Today on Sekulow, the radical left coming for conservatives this week. 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. Welcome to Sekulow. So this week we know that the Democrats are building up towards the televised primetime hearings on Thursday and Friday. That's what they could get the networks to agree to, to cover the January 6th hearings. This is supposed to be the public part of these hearings. So they're using all week, starting on the weekends, starting this morning, to start going after conservatives, going after Republicans, hoping that by the end of the week this culminates in some kind of what? Half the country is going to vote Democrat in the fall?
No. They don't just want to focus on January 6th, because I don't think there's that much there to even talk about anymore. I think that everything about that is out there already. It's that they want to start talking about abolishing the Electoral College or the Electoral Count Act, a congressional law. So if you need a constitutional amendment to solve your problem, your problem isn't being solved. Because there's not going to be a constitutional amendment. That is not happening. There's not that kind of support in the United States. It would take years to do, and there's not that kind of support. So the idea that that's the distraction issue, that they would move there, tells you a lot about what they actually have in the hearing, I think is nothing.
I've heard interviews from people working on it saying they don't have smoking guns. Well, then what is the point of, this is typical of them, setting themselves up for failure because they get the primetime slot. I mean, one is on Friday night, so you can question that anyways.
But Thursday, let's say that's the big day they try to throw. Again, you get people attuned in, you don't have really compelling new info, you're just repeating the same info, and then you start getting into the Electoral College, and then you start getting into the electoral college. Guess what people do?
They start falling asleep. No one wants to hear Jamie Raskin, former constitutional law professor, keep being a constitutional law professor. They want either some smoking guns and some big news that's going to rock the political world, or don't have this.
But I want to play the sound that we have, because this shows you where they're going. This is Dan Pfeiffer, much more competent than the Biden team, but he was a former senior advisor and communications director for President Obama. Listen to the kind of language him, Minkin, Brzezinski are using on Morning Joe this morning about conservatives. Are you saying that the Republican agenda is backed up by the freaks on Facebook, and so they don't want to do anything about it? Absolutely.
Just making sure. Yes, to be very clear, is that Facebook is the most powerful messaging platform for the extreme MAGA message. You know, you got to address this first of all. The same Facebook that puts warning signs when you talk about an issue they disagree with. But let Facebook, let us call people freaks. Yeah, they would not. That would be, I don't think that's right. By the way, we wouldn't do that anyway.
But I mean, they use language that we, if we used, we would get all sorts of word on Facebook. Here's the point of what you're saying. So you've got the January 6th meeting, we're supposed to be looking at what happened on January 6th, who's responsible. They have a committee assignment. It devolves over a period of a year to a political situation. What is the political situation?
Threefold. One, discussions about getting rid of the Electoral College. Well, that requires, Andy, a constitutional amendment.
That's correct. No, it requires three-fourths of the states to agree to it at our constitutional convention, more likely a constitutional amendment, but then you've got to get 75% of the situation. That's not going to happen. And that's not the way our country was set up. Number two, they want reforms in the Electoral Count Act. Well, that's good because they're using some, they're making allegations against people that utilized as a defense the Electoral Count Act. So if they say they need to amend it to close quote the loophole, what are they prosecuting the people that are being accused of violating the Electoral Count Act? Coming up with legal theory. And the third thing they want to do is they want to overturn any election integrity issues by having what? Same day voter registration nationally. I think in the next segment, too, we're going to get into the Insurrection Act that they'd like to change, which is very bizarre based off, again, what they're alleging President Trump should have been doing that day. Because they want to take, I'll just give you a little hint, they want to take more power away from the President to use against civilians.
Well, how do you then allege he wasn't doing his job that day? What about Nancy Pelosi not calling it? I mean, the list goes on and on.
We have that to get into as well. Take your phone calls on this. Are you even going to tune in? Do you care? 1-800-684-3110. Have you talked about it at all with your friends and family? Anyone brought it up to you?
1-800-684-3110. Welcome back to Secchios. So we believe this week you're going to see this targeted effort every day to start going after conservatives, calling you names. I mean, they've already called you freaks. That was MSNBC this morning. I mean, think about all their political correctness.
It has nothing. But of course, when you're talking about anybody that happens to be conservative or Republican or supporter of President Trump, you can use word like freak on MSNBC. I mean, there's a lot of people on MSNBC who could use words similar to that about. But we wouldn't do that, right?
We don't use words like that. One, if you did, you'd be thrown off all your platforms. And two, you know, banned. They'd have warning, this is content not suitable for you. So I mean, the whole thing.
But here's what I wanted to get to. They want to actually tighten the Insurrection Act to make it harder for a President to deploy the military domestically for use on civilians. They are accusing President Trump of not doing that that day.
