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

BREAKING: Whistleblower Exposes FBI

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
The Truth Network Radio
July 28, 2022 2:39 pm

BREAKING: Whistleblower Exposes FBI

Sekulow Radio Show / Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 932 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

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

July 28, 2022 2:39 pm

Rep. Jim Jordan is the top Republican serving on the House Judiciary Committee and he just sent FBI Director Chris Wray a letter stating that "FBI officials are pressuring agents to reclassify cases as 'domestic violent extremism' even if the cases do not meet the criteria for such a classification." He goes on to call this revelation "scandalous" based on the Biden Administration's insistence that "domestic violent extremism is the 'greatest threat' facing our country." Jordan, Logan, and the rest of the Sekulow team discuss these shocking whistleblower claims. This and more today on Sekulow.

Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow

Breaking news today on Sekulow as a whistleblower exposes the FBI. 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. Hey, welcome to Sekulow, folks.

We're going to take your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. And I think you may want to call in about this because, as you know, like disinformation and misinformation, the other terms they love using and classifying everything that happens to do with crime, if they can, as quote, domestic violent extremism. We've heard from this administration that's the number one security threat to our country. Not the drug cartels, not the fentanyl coming, made in China, coming across our border in Mexico, killing hundreds of thousands of Americans.

Not COVID. It's domestic violent extremism. Listen, there's legitimate issues with domestic violent extremism. We've seen those acts of individuals because here's the actual definition of it. Okay, so it's a pretty easy definition. It shouldn't be that hard for the FBI. Quote, an individual based and operating primarily in the U.S. or its territories without direction or inspiration from a foreign terrorist group. So you're not like doing it because of ISIS.

You haven't been persuaded by someone outside the U.S. but inside to carry out in part through, and it has to be, unlawful acts of force or violence. But we're told FBI officials, these are whistleblowers coming from the FBI, that the same official who has been pushing down his disinformation, Hunter Biden information, including the laptop, the same FBI official is involved here with pressuring FBI agents to reclassify cases as domestic violent extremism. Look, we've seen it time and time again. But if these whistleblowers are correct, this is what we mean when we say a politicized legal and justice system in our country. Yeah, I mean, we bring it up all the time.

Sometimes you get laughed at when you talk about things like this. But then moments like this occur where it's just clear and it's not even, there's not even room for speculation. It is exactly what we said was going on inside of these departments, inside of the FBI. Again, as these whistleblowers come out, you have to show respect to it and see what's happening. Yeah, I mean, so they have evidence now. This came in through Congressman Jim Jordan from whistleblowers to him.

The Biden administration, all because of narrative. But disclosures from multiple FBI whistleblowers have showed that they have, the agents are bolstering the numbers of cases to satisfy, these are domestic violent extremism cases, to satisfy their superiors. And they pressured, listen to that word, pressured agents to move cases into that category to create their self-created performance metrics. So they've got numbers. So we're looking at a FOIA here because it appears via the whistleblower logo, they're also being told these agents, you need to find 10 of these, you need to find 12 of these, you need to find six of these here, eight of these here.

They could look much more inflated than it possibly is to certainly shine a negative light likely on conservatives to start that whole spin heading into midterms. Because good news, in the same letter, Congressman Jim Jordan said that the same whistleblowers have disclosed how the Biden FBI is conducting a quote purge of FBI employees holding conservative views. So at the same time, an organization as law enforcement, none of their views should be at play when they are making decisions about who to investigate or who to prosecute. It shouldn't matter if it's a Republican or Democrat or someone in between, whatever their personal political views are, they have to do as best they can to put that bias to the side.

This is the exact opposite. This is encouraging them to use their, if they have a liberal or anti-Republican bias, to go out and then find cases that are somehow on the line and boost this number for political purposes. Instead of all these real threats we do face. And if there is a domestic violent extremism threat, they should be able to handle that.

But also, even through some of what we've learned these past few months, these groups that they act are so big and structured or actually oftentimes not. What I encourage you though is that there's two problems here. Two major problems. One is they're reclassifying this to make being a conservative a threat to the country.

That's the big takeaway. And two, they're going to take out conservatives from the FBI so there's no people with different viewpoints there. We're going to take action on it. We're looking at what we can do to support the work of the ACLJ.

We've got our matching challenge right now. Double the impact of your donation. That's Be right back.

If you're just joining us, let me just recap here. We've got a letter from Congressman Jim Jordan to the FBI Director Christopher Wray. I'm holding up my hands now so you can see this letter. This letter says, hey, we have whistleblowers. This is not just accusations or questions. They have actual people inside the FBI who have gone through the normal, legal process to share this information with Congress to protect their identity. There's two things that the whistleblowers, and by the way, it's not just one, but multiple whistleblowers are focusing in on. One is that the FBI senior officials, and so your bosses, are pressuring agents to reclassify cases.

