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

SCOTUS Nominee: Pro-Lifers Are “Hostile, Noisy, In-Your-Face”

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
The Truth Network Radio
March 23, 2022 3:17 pm

SCOTUS Nominee: Pro-Lifers Are “Hostile, Noisy, In-Your-Face”

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 575 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

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


March 23, 2022 3:17 pm

Senator Marsha Blackburn (TN) called out Supreme Court nominee Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson's portrayal of pro-life protestors in a brief she wrote and signed in 2001. The brief states that women seeking abortions must "run a gauntlet through a hostile, noisy crowd of 'in-your-face' protesters." Jay, Jordan, and the rest of the Sekulow team discuss the brief in question as well as the amicus brief we filed in that same case refuting Jackson's position. This and more today on Sekulow.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Focus on the Family
Jim Daly
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

Noisy and in-your-face.

Now you probably YouTube encourager for the rubble Facebook you still through the fracture queue program going after everything that I would imagine the even today the quote of a breach. She wrote the words I used was, not even using different words but the exact quote she was in a brief that the nominee to the Supreme Court judge Jackson and I just want to be clear so you got the link right there you had over rubble. You can comment how you want to rubble. We could say we what we know as I retake it data site reflect later.

It is a great also to share with your friends and family they got sink in the comment section and where you can be interactive throughout the broadcast is so obvious. All the Bible citizen of the Facebook situation like things that you know this happened last week so you know like this the second time, like weeks. We had initially been booked on by the way, the factor comes back and says oh yeah, we should to on that because it actually was. Hearings on this pro-life legislation, but you I can look at the Facebook numbers right now and tell you what's going on on Facebook.

Okay, here's what's going on there suppressing the feed why because the feed is about the pro-life issue and Jordan quoted her brief which we were involved in because we had to put up on the screen. We found a breakthrough in that case involving pro-life protests in these buffer zones and will put up on the screen. Now if we got it will have in the moment and so that's where it came from. So before the fact checker starts with Jordan come up with that language in context from the brief. The nominee piled up just like to do that is a lawyer representing a client, but there is a here's the brief 2001. This what she said this is about the boat buffers also try to suppress pro-life free speech is not you judge she was on the side of the abortion industry. So if you're wondering who she is because she doesn't say a lot about these hearings. So far she has worked on behalf of the abortion industry in private practice before she was a judge she said this few American citizens who seek to exercise constitutionally protected rights must run the gauntlet through a hostile noisy crowd of in-your-face protesters that watched with they don't say there is that that's on a public sidewalk where you do in America.

Sometimes have to go through it here people you don't like see things you don't like people who might be expressing their view. I think it we all know now it's hardwood free speech is under attack in many different ways, and the groups were used to support real robust treatment spaces ACLU type groups would sometimes side with us to know what their nonpartisan daily want. It's only speech that they agree with you before the police. They agree with that pro-life streets they don't agree with on our own when we went cases for speech notes for everybody speech for both sides.

We would case religious liberty for all religious groups. This this idea again that she would use this kind of language to say what America you should have to hear things you don't like with byways conference with the Supreme Court us, and let me say this, her position on these buffer zones in his bubble zones was rejected by the United States Supreme Court in 2014, 920 sort the position she advocated was to the left of Justice Ginsburg again this is just so you know what we got. Justice Breyer agreed with our position. In that case that impacted by this law in Massachusetts was unconstitutional. Buffer zone were litigating those now, Breyer agreed with us. Justice Ginsburg agreed with us. Justice Kagan Justice over my work.

They agree with us.

This nominee probably confirm that bill very little doubt about this nominee takes the position to the left. Legally speaking of these justices that's what your support of the ACLJ so critical as we talk about. We filed a brief in that case, we argued cases at the Supreme Court of the United States stand with the ACLJ and a matching challenge campaign limiting purchase order work this a critical month across the month of March that only online ACLJ.org we don't do a lot of the broadcast times a year.

These months are very important.

Double the impact that issuing a $25 donation ACLJ.org right now that's like $50 for the group don't match all those donations donate today.

We have been involved in all these battles included with this job with this nominee ACLJ.org the American Center for Law and were engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. Whether it's defending religious freedom.

Protecting those who face covering corruption in the Washington bureaucracy fighting to protect life and the court seen in Congress ACLJ for that.

We are grateful. Now there's an opportunity for you to help any way. $20, $50 gift becomes 100 time for the ACLJ the work we do.

