been an Iranian-sponsored attack that injured an American and killed a contractor inside of Iraq, and this administration says we want to go sit at the table and talk to them. They will interpret that as a free pass to hurt Americans. And so not only did they not go into Iran, when this was done by Iran, we took out Soleimani. We took out the leader of their terrorist force, the Revolutionary Guard, and they were pretty quiet after that.

They shot a few missiles off from Hamas into Israel, nothing, rockets, and some missiles at us that hit nothing, no casualties. And so it was very successful, and you heard nothing from Iran until the Biden administration, of course, comes back in and starts begging at the table. But that is because Iran now knows that when their proxies hit at the U.S., we're not going to go into Iran. Like Mike Pompeo said, Iran knew from the Trump administration that if you use your proxies outside of Iran, we're going to take the fight back inside Iran. We're going to take out Soleimani.

We're going to take out leadership. We're going to hurt, punish you, not just bomb some random place in Syria where those proxies are. We're going to take it to the heart of the problem, and that led to a more peaceful Middle East with Iran on the brink of economic collapse.

This is the thing that I find interesting. We're going to Andy and Thanh on this because you look at the, again, I'm not challenging President Biden's decision to do the missile attack. The way they explain it is in Syria versus in Iraq. I get it, but not really because Syria is a sovereign nation, as Jen Psaki was so upset about last time when she wasn't President, and so was Joe Biden, but not so much anymore.

But our military did, I'm sure, a good job. The point is, what is the policy? What is the American policy in engagement with Iran?

And the truth of the matter is, you don't get it both ways. Crippling sanctions brought Iran to their knees. Now, Joe Biden has already said, Andy, the President, has already said that, through his spokespeople, that they want to go back to a discussion with the Iranians. However, they acknowledged that they are currently and have not been in compliance with the JCPOA. Now, they weren't in compliance with the JCPOA. It's not because the Americans walked out, because the Europeans are still involved. They're in compliance with the JCPOA because the Europeans let them do it because of the economic trade between these countries. Ambassador Grinnell, our special senior advisor on foreign policy, who was the ambassador to Germany, noted that. So, you know, this Iran policy issue, I think we had a reuniting Middle East coming together, which I hope this administration doesn't destroy.

I don't think they can, because I think it's here to stay. But, boy, they're sending these mixed signals at an early stage here, very dangerous politically. That's true, Jay. I mean, we don't really have a coherent policy that we're exercising toward Iran and ultimately deterring and stopping their conduct. I think Secretary Pompeo was correct in saying and asking the not-so-rhetorical question, is this really bombs in the desert? I mean, you cannot appease dictatorial regimes by simply taking token actions against them for what we know are terrorist-sponsored activities engaged in by their surrogates that happened in Hezbollah. And we now are taking these actions that are really not coherent. In a sense, what happened last night at 2 a.m. their time was a laughable act because we did not have a bomb.

We exercised the authority through the President, which I don't doubt that he has the authority, to send bombs on a desert outpost somewhere in the middle of nowhere, but you didn't really look at the real perpetrator, and that's Iran. You've given them a free pass. Yet again, the Biden administration has done that.

That is not good. The Trump administration gave a very powerful signal to the Iranians for backing terrorist organizations and for taking terrorist activities under their wing and for promulgating them. This, I think, that President Biden did does not really prove anything but a weakness on his part to engage in acts that are really showmanship and not something substantive. I don't know if we've heard from Lindsey Graham yet on this.

We'll take a look. But, Than, what are you hearing in Washington? This got very little coverage in the mainstream media. Very little. Yeah, very little, Jay. There are two main problems that the administration has from my perspective in Washington, D.C., and it's kind of on two different sides of the coin.

The first one you all have touched on with quite a bit of depth. The hypocrisy and the inconsistency here is going to really wreak havoc on them. We've already got core supporters like Ilhan Omar saying, you know, what in the world is going on here? You said that you didn't have this authority and now you're using it.

What's the story here? That's going to be a problem for them. But, Jay, in my view, the bigger problem is this idea they're now trying to convince policymakers that airstrikes are somehow a tool of de-escalation. Look, I mean, we've been, one of the voices on the right being very clear about the authority to use airstrikes, but make no mistake about it, an airstrike has to be a tool of deterrence. I thought Secretary Pompeo said it very well.