And again, the agents are the ones on the front line doing good work. But they're getting pressure to reclassify cases as, quote, domestic violent extremism, even if they don't meet the criteria. The criteria is simple. You're an individual based or operating primarily in the U.S. You are not inspired or working with a foreign organization, so it's domestic, and you engage in unlawful acts of force or violence. That's domestic violent extremism, and it's for a political or social goal, so it's not just to rob the store. But again, it's very specific because it's a political ideology or a social goal, so you're trying to convince something or cause something because of your violence.

I'm not saying this doesn't happen, by the way, but I don't think it's widespread. I think that's the issue, Logan, is that they say this is the biggest problem, the number one threat facing our country. And I see China, like when Nancy Pelosi can't travel to Taiwan without possibly World War III, the way the Chinese threatened that, when I see the drugs coming in across our border killing Americans throughout our country, I mean, the security in Russia doing whatever they want basically in Ukraine and scaring Europe.

And we see the economic crisis we have. We are technically, I mean, there's all these things, and they say this is our number one problem. So they know that the numbers didn't add up to that, so they've got to gin up numbers. Yeah, they've got to find numbers to make it seem that way to try to give you some form of, you know, it's a distraction tactic as well. It's distracting, like you said, from the major problems that are actually happening not only in our country but in the world.

I don't know if you've been outside recently. It feels, you know, closer to maybe the end times than ever in terms of what's happening. And it feels that there's a level of oppression that is happening in society. And like you said, a lot of that is coming from Washington, D.C. itself. Some of it is coming from around the world, like you said, from China or from the fentanyl crisis that's happening. And then obviously COVID and all the other situations that have come feels like there's a new flavor of the week. And you're saying that the biggest problem and the biggest thing we have to worry about is these domestic threats. And so much so that you're willing to falsify numbers to make it happen. It's another moment that feels disingenuous.

It's another politicized moment for the FBI, which is sad because it should be one of those departments that we actually look at and can trust. We are taking your phone calls on this at 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. Jerry's calling in from Rhode Island on Line 1. Hey, Jerry. Well, team, here we go again.

The seventh floor being active. And again, the elected officials getting top of a law enforcement arm, which was stellar. But having been in law enforcement and being an initial report gatherer or investigator, you have to submit your report to your supervisors, paramilitary organization.

And then when you get to each level past that, they want to spin it. If they want to please their supervisors, then the initial reporters don't have much control. But thank God that there is a whistleblower mechanism because you wouldn't even know the story without it. Right. On top of that, the same group of whistleblowers.

I want to make sure it's clear. It's not like one person came to Jim Jordan, the FBI, and said this is happening. It's a big claim to make. Multiple whistleblowers are also saying at the same time this is going on, there's a purge of conservatives at the FBI. They actually put that word in quotes. That's a quote from one of the whistleblowers. A purge of conservatives.

So what they want is no check on their power to use these instruments of power for political purposes, whether it's to intimidate, silence, scare people from getting involved in politics. It always happens. And this gets exposed around election time when they're in trouble. They're in trouble in the midterms. We know that. I mean, that's statistically just accurate.

It doesn't matter what side dial you're on. And so you start finding out the extremes they're willing to go to to try and protect their majorities right now in the House and the Senate. But I think they're looking further, too. Of course, I think a lot of this ties in.

You don't have to be a genius to figure out who they're tying this into, which is President Trump. Yeah, absolutely. And look, a lot of people are wondering what they can do. I think that's something we need to address when they see these situations. It's where the ACLJ comes in and does stuff different than a lot of the organizations you hear and a lot of the news outlets you hear. We're not a news outlet.

I want to make sure that that's clear. We are not just here to report to you what's going on. We tell you what's going on, we break it down, and then we go to work.

Yeah, and that's why when we have these matching challenge months like this month, which you have until Sunday this weekend to be part of if you're financially able to right now, this is a great time to support the work of the ACLJ. Because when we see this, we don't look at it as a, this is a great story for radio. We will say, okay, we want to report on this. We want to tell people about this. But the first thing we're doing is saying, what can we do with the ACLJ?

I already see in the letter from Jim Jordan what I would like to focus in on this. It's that they're supposedly from this whistleblower that agents have been pressured to do this domestic violent extremism categorization to hit self-created performance metrics. I'd like to know at what level those metrics were created. So is it seventh floor, like we were talking about, top level leadership of the FBI? Then is that disseminating down to other officials saying you need to find this many of these cases, you need to classify this many cases this way, you need to focus on this, so that President Biden's talking point is correct? That's really who they're doing this for. They're doing this so that Democrat officials, politicians, are able to cite numbers that actually prove their point that somehow domestic violent extremism is the number one threat to our country. Not the drugs, not the cartels, not China, not microchips that they control in our tanks and airplanes, cars and phones and everything else. No, no, it's Americans. The number one threat to America is Americans.

That's what they are trying to sell here. And by the way, let's get rid of all the conservatives inside the FBI. If you want to talk to us, 1-800-684-3110.