Simply not occur without your generous constitutional and religious freedoms are most important to you when you forgive today only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, 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, defendant the right to life. We've created three powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission life will show you how you are personally ACLJ Jesus actions the care means to serve in many ways your membership powering the right question for you/secular folks. We responded to Judge Jackson when she wrote this brief calling again a pro-life protesters supporters of a pro-life speech. It is the language used directly said he support everybody because if they love disinterested social media. Few Americans citizens who seek to exercise consciously to customers to protect the rights must run the gauntlet through a hostile noisy crowd of in-your-face protests, which of course is also constitutionally protected right Americas. You can voice your opinion, as she calls him hostile, noisy, and in-your-face. Again, just zealous support for your your belief in your view on public streets and public sidewalk. This what we wrote back this in 2001. He said the statute is silent concerning prohibition of harassment, violence, obstruction, or any of the other purposes described by the defendants there make you the brief. The fact alone counters over 90% of what defendants there make you have to say there brief, the statute is an example of draconian overkill pro-life speech counseling to women seeking abortion being bludgeoned by this legislation, not merely bird. No other movement for civil rights has been treated in such a harsh, Orwellian manner by the state.

And this is true, would you asked Judge Jackson. Then I beat with the civil rights movement of peaceful protest went when it was also by the way, civil disobedience question about these was is even that know this is these were people on a public sidewalk who have peaked in the Supreme Court since a case called Haig versus CIO, which was a union case said the sidewalks are quintessential public forms traditional public forums for free speech. What you have to understand here in this.

What's critical is this is the abortion distortion factor in this nominee is not only taking that position, she actually advocated for that position in a brief to the Court of Appeals's easy house, joining a senior counseling ACLJ does not work on the pro-life issues that made this is this is not only on the mainstream cc.

The interesting thing here is, nine justices, most recently in 2014 the Macomb case said that those kind of statutes and this was one of Massachusetts to were not narrowly tailored base than the print presented a significant burden on the petitioner's First Amendment rights by denying the petition is the ability to engage in conversation we fling in's on the sidewalks. The law prevents petitioner from engaging in exactly the transmission of ideas.

The First Amendment is meant to protect.

So maybe it wasn't an accident that when asked about what is upon the name your fundamental rights. She didn't say the First Amendment freedom of speech, because First Amendment freedom of speech. Then she'd have to say what you can speak against abortion and like you said, there's abortion distortion. You can speak about pretty much anything you want to speak about that down to speak about protecting the life of an unborn baby and that's why she would want to admit that she argued against it. I mean so does that mean she's not to be confirmed.

No pictures can be confirmed in all likelihood, but nine justices of the Supreme Court rejected the position that she advocated so you know this is not including Justice Breyer.

So Justice Breyer siding with us on that free-speech argument that the sidewalks are unable to goings were open for freedom of speech, and she took a position at least in the brief that she filed that she's not disowned and took a very different position. She basically said silence around the abortion facility. No First Amendment activity right so left, and Breyer says she is actually left a prior email, arguing again that lot. That ruling said the law prevents the petitioners from engaging in exactly the transmission of ideas. The First Amendment is meant to protect them and she is totally going against that. But the First Amendment does not protect again. If you're talking about protecting the life of the baby or talking against abortion issues that we wait out of the mainstream. Here you totally. I mean, this is not look if she can get nominee issues been nominated. Is she getting a confirmed yeah in all probability, but we just need to know all do is pointing out the facts, not talk about whether she's qualified or not. Here's the position she she has a paper trail. This would be like, you know, nominated me for the Supreme Court, you got your four years of work at the Supreme Court Nash that she doesn't have that much but this was a note this is aggressive position. She was taking. And then she didn't answer the fundamental question about fundamental rights including the right to freedom of speech and like you just said cc and now you know why and she repeatedly says shall follow the law shall follow precedent and when you hear her answers.

It seems like she actually says the exact opposite of will shall follow the law may be as long as she agrees with it, or shall follow precedent again as long as she agrees I would play this is Sarah Blackburn has been really broadcast. Tomorrow should on the Senate Judiciary Committee and sheet read the Scriptures late last night was the first statement is about retirement with the idea of this hostility toward people who happen to be pro-life by 11. I want to go to you on something you said when you are in private practice i.e. major views on life in the pro-life movement very clear and in fact you act pro-life when this was an embrace you read you described Dan and imploding, hostile, noisy crowd of in-your-face protesters." And you vacated against the women's First Amendment right to express their sincerely panel interviews regarding the sanctity of each individual life and I'm a pro-life warming, 79% of the American women's support restrictions sometime on abortion and so I find it incredibly concerning that someone who is nominated to a position with life tenure on the Supreme Court holds such a hostile view toward a view that is held as a mainstream belief that every life is worth protecting.

