Latest / The Ben Ferguson Podcast / Why We Should Designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a Terrorist Organization, plus IRS Concludes Churches Can Endorse Candidates & NYT Reports Biden Unaware of Many Autopen Pardons

Transcript

Why We Should Designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a Terrorist Organization, plus IRS Concludes Churches Can Endorse Candidates & NYT Reports Biden Unaware of Many Autopen Pardons · The Ben Ferguson Podcast

0:01
Speaker 1: Welcome in his verdict with Center, Ted Kruz Ben Ferguson
0:04
Speaker 1: with you. It's nice to have you, and we've got
0:07
Speaker 1: some very interesting legislation that you are heading up that
0:11
Speaker 1: is making waves.
0:13
Speaker 2: Fill people in on what you're wanting to do well.
0:16
Speaker 3: This week, I introduced legislation to designate the Muslim Brotherhood
0:20
Speaker 3: as a terrorist organization. This is a fight I've been
0:23
Speaker 3: fighting for over a decade. I think the Muslim Brotherhood
0:26
Speaker 3: clearly is a terrorist organization. It is profoundly dangerous, and
0:30
Speaker 3: I think we are closer right now to victory on
0:32
Speaker 3: this issue than we ever have been. We're going to
0:35
Speaker 3: do a deep dive, explain the background, what the issues are,
0:39
Speaker 3: why we're close to victory, and what that would mean.
0:42
Speaker 3: We're also going to talk about an amazing development, a
0:44
Speaker 3: really important development, which is the IRS has now said
0:48
Speaker 3: explicitly that churches and pastors can endorse political candidates. That
0:56
Speaker 3: is a big, big deal. For a long time, there
0:59
Speaker 3: was legislation known as the Johnson Amendment that was interpreted
1:03
Speaker 3: as stripping the ability of pastors and churches to express
1:06
Speaker 3: their views on politics. The IRS entered into a consent
1:10
Speaker 3: agreement that now makes clear churches and pastors can can
1:14
Speaker 3: tell their congregations exactly what they think about politics.
1:18
Speaker 4: That's a big, big deal.
1:20
Speaker 3: And finally, The New York Times, in a shocking expose,
1:25
Speaker 3: looked at the Biden autopen scandal and they reported that
1:31
Speaker 3: from for a significant portion of the autopenned pardons that
1:35
Speaker 3: Joe Biden signed, that he was not individually aware of
1:40
Speaker 3: who it was that was getting pardoned. That is incredibly consequential.
1:44
Speaker 3: It means as a legal matter, those pardons are null
1:48
Speaker 3: and void. We're going to explain all of that right now.
1:51
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's a really interesting story. We're going to have
1:53
Speaker 1: all those details for you in just a moment. Let
1:55
Speaker 1: me also just say many of you may be listening
1:57
Speaker 1: to the show for the first time fighting this podcasts
2:00
Speaker 1: on another feed, and if you are, don't forget to
2:03
Speaker 1: hit that subscribe or auto download button, as we actually
2:06
Speaker 1: do the show three days a week, so makes you
2:09
Speaker 1: do that.
2:10
Speaker 4: All right?
2:10
Speaker 1: I love when I get to take a moment and
2:12
Speaker 1: tell you about something that I genuinely think you're going
2:16
Speaker 1: to love. And my good friends Buck Sexton and Klay Travis,
2:20
Speaker 1: they are coffee aficionados and they decided to start a company.
2:25
Speaker 2: It is called Krockett Coffee.
2:27
Speaker 1: It is maybe the best cup of coffee I've ever had, period,
2:31
Speaker 1: And every morning I start my day now with Krockett Coffee.
2:35
Speaker 2: It is small batch.
2:37
Speaker 1: They do this on purpose by experts who love the
2:40
Speaker 1: taste of great coffee.
2:41
Speaker 2: It's also roasted in our nation's heartland.
2:44
Speaker 1: And then the best part is it's delivered to you
2:48
Speaker 1: at your home or your office. Now, if you love
2:51
Speaker 1: starting your day with a cup of coffee, why not
2:53
Speaker 1: get the best you can get in a small batch
2:56
Speaker 1: the way they designed it to be done.
2:58
Speaker 2: At Krockett Coffee.
3:00
Speaker 1: You get to choose between their dark roast, their mild roast.
3:03
Speaker 1: They're light roast. They even have a decap version. You
3:06
Speaker 1: get to choose between fresh ground or whole bean or
3:09
Speaker 1: k cups whatever it is you want. They also have
3:12
Speaker 1: mushroom coffee and the positive benefits that come with enjoying
3:15
Speaker 1: that each day.
3:16
Speaker 2: They are now producing that as well.
3:18
Speaker 1: Now, let me save you money so you can try
3:20
Speaker 1: Crockett Coffee and it's gonna save you a bunch of cash.
