BIDEN: Secure the Border, Fund the Police

Today on Sekulow, Biden's confusing state of the union, secure the border and fund the police. We'll talk about that and more today on Sekulow. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow.

Good news! Joe Biden wants to fund the police. Not only that, secure the border and fix our broken immigration system. Did he tell us how he would get that done with Democrats in his party? No.

Who cheered for that? Republicans. That was about the only, I wouldn't even call it a bipartisan moment. He was just, again, talking Republican talking points with no oomph behind it.

No, how are you going to do that? When you've got your party that wants to defund the police and your party that wants to keep the border open. Again, just words. President Biden had a unique opportunity that not every President gets in the state of the union. Most of the state of the union addresses, to be honest with you, are boring.

They are kind of perfunctory. They go through what they've accomplished, what they want to accomplish. But there are moments in time in history, especially wartime, when Presidents have this unique opportunity because they're not just addressing the American people. President Biden last night knew going into this, and his advisors, that the Ukrainians were watching, the people, the Ukrainian President. Putin, even the Kremlin said he would be going through the readout of it. So he knew he had that audience and the Russian people, their audience, Europe plus America. And the Chinese who are watching what we're doing with Ukraine because of what they want to do in Taiwan. And what did he do? He spent a few minutes at the beginning of the state of the union acknowledging the Ukrainian ambassador to the US.

That's nice. But announcing no new moves, no real threats, never calling out Putin directly, never calling out, again, saying how bad it is, how great the Ukrainians have fought back. But not living in the reality that Russia right now is carpet bombing Ukraine.

These cities barely exist anymore. This government will fall if things remain the same. And why can't he get Europeans to take out that convoy without the US having to do everything? So again, he failed. That's all. The entire state of the union was a failure on every point.

Because then his aspirations were all voted on and voted down, even by members of his own party, like Joe Manchin. So all that stuff, like great stuff, free this, free that, free that. Do you think the Republicans, when they take back the House, are even going to send that to the Senate, which will also be Republican controlled?

No. So he's just trying to hoodwink the American people at a time when inflation is high, people are freaked. By the way, COVID doesn't exist for them anymore. That was nice to see. Except for their staffs and assistants, which we've talked about throughout.

But think about this. World War, a war in Europe, teetering on World War, talks of nuclear. What did he spend most of his time on? The parts of Build Back Better he didn't get passed. I think it was a total failure. The thing I thought, Logan, was the state of the union is supposed to be a rallying moment, a confidence building measure.

It was not. It was a lot of false hopes, dreams, and maybe just kind of some stumbles through different things throughout the entire speech. Again, compare this to maybe the 2020, which maybe was the last normal state of the union we could say at least we had, which was sort of the pomp and circumstance. President Trump won with the Tuskegee Airmen and Rush Limbaugh and all that. That's really the only, honestly, of all the state of the union is the only one I can even really recall.

I think some of the Fox News guys who've been there forever were like, they all kind of blur together. I think what we'll remember from last night is a lot of concepts, but not a lot of action. What we'll also really remember is that the Russian Ukraine crisis was just essentially added to the script.

The first five pages, get through that, and then go back to probably what was that script that has been written for a month. So that was really interesting to see, not a huge pivot from what was probably going to be the speech that we all kind of needed during wartime. All right, well, we'll be back in just a moment. You can give us a call. We'd love to hear your thoughts on the state of the union. That's at 1-800-684-3110, 1-800-684-3110. I'm sure you've got a lot to say and we want to hear it. Give us a call. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad, whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith, uncovering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy, and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress, the ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support. For that, we are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help in a unique way. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's Matching Challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20.

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

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

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, 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. Music Biden might have said, I agree with that, except for I don't believe he's going to actually do anything about this because they were like throwaway lines to conservatives because they were literally one sentence. Here's Biden on the police by 23. We should all agree the answer is not to defund the police. It's to fund the police. Fund them.

Fund them. So now all of a sudden, Joe Biden is this pro-police, pro-law-and-order President. It sounded like a candidate, actually, is what it reminded me of.

But the fact of the matter is... If you're a candidate for high school principal or President, it sounded like you're going to get an extra recess. We're going to have candy for free.

That's what it felt like. Again, same thing. We start getting prescription drugs. You're going to have free prescription drugs.

All these things can be great, except for there's no explanation of how you get there. So the one explanation is they go in with this fund the police and secure the borders and immigration reform. That sounds great. Now, we're in favor of funding the police. We're in favor of securing the border. And we're in favor of immigration reform.

You could say all of those things. Meanwhile, over in Europe, there is a war between Russia and Ukraine. And we talk about these unbelievably tough sanctions. This is where Joe Biden is responsible, the President of the United States. Tough sanctions on Russia, except we exempted out their energy transactions so they can sell oil. Guess who's buying that oil, barrels of oil?