So again, this is the second law that they want to change, which doesn't make sense with what they are alleging didn't happen. Well, first of all, President Trump had authorized 20,000 National Guard troops to be deployed around Washington, D.C. during the January 6 timeframe. Nancy Pelosi was the one who said no, and she was Speaker of the House. She had the authority to do it, as did the sergeant in arms. And Andy, a lot of people don't know what the sergeant in arms is, but in addition to the ceremonial responsibility, he's kind of like the chief law enforcement officer. He is, for the Senate. For the Senate, yes. And has that responsibility and really makes those calls and those decisions. Speaker Pelosi did not want the Guard called out, all right? So, you know, it wasn't called out. But the sergeant in arms occupies a very important position, as you said, not merely ceremonial, but in terms of enforcing the enforcement of the law in the conduct of the Congress.
Neither Nancy Pelosi nor the sergeant of arms nor the security head of chief captain of the Capitol Police were called by the committee. So here's what you've got. You had a... Did they reside? No, some of them did. So you had a situation where you had a terrible, terrible day of violence on the Capitol. It was horrible. We condemned it.
We continue to condemn it. But what happened was instead of doing law enforcement against the individual perpetrators of that crime, destruction of government property, interfering with whatever it might be, there's a whole series of laws. What they did is now saying we want to amend the Electoral College, which takes a constitutional amendment to do it, to get rid of the Electoral College. Why do they want to do that, folks? Because they have California and New York. And if you have California and New York, guess what? You got California and New York, it's pretty likely that you're going to carry the day on popular vote.
But the founders knew that, so they said, we're not going to do that. We're going to have an Electoral College. There's going to be a certain amount of electors that are put in place for this.
Right. The Electoral College was designed to make sure that everybody in the United States, all the states participate in the election of the President and not by popular vote, whereas Jay said all you would have would be the most populous states choosing the President of the United States. You'd have nobody going to Nebraska or Idaho or Mississippi or Arkansas. The choice would be made by the most populous states.
And obviously, those most populous states are typically urban, liberal, democratic states. The Electoral College seeks to balance that out by saying, no, that's not what it is. The votes include your total number of electors, include your senators and numbers of representatives, and that's how it works. People forget that there were not direct elections of Presidents to even select the Electoral College. Remember, when you vote, you're voting for electors.
Initially, we didn't have that set up that way. No, I mean, this again, I think for people to understand, you know, why does Iowa play such a role or New Hampshire? They wouldn't. But then you've got a whole, when you combine these regions together, they have very unique economies that need to make sure that they're represented and make sure their voices are heard because of how they're in their economies.
And then the populations may be smaller. They affect the entire country. I want to go back to this war on conservatives this week. I mean, this is what they've declared. And they're hoping, and listen, you know that they think that this is going to be groundbreaking. I think what you all know and who I'm talking to realize the country is very partisanly divided. So is this going to convince an independent voter who is paying $5, $6, $7, $8 at the pump and double for food and can't get baby formula, and, you know, as we said on Friday, we're now reliant on foreign aid as the United States of America to feed babies in the United States. So the idea of that, that this is going to change how they vote, I think is a pipe dream. But take a listen because Dan Fiver, they keep doubling down on the rhetoric.
Here's Byte21. What we have to do is radically rethink how we communicate. Everyone has a role to play here. Democrats have to be more aggressive. We have to invest in building up our own megaphone to compete with Republicans. We need to, that doesn't mean we build our own Fox News. It doesn't mean we run away from the mainstream media, but we have to invest in progressive outlets. They own the mainstream media. They have MSNBC. They have CNN. They own most of the newspapers, certainly New York Times, Washington Post, and LA Times.
So take those and most of the others. They also have the White House, the biggest bully pulpit in the world. They have the Speaker of the House. They have the Leader of the Senate. So what else does their messaging need, Dan Fiver, former Communications Director?
What other tools could you possibly have? The control of social media, which they have. Control of mainstream media, which he said they have. Control of the White House and Senate.
What else is it? They needed CNN Plus. Remember CNN Plus?
They needed CNN Plus, the streaming service of CNN, which lasted 24 hours? Did it ever last more than that? It was up for a month. It was up for a month.
It lasted 30 days. So that's what they need. But this tells you that the substance of the hearing, the substance of the actual hearing is not going to be substantive. They have moved it to, as you said, Jordan, a political hearing, which is a good way to say, you know, they've already said, like you said, there's no smoking gun. What does that mean? Two days of boring TV.
Yeah, that's right. Boring TV carried on by the network, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, all the networks, the progressive, liberal, democratic media are going to be carrying there. I don't think they want to. I think they know it's not going to rate.
I mean, think about this statement. The committee's legacy depends in large part on what reforms it pursues after those hearings to prevent another January 6 from happening, just the attack on the Capitol. And that's where the United Front breaks down. They don't know what to do now. I think we all know what to do. Think about that for a moment. Because you need the security in place.
That's it. You knew, like we said, you've already had people show up, show on TV. People like Kash Patel, they said, here's the documents President Trump signed and authorized. Nancy Pelosi said no. I think that they said no because they wanted a little bit of a scuffle. They didn't realize what they were saying no to could have been as extreme. But the second part of this, too, they want to limit the President's authority to deploy the military domestically for use on civilians.
