Democrats Rage After Massive Elections Power-Grab Fails

This is Logan Sekulow. Today, Democrats rage after massive election power grab fails. Live from Washington, D.C., Sekulow Live. Madam President, I want to be clear about what just happened on the Senate floor. Every single Senate Republican just voted against starting debate, starting debate on legislation to protect Americans' voting rights. The phone lines are open for your questions right now. Call 1-800-684-3110.

The bill that we have in front of us is not so much about voting rights as it is a federal takeover of the election system, and a partisan federal takeover of the election system. And now your host, Logan Sekulow. This is Logan Sekulow.

Welcome to Sekulow. I'm sitting in for my dad and my brother. I'm joined by Will Haines, Than Bennett, others joining us later on, Mike Pompeo, as well as Colonel W. Smith will be joining us. We have an interesting show today. Obviously, we've been discussing H.R. 1, everything that's been going on. Last night ended in a filibuster. Didn't even really make it to the table.

They said maybe it could come up later on. But I think the real reality that is going to be setting in, and I think the topic that we need to discuss majorly today, as well as obviously the specifics that people are freaking out about this. And why are Democrats freaking out? Why is Chuck Schumer out there? And look, as we've always said, there's always these cutesy names, you know, the Voter Rights Act or things like that that make you feel like, well, of course, everyone should be voting for this.

But we all know what's really in these things. This is a federal takeover of state-run elections, something we don't necessarily want if you're on certain specific sides of the political aisle. Or just, you know, maybe you just feel like the federal government shouldn't have that much control.

However, there's always these names and they try to make you feel bad using these names. Like, how dare you vote against this? But really what this looks like is that in general, the Democrats will are coming to the realization that not just this, but any major sweeping change that they hoped would come about due to a Biden presidency, due to some change in the makeup.

A lot of it is destined for failure. Well, and the Democrats promised that they were going to go big and bold and have these sweeping changes across the fabric of America. And Chuck Schumer even said, first we take the Senate, then we take America. And that entire mindset that they were just going to come in and just start changing things into the image of the left is now starting to hit reality, which is that if you don't have 60 votes in the Senate, your agenda is not going to move forward. The Senate traditionally was the place where compromise could happen, bipartisanship, reaching across the aisle. And now more than ever, we're seeing that the Senate is just an extension of Nancy Pelosi's House of Representatives trying to pass the agenda that people like AOC and the Squad are trying to start in the House and move through the Senate.

Now, Thanh, you're joining us from Washington, D.C. I think people maybe need to understand, we'll have videos we're going to play later on if you're watching on social media or if you're watching on ACLJ.org or on YouTube, you'll see these videos. It kind of shows you what all happened last night. But I think maybe in people's heads, the idea of a filibuster, as Will brought up earlier, has shifted a little, especially when it comes to this, because it really didn't even make it that far.

It really didn't, Logan. And look, traditionally in the United States Senate, it's meant to be a cooling off chamber for legislation. You know, a lot of things, things can move quickly in the House.

The makeup of the House turns over quickly as well. But the Senate was supposed to be a place where, like you said, bipartisan agreement would come into place and would take a little bit longer to get through the United States Senate. You know, Logan, traditionally, in order to end debate on a piece of legislation in the Senate, you either had to exhaust the senators or you had to get all of them to agree, something called unanimous consent to end debate.

You're right. That has changed a couple of times along the way. In 1917, they came up with what is called cloture. That is actually the technical term for ending a filibuster.

It's been changed a couple of times over the years. But that's what failed last night, Logan. They could not get cloture. They could not get 60 votes to end debate on the motion to proceed. So debate on the bill didn't even begin. So Joe Manchin is going to say a lot of things today, Logan. But honestly, what happened?

They couldn't get any Republican support. And so the bill died last night. Absolutely.

All right. Hey, phone lines are open. 1-800-684-3110.

1-800-684-3110. We get back. Mike Pompeo is joining us. We're going to talk about this, as well as some other topics that are happening in the world. So you're going to want to stay tuned and listen to that. That's just coming in just a few minutes.

If you're watching or if you're listening, just a short commercial break. Again, 1-800-684-3110. If you want your voice heard on the air and check out all the great content on ACLJ.org. We'll be right back. 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 back to Sekulow. Mike Pompeo will be joining us in just a little bit here, but we are discussing the issue at hand, which is that last night, overnight, not overnight, Will, but in the evening. Evening. Evening hour, Kamala Harris proceeded over the vote to start really the vote for for the right, the Voting Rights Act, which again, you have a lot of these titles.

You have a lot of these specific. It sounds a lot sweeter than it is. That's how it is in Washington, D.C. in general. They always put a title on it that makes you go, well, how could you ever vote against this?

How dare you? But it's just to trick you. The American people, it's just to make you feel bad for believing the way you do by putting a cutesy title on it. We are joined by Mike Pompeo. The Democrats last night showed they are unanimously behind a federal takeover of our elections, it seems like.