This is becomes really relevant when the Supreme Court decision in the Dobbs case which could well overturn reversals when it comes out in the next probably 12 weeks. So what you got here and I think cinderblock was to be I guess our broadcast tomorrow really laid this out well and I think should she laid it out cc very well of what the real distortion here is in the position. Here is an issue said this is this idea that you could treat abortion speech involving abortion as second-class beach, or you can close down the crisis pregnancy center or require that the crisis pregnancy center advertises where you can get abortion services. Yes, you handle those cats continuously ban the abortion distortion that there are rights there fundamental rights but somehow they disappear when you start talking about abortion and protecting the life of the unborn and the naked she is interesting because and she was asked directly about this again let's play bite number seven Alyssa Judge Jackson's response when you go to church and knowing their pro-life women there. Do you look at 10 thinking Dan and that way that there noisy, hostile, in-your-face day. Do you think of MD think I've pro-life women like me that way center that was a statement in brief made an argument for my client. It's not the way that I government characterized the pyrite. Thank you for the clarification. Again, I think the if this was just like a normal criminal case or something like that where you get like a very white collar firms bit. That's one thing you take on a eight industry activist group the abortion industry. She was represented. Client yes and we reps of the pro-life group that's us going up there saying I don't actually believe those pro-lifers, he said, as I was working on because it's different than normal cases. These are high profile. There is variable because they involve these issues which appear to be a nominee one day.

That is, she's been that are to be front and center and they are front center and you'll see these cases agree talk to Frank Manion next segment of these cases right now at a New Jersey we have on pro-life speech and buffer zones.

We have the Dobbs case of the Supreme Court right now these.

These are these are top case we cannot just get away with, say, well, that was just my client you let go, said normal criminal case of somebody when this was an integral and repulsive this was. There was this wasn't vacated for position she's advocating for position is very specific. I mean, the fact which they use hostile noisy crowd of in your face protesters as a way to make that point without using that degrading type of language you know of that women.

Pro-life women are these hostile out-of-control people instead of on the pro-life woman and I choose to treat people in love and kindness said that you can't group me into this crowd, which is what they're trying to get in this report said that when a really benign by denying the petition is the ability to engage in conversation elite wing on the public streets and sidewalks below prevents the petitioner from engaging in exactly is what's best in exactly the transmission of ideas. The First Amendment is meant to protect.

So there you have it crystal clear now. Georgia said it we are actually in court on these cases right now.

I've argued these buffers on cases for three decades at the Supreme Court so I mean obviously we know a lot about this. We file briefs in this case that she filed a brief in we put it up on the screen right now. Your support of the American Center for Law and Justice makes all of this possible and we been doing it in our fourth decade now. Your support makes it happen support our work is a critical month across the month of March is a matching challenge month you donate online ACLJ.org this I would do all the work that we give for your financial support is broadcast as part of that because your financial support were able to do this every single day and all the legal work and other government affairs working on the international because your financial support of ACLJ. Donate today@aclj.org double impact your donation. What is that mean group of donors they've agreed there to match the donation to come through the you donate $20 to match that with an additional $20 so it's like what he dollars the ACLJ hundred dollars at about 700 so again donate now if you support our work time for us. Very important here donated ACLJ.org. Only one.

A society can agree most vulnerable invoice is, 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, defendant the right to life, free our publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission will show you how you are personally ACLJ secure means to as many ways your membership powering the right question/the American Center for Law and engaged in critical issues at home and abroad.

Whether it's defending religious freedom. Protecting those covering corruption in Washington fighting to protect life and the courts and in Congress ACLJ for that.

We are grateful to others in the way 20 oh becomes 100 for the ACLJ simply would not occur constitutional and religious freedoms most beautiful gift today secular 100 684 31 two that's what hundred 63, 110 if you got questions at this nomination process, which is been wedged in between the course is that of Ukraine and Russia, and the threat of work was really into the second half hour and got the pollutants spokesperson long-term spokesperson justifying the use of nuclear weapons in an interview yesterday talk that that the second half hour of broadcast. But with this issue, which came to light late last night and it was because of again. Marsha Blackburn, Sue Black present really broadcast tomorrow and the idea that she brought up a specific case. So was it just a hypothetical is a case that Jackson was involved in where she takes his position that the other pro-life protesters are hostile, noisy crowd of in-your-face protest, which by the way what she said about civil rights protesters with her background. What if I said that about civil rights protesters. This is a white man I said not want to deal with these hostile these noisy black protesters.

That's what she said about pro-life protesters. Miss America is it.

Sometimes you to see protesters you agree with disagree with support it's all around.