It can't just be bombs in the desert. It actually has to accomplish a means that advances the interests of the United States. Nobody in the world, Jay, is going to believe that an airstrike is somehow an act of diplomacy or an act of de-escalation. But, look, they're going to have a big problem with this because not only have they been hypocritical, but the messaging on it is inconsistent.

And, Jay, they've really lost people on all sides of the issue. Harry, I want to go quickly to you, and then, Jordan, you finish this segment up, but from a policy standpoint, again, I point to the inconsistency of the policy, which is going to be particularly dangerous if they are going to try any kind of negotiations with Iran. I think that's true, and I think basically what the Biden administration has done is that they have prepared an open door for future Iranian aggression. Yeah, that's what I think it is.

Jordan? No, I think, listen, ultimately here, you have people like Joe Biden himself during the campaign said this afternoon in the tweet, I'll be discussing Donald Trump's recent actions in Syria, how his erratic, impulsive decisions endanger our troops and make us all less safe. How was it, you know, what was making our troops less safe? Biden comes in, and the first strikes on U.S. troops happened under his watch in months, I mean months if not years. There haven't been strikes on U.S. troops acting in that region based from Iranian militias since we took out Suleimani, and those were very minor, because we took out Suleimani, and they still have a problem in running their revolutionary guard. So this tit for tat, I just can't stand.

No, I don't like it either. I don't like getting our military stuck in trying to play on the same field as these proxy terrorist groups. By the same rules almost.

Yes, right, we'll hit you, we'll just kind of hit you barely. This is leading towards a bad path and a bad outcome. 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 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. The challenges facing Americans are substantial at a time when our values, our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack. It's more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines protecting your freedoms, defending your rights in courts, in Congress, and in the public arena. And we have an exceptional track record of success.

But here's the bottom line. We could not do our work without your support. We remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms.

That remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work. Become a member today.

ACLJ.org. Alright, welcome back to Second Hill. We are taking your phone calls, too, now.

1-800-6A-431-10. So we wanted to lay this out because, honestly, it's just not getting much attention to the media. I mean, it gets its five minutes here, and most of it is pointing out – it's happening right now in Fox News – how Joe Biden and his team are being ripped for their past criticism of Donald Trump on his actions in Syria.

And so I think it's fair to point out that they look very hypocritical. There's even a report out that Kamala Harris had no idea about this, and she's really upset. Because maybe she doesn't want to look like a hypocrite since she was putting out tweets questioning the authority of Donald Trump to even strike Syria as a sovereign nation, even though they are one that we would not consider, of course, an ally.

But why strikes here? Now, this was after chemical weapons were used, for goodness sakes. It was Obama who drew that red line, and it wouldn't back it up. And it was Donald Trump who said, you use chemical weapons, we are going to draw that as a red line, and we'll respond. He did with 100 Tomahawk missiles, and things quieted down there. ISIS was destroyed. Al-Baghdadi was killed. Suleimani was taken out as the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

But I do want to get to phone calls. If you've got questions about this, 1-800-684-3110. And I always point this out. My first reaction is, here we go again. Potentially Democrats, we don't know yet, but you get Democrats in office, they're supposed to be the liberals and the peace lovers. And yet, because of this tit-for-tat, we didn't do anything more than they did, so the response was measured. It's how you get into conflicts. And somehow, under Obama, we were in conflicts everywhere. Libyan civil war.

We had all these Arab springs. We're in Syria. We're in Iraq. We're in Afghanistan. Under Trump, we're pulling things down, and the country was very safe from terror. We were starting to get away from that idea of these terror attacks being a huge threat to the world. And we got rid of ISIS.

Now they're back on the rise, again, in a different way in North Africa. But I want to get to Chris's call in Kentucky. If you want to talk to us on the air, 1-800-684-3110.

Phone lines are open. Hey Chris, welcome to Sekulow. Hi, this is Chris. Thank you very much for having me. I just had a question.

I was like, I would pretty much agree with everything that you guys were saying, and especially with conflicts with this or that. I've been in the Air Force for 16 years. Thank you for your service. Thank you. My biggest question is, do you think that, especially with this or that conversation that you just had, do you think that this is just trying to take away from media attention from current events that are going on right now?

Especially for like corona relief? Oh, well, they got a huge loss yesterday. I mean, I think this deserves a response. And I think you're right, that $15 minimum wage that the left has put all this pressure on was struck by the Senate parliamentarian who said you cannot put this in a reconciliation package in the COVID relief bill. Now the House, though, because they are so tied to their interest groups in the far left, said we're going to keep it in there anyways.

