Breaking news today on Sekulow is Democrats now have legislation to create a misinformation czar to push abortions. We'll talk about that today and the election on Sekulow. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow.
We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments for call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Hey, welcome to Sekulow.
We are taking your calls to 1-800-684-3110. We'll get into politics as well. Rick Ronell will be joining us today as he travels the country on behalf of candidates. Again, whether it's gubernatorial Senate candidates out west, northeast, southeast, there are races that are way too close to predict who is going to win. And this is why people are, millions of votes have already been cast. Probably tens of millions, maybe not 100 million, but tens of millions of votes have certainly been cast in elections already with early voting.
That doesn't even include necessarily absentee voting, which, again, it's tabulated in some states. But as we are, again, getting close to election day, we know that one of the issues Democrats still think, if they can get just enough people back on track and not worried about the economy, rising gas prices, inflation, and economic issues, that they can get them back on track with a certain group of voters on abortion. So we have House Democrats proposing, and this is always unique when Congress is trying to give the executive branch more power, but they are in this situation. They're proposing to fund a new position within the Department of Homeland, Department of Health and Human Services, which would monitor and respond to public misinformation about abortion access.
While DHS was not successful in getting forward their disinformation czar, Anita Jacobowitz, that has not deterred Democrats now in the House of Representatives. We have the legislation putting forward legislation to create a new czar of misinformation at HHS that will focus on abortion. And of course, as you can probably figure out right from there, we'll go after a lot of pro-life groups, including pro-life pregnancy centers. Well, that's actually where it's targeted. So the House resolution is HR 9254.
We have it up on the screen right now. It's entitled, this is the title, HHS Reproductive and Sexual Health Ombuds Act of 2022. And the legislation would allow for the appointment basically of a disinformation, misinformation czar about abortion access. But it goes beyond abortion access and talks about any information relating to reproductive and sexual health that is not evidence-based or medically accurate.
Let me tell you what this means. This means that they are going to target, which they've done on the state level, they're going to target the pregnancy resource centers. When we look at the legislation, we have done this, we've litigated this, and won, by the way, on the state level. Now they're trying to do it on the federal level. Yeah, and that's the exact language they use.
When they say misinformation, when they want medically accurate information, they're targeting the pregnancy resource centers because their claim has always been, and apparently will continue to be, that pregnancy resource centers provide misinformation and medically inaccurate information, which is just not true. So it's a target against the PRCs. And Jordan, they also are the referral authority here. So if HHS sees that there's a violation, the inspector general can investigate it and then refer it to the Federal Trade Commission. And that includes the ability then to have enforcement. So it would be enforced through the FTC, the Federal Trade Commission. But the Department of Justice also has a consumer fraud division.
So it could go there as well. The referral would be from the department at the inspector general. So it starts out at HHS.
It looks like it's more of like an, what it looks like initially is an information source where you could figure out all the abortion laws that are going to be different in each state. That's one thing with HHS. But then, as you said, there is this referral authority which gives it teeth.
So explain that more when we come back for the break. This is not just somebody gathering information. That's what they like you to believe and hope that that's it. I mean, that, that again, I think is bad. We don't need this person inside the federal government.
But on top of that, they're not just going to create the position without teeth. So, of course, they're going to have this referral power so that other branches of government, which have more enforcement power, can go after groups like pro-life pregnancy centers. We're taking your calls at 1-800-684-3110. If you're watching this show, share it with your friends and family. We'll be right back on Sekulow.
Welcome back to Sekulow. And again, if you're just joining us, let me just walk you through real briefly the misinformation czar that the Democrats would like to create. They, it's like they cannot lose this issue enough. And so you would think right before an election, maybe we don't announce another miss or disinformation czar. But because this one is tied directly to abortion, that would be their entire job.
That there'd be an abortion, misinformation czar, inside the health and human services. So this would be created by Congress. Again, the only way this happens, by the way, is in between, I think, the lame duck session of Congress, post-election. Is the whole government affairs team really looking at that to make sure it doesn't? Yes, we should fight this hard because you're going to have a lot of Democrats going out the door who've got nothing to lose on votes because they just got defeated, especially in the House. The Senate, again, it becomes an uphill battle to get this through. But what this would do is not just provide an information source on abortion.
That's part of it. But if they have authority then to refer this over to the Inspector General in HHS who can then give this information over to the Federal Trade Commission, that's got teeth. Also, as teeth, is the consumer fraud, like you were talking about, Department of Justice. It is new ways to go after pro-life pregnancy centers. That is their number one target right now that is, again, outside of just the legal battles they're fighting in the states. Their grassroots battle is to try and have liberal blue states shut these pro-life pregnancy centers down. And we've seen them try and do this time and time again.
