Preborn has helped save 38,000 babies this year
>> Walker Wildmon: I want you to picture this. Her name is Kayla. She is 17, alone, terrified and pregnant, sitting in a clinic, tears blurring, thinking abortion is her only option until she was offered a free ultrasound, paid for by a hero just like you. The moment Kayla heard her baby's heartbeat, the decision was made. And today, her little baby boy, Gabriel, is thriving because preborn walked with Kayla every step of the way. Now multiply that by 38,000. That's how many babies preborn has helped save just this year. And along with saving the babies, mothers are being counseled with practical and spiritual advice to make motherhood possible. But here's the most important thing you will hear today. The goal is to save 70,000 by the end of the year. And they can't do it without us. Every $28 provides that ultrasound that changes everything. Will you be the reason the next Kayla chooses life? The reason Gabriel fulfills his destiny. To donate, dial £250 and say the keyword baby. That's £250, baby. Or donate [email protected] afr that's preborn.com afr.
>> Donald Trump: Ned.
>> Walker Wildmon: We inform religious freedom is about people of faith being able to live out their faith, live out their convictions no matter where they are.
>> Monty Bennett: We equip sacred honor is the courage to speak truth to live out your free speech.
>> Walker Wildmon: We also rejoice in our sufferings because we know that suffering produces perseverance, perseverance, character, and character hope.
Walker Wildmon: Do not weary yourself to gain wealth
This is at the Corps on American Family Radio. Welcome to the Corps here on American Family Radio. I'm Walker Wildmon. Glad to be with you on this brand new edition of the program. The the show's hosted each week by myself and Rick Green and we appreciate and value you tuning in to AFR as always, we do, want to remind you to subscribe to the podcast. Wherever you listen to podcasts, just type in the name of the program at the core and, click the subscribe button. The show will be queued up in your library each and every day. We are in, Proverbs 23 this week, reading verse four and verse five. Do not weary yourself to gain wealth. Cease from your consideration of it. When you set your eyes on it, it is gone. For wealth certainly makes itself wings like an eagle that flies toward the heaven. So don't weary yourself with gaining wealth because just as quickly as you earn it or gain, will flee from you. And, you notice here it doesn't say the scripture. We don't need to misunderstand the scripture or misinterpret the scripture. this isn't a disincentive of hard work. This isn't saying that wealth is evil. Money is evil. No, it's saying don't be consumed by it. That word weary is a very specific word being used that is used when someone has become consumed with something. So don't weary yourself. It doesn't say, don't try to gain wealth or don't gain wealth. It says, don't weary yourself with it. And that's a very specific word, very specific definition that we need to understand so we don't misinterpret and misapply scripture, and scriptural teachings on money and hard work, because those are also hard work is a biblical concept that God wants us to work hard. He wants us to earn honest gains. but with that being said, we don't need to weary ourselves or become consumed with the pursuit of. Of wealth.
There's an active shooter situation at a Minnesota Catholic school today
All right, let's, turn our attention to some of the news of the day. There's a, active shooter situation, ah, today in Minneapolis in Minnesota. And it was at a Catholic school. Don't know a whole lot of details, but it's beginning to. To be, reported that the alleged shooter was a young, male who identified as female, identified as transgender. there's reports of manifesto, type of rhetoric, ah, against, Christianity, against President Trump, against Catholics. all of that's still beginning to come out, but there's some early, early enough reports that we can see what this is looking like. It's going to be after the investigation is concluded. And Bobby, these young people being radicalized, these young disturbed people, very sad, very tragic from an eternal and human perspective. Even the shooters, the fact that, that young people are being introduced to such chaos and such, carnage in their lives that they have to. They feel like they need to resort to violence and death. It's just very sad. But, but, Bobby, these. These numbers of young people, mostly minors that are also transgender, they're dealing with gender dysphoria coming from broken households, probably been abused in the past. these numbers of active shooters fitting that profile are just beginning to be like an every month occurrence.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah, it's been. The vast majority of those numbers have been exactly that.
>> Walker Wildmon: The Nashville shooter.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yes, that's the first one that came to my mind as well. Same thing with the manifesto. again, mass media. Oh, we need to hide the manifesto. FBI. We need to hide the manifesto. To what end?
>> Walker Wildmon: To what end? Right, right.