So then what would you have done? The President had authorized that. Who would have prevented this?
Nobody. Because Speaker of the House says no to her security in the Capitol grounds. The President does what they can, but that's not their domain. The mayor of D.C. did not want the National Guard called out. Right. Remember they were calling the National Guard racist and MAGA and that they were going to turn. And so they didn't want those horrible citizens who serve our country voluntarily to come and protect them. But look at the expectation.
I said this and I want to say it again. What's the expectation for this committee? It was supposed to be factual evidence of what took place on January 6th.
I'm sure we'll hear some of that. But the goal of the committee now, and there's open discussions on this, although there's pushback. Removal of the Electoral College, reform of the Electoral Count Act, passing comprehensive election reform to include same-day registration and voting, which as fraught with disaster, takes it away. The states are given that authority under the Constitution on how to conduct the election. That's right, Jay. I mean, the Constitution clearly says that it is left to the states to make the determination of the method, means and manner of conducting elections.
It is not a congressional prerogative. So what are they trying to get out of this, Jordan? Just to hit on, it's exactly what we said.
It's an attack on conservatives. These are all last-ditch efforts. Think about how long this has taken.
18 months after. To keep the American people's attention, first of all, it's just not realistic because we have to deal with problems. We all have families, we got kids, grandkids, you got jobs, inflation, coming out of COVID.
So because of that, people are busier, things are costing the stream, we got war in Ukraine, we've got all these different things that we're talking about every day on radio. To go back to something that happened 18 months ago and try to get people to relive that, which is what they're going to want to do, but then have no solutions anyway, see if we disagree with them, just shows you how inept they are. These are the same guys we beat before in an impeachment trial.
How many times do they want to do this? They've done two impeachments and now a special select committee. They had Bob Mueller. Okay, they've had a special counsel, two impeachments, and this committee.
Nothing's changed. Look at what they do every time. They set this bar so high.
And then you know what's going to happen. Adam Schiff's going to ad-lib the evidence, like he did during the impeachment, where he ad-libbed the evidence, and then we read what the evidence actually said. And they overplay it. So that's why they're going to, let's get rid of the electoral count act, close the loopholes there, let's get rid of the electoral college, let's go ahead and change the statewide voting laws. That's why they're going to that approach. Yes. And I think, again, we're just going to see the beginning today. So it's going to be a buildup of nastiness about you.
They call it colony freaks. They're attacking what we do every day on our broadcast. They want to shut this down. And they said they need more bully pulpits, more megaphones. They have the White House, the House, the Senate, and the New York Times, the Washington Post. He said that on MSNBC, Dan Pfeiffer, which is also stuff, because he goes, oh, we don't need a Fox News, because you have one. And then you even have CNN.
So you've got two of the three biggest. So again, folks, there's a lot to talk about here, but we did have someone bring up and rumble Nigeria and the horrible attack that happened there on the weekend on Christians. We are going to get to that as well in the next seven months. I know that there's a lot of crises in our own country and violence. And, you know, we're almost inundated with bad news right now, but we can't ignore what's going on in the world as well because of the role the United States plays and what's going on in the world. And our fellow Christians. Christians came together this Sunday celebrating Pentecost.
And there was another horrendous attack. I know some of you brought it up on Rumble, watching our broadcast today, before we even got into it, where at least 50 or more, some people are saying 70, people, men, women and children killed in a church service celebrating Pentecost, celebrating their faith, exercising their religious liberty and religious freedom. And this is at a time when the Biden administration wants to remove Nigeria from the country's in particular concern list, even though they are not coming in and doing what they can, knowing that, you know, this was a big holiday, especially the Catholic Church, where you were going to have, even if you probably saw it in your own neighborhood, the churches were busier this week, especially of the Catholic denomination. And you don't put the military in place. You don't put the police in place.
You don't say, okay, nationwide, we know a lot of people are going to be gathering that some people don't like. That's why you should be on that list, is you're unwilling to protect or you can't protect your own population. So the reports are that gunmen, and these are usually, you know, Muslim groups, sometimes it's Boko Haram, sometimes it's offshoots, killed, we know dozens, some, like Jordan said, some say 50, some say 70, including shooting at the church service in southwest Nigeria. Now, we've done a lot of work in that region and continue to. C.C.
Hiles here, who heads up a lot of that effort. C.C., first, what happened here, and this was in a region that hasn't had as much violence, right? Typically in Nigeria, we see these attacks in the northern regions with the Fulani herdsmen and Boko Haram. This was actually in the southwest section of Nigeria, which, you know, is more quiet and peaceful. And so that is kind of shocking, and it shows that these attacks are spreading across Nigeria.
It's not getting better, it's getting worse. The number of Christians killed in Nigeria, folks, this is breathtaking, proportionally. This is why we, and why the government, why President Biden's administration and Secretary Blinken took them off, we put, the previous administration put Nigeria on a list of countries of particular concerns.