600,000 to 800,000 a day. The United States of America. Joe Biden closed down the XL pipeline. Closed it down.

It would have produced 830,000 barrels a day. When is somebody going to say it is your policies that have allowed Vladimir Putin to do exactly what he's doing? And it's really going to get bad over there, folks, in the next days. Really bad. It already is. It's significantly worse than it was even 24 hours ago. The UN has voted to censure Russia.

That's breaking now. And that's unique because there are a lot of UN member states that would be persuaded by China and Russia and would not be considered part of the West. So the fact that they've taken that step, now that doesn't really mean anything. Yeah, what does it mean for people who are listening? It's kind of like a resolution in Congress. But it's a step forward in the potential war crimes. So if you've already voted to censure, when this conflict is over, and Vladimir Putin and others could be charged with crimes against humanity and other war crimes because they're targeting of civilians, the cluster bombs they've used, etc. And we don't even know how bad it will get.

This is just what's happened so far. And you would then need a General Assembly because neither Russia nor Ukraine are part of the International Criminal Court. The General Assembly would have to actually vote to send it to the ICC.

So this vote is important for that purpose of ultimately holding the Russian aggressors accountable. Our international law team is already looking at the possibility of a referral. We don't think there's general jurisdiction because we don't believe there's universal jurisdiction with the ICC on non-member states. And Russia and Ukraine, neither one of which are members of the Roman Statute, nor is it the United States. But the General Assembly can make a referral over.

What's interesting here, Logan, you said what's the significance of it. The significance of it is telling Vladimir Putin he's isolating himself from the rest of the world. Now, is that going to stop him from what he's doing in Ukraine right now? As I look at the pictures, I don't think it stops him.

But it does send a message. But we have to toughen up these sanctions more. We have to bring the Russian economy to its knees.

Literally, we need to see a financial collapse in Russia. Yeah, we'll see if that happens. At least it's a step. And look, everyone is kind of debated, even with our own staff here. We're all a bit split on what the next steps should be, what we do need to do.

How far do you go to escalate this? And it's a tough time. People see these images, just like they did in Afghanistan, which by the way got zero reference during the State of the Union.

Maybe the biggest blunder mistake in our lifetime, not a reference. We produced a film series on it, and the President didn't even put it into a sentence in the speech. But people see the imagery that's coming out of Ukraine, and even the American people, they want to help. They want to do something. They don't just want to sit around and say, oh, it's so bad. You see everyone sitting in there last night at the speech with their Ukrainian flags, and you wonder how much is just virtue signaling and how much is real. And you want to be able to at least step up when you need to. But what that means is very different.

It can mean many different things. What I'm looking at too is on this UN vote, just so people understand the kind of depth, the vote was 141 to 5 with 35 abstentions. So that means in the future, if there was a vote on sending that to the ICC, it looks like the votes are there, which means Russia has lost a lot of influence as well as China on these atrocities.

Now that would be a much more serious vote. It would have worked a lot more differently than this censure vote, so I wouldn't say it's a guarantee. But it certainly shows that the world is moving, like Logan was saying, they're not exactly sure what to do, everybody in the world, but they know they aren't going to be just giving Russia a pass anymore.

This would have been fairly quiet, kind of like what everybody predicted, which was they'd roll in with kind of little violence and take over the government. I don't think he would have gotten these votes even at the UN. It's an interesting commentary though also on President Zelensky, I want to get Logan's comments on this, because this is a guy that is a lawyer by training by the way, didn't practice law. He was an entertainer, and his ability to communicate I think has done the Ukrainian people a tremendous benefit. Yeah, I mean everyone is very, very pro-Ukraine around the world. Sure, there's issues with Ukraine, you can go into those, but people aren't, because it doesn't matter, they're not seeing the killing of children from the other side, from Ukraine. So clearly there is good and bad, there's certainly bad and way worse, and the way worse is certainly the fact that Russia has gone in and done this, so much so that you saw political commentators yesterday now questioning the health and well-being of Vladimir Putin. And from Pelosi to Rubio, both of them were saying we think something is dramatically wrong with this guy because he has changed so dramatically in his tone and rhetoric over the last few months that what could possibly happen, there's a lot of speculation.

But I don't know, part of me just feels like the guy is a dictator, and eventually these guys get this way. Yeah, well he certainly, trained KGB, we're going to take phone calls, 1-800-684-3110, your reaction to the State of the Union message, your reaction to the state of the world right now, we'll take your calls at 800-684-3110. We've got an interesting call already coming in, let's take it, David is calling from Maryland. Yeah, David from Maryland, you're on the air. But why are, I'm getting an echo.