I added one of our our our long-term seven Robbie from off to DC severe video yes to all the protesters going on around the Supreme Court right now and Capitol Hill because the nominations allow the pro-abortion groups abortion groups have a right to be there to. I would argue that they doubted it. It's it's up to the pro-life groups to let their voice be heard but to think about that for a moment of all, like the black lives matter, which I think you you can separate out civil disobedience is that there's a speech you don't like on a public sidewalk which is different as well. And then there's a give this there's the violence that we saw was some of these movements arrives violence and riots. A crime is one thing that's illegal.

If you engage in civil disobedience. You could be arrested but we have a public sidewalk. You just speaking your mind. Just because people don't like it stupid us. You can apply this to so many others. We said our brief responding. Here's why. Is it pro-life speech that gets free this way. Same way with its religious people to get through this way, but if you're if you happen to be civil rights for you if you the speech of the day for the black lives matter move the day. People care for burning down cars. The neighborhood, but this is not this is this is that are engaged in an impure space that we just came out a trial on this bright man is joining a senior counsel for the ACLJ you were just in court on this very type of legislation.

All prohibition on speech activities around abortion clinics that the nominee is always on the other side of the briefing filed in 2014. Imagine outliers perked up with what I heard this exchange yesterday in the hearing per week 13. I've been buried in the calling case of the Massachusetts buffer zone.

Our prolonged time. Now we just try to case in Federal Ct., New Jersey a month ago today we started it involving these issues. Got another case in Louisville Kentucky I meet the Kentucky case were actually in the Sixth Circuit already because the court denied our motion for an injunction without at least doing two weeks and in the Kentucky case we got our proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law doing today so we are yet were up to our next and buffer zone issues and it's honestly a little concerning hearing nominee take that kind of a position where she described basically what our clients as hostile, aggressive, in-your-face concern, you will know what where she would come down in an actual case, but it does seem to be different than the approach taken by all nine justices in the calling case, including the most liberal members of the court. That was my point: it's 920. She's replacing Justice Breyer Justice Breyer McCombs and are signing free speech rights protesters around abortion clinics.

He seeks this nominee. We don't know if Frank said we want her judicial decision would be, but her advocacy position. By the way, she represented abortion access project of Massachusetts may route which was then the national abortion rights. Actually Massachusetts national organization for women in the REIT religious coalition for reproductive choice severity question where she is on this issue.

I don't think there's much question but having said that she is not in line with the most liberal members on the Supreme Court on the speech issue not acknowledging that the First Amendment right of free speech, which like we have all said you can say whatever you want to say whether people agree with that or not but judges, activist judges don't want you speaking if it has to do with the life of the baby protecting life of an unborn baby or abortion. And we see that over and over again at the First Amendment applies, except for again and unborn baby or abortion. She filed a brief by the way they were talking about in 2001 on putting up on the screen are brief that we filed in response to that case, which took obviously the opposite position and then ultimately all these cases percolated prolonged time when this report next reviewed Frank a case out of Massachusetts all nine of them the most conservative and the most liberal said that laws was unconstitutional and we want to breath of fresh air. True in most abortion cases that you know better than anybody else we we do with the abortion distortion tractor and towards the calling case, all nine members of the Supreme Court agreed that pro-life speech sidewalk counseling specifically is entitled to the highest protection under the First Amendment of any form of speech, and that's what were trying to apply new cases that were currently litigating at least one of which is ticketed for the spring court my opinion. And so it is obviously concerning when you hear this kind of rhetoric be used by a potential member Supreme Court e.g. Idaho online to place a call if you want talk to Samantha, 1-800-684-3110 Angela secular.

I called Mike and played out. Jackson Janda so in her need to call her, like individual just completely pro-life women are abundant in this nation and they provide a wonderful spirit on this building to her like Frank in Idaho and we welcome all women and any kind of circumstances that walked in the door and the take care of them. We love them. There is no rabbit dialogue course which he said the words exactly are.

This is in her brief few American citizens who seek to exercise constitutionally protected rights must run the gauntlet to a hostile noisy crowd of in-your-face protesters.

Not a lot of these protesters are women around these abortion clinics nonexclusively but a lot of the more and the idea here that you would characterize people this way in a brief gets a free country and she's advocating she can do that but right now she went to the Supreme Court. There's a lot of advocacy and it's noisy and it's running gauntlets and is protected speech. She just doesn't believe it is.

And this is the only speech that she's going after Ann and Jordan made a great point that he knelt for the black life matters. Those those kind of protests you didn't see you saw the First Amendment being pushed out there every single time and then get the First Amendment doesn't protect your right.

If you want to hand pro-life leaflet to a woman walking and to make the most important decision she's ever to make whether to keep that baby or kill that baby got back to gets it scheduled for an hour it's the right in America. That's actually supports freedom of speech and the left which is always have this kind of tinge of silencing what they don't like keeping out that's basically fighting buffer zone to make these speech free zones. I would live in a country where you say what you want and deal with it. If you can't deal with it should be living in America set the country. Because usually affiliates really hear the side you don't like said you like and we can build a faith that it discusses.