And I have a question for you. What does that signal send to our country? It's really it's really unfortunate, but this is this is the left, the ruling class trying to create even more power to themselves. They don't want they don't want simple things like people to be able to to require to show an idea to vote. They want to take your money and give it to candidates that you don't like. Right.

Deeply abhorrent and violated by the First Amendment as well. This is also a demonstration in terms of the unanimity that this isn't some fringe group within the Democrat Party. This is this is who they are.

Full stop. They are people who want the power to be in Washington, D.C. and not with the people. Secretary Pompeo, the Republicans were able to block using the filibuster, the legislation from moving forward. But we're now seeing the left coming out in full force, trying to call for doing away with the filibuster. We know how quickly Senator Manchin flipped from I will not vote for this to giving his vote to it last night.

Do you think that we're in danger of seeing the so-called moderates like Senator Manchin, Senator Sinema, caving to the far left of the party and maybe going forward with doing away with the filibuster? Well, I'll tell you, he's been pretty clear. So has Senator Sinema about the filibuster. She wrote an op-ed this week. I mean, they were unequivocal.

There were no caveats. But I mean, I've been around this a while. One never knows. We have to stay diligent. Places like the ACLJ have to continue to make the case why this would be a calamity for our republic. We need to continue to man the parapets.

They're not going to go away. They're going to keep chipping away at this every time they're defeated by the Republicans in the Senate. They're going to make the case that the filibuster needs to go away for some higher noble calling that they have asserted, whether it's the Green New Deal or caving to Iran, whatever, whatever their topic of the day is. We need to stay vigilant.

They're not going to give up on this for sure. One of my concerns from that op-ed of Senator Sinema was she said it is time for the Senate to debate the legislative filibuster. Now, I understand that she thinks she can make the case for it. And you mentioned her op-ed was unequivocal. She thinks that that it is important for the filibuster to stay. But doesn't opening debate show that there could be some wiggle room because it's something that exists now? And what would a debate do but potentially change minds?

I don't know what she was getting at there. What's important is that we understand that they know that their agenda is unpopular. They know that they have only a number of months before they are likely to lose control of both houses of the United States Congress and that they're going to move heaven and earth to move heaven and earth as quickly as they can. And so we need to continue to make the case for why our vision is right, our principles are right, and then fight these inside battles inside the United States Senate with every ounce of energy that we all have.

I can't tell you why she wants to have the debate, but I can tell you this. I have every expectation for every one of our leaders in the United States Senate to do the right thing and continue to make sure that they remain united. Absolutely.

And, Than, you're in Washington, D.C. I feel like you have something probably you want to chime in with as well. Yeah, Mr. Secretary, just to echo your concerns about op-eds written by senators. You know, it was just about a couple of weeks ago, June 6, in fact, that Senator Manchin wrote an op-ed in which he said, I will vote against the For the People Act. And as you know, last night he did an about-face and he voted for cloture to proceed to the For the People Act.

He can say it's about a compromise, but that compromise is not in legislative text and he voted for the underlying bill last night. So I share that concern. But I wondered if you might just say a word or two to our listeners about your concern that you've written about on ACLJ about the weaponizing of the IRS. As you know, this underlying bill would repeal the lowest learner rule, which was put in place to keep the IRS from targeting the American people based on their viewpoint. This bill would repeal that rule.

So talk to our listeners, if you would, for just a moment about the threat that that would pose. So we all lived through this in recent memory where we had the Internal Revenue Service making it really difficult for conservative groups to establish themselves as 501c3s and investigating conservative groups. This was the woman in charge at the time was named Lois Lerner.

That's the nomenclature for the rule. The Trump administration, by the way, we did it right. We didn't say you can now go after left leaning groups. We said, no, the IRS is neutral and ought to just do the people's work collecting taxes as you're statutorily mandated to do. The fact that they're going after it, that they want to unwind, it means that they believe that they can direct the IRS to attack, whether that's churches, conservative leaning 501c3s, places like ACLJ, and undermine their ability to do their work, their constitutionally protected work. This is an assault on freedom of speech, an assault on freedom of assembly.

I hope that the ACLJ and all of us will continue to work to make sure that we don't have another Lois Lerner attacking those of us who come at this from a Judeo-Christian perspective and those of us who are conservative believers in our founding. Absolutely, Secretary Pompeo. I did want to shift, we only have a few minutes, but to shift to Iran and what's happening there. The Iranians elected sort of the Ayatollah's pick for a new President. This President-elect is responsible for the mass murder, he's calling it the murder, President mass murder of thousands of Iranians and was sanctioned by name when you were Secretary of State. Shouldn't making this man President while the Biden administration is trying to negotiate their way back into the deal with Iran be sort of a big red flag, you'd think, about how the Iranians may act in this current state? I think the Ayatollah sent us a message, I only hope that the Biden administration will be in receipt mode. But this guy was selected by the Ayatollah, he's 60, he could be in charge in Iran for 20, 30 years or so.