>> Walker Wildmon: so all you're doing is protecting these people. Who definitely have issues and need, to be treated accordingly. And, the only thing we can do is pray for their families at this point.
>> Walker Wildmon: That's right.
>> Walker Wildmon: Not only victims. I'm talking about the shooters themselves.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah. Because they're coming from very broken lives, very broken homes, to your point. And, folks, this is indicative. Yes, there is. There is. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of Christian hatred out there. There's a lot of anti Christian hatred out there. and entertainment and media are doing their part to mock Christianity, to belittle Christianity, to call us haters and bigots for having religious convictions, having biblical convictions. But along with that, we're also facilitating m, a culture of, familial and marital chaos. we're having children raised by single parents. Dads are mia, moms are mia, Kids are being thrown into the foster system, the adoption system. it's pure carnage. And then our. Our society and our government says, yeah, we don't really know what marriage is. And it's not really a male and a female. Maybe it can be something else. Who knows? and so then we're throwing kids into situations with two dudes, two women, two women and one dude. You've, got divorce where we're passing kids off every other weekend. No consistency in their life. And so I could go on and on about these terrible situations, but.
>> Monty Bennett: What.
>> Walker Wildmon: You do, folks, is this is why I want to hammer home that adult decisions affect more than just adults. And this is the narrative that we have to debunk, is that, well, what two adults do is none of your business, or the government shouldn't have a say in what two adults do. Well, now, that's not true. That's not true. because what two adults do ends up affecting other people. Especially when we get into the marriage and family conversation. so very, sad situation going on in Minnesota. We'll continue to track it. but we have to ensure that we have a society and a culture that raises and treats kids, with, dignity, with respect, with a moral compass, with. With truth, with compassion, with love, and totally flee away from this culture and society of lawlessness, chaos, and no moral barriers, no moral teachings. We have to teach young people right from wrong. We have to teach them that they were created in the image of God. He has a purpose for them, has a purpose for their life. how he created them is his intent, his design. You know, we gotta totally flee from this gender dysphoria and transgender embracing that we've been doing. And, Point kids in the right direction. So, that's what's going on in Minnesota.
Lisa Cook on Federal Reserve board accused of allegedly committing mortgage fraud
I want to spend the rest of this, segment talking about, the, this Federal Reserve. And we'll pick up some of this in the last segment. But this Federal Reserve governor, Lisa Cook, who was appointed by Biden, has been, has had a criminal referral sent over to the Department of Justice alleging mortgage fraud for the simple fact that she allegedly, this federal, board of governor, member. She allegedly completed a mortgage application in two different states and claimed both of the residences as her primary residence. Which you can't do that. You have to pick, you have to pick your primary residence and then your other would be secondary, which doesn't come with as much of a favorable, mortgage rate and other, other things that aren't, aren't incentivized. And so this is a big deal though, to be, to be on the Federal Reserve as a governor and allegedly committing mortgage fraud. That's a big deal. That's a big deal. and so this was, was sent over to the doj. President Trump in return, sent a letter terminating Lisa Cook from the, from the board, from the Federal Reserve. And of course she's, she's fighting it. She's, she's not disputing it. She hasn't said once that I didn't commit mortgage fraud. She won't actually won't address the allegation, which is interesting. but she says she's gonna fight it. She's gonna take President Trump to court. That's what she said and that's what Jerome Powell said. Here, here's the stark truth. Here's the reality. The reality is, is that President Trump can terminate any article, two employee. Any article two, federal worker. And if you say he can't, then you're saying that this, that the Federal Reserve is a fourth branch of government because the president can't terminate a federal judge. The president cannot terminate, a congressman or a senator because that's a co. Equal branch of government. Separation of powers. This is government, 101 class. So this, this assertion out there that President Trump can't fire Lisa Cook because why? Well, they don't say so. Well, the Fed's independent. Well, okay, that, what does independent mean? Well, they, they should make their decisions that are non political. Okay, well that's not legally independent. Maybe, that's, maybe their decision making should be independent. But as a legal matter, the president nominates governors to serve on the Federal Reserve and the, and the chairman. And if he, if he can appoint them, then the logical conclusion is he can terminate their employment. All, right. Then we get into the debate about four calls and we can debate that all day long. What that means. It's actually not specifically, outlined in many of these statutes. It's left open ended. But nonetheless, we have to, we have to debunk this notion that President Trump can't fire a federal employee. The President cannot fire a federal employee. If that is true, which it's not. But if that is true, as a matter of fact, then we have created more branches of government than are outlined in the Constitution. Because right now, and for the past 250 years, we've had three, we've had the judiciary, we've had the executive and we've had the legislative, the three branches of government. And the President is the chief executive of the executive branch, commander in chief president. And so anybody who suggests that the President can't fire Lisa Cook is suggesting this is a different branch of government, a co, equal, separate branch of government that we haven't had in 250 years, but now we do, we've got a fourth branch of government. And then this notion that he can't fire people at the DOJ, or he can't fire a special counsel, or you just go down all the laundry list of all the positions that people have claimed the President can't fire that are not within the three branches are, there within the executive branch. They're suggesting we've got another branch of government that is made up of government employees under Article 2 that are unfirable. They're unfirable. They can be hired, but they can't be fired. Make that make sense. You're not going to have it make sense. let's play real quick. Bobby, how much time we got left? About a minute and a half.