Like it or not like it if you walk by it. You gotta walk by if you got a slave to your kids, you got explain it to your kids.

America stuck without a password. Don't start picking and choosing speech based on the most dangerous path it were any worse place now were before support our work. ACLJ.org building today. Double your impact second, the American Center for on critical issues at home and abroad for limited time you can participate in the ACLJ challenge for every dollar you donate $10 20 $50 gift becomes 100 protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms you forgive today online keeping you informed and now Jordan secular to 163, which is further broadcast his nuclear threat from Russia is is real, putting up their spokespeople to make the case to deny they would use nuclear weapons, but that they have a right to use nuclear weapons are they not limiting their comments.

By the way, to these tactical nuclear weapons so obviously what the threat that America which which I feel like they been successful at so far in keeping America by saying you know by use nuclear weapons within the going on the record in English talking about using nuclear weapons were also is really into that were given to the church's role unique depending on what what country you're in the Orthodox Church in Russia which is separate from the larger Greek Orthodox Church, but they they they want Ukraine back Ukraine was granted its independence from the Russian Orthodox Church. You have their leader country annihilating people is because of sin, yes I been so that you see how coded others are utilizing different tools. The Soviet Union did which was of course banned all religious belief of the other using some of this religious belief and also to divide the country sometime at that as well. Also, just a kind of a slave he always worked were doing this is because of coded we could still actively engaged the United Nations we been able to do it remotely, but is still happening and here's what I want to play this for people at this is what it in intervention. We did at the United Nations human rights Council on the situation for Christians in Afghanistan take a listen or watch it if you watch the broadcast. All the investors saw this at the UN when we intervene. Take was and now I give the floor to the European Center for Law and Justice, the EC LJ would like to address the extremely dangerous situation currently threatening the lives of Christians, religious minorities and women in Afghanistan under the harsh rule of the Taliban. While the world is understandably focused on Russia and Ukraine. The Taliban continues to commit brutal human rights abuses since it sees control of Afghanistan. The Taliban has begun a campaign of violence and terror against Christians and other religious minorities as well as atrocities against women. Afghanistan has now been rated as the worst place in the world for Christians by leading human rights organization.

Many Christians rightly fear they will be hunted down, abused and even killed because of their faith. We know from history that this is only the beginning. Swift action must be taken now to stop the violence, loss of life and human rights violations committed at the hands of the Taliban, Christians, religious minorities and women in Afghanistan are running out of time. Therefore, the EC LJ respectfully calls upon this council to take whatever action is necessary to protect Christians religious minorities and women in Afghanistan and to stave off any impending human rights abuses and bloodshed. Now before it's too late again that goes out to the entire audience about this covert issues at the UN. That's it for the UN in Geneva, the, the investor staff because they are there there participating in these meetings and so I will be back captures fairly soon. Hopefully in person where we have a team from France do it. As you will be there doing it but it's because this unique set up.

And of course we have the resources to where you have to tie that Alex will all go behind the scenes for people that is me off the cuff that has to be tied exactly under 90 SB 90 seconds or less, or else they will not Be considered and to you if you were in person they would just cut you off if they needed to but but when you're doing it this way sweep our production team. We we put the script together so we get out everything exactly the way we want it said for all the record at the United Nations. RT puts it up. We put it together.

Sometimes it takes what type stud 615 times to get it all said so that we can deliver that message to the UN is another part of our work takes more than just me in front of a camera takes a team to put the script together to put exactly together in less than 90 seconds to run through it been delivered to our team in Europe within delivers it to the UN system and then what you see is the influence the EC LJ's.

They don't have to always air put in the record. More times than not, the majority of the time our message is air, and so I just did what day will be for you and it's for tomorrow at the UN on Nigeria so I did that before radio broadcast a similar message you it's our work@eclj.org. You see the breath to see the scope revolved everything but ACLJ that will be right back. The American Center for Law and solutions at home and abroad. Whether it's defending religious freedom. Protecting those in Congress ACLJ to support for that.

We are grateful elders in a way 20 oh dollar gift becomes 100 constitutional and religious freedoms only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is, 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, defendant the right to life, free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission will show you how you are personally ACLJ secure means to as many ways your membership powering the right question/word you crave it picture for escalation. You what we are seeing this week is spokespeople going out to various media outlets in English you in in different languages so the not that these are not when you peer this this not being dumped. This is that this the head spokesperson for the cripple. He's been foods guy for decades presented power. Dimitri passed off it's it's a get.