This administration takes them off. What's happening with Christians generally in these attacks? And what's so egregious about this, a country of particular concern, it's designated as that specifically for religious persecution. So you have Nigeria where a Christian is killed for their faith every two hours.
Every two hours, a Christian is killed for their faith. And the amount of Christians murdered in Nigeria last year, 2021, was greater than any country and actually accounted for 80% of Christians murdered worldwide. So you'd think if any country is going to be on this country of particular concern list, it would be Nigeria, which, of course, the Trump administration put them on, rightfully so. And the Biden administration, Secretary Blinken, removed them.
And the same week, actually, he removed them the same week he met with the President of Nigeria. So we're taking some direct action on this. And one of the things we're doing is, number one, we've got a letter that's being drafted right now that is going to Secretary Blinken. And it talks about exactly what Cece just said, that in Nigeria, a Christian is killed for his or her faith every two hours. That letter's being worked on right now. In addition to this letter that's going out, I'm holding a draft of it in my hands right here, it's still being worked on this afternoon, we are also sending out a Freedom of Information Act request.
Right. And so we want to get to the bottom of this. If this administration removes Nigeria, we want to know what went into making that decision. Obviously, the facts didn't go into that because more Christians are killed in Nigeria than any other country. So we want to get to the bottom of why was Nigeria removed from this list?
Yeah, and I think that this is, again, what we're going to is there has to be some kind of reason. Is it because of economic issues? They're also an oil country, offshore, and is it because of those issues like that? Because we cut off our domestic ability to produce and we went from a country that could export to a country that has to import and rely on other countries' oil and gas sources. Does it have to do with, again, any like of Venezuela, like in Iran, and why?
Because there is no explanation, but for there has got to be some kind of economic reason or policy reason. And it deserves, while people are being killed there because of their faith and these mass numbers, it deserves a response. It deserves an explanation to the American people about why are we okay with what's going on in this country and just treating them like a normal country and treating the government like a normal government. And what about the people in Nigeria, too, who have the U.S. now saying, you know, everything's fine there? So the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom on Wednesday condemned the Biden administration for removing Nigeria from the U.S. Department's list of countries of particular concern. I'm reading a quote, the USCIRF is disappointed that the State Department did not adopt our recommendations in designating the countries that are the worst violators of religious freedom. So you had a situation where our own U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, which is a joint White House Congress committee, commission, said have them as part of the – they should be listed as a country of particular concern.
That recommendation was totally disregarded by the administration. Yeah, so the State Department's Office of International Religious Freedom ignored USCIRF's recommendation to put Nigeria back on. And it's factually based. USCIRF's letter was factually based just like we say, you know, every two hours there's a Christian killed. Nigeria is the same place that Leah Cheribu was abducted when she was 14, and she is still missing to this day simply because she wouldn't recant her faith as a Christian.
And you have all these Christians who are attacked. They continuously say the government will not help us. And so action needs to be taken, and they need to be on this list. We're sending a FOIA in. We're asking for all records of communication by or with Secretary Blinken involving or regarding removing Nigeria from the CPC list, all records in communication with any other Department of State official at a GS-14. That's the second highest rank level or higher within the secretary's office involving or regarding removing Nigeria from the list. All records, communications, or briefings created, generated, or forwarded, transmitted by the Department of State's officials within the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor.
This is a comprehensive demand. We also have a letter going to Secretary Blinken as well. So we're taking here, Jordan, direct action on this.
Yeah, that's right. And again, you'll be able to see all this at ACLJ.org once we send it off and have it prepared. But I want you to know it's the two-fold approach.
One, going directly to Secretary Blinken. And two, using our legal abilities to go to their FOIA office, and likely when we know that, that we're going to have to take that into court, ultimately. But it is calling for an explanation. And those of you who listen to our broadcasts and follow this news closely already knew about this attack. It was that big of a story that happened just yesterday in Nigeria. And that meant much loss of life. And you want to know why is this administration, which seems like it makes such bad foreign policy decisions over and over and over again.
What happened here? And we're not going to let it get sidelined and not pay attention. That's what they hope you will do. They hope you, it's Nigeria, it's confusing, I don't really know what's going on there, so we don't pay attention to it. There's a reason why they made this move. They need to explain it. Because the way people are being treated in Nigeria is the same, if not worse. It may be even getting worse.
So it's a lawless place where Christians aren't protected. We've got former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo coming up, former Director of National Intelligence Rick Grenell, both of which are part of our team here at the ACLJ. They will be on in the next segments of the broadcast. Stay tuned, a lot more ahead. Support the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org.
Back with more in a moment. Music. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well, this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work.
Become a member today, ACLJ.org. Music. Keeping you informed and engaged. Now, more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Hi, folks. Welcome back to Sekulow.