3:22
Speaker 1: A right, go to Crocketcoffee dot com and if you
3:26
Speaker 1: use my name Ben, you get twenty percent off your
3:29
Speaker 1: first order. All right, that's Crocketcoffee dot com and my
3:33
Speaker 1: name Ben as your promo code. You're gonna get twenty
3:36
Speaker 1: percent off. Whether it's k cups with the whole being
3:39
Speaker 1: and the fresh ground, just up your coffee game. And
3:42
Speaker 1: it's also really well priced. That's what you're gonna love.
3:45
Speaker 1: You just gonna upgrade to a better cup of coffee
3:48
Speaker 1: for probably what you're spending right now. So check it
3:50
Speaker 1: out Crockett Coffee dot Com. Use my name Ben as
3:53
Speaker 1: your promo code. You get twenty percent off. All right, Senata,
3:56
Speaker 1: you said that twenty This has been something I should say,
3:59
Speaker 1: for well over a decade you have been working on
4:03
Speaker 1: and I am shocked why there is so much pushback.
4:07
Speaker 1: Give a little background on the Muslim Brotherhood. Let's start
4:10
Speaker 1: there for people that may not realize what this global
4:13
Speaker 1: organization is, what they do, and why you think that
4:18
Speaker 1: they need to be included and designated as a terrorist organization.
4:22
Speaker 3: Sure, the Muslim Brotherhood is a global Islamist violent organization.
4:29
Speaker 3: It was founded in nineteen twenty eight in Egypt. It
4:33
Speaker 3: was a fringe group for the first few decades, and
4:36
Speaker 3: then it grew dramatically inside of Egypt and then it
4:39
Speaker 3: spread beyond. The Muslim Brotherhood has branches and countries and
4:43
Speaker 3: territories all over the world, and they are openly committed
4:48
Speaker 3: to seizing control of those countries and seizing control of
4:52
Speaker 3: those territories. They explicitly intend to use violent jihad to
5:00
Speaker 3: overthrow non Islamist governments. During the Obama administration, they did.
5:07
Speaker 3: They seized control of Egypt. Mohammed Morci and the Muslim
5:12
Speaker 3: Brotherhood seized control until they were ultimately overthrown by the
5:15
Speaker 3: Egyptian army. By the way, when when the Muslim Brotherhood
5:19
Speaker 3: took over Egypt, the Obama administration cheered them on. And
5:25
Speaker 3: how do we know that the Muslim Brotherhood supports terrorism
5:28
Speaker 3: because several of their branches are explicit terrorist organizations. Among
5:36
Speaker 3: those is Hamas, which everyone listening to this podcast knows about.
5:41
Speaker 4: Hamas.
5:42
Speaker 3: Yeah, Hamas is one of the wings of the Muslim Brotherhood.
5:47
Speaker 3: They also include other groups that folks may not have
5:51
Speaker 3: heard about, like Hassim and Leewa al Thawrah, both of
5:58
Speaker 3: which the State Departman says have been associated with the
6:01
Speaker 3: Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, and they are branches that have already
6:06
Speaker 3: been formally designated as terrorist groups. Other Brotherhood branches are
6:11
Speaker 3: committing terrorism right now, but they haven't yet been formally designated.
6:16
Speaker 3: Just a few weeks ago, the Jordanian government disrupted attacks
6:20
Speaker 3: being planned by Brotherhood members, and police raided the Islamic
6:26
Speaker 3: Action Front, which is the Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood branch.
6:32
Speaker 2: You hear that.
6:33
Speaker 1: And then the question that I think some of people
6:35
Speaker 1: listening and I'm thinking my head right now, is Okay,
6:39
Speaker 1: if there is such a long history, why did it
6:42
Speaker 1: take so long for us to even get to the
6:43
Speaker 1: point they're at right now? If it's been this clear
6:46
Speaker 1: that their terrorist organization? And then the second part is,
6:50
Speaker 1: then why in the past, even after whether it was
6:53
Speaker 1: nine to eleven or other attacks that we've seen around
6:55
Speaker 1: the world, why haven't they already been listened as a
6:57
Speaker 1: terrorist organization.
6:59
Speaker 3: Well, so, it's a complicated story, and it basically comes
7:02
Speaker 3: down to the messed up politics inside the American Democrat Party.
7:08
Speaker 3: A bunch of our allies have already designated the entire
7:12
Speaker 3: Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization in.
7:15
Speaker 4: The Middle East.
7:16
Speaker 3: Bahrain has done so, Egypt has done so, Jordan has
7:21
Speaker 3: done so, Saudi Arabia has done so. The UAE has
7:24
Speaker 3: done so in Europe. Austria has designated the Muslim Brotherhood
7:29
Speaker 3: as a haarrist organization. There's a bill right now in
7:31
Speaker 3: Germany to designate it, and French intelligence has described the
7:35
Speaker 3: Muslim Brotherhood as quote a threat to national cohesion. British
7:40
Speaker 3: officials say the Brotherhood is right now under surveillance under
7:46
Speaker 3: their anti extremism laws. So the question is why is
7:51
Speaker 3: America lagging behind? And I'll tell you We've done it.
7:55
Speaker 3: I've been pushing to do this for over a decade.
8:00
Speaker 3: You're in the one hundred and nineteenth Congress right now.