But here they are doing it at the federal level. They want to put someone in charge of that effort who will be the leader to try and shut down the pro-life pregnancy centers. We're going to go right to the phones at 1-800-684-3110. If you want to talk to us on air, that's 1-800-684-3110.
Robert's calling for Maryland on line one. Hey, Robert. Hi.
How you doing, Jordan and Jay? Thank you for taking my call. I wanted to ask the both of you if you could give me more information on what this misinformation is.
Yes. Our office entitled entails and also will they have the capacity to use some of the spy apparatus of the National Security Agency as a weapon to further harass pregnancy, crisis pregnancy centers? So, Robert, here's what it says.
I'm going to read it for you. It says on this under Section 5, it says to provide the public with evidence-based and medically accurate information related to medical medication, abortions conducted outside formal medical settings. So, it's not just on the abortion centers themselves, but any of the abortion pills, to collect information regarding and to address reproductive and sexual misinformation being disseminated to the public.
That's number six. Circle that one because this idea of reproductive and sexual health information being disseminated to the public, of course, targets the crisis pregnancy centers. Then take it a step further and then it says, and this is what we got to really make sure why we defeat this bill, to coordinate with the FTC, if that's the Federal Trade Commission, they can coordinate, collect information and address consumer protection and data privacy concerns on the provision of any services relating to reproductive and sexual health. That's going to allow the FTC to get in on these pregnancy resource centers and go after them for what? It's going to be going after them, CC, for quote, misinformation. By the way, this comes on the heel of Friday with the FBI saying that misinformation, disinformation is now an election crime and that cheat sheet they have, which we've got a team of lawyers working on right now. Go ahead.
Right. So, misinformation, we've seen it where they even claim that, you know, ultrasound machines even give misinformation. So, what they can categorize as misinformation is really unending. But if you have any information that goes against the abortion narrative, that will absolutely be deemed misinformation. Medically inaccurate if you have information showing how abortions affect women, how they have more miscarriages after. That is medically accurate, proven information, but that is always deemed by the abortion distortion people that that's medically inaccurate. So, that section for sure, when they talk about misinformation, is directly targeted at pregnancy resource centers, absolutely, without doubt.
And the fact that they can inspect, investigate, and audit, that would be targeting these resource centers as well. We're taking more of your calls. 1-800-684-3110, 800-684-3110. Yeah, let's go right to the phones.
This is a good one. Let's go to John in California on line 3. Hey, John. Hey, thank you very much for taking my call.
I love what you guys do. So, we all know a fetus is developing a human being. I think they put themselves in a box with this medically accurate stuff because now they have to prove it's medically accurate. Their fetus isn't really a human being. They have to feel the, I mean, viability has been changing for years. It used to be they used to do surgery on babies without anesthesia because they didn't think they could feel pain. The science is showing earlier and earlier and earlier with this so-called viability line.
Yeah, but here's what you've got. When you've got an administration that's hostile to the life position that is protecting the very person you're talking about, the unborn child. What's going to happen? I mean, just under this scenario is they're going to say the information given out by the Pregnancy Resource Center is inaccurate. It's misleading and it's fraudulent.
And that was a position in the state of California. And that's been the position of the state of New York. And now they want to do is is authorize what basically weaponize now health and human services, which would have jurisdiction over all 50 states to start these investigations through their their misinformation czar. You understand what they're doing to the First Amendment.
They're turning it upside down. I mean, they're so concerned about shutting down conservative viewpoints, pro-life viewpoints that they will go to any extent. And now that extent includes in this case, which is just bizarre, to say the least, a misinformation czar to go after it's targeting the Pregnancy Resource Centers.
Absolutely. And they're not hiding it. I mean, they use the same language that we have seen and litigated, like you said, in New York, in California. We've litigated and we've won in these states when they target Pregnancy Resource Centers using the same information saying it's misinformation. It's medically inaccurate. It's confusing. It's misleading.
And of course, they will say anything that is against abortion falls into that category. Jordan, this is also a political move. I mean, this is coming. You said the only time they could get this to the lame duck session when they still have the house, because in all likelihood, come January, they're not going to have it. Right. I mean, this is a political move.
It is. I think it's being released today to try and, again, bring up the abortion issue on the campaign trail. And they're trying to, again, they're trying to get candidates, Republican candidates, they're trying to get to admit to, you know, what kind of restrictions would you support.
They try to make a huge deal out of that. And then on the left, they were just hoping this was going to be the issue that carried them over the top that made it where these races that were close, maybe tilted them in their favor. That has not been the case of the most recent polling is things are going into Republicans favor right now.
Now, here's where we're at. I mean, I think politically, we'll get more into politics a little bit later this show, but with so many votes already cast through early voting and, of course, absentee voting as well, but early voting, too. You have to then start wondering how much of these late breaking issues actually affect people getting to the polling place. Now, these elections are all close.