You're dead on the air, you're fine. Okay, why were UN peacekeeping troops not sent in a month or two ago? What happened to the UN? And why can't they be sent in now and march right up to the borders of the two provinces that are said to be Russian? But you send in UN peacekeeping troops when you usually have either a resolve situation that's being... Like if it was Russia and Ukraine, so you'd go into a no man's land area, a buffer zone, and they put troops there, their job is to monitor both the troop movements on both sides, and to make sure, because they're armed and they are troops, that if someone tries to be aggressive, to prevent that from happening. But ultimately, you know, those peacekeepers, unfortunately enough, in these kind of tough situations, if war breaks out, they move out. I mean, that's not their job, is not to stop war if one side starts going full speed ahead.

So this is not the situation where they would be prepared to go in. Ultimately, maybe. If there's a peace treaty. But there has to be some kind of ceasefire at least.

Even without a peace treaty. The other aspect of this, and we'll get into it later in the broadcast, is the whole NATO aspect of this. And that is, if a NATO country were to send in troops, that's not an attack. Let's say Poland said, you know what, this is getting out of hand, more of the country is being involved.

That's different than an attack on one is an attack on all. And there's a whole dispute about how that would actually plan out. But the possibility of escalation here is really serious, in my view. Because I think Vladimir Putin is in a corner. And he's got this big convoy, I don't know how they didn't take that convoy out already.

To me it's a mind-boggling to me, but there may be stuff we just don't know. But that's what's concerned. But there was no confidence out of that speech. You don't like the personalities like Vladimir Putin getting backed into a corner because it can't end well. It doesn't end well. So that is obviously a big concern.

It is much different. So we will see what happens with that, but you're right. It was a tacked on part of the speech at the beginning to talk about Ukraine, moved on to other things, moved on to the border, moved on to the police. We have to defend our border, get some round of applause, standing ovation. In the meantime, the Democrats are blocking fentanyl from being rescheduled to a drug that matters. This is where everyone sees through it.

People are throwing stuff at their television because they know what they're seeing is just certainly not true. Because you even have the other outlets, not just your conservative news outlets, before the speech going, what's he going to say? How's he going to make anyone feel better? And we know he didn't. No, he did not.

So what he did was he squandered his best opportunity to look like a President, to look like a commander-in-chief of the most powerful country in the world, and to address our country and the world. And there were some people really watching in Ukraine. You know what their immediate response was? That's not what they wanted to hear. Now, I know that they may want some things that we don't even want to do, but they didn't feel like that was any kind of confidence building and any kind of threat to Vladimir Putin either. So internationally, the speech was panned. Domestically, by the way, I mean, they were, the Democrats watching it, commenting after, they were like trying to find something about this speech.

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

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

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

Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. Welcome back to Secula. We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110, but we're going to get into some of the NATO talk last night by President Biden because he got real emotional and intense about that, except for Ukraine's not a NATO member. Other countries that Russia might want to look to next are also not NATO members yet. There are some down the line against smaller NATO countries like Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, but we even saw Lukashenko from Belarus. He was giving a presentation about the Russian invasion with maps, and on the map he had Moldova marked.

So the question is, is that the next place they want to go, which by the way borders Ukraine and is not a member of NATO, so would not invoke Article 5. I want to take Linda's call from Tennessee on Line 2, then we'll get into more of the NATO issue, but I think we'll take Linda first. Hey Linda, welcome to Secula. You're on the air.

Hey, hey, thank you so much for taking my call. Two takeaways from last night that I'd like to hear what you guys have to say. The first one was when he said that you cannot build a wall high enough, and then he stopped and then referred to COVID. I thought that was interesting.

Right, I'd say interesting is the word. Yeah, and then secondly, something that's bothered me for a long time is that at the end of every speech he only says, God bless our troops. He never says God bless America. And then he said that go get him, or go get him or him. There's like debates going on. You know, here's the thing on that Linda, I appreciate your call. Look, there's a lot we could take apart here. What I'm worried about right now, and I'd ask Colonel Smith this, is you heard in the speech, and we want to play this, let's play the, this is the NATO statement from Joe Biden. Let's play this.

Fight 7. Our forces are not engaged and will not engage in the conflict with Russian forces in Ukraine. Our forces are not going to Europe to fight Ukraine, but to defend our NATO allies in the event that Putin decides to keep moving west. For that purpose, we have mobilized American ground forces, air squadrons, ship deployments to protect NATO countries, including Poland, Romania, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia. And as I've made crystal clear, the United States and our allies will defend every inch of territory that is NATO territory with the full force of our collective power.

Every single inch. That sounds very great that we will go in and defend this, but as I talked to Colonel Smith when we were in a radio prep meeting, this means that American troops, if this were to happen, folks, I want everybody to understand this, would be shooting at Russian troops and vice versa. Yeah. And after you and I talked this morning, I went back and did a little more research on that. Article 5 of the NATO charter has only been invoked once. That was on September the 13th, two days after we were attacked. But you go back and you read the article and what it says is that, you know, an attack on one is an attack on all. However, each ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary to respond in an attack. It does not automatically include military force.

Interesting enough also, the Pew Research Foundation did a poll. Do you think it should include military force? This was done before Ukraine was invaded. 40% of Germans said yes, military force.