8:02
Speaker 3: I introduced versions of this bill in the one hundred
8:05
Speaker 3: and fourteenth Congress in twenty fifteen, in the one hundred
8:08
Speaker 3: and fifteenth Congress in twenty seventeen, and the one hundred
8:11
Speaker 3: and sixteenth Congress in twenty twenty, and in the one
8:15
Speaker 3: hundred and seventeenth Congress in twenty twenty one. And the
8:20
Speaker 3: reason that it hasn't gone anywhere is that Democrats oppose it. Now,
8:27
Speaker 3: it seems weird. Why would a why would progressives embrace
8:32
Speaker 3: a fundamentalist Islamist jihadist organization which is openly and brazenly
8:38
Speaker 3: against rights for women, openly and brazenly against rights for homosexuals.
8:44
Speaker 3: But to the left, they do it because the Muslim
8:47
Speaker 3: Brotherhood is also anti American and it wants to see
8:51
Speaker 3: Israel destroyed. And there is a significant chunk of today's
8:55
Speaker 3: left that celebrates with the anti Israel hatred, that celebrates
9:01
Speaker 3: with Amas, and and that celebrates attacks on America.
9:06
Speaker 1: If I remember correctly, the Muslim Brotherhood was also if
9:09
Speaker 1: we go back to Obama's years, somewhat normalized as well.
9:13
Speaker 2: Right.
9:14
Speaker 3: Yeah, look when when the Muslim Brotherhood was running Egypt.
9:18
Speaker 3: When when when they they took it over, Mohammed Morsey
9:21
Speaker 3: was was there? You may remember there were a million
9:23
Speaker 3: people that showed up in the streets of Cairo protesting
9:26
Speaker 3: against the Muslim Brotherhood because the people of Egypt did
9:29
Speaker 3: not want to live under Jahadis, They did not want
9:32
Speaker 3: to live under enforced Sharia law. And at the time,
9:36
Speaker 3: it was amazing. There were signs that you could see
9:41
Speaker 3: in this crowd of a million Egyptians protesting, signs that
9:45
Speaker 3: said Obama supports the Muslim Brotherhood.
9:48
Speaker 4: Uh.
9:48
Speaker 3: The ambassador, Obama's ambassador at the time to Egypt was
9:51
Speaker 3: a woman named Ann Patterson. There were signs pictures of
9:54
Speaker 3: her saying Ann Patterson supports Mohammed Morsey. The Obama administration
9:59
Speaker 3: leaned in aggressively supporting the Brotherhood. And and in fact,
10:05
Speaker 3: when when Alceci was the current leader of of of
10:08
Speaker 3: Egypt took over, when the army took over, the Obama
10:11
Speaker 3: administration was vocally against that. Now Alcci is an ally
10:15
Speaker 3: of America. Alceci is locking up Jihadis and radical Islamic
10:19
Speaker 3: terrorists who want to murder us. And bizarrely, the Obama
10:23
Speaker 3: administration got very angry with them, withhold weapons from them,
10:27
Speaker 3: put pressure on them because they didn't like that that
10:31
Speaker 3: that the current Egyptian government was standing up to the
10:34
Speaker 3: Muslim Brotherhood. And if you fast forward to the Biden administration,
10:38
Speaker 3: the Biden administration basically restored the old Obama policies of
10:43
Speaker 3: embracing the Muslim Brotherhood. And and not only that, they
10:48
Speaker 3: sent hundreds of millions of dollars maybe even billions of
10:50
Speaker 3: dollars UH to Gaza, knowing that Gaza was controlled by
10:55
Speaker 3: Hamas and knowing that it would go directly into the
10:57
Speaker 3: hands of Hamas.
10:59
Speaker 2: Yeah, and that.
10:59
Speaker 1: Is when I look at this. And then you go
11:02
Speaker 1: back and you say, okay, all this is happening. You
11:05
Speaker 1: announced that you're doing this bill several weeks ago, in fact,
11:08
Speaker 1: you announced it on AX and I remember in that
11:11
Speaker 1: post that you said you were introducing a modernized version
11:14
Speaker 1: of your bill.
11:15
Speaker 2: Explain exactly what that means.
11:18
Speaker 1: How is this one different, and what changes were made
11:22
Speaker 1: and why they're so important? And could this help this
11:25
Speaker 1: possibly become something that is bipartisan or is there no
11:28
Speaker 1: way that's going to happen.
11:29
Speaker 3: Well, it might, and actually it is bipartisan right now
11:34
Speaker 3: in the House. So I've introduced the bill in the
11:38
Speaker 3: Senate and I have a total of five senators on
11:41
Speaker 3: my bill right now.
11:43
Speaker 4: They're all Republican.
11:44
Speaker 3: I am trying to convince a Democrat senator to support it.
