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

ABSURD: Communist China Given MORE Power

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
The Truth Network Radio
June 7, 2022 3:57 pm

ABSURD: Communist China Given MORE Power

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 1022 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

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


YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
The Charlie Kirk Show
Charlie Kirk
What's Right What's Left
Pastor Ernie Sanders
What's Right What's Left
Pastor Ernie Sanders
What's Right What's Left
Pastor Ernie Sanders

Today on Sekulow, it's totally absurd. Communist China given more power.

More power even over you. We'll talk about it today on Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow.

File this under you cannot make this stuff up. Because on May 30th, so over the holiday week in the US, guess who, what country joined the executive board with unanimous support that includes support from the United States of the World Health Organization. You might be able to guess from the tease of the broadcast. The Chinese Communist Party. Yes, the CCP is now on the executive board officially of the World Health Organization. This is the World Health Organization that a week ago began considering two problematic sets of health proposals concerned with strengthening World Health Organization preparedness for in response to emergencies. We're going to talk about those civil liberties, sovereignty, global digital surveillance, individual digital vaccine passports, transnational disinformation board.

And guess who's going to be having influence on this? The creators of the pandemic. Because they either came out of their lab or came out of one of their places, but it's China is responsible for what the world has gone through. And yet they won't even let the World Health Organization investigators do their investigation into the lab, figure out exactly how this pandemic started so they can prevent them in the future. So why would you reward them with a seat on the executive board? Because they basically are now the new world power when it comes to these international organizations. The Biden administration is consenting to all of this, by the way. Yes. So they're not fighting this. That's number one. Number two, the idea that a World Health Organization has been giving information to establish means of communicating misinformation.

Well, that doesn't sound like, was that a big deal? They're talking about on social media so that they can squelch their own pandemic starts. You have to understand this. The media initially when the pandemic started said it came out of a wet lab, a wet market in Wuhan, China. Then it appears that it came out of a lab in Wuhan. So what do you think the Communist Party of China is going to do when they are put in charge of the executive committee, or at least part of the executive committee, on misinformation? And the Biden administration thinks this is a good move. Yeah, they know how to crack down on misinformation. They know how to crack, or what they consider, which would be anything against the regime. They also know how to use digital surveillance pretty well and including, as our FBI director said last week, put China in the group with North Korea and Iran and Russia as actors trying to attack us officially through their government with cyber attacks. So again, when you look at what the World Health Organization is looking for, more power for surveillance, more power for digital passports, transnational disinformation board, putting a communist power with any kind of influence over that, when they are the reason we have a global pandemic and they will not allow, like the rest of the world would say, this is horrible, this emanated from our country, please figure out what happened so you can tell us this never would happen again. That's what a normal country would do, but they're not. So they don't let the World Health Organization investigators look in. I mean, so this again, folks, I want to take your phone calls on it at 1-800-684-3110. Can you believe?

I'm serious about this one. Can you believe that even through this pandemic, which the Democrats love to keep extending, they want to keep you in mask on airplanes, they're fighting that out in court right now, that they just allowed China no objection to moving forward on this executive board. And while we know the World Health Organization is looking to grab more power from American sovereignty, I want to get your reactions to that. 1-800-684-3110. Increased surveillance of Americans too. This would be you. This transnational disinformation board.

It would impact you, your right to speak. 1-800-684-3110. Is the World Health Organization the new problem organization? Not new problem, but it's even a greater problem now because we are seeing China flex their influence, the U.S. not flexing the influence, similar actions with the Biden administration.

Again, folks, I want to hear from you on this. 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. China has joined the executive board of the World Health Organization by acclamation. That means no one stepped up. There's some questionable actors on this board, but the U.S. is on it too, and the U.S. could have flexed some muscle here, you know, internationally. Be nice to see that from the Biden administration.

But nope, they're part of that acclamation group, which means 100% said, let them join, let them be part of the committee. Now remember, just about a week ago, we saw these proposals by the Biden administration to amend the international health regulations from 2005 that would do this. These amendments cede American liberties and sovereignties to the WHO, empower the WHO to finance surveillance measures in countries around the world, including the United States, share unverified health info reported by potentially malicious or self-interested third parties.

We'll get to that later in the broadcast. Grant sweeping powers to the director general of the WHO, and then they can declare a public health emergency, potential or actual, and you can see how that could be used for many bad decisions, not actually even health-related issues. And it significantly shortens the length of time to consider and adopt these proposals. They're trying to rush this through as a new proposal and then ultimately a treaty. Let's start with this amendment, which will cede American constitutional liberties and sovereignty to the World Health Organization because it gives the WHO the power to finance surveillance measures in countries around the world.