They say that, you know, Republicans are favors. We're going to go through, I mean, their favorite one in two points. So you have to be thinking that there's going to be this momentum on election day as well. And in the early voting where, you know, I think there's two things to look at. Did Republicans keep early in your state, keep early voting close?
Not necessarily you have to win it, but did they keep it close? And then they've got to blow out on election day. So under the voting. So you're right. I think the politics are showing that. But here's what this bill says.
I want to go back to it. Public outreach. The secretary shall take all appropriate actions to advise and engage with the public regarding the existing authorities and duties of the Ombudsman's office. And the Ombudsman's office is where this misinformation czar is going to be based. And that misinformation czar then targets the crisis pregnancy center, the pregnancy resource center, who then refers it to by the inspector general who does an investigation, which tries to put them out of business just by investigating, and then gets over to the Federal Trade Commission. So now you've got to fight the Federal Trade Commission, which we will stand with every crisis pregnancy center that's subject to this. If this bill were to get through. But you know, the way to win this is don't let this bill become law.
Absolutely. You know, we fought it before with the misinformation czar that they tried to put in. This is, again, or disinformation czar.
This is the same thing. It's a misinformation czar specifically targeted for abortion. And you know, what's amazing is they're trying to also they're definitely targeting pregnancy resource centers, but they're also going to tell you where you can get an abortion, where you can get funding for an abortion, how you can get medication abortions.
So they're going to just be pushing. It's an all out push to support and promote abortion wherever they can, however they can. If you're in a state that doesn't allow abortions or have restriction on abortion, they're going to give information on how to go elsewhere. Again, get funding, ask off.
They're going to provide all that information. Meanwhile, targeting and trying to shut down the pregnancy resource centers by saying that they provide misinformation, disinformation and medically inaccurate information. We represent, Jordan, crisis pregnancy centers and pregnancy resource centers, literally coast to coast. And we have for 40 years. So we got to defeat this legislation. That's why we have an Office of Government Affairs. That's also why we have ACLJ Action to engage these kind of issues at this level.
Yeah, absolutely. And we want your support at ACLJ.org. You can also join ACLJ Action to become a member of ACLJ Action.
It's a $25 donation. That's at ACLJAction.org. And again, this is how we are engaging these issues at a multi-level fight, whether it's the Washington D.C. federal side, whether it's happening in your states, whether it's a vote, whether it's a legislative battle at the state level, federal level, or, of course, at the ACLJ, all of the legal battles. I think more and more we're seeing from some of these state efforts is that courts are going to have a role to play, but it's not going to be necessarily the federal courts now. It's state courts that are going to be having this new role to play in the post-dobs world. We're ready for it. We're already engaged in it at the ACLJ. We can do more with more support at ACLJ.org. Donate today if you can. We'll be right back. All right.
Welcome back to Secchia. One thing, too, if you are watching the broadcast, if you're like on Rumble right now, there's a plus button right below the video that you're watching, the screen that you're watching. And I encourage you to hit the plus button. That's kind of like their share feature right now.
Again, we've got over 1,000 of you watching there at Rumble. So we'll know if people are listening and clicking that button. That's all you got to do. It won't bring up anything else. You literally just click the plus button.
It's like thumbs up on YouTube or clicking the share button on Facebook. So we encourage you to do that on all those different platforms, by the way, so people are getting this information like on the abortions are. Then again, I think we want to make sure you're not just getting three minutes on that, but you got two full segments to get you updated on where that stands. There's also, you know, we're talking so much about Dobbs, the post-Dobbs world, that it's almost tough to imagine Supreme Court's been back for a month. You know, we did a preview about some of the more high-profile cases, but there is one that was split up today to two different oral arguments on affirmative action that is making a lot of news because it could be the first major shift in about a little more than a decade on affirmative action at the court. It's on race-based admissions, and our friend and colleague Patrick Strawbridge... At a very different angle than people.
Yeah, at a very different angle because it's primarily affecting Asian students, actually. Harry's going to talk about this in a moment. But our friend Patrick Strawbridge from the constable law firm argued the case.
Today he's arguing still right now as we're live. But what's interesting in this is I never forget the words of Chief Justice John Roberts when he said the way to end race discrimination in admissions is to stop discriminating on race and admissions. But that's not...it's kind of the opposite of actually what's happening. Harry, what is at stake here and what was going on at these universities in particular? Well, a lot was going on, but first and foremost, these two schools seek to protect their ranking and the selectivity of their admission process while simultaneously improving the diversity of admissions on the basis of race. And so if you focus, for instance, on merit, this naturally favors Asian American students.
Why? Because the average Asian American student in the United States studies 13 hours per week in elementary and secondary school versus five and a half hours for non-Asian students. So that would mean that Harvard and the University of North Carolina would be overwhelmed with a large number of Asian American students.