>> Bobby Roza: Oh, you got plenty of time.
>> Walker Wildmon: Okay, let's play four. Yeah, let's play clip four from the Fed.
>> Scott Bessent: And there are people like President Trump and myself who think that if a Fed official committed mortgage fraud that this should be examined and that they shouldn't be serving as one of the nation's leading financial regulators. And what we haven't heard from, Ms. Cook is we haven't heard her say I didn't do it. We haven't heard her say I didn't do it. she just keeps saying the President can't remove her. The other thing too, that I have called in the, in the recent past for an internal review of all the Fed's operations. And I've encouraged Chair Powell to do this on an internal basis before there is an external review. And this is the kind of thing that needs to, be addressed, because the Fed is an unaccountable institution, and its relationship with the American people depends on a high level of trust. And incidents like this puncture that trust. So President Trump is trying to make.
>> Walker Wildmon: Sure they have it. We'll be back in a few.
Tim Wildmon is president of American Family association and American Family Radio
Hello, everyone.
>> Tim Wildmon: I'm Tim Wildmon. M President of American Family association and American Family Radio. Hey, we're going to the Holy Land on a tour in March of 2026. We can't wait to go back. My wife Allison and I have been leading these tours for over two decades, nearly three decades. And we are going in March of 2026 to Israel. See all the places that you've read about since you were a child in the Bible. Bethlehem, Jerusalem, the Sea of Galilee, the Jordan river, all of it will be going there. And also my sons, Walker and Wesley Wildmon will be going to Greece on a Footsteps of Paul tour. You can do either the Holy Land trip or the Footsteps of Paul Greece tour or both. For all the information on these tours, go to wildmangroup.com w I l d m o n group.com to get all the information on the 2026 March Israel and Greece tours.
>> Walker Wildmon: At the Corps podcast are [email protected] now back to at the Corps on American Family Radio.
Monty Bennett discusses whether the president can terminate Federal Reserve nominees
Welcome back to the program. Well, if you missed the last segment, towards the tail end of it, we talked about, whether or not the president can terminate the employment of someone serving on, the Federal Reserve that's nominated, ironically nominated by the president. so this whole legal theory that the president nominates but he can't terminate, within the Article II branch is quite an interesting, argument to hear, but a lot of it going on out there. We'll continue to track it and maybe talk more of it in the next segment. Right now we've got a guest with us. Monte Bennett's with us. He's CEO and chairman of Ashford Inc. Which is a hospitality focused asset management company, is also a conservative philanthropist and activist and has done extensive work on the topic of homelessness, especially in America's inner cities. Monte Bennett, welcome to the program.
>> Monty Bennett: Thanks for having me, Walker.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yes, absolutely.
Walker, how did you get into addressing homelessness in North Mississippi
Well, I broached the topic of homelessness relatively often, maybe once or twice a month on the program, but because, our city here in North Mississippi, Tupelo, Mississippi, we've got, roughly about 40 to 50,000, residents in the proper, and then a larger, you know, over 100,000 in the surrounding area. But for North Mississippi, it's a pretty good sized town, pretty good sized city. But homelessness is, homelessness is a major issue. And then you go to major, cities like Atlanta, Dallas, Chicago, New York, homelessness is rampant in many regards. President Trump's been talking about it recently. Tell us how you got into addressing the issue of homelessness and some of the creative ideas that you found to be helpful.