Andy, that would include the United States. Why, of course. What about probable cause? What about due process? Gone, out the door, because the Chinese don't have any such concepts of probable cause, due process of law, or anything similar to what our Constitution safeguards, and we are now giving them the power to oversee that in the United States of America. So, Harry, they also say they're going to share unverified health information reported by potentially malicious or self-interested third parties. Unverified health information, the WHO, and then they can determine what information is true and what is not true.

Absolutely, and the sharing of unverified and unverifiable information has consequences for the freedom and the liberties of the American people, and so we should all be very concerned. I want to go to the phones. 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. We want to talk to you today about this issue. Tim in California online, too. Hey, Tim.

Thank you for taking my call. Why is the Biden administration wanting to take U.S. sovereignty and give it to China? You know, this is – I'll tell you what it is, in my view. Our lack of power, our lack of respect around the globe – we're going to talk about this later with the Organization of American States conference, where governments are boycotting the President, basically. I think the lack of respect on the international stage means the United States cedes authority to the World Health Organization, which now has China on its board. China wasn't on its board until we ceded to it.

Yeah, we have to understand that the liberal mindset is a more globalist mindset, so they want to – like the rest of a lot of other parts of the world, including Western Europe, ceding power is a norm. They did that to the European Union. But here, what I think is most troubling is that the World Health Organization showed its true colors during the pandemic.

They never pushed China. They should have thrown China – if China didn't allow them in, they should have been thrown out. They should have forced – I mean, there should have been an international outcry to get the research done to figure out exactly how this pandemic started so that we could prevent it from ever happening again. That would be a good World Health Organization.

But that's not what this is. This is a compromised World Health Organization controlled in part by China, but funded significantly by – guess who? You and me, the United States, of course. But we are not strong enough in a position to say – I don't think we are strong enough in a position to say no to China. I think the Trump administration would have said we might pull our funding, we might pull out of this, but that's not the Biden administration. Remember, they're globalist, so anything they can do to bring us more into that globalist worldview, which is we should all share surveillance, we should all share this, it is exactly what we've been opposing. We've been opposing joining international criminal courts. We're opposed, again, to letting China on the WHO. Yes, every time you do this, you're ceding power.

That's right. So you've got – the ACLJ Action, by the way, uncovered this. Our ACLJ Action team, which is our C4 organization, you need to get information about that. You go to ACLJAction.org.

A lot of you have already joined. One of the things that we noted in here is – and I said this earlier – is this idea that, number one, this misinformation and disinformation, which seems to be the buzzwords of the Biden administration, powers being seceded over to the WHO after it failed in the United States because of groups like ours and others that said the outcry here. But it's either – this is what is so shocking. Neither the United States or any other Western country objected to China's election to the WHO, despite the fact, Andy, that the WHO at every turn obstructed the investigation into the pandemic's origins.

That's exactly right. And, in fact, denied that it originated in their country at all and said, no, it was not anything that happened in China. What are you talking about? Shockingly, neither the U.S. or any other country objected to China's election.

And that's really what bothers me. As Jordan alluded to, we're talking now about a globalist, elitist world, a world of people who know better than anybody else and who, most importantly, do not put America first. We are now becoming a second-rate power. We yield and we subvert our interests and subjugate ourselves to the powers of globalists. And when you do it to the Chinese Communist Party, which runs China, that's pretty scary.

Congressman Guy Reschenthaler from Pennsylvania tweeted this. World Health Organization elected China to its executive board last week, of course, during our holiday. America doesn't object.

China's public health track record silenced doctors who warned about COVID, gave false information to the WHO about COVID, obstructed investigations into COVID, imposed – and they currently do – draconian lockdowns on their own citizens. And he ended that with the WHO has lost. I think it already did. But, I mean, this just adds to it. It's lost all credibility.

Completely. But, you know, Harry's been talking about this a lot, this kind of global elitist mentality of you join these world organizations and now we are the world, we're part of the greater body. But what it actually is doing is showing America weakness and lack of leadership.

Harry? I think that's correct. And essentially the global elitists have preached openness and tolerance to virtually everyone but rank and file Americans. And so they have decided to diminish the interest of average working class Americans in favor of international bodies.

These are essentially revolutionaries who believe that all that currently exists should perish and that the elites should control essentially our every daily lives. And I think we need to push back. So I want to go to the phones and we're going to keep taking your phone calls on this. 1-800-684-3110. Wayland in Colorado on Line 1. You know, I told folks when we drilled down on this WHO info we would really get into it. We're getting into it today. Hey Wayland, welcome to Secular.

Hi, thank you for taking my call. The question I have is why does the Supreme Court not have the power to shut down any of this that is not protecting any of our constitutional rights, adding national security issues, and if they do have the power, how come they have not stepped in yet? Well Wayland, they don't have the power. The Supreme Court in the United States on its own cannot initiate a proceeding, number one. Number two, their jurisdiction would not. This is an executive branch decision, not a judicial branch.