He is of the revolutionary mindset, he is an IRGC advocate. He's going to extract enormous concessions and then probably allow this deal to go forward because it doesn't impact him, right? He'll have billions of dollars more to spend on terror campaigns. The Iranian people will suffer greatly at the hands of Ibrahim Raisi, the elected President of the regime in Iran. I hope this administration doesn't think for a moment that they can negotiate a deal that will prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon or building their missile program or conducting terror.

It is a fool's errand to think that somehow he will change the course of this revolutionary regime. We've seen a lot of movement even today in the news. The DOJ has just seized, allegedly it's all just coming out, dozens of, and you read the headlines, it's kind of hard to even part through, dozens of Iranian news media sites, including domains, websites, some of those are registered in America, so they're able to sort of seize those virtually, if you will. Also some English language television because there is a spread of disinformation coming. Is this, though, a step in the right direction to kind of throttle Iranian propaganda? I've seen the reporting, and if it's right, this is good news that the administration was prepared to take serious action to impose real costs on the Iranian regime in their effort to spread disinformation around the world.

I'm looking forward to learning more about what they did, but if the headlines are right, I want to give credit where credit is due for them confronting the Iranians in this important space. Yeah, I think that's a topic that I'd love to dive more into in the future because you kind of don't even think of that as something that's a possibility with the way the internet works. Some people may be concerned with kind of government overreach, but when there are these type of things, Will just went to one of the websites and it says- Right, you have PressTV.com, which is their English language state media, says this website has been seized and has a DOJ seal and a U.S. Department of Commerce seal on it. It says the domain has been seized by the United States government in accordance with a seizure warrant issued.

It has a whole bunch of information on it, so that's the first thing. I mean, one, interesting to know that that could even happen, so you should keep aware of that, but specifically on this, I'm glad that you kind of can confirm that this is a step in the right direction because I think we're all always a little concerned with that, but I also don't know if people understand the complexity of the internet and how much of it is being controlled through our country. And that's always been a point of discussion we've had here, which is where does ICANN, where do these big domain registers, where do they live, where are they housed, and who has control over them? Well, it's clear that the American government at least has some oversight into what's going on. Look, we've seen all these debates, all the challenges that were confronted in the cyber world, they're closely related to this same set of issues. These are the very inexpensive tools that our adversaries are using to undermine the United States and our republic.

To the extent that it's an Iranian-controlled site, the fact that we now have prevented that from spreading propaganda is a good thing. Yes, absolutely. Thank you, Secretary Pompeo. Again, new pieces available on our website. You should read all of, not only just what Secretary Pompeo posts, but all of our great authors and writers.

That is at ACLJ.org. Go check out what we have going on there. There's new content posted every day, not just this show, this show as well as stories. There's now new options that will be rolling out soon. We'll be able to listen to these blogs. We're coming up with a lot of new ways to get this content to you in an easy, digestible, shareable way. We appreciate all the support. Look, we'll be back for a second half hour. I know we have a third segment of Jay Sekula Live and Sekula Radio. I appreciate you guys tuning in.

We'll be right back. ACLJ.org. 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, a 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. Welcome back to Sekulow. Again, joined by a fan-band in Washington, D.C. Will Haines here in the studio. Just got done with Secretary Mike Pompeo.

Later in the show, be joined by Wes Smith. So we got a lot of content coming up. But the main topic we're talking about right now is the filibuster from last night, specifically on the Voting Rights Act. And we've gone through sort of the details of what was in there, why we opposed it. I think a lot of people opposed it. A lot of it's because people don't necessarily want the federal government in control of every bit of your life.

Sometimes you want the states to have some control, maybe some of your own independence. And it gets lumped in with these titles that sound kind of cute and kind of silly or even sweet or something you feel like you can't vote against. But it is done some ways to mess with your head on both sides to really try to use these words to make you feel like, of course, you couldn't oppose that. Well, you can oppose it because there are real issues that are at bay.

We don't take everything at face value here. One of the main talking points that really we need to go through in this is the real possibility that a seismic shift from the left may not happen because of things like this being blocked and the ability to still block it as of now. Obviously, elections change. Things happen. We're not that far away from another shift again.

But for now, things are okay and can be stopped. And this comes from a lot of the big issues they're talking about. I think there's a summit today about the Guns Act.

We'll see what that looks like. There's obviously all of the different things in terms of the border and immigration reform. Obviously, there's voting rights and even stuff like the minimum wage.

We've heard that talked about a lot. The upping federally of the minimum wage to the $15, I believe, is what is wanted. Now, some states have $15 minimum wages already.

Some don't. But this would be a federal move, which concerns a lot of business owners. I think fast food has already specifically said, hey, if you do this, we've got McDonald's. It's like we already have the automated system where you're not going to be talking to anybody. You're going to be pulling up and talking to an auto response and we're not going to be able to afford that.

I mean, there's restaurants that already have things like that, have robot waiters. Yeah. Which one last week? I was on family vacation. I was in Orlando. Yeah. I've been to one of these robot waiters.

Yeah, I did. I've been to one last week. It was big on TikTok, big popular thing.