You know what this means? The Senate will have to strike it out, and it's going to delay more and more delay for actual relief to the American people. Welcome to Democrat controlled House, Senate, and White House. They tell you they want to help Americans quickly, and yet when they're told you can't do it this way, they're still going to keep it in there for political purposes. Shame on Nancy Pelosi, those Democrats, because Americans need help. I think that Jordan's absolutely right.

Now, I don't think it was a distraction because it did not become a distraction. I think their question is, I'll go to Andy and Harry on this, the question is that you have to realize that when you listen to what Jen Psaki said about open invitation for diplomacy, take a listen to the soundbite. The point we are at is that the United States has expressed an openness to an invitation to have a diplomatic conversation. And then, Andy, we will go ahead and attack your troops, which I understand exactly why they did it, but we'll go ahead and attack your troops and your surrogates that happen to be operating in Syria. But we don't want to escalate anything. This messaging is ridiculous. Well, it is, Jay.

I mean, it is ridiculous. We want diplomatic relations, and we want rapport with you, and we want to open the lines of communication with a sworn terrorist enemy of the United States. There's no question about it. Your surrogates attack as will kill Americans. And what we do to retaliate, what we really do to show you how serious we are about saying that we don't like what you do and that we condemn it, is we drop seven 500-pound bombs in some outpost in the middle of nowhere, making sure that it's in Syria so as not to upset, you know, the Iraqis or, for that matter, the Iranians, in my opinion. But you do it in a sovereign country, which Psaki said before several years ago that you shouldn't have the right to do, and Kamala Harris condemned roundly. Well, wait.

I mean, it's laughable. This is not a policy. This goes back to what I have said on this program for years. You cannot appease a dictator.

You cannot continue to feed the crocodile in the vain hope that he will eat you last. And that's what we're doing with the Iranians. Lindsey Graham tweeted, Senator Graham tweeted, he's very supportive of the strike, hopes it will create necessary deterrence in the future, which, Harry, from a policy perspective, that's what you do. You do a strike as deterrence, not to get them back to them and maybe gets them back to the negotiating table, but we're negotiating something they want, not something we want.

Absolutely. So one of the things that the Biden administration could actually learn from with respect to the Trump administration is that the Trump administration believed that you take the attack provided by the enemy back to the enemy. So the Biden administration needs to take a page from Moshe Dayan, who said to the Egyptians decades ago that the road that leads from Cairo to Tel Aviv leads from Tel Aviv to Cairo. Instead, the Biden administration has basically said, oh, we're going to drop a few bombs, but please come back to the negotiating table and we will basically give you what you want. I think the message that has been received by the Iranians is, well, let's attack Americans again. And so I think the Biden administration needs to stand up and say, we will not take this from any other country going forward.

I agree with Harry. Than, let me ask you this because we're going to talk about this a little bit, the COVID relief package. A lot of people are concerned about it. With this 15, the parliamentarian struck down the ability to do this by reconciliation, basically. What's going to happen now?

What is the word up there? Well, Chris, the caller asked the right question. I mean, they do need something to distract from this mess. And we told people that this was coming weeks ago, Jay. They could have gotten a bill out of Washington, D.C. to put checks in the pockets of the American people. They didn't want it to be bipartisan. They wanted to pack it with policy initiatives, including this $15 minimum wage.

Jordan really said it correct. Here's the bottom line. The ruling from the parliamentarian and the refusal from Speaker Pelosi to take that language and, by the way, other language that's going to be stripped out by the Senate out of that bill. They're going to move it out of the House tonight, Jay. The Senate will consider it next week. They'll have to make those changes because of the Byrd rule.

And then you know what's going to have to happen? It's going to have to go back to the House for another vote. So, actually, the bill that the House is voting on tonight, Jay, it's not even that relevant because they're going to have to consider it again after all the extraneous material comes out. And the American people are going to have to continue to wait for these checks.

I'm going to tell you this. When we get to the second half of the program, which is coming up, we're going to get into some of this COVID relief issue, what the politics of it are. We'll talk more about Iran.

What a week. And a big week for us with the announcement that Mike Pompeo is now a senior counsel for global affairs at the American Center for Law and Justice. We're going to take a look at our foreign policy team with also, of course, our senior advisor, Rick Grenell.