There's a lot to talk about. What we believe, though, this week that we need to be ready for is conservatives. Because the attacks are beginning. They've begun already this morning in the likely places, MSNBCs of the world. But I think there's going to be a buildup. It's going to be a buildup to try and get more Americans to actually pay attention to January 6th, these hearings.
Now, this is what's unique about this. It's two days of live hearings in primetime. I think it's 8 p.m. Eastern time.
Thursday, probably the biggest day, because Friday evening, it's primetime, but people have a lot else going on. Here's what they've got to do, is I don't think they're trying to necessarily get Democrats. I mean, you know, Democrats can tune in and hear their own thing. Republicans, not persuadable. They're trying to get the small group of independents left in the country, and there's not a ton, who could somehow say what they learn from this hearing is going to impact what congressman or senator they vote for in the midterms coming up. Now, that's already a tough connection, because it's not a Presidential election coming up. So they're saying things like, we don't have enough voices.
They're calling you freaks. That's literally, let's play that again. This is Dan Pfeiffer, former top Obama official, former communications director of the White House. He's got a lot of his former underlings running things at the current White House right now. Take a listen to the language used by Mika Brzezinski on MSNBC. Not that it's shocking, but just remember the double standard, the hypocrisy, if you use this kind of language, about anyone on the left. Are you saying that the Republican agenda is backed up by the freaks on Facebook, and so they don't want to do anything about it? Absolutely. It is- Just making sure.
Yes. To be very clear, is that Facebook is the most powerful messaging platform for the extreme mega message. First of all, again, I think you have to look at social media in totality, not one network. I think that it's true that on Facebook, where he says it's like the most shared and engaged, it's not necessarily the most followers, the most shared and engaged pieces have to be conservative. That's because they're compelling.
Right. It's a liberal's communication problem that they can't write. I think that's why he says we don't need more MSNBCs.
We don't need to see them. We've got to figure out their messaging more. That's why the CNN streaming failed. So they brought in, I mean, I just wanted people to know, on Thursday, they brought in the former producer of Good Morning America and Nightline to produce, because they didn't want it to be a shift show. This is the Congress.
Yes. So the January 6th committee has brought in a former ABC news producer to try and get you to watch a rerun of something that happened 18 months ago that people have already talked through, found out a lot of information about. We know there's no smoking guns. We know there's probably some new imagery, I'm sure videos out of the Capitol. And I think that a lot of you will probably tune in because you want to know what Adam shifts up to. But again, remember, they're trying to reach an audience that's not already this keyed into the news, like our audience, like people listening or watching the show right now. They're trying to reach, Dan, the kind of normal voter who engages, maybe they're Republican, maybe they're Democrat, maybe they're an independent, but they don't really engage until a week before election day or election day itself. But the difficulty is that they've already shifted what it's going to be about. So originally it was going to be about what happened on January 6th and what led up to it.
I'm sure there'll be that. But now it's the solutions are do away with the Electoral College, which would take a constitutional amendment, fix the Electoral Count Act because they brought charges against individuals. Yet what those individuals have done may well have been within the exemptions within the Electoral College Act. That's why we want to, quote, close the loopholes.
And then they want same day nationally, same day voter registration for every state, which of course the Constitution lets that decision be made by the states themselves. So what you have is a shift going on. Look, Jordan, you and I have done this. We have been on the halls of the Senate. We've been on the floor of the United States Senate. They set these expectations way up here and then they just can't deliver.
And when they can't deliver, what happens is then they go to these other things and it's going to be right. They don't want the Adam Schiff show again. Let me tell you something that's very boring. I'm having debates over the Electoral College. Not that it's not relevant. It's not real. You can have those debates, but trying to tie it to this is absurd.
It should be a separate discussion. And it's very academic. And I say it's academic because it's not happening. It's like a law professor typical because we got a law professor, Jamie Raskin running the hypotheticals and supposedly the committee so divided on this.
They have no solutions. So it's very typical Congress is that you're going to see flashy show that is likely meaningless. But again, there's this build up this week. It's going to be a high hyper partisan attack on conservatives all week.
You need to be prepared for it. Again, folks, we're talking about this week because I think the theme of this week, obviously, we know with the January 6th meeting here is going to be this attack on conservatives, attack on MAGA, attack on Trump supporters, attack on Republicans. We're seeing it this week right away on the liberal media because they need a build up to try and convince Americans to use their Friday, Thursday and Friday evenings to watch Adam Schiff and Jamie Raskin again on TV. Like you haven't seen them enough the last few years to again present you to something that has no conclusion, that has no smoking gun, admittedly from their team. It's going to look real flashy. I think that that's the thing. It's going to look real flashy. So we've heard that from them before.
And it doesn't really come together because that mixed media of trying to put in flashy media, video bites, it's not a clear message. But we know it's happening. Rick Renell is joining us now. He's our senior advisor for national security foreign policy.