This is true. A restaurant that went viral, not because of their food. Their food was delicious because their staff is robots. And I mean that actually robots, these robots that are automated. So, there's a person, a real human being who greets you at the door.

And then from then on, you don't really interact with another human. He types in what table to go to. Then you follow the robot. The robot leads you to the table, has a cute little face.

It's a fun, your kids love it. And it takes you to your table, you sit down and then another robot comes out that almost looks like a tray, like a cart, and it has all of your food on it. And the robots can sing you happy birthday. They do all of these different things and they have their own version of happy birthday, or is it generic happy birthday?

It's the normal happy birthday that we're all accustomed to, but it is interesting to see. I did a lot of research on this because I was sitting there going, wow, this is cool. I see why we're all going and these places have three hour wait because people all just want to be seated and served by these friendly robots. I loved it.

I thought it was great. Again, has become a viral sensation in a strip mall outside of Orlando, not necessarily in like a, this isn't a high end restaurant. So I looked at a little research because I posted about this and I said, hey, this is what happens. This is, this is clearly where we're going. If the federal minimum wage potentially goes up to $15 or, or it becomes not a, there's no, not a way for businesses to see this is where we're going. And someone responded going, well, if a restaurant can't afford to play, it's it's customers or it's it's staff, the federal mortgage, $15, they, how could they afford these robots?

Well, I did a little dive. One of those robots cost about $7,000. The higher end ones cost about $10,000. So over the course of your life, imagine the efficiency, guess how often these things work 24 hours a day on a battery life.

I'm sure that's pretty good. And they redock themselves. This is the tip of the iceberg in terms of automation that's coming. I'm not necessarily saying I'm against it in terms of technology moving forward, but it has become a necessity. It's going to become a necessity for a lot of these businesses, but because of something like last night, what would happen with the filibuster? Maybe we won't see those sweeping changes happen that we know could be a detriment to our workforce and our society. And a lot of these policies, whether it be green new deal, whether it be a federal takeover of the elections, whether it be $15 minimum wage, it it's all coming from the far left of the party of the Democrats. It's not like these are just issues that the Republicans are blocking to block. I actually thought it was interesting to see 50 Republicans stand together last night more so than it be even, not even a couple breaking off. The Democrats always have a good handle on their caucus while I feel like the Republicans are the ones that typically have people breaking off. It's sometimes a broader tent party where there's more nuanced to views within the Republican party, but the fact that you had all 50 and you're going to continue to see, I feel like 50 saying, no, we're not moving forward on this because the Democrats aren't wanting to budge an inch. And you look back to just last year when you had five relief bills, COVID stimulus relief bills that passed bipartisan and then the one this year, because it had so much of the far left agenda in it and no compromise, they had to use budget reconciliation to get around a filibuster because they weren't willing to work across the aisle in the Senate. That's part of the problem and why it's emboldening Republicans to stand up against it. And I think it's a good check on the far left agenda and not having these federal takeovers of so much of the government and the country and the States and all of this. So I'm going to ask you that, why do you think the Republicans stood strong on this when historically at least there's been somewhere, we always hope for bipartisanship, but sometimes stands are made.

Yeah, I really agree with Will on this. I mean, I've talked about this before, but I think the posture of partisan legislating was sort of the stage was set for it during that COVID stimulus debate. I mean, like Will said, there were five bipartisan bills last year.

There could have been a six, Logan, there was an appetite. There was plenty of Republicans willing to work with Democrats to pass another one. And I would tell you, there were plenty of Republicans who wanted an infrastructure bill. There are plenty of Republicans today, Logan, that want to pass an infrastructure bill.

But Senator Schumer has decided that he would rather put forward bills with his wish list. I don't think that's an unfair way to characterize it. And by the way, Logan, you've been talking about how they title these things, you know, the For the People Act, who could be against that? Well, if the bill was actually about election integrity and securing the election, I think you would have bipartisan support for that. The last two election cycles, Logan, the losing side has felt like there were flaws in the election structure. So if there were ways to shore that up, I think there would be a bipartisan support. But to answer your question directly, I think the reason there were no cracks inside the Republican conference is because if you look through this 887 page bill, it's not an election integrity bill.

It is truly a federal takeover of elections. And people just don't want Washington, D.C. making those decisions for one simple reason, Logan. They don't believe they would do a good job at it.

And so therefore, they oppose it. We got another half hour of secular coming up. We have Wes Smith.

Carl, Wes Smith is going to be joining us. We're going to be diving in on this topic on Iran and on many other topics. And I want to hear from you. What's important to you right now?

1-800-684-3110. One of my favorite things, Will, right now has been reading all the comments on YouTube specifically related to robots serving people at restaurants. And I will say this, I'm going to plug myself right here on Instagram. You go to my Instagram, Instagram.com slash Logan Sekulow, search Logan Sekulow. Follow me. You can see a picture with me and Peanut the waiter. So you can see that.

It's a cute pic. You can find it again, Instagram search for Logan Sekulow. You'll find me there. Also check out the great work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org.