He runs the entire Kremlin press operation is a prudent ally. He went on to Christiana report succeeded international to do an interview, not his native language and Russian be translated but in English on the question of utilizing nuclear weapons. Do you really believe that you have your in a situation where you could justifiably use a nuclear weapon in Ukraine.

Take a listen by 22. We have an onset of the domestic security and will you can read only reasons for nuclear arms to be used as is existent notes Stratus rent for own country, then it can be used in accordance with our constant. He believes they believe that Ukraine might say that they wanted to join NATO. That alone is the exceeding success of threat to their to their existence. So the question is, of course, the present is on his way to NATO.

So, what Smith is with us and comes with. My question is presence on the way to NATO that can be a show of unity I guess. But what really can be accomplished and what should be accomplished well. We need something that we haven't had enough and that is clarity and conviction regarding all this going on United States under Pres. by leadership and influencing NATO decided out. Decided early on we would take actions mainly sanctions to deter Vladimir Putin what is happening now. Jay is the table is been reversed.

Letter number Putin is using his rhetoric just like we what we just heard to deter NATO to deter the United States from taking any meaningful action that would stop his aggression and get him to stop attacking your ranks are so were in a serious situation. Decades of peace in Europe are at stake that establish borders in Europe are at stake in Vladimir Putin is playing the better cards right now because of the fear of provoking him and having a wider war.

I don't know what the answer is, but we can't keep doing this what you think they come out lemming I'm trying to figure is probably wise of the presence going to sit probably and need some statement needs to be made, but the question is we know they don't want to put troops on the ground right and I think there's very little support for that but I think the question becomes the Newcomb sense is what this will be really bad anywhere they say I think if Putin were to use it, and most analysts are saying people smarter than me that that he's not likely to use even tactical nuclear weapons at initially that if the if the escalated listing gets desperate because it looks like to me right now just being honest. Looking at what you're saying is it the weather to start changing yesterday get warmer. There is stuff to get stuck.

Yes, it already isn't minority and saves his armaments the vehicles and he has destroyed some city so I mean if my limit Russian doctrine and they've uses multiple times before, is if they can't win on on the tactical battlefield. They bombard their enemies into submission that David did this answer this by 500,000 people are dead in Syria today so that's what he does he could escalate. Most people think you would escalate to chemical weapons first before tactical nuclear weapons. To answer your question. J if that happens I'm with you.

NATO is not will put troops on the ground and in Ukraine to fight Russian soldiers. However, I think if that happened, in addition to increase rhetoric what NATO would do would be increase military support for Ukraine to include perhaps giving them those big 29's.

They want as well as antiship missiles and antiaircraft batteries. I think NATO would react to this when there's not there's another dynamic in all this is going on is getting at the NATO dynamic and then Prof. Hutchinson, you have the usual dynamic and I say that because Israel taking a very nuanced position on this because it they've got relations with Russia and now you see kind of a focus shift toward the ministrations and stop blaming Israel.

I think you get this moving. I think that is true, Lee Smith has a great article in tablet magazine and the subtitle is the President that is Pres. Biden and his people are trying to seal a new arena nuclear deal by hanging their appeasement of on Israel, and I think it's a very carefully thought out article because if you look at the back of pollutant has been massing troops on the Ukrainian border since March of last year in 2008, Putin announced that if NATO troops are placed on its border. That is the reddest of all redlines that is the assessment that is shared by Biden CIA director Bill Burns and then Pres. Biden said we will only impose sanctions if Putin attacks rather than imposing sanctions as a deterrent. So I think at the end of the day. Lee Smith has a lot to say about the possibility that first Biden administration will put pressure on Israel to negotiate with Vladimir Putin and if that fails, we blame Israel and if it succeeds. Guess why the administration would then be able to to achieve its paramount objective in Ukraine. It is not NATO in my opinion it is the Iran nuclear deal, which I was about to bring up because Russia they join they just confirmed again today that Russia is still playing this intricate part of the negotiations between United States and Iran is the only reason that it's actually hasn't been announced that the US backing is because of the carveouts that Russia wants they want while they are being sanctioned and acknowledge those sanctions they like them. They want the Iranian nuclear bill to exclude them. So when they did with Iran. There would be no sanctions on them, but I got back to nuclear issue again because Dimitri Prescott this is Prudence what his right-hand man.

I mean, so he's more than just oppressor is more than a gin sake. This is a senior advisor who's been with him throughout decades of is not so was there for a few years and he's easy to follow question about Putin trying to scare the world with nuclear weapons by 25 I want to know where the poodle intends the world to be afraid of the new Option when he use it. Pres. Gordon intends to intends to mean the world listen to understand concerns within trying to convey our concerns to the world to you or to the United States for a couple of decades. No one would listen to us and before it is too late.