I don't have a problem with it. That is what merit is all about. But universities have a problem with that because when they talk about diversity, they mean diversity of ethnicities. And if Asian students are overrepresented by... then that will mean that non-Asian students will be underrepresented. So both the University of North Carolina and Harvard today seek to defend a policy which, in my judgment, violates the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution.
And I think both Harvard and North Carolina, this is based on my assessment of reading the briefs, they will both lose, and in my judgment, they ought to lose. In other words, we ought to encourage each and every American to take advantage of a meritorious system, study hard, work hard, and we should move away from the approach offered, which is so-called holistic admissions. And holistic admissions mean that we hide the discrimination from the eyes of the court.
So let's talk about what we're talking about here. You've got students that are applying that are qualified. But because... this is like reverse discrimination. It is reverse discrimination. But because they're qualifications, and they're within a particular ethnic class or racial-based group, and there's too many of those students that would qualify, they're out.
Yeah, I mean, I think this is when you realize that these kind of policies have run their course. But when a policy to help diversify and make sure that students who are underrepresented or represented gets to a point where it's now being used to exclude a minority, in the United States, and again, I think that we've all gotten to the point where, especially these schools that we're talking about here, UNC and Harvard, these are pretty woke places, let's put it mildly, to say the least. So they're not like... Again, the Supreme Court even saying you can't have this policy, I think what it just does is just levels the playing field for another predominantly minority group who's applying for these positions. You understand what's happening here, folks, is Asian American students are being discriminated against because of this policy, like in record numbers. We're not talking about from overseas, we're talking about Asian Americans. American students. These are American students that are associated with a particular class or race. These are Asian students that are Americans.
Yeah, I think the two hardest ways to get it right now, I think number one is probably if you're Asian. Number two is if you're a white male. Those are two things in these schools, and they're doing it on paper. It's like, oh, this is part of our consideration.
This is like a active policy. So it's, again, interesting here because you have one private institution, one state institution. Some states have barred the use of affirmative action from their state universities, but that's only a minority of states.
And again, they both receive federal funds, so they both, you know, the federal government and the Supreme Court has oversight here. People are predicting that this is going to be the end of affirmative action. I was going to ask you, Harry, what do you think is the – what's the likely outcome? What is the outcome that the plaintiffs are looking for, petitioners are looking for here? Well, basically the invalidation of the current admissions process and simply focus on merit. But both institutions recognizing that a focus on merit would actually, in practice, favor Asian-American students. They are arguing against merit while simultaneously trying to maintain their selectivity ranking in U.S. News by focusing on merit. So they only want a limited number of Asian-American students, and the argument that they have settled on is if we get a sufficiently diverse class of students ethnically, this leads to – or this produces truth.
Well, the reality is if they were truly interested in truth, they should increase the number of conservative students that they're admitting to their classes, because it is the clash between liberals and conservatives that produces truth, not the clash between ethnicities. So we argued in our brief. Here's our argument.
I'm going to read it to you, because I think it sets up what this case is about. Time, benefits, or burdens, which would be admissions, to racial labels is race discrimination. Racial categories are arbitrary and ultimately incoherent. And then we also say the history of government racial classification of individuals is not one that should be imitated. So you understand what this is.
It's reverse race discrimination, which we think is wrong, because we merit-based. All right, the first half hour of the broadcast is gone, which is hard to believe, but we've got Rick Grenell coming up in the next half hour. We're going to do some analysis. Are you ready for this one, folks? How about this? China police stations in major cities in the United States.
You can't make this up. Police stations from China in the United States operating as police information centers. We're going to talk about that with Rick. We've got other things to talk about, and then at the last segment of the broadcast, we're doing this, we'll do this every day now, is give you information on where we are on these various races.
Don't forget to work the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org. Secular Brothers podcast today? Yeah, new podcast today. And again, there's a lot to talk about. With all the politics going on, we're going to get to some of that on the show today on Secular. We'll do more on the Secular Brothers podcast.
Check that out later this afternoon. We'll be right back on Secular. Keeping you informed and engaged now more than ever. This is Secular. And now your host, Jordan Secular.
All right, welcome back to Secular. We are taking your calls to 1-800-684-3110. That's 1-800-684-3110. We've updated you on the information involving HHS. But it's really, this is not the Biden administration taking the action. I'm sure they're in support of it. But it is the House Democrats as they cling to their last likely couple of months of power to pass legislation. They're still active, even if there's major Republican gains, including taking back the House, even taking back the Senate.
They still have a time period to act. So they're going to likely try and push some pretty extreme things through. We talked about this. Misinformations are on abortion that they will try to put through. So we got that out today on the broadcast as well. Again, I updated you on a case of the U.S. Supreme Court that ACLJ has involved in with affirmative action. Really, again, a lot of people looking at that saying that could be the end of that when it comes to higher education. We're going to talk about some of the four issues going on. Rick Rinell is about to join us. We'll get into politics as well.