Again, amazing content that's posted each and every day. Follow us on all social media platforms, ACLJ, Jay Sekulow, Jordan Sekulow, Logan Sekulow, and give us a call. 1-800-684-3110.

1-800-684-3110. We'll be right back. 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. Talking about freedom, talking about freedom, we will fight for the right to live in freedom. Live from Washington, D.C., Sekulow Live. And now your host, Logan Sekulow.

Welcome to Sekulow. Again, this is Logan joining. We got Will Haines. We've got Than Bennett, Washington, D.C. We're joined now Colonel Wes Smith here in the studio, and we're going to be discussing a lot of topics, whether that is the filibuster, whether that was happening in Iran, and we'll also be taking your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110. I'm going to go ahead really quickly and take a phone call. Kelly is calling. You've been a whole about a half an hour, Kelly. I apologize. It was a busy half hour, but go ahead.

You're on the air. Well, I'm from Illinois, and our legislature here just passed a bill in the middle of the night on Memorial Day about comprehensive sex education. But I'm wondering if the Democrats in Congress have another way to push that voter rights — I put that in quotes — bill through and use reconciliation to ram it through. Good point, A-Than.

So what is the process, the next steps? As they say, because we heard Schumer say, this isn't the end of this bill. There are other methods for us to get there. This doesn't necessarily kill the bill in general. This actually gives it a chance to, like you said, gives it a little breathing room. That's a great question from Kelly, Logan. I love when our listeners get into the parliamentary procedure of the United States Senate.

I kind of geek out on that as well. But look, the reconciliation process that Kelly is talking about, that's the process that they used to pass the COVID stimulus bill. It only requires 50 votes plus the tie-breaking vote of the vice President to get something through.

But Logan, as we've talked about on this show before, it has to be at least somewhat budgetary in nature to accomplish it. Most of the provisions inside this piece of legislation would not meet that threshold. The Senate parliamentarian would not allow them to move that way. So as it stands now, the reconciliation process is probably not an option for this bill. But what they could do, Logan, and what we've been talking about during this broadcast, they could change the rules and precedent of the United States Senate to not allow a filibuster to eliminate or at least change the cloture rule and not require a supermajority to end or begin debate on a measure. If they were to do that, Logan, if Senator Manchin and Senator Sinema and the others that have expressed concern would change their mind on that, then they could move something with 50 votes and the vote of the vice President. And that's why today in the news cycle, you're not hearing as much about S1. You're hearing about eliminating the filibuster. And that's really what we're talking about here.

It is funny to me. It's interesting that Joe Manchin and now Sinema are names that we hear probably more than any senator in general. Like we don't hear about most senators. You occasionally hear about specific ones that are maybe a little bit more boisterous, a little bit louder.

You hear them on the news. They have a committee chair or something to that effect. But when it comes to these topics, it's always down to Joe Manchin and now Kyrsten Sinema. Maybe that's a good thing because you could say, hey, these people actually are voting with their conscience, not necessarily with their party, but then we see what happens with these kinds of situations. I think you brought up, well, it's often like, I feel like with the elections, they bring up states that are like on the edge. Well, maybe we could get Pennsylvania this time and then it's like, well, maybe that was a lost cause.

Right. Well, and one other thing that you're hearing about, and this is a senator's name that you may not know as well as some of those others, but Jeff Merkley, who was one of the original sponsors of this in the Senate, says that the next step is to continue to work the dialogue between the 50 senators and evaluate the next approach. I don't think he's talking about the 50 Republican senators and what is cause for concern is that when you're only focusing inside your own party, instead of looking to across the aisle, that means that they're just going to double down on what failed last night and try to find a way to get it forward instead of what we're talking about. Maybe you don't federalize the elections and take over. Maybe you strengthen the federal election committee commission and then something like that.

It's just a discussion point. We actually could talk it out. Let's hear from Chuck Schumer. Oh, we can't. Run out of time. He's going to set it up. He's going to make you all call in, but I can't do it because I ran out of time. But give me a call 1-800-684-3110.

Guess what? He's not a fan of the filibuster and he's not a fan that this happened. He said the Republican party has now signed their name, but that the official platform of the Republican party is voter suppression. Yes, that's exactly how that went, Senator Schumer, I'm sure. All right.

1-800-684-3110. We get back. We're talking more with West Smith specifically about not only this, but what's happening in Iran, military, everything we're going to get into it. We're going to go deep, but I want to hear from you 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. 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. If you're watching on social media or on ACLJ.org, you got to see a video put together by our great video team. And one of the comments you made is just, it just feels so disingenuous when you hear the statement that came out from President Biden, from the administration. I don't know if we have a sound from that, but we have the statement itself. Well, we can get that pulled up, but specifically saying in general, oh, this is just, you know, the fact, this is just voter suppression again. They are voting for photo.