I think we've got one of the best foreign policy teams in the country. Absolutely, folks. Support the work of the ACLJ. Your donations are so important so we can bring on these experts and bring them to you throughout our broadcast and work with them. Donate today at ACLJ.org. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines protecting your freedoms, defending your rights in courts, in Congress and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life changing work. Become a member today.

ACLJ.org. Live from Washington, D.C., Jay Sekulow Live. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow.

Welcome back to Sekulow. We are taking your phone calls. 1-800-684-3110, our second half hour of the broadcast. We're going to get into that COVID relief tube. A caller brought that up. The idea that, again, not as much attention on some of the issues that are now being stripped of the COVID relief bill.

So that $15 minimum wage, which was kind of this golden ticket item for the far left and the AOCs of the world, where the Senate parliamentarian said, not the route you're going. I want to go to Thanh a minute in Washington, D.C., because Thanh, you know, we'll get back to Syria. We'll take the calls on that.

The airstrikes, 1-800-684-3110. COVID calls as well. But COVID calls as well on COVID relief because Americans need the relief.

Yes. And the Senate parliamentarian said you can't do the $15 minimum wage the way you're pushing this through. I want you to explain that because there's a unique way they're trying to get this legislation done. But yet the House says we're going to keep it in, which means it will ultimately take longer for this relief, if ever, to get to the American people. Yeah, well, first of all, the $1,400 in checks that were promised to the American people would already be in their pockets if President Biden and Senate Democrats had decided to work with Senate Republicans. There were plenty of votes in the United States Senate to pass that package, to pass a narrow COVID relief package, get it out the door quickly and then have some of these other fights. Senate Democrats, with President Biden's blessing, Jordan, decided to go another route. They decided to use what's known as budget reconciliation, which is a process that can address budgetary items and can move through the Senate with only 50 votes.

But Jordan, you can only move items that are significantly budgetary in impact. And it was very clear from the very beginning that a huge number of items that Speaker Pelosi was putting in this bill, most notably the minimum wage increase that so many on the left wanted. We're not going to survive that process. And that ruling officially came down from the Senate parliamentarian yesterday. So, Jordan, you would think if they were trying to move this bill quickly, since they hadn't taken that vote in the House yet, they would remove that language from the House bill.

They didn't do that. They're going to vote tonight on the bill, leaving that language in, knowing that when it goes over to the Senate, that language is going to be stripped out. Jordan, you can't send a bill to the President for his signature if both chambers don't pass the same bill. So, you know, best case scenario, the Senate's going to strip that language, pass the bill next week, and then the following week, they're going to have to send it back to the House for another consideration.

They're not trying to get these checks out, Jordan. They're trying to pass pet projects. This is like gambling, Harry, with the American people's future. A lot of people need this relief.

Absolutely. But the Democrats persistently and consistently persist in advancing arbitrary and capricious policies to the detriment of the American people, primarily because Democrats, I think at the end of the day, do not really care about the American people. They care about advancing their own political power and the power of special interest groups who are pushing a radical agenda rather than providing real help to real Americans in need and basically helping rank-and-file Americans get through this crisis. The Democrats are not really interested in doing that.

Andy, really quickly here. The Democrats know this isn't going to happen, this $15 minimum wage issue, not going to get through. It's like indicting, knowing you're not going to get a conviction. That's a good way to put it.

I mean, usually when I indict, I know that I have a pretty good chance of convicting the defendant. Why are you going and voting tonight on a bill, a 1.9 or whatever $3 trillion package that Biden puts through, and you're adding the $15 minimum wage, knowing that the parliamentarian in the Senate has ruled that you cannot tack that on to the COVID relief bill? You know, you can't do it.

It's not permissible. Under the budget rules, it's not germane and it cannot be tacked on to the COVID relief bill, but yet you forge ahead. And as Harry Hutchinson said, and he's usually right, they don't care about, the Democrats do not care about the American people. Their interest is in the hard left special interest groups.

When we come back, we want to continue to take your comments, Facebook, YouTube, again on the phones, 1-800-684-3110 on this COVID relief. How important would it be to you or your business to get this relief now? Or have you gotten to the point where it's just like you never expect it's going to actually get there because of how Washington's operating? Even when Democrats are in control of both the House and the Senate, they can't seem to figure, and the White House can't get it figured out. They just can't get it and they had to put an impeachment in the middle of it.