11:48
Speaker 3: In the House, the same bill is being led by
11:51
Speaker 3: two representatives from Florida, Mario Diaz Billard, a Republican, a
11:55
Speaker 3: fellow Cuban American, a good friend, and Jared Moskovitz. And
11:59
Speaker 3: Jared is a Democrat. So in the House we have
12:01
Speaker 3: Democrat supporters bipartisan support. That is encouraging. But you asked
12:09
Speaker 3: how we modernize the bill in the past, both in
12:13
Speaker 3: Congress and in the Trump forty five White House. We
12:17
Speaker 3: took a top down approach to listing the entire Brotherhood,
12:22
Speaker 3: and the idea was to designate the global Muslim Brotherhood
12:25
Speaker 3: and then all of its branches. Now, the challenge and
12:28
Speaker 3: some of the pushback we got is that not every
12:31
Speaker 3: one of the Brotherhood branches is currently violent, and so
12:36
Speaker 3: each of the branches doesn't necessarily meet the criteria for designation,
12:40
Speaker 3: and that was an argument critics used to try to
12:43
Speaker 3: block the designation. This new bill instead uses a bottoms
12:48
Speaker 3: up approach. We start by identifying all the branches that
12:54
Speaker 3: the Muslim Brotherhood supports that are terrorist groups or that
12:57
Speaker 3: commit terrorism, and then we designate the entire Brotherhood for
13:03
Speaker 3: that support. In other words, we build up with what
13:05
Speaker 3: is explicitly and indisputably terrorist, and then we designate the
13:09
Speaker 3: Brotherhood as a whole for supporting those terrorist groups.
13:14
Speaker 1: So do you think this approach will actually work moving forward?
13:18
Speaker 1: Is this something that you say is going to be
13:21
Speaker 1: more palatable for people and also easier sale.
13:25
Speaker 4: Well, look, I think it could work.
13:27
Speaker 3: We use the exact same approach during the Trump forty
13:30
Speaker 3: five administration to list Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp. That
13:36
Speaker 3: the IRGC in twenty seventeen, and Congress mandated that action
13:41
Speaker 3: through legislation, and then the Treasury Department implemented our mandate
13:46
Speaker 3: by listing the IRGC for supporting one of its branches,
13:50
Speaker 3: the IRGC Quood's Force, which is undoubtedly a terrorist organization.
13:56
Speaker 4: So it worked.
13:58
Speaker 3: And to get technical for sex, there are three different
14:01
Speaker 3: ways to list terrorist groups. Congress can do it through
14:07
Speaker 3: the Anti Terrorism Act of nineteen eighty seven, which is
14:09
Speaker 3: how the PLO is listed. The State Department can do
14:12
Speaker 3: it by labeling a group as a foreign Terrorist organization,
14:17
Speaker 3: or the Treasury Department can do it by labeling a
14:19
Speaker 3: group what is called a specially designated Global Terrorist. My
14:24
Speaker 3: bill does all three, and so it's belts and suspenders
14:29
Speaker 3: on the global Muslim Brotherhood. And that results in immediate
14:35
Speaker 3: and devastating sanctions, and it gives law enforcement greater tools
14:40
Speaker 3: to go after not just the Muslim Brotherhood, but those
14:42
Speaker 3: who are financially supporting it. Now you asked, can it happen?
14:48
Speaker 3: It can? We have one Democrat in the House. I'm
14:52
Speaker 3: hoping we will get one or more Democrats in the Senate.
14:54
Speaker 3: We don't right now. I've had conversations today with Democrats
14:58
Speaker 3: trying to get them on board. There are two paths
15:02
Speaker 3: for this to go forward. One, I think it would
15:05
Speaker 3: make a very good sense for us to vote on
15:07
Speaker 3: it on the Senate floor, for John Thune to bring
15:10
Speaker 3: it up and make senators vote. Most of the Democrats
15:13
Speaker 3: are going to vote no, because, for whatever reason, the
15:17
Speaker 3: Democrat ideology. These are the same Democrats that are terrified
15:21
Speaker 3: to announce the anti Israel antisemitic protests on campuses. These
15:26
Speaker 3: are the same Democrats that are really frightened of the
15:28
Speaker 3: pro Hamas wing of their party, and the pro Hamas wing,
15:31
Speaker 3: as we talked about, Hamas is explicitly an arm of
15:35
Speaker 3: the Muslim brotherhood. So most of the Democrats would be
15:38
Speaker 3: a no. I think it'd be valuable to get them
15:40
Speaker 3: on record, force them to vote. But I'll tell you
15:44
Speaker 3: what I think the real path the success will be
15:47
Speaker 3: is that we're going to lead the fight in the Senate.
15:49
Speaker 3: I hope we tee this up for a vote, and
15:53
Speaker 3: if the Democrats block it, which in all likelihood they will,
15:56
Speaker 3: they have.
15:57
Speaker 4: For a decade.
15:59
Speaker 3: What I think is going to have and is I
16:00
Speaker 3: think the President is going to do this through an
16:02
Speaker 3: executive order and I'm certainly urging President Trump to designate
16:06
Speaker 3: the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization through an executive order,
16:10
Speaker 3: and I think the fight that I'm leading in the
16:13
Speaker 3: Senate helps build momentum for the President to step in
16:18
Speaker 3: and make this designation.