Right, there's two. There's proposals by the Biden administration to do all these, the global surveillance, the information, more power for the director general of WHO to declare the public health emergencies. So those are proposals for an existing federal law to expand on the international health regulations law. And then you've got, the second set would likely be treaty and the Supreme Court there cannot invalidate a treaty. And that's the problem. So the Supreme Court is not the, this is... I think we can beat this at a treaty level.

Yes, well that's the thing. So politically, the way this has to be handled is if it comes to a treaty, there has to be not enough votes for the treaty to go through. That's what the Constitution authorized legislatively.

That's right. Congress has to concede. The Senate has to make the determination. But this is not something for our court to decide. This is what the executive branch of government decides, foreign policy, our policy with respect to interaction with countries of the world, with organizations of the world. Not a court decision, but an executive branch decision. This is what the presidency is all about and why it makes all the difference who the President and chief executive officer of a unitary executive is. Right. So that's where it comes down to.

This was the Biden administration's seating authority. Yeah, 1-800-684-3110. We want to take your questions. If you've got questions about the WHO, comments about the WHO.

And again, we're going to get into even more information on that. But I want to go to Lisa in Wisconsin on Line 5. All right, we don't have time to get to Lisa right now. We'll do it right after the break. Lisa, you will be our first call when we come back for the break.

It's a great question from you. We want to continue to take more of your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110. Let me just do a shout out to our team at ACLJ Action, which is a sister organization of the ACLJ. They have been on this, putting this together because that team came out of the federal government. They were able to really get into the regulations and the regulatory power and put this together for us. So what we're providing you is accurate information because there was a lot going on.

There's still a lot going on around the Internet about the WHO. To support ACLJ Action, we actually ask you to join ACLJ Action at ACLJAction.org. That costs $25 a year. So you make a $25 donation today. You have joined ACLJ Action for the year. You're actually a member of the new C4 ACLJ Action. We are still working on building our membership as we speak.

Do it today. All right, so it's pretty shocking that no countries in the world, including the United States, objected to China's election to the World Health Organization's governing body. And we've talked through what they want to amend through, which is a binding, the international health regulations, which are binding on all the members of the WHO. And they want to amend that. It seems like they're trying to amend it by trying to then go around the treaty process. And the Biden administration supports these amendments.

I just want to list them to you. This is what your U.S. government right now is supporting giving to the World Health Organization in their binding authority. Seeding your liberties and sovereignty so it gives a global digital surveillance regime power to the WHO. It allows the director general of the WHO to declare potential public health emergencies or actual public health emergencies.

That is very broad. I mean, talking about getting involved in our processes in the U.S., it could do that. But even a transnational, transnational, worse than we were talking about with DHS, because this would be a transnational disinformation board. This is what the Biden administration is trying to do with the WHO. They're not fighting this. They are proposing this. Yeah, well, on top of that, the World Health Organization has issued guidelines for reproductive health, which is what they call abortion care guidelines.

This just came out at the end of March. They consulted 121 experts from outside organizations, outside the WHO. It just so happened, CC, 67 percent of them were from pro-abortion organizations like Planned Parenthood.

Absolutely. And that's exactly what the WHO does. They're a pro-abortion agency. And, you know, here's the interesting fact about abortion across the world. The WHO would have you think that abortion is the norm, but in a majority of countries, they do not allow abortion at all or only for the life or health of the mother. So they don't allow abortion.

That's the majority of the countries. And then if you add in the countries that restrict abortion to the first 12 weeks, you get up to 84 percent of the countries in the world that have restrictions on abortion, and yet the WHO is trying to say you have to allow it up till birth. Yeah, well, here's what the WHO's guidelines would do. Legalize abortion on demand without conditions until the end of pregnancy. Reduce the freedom of conscience of medical professionals, and not informing parents in case of an abortion performed on their minor child. Right.

Exactly. So there is no international right to abortion. A majority of the world has restrictions on abortion. But the WHO wants to come in and say that you can kill a baby until the time it's born. You can't have any kind of conscience objections.

You have to have abortion on demand with no restrictions. I want to go right to the phones. We said Lisa in Wisconsin on Line 5. And folks, we want to talk to you. Give us a call. 1-800-684-3110. We've got some lines open because we've already started taking calls. 1-800-684-3110.

Can you believe your own government wants to cede power to the corrupt WHO who couldn't figure out COVID? Give us a call. 1-800-684-3110.

Hey, Lisa. Thank you. I pray for you every day and I support you. I heard about legislation or a bill that Senator Rick Scott has up for a vote in the Senate. What would it do and do you believe that it has the vote that would be needed to pass it? Unfortunately, I don't know if it has the votes because you've got to have Democrat support.

So unlikely in the House and pretty close in the Senate. So, I mean, they might have the support in the Senate, but I can't imagine Pelosi being that at odds with Biden on this because they are globalist. So what that bill would do, and I support that bill, it would limit the authority of the WHO organization on the U.S. generally. And it would oppose these amendments to the WHO Constitution that haven't been approved by Congress.