>> Monty Bennett: Well, I just caught the last part of your question there. so let me just talk a little bit about this, homelessness issue. I'm just a businessman here in town and after January 6th, I was up there on that day when it was clear it was just a big government operation to try to put patriot patriotic Americans in jail. And I avoided jail only because I didn't happen to go into the building. I came back and I thought that that was a lot for me and I still wanted to do my part and help, but I should turn my attention to do something local. And so I've gotten involved with some initiatives here in town for some charter amendments, for some education initiatives, and on and on and on. And one of them is homelessness. And we have a homelessness problem here in Dallas. And unfortunately, the so called solutions are solutions that just perpetuate the entire homelessness industrial complex with people in many cases are motivated not to solve the problem. Many of them are, and many of them are really good people. But you do have many that aren't. And so there's no real push to solve the problem, despite the fact that they'll keep saying that they're trying to solve it. Because if they don't really say that well, then, they're not going to be in their positions anymore. So this just perpetuates. And what I'm doing is I'm working with some local folks, some other businessmen that, trying to do some things down at our state capital, Austin, for some legislation there also with the county and just trying to get involved with players that want to actually solve the problem. And this whole idea about homelessness, as you know very well Walker, is that those on the far left think that the way you help homelessness is that if someone is homeless, you give them whatever they want, whenever they want, as often as they want, and let them go and do anything they want, wherever they want. And that's a recipe for disaster. And that's what we're seeing everywhere. And it's not compassionate. It's not compassionate at all. And as followers of Jesus Christ, we are called to be passionate. These people need to care in our love. And many times that love is not doing what they want, it's doing what's best for them. These poor people have drug problems, they have mental problems. So some are just scammers. There are a few that are just down on their luck and they just need a little help to get back on their feet. In my experience, that's maybe 5 or 10%. The vast majority are people that are either have mental difficulties or they're drug addicts. And they're going to keep taking advantage of the system if you keep letting them. So, we're spreading the word and we're pushing the right narrative, which is, look, you can be homeless, that's your choice, but that doesn't mean you can be homeless wherever you want, whenever you want. And there are consequences to decisions that you make. And starting to change the mindset of people, of this is not compassion. This is not compassion at all. We're working to, have a new center built away from downtown, not in downtown, away from downtown, called Refuge for Renewal. And it's modeled after something that they've been doing in San Antonio for 10 years, which is called Haven for Hope. And it's a one stop shop where the homeless people get picked up, they get taken there, their needs are assessed, and then they get shipped off to where they can be helped. And it's not an option for them to loiter in the streets, to sleep in the streets, to use the restroom in the streets. we're also encouraging a number of, nonprofits, ministries even not to feed them downtown because that just encourages behavior that's not helpful to a city. We want to provide food down at the center. So if they need food, and some of them really do, fine, you can have food. But down at the center that's a few miles downtown. And it's just, it's just logic. And I think it's important that we need to, as Christians look at ourselves is what have we maybe not done as well as we could have? And I think that we've let a lot of these issues be taken over by the far left and have not led in this area. And there are some great, very good Christian focused homelessness centers in this town. But there's not enough and unfortunately to do a few things that's not quite right in my opinion. One of them is having the facility downtown. So, yeah, we're out in the marketplace, we're raising money, we've got some land identified, we're working with, people in, this whole, homelessness, part of our economy and trying to make a difference, and we're making some.
>> Walker Wildmon: Great progress, you know. Yeah, you make a lot of valid points. And one of our problems locally, to your point is we've got, the Salvation army, which is, I mean, I'm not dogging them, but they're downtown.
>> Monty Bennett: And.
>> Walker Wildmon: And then you've got multiple churches feeding the homeless downtown. And so you've got foot traffic, drugs, needles, feces, etc. And it's completely unnecessary. I mean, I don't know why they set up downtown other than the fact that we're trying to make it convenient to be homeless, which is, which is literally one of the talking points as well. They've got all their services downtown, so it's easier for them to be homeless. Well, it's like, why are we making it easy to be homeless? That sounds counterproductive. but yeah, moving some of these operations out of the city will restore the city and the safety and well being of the city to where families can go downtown without having to be concerned about stepping over needles and feces. what kind of.