That update you on kind of where the races stand, what we're hearing, what Rick's hearing as well. But this issue involving China, overseas from China, these police stations, that they're trying to say, there's one in Chinatown in New York, for instance, and they're trying to say, oh, these are places to go if you need help with your visa. There's consulates for that. There's embassies for that to go.
And we have those across the world too. But these are specific police centers to track their foreign nationals, their nationals' activity in a foreign land. So they're spying on their citizens in the United States. Yeah, they're spying on us through their embassies and consulates. Of course, we know that. But they're also going after, of course, their own citizens.
But they're operating these facilities in the United States of America and basically getting a free pass. So, you know, we're going to really, I really want to get into this. We do have a couple of calls that are still coming in on what we talked about earlier on with this.
Misinformations are now on the abortion issue. Let's go ahead and take Judy out of Oregon on line one. Go ahead, Judy.
Hi. I was just curious because I completely trust you guys. If you say it, it's true.
I don't question it. On my email, I got a notification in capital letters that said, infanticide just legalized in California. Is that true? Yes, because they included, on their definition of abortion, they included that it can be perinatal, not just prenatal.
Perinatal is post-deliberate. And they give you a hundred reasons why they're doing it. But the end reason is they don't want any of these investigated.
So it's horrific. It's what the former governor of Virginia tried to do years ago. It was like three or four years ago, which ended up costing him, the Democrats for the Virginia seat, that and what they did to parents. And the fact is that we're on top of it.
I mean, we filed comments on it. But in California, the first line of defense is going to be the pregnancy resource centers. But let me tell you, if this legislation, which we're going to fight aggressively against, we're to get through Jordan.
And again, this plays right into the political season two. That's how they would get those closed down through the Federal Trade Commission. I mean, I cannot imagine the words coming out of my mouth are that the FTC will be investigating crisis pregnancy centers and pregnancy resource centers. But that's exactly what this legislation authorizes.
Yeah, it did. And in late September of 2022, it was AB 2223, which legalized some forms of infanticide. As we say on our website, we have this full resources up for you at aclj.org-sport-slash-abortion. You can look up your state.
It's got a map of the country so you can click on every state and know what's going on, whether there's legislative battles, whether there's initiatives that are being voted on, or just the honest truth about where things stand right now. And that's where they use that perinatal period, which is up to 28 days after birth, which is why we use the terminology infanticide. They intentionally use that language.
It included it there. In these states, we knew that was the case. We said there's going to be states that enact very radical pro-abortion legislation and that we were going to see that in the bluest of blue states. And we are, which is why it's a long-term campaign in those states to talk to the people, the voters, the elected officials as well.
But we're not giving up. We've been unleashed in a post-ops world to do that work. Support the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org. That's ACLJ.org. Again, we don't have this at a federal level anymore in our country, and that's a great thing. But we've got to fight state by state now to save lives.
That's ACLJ.org. We'll be right back. All right. Welcome back to Secchiel Rick Rinnell, our Senior Advisor for Foreign Policy and National Security is joining us.
We're going to talk politics in a minute with Rick. But we want to talk about these overseas, which means here in our country, Chinese police stations being utilized to track Chinese nationals in the United States and in other countries. There's any reports of 50 to 100 of these around the world. We know they're operating here in the United States. There's one in Chinatown in New York City, and they try to describe, oh, this is a place like if you run into trouble in the United States, you need help with a visa. There's already consulates and consular services available, plenty of those by the Chinese. Every major city.
In every major city. And then, of course, in Washington, they have their embassy. But there's also the connection of, of course, the pressure that can be put on these nationals to take actions adverse to the United States because they've got family at home in China.
And they're grabbing the kids. You can utilize this whole new group of people who are here for no nefarious reason and put pressure on them to spy, put pressure on them to, again, take advantage of the unique situations they may find themselves in. So 230,000 Chinese that were in the United States have been sent back in the last 15 months, ripped by the Chinese government. The idea, and you were the director, acting director of national intelligence, that the Chinese have a, quote, police station offering information or whatever they're doing, which is going to be nefarious.
We know that. In the United States, particularly in New York, is, is really troubling. I mean, and in other countries where they're doing it, the reaction of their intelligence officials, like your counterparts, have been very strong. They're saying that, for instance, in the Netherlands, they've, they've opened up an investigation on this and they call them, we're investigating the activities of, this is, this is in the Netherlands, of these so-called police centers that have opened up.
How serious could this be? Look, I think I've said it a million times here. Russia's a problem, but China is a crisis. And no one should be surprised in the United States that the Communist Party of China has enforcement mechanisms that they utilize and leverage not only in the United States through these enforcement groups, maybe you call them police stations, but it's also happening on our universities. And it's happening through the funding that Chinese businessmen who are connected to the Chinese Communist Party are doing in our universities and then creating technology. Look, they're, they're funding these, this research, creating technology and then demanding that these people come back to China. They're literally taking advantage of our open system. We should demand that our politicians do something.