16:20
Speaker 4: I think it's going to happen. I think we're going
16:21
Speaker 4: to see it happen this term.
16:23
Speaker 1: Final question on this for people that are listening, This
16:25
Speaker 1: is why I love doing the show.
16:27
Speaker 2: People want to get involved. What can they do?
16:30
Speaker 1: Should they be calling their Congress and their centaters, and
16:32
Speaker 1: should they be reaching out to the White House as well?
16:35
Speaker 3: Yes, yes, yes, absolutely speak out. Call your senator, call
16:39
Speaker 3: your house member, tell them to support my legislation designating
16:43
Speaker 3: the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. Get on social media,
16:48
Speaker 3: speak out, use your voice, and by the way, share
16:50
Speaker 3: this podcast. This podcast lays out all the facts and
16:53
Speaker 3: so if you want people to know about this, share
16:56
Speaker 3: this podcast with others so that they can know the
16:59
Speaker 3: facts and build momentum. Because really, what we're trying to
17:02
Speaker 3: do through this fight is build momentum that will encourage
17:06
Speaker 3: the White House to designate the Muslim Brotherhood, which would
17:09
Speaker 3: be a big, big deal if and when we get
17:12
Speaker 3: this done.
17:12
Speaker 1: Yeah, we're going to keep you updated on this because
17:14
Speaker 1: I mean this could be something that could take obviously
17:16
Speaker 1: weeks or months, right, I mean that's a realistic timeline, absolutely,
17:20
Speaker 1: So we'll keep you update on it. But I love
17:22
Speaker 1: that we got to start with this. This is something
17:24
Speaker 1: you may hear nowhere else. Make sure you share the podcast.
17:27
Speaker 3: All right.
17:27
Speaker 1: I want to move on to this other issue center,
17:29
Speaker 1: and that is the IRAS is now saying churches can
17:33
Speaker 1: endorse candidates. I want to be clear. When I first
17:36
Speaker 1: saw this headline, I'm like, hold on. Many on the
17:40
Speaker 1: Democrat side have been doing this.
17:42
Speaker 3: For years, and I know it's a complete double standard.
17:46
Speaker 3: You see Democrats that they go and campaign in frequently
17:51
Speaker 3: African American churches and pastors and endorse Democrats openly and brazenly.
17:57
Speaker 4: They have for a long time.
17:59
Speaker 3: Nevertheless, that there is a provision of the United States Code.
18:03
Speaker 3: It's known as the Johnson Amendment, and it is part
18:06
Speaker 3: of of twenty six USC. Section five oh one c
18:09
Speaker 3: three that threatens to strip nonprofits of their tax exempt
18:13
Speaker 3: status should they quote participate in or intervene in any
18:20
Speaker 3: political campaign. And for many years, pastors and churches particularly
18:26
Speaker 3: those right of center, have been afraid to be explicit
18:30
Speaker 3: about politics because the consequence they feared was that was
18:37
Speaker 3: that their tax exempt status would be stripped away. Now,
18:40
Speaker 3: from the day the Johnson Amendment was passed, no church
18:43
Speaker 3: has ever had its tax exempt status stripped for speaking
18:47
Speaker 3: out under about politics. But nonetheless, a lot of pastors
18:53
Speaker 3: self censor and are afraid to say say their own
18:58
Speaker 3: views about about what they think the Bible teaches about
19:01
Speaker 3: issues of public policy, about issues of politics. And just
19:07
Speaker 3: last week on July seventh, the IRS agreed in a
19:10
Speaker 3: court filing that churches can now endorse political candidates at
19:15
Speaker 3: the pulpit, and the IRS created an exception to the
19:19
Speaker 3: Johnson Amendment. The IRS reasoned that churches endorsing political candidates
19:28
Speaker 3: resembles a family discussion concerning candidates, and therefore communications from
19:33
Speaker 3: houses of worship to its congregation on matters of faith
19:37
Speaker 3: involving electoral politics do not run a foul of the
19:41
Speaker 3: Johnson Amendment.
19:42
Speaker 1: This is one of those moments where I actually think
19:45
Speaker 1: this is going to just be massive to level the
19:47
Speaker 1: playing field, as you mentioned a moment ago, because it's
19:50
Speaker 1: been happening on the left for so long and there
19:53
Speaker 1: have been a lot of, like you said, pastors, pastors
19:55
Speaker 1: that I know personally that we're afraid to talk about
19:57
Speaker 1: politics or even the election day outside of like hey,
20:01
Speaker 1: remember to vote, a registered to vote, but like not
20:03
Speaker 1: getting into the issues, not getting into the candidates. And
20:06
Speaker 1: this is I think great that many Christians, in many churches,
20:11
Speaker 1: many pastors are now going to be freed up to
20:13
Speaker 1: actually preach what they believe the Bible says about biblical
20:16
Speaker 1: issues that are in the political realm. Abortion is a
20:19
Speaker 1: great example of that.