What do you recommend for people perpetually trespassing on private property
let me ask you one more thing before we talk more about this Refuge for Renewal idea, because it's a very fascinating idea and I want to know more about it. But, but what do you recommend is done for these perpetual, law violators, these people that are perpetually trespassing on private property? They don't care what the police say. They never get written up, they never get taken in, they're never booked because, quote, our facilities are too full or our police are too busy, whatever the excuse is. what do you do with those people? Because I think, I think at some point you have to. They have to face jail time, some semblance of jail time to help them understand that you can't loiter on people's private property. But what, what do you guys recommend on that front?
>> Monty Bennett: You cut out for a little bit.
>> Walker Wildmon: All right, we just, we just lost him. I think he's having some zoom issues. nonetheless, we've been talking, to Monty Bennett. Monty, do you have me now? I'm.
>> Monty Bennett: I'm back.
>> Walker Wildmon: Okay. Sorry about that. I saw you drop, and then now you're back.
What do you do with repeat law violators?
What I was asking is what do you do with the repeat, law violators, these homeless people that repeatedly trespass Repeatedly disregard law enforcement and private property owners. What do you do with them? Do you lock them up? Face jail time? What do you do with them?
>> Monty Bennett: I think you hit on it earlier and that is you have to make it very inconvenient for someone to be homeless. Some people will rightly say, oh my gosh, it's already terrible, they don't want to be homeless. That's not true. There's a lot of people that want to be homeless. It's to their advantage. And you know that by looking at the demographic of the homeless, first of all, you see a lot more men than women. And you ask yourself, why are men more discriminated in housing than women? Well, of course not. The reason is, is because there's much worse consequences for women to be homeless than there is for men. It's a danger for them and it can be harmful to them or if they have children. And so they work very hard not to be homeless. Men just don't work as hard to be homeless. You look at the races involved, you find white people, white men and black men are homeless. You don't see very many Hispanics, you don't see very many Asians. You don't see, other types of, racial groups. And the reason is cultural, is that those cultures are more family oriented than the white culture and the black culture. And it's an embarrassment for them to have a relative out on the street. They will go in and they will take their relative and bring them in house and help them. And we need to, those of us in this other category, whites and blacks, we need to reach out and take care of our family members more. So there's this cultural issue, but you do have to create an environment, so it's not helpful for them. Don't feed them in places that are convenient. If they need to eat, great, let's put them in a place where they can eat. But they're not a distraction and don't cause problems for other people trying to live their lives. And so you do have to rest them sometimes and you might have to arrest them repeatedly, some people, but just the fact of not feeding them in a spot, not, letting them sleep in certain spots, not letting them lay on the sidewalk, certain spots. Look, these people are homeless, many of them by choice. And if you make it uncomfortable for them, they are going to move elsewhere or they're not going to become homeless. And so it's some type of pressure one way or the other that will address a lot of them. And then again, there's A number of people, God bless them, they need help. They need psychiatric help. They need, help with addiction, and we need to help those people. However, if they won't get help, I'm talking specifically about addicts. Well, they have to have the consequences. We've all heard about the interventions, right? And there are consequences if someone won't let themselves get help. And so there has to be consequences. Some of those consequences are you can't be here, you can't lay down here, you can't be in this park, you can't do all these kinds of things. That makes life very difficult for them. I'm thankful for what President Trump is doing with the border. And fentanyl, for example. Fentanyl is so cheap and so powerful that it makes a lot of people addicts that otherwise might not be. And if we could really stop the flow of that fentanyl, make it a lot more expensive, I think that would help with a lot of the addiction problems as well. But it's really just common sense. You can't make it easy for people to engage in behavior that you don't want them to engage in, whether they want to engage them or not. And just because they want to doesn't make it okay.
>> Walker Wildmon: absolutely. Yeah, absolutely.
Monty Bennett started Dallas Express five years ago to provide alternative news
Hey, Monty Bennett, We've got about a minute left. Tell our folks your, website where they can check out more about yourself and some of the work that you're doing.