Remember that Congressman Jordan, he's the ranking member on Judiciary, the committee that has oversight over the FBI. But this is, again, you got to be very careful. I don't want anybody to hear this and think, I'm too scared to get involved. We're going to fight back. Every time they try to do this, it hurts them more than any American. The FBI credibility has gone just totally downhill. I don't like that as an American. You want to respect it. You want to respect the FBI. It shouldn't feel like anything is politicized.

It shouldn't feel like a system that's politicized. But what we've seen, whether it was this administration or the last one or even the last one, we saw that over and over and over again. And we've seen sort of the deep state that is involved within the FBI.

And that becomes a real thing. We've all seen it play out now too many times on repeat. Under Obama and Biden, the FBI focused on conservatives outside the government. Under Trump, the FBI suddenly switched and said, let's focus on conservatives inside the government so we can purge them out, make their life miserable, make them have to lawyer up, no knock at their door at 5 a.m., dragging them out when they haven't even said they wouldn't comply with information that a lot of times seems almost always politically motivated to some extent.

This to me, this is the biggest threat to our democracy, to our democratic republic, is that if we don't have trust in our institutions, and if it goes even worse than that, our institutions are failing us at a level where you have to have the most buy-in as an American. When it's law enforcement, they have the ability to take everything from you. You have to trust that they're only doing that to people who are guilty, or at least from the FBI's point, they're building a case against them that will ultimately go to court to determine their guilt. But then there's serious crime. When you think FBI, you think serious crime, which not padding numbers, it should be honest and open. For a political narrative. Yeah, and so I think we're going to focus in our foil.

I'd like to focus in on, I think when, you know, it's like when your local police department sometimes they do these, you'll notice at the end of the month, a lot more people out for speeding tickets. Yeah. Okay, but that's one thing. Quotas.

Okay. If they have quotas, which it does indicate in this letter, that there is a self-created performance metric on domestic violent extremism, if they have to do that, what does that show you? It's a problem. I'm sure it's one of many problems the FBI deals with. It's not their top problem.

Because if it was, they'd be overrun with it. And these numbers would not have to be padded. They would not have to have performance metrics so that their superiors are happy. At the same time, they're going to try to push out, they're going to try to push out conservatives within, because who do you think likely the whistleblowers are? I don't know if the whistleblowers, by the way, are necessarily politically Republican. I think they're likely just saying this is not right for a law enforcement agency. So the ACLJ will take the appropriate action. I think it's the FOIA route at first.

I think it's the looking at specifically through these performance numbers. We got to create, we got to find domestic violent extremism where it doesn't exist. Instead of focusing it on where it does exist, deal with that problem. Fine.

Go by the actual definition. So we need your support. You know, yesterday we've been talking about a lot of the life work, but also the work of protecting your constitutional rights. Double the impact your donation or a matching challenge right now at This is a great time to do it.

You have a few more days until Sunday, but you can do it today. And it means a $25 donation that's all you're charged on your credit card. That triggers another $25 donation. So it's like $50 for us at the ACLJ. That's a huge impact. That's higher than our average donation. Donate today. We'll be right back. Alright, welcome back to Sekulow. And I want to take some of your phone calls on this too. This idea that, and these are whistleblowers. So this is not, we suspect this is happening. It's not a Congressman, we think it's happening. People are coming to them from inside the government saying, this is happening. We have quotas to hit on domestic violent extremism.

When we don't put it through, our supervisors are unhappy with us. So to make them happy, we have to try to find in cases that don't have a link, some kind of link to domestic violent extremism. It has a very clear definition.

It has to be inside the US. It has to be for a political or policy purpose that you're carrying out a violent act inside the US. So that's the definition.

You've got to hit all those points, all those different parts of the definition. But, what the whistleblower is saying is, we're stretching it, and at the same time, purging is the word they use. Conservatives from the FBI. We know, and I think it's pretty accurate, and we've got a FOIA into the FBI right now, and a lawsuit on the abuse of the FBI of the FOIA process.

How they abuse the process as well. I want to get to the phone calls too. Fred in Tennessee online too. Hey Fred, welcome to Secular. You're on the air.

Thank you for taking my call. My question is, what can the incoming President do to get rid of like 4 or 7 of the FBI, and how far can he go? Well, okay, so this is interesting. At the end of the Trump administration, President Trump talked about this in Washington DC this week in his first speech back in Washington to his policy institute. And we can actually talk about this with Rick Rinnell later in the broadcast too.

I'll bring this up. They classified a new appointment of bureaucrats in the Trump administration. It's called Schedule F appointments. Those were people who were bureaucrats who were protected by civil service, but were deeply involved in policy-related positions. And so they were going to reclassify that group of employees, which was about 50,000, so that the President could remove them like political appointees because they are involved in policy-making. There was a move earlier by President Trump.