1-800-684-3110. We'll be right back. The challenges facing Americans are substantial. At a time when our values, our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack, it's more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines protecting your freedoms, defending your rights, in courts, in Congress, and in the public arena.

And we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line, we could not do our work without your support. We remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms.

That remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life-changing work.

Become a member today. 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, 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. Alright, we're starting to get phone calls ready. 1-800-684-3110. If you want to talk to us on air, that's 1-800-684-3110. I'm going to talk about COVID for a moment, the COVID relief, because look, I'm concerned economically because I know this has taken, you know, like every American, you know, we're still dealing with COVID. It looks like we're, because of the work of the previous administration, the President Trump's administration, the shots are out there, the vaccines are happening and starting to get out there.

It's still a bit of a problem getting them. But this is stuck in limbo. I mean, this is, and I want to go to Than on this first, because I do want to hear from our audience. I mean, those of you that have small businesses or maybe work for a small business or have your own business, how's this impacting you? How's it impacting you with your, in your job? Do you need this relief?

800-684-3110. But then I don't understand when the parliamentarian said, no, you can't use this bill to basically put through a substantive different legislative piece. You thought that would end the equation, but then the House Democrats say, no, we're still going to stick it in there anyways, like Jordan said, knowing it's not going to get through. Well, Jay, it would have ended the discussion if the goal was to actually get the help that you're talking about out the door. If the goal was to get checks to the American people and assistance to small businesses, that would have been the end of the discussion.

They would have moved a narrower bill and they would have passed it through the Senate. But then again, Jay, they could have done that three or four weeks ago and they chose not to do it. This is about prioritizing their list of pet projects above that assistance. And look, I mean, the list of things that we could talk about is so long. We've talked about state and local bailout before. Think about this one, Jay.

I'll just give you one. There's one hundred and thirty billion dollars in the House bill that is supposedly supposed to help schools open, right? That seems like a noble goal. Schools need to reopen. There might be dollars necessary for that. Jay, only five percent of that one hundred thirty billion dollars is available for this year. The rest of it is for out year spending.

That is so ridiculous. That's not covid relief. That's not getting schools reopen. That's just pork barrel spending for out years. But Jay, that is a higher priority right now for Democrats in Washington, D.C., than getting actual covid stimulus out the door.

But I'm trying to think, Jordan, why would, what's the advantage now? They know that Senate parliamentarians said, no, you can't do this. So wouldn't you say, OK, let's just get, we got to get relief to the American people here. Let's get a legislative win.

I'm thinking if you were a Democrat, what would you be thinking? Let's get a big legislative win here. Get this through. But they won't do it. No, I mean, Leonard on Facebook writes, help Americans get the relief they need. That's it. That's what we need. But instead, they're stuck.

They're stuck on the pet projects. Mike's calling from Pennsylvania about that. Hey, Mike, welcome to Sekulow. Hi, Mike. Hey, guys. Hey, Mike. Hey, thank you so much for everything you guys do.

I think you guys are awesome. So my question is about this fifteen dollars an hour minimum wage being raised. What happens to guys like me that I'm already making fifteen dollars an hour and I went to college just to get paid that much and fifty thousand dollars in debt just to do that. So, like, are they planning or do you think these companies are going to give us raises or just ditch people? That's you know, you ask a really good question. I'm going to turn to Harry Hutchinson, because part of the problem when you have a mandatory minimum wage increase in some industries, they can't afford that, especially in the food industries.

Absolutely. So what typically happens is that you actually get a raise if the minimum wage goes up so long as you keep your job. But what we ignore often are the adverse implications of raising the mandatory minimum wage. And typically people lose their jobs and some employers simply go out of business. The other thing that happens, which reduces employment, is the rise in robotics and automation. And so now if you look at many restaurants throughout the United States, what are they doing? They are having automation as opposed to actual individuals who are taking your order in the restaurant.

And so if you go to Panera Bread or some other place, guess what? They are replacing individuals with technology and therefore they're not actually paying employees the so-called mandatory fifteen dollars an hour. In addition to all of that, minimum wages tend to have an adverse effect on individuals, particularly minority individuals and people without a particular skill set. And so at the end of the day, as one left-wing Democrat said, the Democrats are basically sending a signal to employers who cannot afford to pay fifteen dollars an hour, please go out of business very, very quickly. Fan, I want to give the people hope, though, because this is important. What are the prospects for really getting something done here? Or, as Jordan said, are we looking at another two-week, three-week delay? You're looking at a two- or three-week delay, Jay.