So that's when we go back to that treaty power. So what this would do is say, listen, you can make your amendments proposals, but we as the United States do have a role. Congress has a role. A Senate specifically has a role in approving because this would be like a change to a treaty. Yeah, but the midterm elections are not that far away.

These amendments have not yet been adopted. So there is a chance that after the midterms, you could see action. Also, let me talk about direct action that we've taken. The European Center for Law and Justice, our affiliate in Strasbourg, France, has already informed, and this just went out at the end of May, the World Health Organization and other entities. And we are really pressing on this. It's about a five-page letter drafted by our director general.

And, Cece, this letter has already been delivered. Right, to the U.N. permanent representatives calling out this WHO guideline document and pointing out that, first, it's not a legal binding document whatsoever, although, of course, the WHO tries to indicate that it is and states should follow it as a legal binding document, but it is not legally binding. There is no international right to abortion. We point out that most of the recommendations, they're not even based in science, that they do not have conclusive scientific studies to support 20 of its 54 recommendations. And these are the people that are saying, follow the science. And then they're saying, in their proposals, we don't have the science backing these up. This is abortion on demand, no restrictions.

Nothing. We've got the conscience protections for medical providers, so all those that we fought for in the United States, for nurses, for pharmacists, for doctors, and we've won, those would be, again, potentially subject because we then be, the U.S. could be in violation of a treaty that we've signed if we don't allow it. So see how they're working this to even bring back abortion on demand without having to go to courts in case Roe vs. Wade gets overturned?

This is another way. They can't federalize the abortion protections through legislation. Can they get a world institution to do it for them and say, well, hey, the U.S., you're violating your treaty authorities by not having every state have abortion on demand whenever you want, no restrictions. So shockingly, Dobbs' opinion on Roe vs. Wade gets leaked.

We don't know who the leaked source is yet, but I think the assumption is somebody on the left to try to build up support for attacking the justices, getting legislation through. They're not going to be successful in the United States, so what do you do? Cece, you go to the World Health Organization.

That's right. You go to the international stage and you see if you can get it in a different way through a back door, and that's what they're trying with these guidelines, again, which are not legally binding. And there is no international right to abortion, but if you listen to the WHO, you would think the exact opposite. You know, I'm looking at our letter, and in the letter we talk about the fact that a lot of the proposals being made here are not supported by science, yet these are the proposals being made by the World Health Organization. So you have to think for yourself for a minute, why are they doing this? Because they are trying to get around the U.S. policies, and the Biden administration is saying that's a good way to do it, because we're not going to succeed in the Roe vs. Wade situation in the United States.

That's the real problem. Yeah, I want to be clear that I think the World Health Organization is taking these steps because they feel emboldened by the United States, who said, these are our proposals, we want to give you more surveillance power. We support the Abortion on Demand, the Biden administration.

We want to let you declare the public health emergencies. We have no problem with China joining the executive committee, so we acceded to that. This is all happening by President Biden and his administration's actions. Yes, America has a weaker standing in the world right now, but there actually is not the World Health Organization coming up with this. The first set of proposals we're talking about are the Biden administration coming up with this. The abortion part, that's the World Health Organization coming up with it, but we know the Biden administration is step with them on abortion.

The Democrat party is owned by the abortion industry. We made that very clear, we've seen how clear that is. So folks, we're going to take your phone calls on it, 1-800-684-3110.

We've got some more information too on just kind of our standing in the world right now. This speaks to it, some other stories we're going to talk about speak to it as well, 1-800-684-3110. Support the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org. And again, it came out of ACLJ Action's work, we just launched that new organization. You can become a member of ACLJ Action, cost $25 at ACLJAction.org. For decades now, the ACLJ has been on the front lines, protecting your freedoms, defending your rights, in courts, in Congress, and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member, thank you. And if you're not, well this is the perfect time to stand with us at ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work.

Become a member today, ACLJ.org. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Alright, welcome back to Sekulow. We're taking your phone calls at 1-800-684-3110.

Let me just reset quickly for people just joining us. So China has now joined the Executive Committee of the World Health Organization. America was okay with that, didn't object.

No country did, which is also telling about Chinese power that no country objected. So they're now on the Executive Committee of the World Health Organization. This is the same time the World Health Organization is considering proposals by the Biden administration to amend the World Health Organization constitution, to allow the World Health Organization to do global digital surveillance, put in a whole new regime for that, individual digital vaccine passports, and the creation of a transnational disinformation board.

You talking about dangerous? That is what the Biden administration wants. Then the World Health Organization has proposed sweeping new abortion policies that we've had to make clear to folks aren't actually binding. But do you think the Biden administration is going to stand in the way of those? No.