I will tell you this. When you go against this giant behemoth bureaucracy, you better be willing to stand with the politician who does it. President Trump, because of firing Jim Comey, had to deal with a special prosecutor. That was just one guy he fired. He then had to deal with two impeachments.

And then was lost, however you want to say it, lost the election, lost the White House, however you think it was, is no longer President. And it all started with his move to, what do you call it, remember folks, drain the swamp. And if you drain the swamp, oof, there's a lot of alligators, plenty of crocodiles, plenty of other nasty things that come at you. So if someone, if it's President Trump or someone like him, does come back into the executive branch, he has outlined a way to remove about 50,000.

Now maybe they're not all bad. Out of policy-making positions, that would be classified as this. I want to go to Harry Hutchinson, too, because Harry, this is another issue, again, when we talk about threats to the country, it feels like China is number one by far on so many levels. And there's been kind of a new work on these Confucius Institutes, specifically at the university setting. I just want to explain to people, too, just right off the bat what they are, what they do.

That is a great question. So essentially, China has a deliberate policy objective, which is to infiltrate sources of power and information. And so they have essentially bought American academic institutions, and they've set up their own institutions at American universities. They have sent their own scholars to the United States. And so one of the things that they have focused on are so-called Confucius Institutes, which are designed, they claim, to provide entree for Americans into Chinese culture and language. Really, the Confucius Institutes are simply a data mining operation with a deliberate focus on intellectual property, but also they, I think, are interested in turning American academics and students toward China.

Basically providing a unlimited source of information, very much like intellectual property theft, but it's much more sophisticated. Now, after China has faced pressure from the American politicians and the American people, they have simply created new institutions, and they've closed down Confucius institutions at a number of universities, I believe 118 universities. But then they've set up new institutions with American universities. They've set up an institution at Western Michigan University, Georgia State University, and theoretically, they're designed to advance Chinese culture.

Basically, the Chinese government claims a benign purpose, but the American people ought to be very, very wary of what China is doing. They get heavily involved in research and development, what we're working on, what universities could be doing research on, or even working with the U.S. government in tandem on. That's not unusual, especially at many different research institutions across the country. But as Harry said, this example out of Georgia State, just to make it clear, so in 2020, you may have said, if you were in Georgia, you may have seen the news that in 2020, Georgia State closed its Confucius Institute. Like Harry said, most of them have been closed. But then, at the same month, the exact same month it closed, the Confucius Institute, a new agreement between Georgia State University and Beijing.

The Beijing Language and Culture University, which was the former partner school for the Confucius Institute, was signed on for a new program, the Chinese Language and Culture Program. Logan, they're just trying. They are just changing the names. Yeah, you're just swapping out names. So you thought they did the right thing in 2020? They likely didn't. Sorry. Sorry, yeah.

I remember I'd taken money from who knows what. I mean, this is just another example of what's going on, especially inside some of these institutes. You have to really be careful of where you're encouraging your kids to go, where you're encouraging yourself, where you're looking for higher education. I think it's always a concern of where the narrative is coming from. Yeah, and Harry, that to me is, again, just to kind of fish this out, no school has to have this state or private, public or private institution.

They could all say no, but it even seems like the ones that said no were just doing it to try to cover themselves visually, you know, publicly. And they figured out another way to take the money and resources from China. I think you're precisely correct, and what's worrisome is American universities are increasingly dependent on China for revenue, and therefore, they are subject to exploitation by the Chinese government. All right, folks. Again, this is just another example of the work that we're doing with the ACLJ to expose what I think is the biggest threat to the United States, short term and long term. If you look at the kerfuffle just over Nancy Pelosi's trip to Taiwan, we've talked about chips, we've talked about the land purchases, we've talked about the Huawei cell towers.

There's still an operation in the United States today that we know are spying on our U.S. Strategic Command, which oversees our nuclear weapons arsenal. You've got to support the work of the ACLJ today at We have a matching challenge through the end of the month, which is Sunday. So if you've got time between today and Sunday to be part of that, double the impact of your donation. So a $50 donation is like $100 for us, but all your charge is $50.

It just triggers another $50 donation., let me encourage you, support our work today. It's not just for the broadcast, but for all the work that you see at Donate today.

We'll be right back, second half hour coming up. At the American Center for Law and Justice, we're engaged in critical issues at home and abroad. For a limited time, you can participate in the ACLJ's matching challenge. For every dollar you donate, it will be matched. A $10 gift becomes $20. A $50 gift becomes $100. You can make a difference in the work we do, protecting the constitutional and religious freedoms that are most important to you and your family.

Give a gift today online at Keep you informed and engaged. Now more than ever, this is Sekulow. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow.

All right, welcome back to Sekulow Pact. Second half hour coming up. Congressman Bob Goode will be joining us the final segment of the broadcast. Rick Grenell joining us the next segment of the broadcast. With Rick, I'm going to talk about this FBI issue.

I want to talk about some of the China news as well. And just, you know, the politics of this are just horrendous. So we'll get into all of that just right away. And just to remind you, if you're just joining us, this whole conversation, surprise, surprise, we're getting closer and closer to finishing out the primary season.