How dare they, and Colonel Smith, we can just know that this is just one of those things that is just not real. It's speaking because they know the American people, sadly, a lot of them are not going to, you got it well, read the next paragraph and really see what they're voting for. It was the statement, there was a press statement, so put out not audio, but from the President, Joe Biden, it says it was the suppression of a bill to end voter suppression, another attack on voting rights that is sadly not unprecedented. You know, you were talking earlier about how the Department of Justice has, you know, taken over a couple of Iranian websites because they're presenting disinformation.

I say this very tongue in cheek. Perhaps they should take over the White House website and Chuck Schumer's as well about disinformation. This bill was never about voting rights. What I found there, there's so much disinformation and disingenuous going around on this issue. But one of the things I found very interesting and troubling was that yesterday before the vote was taken, President Biden tied this so-called Voting Rights Act to foreign policy and said that the world was watching to see whether or not democracy works in America. And in fact, that proposed legislation is what corrupt dictators and single party political countries do is the reason when we send election observers to another country is because they run their elections like this legislation would have suggested that we run our elections. And so to say that the world is watching, I mean, is really so disingenuous. They're actually attempting, if you look at the details of H.R. 1 and S. 1, they're attempting to make our voting system much like the other countries that we criticize because of how they run their voting system. It's just unbelievable.

It really is. Well, you also brought up that he tied foreign policy, the world is watching. There was an interesting quote from a nonprofit group that was in one of these articles we read in our briefing this morning. This is from Ellen Scales, and she's the communications director for the Sunrise Movement, which is a climate change organization trying to push for legislation on climate change and things of that nature. But her quote in here is that Biden and Harris must use their bully pulpit in full force. They must realize that voter suppression is just as existential a threat as climate change because tackling one is inextricable with the other. So the far left is seeing the For the People Act as just that, as the gateway to every other wish list policy, and they're even recruiting the climate change organization, which is fine to have, you'd think in an article about Green New Deal or something, that you'd be quoting. But quoting this communications director in an article about the failure of the bill on the For the People Act and the filibuster, that's who they go to. That's kind of mind boggling to me.

Yeah, absolutely. Let's go to Barbara's calling in Pennsylvania with a kind of specific question related to this. Barbara, you're on the air. Hi. Thanks, guys, for what you do.

Thank you. My question is, what right does the federal government have to take over the voting procedure when the Constitution says that it's given to the states? Well, Barbara, I don't know if you know this, they don't really care about the Constitution.

Let's start there. Let's start with just what we just can assume, which is the Constitution- That's our baseline. Yeah, the Constitution is not very strict in terms of what they care about, whether it's in the Constitution or not.

But then I'll pitch it to you here and say, what does that process look like? I'm not as versed in those specific laws, but when it comes to making this sweeping change, is it just as simple as going through and passing this and saying, oh, there you go? Well, first of all, I think you did pretty well, Logan. I think them not caring about what the Constitution says is essentially what we have here.

But look, let me go one layer deeper. Barbara's talking about Article I, Section 4, which says, the times, places, and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof. Yeah, now, look, Logan, I'm just going to preempt the argument you're going to hear from the other side. They're going to latch onto the next clause that says Congress can make laws that alter, make or alter such regulations. But Logan, if you look at what this bill is, it says that the federal government gets to set how voters are registered, where they go to register, how districts are drawn, when they can early vote, how long they can early vote, whether or not they can use provisional ballots, whether they can do mail-in.

Does that sound like they're altering or does that sound like they're prescribing? I think it's pretty clear this is the federal government prescribing the way that elections are held and Article I, Section 4 clearly says that is the state's duty and authority to set. All right, let's also take some calls.

We got some availability, 1-800-684-3110. But one thing I wanted to play earlier and I ran out of time was from Chuck Schumer. Chuck Schumer addressed this. We said earlier that the Democrats were raging.

We didn't really dive deep into what that meant. Why were they so upset? We discussed that maybe they're upset because really what they know now is that likely not just this, but because of the filibuster, because of the current situation, they're likely not going to get anything passed. But let's hear from Senator Chuck Schumer that is on Bite 8. Senate Republicans have signed their names in the ledger of history alongside Donald Trump, the big lie and voter suppression to their enduring disgrace. This vote, I'm ashamed to say, is further evidence that voter suppression has become part of the official platform of the Republican Party.

Wes, I saw you reacting. Again, same kind of feeling I have, which is, again, this just feels like, it just feels like propaganda. But go ahead.

Yeah, it really is. You know, and basically the way they approach this and so many other issues is if the Constitution is a problem, go around it. If the rules are a problem, then change the rules. This is about power, and do you really want that much power in the federal government? Thanh was talking about Article 1, Section 4 of the Constitution. You go back and look in the 237, 38 years since the Constitution was ratified, the reason they put that particular article in the Constitution was they felt like that the people needed close representation on major matters in the government. That's why we are really a representative democracy, a democratic republic.

We're not a true democracy. We send it representatives to vote for us. But the reason the Constitution said the states shall control the time, place, and manner of voting is because when you elect your representatives to Congress, that's one level above where you are, and Senate even more so. But with your state legislature, you can actually know those people.