In fact, it's a way you could potentially get around Dobbs, at least they could make an argument that if the World Health Organization adopts those officially, like abortion on demand, no conscience protections whatsoever, if they did that, then the World Health Organization could say, well, the U.S., you are violating your treaty obligations. Yeah, let's go ahead and take some phone calls here, even though it's just the first segment of the second half hour here because a lot of people are waiting. Yeah, let's go to Tony in New Jersey on Line 1 first. Hey, Tony. Hey, how are you, Jay? Good.

Go ahead. I just want to say firstly, let's say it like it is. It's the Obama administration. I'm so tired of hearing the Biden administration.

It's Obama. And my thing is, why aren't every GOP in the House and Senate coming out and, you know, doing press about this? Because they don't have the authority to make a change, because right now the House is in the control of the Democrats, so this is dead on arrival in the House. And the Senate, I don't know if the Senate, you'd have the 50 votes.

Yeah, I mean, you'd have to have 60. I want to say all. I'd say most Republicans, I think, have started talking about this. The media is not covering it a lot, but the Republicans, you can kind of see, and you'll see a lot of them commenting on this, about China joining, that news just breaking today, but also about this seeding of U.S. authority. The issue is the current makeup of Congress makes it tough to even get what Rick Scott wants through, Senator Scott, which is something simple, which is the U.S. is going to stop seeding so much authority, and that if you're going to change the Constitution of the World Health Organization, then you need to go through a congressional approval process like a treaty. So that's where it stands. I think that the opposition is building, and I think the way that we can really get at this is forcing a vote ultimately in Congress, not this Congress, no.

But there's a coming new Congress next January, and that could be a Congress that is controlled by Republicans, which is very important. Let's take Sharon's call, even though we've got a minute and a half left. Sharon, go ahead. You're on the air.

Thank you for taking my call, and thanks for all you do. Since the Biden administration or Obama administration, whatever the hell it is, tends to circumvent our laws, can the Congress cut them off at the knees by just refusing to fund the date? Only if you have the votes in Congress to do that, and in the House of Representatives, you don't.

I mean, I know it's frustrating, but that's just- I don't think we want to sit it yet either. I mean, because these proposals are proposals. We want to fight those, but I don't think there's- right, I mean, we always want to be truth tellers here. We have to start building the grassroots movement here and to call, so you start educating everybody, making sure you're getting the right information, correct information. Who's proposing what? What's coming from WHO? What's coming from the Biden administration? Then we start building the opposition to this.

It is building in the Senate, it is building in the House, but right now, Republicans are not in control. We've got- we're going to talk about the Organization of American States next, which is another thing we're conceding control over, which we'll talk about that. And the last segment, California, and we are on a lot of stations in California.

You've got DAs that are subject to recall. We want to hear from folks in California. 1-800-684-3110. You've got primaries today, and tell us what's going on out there. 1-800-684-3110. We'll take your calls when we come back from the break. We are going to talk about the Organization of American States, another big issue, and then we'll talk about what's going on in California.

800-684-3110. The first time since 1994 the United States is hosting in Los Angeles the Summit of the Americas, which is Latin America, Central America, and South America. And these countries coming together, being hosted in the United States.

So when you're the host, you have power over who you're going to invite. Of course, you've got to provide visas, because this is a regional organization. It's not an international organization, so it's region-focused. And it's connected to the Organization of American States.

So you have this summit. Well, we've been snubbed, the Biden administration, by some pretty powerful leaders in that region, including, right on our southern border, the President of Mexico. He's not coming because he's upset about Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba's President not being invited to even attend, which, like, at the U.N., they would be invited. And now the U.S. doesn't get to decide that, even though we have the U.N. in New York. That's up to the U.N. They would get to go if they want to go, and we'd have to provide the doc—allow them to travel.

Sometimes we really limit their ability to travel inside the U.S., but we allow them to be there. So they had to beg the Brazilian President to come. He hasn't even talked to President Biden yet by the phone.

They haven't even spoken. But there's three more countries. So it's not just Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, plus Mexico. There's three more, because Guatemala, Honduras, and it was the third—let's see, it's Guatemala, Honduras, because it's people who met with Harris, and Mexico. So Guatemala and Honduras, two of the three Northern Triangle countries, are also not attending, or they're not sitting there present.

By not sitting there present, of course, they are sending a message. Remember, two of those— We're sending our President. Two of those three countries, Guatemala and Honduras, are part of the immigration issue. So here's the—and of course, at the same time, we're asking Venezuela for more gas and more oil. So Wes, I look at this and say this is an incredible snub of the President, but we're funding a lot of these countries with aid.

Absolutely. Right now in Congress, it's stalled, thankfully, but President Biden has asked us to send $4 billion to the Northern Triangle countries. You see, whenever President Trump was President, he tied our aid to these countries, to their cooperation with us, especially on immigration. So they police their own borders. The Northern Triangle countries police their borders going north to Mexico. Mexico police their southern border. It cut down drastically on illegal crossings, you know, in the United States across the border.