But Rick, you tweeted out, he said Trump would start World War Three and he literally made world peace. We talk about that a lot in this broadcast that we've now come to this period where, I mean, January 6th and focusing on that when we've got war in Europe, when we have potentially this Taiwan issue, we're worried about China. We're worried about baby formula like we were talking about on Friday. We're now relying on foreign aid like we talked about on the show Friday. So this idea, this attack on conservatives, but we do feel, Rick, that it is a heightened attack this week trying to make something out of this primetime hearing. Look, I want to make one thing very clear about January 6th. Within hours of individuals breaking into the Capitol and committing vandalism, me and many other Republicans were very clear to say, find each individual who's committing vandalism and arrest them.
This is unacceptable. And by the way, many Republicans were saying this the previous summer before when Seattle and Portland and Minneapolis and Chicago were all attacked by BLM. There's a difference between Republicans and Democrats on January 6th in that Republicans generally condemned both sides of the violence whenever it happened. Democrats didn't. Democrats were totally silent when it came to BLM.
I'm so tired of them playing one side in Washington, D.C. We didn't have nightly hearings when it came to all of the BLM attacks and people killed and properties damaged. We didn't hear much about that. We didn't see DOJ going after those individuals. But we do see that when it comes to January 6th.
I'll say it again and I'll say it till I'm blue in the face. Whenever we see violence or vandalism, I don't care who did it, you should arrest them. And we shouldn't play politics that the left is doing. But, you know, Rick, you said we shouldn't play politics. But here's the reality of what's just happened.
With what they're saying now and what they're leaking out from the committee, it's gone from, well, we'll let you know what happened on January 6th and the buildup and they're going to have this show, so to speak, on Thursday and Friday. The problem is what they've already done is started moving the ball. And they're moving the ball by doing this. What we really need to be talking about is getting rid of the Electoral College. What we really need to talk about is corrections in the Electoral Count Act. What we really need to talk about is nationalizing voter registration, even though the Constitution rests that authority with the states. So they've already showed their hand on where they're moving the ball here.
Look, I think that it's really important that Republicans go on the offense here. Mailing ballots to individuals on a voter list creates all sorts of chaos because people get multiple ballots. And we all know that.
You see them everywhere. You're getting multiple ballots. They're trying to get people to vote more than once by flooding the zone. What we should do is we should go back to paper ballots. We should go back to one-day voting. And we should have very limited absentee ballots.
You should have to request it and you should have to have a good reason. Otherwise, let's show up and let's produce an ID. And I think that every state should require an ID. If you are against a voter ID, it means you're cheating. You're trying to cheat.
I agree. Rick, I want to go back to some of the foreign policy implications of this. Two things. One, we're seeing the whole world now. I mean, you've got South Korea and the U.S. launching missiles in response to North Korea missile test yesterday. We're seeing, of course, what's happened to Ukraine and Russia, China and Taiwan. I mean, these issues.
It just seems like while we are, again, focusing on these issues at home, and some, I mean, are very important, like the inflation, but others, like this committee hearing, it's kind of like ignoring what's happening around the world while they're all taking all this primetime space up. Because I think that our standing in the world has been so diminished that every country who doesn't like us is testing the waters on how far they can go, whether it's provocations in their own region or, you know, testing ballistic missiles. Look, I'm going to have a piece up later this week on ACLJ.org talking about how we are having to receive foreign aid to the United States under the Biden administration.
It's really outrageous, and this continues to happen. I'm so glad you showed that tweet that I put out, which has really taken fire, because they told us that Donald Trump would cause World War Three, and the opposite has happened. Joe Biden is causing World War Three. Donald Trump actually brought us the Abraham Accords. He brought us world peace.
And while Washington, D.C., can't say it, we know the truth. The world was so much better off with Donald Trump in charge. It was more peaceful, and countries were signing peace accords.
That's just the fact. You know, Rick, in following that up, I mean, you take a look at the Abraham Accords, I think are probably the best example of unbelievable progress in the region. Tremendous. But you don't see the Biden administration really building on that. Instead, they're going over to beg the Saudis, instead of a phone call, to produce more oil. We talked about that on Friday.
We had a huge response from our audience on the concerns there. But I look at the way the world is right now, and this reminds me a lot of, and this is, you're younger than me, but it reminds me of Jimmy Carter. And maybe worse, because I think that the lethality of things are worse, and the politics of the moment are worse. But it feels like a flashback to 1977, where if you were working, as I was, as a federal government lawyer in the Department of the Treasury, we couldn't have our heat in the building over 67 or 68 degrees.
I had to get, you know, my wife was teaching school, and I would take excess paper that we had, and they would use it on the other side to make copies for the students. And it's like not getting baby formula. I mean, this is absurd on what has happened. And I think, and then you have, on top of that, you've got the January 6th committee launching into, let's change the Electoral College, so we could really rig the system by changing the Electoral College. And I think this is just, it shows you how desperate they are, knowing what's coming up in November.
They know this is going to be a red wave, House, probably the Senate, and then Joe Biden is lame duck for the next two years. Your Jimmy Carter analogy sounds like current day California. I mean, we literally don't have enough electricity and water, and the state is running commercials saying conserve, conserve, conserve. We live on the ocean. We shouldn't have a water problem in California.