And guess what? More whistleblowers from the FBI coming to members of Congress. This time it was Jim Jordan saying the FBI has got quotas on domestic violent extremism cases. So even when it's not domestic violent extremism, agents in the field are feeling pressure from their superiors. It's definitely coming out of Washington, D.C., no doubt. Pressure from their superiors to classify crimes that weren't domestic violent extremism as trying to find some link. You know, somebody tweeted something about politics, I guess, or if they had anything on social media and then they committed a crime, that they're ultimately associating that crime with a specific defined act, domestic violent extremism. You have to be inside the U.S. You can't be being influenced by foreign outside actors.

So this is not ISIS. This is not like I'm doing this for some outside foreign group. And you have to be doing it for a political purpose, policy purpose, for some reason to shape public policy or legislation or for just straight out politics. As agents are saying, we're being told to do this. At the same time, the whistleblowers are saying, by the way, they're purging the FBI of conservatives. So we want to get to the bottom of that. We're going to file a FOIA to ACLJ. I mean, Logan, when I see those kind of points, I think those are the two areas I like to focus on is, one, the quotas.

Who set these metrics up? Is it Washington, D.C., to satisfy Joe Biden? Because that's the politicization of law enforcement, which is the worst part about the kind of relationship that the American citizen has with their government is you have to have trust in your law enforcement that they're going to do the best job they can and they're going to keep their bias out.

That's what you said. It's no fun for us to report on these things. It's no fun to tell people this is what's going on behind the scenes, the FBI going on behind the scenes in there, like you said, on law enforcement. It's upsetting.

It should be upsetting. But that is why, unlike everyone else, the ACLJ is very uniquely centered, where you may hear the show and we're surrounded by other talk radio personalities. We're surrounded by other news outlets. But that is not what we do here. That is a portion of what we do here. We produce this show each and every day.

And I wish, as I said, I wish you could see beyond the glass if you're watching online or if you're listening, I wish you could see the crew that's doing this. It's an amazing crew and tons of people who are putting together the media side of this. But not only do we take the media side, we also go to work and we go to work on your behalf. And that it can only happen if we have the resources to bring in the best of the best, which is what we do here. That's why Rick Grenell is joining us later. It's why we have Mike Pompeo.

It's why we have this incredible team you heard from, Harry and the whole group. And you can find all that content, by the way, at You can go to, play around a little, see what's there, incredible blogs, video content, audio content. Just take a look at everything we're doing here and realize this is so much more than a radio and television broadcast. Though that has to be, you know, obviously a portion of the budget we spend is to make sure we are heard and that has to be through this show. And that's important as well. It's one of our most important, probably the biggest way we let you know what's happening in the world.

Yeah. And I think that what you've got to do is understand as we go to the next break, Rick Grenell joining us next live, and then Congressman Bob Goode from Virginia joining us as well. Like Logan said, I mean these packed shows with so much information from experts and we actually take action on these issues. So for instance, in Kansas next week, on Tuesday there's a vote on life. And it's one of the first times actual voters in a state are taking a vote post-Roe to allow their legislature to start putting in restrictions on abortion.

It's as simple as that. We encourage people to vote yes. Through ACLJ action we have an ad campaign running. One of the ads has Mike Pompeo in it because he's a former Congressman from Kansas.

One is of a child. And that's running. We have an ad campaign out to support voting yes on that initiative.

It's the first time people can vote. We take a stand. We don't just tell you about it. We put our money where the mouth is. And that's because of your financial support of the ACLJ. We can do it. Donate today. Be right back. Alright folks, welcome back to Sekulow. And right now, President Biden, scares me a little bit, is talking, is on the phone with President Xi of China. We'll, I'm sure, have some report about what they talked about and we'll see if that looks like that adds up to what's actually going on publicly by the Chinese. Because their threats against us are increasing verbally as we speak. I want to go right to Rick Rinnell, our Senior Advisor for Foreign Policy and National Security. Because Rick, these phone calls are significant.

This is one that's kind of been talked about for the last ten days or so. President Xi is looking for this third term in China to remain as their leader of the CCP. But also, you've been this advisor before, so if you're about to do one of these phone calls, it could be an hour or longer with all the translation that goes back and forth. And you've got a number of issues with what is becoming increasingly a full-on adversary, but also this economic partner, so this kind of bizarre relationship.

What would be your top issues we need to address right now, President to President? Well, first of all, I've been on many of these diplomatic phone calls and preparation works for calls with Chinese officials. And the way that the Chinese like to do diplomacy is they like all of the issues before the call. They want all of the negotiations done before the call, so that the call is just more reminding each other of the talking points. Donald Trump never did that. He would bring up subjects that they weren't prepared for and really would get them off their game.