53% of Brits and 53% of the French. Only 62% of Americans said that should include military force. So the bottom line, Jay, as you and I talked earlier, it is not a given that military forces would be sent in. It's not a given that all 30 NATO countries would agree to do that.

And it's certainly not a given that it would be popular in America. How do you control if there was an incursion into, even if it was by a general going rogue, a Russian military leader going rogue, how do you control a military conflict at that point between the United States military and the Russian military? I don't think you do. I think what you say is we'll fund you Europeans, go fight your battles. You die for your country. We're not dying for your country.

That's what you do. Like you and I talked earlier, it could mean World War III and the use at some point of nuclear weapons. I mean, this is... And I know this is contrarian, but I do not see sending American troops into Estonia. To defend, yes, but not to...

I think you take what Wes just said. What we could do is provide unbelievable support. They need to go die for their countries. This doesn't have to become World War III. If they're unwilling to do that, then their countries fall. Yeah, I agree.

And I think that's where we are right now. We can provide them with every weapon much better than we did in Ukraine because these are NATO allies. They can get F-35s. I mean, they could pose real threat, but they have to be willing to die for their country.

Send their sons and daughters to go die for their country's freedom. If they're unwilling to do it with all the support we could give them, why do we have to send our guys to do it for them? Again, we heard from a lot of our friends in these regions, they have no militaries.

That's their problem. They're rich countries unwilling to spend on firepower. Where's the line where you finally say, okay, we do have to step in? Obviously, we did it with Hitler. Genocide.

Okay, so what's the definition? Genocide is a mass targeted execution of civilians, like concentration camps. So they start leveling Ukraine. Not Ukraine. That's not genocide. That's war.

Also because they had so much time to leave. Well, Article 6, the following article in the NATO Charter actually defines what is considered an attack, and it's an attack on territory, it's an attack on forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the NATO countries. It does not spell out anything other than an armed attack. Let me go to Thad Bennett. He's in Washington. I'm in New York.

You're in Washington. Of course, the UN in New York just voted. Surprisingly, I mean, I was surprised here.

Tell us what's happened here. Yeah, this is a pretty overwhelming vote, Jay. Typically, if Russia were to be condemned or censored, which by the way, it's almost never any country other than Israel that's up for a censure, but it was Russia this time. And typically their dominance in providing energy to multiple segments of the world would mean that they would win a vote like this, Jay. But we're on the floor of the General Assembly because Russia blocked the resolution at the Security Council on Friday. Jay, they just took the vote, and 141 members of the 193 members of the General Assembly voted to condemn this invasion. There were only five that voted no. It was Belarus, North Korea, Eritrea, Russia, and Syria. Now, 33 did abstain, but Jay, just quickly doing the math, you need two-thirds to pass a resolution like this, so they needed somewhere around 120 votes. They got 141, and Jay, interestingly enough, Switzerland voted yes. They almost never do that for something like this, and China abstained. Yeah, well, China abstaining actually is almost an accomplishment. Wes, as you look at it right now militarily, what does it look like in the next couple of days?

I'll tell you what. You know, Ukraine is pushing for us to provide a no-fly zone over their country. I think that is a no-go. That means that our U.S. pilots would be countering Russian pilots in helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft over Ukraine. I think Ukrainians are holding on by the skin of their teeth. I'm proud of what they're doing, unless the world steps in with more, really, sanctions that have real teeth in them that include Russia's energy, which right now it does not. Unless that happens, Ukraine will ultimately fall.

We hope that doesn't happen. But Jordan, if it does include Russian energy, their country will fall apart. Russia will fall apart. They will be in a serious financial situation.

If it does include energy. If it does include – see, right now this is the big scam being pulled on the American people. We think we've done these unbelievable sanctions on Russia. What that's actually hurting is more the Russian people. The leaders in Russia, so long as they can sell their gas, which we're buying still, and oil, guess what? That's a third of their economy, is that. So as long as that is okay, do you think they're going to stop the invasion into Ukraine?

Do you think they're going to lighten up? No. Now, folks, we've got all these experts. We've got all this information up at ACLJ.org. We are involved at the UN directly because of our NGO status. You can support the work of the ACLJ. We have a matching challenge right now. You double the impact, your donation, throughout the month of March. Donate today at ACLJ.org.

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

A $50 gift becomes $100. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org. I'm talking about freedom.

I'm talking about freedom. We will fight for the right to live in freedom. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow.

And welcome back to Sekulow. We are going to take your phone calls too. 1-800-684-3110.

That's 1-800-684-3110. We want your thoughts. We know you're an audience. I know some people say they didn't really want to watch the speech last night, but you've seen clips, you've seen some.

We're breaking it down for you as well. This was a State of the Union that gave President Biden the opportunity to speak to the world. They were tuning in.