They cannot just sit by. The Trump administration began to really focus on this and then COVID hit. And we really were in a predicament because of all of the pressure that the Chinese government was going to put on us. But our politicians, Washington, D.C., the Biden administration needs to get very focused on this.
I'm going to follow that up, Rick, if I can. And that is, you know, when you, and you mentioned the COVID situation. So that kind of derailed a lot of things. And if you look at the, what, what the impact of that has been. And I'm hopeful that once the Republicans are back in power, we're going to find out where this originated and who's, what entity or government entity is responsible. But we, you mentioned the college campuses and this is a gigantic problem. Chinese resource centers are calling them or cultural centers of what they call them on the, on the college campuses. There is so much money coming from these countries that, from that country to the United States educational institution, including our Ivy league schools, or maybe especially our Ivy league schools, that it's changing the way in which these schools then will teach and address what is, as you said, the greatest threat potential to the United States, which is China.
I got to be very careful as the former DNI on, on how I talk about this next subject. But let me just generically give you an example of what they do, Jay. The Chinese community of, of communists all throughout China are utilizing every leverage possible. They did this through PPE. They, they got to our local politicians to say, you can get PPE if you talk positively about us.
If you talk negatively about us, we're going to cut you off. But we also know that the universities will go to engineering students, American engineering students, and they'll say, hey, you're a smart person. Can you teach a course for an hour and we'll pay you $1,000? And our university engineers are taking these little gigs. That little gig then turns into, hey, can you do a four hour seminar? That turns into, can you come to Beijing for a weekend?
The price goes from $1,000 to $5,000 to we'll pay you $25,000 if you come here. Suddenly now our engineering students are giving away our intellect, our intellectual policies, and they're giving it to the communist government and the communist government is leveraging them saying, you've now given us state secrets. You've got to give us more. This is a real attack. It is an attack.
That's the perfect word to use. It's an attack on our democracy and our transparency and our willingness to be capitalists. Yeah, and I think it's that multi-level approach that we have to be so concerned about is that it starts off with these small, you know, these police stations that, oh, it's about our own citizens, not about Americans, don't worry about that. And yet this is, you can turn an entire group of people who didn't come from nefarious reasons, even to the United States, into spies by putting the pressure on them to say, you know what, we know where you are. We know where your family is and you don't give us this information from the university or whatever you're studying or wherever you work. Your family is going to be in trouble. So we know this is a real problem. It's internationally a problem. I think that's good news that the rest of the world is starting to also pay attention to this. I do want to get to Rick, some politics as well. We are looking at, of course, again, it's, things feel like they're trending in Republican, the Republican way, which is always great when you're about a week out from election day as we are.
But I know you're out on the trail and out West to in places like Arizona, where again, it feels good. But if you look at the polls and again, you don't be too much waiting polls, but none of them are showing any kind of blowout. So it is still as we're, you know, if you got these seven days to work, turn out talking to friends and family, getting people actually to vote is a huge deal right now, because again, you kind of almost toss the polls out. We know these races are very close, which means it turned out will determine who wins.
Yeah, it's really a good point. I know we're close because the New York Times just wrote a story that said in all four of the key Senate races, Republicans are slightly behind, which means to tell you we're way ahead. And so what we really have to be able to do right now is concentrate on, as you say, Jordan, get out the vote. People need to vote.
You need to realize that this is a red wave, but it only can be a red wave tsunami if you get out and vote and drag 10 people to the polls. I've been all over Arizona and Nevada. I'm going again this week. I'll be there starting on Tuesday.
And I have to say that it feels really good on the ground. It feels like it's going to be a big win for Adam Laxalt, for Blake Masters, for Kerry Lake, for Abe Homiday. But we have to continue pushing all the way to the finish line. Remember, Republicans vote on Election Day. Democrats are voting early. And so when you see some of the very early numbers that drop right when the polls close, that's counting the Democrats.
And so we're probably going to be behind as Republicans in the very beginning, but that's because they haven't quite counted the votes on Election Day. You know, Rick, you mentioned Abe Homiday, who's a friend of ours. And of course, he's running for the Arizona Attorney General slot. And I keep reminding people, the governor important, senators important, congressmen important, but let me tell you something. The state attorney general and the school board are probably the two most impactful to the individual citizens of a state. And I'm glad you mentioned Abe, who I think will be a great attorney general without a doubt.
He's a really smart guy and a very good lawyer. But people overlook those races. And the other thing I don't want people to do, Rick, is this idea, oh, there's all this voter irregularity, my vote doesn't count. I've been harping on that. We've got to get people out to vote, period. Yeah, for sure.