20:21
Speaker 3: Yeah, and and and this was teed up. This came
20:24
Speaker 3: through litigation, and it was a lawsuit National Religious Broadcasters
20:29
Speaker 3: versus long Billy long As is the commissioner of the
20:32
Speaker 3: i r S and National Religious Broadcasters sued the i
20:37
Speaker 3: r S and and they argue that the Johnson Amendment
20:39
Speaker 3: violated the church's First Amendment rights. And they filed the
20:44
Speaker 3: case in the Eastern District of Texas. They were before
20:46
Speaker 3: a Judge Cam Barker, who I helped select.
20:50
Speaker 4: To be on the bench.
20:51
Speaker 3: He's a strong principled conservative and a constitutionalist. And they
20:58
Speaker 3: were litigating before Judge Barker in Texas, and the IRS
21:02
Speaker 3: decided to settle this matter, and the IRS settled this matter.
21:06
Speaker 3: And this is one of the advantages of winning elections.
21:08
Speaker 3: When you win elections, you control the executive branch. And
21:11
Speaker 3: when you control the executive branch, you can decide to
21:14
Speaker 3: settle litigation. And so the IRS signed a joint consent
21:18
Speaker 3: judgment that expressly stipulates churches may endorse candidates or promote
21:26
Speaker 3: political issues without risking their taxes m status. And here's
21:29
Speaker 3: what the Irs said. When churches address political matters quote
21:34
Speaker 3: through the lens of religious faith, it neither participates nor
21:40
Speaker 3: intervenes in a political campaign. Remember those are the words
21:43
Speaker 3: of the Johnson Amendment. Participate or intervene in a political
21:46
Speaker 3: campaign within the ordinary meaning of those words, rather than
21:51
Speaker 3: take part or interfere with the course of a campaign.
21:55
Speaker 3: Churches that endorse political candidates simply engage in a family discussion. Therefore,
22:01
Speaker 3: when properly interpreted, communications from a house of worship to
22:05
Speaker 3: its congregation on matters of faith involving electoral politics quote,
22:11
Speaker 3: do not run a foul of the Johnson Amendment. That
22:15
Speaker 3: is a big deal, and it will free up the
22:18
Speaker 3: ability for for religious leaders, for pastors to to speak
22:22
Speaker 3: their heart and to speak the truth to the congregation
22:25
Speaker 3: about what they believe the Bible teaches and and and
22:29
Speaker 3: and how that impacts issues in public policy. This is
22:32
Speaker 3: a major major change.
22:34
Speaker 2: Yeah.
22:34
Speaker 1: It also going to have a huge impact on local elections.
22:37
Speaker 1: And I think that's one of the biggest outcomes that
22:40
Speaker 1: could be positive from this, is that pastors really are
22:42
Speaker 1: able to talk about who they believe is best for
22:45
Speaker 1: their cities, uh and for their community and bring it
22:48
Speaker 1: back to the local aspect of it. And it'll be
22:50
Speaker 1: well see how this plays out as well.
22:52
Speaker 3: Yeah, Ben, And let me tell you a story from
22:55
Speaker 3: from a number of years ago. A number of years ago,
22:58
Speaker 3: the the huge Houston mayor who was a left wing Democrat,
23:05
Speaker 3: and the Houston City attorney subpoenaed the sermon notes for
23:12
Speaker 3: five pastors in Houston. And these were pastors in Houston
23:16
Speaker 3: who were preaching on marriage and preaching on same sex marriage.
23:21
Speaker 3: And the left wing Democrat mayor did not like what
23:23
Speaker 3: these pastors were preaching about marriage and biblical marriage, and
23:27
Speaker 3: so the city decided we're going to subpoena your sermon
23:30
Speaker 3: notes and go after you. And when that happened, I
23:35
Speaker 3: was very.
23:35
Speaker 4: Dismayed about that.
23:36
Speaker 3: I've spent most of my adult life fighting to defend
23:40
Speaker 3: religious liberty, and the idea of the city going.
23:42
Speaker 4: After pastors was horrific.
23:44
Speaker 3: And so I picked up the phone and I called
23:47
Speaker 3: my pastor and I called him. I said, Pastor, have
23:50
Speaker 3: you seen what's happened with a subpoena to the five
23:52
Speaker 3: pastors in Houston? And he said, oh, yeah, I've definitely
23:56
Speaker 3: seen it. He said, I've been praying about it all morning.
24:00
Speaker 3: And I said, well, look, I'm praying about it as well,
24:03
Speaker 3: and I'm very dismayed. I want us to stand up
24:06
Speaker 3: and fight it. And I told him, I said, listen.
24:10
Speaker 4: I want to organize a rally.
24:12
Speaker 3: I want to bring pastors together to speak out against this,
24:14
Speaker 3: to defend the religious liberty of pastors in our hometown.
24:19
Speaker 3: And I said, I'd like to have a rally of
24:21
Speaker 3: pastors tomorrow, Thursday at eleven am. And I was calling
24:28
Speaker 3: to see would you be willing to host that rally
24:31
Speaker 3: at the church. And then my pastor begins laughing and
24:36
Speaker 3: he says, ted, you know, the Bible tells us that
24:40
Speaker 3: God has ordered our steps.