>> Monty Bennett: Sure. Well, something I started up five years ago as well is, a newspaper here called Dallas Express. And you can go to it@dallas express.com and we cover Dallas News, Texas news and national news. And it was the problem that we all have. The legacy media is so bad and so far left. We wanted a, news organization that just prints the news and we can find out local, national, state news without all this bias. We have something like 500,000 people that receive our newsletter. Over 250,000 people a day. Meanwhile, the local paper sends out about 67,000 newsletters, and then the one of Worth about 30,000. So we're very popular. we've met a huge need in the marketplace. We'd love for your listeners to subscribe to Dallas express dot com. subscribe, and any type of. It's a 501C3. So any type of patronage there you want to, provide would be greatly appreciated.
>> Walker Wildmon: Excellent. That's ah, Dallas Express dot com. The conservative, alternative and the common sense alternative to the legacy media in the Dallas area. We got a huge listening audience We've got a station in Greenville that reaches most of Dallas proper. hey, Monty Bennett, thanks so much for coming on. Appreciate your insights into the homelessness issue.
>> Monty Bennett: Thank you, Walker. Blessings on you.
Monty Bennett: America's inner cities need to figure out homelessness problem
>> Walker Wildmon: All right, appreciate that. That's Monty Bennett, CEO, and chairman of Ashford, Inc. That's a hospitality focused management, company. And. And he's got, obviously, his hands on a lot of other projects as well, and businesses and nonprofit ventures, including, the one aimed at addressing the homelessness issue in Dallas. In the inner city of Dallas there, trying to create, what's known as a refuge for renewal, operation outside of the city that is mirrored off of what's going on in San Antonio. And the. America's inner cities are going to have to figure this out. There's no choice. They're going to have to figure this out, or the inner city is going to go to the wayside, the inner city is going to die. Because, I mean, this is. This is big town and small town, but wherever there is a homeless problem, families do not want to be there. People do not want to be there. And the same thing with what we're dealing with in our backyard. It's all over the place. And the police feel like they've got their hands tied, and the residents feel like they've got their hands tied. And. Well, we're doing our best. And, I don't know what the solution is, but it's not a perfect solution. Don't get me wrong. Even m. What Monty's talking about isn't going to work 100% of the time. But you've got to get these. These perpetual repeat offenders and repeat trespassers off of the inner city streets. And it's just what President Trump's doing in Washington, D.C. you've got to get them off the streets so that residents who want to enjoy their city can enjoy their city without looking over their shoulder, are being concerned about being assaulted or stepping on a needle or stepping on feces, are being badgered for money that's gonna be used on drugs and cigarettes and beer. It's. This is just ridiculous. It's unacceptable. And it shouldn't be this way. To quote Vice President J.D. vance, it doesn't have to be this way. All right, there you have it, folks. We got a segment left coming up here in a few minutes, we'll continue more of our news coverage here on at the Core. Stay around. This is at the Core on American Family Radio with your host, Walker Wildmon.
Bobby Roza: Argument that President Trump cannot fire Federal Reserve member baffles me
Welcome, back to the Core here on American Family Radio. Well, I've got to go back to this, because it's just bugging me today. But, but, Bobby, this, this notion, this argument being made by commentators all around the world that President Trump cannot fire a member of the Federal Reserve, whether it be the governor or the chairman. Is that argument, that legal argument? Is quite. And maybe it's not a legal argument. Maybe it's more of a political narrative, but it's quite baffling to me.