All of that's gone by the wayside. We're giving them presently millions and millions of dollars. President Biden wants to give them another $4 billion. We fund Mexico to the tune of almost $100 million a year. And yet they are not cooperating with us. They're not helping us with immigration. And now there's this snub, a diplomatic snub, on the OAS as well. It is indicative of a lack of respect for the Biden administration for these countries who depend on us for aid. Meanwhile, as we all know, our southern border is in chaos and they're not helping. Just imagine for a moment, Vice President Harris, she goes to three countries as the borders are and as Vice President of the United States.

All three of those declined to send their President. So she's trying to use this as a way to rebuild her reputation. But even the mainstream media is not letting her forget, everywhere you went, they decided not to come, which tells you a lot about how much they think about this administration's influence on the world. Which is then the United States' influence on the world, which talks to that bigger issue we've been talking about today is the world, and we talked about it yesterday, the world senses the American weakness and they start acting in ways, some militarily, like we've seen in Asia and we've seen, of course, in Eastern Europe. Some diplomatically. So you've got Mexico, our border neighbor that we work with closely on so many issues, economic issues, trade issues, even outside of the border problems. They're not sending their President. And then two of the three Northern Triangle companies, they're not sending their President.

What's the one connector between all three of those? Vice President Harris went to their country and met with their President. What does that tell you about the view of these countries as to our standing in the world stage?

That's the real problem here, Wes. Absolutely. Our standing has decreased dramatically and it affects so many things. It affects our economy, it affects our border security, it affects national security. I mean, because of the lack of cooperation and respect from the Northern Triangle countries in Mexico, that is why, Jay, as we speak, there is a new group of migrants coming towards the U.S. border.

Up to 15,000. And since Joe Biden was elected President and inaugurated, we've had almost 50 people in these groups coming across who are on the terror watch list. So it's not only a general security issue, it affects our national security directly. So it's up to 15,000 migrants in this caravan, many of them are from Central America, Venezuela, and Cuba, may soon join another massive caravan that set off from the southern Mexico towards the U.S. border on Monday with its members calling on President Biden to repeat – the members of these caravans to repeal Title 42, the health policy, by the time they reach the frontier. Well, I feel like some of these leaders who met with Vice President Harris, if she spoke like she's spoken at a lot of these events and she just said, we need to work together because working together is good and let's all work together.

And that's what she left with. They're thinking, you know, I got issues in my own country, I'll sit in the foreign minister. That's his job or her job. So that is, again, it shows America's standing, and it's not the kind of standing we want it to be. Usually, these countries would jump at the opportunity, even if they were mad because you said I'm not having Venezuela there, which I think is a decision because weren't we begging Venezuela for oil and gas? So maybe that didn't go well. Maybe that didn't work out. But still, these other countries would not have not shown up with their leaders.

They would have been honored to be in the United States of America and participate as their country's President with the most powerful leader in the world, the President of the United States. Who has put us in this situation where we're having no respect. Listen to this. This is a White House press briefing. Listen to the – listen to the question, but listen to the response from the White House press secretary. On the side of the Americas, with the U.S. not inviting Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, for principal reasons as it's been described about democracy, does the President feel in any way embarrassed that a neighbor like Mexico is not coming?

Does it rise to that level of awkwardness? Well, let me just first say that the President was aware that when speaking to Obrador that he wasn't going to attend. He was aware before the press conference was made, before he made his decision to make that announcement. So there was communication there and he was made aware.

That sounds like Kamala Harris too. How many times has she said he was made aware? That's what they're saying as well. He's still the U.S. President so he gave him a heads up before he publicly said I'm not going to show up to your meeting. And they're saying that is a sign of strength.

But this is the problem. So what are we transmitting to the rest of the world when we have a conference in the United States, the Organization of the American States, we do invitations and people we invited, including Mexico's President on our southern border, says I'm not going to attend. What does that say, Wes, to the rest of the world? It says to the rest of the world that we have an extremely weak leadership in the United States of America and that they can do this, Jay, and get away with it and we're still giving them aid. Tying our aid to cooperation, that is not being vindictive.

That is common sense. Every country does that that is involved with aid. You expect something in return. That is a legitimate quid pro quo and we're not doing it and so they see us as weak and as vacillating it.

Look, it's no different than the World Health Organization and seeding authority there. We've got a call coming in that I want to take. It all ties in, folks. The globalists are winning because we're seeding our authority and that's a mistake. Let's go ahead and take Cheryl's call.