24:42
Speaker 4: Long before we have any awareness of it.
24:46
Speaker 3: My pastor said, a month ago, God laid on my
24:50
Speaker 3: heart to pray for our city.
24:52
Speaker 4: He said.
24:53
Speaker 3: A month ago, I reached out to pastors across the
24:55
Speaker 3: city and invited them to come to my office to
24:58
Speaker 3: pray for the city of Houston. He said, I've got
25:02
Speaker 3: fifty pastors coming to my office tomorrow Thursday at ten am.
25:09
Speaker 2: That's incredible.
25:10
Speaker 3: And we both just kind of stopped. And I don't
25:13
Speaker 3: know if you ever heard the phrase of godwink, but
25:15
Speaker 3: it kind of kind of felt like, you know, God
25:17
Speaker 3: was winking at us then. And so the next day
25:21
Speaker 3: I arrived at his office at ten am, I joined
25:24
Speaker 3: the pastors. We spent an hour on our knees praying
25:26
Speaker 3: for a city, and then we went out in a rally.
25:29
Speaker 3: And it was fantastic. If you look at you had
25:33
Speaker 3: pastors across denominations. You had pastors across racial lines of
25:39
Speaker 3: white pastors, Black pastors, Hispanic pastors, Asian pastors. Heck, you
25:45
Speaker 3: even had first Baptists and second Baptist and you know
25:48
Speaker 3: well that that is not easy. But they were there
25:52
Speaker 3: and we had complete unity. And one of the things
25:56
Speaker 3: I said at that rally, I said, Caesar has no
26:02
Speaker 3: jurisdiction over the pulpit. And when usubpoena one pastor. You
26:08
Speaker 3: subpoena every pastor, and I'll tell you, Ben, it was amazing.
26:12
Speaker 3: There was so much light and heat that came from
26:16
Speaker 3: that press conference. It drove enormous attention and drove enormous
26:20
Speaker 3: coverage in the news and in the media that within
26:23
Speaker 3: twenty four hours, the city of Houston withdrew it subpoenas
26:27
Speaker 3: and just surrendered. That was the power of pastors standing
26:31
Speaker 3: up saying we will not submit, and it made a
26:35
Speaker 3: real difference in the city of Houston.
26:38
Speaker 1: Finally, Sender, I want to move to another issue, and
26:41
Speaker 1: it is really exploited over the last twenty four hours,
26:45
Speaker 1: and that is new information that we now have on
26:49
Speaker 1: Biden's use of the auto pen. It is a scandal
26:53
Speaker 1: that I don't think people understand just how big it
26:57
Speaker 1: is and what has now been at mass to when
27:00
Speaker 1: it comes the autopen usage and Joe Biden maybe not
27:03
Speaker 1: knowing it was being used at all.
27:05
Speaker 4: Well.
27:06
Speaker 3: So The New York Times on July thirteenth wrote a
27:08
Speaker 3: major story that says Biden says he made the clemency
27:12
Speaker 3: decisions that were recorded with autopen, and you and I
27:16
Speaker 3: talked about in an earlier podcast that the Department of
27:19
Speaker 3: Justice has an opinion that it issued a number of
27:21
Speaker 3: years ago the Office Legal Counsel about whether you can
27:25
Speaker 3: use an autopen for presidential signatures, whether that's a presidential
27:29
Speaker 3: signature on an executive order, a presidential signature on a
27:34
Speaker 3: law that is being signed into law, or a presidential
27:38
Speaker 3: signature on a pardon. And what the Department of Justice
27:41
Speaker 3: has concluded is that you can use an autopen for
27:44
Speaker 3: any of those. But the test is the authority is
27:48
Speaker 3: the president's and the presidents alone, So the president cannot
27:52
Speaker 3: delegate that authority to anyone else. The president has to
27:58
Speaker 3: make the decision. And what the Department of Justice explained,
28:00
Speaker 3: and this was years ago, is that the operative legal
28:06
Speaker 3: test is did the president make the individual determination to
28:11
Speaker 3: sign the executive order, to sign the specific piece of
28:14
Speaker 3: legislation to grant the pardon? And if the president made
28:17
Speaker 3: that individualized determination, then you can use an autopen to
28:24
Speaker 3: reflect that, But the president has to be the decider.
28:28
Speaker 4: And so that's the legal standard. But what the New.