>> Bobby Roza: Yeah, I'll go with the latter. It's a political narrative. It's, Again, anything Orange man tries to do to control what's going on in his administration, he doesn't have the right to do so. It doesn't matter who it is, doesn't matter what it is, what department, what agency, what division, it doesn't matter. And it's, This is, this is the new way that they're attacking him, as opposed to what happened in 2016. It's, anything he tries to do with his administration, he's overstepping, you know, controlling law enforcement and getting large cities under control. And obviously the statistics are there, but they're being whitewashed by the other side. And, bottom line is, American people know facts are facts. Yeah, it's working. It's working in spades, and it'll continue to do so. And based on those results, you'll be seeing more of that across the country in major cities.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah. So let's just break this down. Ah. As far as what the Constitution says, and yes, there's some federal statutes that get more granular on hiring and firing for the federal government. But for the sake of this discussion, let's keep it simple. Let's. Let's remind ourselves of the three branches of government. The three co. Equal branches of government. Okay? Here's how accountability works. Because people say, you know, how do you hold government accountable? Here's how you hold government accountable. Okay, obviously we have elections. That's example one. But let's go through these, these means of accountability that exist at all times in the federal government. And this is also applicable for state government as well. But, but let's just talk about the US Constitution, the president. The means of accountability for the president is Congress. Okay, yes, the, the federal judiciary can also keep the president in check. But I'm talking about removal from office. The only person or group of people that can remove the president from office during a term is Congress. They can impeach and remove. They can impeach and remove the president. All right, who can Remove sitting lawmakers, members of the legislative body. Well, the legislative body can. All right, it's called expelling. A member takes two thirds. Congress can expel a member of Congress with a vote of 2/3. This is all Article 1 and Article 2 of the US Constitution. Well, who holds the federal judges accountable? Who holds the Supreme Court accountable? Congress does. Congress can remove a federal judge, I. E. The Supreme Court or lower court, with, the same impeachment mechanism that it would use for the President. All right? And so there is accountability built in to the Constitution for each branch of government. All right? So those are the means of accountability for the three branches of government. When you go to the executive branch and you go below the president, which below the president is the Federal Reserve, the Treasury Department, the Commerce Department, Department of Justice. These are all positions, especially cabinet level positions, that are appointed by the President. President Trump appointed Jerome Powell, for better or worse. President Biden appointed Lisa Cook the, the board governor that we're talking about. To suggest that the President cannot fire Jerome Powell or Lisa Cook is to blatantly disregard the constitutional black and white copy, the black text of the US Constitution. It has to be completely disregarded. To suggest that, that the President cannot end the employment or the term of a member of the Federal Reserve, which would leave us an unaccountable fourth branch of government. Because there is no provision in the US Constitution outside of Article 2 that gives any accountability measures. For example, the Federal Reserve. If the President isn't the one to be the one to hold the Federal Reserve accountable, then there's nobody else per the Constitution. And so, I want us to understand the gravity of this argument that isn't rooted in the Constitution. It isn't rooted in law. It isn't rooted in logic. This argument that, that President Trump cannot, cannot interfere with the term of the Federal Reserve governor and board and chair is, is a very dangerous argument to make. And we'll see where the Supreme Court falls on this. I think they're going to have to take this up and I don't want to hear. Well, I'm going to hear, because I've been watching CNN too much. But the argument, well, if President Trump, if the President can just fire Jerome Powell, or if the President can just fire a board governor of the Federal Reserve, then this is just going to become another politically motivated agency that is at the whims of the President. Well, okay, that may be true, but that's not a legal argument. That's like a political and implication argument. That's not a legal argument. who knows what the Federal Reserve will look like? Should the president desire to remove board members? Who knows what it'll look like? We don't know, because we've treated this Federal Reserve as this insulated, apolitical. You can't touch this agency. And that's a very dangerous thing to have. I don't want that. Our Founding Fathers did not intend. Which is why this whole notion of the Federal Reserve didn't come around to the early 1900s. Our founding fathers would be appalled if they found out that there was a agency that was immune from termination within the federal government with no explicit U.S. constitutional accountability procedures in place. What our Founding Fathers would say is, okay, we've got a fourth branch of government you guys are wanting to create. And if we're going to create a fourth branch of government, there has to be a process for how these people are elected. What are their terms, and who can fire them. Somebody has to be able to. And so I'm glad that President Trump is going down this path. This is beautiful. It's honestly a beautiful thing, because no other president has had the backbone to try some of these unconventional maneuvers that everybody else has said, oh, no, you can't do that, you can't do that, you can't do that. They kept telling President Trump in his first time, oh, no, you can't do that, sir. You can't do that. Everything he wanted to do, everything legal he wanted to do, no, sir, you can't do that. No president has ever done that. And so we'll see where this goes. I think Trump's gonna win. I think he's gonna win at the Supreme Court. it may be five, four, maybe six, three, who knows? But the ramifications for a loss here on the president's side is massive. If the President is told now, you can't. You can't fire somebody you nominate within the executive branch, mind you, I'm not talking about the judiciary, which are also nominated by the President. I'm talking about within the executive branch. Then if, the president can't terminate a member of the Federal Reserve, then we have a de facto fourth branch of government with no accountability. And that's what Scott Besant was saying. The implications here are very broad and risky. This is a risky move, but should President Trump prevail in the courts, then, it's going to be a good day. It's going to be a good day, and it will put the rest of the Federal Reserve on notice that if you guys want to be Political hacks with our interest rates, then there's going to be consequences. If you guys want to commit mortgage fraud, there's going to be consequences. If you guys want to do insider trading, which we've had multiple Fed governors, not at the National Fed, but at the, for example, Atlanta, St. Louis, at these other Feds that we've had multiple members resign. Why? Because they were allegedly doing insider trading and the news broke that they were doing it and then they resigned. And in the instance of Lisa Cook, there's alleged mortgage fraud that has been referred criminally to the Department of Justice and she has not refuted it.