I mean, look, I will give people this hope. I do think there is going to be a bill that passes out of Washington, D.C. with that fourteen hundred dollar check. My great regret, Jay, is it could have happened a month ago, but it's probably going to be close to another month, if not a little bit more, before that's in the pockets of the American people.

Here's the other thing. There is going to be unrelated items in this, Jay. I mean, they've just committed themselves to it.

It's not the best way for it to happen, but you want to give people some hope. That check is coming, Jay. It's not coming as fast as it should have. It's not coming as fast as I think there was a moral obligation to get it out the door. It will leave eventually. It's going to leave with a lot of extraneous matters, but it will get there eventually. Chris is calling from California on Line 3 because this is interesting, too.

It's at the levels, which is still being negotiated. Hey, Chris, welcome to Secular. You're on the air.

Hello, gentlemen. My question is, why does every American have to get the check from the Biden administration on COVID relief when some of us, fortunately, like myself, I haven't missed work? And people that get a pension and people that get Social Security, their money is still there. People that get welfare, their money is still there.

Why do we have to continue to pay people that haven't lost a day's pay? So it's not everybody who has kept working. There are numbers on this right now. Is it still the 75,000 and 150,000? So 75,000 individuals, which I don't think they need a check. If you're still making $75,000, you're not the ones hurting the most in our country.

And if you're a couple and you're making six figures, you're not the ones hurting the most. I mean, that's not like what you made before. It's what you're making right now, which Chris is saying. That's currently the bar thin, and a lot of Republicans say this is a little too high. Yeah, it's not set in stone either, Jordan, but you're right.

Those are the levels right now. It'd be $1,400 a person starting to phase out at about $75,000 and then completely phasing out around $100,000. Look, I mean, there's going to be a fight over where those levels go, but again, Jordan, it comes back to the fundamental principle that if you weren't wasting hundreds of billions of dollars on other things, you could send bigger checks to more Americans. So I think that's really the ideological debate that should be happening, but instead, they're bickering about where the cutoff is.

You know, Andy, I was thinking about this. We mentioned the GoFundMe campaign for that famous restaurant in Atlanta back a couple of months ago. The fact is, while things are getting better, they are not back to where they were, and certainly I saw the prognosis on overseas travel. I was reading an article about that this morning that they're saying it may return to where it was in 2019 by 2024, 2025.

That's a long time. But the stall in Congress is such a damage, such a danger to the American people, and I want to hear from you that are listening to the broadcast at 800-684-3110 because we may have to get to where next week we're just pushing to get things through aggressively on the Hill. I mean, because I want to know what your needs are, but Andy, we talked about that. I mean, people are in need.

We know that. Desperately in need. I went to that almost failed restaurant, which was a landmark in Atlanta for so many years, and the GoFundMe helped them substantially, but I was talking to some of the personnel who were working there, and they said they're really struggling right now. The help that the waiters and waitresses and so forth that are helping in the restaurant are really struggling. Their wages are down significantly. Their dips are down.

The restaurant is operating at 25 percent capacity. They desperately need help, and they don't need these games that are being played by the Democrats in the House of Representatives knowing that this bill is dead on arrival in the Senate even though they vote on it tonight in the House of Representatives because of what the parliamentarian does. We've got to help the people. The Democrats, supposedly the Democratic is the party of the people, the party of the working people.

This is how they touted themselves from the Roosevelt administration on. Where is your help for the people? It's not there.

Well, I think that this is a big issue. You're talking about 25 percent capacity. So you're talking about not just the relief to individuals but to their businesses as well. The tips aren't there. Those are employees in service industries where that's really where they make the monies off the tips that they receive from customers. But if your customers are down to 25 percent, I will tell you even where we are, which has got higher capacity, most places require reservation or you're waiting. And on the weekends, if you don't make it like on a Monday or even two weeks out, you can't get a spot. And it's not because they don't have the tables available or the staff that would like to work, but it's because they're only allowed so many people in, even these larger restaurants. So it becomes a hassle for the consumer, it becomes tough on the employer, and it becomes tough on the employees. So everybody, hard for you to go, hard for the employers to keep their staff, and it's hard on ultimately the employees who in the service industry have been just destroyed.