And I think that unpredictability was really a key to the success of diplomacy. I don't know what Joe Biden and his team are doing, if they've gone back to the traditional way of telling the subjects and being very clear about what we were going to ask for beforehand. I would suspect that Hunter Biden's laptop did not come up, but I can guarantee you that would have been something that Donald Trump would have brought up. I think the Chinese need to answer the question, what's on that laptop?

Are you involved in the Biden family financially? And we need to always bring up COVID-19 and the origins of COVID-19. The Chinese communist Chinese government has covered up what they knew and what the world did not know.

And that's unacceptable. And we have economies that have tanked. We have small businesses that have lost their livelihoods. Individuals have gone bankrupt because of COVID-19. People have died because of COVID-19.

The Chinese communist ways of covering up that pandemic need to be always at the forefront of these conversations. I doubt they were today. Yeah, and it seems like even Washington, even outside of the Biden administration, Rick, cannot get their hands on it. Even with the chips legislation, which was somewhat controversial inside Republican, well, it was kind of controversial, and then it passed the Senate.

And right away, Joe Manchin comes out with an endorsement of basically build back better light, if you want to call it that, to be nice to Joe Manchin. It's basically the Green New Deal. It's tax hikes during a time of economic uncertainty. So the politics around China, they just cannot act.

You can't get through it. So you can't rely on just the government or Congress getting it done because it seems like everything gets tied back to another political gotcha. Let me just talk about the chips thing for a second. The game in Washington is that wealthy chip makers will hire lobbyists to go into Congress and say, we cannot build chip manufacturing facilities in the United States unless we get some government subsidies, unless you pay us to come back.

And I think that's crazy. I don't think we should be spending 52 billion dollars to help wealthy companies bring their their manufacturing plants back to the United States. Instead, what we should do is we should put tariffs on any chips that are outside made outside of the United States. We need to incentivize the system, the market, not individual companies.

And I think that's the difference. And that's something that Donald Trump would have seen very clearly. We're not going to do taxpayer giveaways to wealthy companies, but we do need to bring the supply chain home. These companies, these American companies need to bring back those chip manufacturing facilities to the United States because it is the best thing in their interest. And we can incentivize them through tariffs if they don't. That's a really interesting way to look at it, Rick, because a lot of people see our reliance on China and go, well, there's really nothing we can do. I mean, at this point, if we're just being honest with ourselves, half of the things that are more that are being made just to get this show on the air were manufactured and created likely in China.

It's just sadly the fact. But what you said, what you brought up is coming up with a different way to do it. That's not an all or nothing. It gives you the pathway to getting things back to America, because if anyone's ever been in manufacturing, tried to get things done, a lot of it is very difficult, very hard for companies to even attempt to get it made in America. You go to some of these people that factories that we'd like to do this and they just go, well, no, so let's find a way to do that.

I really appreciate that that way of looking at it. Well, one thing I will say is that politicians don't know how to do this. Joe Biden has been a politician for 40 plus years. He doesn't know how to do this. Donald Trump is the outside businessman. It was second nature to him to think about the markets.

I'll give you another example. When we did the we got rid of NAFTA and we created the Mexico Canada agreement with the United States, there was a move in the Trump administration. If we had more time, I think it would have veered out to incentivize the triangle countries, Guatemala and these countries where we see a lot of immigration starting in the illegal immigration into the United States starting. There was a way that Donald Trump was saying, let's bring home the supply chain from China. It's better to put it in North America. It's better for America if these manufacturing plants are down in Guatemala and in the triangle region, because if we can create jobs down there, they're not going to be flooding into our country. And so rather than have a supply chain in China, let's have a supply chain somewhere in North America or Central America that's going to greater benefit the United States.

This is the type of outside business thinking that we need in Washington. Ultimately, Rick, the whole news too surrounding Nancy Pelosi, the trip, and you kind of have Republicans saying go at this point, but now she is getting tremendous pressure from her colleagues, from the President, from the White House to not go to Taiwan. Ultimately, if she does not go on that trip, is that a victory for China? Yeah, it's another victory for China, I would say. They've already come to Alaska and lectured us on our soil about our human rights, and our secretary of state couldn't get out of his chair to push back. And so we see weakness all over. You know, we've talked about this so many times, Afghanistan, Nord Stream 2, you know, the Houthis being taken off the terrorist list.

It's just example after example of the Biden administration being weak. And here we go again, the speaker of the House, the woman who leads the Democratic Party in the House is somehow intimidated to go to Taiwan. I hope she doesn't back down. I hope she goes. She should have decided to immediately go without making a big deal out of it.

She was going to be in the region. Just go to Taiwan and do our foreign policy. Don't let others veto our foreign policy. Rick Rinnell, senior advisor for foreign policy and national security. Rick, as always, we appreciate it. And folks, let me just take this time right now just to underscore why we can bring in Rick.

And again, we're able to do this. We're able to schedule it out and then know that we've got Rick. And then when these issues arise, we know he's been on those phone calls. We know he's prepped those phone calls.