You can interact with those people. In many states, like my home state of Georgia, they actually delegate much of the authority on elections down to the county level so that the people actually have input into elections. And when you're talking about a representative democracy like this, it's very, very important that the people's voice be considered, that the people's voice be heard. And so what this legislation does, it takes it away from the state, which takes it away from the counties, which basically takes it away from the people, and it's the federal government saying, trust us. We know what's best for you. Does anyone in their right mind really believe that, generally speaking, that the federal government should be that involved in your election process and that they know what's best for you?

Absolutely. Incredibly well said, Will. And to that point as well, the Secretary of State of New Hampshire, who's a Democrat, Secretary of State Gardner, he has been voicing his concerns about that very bill for those reasons, because he says that the bill will make their state constitution null and void because in New Hampshire, one of the first states of the union, it's not like New Hampshire has any, we're not talking about Alaska here, they've got a long history, proud history of their state constitution.

Will is a slam in Alaska for being only 67 years old. But their constitution enshrines how they conduct their elections. It's not even just later law. It's one of their founding documents, which is one of the nation's founding documents. And he's concerned about it because it says it takes away the things that we can and can't do under our constitution when it comes to elections and denies the people the right they have under their own state constitution. So when they also point to, look, the Democrats are unified here. We voted 50 in the Senate, all Democrat senators voted for this.

They're ignoring some state officials that are concerned about what this would do to their own state's rules and laws. Like I want to play this quick, quick clip before we go to the final segment of the show today. Again, I want to hear from you because usually in the last segment I like to take as many phone calls as I can. So if you have a comment on this or any other really topic that's related to the work we do, we'll take some calls 1-800-684-3110. But here's from Andrea Mitchell.

This just happened on MSNBC. There's very few times you'll agree with this person, but maybe you will now based on the comment we just said before. So let's take a listen.

Then we'll explain after. What do you do about the objection to ending the filibuster from both senators, Manchin and Sinema? How do you even get your Democrats? Andrea, I'm tired of talking about Mr. Manchin and Ms. Sinema. You know, we have got to do what we can to bring people together. So we're maybe on the different sides, but we're both sick of hearing about the same two people that come up at every conversation that they each are trying to go for. You know, it's like it was a popular person.

Can we get them to come to our party? And oddly, he's saying we've got to do what we can to bring people together. Well, that's kind of what the filibuster, the whole point of it is. I don't think we're going to agree on the conversation point with Bernie Sanders by Bernie Sanders. If you didn't recognize the voice, I didn't say that was obviously Bernie Sanders, but he's tired of hearing and talking about Manchin.

He's tired of talking about Sinema as well. We got a lot going up. 1-800-684-3110. Again, 1-800-684-3110.

We've got a couple lines still open. We'll take them in the next segment. 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. 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. Welcome back to Secula, phone lines are lighting up, we're going to take as many as we can. 1-800-684-3110, if you have a phone call, I want to hear from you. Telephone's going to lighten up a little bit, 1-800-684-3110. Let's go first to Owen, who is either in Washington state or, I think he's in Washington state. Owen, you're in Washington state, you're on the air.

Yes, sir. Thank you so much for taking the call and thank you for what you guys do. I'm an immigrant from Papua New Guinea. I am so proud to be in this country and very grateful for what you guys do. And I'm just so happy that the Republicans filibustered this and stopped it because I know that my country is a democratic country and everything is run from the federal level, which takes all rights as citizens, but in America, we have separation of powers and the states do have the rights to make their own laws, which creates the check on the federal government. And I'm so grateful for you guys getting the word out. Thank you so much. Well, thank you, Owen.

I appreciate the comment, Will. And that, to his point as well, that's why, one, the comments of the Secretary of State of New Hampshire were so important as well, that you can look at all the terms they use, calling it the Voting Rights Act or the For the People Act, and it's really easy to get caught up in those if you only hear what the Democrats' talking points are. But we know for a fact that it's not the things that they call it. It's almost Orwellian when they say it's the For the People Act because it's the Against the People Act in many ways. And then they also push back that states are making their own laws or they're trying to suppress the vote.

It's like that's the point. And one of the rules is what? You cannot be voter ID, federally. And then Manchin's compromise, which was not in what they voted on, but what his compromise was is that there would be a federal voter ID regulation, but that could be a water bill. So probably the least secure form of saying there's a voter ID, it's just lip service to people. That's not what is an ID. You can print out a water bill, like the fact that they would try to say that's a compromise point.

And fans brought this point up many times as well. It's one thing for the states to have different types of voter ID requirements, but when the person who's in charge of that is the federal government, mandating it, changing the rules, all those things, that takes the power away from the states again. We are coming out of an election that was very controversial, that had a lot of issues. So there are pushes and wants to see some reform in the way things work.

When we had days and days of delays, you had Georgia, weeks and weeks and weeks of delays. All the problems that happened, I understand the American people going, we've got to figure this out. However, that doesn't even really address any of those issues. Has nothing really to do with those.