It was a decision to stop the launch is special and arranged operation Miller transformation to get a credo entire rush that was created next to the borders, but Russia and to enter Russia because Ukraine actually Ukraine stunted to be. It was formed by the Western countries came to rest. This is research that this he's this he's giving their view.

It's not whether you believe it or you like what he's saying. This is the doctrine I see called it of of the other crippled right now it of food and is when he's asked about nuclear weapons.

He said they want to work a list understand the world certainly pays attention to you when you invade a country mass a landmass and also hang over the world's had the threat of using nuclear weapons.

Absolutely no and he is using the vagueness of that doctrine is the dust Russian doctrine to little bit big. What it says is we can use nuclear weapons if our country, our territories actually invaded or if there is a threat that our government is going to fall that last little part that he talked about that Ukraine is a part of Russia.

The wheel. It was created by the by the West is the justification they might use. I still think that because mutually assured destruction J is still a real name I cannot see them wanting to launch a nuclear war reducing the morning to not when in Ukraine know that they want to win, which is why you and I talked about trying to give him an exit ramp and they've given him act or perhaps any will not take it. That's the thing is very uncertain of the policy issue here.

I know we going out a minute left is is buried it's this is very complicated because Russia is not coming there annihilating cities, but they haven't gone into the capital.

They have not and I think at the end of the day will likely prevail. It's going to get messy.

It's already messy and major parts of Ukraine but I think it will contain 10 million people displaced possibly once he wants that because that's interest anybody likes and the popular. That's how you're able to go in. It's also related that they've lost upwards of 10,000 Russian troops, but this is a country that would be the member that's that's nothing. Now it's a lot of people in America we would take is a serious loss given at the sky velocity bracket saving a racket if is a combined but in that their viewpoint you just keep sending people for keepsake of what you look at their history, how they fought World War II. They lost a lot more trips to the terms yes in the balefully one bite by say were to keep going to keep pounding keep coming at you nonstop another wave of people to God.

Some of the data will get another wave of people that it seemed like that's exactly what they're doing in Ukraine, so it makes some people, so maybe they're not living the way they wanted to ensure they wanted to waltz it, but that doesn't mean they can't ultimately they don't have the weaponry of the people to carry this out, so long as Putin is able to pay to maintain his political power domestically in Russia. Discussed at coming up next. Give us a call. 164 30. What did you write back only one. A society can agree most vulnerable invoice is, 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, defendant the right to life, free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission will show you how you are personally ACLJ secure means to as many ways your membership powering the right question/the American Center for Law and engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. Whether it's defending religious freedom. Protecting those covering corruption in Washington fighting to protect life and the courts and in Congress ACLJ for that. We are grateful to others in a way 2001 hundred time for the ACLJ simply not occur without your generous constitutional and religious freedoms most beautiful gift today is precious to we have tried to get you to pay attention does to decades. You ignored us. Now you're paying attention now you're listening. Yeah, we might use nuclear weapons, but all of that to be said is that guest could Russia. Ultimately, if things were to maintain the weight you carry out an invasion of Ukraine. Even though it's been tough on them.

They've had a lot a lot yes they can ultimately win that you have to keep maintain your domestic power. That's the key here is what's going on domestically in Westerly Valley sanctions on the economy is getting tougher and further average Russian. Also this interesting move here which is unique.

It's it's unlike the Soviet days where religion is being used directly in the Christian faith directly to not only divide but justify the conflict of Russian others also breaking is to just get out there. One of the oligarchs of the principal's high profile oligarch from a Russia Abramovich who was the owner of the Chelsea football team has massive yachts all over the world including the Caribbean, which you can see I've sought to isolate the once and for the vacation. I mean they are that they are some of the biggest is the largest sailing boat vessel at its independently owned in the world and that has been seized that's on sale yet a he's trying to unload that that Socrates at the soccer team in the UK. His ex-wife is held up and it $50 million mansion in London. They don't know what could happen, but he's now what we found out the reason why the US didn't say should have directly because he is the go-between between Russia and Ukraine in these talks were they try to cope with a solution so that that's breaking now. It just shows you that the again that the companies complicate how complicated this complicated and there's another dimension to it and that is Putin is taken on this mantle of this being a religious war that is justifying this out of this faith and you got this conflict between the Russian Orthodox Church and the Ukrainian church which is really under the auspices of the Greek Orthodox Church any condos here with us was a historian. Also, in addition to being a lawyer and but Putin is playing that very aggressively right now and he's getting participation from the patriarch in Moscow. Yes, he is his cohort in arms if you will, is patriarch Carol was made patriarch of all the roosts all of Russian 2009 they dragged Carol recently preached a sermon in which he said we have entered into a conflict which has not only physical but metaphysical significance. We are talking about human salvation. Something more important than politics.