That's not common. Only in times of war usually, so the world was tuning in. The Ukrainians, the Ukrainian President, the Russians, Putin, the Europeans, our allies, and of course the American people most importantly. And he spends about 10 minutes talking about Ukraine in the beginning but gets to know resolution about what we're actually going to do or has he gotten Europe to decide to do anything outside of the US to better secure the Ukrainians who are having their cities leveled as we speak right now. And again, this idea, you know, he was as fervent about defending NATO countries as he was about not sending US troops into Ukraine. I do agree with that.

I just wonder. There seems like there's a build up here to war and he's saying that now. He's just waiting for something to happen that then would, as our friend Tulsi Gabbard likes to say, this military industrial complex would seize on as a reason why to say, you know what, nevermind, we got to go in.

Well, this is the great concern here. We're very animated on this because we have offices around the globe at the American Center for Law and Justice. We are very active at the United Nations and in the year ahead, two years ahead, we're going to get a lot more active up there, over there and up there. And the fact of the matter is, and I think we have to be clear here, West Colonel Smith in the last segment gave percentages on a Pew poll of Americans less than, was it less than, was about 40% supporting sending in US troops to defend a NATO country if attacked. Jordan took the view and I think, and I agree with it, is I would fund the Europeans as much as they needed.

I'd get them as much ammo as I needed. Churchill was begging in World War II for the United States to send the ammunition, to send the ships, to send the finances. I wouldn't make the Europeans beg for it. I would say, listen, it's your war.

We're going to fund you every way we can. But the days of the United States going in and just doing this, especially when you're looking at the foe, is Russia. I mean, that is a big, big deal. So the question is, to the President of the United States, you're talking really tough, except we're taking in 800,000 barrels of Russian oil a day in the United States, a day. And you closed the pipeline that would have allowed us to produce 830,000 barrels a day. So we lost our energy independence at a time when Russia aggression is incredibly on display for the world to see. And while I think the Ukrainian military has been very brave and Zelensky has done a great job, look, we deal in these regions of the world. This is not the United States. This isn't France or Europe. This is Ukraine.

I'm praying for those people, praying for their leadership. And they put up a valiant fight so far. But Russia has not yet unleashed their military might.

And that's where I'm concerned this whole thing escalates up out of control. I mean, the military experts have said one one-thousandth, one one-thousandth of what the Russians could release, unleash on Ukraine. So when you hear statements like this from the President, let's play it quickly, I mean, from the State of the Union, it's not a lot of confidence by 32. Putin may circle Kiev with tanks, but he'll never gain the hearts and souls of the Iranian people. He'll never, he'll never extinguish their love of freedom.

And he will never, never weaken the resolve of the free world. So I guess when you start talking about the Iranian people, but also when you talk about hearts and souls, you talk about people that have already been killed. They've already been crushed at that point. It's just, you can't just see, ultimately one day there might be a spirit amongst Ukrainians to take back their home.

But what a kind of already, if you really listen to it, it's like it's over already. And that is not inspiring to the Ukrainians who are just looking for more military assistance. You know, European countries could voluntarily enter this without invoking NATO. And they could go and institute a no-fly zone. They got the planes, we've given them the kind of tech.

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

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

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

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

It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, 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.

And welcome back to Secular. We're joined by now by Congressman Darren LaHood from Illinois' 18th congressional district. Congressman LaHood, we appreciate you being with us.

You serve on the House Intel Committee. You were at the State of the Union. Let me just ask you, I know you put out a statement about the State of the Union, a lot of failed policies already in it. I thought it was this unique opportunity for a President of the United States because they don't always get this, Congressman, where it's not just the American people that might be tuning in, but Vladimir Putin, the Russian people, the Ukrainian people, the Ukrainian President, and our European allies. What did you take from the State of the Union last night? Well, Jay, first of all, thanks for having me on. Good to be with you and your listeners. A couple things. I thought, you know, his beginning of the State of the Union talking about Ukraine, I thought was pretty good on being united, supporting Zelensky, supporting the Ukrainian people.

I thought that was good. Obviously, 90% of the speech was based on domestic policy, and I think it was a lot of empty rhetoric. You know, he talked about defunding police. I mean, why wasn't he mentioning that two years ago when BLM was burning down federal buildings and desegrating them and committing crimes? You know, so it's a little hard to listen to that talking about, you know, securing the southern border. You know, his rhetoric hasn't matched any of that. You know, he tore up President Trump's Mexico contractual obligation on day one. He's continued to do everything to keep the border open. So, listen, I'm all for being united on Ukraine.

I think there's many of us that want to be there on that. I thought that was positive. But, you know, in terms of the State of our Union when it comes to our domestic policy, it is very, very weak. Congressman, I'd like to talk about the going back to Ukraine for a moment. We're still importing from Russia 600,000 to 800,000 barrels of oil a day.