So as President Biden right now, Logan, is speaking to the leader of China, we're bringing in experts who have been in those rooms at the highest level. Yeah, we couldn't do it without the support, obviously, of people like you who are watching and listening to this show right now. And we appreciate it right now. We are at the very end of our matching challenge at the ACLJ. End of the month.

This is when it's most important. So go to And what that means is that all donations, if you make $5, $10, $20, whatever it is, there are other donors who have agreed, who have said, if those people make a donation, we will match that donation. So if someone gives $100, we will make that $200, effectively. So it's a very cool way to get involved with the ACLJ. If you're a brand new donor, this is a way to do it. You can sign up, you can become a recurring donor, and it will be matched. And we appreciate that.

Or you could do a one-time gift, and that's fine as well. Again, we know times are tough. That is a very interesting time. But that is why we have to be there, whether it's our work internationally, whether it's our work that we're doing currently. Whether you sit with crisis pregnancy centers around the country, if you've heard about all of them, they need help. And what we're able to do is provide free legal help to them. Or to you, if you have legal help that you need that is within our scope, we're available at You just have to click that Get Legal Help button. And if it's within our scope of operation, obviously the work that we do, we will assign a lawyer to you, we will get to work. But we can't do that. Again, these aren't lawyers who aren't getting paid.

This isn't a video production crew and a radio production crew doesn't get paid. No, I want the best of the best here. We can't do that without the support from you. So right now, go to It is very important, and it's an important day to do so. That's right. We've got a group of donors that want to match, that will match, all of the donations that come through to the end of the month. And so if you make that donation today and you decide it's $25, they're going to match that. So it's like $50 for us. All your charge is $25. If it's $50, that's like $100 for us, but all your charge is $50. Do it if you're financially able.

It is part of keeping the broadcast on, but also in bringing in the team players, but also all of the work that we do here in the U.S. and around the world. Donate today at That's We're coming back with Congressman Bob Goode of Virginia. Folks, we've been talking about it, especially throughout the week, about kind of all the work that's going on in all 50 states.

We have that interactive map at on life. There is work being done at the federal level as well. There's some bad things being done by the House and Senate Democrats who want to permanently enshrine a right to abortion in our legislation.

So there's federal work being done that's negative, but there's also positive work being done, especially as we lead up to the midterm elections. I want to bring in Congressman Bob Goode, who represents Virginia's 5th congressional district. Congressman Goode, thanks for joining us on Sekulow. Great to be with you again.

Thanks for having me. And so, Congressman, you are leading an effort, a discharge petition in the U.S. House on the Life at Conception Act to force a vote on the House floor. You've got 120 members who've co-signed the petition.

Tell people what the act would do. Well, we're actually up to just under 130 now, and I will also tell you that it's the discharge petition on the Life at Conception Act. So if you take the co-sponsor to the Life at Conception Act, sponsored by my friend Alex Mooney from West Virginia, and the discharge petition, meaning those who've signed on to help us try to force a floor vote, combine all of them together, we're at 182-plus Republicans for it.

So nearly 90 percent of the conference has supported this bill, which will do two things essentially. One, recognize the science that life does begin at conception, and then number two, it deserves protection under the 14th Amendment. So we're trying to stake our claim clearly as the party of life, the bold party of life from conception, while we know the other side has become the party of death, the party of abortion up to the moment of birth, any time for any reason, even after birth, and you get to pay for it with your tax dollars. Yeah, and unfortunately we're here for lots of folks in deeply blue states who are kind of saying, what can we do now? And one of the things we've had to tell them, Congressmen, is we have to go to fight in the ACLJ. We do that often, and we have attorneys doing it right now in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and had to do it in California a number of times, especially when Kamala Harris and Becerra were AGs there, state AGs there, is the pro-life pregnancy center is on the front lines for life.

Who are the answer to that question? Congressman, everybody says there's going to be too many babies. Yeah, we have organizations in place, but even Governor Whitmer in Michigan just vetoed $20 million for adoption there to expand services there. It's like they want to create a crisis of children, which is just kind of sick.

That's right. They have become the party of we want more abortions, essentially, that there should be obviously no restrictions for any reason at any time on abortion. And as you well know, the number of families seeking to adopt children greatly exceeds even the number of abortions that are performed annually in this country. But thank God after 50 years, nearly the most catastrophic, devastating, damaging court decision in the history of the United States that caused more carnage than any other has mercifully been overturned. And so we as Republicans have to rise to the moment, seize the day, match the courage of the Supreme Court, who followed through on this decision, and respond to it with legislation that does affirm and protect all life from conception. Yeah, because that's been our clear message, Congressman, as well.

That's why it's great to have you on. We're talking to Congressman Bob Goode of Virginia, is that we wanted to give people some time. It was kind of, you know, it was leaked out, and there was a lot of, you know, we could get into that for days. But there was some time where people kind of started to realize this may be real. We may actually see the overturn of Roe vs. Wade.