Let me submit that that is a nonsensical statement because what Carol is doing is pushing the agenda of Putin in the Ukraine and there and requires just a little bit of background.

A couple of years ago the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which is the biggest church in the Ukraine was under the jurisdiction of the patriarchate of Moscow of Carol K.

They became and they were an independent country and they said we want to be able to elect our own bishops.

We want to be able to run our own church. We don't want to be under Moscow. We are a separate country and in order to do that. They went to the head of all Orthodox communions in the world, legal, medical, patriarch of Constantinople who happens to be Greek in Istanbul and he gave them what they called a do what is called a tow most of the auto severally in plain English. You are an independent church you're not under Moscow. You can elect your own bishops will cure all went crazy literally over this ceased to recognize the medical patriarch and said you are schismatic that is you and Ukraine will go with the new bishop that has been appointed are not any longer. Christians you are heretics you are out of the mainstream of the church.

What Carol is doing is supporting Putin's invasion of the Ukraine, Jordan J so that he can get the Ukrainian church back under the jurisdiction of Moscow.

It appears that Putin is using that Jordan also as justification with his own people gets right to. This is the way the subzero people because they give you the majority of the population is Russian Orthodox and so if you could buy the political leader the religious leader and sake of this is a just war. This is something else it by our faith. And it's important that this was the early part of the narrative to his member uniting these two countries. The message has changed from Russia. Like we said that the message from real is change the message from the Kremlin has changed and now the Ukrainians are the enemy. They are not to be unified anymore. It's about destroying the idea he say you're Dimitri Prescott, the cripple spokesperson. So Ukraine is a western entity that's not really what they were saying yoked to three weeks ago. They were say that Ukraine is a part of us were tried were brothers and sisters that technically they are but they've they've changed the viewpoint data so okay if you fight back this way, which the Ukraine is valiantly done. Were going to will annihilate you kind of language that yes they are wiping out you get to a certain point in these kind of conflicts we start say in a country like Ukraine which is has a shorter history. What are your soldiers fighting for now just fighting to try and get people out safely and is out because the cities are gone. The infrastructures destroyed.

People can't return excitedly or it was a place I surrounded tomorrow. They can return to the cities. No. And the last one that remains kind of intact is their capital, and I think that the only reason that remains intact because the Russians would like to go take it without it being totally destroyed. So the utilization here that utilizing a religious faith right justify what they're doing at the same time you have the patriarch of the Russian church agreeing with Putin which he has to, but you said something any before we were on-air and that is the symbiotic relationship between the ear. The leader of the church and Putin is very very in sync. It is in sync, and it is in depth and it goes back a long way. I am not going to make the statement apparent patriarch. Cheryl was an agent of the Soviet Union. I'm not going to say that because I have no evidence of that, but many Russian Orthodox priests during the Soviet era had to cooperate with the Soviet authorities in order to keep their church is going and that develop this concept in Greek. We call it seemed for anemia, the union of church and state for a common goal and in this case and serialized it is to bring back the schismatic euro may your Ukrainian church and bring them back under Moscow and in the eyes of Putin is to bring back the Ukraine, the heartland of where Russia was baptized in 988 and they're working together to achieve this goal. Hand in hand. I just don't see and what is the exit ramp here for Vladimir Putin. Other than total destruction of that's what's got me considering I'm I'm sure that people putting our thinking through this, but boy, it seems very difficult. Yeah, I think that what he he he would accept as if you if installing his own government there, which I am in me that was Zielinski leaves Ukrainian government is folded and it just becomes a puppet state which is a lot of what people thought and what the Putin think he wasn't going in is that they would be able to quickly do that quickly install a puppet government but that offer has been on the table to the Ukrainians they've had the offer to say.

The bombing campaign you give up your country is a pretty big decision to say really give up our country, but it has been made, and so far the Ukrainian people have not been supportive of the decision to have their government step aside, look at what we covered today.

Folks recover the success of the Senate confirmation hearings of the Supreme Court justice, including positions on pro-life issues with covered NATO. We covered the historical aspect of what's going on in Ukraine and Russia. All of this interventions at the United Nations.

All of this because of your support of the working American Center for Law and Justice towards what United do it for matching challenge campaign funds. We need your help. Go to ACLJ.org you donate today matching child's review make a $50 donation right out ACLJ.org. Notice to the fact that $50 take that initial step in the initial action they matched with like $100 for Stacy okay donate in a sealed cross the American Center for on critical issues at home and abroad for limited time you can participate in the ACLJ matching challenge for every dollar you donate will be $10 becomes $20, $50 gift becomes 100 protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms you forgive today online


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