And on top of that, so many college students are not on their university campuses, are not in class. I mean, we have got to get a handle on this. And I think, you know, I think we got the vaccine. This is a great thing. We need to get a better distribution method. I think it's improving. I hope it is.

But we've got this economy can't take two more years of this. We'll talk about this and answer your questions in the last segment coming up. But I do want to say this, a huge thing. I say this and then cannot believe every morning when we wake up at the ACLJ and we get our overnight, the response on our various projects that we're working on. And it's stunning and amazing actually. And we want to thank you.

We know that God uses people and you all have been more than generous is an understatement. But thank you for your continuing support of the ACLJ. 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. The challenges facing Americans are substantial. At a time when our values, our freedoms, our constitutional rights are under attack, it's more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines protecting your freedoms, defending your rights, in courts, in Congress, and in the public arena.

And we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line, we could not do our work without your support. We remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms.

That remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life changing work.

Become a member today, ACLJ.org. Music Alright, welcome back to Secchios. We've talked to serious strikes, we've talked to COVID relief, and now I want to get to the phones. 1-800-684-3110. We're going to go in order of people that have been on the line. Let's start first with Mike in Missouri, on line two. Hey, Mike. Hey guys, how you doing? Happy Friday to you.

Thanks, Mike. With this thing going through with raising the minimum wage, we know businesses are going to raise their prices because they're not going to take the hit. What's going to happen on fixed incomes? What are they going to do for us? Well, I mean, you're going to spend more per product. Right, and this minimum wage hike is not getting through, so I want to make that clear to people.

It just got shut down. It would have to go through with a separate THAN as an actual piece of legislation, not through budget reconciliation. So to get this minimum wage hike, which they wanted over four years, which would kill jobs, because we're already in a time where people have lost those jobs. And you know, I'll even listen to THAN to these liberal commentators. They're like, man, these jobs are already gone anyways. You know, so in a sense, it's not really going to hurt the economy that bad because there's so few of these jobs left. Well, first of all, on the impact of a raise of the minimum wage, a mandated raise of the minimum wage, Jordan, the CBO, which is not exactly a conservative organization, they said it would cost 1.4 million jobs if that increase were to go through.

And what was the response from Senate Democrats? Ron Wyden said, OK, that's fine. We'll do it another way. We'll just levy a heavy tax on these businesses that won't raise the minimum wage. But look, that's the doom and gloom, Jordan.

I think the optimistic point is the one you just made. The Senate parliamentarian said they can't do it under reconciliation. So it's not going to be passed in this bill. There probably will be a debate, Jordan. But look, that'll be a debate that will take it.

I have to clear a 60 vote threshold and it'll be a debate that has to, again, start anew and pass the House and the Senate. All right, folks, we're going to continue to take your phone calls. 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110.

Lewis called in from Colorado online for Hey, Lewis. Hey, I just wrote out my check for you folks. Listen, why is it just the 15 minute, I mean, $15?

What about everything else? The bridge in New York, the tunnel in California, money going overseas? How come they didn't say anything about that that's supposed to be in this bill? Well, you know, the big thing was the $15 minimum wage. But this has been a huge criticism fan of the entire COVID relief.

They don't even call it that. It's now about rescuing America and it's bigger than COVID. That's how Democrats are trying to spin it. So it's not just about COVID relief, though. That's what it is supposed to be about.

But Lewis is right. There's all this other pork in there that's led even people like Mitt Romney, they say it's a clunker, this piece of legislation, which is why it's hard to get it through with reconciliation even. Jordan, only about 30% of this bill is actually related to COVID. And that portion had wide bipartisan support. That's why it could have passed weeks and weeks ago. The rest of it somewhere around 70%, depending on how you calculate it, is on unrelated stuff. And the caller is exactly right. I mean, the minimum wage is the provision that has run afoul of what's known as the bird provision.

They call it the birdbath. But Jordan, a lot of the other stuff that does have a budgetary impact, so technically, procedurally, rules-wise, it can move in this package. A lot of it is just an absolutely terrible idea.

I mean, crushing to the economy. And I think, Jordan, one of those ideas, I think it's worth mentioning this again. We on this broadcast have advocated for federal dollars to help schools open many times before. Democrats are saying that's in the bill. There's $130 billion in there.

Jordan, again, the CBO took a look at it. You know how much of that $130 billion can be spent this year to actually help schools open? 5%. 5%.