This is total mismanagement. And yet what we've seen constantly is the left completely taking us to a woke state, even farther left, where we're asking Venezuela and Iran and others. And by the way, we should talk about the fact that the Saudi trip just got postponed, the Saudi and Israel trip. What do you read into that, Rick?
What do you read into that, Rick? What do you read into that, that it got canceled, postponed? The Saudis absolutely don't want Joe Biden coming. He made them a pariah state. Remember, one of the first things that the acting DNI did, or sorry, the DNI, Avril Haines, what she did when she came into office, is repackage the Khashoggi intel to stick it in the eye of the Saudis. When we were trying to move on, we made the lessons very clear to the Saudis. We sent strong messages to them to say, this is terrible. This should never happen again. We were moving on to grow the relationship, yet they repackaged the intel in order to send a message to Iran that they knew how to be tough on the Saudis.
It's a really terrible manipulation of intelligence. There's one that maybe hasn't gotten as much attention, but also the Summit of the Americas, which happened in Los Angeles this week, and the Mexican President just announced he's not going. He's having a public spat. It's just unique that they had to try and convince the Brazilian President to come. He hasn't even spoken to President Biden yet. They are having trouble getting countries that are not the leaders, not the Chinas of the world, the Russia of the world, but they're important to the United States and our relationship. Of course, they're right on our border. The country right on our border, not even showing up this week.
He's going to send someone else from his government, but it's a big message. It just shows you, it's kind of like the Saudi Arabia thing, Rick. They don't even want to show up because they think that there's no reason to.
Yeah, you look at Mexico, you look at Saudi Arabia. I mean, we've got to be talking about these issues because those newsrooms in Washington, D.C., are scrambling today to hide the ball. They do not want anyone to know that Joe Biden on the world stage is humiliated and being mocked. I can tell you from Eastern Europe to Europe to the Balkans, people absolutely are embarrassed that the United States is led by Joe Biden.
This is the first time we've hosted the Summit of the Americas since the Clinton administration. Most of the time, those leaders from those countries, the part of the world, to get that kind of attention, to get that kind of focus from the United States government while they're hosting it, would be on that first trip to Los Angeles. And the fact that the country most influential in that region and right on our border, Mexico, is the President says no. And there's a few other countries that say they might not. I mean, going all the way down to Argentina.
So, I mean, this could have a huge consequence, again, in what Rick said. So embarrassing to the United States, on the world stage, and they try to bury you from even knowing it's happening. The rest of the world does know. The rest of the world is seeing this in their media. That's a big deal.
Be right back. Welcome back to Secular. We're joined now by former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, our Senior Counsel for Global Affairs. There's a new piece up at ACLJ.org today, so I encourage everybody to go check it out. Does anybody know what our policy is toward Taiwan? We were just talking about these foreign policy issues that should be getting more and more attention, especially in the January 6 prime time hearings produced by a former ABC producer. We should be focusing on what's actually happening in the world right now in the United States. We've seen President Biden firmly state three times since becoming President the U.S. would militarily defend Taiwan, then his aides walk it back.
So, Secretary Pompeo, I want to go right to you. What is going on in the White House? What is the position of the United States right now when it comes to Taiwan?
Jordan, it's good to be with you. I don't know the answer to that question, and dangerously, I don't think our adversaries in the world know either, and I'm confident that the people of Taiwan don't know the answer to that either. It's incredibly confusing. When the President says that somebody from the White House walks out and changes it, and then we hear the President's upset for them changing it, in the end, the things that deliver deterrence for nations, just any country for sure, but the United States in particular, what delivers deterrence, what prevents us from ending up in wars across the world, what keeps American people safe and prosperous is American deterrence through clear, unequivocal statements about the things that matter to us. When you get all mushy and you're not clear or you are confusing, the bad guys will drive a truck through that gap.
They will assume that you are weak and not prepared. Your allies won't stand beside you. And I'm afraid on Taiwan, that's where we are today. I could not tell you what the Biden administration's policy is with respect to Taiwan and, frankly, the broader Southeast Asian challenges we confront as well. There is no doubt in my mind, Mike, that when your administration, when you were secretary of state under the previous administration, that China was not going to go waltzing into Taiwan. I do not have that confidence right now.
But my question is this. If you were President of the United States and China were to do this, were to attack, to take over Taiwan, what do you do? Well, the first step, of course, is put the fear of God in them. Convince them that the cost will exceed the benefits of a military invasion. Second, there are lots of tools that the United States has in its hands. They can support the people of Taiwan so they can defend their own sovereignty. And I can't go into all the details, but suffice it to say, we are not without resources in that regard. And I think the Chinese Communist Party is aware of that as well. Third, we should continue to provide them the things that they need to defend themselves.