>> Bobby Roza: Yeah, the only thing she keeps saying. Is I'm not going, I'm not going anywhere. Right.
>> Walker Wildmon: Really?
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah. Which is not a good look.
>> Walker Wildmon: No, it's not a good look. and the other aspect of this that deserves questioning is why a 14 year term, where did that ambiguous number come from? Is this like Dr. Birx's 6 foot spacing during the pandemic, which originally started at 10ft but they didn't think would be palatable?
>> Bobby Roza: Yeah, they went to six and then they admitted that six wasn't rooted in anything. No scientific backing.
>> Walker Wildmon: Yeah, yeah, that's right. This, this folks, is, I just, I love breaking free from these shallow political talking points that aren't rooted in fact, logic or legal theory or the Constitution. Breaking free from it. It's so liberating. Like to have this discussion, which really isn't a discussion. I'm just telling you the president has to be able to fire members of the Federal Reserve. He just has to. Legally. He has to be able to. And I don't like the for calls thing. even though that's very ambiguous. I don't like the for calls, which is a legal. Well, it's gotta be for cause. What, what does that even mean?
>> Bobby Roza: Like, and again, that can be political as well.
>> Walker Wildmon: It can be, yeah. And what does that even mean? Do they have to like violate federal law, which mortgage fraud ironically is. so what is four calls? Is it like, because I don't like, like what they wear. What does that even mean? I don't, I can't stand these, these four calls being put in statutes and the, and the legislative body doesn't clarify it. I mean it leaves the courts to interpret something that's not interpretable because it just says for cause, which is a very, very subjective legal term. that, that it leaves the judges up to figure out what it might mean even though nobody knows what it really means because they didn't write the law.
President Trump says Chicago needs federal resources to clean up its crime problem
All right, let's move on to a few other topics. Enough of that. the, Chicago. All right, Chicago is, has had the top homicide rate for, like, 25 plus years, for America. Compared when you look at all of America's inner cities, Chicago has been at the top. It's a literal war zone. When you look at the definition of war zone, you look at the military statistics on, on fatalities, on casualties, rather within a war zone like Afghanistan. In the past, Chicago has been up there with the war zones as far as the number of casualties. so let's listen to the need, for Chicago to have federal resources, surged in. This is President Trump. Let's listen.
>> Donald Trump: He should be requesting us to be there. And the governor of Illinois should be. Chicago is a disaster. And the governor of Illinois should say, president, would you do us the honor of cleaning up our city? We need help. They need help. They need help. So are you waiting back to question? We may wait. We may or may not. We may just go in and do it, which is probably what we should do. The problem is it's not nice when you go in and do it and somebody else is standing there saying, as we give great results, say, well, we don't want the military yet. They need. They need help badly. Chicago desperately needs help. Just look at the crime statistics. Look at the statistics that JD Said about even I didn't know it was that bad. That's terrible.
>> Walker Wildmon: Okay, so looking at these statistics, when you break down some of Chicago's zip codes, the homicide rate for young men is. Is. Is nearly three times higher than the average casualty or death for an American soldier in Afghanistan and Iraq. So the rate in certain zip codes in Chicago are 1200, homicides or casualties per 100,000. You go to Iraq and Afghanistan, per 100,000, it's 395 and 330. So that's a near threefold more likelihood as a young male to be killed, to be murdered in certain parts of Chicago than it is to die an American soldier serving our military in Iraq and Afghanistan. Completely not making this up. These are the facts. All right, so if we can send American soldiers to Afghanistan and Iraq to nation build and do law enforcement activities. Activities, why can't we do it for our own inner cities? We'll see you next time. The views and opinions expressed in this broadcast may not necessarily reflect those of the American Family association or American Family Radio.