Yeah, absolutely. Hey, Cheryl, welcome to Secular Calling from Tennessee. You're on the air. Thank you so much for all that you do and my question is how do we individually rise up against the WHO today and support America? Well, let me tell you what we did which is on behalf of you all that listen to this broadcast are members of the ACLJ. The European Center for Law and Justice has already notified the member states that what their proposals are here are a violation of their own charters.

So that's number one. Number two, ACLJ action has already prepared a very detailed memorandum on all of these issues that is going to be distributed or already has been distributed very broadly on Capitol Hill. So there's two actions we're taking but a lot of this is lack of control of Congress doesn't help. Yeah, so we're in that education phase and we hope that, you know, all of you remember how to vote in November so that you could actually get some of this legislation through that would put President Biden in a bind.

I mean, he could try to veto things, remember still, but he has to have the vote so, you know, to override a veto, there's things like that. But I think we will start seeing more action. We just have to be prepared. That's part of ACLJ action is that it's not that you're going to get things done in a day. It's that when you see these things, you start charting out a course to defeat them.

That's exactly right. All right, let me tell you what we're going to do coming up in the next segment of the broadcast. We want to talk about the situation, specifically in California. It's other states as well.

But you've got these DAs that ran on, we're not going to prosecute crime. And what's happened to San Francisco, Los Angeles, and other major cities has been huge. We have a big audience in California. I want you to get your comments in either on our social media platforms or call us right now. We've opened up all the phone lines at 1-800-684-3110.

That's 800-684-3110. We want to talk to you about what's happening in Los Angeles, what's happening in San Francisco, what's happening in California. It's happening in Wisconsin and other places as well where you've got these DAs not enforcing the law. Lawlessness. Backed a lot of it by, you know, serious money coming from the left. But the results of this have been catastrophic. We're going to take your calls on that and we're going to discuss it.

Andy's going to join us back. It was a DA. 1-800-684-3110.

That's 800-684-3110. Yeah, I love your phone calls on this, especially out of California. You've got a recall today for the San Francisco DA. You've also got a primary, which is pretty unique that we're talking about a Democrat primary on Sekulow because of a unique candidate who right now is in the lead.

Probably a little runoff. We would like your thoughts on that too if you're an LA voter and you're a San Francisco voter on both of those. 1-800-684-3110.

The recall and then the actual primary for mayor. 1-800-684-3110. We'll be right back. Welcome back to Sekulow. We've got a lot of California listeners. If you want to weigh in on this from California, this is the time to call.

1-800-684-3110. You've got your primary today for LA mayor. It's a mixed primary. It's called Jungle Primary.

Explain that to everybody. Everybody runs in the same primary, Republican and Democrat. The top two there then go into a runoff.

So it's unlikely that anybody gets the 50% to win today. But what's interesting here is that there's a former Republican who's now registered as a Democrat, Rick Caruso. He's a major real estate developer, just joined the Democrat party, got endorsed from Elon Musk, spent $34 million so far in the campaign. Ten times more than his main opponent who is the current Democrat mayor or is a current member of Congress, Karen Bass. So likely he will get into the runoff. It's very interesting there because again, he was a Republican until he decided to run for this. And he's got endorsements from people like Elon Musk who said, I've got to move my company out of California because of the taxes and the lifestyle.

It's not a good place to be. So that's happening in LA today. Then you've got the DAs. In San Francisco, you've got a DA, not an election, but a recall. Now this is a DA that came in with this wave of others in 2019. The parents were members of the Weather Underground.

This is so typical, but they went to Ivy League school and Rhodes Scholar. They're called reformist DAs. These are the Soros DAs. We actually got a comment on Rumble. Hasn't George Soros been heavily funding these DA races?

This is a good example and maybe the best example. In the most liberal major city in the United States, major city, San Francisco, they're so fed up with this DA not putting people in prison who are committing crimes. That's the city we see the people just walk into the Walgreens and take everything. That's the DA's decision has been to not police, not to prosecute, to let even violent criminals right onto the street.

I think it's pretty likely that they get recalled today. But again, the fact that there was even a recall in San Francisco, they had to put together all those votes to get that on the ballot today, shows you that even in the most liberal cities, they are starting to feel the pain of putting in these out of control nuts to run their prosecutor's office. So when you have DAs that will not prosecute, Andy, and you've been a DA, you've been a U.S. attorney, you've been a DA. If a DA's role is not to prosecute crimes, then what happens?

Chaos. Yeah, I mean if a DA's role is not to prosecute crimes, then he or she ought not to be a district attorney because that's what you're supposed to do. Prosecute criminal offenses. This district attorney promised that he would eliminate cash bail, and what I found interesting... What does that mean, cash bail? Well, when you go into jail for a crime, you've got to put up an extra amount of dollars in cash in order to get out, and he says that discriminates against people who don't have money.