Now, here's what is mind boggling to me. If we are really trying to put on sanctions that really matter, and, of course, the President, President Biden, closed down the pipeline that would have produced 830,000 barrels a day here in the United States. If we were really trying to do crippling sanctions, and that's the word that everybody likes to use, you would think, one would think that we would stop taking their oil, which is what's propping their economy up right now, which is in real trouble and probably would bring it to its knees.

Well, Jay, you're exactly right on that. We are giving Putin every single day on those 600,000 barrels of oil. We're giving him $75 million a day that goes directly into his coffers.

I mean, that's absolutely ridiculous. But that's going to happen tomorrow. It's going to happen on Friday.

It's going to happen on Saturday. We have the ability to shut that off. Now, to your point, yeah, where are we going to make up those 500,000, 600,000 barrels of oil? I mean, this should have been thought about a year ago or two years ago when Biden came in initially 14 months ago and shut down the Keystone pipeline on day one. It should have been thought about when we had energy independence under President Trump, but clearly that wasn't thought of. And so Biden's put us in a very, very tough spot because if we cut off that oil, gas prices are going to skyrocket. But in some ways, cutting off that $75 million from Putin I think is worth doing.

But because there wasn't a lot of forethought that went into this and a lot of planning, we're left with, again, decisions being made by Biden that put us in a very tough spot. Yeah, Congressman, you're also on the House Intel Committee and I know you can't share classified information, but you've been getting a lot of briefings. There's been a lot of briefings from members of Congress on those committees. And the American people, I think, you know, they see the images out of Ukraine. They do understand how horrific it is. There is still, I think, it's not even fair to say a division about whether Americans support engaging in a no-fly zone, which is like getting into war.

But they certainly are a bit confused. Where are your colleagues right now? Where are you and your colleagues right now when it comes to further assistance to Ukraine? Well, Jay, we hear a lot about lethal weapons and giving them to Ukraine. And listen, stingers are great, javelins are great, assault weapons are fine. But when they have to face the might and the power of Russia, unfortunately, those aren't going to work.

And so we're at a real inflection point, Jay, on what we do. If we would have had some insight and would have planned accordingly and been doing things a year ago, we could have given them Black Hawk helicopters. Right now, there's nobody in Ukraine that can fly a Black Hawk helicopter. Giving them missile defense systems, I'm sorry, Patriot missile defense systems to stop the missiles from coming in from Russia.

They don't have those. Looking at further high-capacity drones and UAVs, they don't have the capacity to fly those. And then looking at, you know, of course, F-16s.

But none of those can be flown by anybody in Ukraine right now. So we're in a tough spot. And so it's what is NATO going to do to step up? What else can we do to give them the firepower that they need? And frankly, Jay, that really concerns me. I know we're going to look at passing a package next week that's going to continue to give more weapons. But, you know, what we're up against with Russia is, you know, it's very, very difficult to overcome with what Ukraine has right now.

Yeah. I want to go to a domestic issue for a moment because the President mentioned securing the border and fixing the immigration situation in the United States. Now, I've been working on this for 30 years, and the border was being secured in the previous administration, and President Biden stopped that. So I'm trying to figure out, Congressman, of your colleagues, who's he talking to here? Well, he knows that it's an election year and he knows he's on the wrong side of the American people on this by a large margin. I mean, Jay, you look at we were letting in 400,000 people a month last summer.

I mean, absolutely crazy people blatantly violating the law. We had the lowest levels of immigration on our southern border under President Trump, under the policies that you and lots of others were engaged with. Because we work with the Mexicans, we work with the Central American countries, we got it under control. You know, we worked on the border wall. We worked with our border patrol agents.

That worked. Supporting the rule of law worked. His rhetoric last night, I don't believe one word of it. I think it's because he knows he's in a very, very difficult election cycle and he's so far underwater in the polls domestically. And it's, again, I don't think you'll see any policies put forth or any changes in terms of what he's doing at southern border.

He can't go against his radical socialist left. Final question for you, Congressman. You spoke to these kind of empty issues, issues that have already failed in Congress. You've already voted down in Congress. And for all indications, it looks like there will be a lot more Republicans in the House serving with you and a majority and likely the Senate as well. And yet President Biden went back to basically build back better.

He didn't say build back better, but it was the parts of build back better that have already failed in Congress. Well, Jay, listen, I mean, when you when I talk to people in Peoria, Illinois, where I represent, I mean, they can't believe the high cost of paying their electric bill, filling their car up with gas, going to buy groceries. I mean, it's crazy. And so the way you the way you fix that is you stop spending money. We've spent seven trillion dollars of taxpayer money in the last two years. That's deficit spending. We have so much money sloshed around the economy right now. That's what's leading to inflation and supply chain issues and not getting people to work. We've disincentivized people to work by means to start spending money. But to your point, Jay, what did he talk about last night? More government programs raising the minimum wage, more government programs for health care, more of when it comes to education, taxing businesses and corporations going the wrong way.