In fact, it would take the things that we saw as problems with the 2020 election and make them federal law and say, okay, we saw Pennsylvania and Georgia and these states had issues with it. Everyone do it that way. Or the mail-in issues in general. Right.

Yeah. And there's so much lying. It's not just disinformation. It's actual lies about some of the states that have passed new voter laws. They're trying to fix doubt in our federal election system. They're trying to fix voter fraud and you go back and you look at the actual legislation that was passed by a number of states, including Georgia, it is not voter suppression. It actually, in Georgia, they increased the time and days and hours that you can vote. They said, well, you can't bring water or food and give it to people in line. You can bring your own water and the voter, the people who run the voting, you know, presets can give you water.

If you're running for office, you can't bring them food and water, trying to end corruption. You look at the details, the actual details of these voter legislations that were passed in the states. They actually protect and clean up the voter system. I haven't seen one piece of it that was actual voter suppression.

And yet that's what you're hearing all the time. And one other quick thing I got to say about Senator Manchin, you played that quote from Bernie Sanders yesterday to give you an idea of the left and how aggressive they are. They have an agenda and this issue is not going away. The whole voting rights thing and this H.R.

1, it's going to be debated again, I guarantee you. But yesterday, a left leaning journalist actually complained about Senator Manchin, said that if he would be the 50th vote to end the filibuster and then the vice President come in and they would end the filibuster, he could have great power. And he is forsaking his power in the name of, she said, bipartisanship and what his constituents want. That somehow it's a bad thing to do to represent your constituents. And to be bipartisan when you could have power instead.

For them, Logan, it is about power. When you read that statement, all of us go, well, yeah, of course, he's going over bipartisanship and actually you said voting for his constituents, not just voting against party lines, but that's not how it works. And as we know, times flip, things change, Republican, Democrat, who becomes the power, it moves continually. I think we're about to see, we're probably 10 years away, five years away from a massive shift again, because you see who's popular in music, if you're Tom McDonald, you have these guys that are coming out, are fully independent, more conservative style voices that are coming out.

And who's the most popular with? Kids that are 16 and 17 right now. So guess what? Millennials, sorry, in about 10 years, and look, I'm one of you, but 10 years when the next generation, now I know the next generation, the one after you, because you're that old now, the next generation, two generations now are coming, it's going to flip back and they don't ever care about what this could mean for them. That's the part that we got to end the filibuster.

Well, guess what's going to happen in two years, something shifts, five years, something shifts. Well, and that's part of what the argument of people like Senator Sinema are. It's not necessarily that she wants a ton of input from the Republicans.

It's that, hey, we have to think forward. And if say the house changes or the Senate changes, then what happens with the stuff we don't want going forward? You know, we want to have input when we're not the majority party, but it's interesting because now people like Senator Elizabeth Warren are, that's her entire point for ending the filibuster, is saying, right, next time, if Mitch McConnell is the leader of the Senate again, he's going to get rid of the filibuster. You better bet he's going to do it.

It's like, well, he was the majority leader before this last election and he didn't because he was afraid of this, but she's trying to actually make the case for ending the filibuster saying that Mitch McConnell is going to do it, he's going to do it. Let's take the final call. Clark in Ohio. You're on the air. Yeah. Hi. Um, I've been wondering this for a number of months and I don't know who else I could possibly ask about it is the fact that, uh, the, um, let me take off the speaker phone. I'm getting this echo. Hey Clark, come on, man. We got, we only got two minutes left. Okay.

You will. The fact that, uh, once, uh, politicians get into office and they've taken the oath of office to uphold the constitution and defend us against all enemies, foreign to domestic, and then they basically do just the opposite. Why is that not grounds for removal from office? Well, sadly, this is sort of the system we are in right now. Well, and look, a lot of problems, a lot of constituents don't feel that way. Well, and also the left tends to believe in a living constitution that it's fluid, that things change without even needing to amend it.

So they probably believe to some degree that they are defending their version of the constitution, that's not the text that was written down by the founders, but this living, breathing document. I want to thank everyone for listening. We only got a minute left. I appreciate it.

Uh, my dad, my brother, they'll be back in the next day or so. And thank you, Wes. Thank you, Dan. Thank you.

Uh, secretary Pompeo for coming in. We'll of course, thank you guys for all tuning in aclj.org is where you need to go to find all the latest information and check out what's going on. Maybe we can do a little more on this situation where, where the U S is claiming the Iranian news sites and take them down and Colonel Smith, you said something in a break and I wanted to get to it for it, which was they'll take down the websites, but they will not. Yeah. Let's take down the Iranian websites, but Oh, they might develop a nuclear weapon if we lose sanctions.

Well, that's okay. We'll take down your websites. We're not going to take away your ability to have nuclear weapons.

So that's just the state of America we're in right now. Hey, again, check out aclj.org support the work of the ACLJ at aclj.org. Subscribe to the app, subscribe to the podcast, follow us all on social media and thank you again for listening.

We'll be right back tomorrow. Same time, same place, tell your friends aclj.org have a good rest of your day. 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.