We've had cash bail since the beginning of the Republic, so you know, that makes no sense. But what I liked best of all, what I loathe I should say best of all, is that he's not going to prosecute quality of life crimes. And I looked that up and I wanted to see what he said about that. Quote, he is not going to prosecute, quote, crimes such as public camping, offering or soliciting sex, public urination, and blocking a sidewalk should not and will not be prosecuted as crimes. By the way, and the victim of the prostitution is the girl, and it's usually, a lot of them are underage, and he's not going to prosecute them.

That's really great. Public camping is homeless encampments, which are infested with drugs, violence, death, sex crimes, more trafficking, more abusive people, because those are people that get taken advantage of. They're living on the streets, usually drug addicts. So to go in that way, well now San Francisco voters are saying maybe this isn't the approach, I'm not expecting, let's say this DA gets recalled, I'm not expecting them to put in some hard right conservatives as a DA. But at least a DA who prosecutes crime, and who isn't trying to play this game of social engineering. Which is weird because you have the mayor of the city who's called out the DA and said we have to quote, this is the mayor of San Francisco, quote, the reign of criminals, we have to stop the reign of criminals who are destroying our city. Reign of criminals is how they're calling, the mayor of San Francisco is describing her own city. Okay, so if you've got the city of San Francisco, which was a beautiful city, is now the reign of criminals, and you've got a district attorney funded by Soros, listen, he doesn't hide this, this is not like we're giving you news you don't know. Why would George Soros fund a district attorney's race in a local city for exactly this? It's social engineering.

It is social engineering. It has nothing to do with crime and going after crime. It's homelessness on the streets being accepted, prostitution being legalized everywhere, or we're just not going to enforce the law. Sale of drugs, not a crime. We don't care about sex trafficking. We don't care about hard drug use in these homeless encampments, people dying or blocking the street even.

You can block the street. But the problem with all of this, of course, is the DA's function is to be the prosecutorial alarm so that people are safe. And if people aren't safe, then the DA, Andy, is not doing their job.

No, they're not doing their job. Look, a prosecutor's job is to prosecute criminal offenses. Of course, as Jordan alluded to, this guy came by this naturally. His father spent 40 years in prison for second-degree murder and first-degree robbery. So, I mean, why would he think that those are criminal offenses if his father was a member of Weather Underground and was in jail for murder and robbery?

I mean, that comes natural to him. But can you imagine electing a district attorney who will not prosecute criminal offenses? What are you there for? You know, Maria on Facebook wrote, and she's in San Diego, they have a good DA, not political, thinks they're doing a good job, but that Governor Newsom just added more felony categories to the growing list of sentence reductions. So the system is even stacked against the good DA's.

Yeah, so let's talk about what that actually means. When you've got felonies being added to sentence reductions, Andy, let's explain to everybody what that actually means. Well, basically what it means is for felony offenses, which there are two categories of crimes, felonies and misdemeanors. Misdemeanors are punishable by a year or less in jail, felonies more than a year in jail. And what he has done is sentence reductions that, in other words, a judge would have discretion to reduce a sentence that is mandatory under the statute to something less than what is permissible by the law. So a five-year felony jail term could be relegated out to six months.

Six months. Or nothing, or put them on probation. So, you know, we just empty the jails and put them back on the streets.

What does this result in? Public chaos, public crime, criminal activity, open cities, exactly what George Soros is wanting, exactly what these liberal DA's want to have done. They're getting and achieving in San Francisco absolute chaos and lawlessness.

Soros spent hundreds of millions of dollars, I think through his son, to go after races that people don't pay as much attention to. Because usually when you think of a DA, you think they're going to be a prosecutor, they're going to prosecute crime. That's their job.

And they don't play too much politics with how they do that. And that they want to keep a city safe and clean as best they can, especially big cities. I mean, this was a role that Vice President Harris had, and she had to defend herself in the Democrat primary for prosecuting too many black people. Remember that?

Yeah. And they were going after her for being a DA who actually was tough on crime in San Francisco. It's a city that has always had issues with people on the streets and homelessness. It's the thing with California, because the weather. And the weather kind of assumes that.

It's always had questions on drugs and things like that. So it's always been a very progressive, liberal city. But you still have to be a city that functions. So you have to have some rules, some laws. And when a DA comes in, not the people, but the DA comes in and says, prostitution now, not prosecute, that's basically legal. Urinating the street, that's legal. Blocking the street, legal. And camping in public space, which is homeless encampments, which are full of drugs, death, and crime. Sex trafficking, legal. So what you've got is a DA saying, Andy, chaos reigns in our city, this is what we want.

That's what we want and that's what I'm going to do. I'm going to make sure that there is criminal activity and lawlessness in the city of San Francisco. I'm the district attorney and I've chosen not to prosecute these crimes. I can say one thing for sure. In all the years that I prosecuted, in 40 years, I never prosecuted for political reasons or for social engineering. I prosecuted to enforce the law.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-04-08 08:00:08 / 2023-04-08 08:20:59 / 21

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