That's going to exacerbate all of these things that are driving inflation. And unfortunately, we have to capitalize, I should say, fortunately, we as Republicans have to capitalize on this election year and make sure that we rub his nose in it. Congressman Darren LaHood of Illinois's 18th Congressional District, thanks so much for joining us, giving your thoughts on the State of the Union as you as you attended. And because of your role in that House Intel Committee, I know all that information on Ukraine that you shared.

People want this kind of information. I appreciate you joining us, Congressman. Let's go right to the phones.

1-800-684-3110. Let's go to Tim in Virginia on Line 1. Hey, Tim. Hey, Jordan. Hey, Jay.

It's nice talking to you. I want to make the American people aware of an agreement that we have with the Ukrainians. It's called the Budapest 1994 memorandum, and it's filed at the United Nations as a treaty. But basically, it was a deal brokered by the Clinton administration for Ukraine to give up over 4,000 ICBMs on their soil in exchange for security promised by us and the United Kingdom in the event that Russia invaded.

What has happened? Okay, so what happened was there were opportunities for that to go into effect under President Obama. And I remember in 2014, you also had a – so first you had the annexation of Crimea.

They didn't do anything there. Then in 2014, there was a revolution in Ukraine that overthrew the pro-Kremlin government. So Putin said that memorandum now is null and void because the government that signed that agreement is no longer present.

They were thrown out illegally by revolution, not by vote, and because of that, he doesn't see it as holding any weight. On the other hand, the U.S. didn't do anything either, and so – With two opportunities to do it. Right, with Crimea and with the eastern Ukraine invasion. So both of those opportunities came for the Obama administration. They didn't act. So when you start not acting on these agreements, guess what those agreements become? Meaningless.

Now it was interesting. Ukraine did denuclearize, but if you really want to know the story there, they had no operational control. This goes back to this whole issue over those weapons. Those were Russian nukes. The Russians had the codes. They were just in Ukraine. That tells you the partnership there was one that existed in a post-Soviet world into the 1990s between Russia and Ukraine. So those weren't Ukrainian nukes that they gave up.

They were Russian nukes that were decommissioned because the Ukrainians had no control over them. These are all things you need to know as we get deeper and deeper into this conflict. To defend the right to life, we've created a free, powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn. It's called Mission Life. It will show you how you are personally impacting the pro-life battle through your support. And the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases, how we're fighting for the rights of pro-life activists, the ramifications of Roe v. Wade 40 years later, the Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry, and what Obamacare means to the pro-life movement. Discover the many ways your membership with the ACLJ is empowering the right to life. Request your free copy of Mission Life today online at ACLJ.org slash gift. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. Whether it's defending religious freedom, protecting those who are persecuted for their faith, uncovering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy, and fighting to protect life in the courts and in Congress, the ACLJ would not be able to do any of this without your support.

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

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

Welcome back to Sekulow. One part of the domestic speech I wanted to get to, because I think it was just absurd and I just wanted to play it for you, and it was about the U.S. economy and basically a little bit of America First by Joe Biden. And we heard from Congressman LaHood.

We've talked to everybody we've talked to. It's election year. President Biden knows that, so he's trying to throw these key words out. But take a listen to this bite. I mean, this does not sound like the Joe Biden who ran for President.

It certainly doesn't sound like the Democrat Party. One way to fight inflation is to drive down wages and make Americans poorer. I think I have a better idea to fight inflation.

Lower your costs, not your wages. That means make more cars than semiconductors in America, more infrastructure and innovation in America, more goods moving faster and cheaper in America, more jobs where you can earn a good living in America. Instead of relying on foreign supply chains, let's make it in America. Look, Intel's CEO was there and they said they're going to go to Columbus, Ohio, and they're going to spend like $20 billion. But then he said, if you pass legislation, they'll do it. So you mean we're going to be spending $20 billion for Intel, for a private company. So these companies will not invest in the U.S. unless we're paying for it. Or at least paying a significant portion. There was something that they needed that they wouldn't do without legislation. Tax breaks or concessions or funding.

Intel's not going to do this unless we pay for it. That's the politics. Now yesterday we talked on the broadcast. It was just breaking that there were reports that Ukraine had been granted candidacy status at the European Union, which would bring in all kinds of mutual defense treaties. We got into it.

Our team got into it. So Andy, what's the status right now, first of all, of Ukraine as they've signed the application? Well, the President formally, President Zelensky formally applied to join the European Union and he's asked for fast-track admittance due to the Russian invasion, which entered, of course, its seventh day today. What I can report to you is that the European Parliament, which is the European Union's legislative branch, gave a boost to Ukraine's hopes of one day joining it by urging the leaders to block, by voting by 637 to 13 to give, recommending that the 27-member nation of the EU give Ukraine candidate status. They have not yet achieved candidate status. Decisions on admitting new members to the EU must be taken unanimously by the bloc's 27 national governments.