The rest of it is for out years pet projects inside the education space. Andy, this is exactly the problem. When you have legislation that's not focused on solving the problem, but rather is a social agenda to, as Jordan said, kind of a national change on other projects, now beyond COVID. This is where it gets very dangerous very quickly because nothing gets done.

Well, this is exactly what Harry Hutchison said. The Democrat left, hard left, has a social agenda that they intend to pass, and they're going to persist in it no matter what happens. Whether it's for the good of the American people or not, they already know it's for the good of the American people.

The elitists have made the decision that the 15-hour minimum wage is what it's going to be, and no matter what happens, they're going to persist in that, knowing that Kyrsten Sinema is not going to vote for that in the Senate, nor is Joe Manchin. They're going to persist in it. They get a blow from the parliamentarian in the Senate that says it's not germane, but it doesn't in the House, and it cannot be tacked on to the COVID relief legislation. But nonetheless, they're persisting, and they're going through with this. No matter what, they're going to vote this through, and they're going to send it over to the Senate where it's dead on arrival. Meanwhile, what happens to the servers at the Colonnade restaurant in Atlanta, Georgia, or any other place?

Nothing. This, again, brings all these different stories and all this different spending. Does it actually ever get out to the American people? Is it also corrupt?

And you brought up Title X Plus is up as well, and explain to people what's going on there. There's lawsuits going on there about whether or not Planned Parenthood should get funding again, and Planned Parenthood is being joined by the Biden administration, even though Title X funding says no funding to abortion providers. Yeah, the law says no funding to abortion providers. We've fought that over the years.

We've been winning. The Trump administration was very effective in applying the law, and essentially what it meant, Jordan, is that the law was rightly applied, and Planned Parenthood was deprived of about $60 million a year that they were not entitled to under the law. Jordan, this COVID bill actually attempts to plus up the Title X account by a $50 million amount, and look, I mean, this is transparent.

They may or may not tell you this, but I can tell you why that plus up is in there. That's a prorated payment to Planned Parenthood for what they lost under the Trump administration. They're trying to move that inside a COVID stimulus package. You tell me, Jordan, what does $50 million for Planned Parenthood have to do with COVID relief? And what does $50 million for Planned Parenthood, Harry, have to do with opening up public schools that need to be open for the kids to be served?

Absolutely nothing, but I think the real problem is that the Democrats, they prioritize union leaders rather than union members. They prioritize the radical left and eugenics supporters rather than the American people. And at the end of the day, they prioritize global elites rather than putting America first. You know, I think that the whole issue here is exactly what Harry says. It's all about getting it to their friends and allies.

How much can we dole out billions and millions and billions of dollars to our friends and allies, businesses and organizations we like? So it's Planned Parenthood, of course. They're all in the back pocket of Planned Parenthood. We haven't even gotten to Javier Bester's nomination to lead HHS yet today, but guess what? Like Tanden's nomination, which is in doubt, now his is facing some uncertainty, Than. You know that. We all know that because he could have had the vote today and they've kicked it to sometime next week, haven't even scheduled.

What does that mean, Than? Well, he went through his two hearings today. We obviously weighed in in opposition to it. Look, he's absolutely terrible on the life issue, but Jay and Jordan, the reason his nomination is in trouble in the United States Senate with people like Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema and Bob Casey is because he doesn't have a lick of public health experience. In the middle of a pandemic, you're going to nominate a secretary to the Department of Health and Human Services, have a leading role in trying to pull us out of the COVID pandemic, not a lick of public health experience. That's why his nomination is in jeopardy in the United States Senate. And I'll just tell you, his nomination should be rejected. He should not be the next secretary. We beat him in court, but you know what? The Supreme Court, but it was on an issue where he was trying to force abortion clinics to tell people where to go get abortions. This is the guy that's going to head up HHS.

Maybe not. Well, I think that, listen, I think it's a, there are people now where you're seeing when you have a 50-50 Senate, you fight. You fight those nominees who are Twitter trolls. You fight the nominees who are pro-abortion advocates like Becerra with no experience during a pandemic. And they would criticize Azar, who had already been the deputy HHS director general counsel for HHS, but he wasn't good enough for the left. Well, Becerra certainly isn't.

He has no experience compared to who was leading it under the Trump administration. We will talk about all this tomorrow. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines, protecting your freedoms, defending your rights, in courts, in Congress, and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work. Become a member today, ACLJ.org.