28:32
Speaker 3: York Times reported was, quote, mister Biden did not individually
28:40
Speaker 3: approve each name for the categorical pardons that applied to
28:44
Speaker 3: large numbers of people. He and AIDS confirmed, rather, after
28:51
Speaker 3: extensive discussion of different possible criteria, he signed off on
28:55
Speaker 3: the standards he wanted to be used to determine which
28:58
Speaker 3: convicts would qualify for a reduction and sentence. Even after
29:04
Speaker 3: mister Biden made that decision, one former AID said, the
29:07
Speaker 3: Bureau of Prisons kept providing additional information about specific inmates,
29:13
Speaker 3: resulting in small changes to the list. Rather than ask
29:17
Speaker 3: mister Biden to keep signing revised versions, his staff waited
29:21
Speaker 3: and then ran the final version through the autopen, which
29:25
Speaker 3: they saw as a routine procedure. The AID said that
29:29
Speaker 3: is stunning because under the Department of Justice guidance, those
29:33
Speaker 3: pardons aren't valid. If the President didn't decide I am
29:37
Speaker 3: going to pardon Ben Ferguson. If he didn't know that,
29:44
Speaker 3: that would not be sufficient. And the New York Times
29:47
Speaker 3: the consequence of this listen. I think the Trump White
29:52
Speaker 3: House needs to go through the records and look they
29:54
Speaker 3: have the records because they're now in charge of the
29:56
Speaker 3: White House, and examine what specifically has a paper trail
30:00
Speaker 3: that shows Biden signed off on the specific action, and
30:05
Speaker 3: those that that there is no paper trail, that there
30:08
Speaker 3: is no evidence in the New York Times is reporting
30:10
Speaker 3: they're admitting, Oh yeah, they're broad categories. He didn't know
30:12
Speaker 3: about it all. He didn't know the specific people. Those
30:14
Speaker 3: are null and void. Those have no legal force. And
30:18
Speaker 3: my recommendation to Pambondi in the Department of Justice is
30:21
Speaker 3: they should look specifically at the most vulnerable and and
30:26
Speaker 3: and devise and implement a legal challenge to challenge these
30:32
Speaker 3: and to make clear that an unelected aid running an
30:36
Speaker 3: auto pen does not have the power to grant a
30:39
Speaker 3: pardon under the United States Constitution.
30:41
Speaker 1: So, now that we have this information, the big question
30:45
Speaker 1: is when do these pardons, what happens next, how do
30:49
Speaker 1: you go about undoing this?
30:51
Speaker 2: And how big of a legal fight is that going
30:53
Speaker 2: to be?
30:55
Speaker 3: Well, look, it's going to be a termination number one
30:57
Speaker 3: of the White House and the White House Council assessing
30:59
Speaker 3: what are the record show? What records did they keep
31:03
Speaker 3: of Biden's signing off. We know that he personally signed
31:05
Speaker 3: the pardon for Hunter Biden, so that one he knew
31:09
Speaker 3: about and he did so.
31:10
Speaker 2: So that one is is that also very telling?
31:14
Speaker 4: Yes?
31:15
Speaker 1: And is that going to be used in many ways
31:17
Speaker 1: as an example of like dud he had no idea
31:19
Speaker 1: what was going on over here. The ones he did
31:21
Speaker 1: know about, he knew, he damned it well better signed
31:23
Speaker 1: them himself. His son is a great example of that.
31:26
Speaker 1: Does that actually hurt the argument for Biden? All the
31:29
Speaker 1: others are.
31:29
Speaker 3: Valid potentially, although they are arguing that they discussed it
31:34
Speaker 3: with him and he approved, and so some of the
31:35
Speaker 3: high profile ones, like you look at Anthony Fauci who
31:40
Speaker 3: was pardoned, they're maintaining they discussed it with Biden and
31:43
Speaker 3: Biden said he wanted to he wanted to pardon him.
31:49
Speaker 3: If that's true, if he made the decision and directed
31:51
Speaker 3: them to sign a pardon, then under the Department of
31:54
Speaker 3: Justice's OLC memorandum, that is valid. The question is are
32:01
Speaker 3: there ones, And according to the New York Times, there
32:03
Speaker 3: are a lot that Biden did not know and did
32:08
Speaker 3: not approve the specific individual receiving the pardon, And if
32:12
Speaker 3: he didn't know and didn't approve, then it's not a
32:14
Speaker 3: valid part.
32:15
Speaker 1: So when you look at the timeline of this moving forward,
32:18
Speaker 1: and some of these could be very significant, one that
32:20
Speaker 1: comes to mind is doctor Anthony Fauci, for example, could
32:24
Speaker 1: this could I mean open up a whole lot of
32:28
Speaker 1: can of worms on a lot of different issues.
32:31
Speaker 4: It could. It depends what so what I believe.
32:34
Speaker 3: I believe the White House should go through systematically through
32:36
Speaker 3: the records and see what the records demonstrate, and the
32:39
Speaker 3: Department of Justice should pick starting with a test case
32:43
Speaker 3: to go challenge this the look for a fact pattern
32:48
Speaker 3: in which there is the clearest absence of any approval
32:52
Speaker 3: from from the actual president and go challenge those in particular.
32:58
Speaker 1: It's going to be interesting. We're to cover all of it.
33:00
Speaker 1: Don't forget. We do the show Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
33:04
Speaker 1: Hit that subscriber auto download button and make sure you
33:08
Speaker 1: don't miss as we continue to keep updated on these
33:10
Speaker 1: exact issues moving forward.
33:12
Speaker 2: The Senator and I will see you back here on
33:14
Speaker 2: Friday morning.