We told people the first few days, let's celebrate it. We've been fighting for this for decades. We're at this point. But don't forget, what we've been working on since that case was taken by the U.S. Supreme Court is, what if Roe vs. Wade is overturned, the battles that will be unleashed, both at the state level, but also the federal level. And you've got, again, the divide. We need to talk about that for a second, because it just seems like there is no space on the other side of the aisle from any of your colleagues on the Democrat Party to support anything that has to do with potentially being seen as pro-life now. You have to be, it's not even that, you have to be anti, I think it's the new way, you have to be anti the pro-life movement as well, not just pro-abortion, but anti the pro-life movement, like Elizabeth Warren's saying, we need to shut down these torture centers when she's talking about pro-life pregnancy centers. Yes, we can't even get the Democrats to support born-alive legislation that if a baby, in that rare circumstance that a baby survives an abortion, they will not vote, tragically, they will not even vote to save that life.

No Democrat criticized Ralph Northam's stated position in my home state of Virginia just a few years ago, when he said, hey, you get to decide after the baby survives what to do with it. So that's who they've become. They've surrendered, as you said, all the middle ground, all the compromising territory.

So the Dems have become all the way in the left extreme. And so we need to be bold on life. We can win with this issue. We're going to win with this issue. November will show that after the Supreme Court has decided, Roe v. Wade or reverse it, I should say, and left it to the legislators, American people are going to vote Republicans into office. So why not go into November having won, having been bold on life so we have the courage to advance legislation in the majority? We're going to elect hopefully 30 to 40 new pro-lifers this fall. And we'll have the numbers if we have the courage to pass the Life at Conception Act as a Republican majority in the House, put every Republican on record a truly pro-life as they ran, as they campaigned, as they fundraised, as they say when they're talking to faith-based groups. And then we'll also put the Senate on record of how many of our senators are truly pro-life.

And then the 24 is a great Senate map for us where we're going to have a chance to pick up more seats in 24 and hopefully a presidency as well. And then we can hopefully get legislation like this signed into law. So this should be the standard that we're pursuing. This should be our stake in the ground. While we recognize we may have opportunity to pass more incremental legislation along the way, we'll take that if we can get it, but we never stop fighting for conception. That's what we've been doing, Congressman, is kind of saying do everything you can that you know we're going to win easily in court or not even have to go to court over. And then we work on the next phase as well.

You can do that simultaneously. There's a big enough movement behind it. And we have to be just as energized, if not more energized, than the pro-abortion left and their allies like Planned Parenthood. Congressman Goode, thank you for joining us.

Thank you for what you're doing too for life at the federal level because we've been focusing so much, Logan, on the state level. And as a reminder, again, things can drastically change after the midterms. It won't change who's in the White House. It may not change getting this passed. But you will actually be – or getting it signed into law. But you can start passing legislation like this, especially if there's the change not just in the House but the Senate, and getting people down who have been campaigning as I'm pro-life, I'm this, I'm that, are they willing to vote that way?

Yeah, put their feet to the fire and see what actually happens. And it's an interesting time. It'll be an interesting time in the next couple weeks as midterms are starting to happen. You're seeing all the primaries. Everything is happening right now. There's voting signs everywhere. It is that moment. I'm sure you're getting the text. I'm sure you're getting the emails from your local candidates running on the state and on the Senate level. And it's been really interesting to see all of it happen. It will be – it looks good, but you never know.

That's why you have to stay engaged. You have to stay informed of what we're doing here, whether that's through the ACLJ or the ACLJ Action or any of our programs that we run here. That's why we create content for children. We create content like this every day. We have so many different arms and facets of the organization that you need to go to our website.

You need to see what we're doing. Go to Download the ACLJ app. It's a really easy way to sign the petitions, to get involved quickly, easily, saves all your information. It's an easy way to do it.

If you have an Apple device, I believe there's also on many other different smartphone devices, you can get the ACLJ app. But most importantly, right now, because we are headed towards the end of that matching challenge. You'll hear from us tomorrow. Then we have the weekend. After the weekend, the matching challenge is over.

So right now, this is the time to do it. Jordan, if you give a donation right now, it is effectively doubled because there's another donor ready, an ACLJ member saying, I will match that donation of any level. That's right. So a group of donors comes together. They pool their resources. They say, okay, we're going to match it, but who has to take the first action?

You do. So you've got to make the $25 donation. That is all you're being charged. So when it's matched, and I say it's like doubled for us, you're not double charged. You're charged just the $25 to your credit card, but that triggers the matching donor's $25 donation.

So that's how, again, you can double the impact your gift. You have until the end of this month or just a few more days. But do it right now while you're thinking about it. It takes a couple of minutes online at The resources are so important right now as we fight against some behemoth organizations like the abortion industry for life. Donate today. Talk to you tomorrow.
Whisper: medium.en / 2023-03-18 20:58:48 / 2023-03-18 21:20:01 / 21

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