That's incredibly important. We've made some fixes. We still got work to do. But the system should be a little bit better. But you've got to get out and overpower the polls and make sure that every single person votes. I just want to add one thing because I do know on the west, I've been concentrating on the west. Sigal Chaddah is running for attorney general in Nevada. Your point about getting really good AGs. This is an Israeli-American.
She's amazing. And George Soros is going after both Abe Homiday in Arizona. And he's going after Sigal Chaddah in Nevada. That's because these two young people are going to absolutely make a difference. He doesn't want to see it.
You should try to get both of those will on the air. I mean, Abe content. It's such a good reminder because if you watch where the Soros money goes, they figure that out. What you just said, they've long figured out the DA's.
Right down to the district attorney. The AGs races. They realize, yeah, it's good. Those big races. Everybody cares about the Senate, the flashy, the gubernatorial race. But the AGs, the DA's, the school boards. They're putting national money into those. By the way, back on the Chinese situation really quick, Rick, they're trying to impact school boards too.
We know that even in the local high schools and elementary schools. For sure. We got to keep concentrating on it. That's why we've shut down the consulate in Houston under the Trump administration. Exactly. You understand that the consulate in Houston was shut down because of activities just like this. Rick, thanks as always. You know, folks at the ACLJ, we've got people like Rick Ronell as part of our team.
I mean, think about this for a moment. The former ambassador of Germany, former acting director of national intelligence. These are cabinet members, folks.
Your support of the ACLJ makes all that happen at ACLJ.org. Back for the last segment in your calls in a moment. We're just talking to Rick about turnout.
So this final segment of the broadcast, what I want to use is just an example. When you look at these wave elections and what you hope for as conservatives, of course, a red wave throughout the country. But it is not to say that you're going to win all these races by 10 or 15 points. You're certainly not going into election day. As Rick said, you're going into election day in a lot of, this should motivate you to get out to vote. In many states, you're going into election day a little down because of the early voting.
Now, the question is how far down. I think Republicans are likely doing a better job this cycle. I've seen some numbers coming out of some states where it's just very close. And if you can keep it close as a Republican going to election day, you almost certainly are going to win the race in these states.
But none of the polls show anybody really running away with it. The only person who's got a really, there's only two who've got leads into like the six plus number. And that's Kip in Georgia and DeSantis in Florida. And the other ones are all of you, like the Marcus Romero.
Rubio's also is kind of, again, I would say that's not, that one is- Friending in the right direction. Yes. So it's getting up, you know, he's a head by five. Not double digits though.
No. So when we talk about wave, it's more about what's when you combine it all. It's not saying that these candidates are walking away with it so easily. In fact, most of the candidates you support right now, there are more Democrat votes that have already been cast.
That's what I wanted to go over. So, you know, when they say there's this record early turnout, that does not usually bode well for Republicans. Early voting does not usually plus Republicans. So that means day of voting needs to be very, very strong. The other thing that Jordan said, which is a hundred percent correct.
I think people really ignore this. When we say a wave election, we're talking about at the end of the day, how many Republicans are in the House and Senate versus Democrats? If they were racist, did you win?
Yeah. But those races are going to be, look, we all think Adam Laxhall is going to be the next senator from Nevada, but you know what he'll probably win by? Two percent. Which means if you don't show up and vote, guess what? He loses. Same thing in Georgia. Hershel Walker has got a good shot at being the Senate candidate.
But I think he's a one point seven. And if you looked at the real clear politics average. And behind is some polls. And you have to win by a majority there.
So we'll walk through some. So in Arizona right now, we were talking about, again, the race there with Blake Masters and Mark Kelly. Again, they're saying the Arizona projection by real clear politics is that it'll be a GOP pickup. But there's not been a single poll.
Showing Blake Masters ahead. Now, there has been a lot of polls showing Kelly Lake, who's running for governor there ahead. So that, of course, can play into it as well. When we go to Nevada, Laxhall, in the best poll for him, he's got a four point lead. And the average of polls, a one point lead. That is turnout. Right. That is completely turnout. It's not even issues at this point or surprise. It's just getting people out to vote, including early voting.
Yeah. Now, Pennsylvania, we had Dr. Oz was on our broadcast in the real clear average poll. This is the poll averages. Fetterman is still up one point five. Now we have the New York Times poll that was done on and completed on ten twenty six.
October twenty six has excuse me. Insider Advantage has Oz up plus three. But New York Times, CNN poll has Fetterman plus five.
So what Jordan is saying is one hundred percent correct. It's going to matter at the end of the day when this counting is done and maybe two days till we know how many people actually voted. That's what's going to make the difference. And then when you look at the total results, then you can say, wow, this was a big win for the Republicans or Jesus, the Democrats surprised everybody and pulled these seats out. But we're talking and we're not done yet.