The expectation is that the vote could take place on Friday. Which then brings in, and we'll get, let's take a call, but that brings in the whole treaty issues that we've talked about in the mutual defense, which could complicate it more, although to Jordan's point, maybe gets the Europeans to do what they're supposed to do. Yeah, I don't think anybody right now in America would be against going to a country like the UK or France or Germany and saying, here you go, here's way better weapons, go fight the war. Go fight your European war.

Voluntarily enter. You don't have to be attacked, no NATO, you go put your troops in. Even if you only got 20-30,000, they got pilots, they have sophisticated, they could fight fighter pilots, they could take out that supply chain, they could probably, but that would mean them dying to protect Europe, not us. Now we could give them everything they need to do it, but some of them would be killed. They're unwilling to do that. Don't let them drag us into being their hammer. This is not in the sense World War II. These are countries that have militaries, that have sophisticated aircraft, that have sophisticated arms, some have nuclear weapons.

I mean, the list goes on. We need to be clear. We need to be clear. We would fund and probably support those efforts for them to voluntarily enter the conflict, but they're not willing to do it, the Europeans. Not yet. So far, they have not been willing to do it. Which brings up an interesting question.

We'll take a call in a moment here, Ben. And that is, what is the prospects of, because it has to be unanimous, you said. It has to be unanimous. Twenty-seven member nations of the European Union have to unanimously vote. And when they vote, they know that that triggers their defense facts. That's right.

Under Article 42.7 of the Mutual Defense Clause of the Treaty is triggered in addition to what's called Article 222, the Solidarity Clause, and that includes the implementation of, let me just read it, military resources made available by the member states. Exactly what Jordan's talking about. Let's go to Laura in Idaho on Line 2. Hey, Laura.

Hey there. My family's actually been to Ukraine twice on mission trips, and we have lots of friends all over Ukraine. So we're just horrified with all this, and I feel like we're just watching a bully on the playground beat up the kindergartner, and we're just standing by and watching. What happens if, what Jay said a little bit ago, and Ukraine does fall in the next few days, are we just going to look the other way like we do with Crimea? If it's annexed, you know, quote, unquote, will we go back to business?

Will we continue buying gasoline? Well, let me ask you this, Laura, because we're trying to get what our audience is thinking. Would you be in favor of, let's say Ukraine unfortunately does fall to Russian control, and would you want U.S. troops put in to defend? Absolutely. I think all of our young men and women...

Okay, that's fine. I'm not trying to cut you off, but that means you're fighting the Russians at that point. U.S. troops fighting powers at work. Two nuclear powers staring each other down. You understand, Laura, how that could escalate, right?

Yes, I understand. It's a very complicated situation, and I think there's very creative tactics we could be doing. And I think the creative tactic is to get the Europeans to engage this, not directly because it's a European war.

They have failed to defend themselves throughout modern history. They have always needed the U.S., but we've backed them up with the weapons now. We have the capabilities.

We could get it in today. That entire Russian convoy could be taken out by a number of different European countries. How it hasn't been is unreal. Voluntarily entering. But see, they're too afraid to do that because they're not willing to die like Americans are. Americans were willing to fight and die for liberty. These Europeans have never really been willing to do that. They've always needed us to fight their battles. Now, some of that's because some of their countries are smaller, like the U.K.

They've been willing to fight and die, but they're just small. That being said, they could have the weapons, they could have the jets, let them fight the battle. And I think the U.S. could play an unbelievable role in backing up the economies of those countries.

Well, I think Jordan is absolutely right. We've, in the 20th century, twice taken the Europeans' lines and saved them, if you will. In World War I, we did that. When we came into the war with American troops. In World War II, we did that when we came in with American troops. And there was genocide in World War II. And there was a lot of, it's a different situation. But this is a European war, and the Europeans are going to have to step up to the plate and defend themselves.

It'll be interesting to see if they do actually on Friday, which is just two days from now. Yeah, because we're used to these wars, and I'm not trying to take away anything, but like where we've seen, you know, three or four thousand U.S. troops killed over long periods of time. This would be three or four thousand killed in a day. Because you'd be having countries that both have the mother of all bombs dropping on each other, back and forth, back and forth.

And when those drop, everyone that's around it is dead. So it wouldn't just be a fighter pilot here, risking their life, or a soldier there. You're talking about entire infantry divisions that could be on both sides, wiped out by very similar weaponry. We have a better ground force than the Russians. I think that's been shown now to the world. We have very similar capabilities when it comes to missiles, rockets, and nuclear weaponry.

I think that's right. And that's why, listen, we need to pray for peace, pray for a resolution, but folks, let's not be buying their oil. I know it's going to raise gas prices for a while. I'd rather do that than sending Americans into harm's way.

We'll be back with more tomorrow. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's Matching Challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20. A $50 gift becomes $100. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family. Give a gift today online at ACLJ.org.