We shouldn't wait for that moment. In some sense, the invasion is already on, right? She has made clear his intentions with respect to Taiwan. So we should be treating this as an ongoing challenge and providing the people of Taiwan today as we're on the show, all the things they need to defend themselves. And then finally, the last piece is, should she take such an outrageous step, we need to make sure that we've done all we can to provide support to the Vietnamese, the South Koreans, the Australians, the Japanese, the Philippines, all of the countries in the region. This will quickly come to envelop them as well. It's difficult to get to Taiwan without moving through Japanese economic zones.
So you're already going to have a very complicated both naval and air conflict. We need to make sure that we are there in that moment to support those nations' efforts as well. In the end, we've got to help the Taiwanese people do what they have been preparing for for a long time, and that is become an independent nation that has the capacity to protect its sovereignty and demonstrate that you can have a nation in that region that is a democracy and a successful economy. Xi tells his people the only way to do it is communism and Leninism and Marxism.
It's not true. Taiwan matters to the American people. I think what would help people is, and I think we got into it to some extent, but it's just we saw what is kind of the, where is the policy? If the policy was in the Trump administration right now, what would it be towards Taiwan? What would we be telling the Chinese? Would it be clear to the American people that it was a positive, this is what we'll do, this is not what we're going to do?
Because we arm them a lot more with U.S. weaponry than a Ukraine had, with much more intensive U.S. weaponry. So where this administration is back and forth and you don't know who to believe, before that, what was the direct policy? Like if Taiwan was invaded under the Trump administration, what would have happened the next moment? So Jordan, our public policy was the same as during the Reagan administration. It was the same set of ideas. There was this, there was a concept of strategic ambiguity and we hewed to that line as a public matter. But if you look past our statements, if you look at our actions, whether it was putting pressure on the Chinese economy, building out the American military, as you discussed, we provided lots of tools, weaponry, some of which you can see, some of which was intelligence-related activities, the things that the Taiwanese need. So not only did we maintain a policy that was pretty clear, I think, to the Chinese Communist Party, but we had two other drivers of deterrence. First was the weapons we provided them and the final one was, I think they understood the Trump administration.
When the Iranians began to move about the cabin, we responded strongly. When Chairman Kim was firing missiles, we told them, nope, you've got to stop. There were 17 missile tests just this year in North Korea. It was this global idea of deterrence that we had built up over the course of our four years that I think was a powerful testament to the actions we would take, communicated to the Chinese Communist Party in a way that would have prevented them from even contemplating such an action against the people of Taiwan. You know, the stark difference between when you were Secretary of State and your predecessor, Antony Blinken, is North Korea fires eight short-range ballistic missiles from multiple sites basically over the weekend, which caused provocation. South Korea responded with some initial firings of their own and then the U.S. purportedly sent one missile as well into the East Coast Korean peninsula in the water. Now, you all had direct dialogue with the North Korean leader and that kind of flying missiles over Japan nonsense stopped. My question is, now that we look at it, you've got President Biden was going to go over to Saudi Arabia because he wants more oil production.
That has now been postponed and we don't have a date when that's going to take place. What do you think is going on there? Jay, you've connected up some interesting dots. I heard you in your earlier segment too. These are all deeply related.
You know, Herb Keller at Southwest Airlines had the line, you are now free to move about the cabin. I think bad guys all across the world are feeling that way. So you demarked what's going on in North Korea. We've talked about Iran. The Israelis can see that the knuckleheads in the Gaza Strip are getting more active as well. These are all a result of American weakness, a leader in the White House that our adversaries don't fear and that are our friends.
Right. So our Saudi friends, our Emirati partners, our partners in South Korea and Japan and Australia, they're not sure what to make of it. And when they're not sure what to make, what they'll do, they'll engage in traditional hedging behavior and they'll become closer with the Chinese Communist Party. This is dangerous for Americans in Nevada and in my own state of Kansas and in New York. These things matter to us an awful lot. We can all see it at gas prices today. American leadership in the world makes an enormous difference domestically here at home. And we've got it wrong. We've got a leader sitting in the White House today that people are confused about what he believes are America's interests.
And that is really dangerous. The risk of cascading crisis beyond what's happening in Russia and Ukraine today, the risk of cascading crisis is real and serious. I appreciate Secretary Pompeo is always a senior counsel for global affairs at the ACLJ. And I'll say this to the Secretary Pompeo had already tweeted out on his own on Nigeria and the situation there.
We didn't have time to get to it in this segment. But the idea again of these were leaders for our country who did pay attention to what was going on in the world and some of those countries that don't get the primetime placement. And we forget that they were mocked for what they did with North Korea or no one paid attention to what they did in the Abraham Accords, which is gigantic. If any other leader could put that together. They can't because they can't get past Palestinian issues. They can't get past this issue or that issue. Just be prepared for it this week, folks. We believe it's going to be a war on conservatives all week leading up to this January 6th public hearing beginning on Thursday. You need to be ready for it to fight back.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-04-08 15:58:06 / 2023-04-08 16:18:50 / 21