These are very the swimmers of margins. Georgia, the question is, does anyone get to 50 percent? Explain to everybody how that works. So in Georgia, you have to get to a 50 percent to win as a U.S. Senate candidate. So you could, Hershel Walker could win. You know, there's always an independent running, things like that. And so you could win, but you get under like four, you know, you got forty nine point four.
That's not enough. So you go into a runoff and the runoff happens in these runoffs in Georgia. You've done the runoff be December six. And so, again, the run, whoever wins the runoff wins the race.
You know, there's there's no bar. So in that one month, what happens? Well, I mean, if Joe Biden will be down there, Barack Obama would be down. I mean, they'll have everybody down there. Yes, it would be like a Presidential campaign in one state.
And probably, you know, you could spend a hundred million, two or three hundred million dollars in a month. So the media is hoping that they get that. The media is probably hoping that they get that. Republicans are hoping that this is the kind of thing we're talking about a wave.
You get that extra point five percent out and you don't have to go through that process. And the best thing for Republicans would be in Georgia. Oh, absolutely. Especially if the balance of power came down to it. Like we'll know well before December six how some of these states that take some time to figure out. Let's say Georgia, you know, had to go to runoff so we didn't know. But Arizona is a win and Nevada is a win. And if the GOP holds. And Arizona and the other seats hold.
Pennsylvania, like Ohio, these places. Yeah, I think. 51-49 at that point. Still is going to be worth. Oh, I think so. A huge race.
It may not be as huge. But talk about the dollars that'll be spent in that month. Oh, at these days with the kind of money that's being spent. I mean it would be everybody that had any resources left over dump them all into that race.
On both sides. So we'd be outspent likely. Republicans would likely be outspent. Unless the Democrats and their donors were just so down on how their resources failed them.
But, you know, they're pretty smart too. They understand that you win some, you lose some. If they've got a shot at it again, they're going to play. They've showed that in Georgia, if they could get to these special elections, that could be helpful to them. Hopefully we don't get there, get out the vote in Georgia. And again.
What about North Carolina? People were concerned about that. But that looks like Bud's going to be plus four.
It does. Again, these kind of races where you've got to pick and choose resources, right? So if you're trending that way and you've been trending that way, it looks like Republicans, it's going to be a hold there for Republicans at Burr who's retiring. But that's not a state that's traditionally just, you know, GOP anymore. Wisconsin, again, they're predicting a hold with Senator Johnson. Yep. But again, it's a plus three lead.
So just to- He was very helpful to us during the impeachment. Just to encourage you all. I mean, you've got to get out the vote wherever you are because these leads can be overtaken by turnout. Jordan, even North Carolina, Bud's up by four. Yeah. Well, that's like J.D. Vance is up too now. Dwight is up by like 20.
Yeah. Explain the gap on that. In the same thing with Georgia- Because Tim Ryan has tried to run a very misleading campaign. He's tried to run like he is this moderate, almost, you know, not a Democrat type. And yet he's got a hundred percent voting record with Democrats on abortion, on anti-gun.
I mean, the whole list goes on. But he's tried to- he talks differently, I guess is the way. And so he's- J.D. Vance has done a good job, I think, exposing that. But because he's new to the scene, and so he's been defining a lifetime politician in Tim Ryan, I think that explains some of the closest there. But it looks, again, like it's going their way.
I think they've got another event this week with Fox News is hosting between the two of them. People said Colorado was getting closer than people thought, but you still think that's out of a not-probably-employed- Well, that's like how Washington State, Colorado- right. I mean, some of these are going to come in the last minute, and you have to- what different campaign arms have to look at. Where does the money deployment come from? Like when they say Mitch McConnell just put in $30 million. I mean, I know the answer to this, but I want you to say- So he has PACs, leadership PACs. And then he- multiple that are affiliated with him.
And C4 is $5.27, the list goes on. Then, of course, you have the official, like Rick Scott is in charge of the NRSC. Yeah. And so he's overseeing getting out the money that comes through there and trying to- so almost though, like everybody, like our friend's Mike Pompeo.
A lot of our friends who are like Elise Tefonic, too. Yep. She's got her own PACs, and they're going around, and like Mike has Cav Pack, and it's going around, and it gets money into candidates as well. So that's what they're talking about there. But then you've got the big, huge money donors.
Yep. That go to the $5.27 groups, what they call dark money. And Republicans have done a better job this cycle of trying to match that Soros kind of money. But it's hard to match Soros with money. Yeah, you have to have a lot of Peter Fields. Or a handful of them. But Peter Fields has been spending in places like Ohio.
In the Billions. More information tomorrow. That's why you watch this broadcast. Support the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ. Or secularbrothers.com for the podcast.
Whisper: small.en / 2022-11-09 13:54:44 / 2022-11-09 14:06:55 / 12