Rick Green: When a woman is told abortion is her only option
>> Bobby Roza: We are living in a time when truth is under attack. Lies are easy to tell, easy to spread and easy to believe. But truth, truth is costly. And nowhere is the cost greater than from others in crisis. When a woman is told abortion is her only option, silence and lies surround her. But when she walks into a pre born network clinic, she's met with compassion, support and the truth about the life growing inside her. That moment of truth happens through a free ultrasound and it's a game changer. When a mother sees her baby and hears that heartbeat, it literally doubles the chance she'll choose life. Preborn network clinics are on the front lines, meeting women in their darkest hour, loving them, helping them choose life and sharing truth. Friend, this is not a time to be silent. It's a time for courage, for truth, for life. Just $28 provides one ultrasound and the opportunity for a mother to see her baby to help her choose truth and life. Donate today. Call £250 and say baby. That's £250, baby. Or give [email protected] afr that's preborn.com. Afr.
>> Rick Green: 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. We equip sacred honor is the courage to speak truth, to live out your free speech. We also rejoice in our sufferings because we know that suffering produces perseverance, perseverance, character and character, hope. This is at the core on American Family Radio. Welcome to at the corps with Walker Wildmon and Rick Greene. I'm Rick Greene, America's constitution coach. Thanks for joining me on this Thursday afternoon. A ton to get to. I'm gonna be going rapid fire today. So many topics, to cover and of course some good, some bad, some ugly. So we're hit it all and of course we'd love to have you call in 888-589-8840-888858-98840 is the phone number.
There is always a tension between liberty and security on some issues
First, topic, up today that I wanted to just hit real quick because I will admit to you, this is one of those topics I, I don't know if struggle is the right word, but I have to, I have to slow down and really think through it. I mean, a lot of times a topical hit and it's one I've dealt with before, so I kind of know where I stand on it. I have a little bit of history on it or some experience with it and it's fairly easy to tackle. And then there are times when something hits and you really have to think through the principles of how to apply that particular issue because there is always a tension between liberty and security. And of course we know, you know the famous Franklin quote, we think Franklin. Anyway, it's attributed to Franklin. It's actually a letter from the colonial legislature in 1755, that basically said if you're willing to give up your liberty for safety, you deserve neither liberty or safety. So I agree with that, but not entirely because we do give up some parts of our liberty for security in our communities. I mean, we abide by speed limits. So we're giving up our Liberty to go 120, which is my preferred speed, in order to have an overall general safer roads as best we can, and a better secure environment. we, we give up our liberty in other small ways in order to have security in the community. And there's always that tension and we should always lean to liberty and only move to the security side of it when our combined opinion in our local society, local county, state, federal government, whatever it might be, together we decide, okay, and on that issue, it's worth giving up a little bit of my liberty to have that security for the whole community. Now I, most of the time, am, going to say no to giving up liberty for security. It's going to be rare that I would agree with giving up some piece of liberty in order to have security. And I think that should always be the case, but we should not say never. Now my youngest son would definitely disagree on the speed limit thing. Like, he's brought the bill to Patriot Academy's leadership Congress many times to ban all speed limits. The whole, make the whole world the, you know, Audubon. as much as I like speeding, I admit it, I've had way too many tickets in my life. I just like going fast. Okay. I don't think I can go quite that far. That's a bridge too far. No speed limits anywhere. the topic is social media ban for kids and Australia has just implemented this, so it's kind of raised a, bit, you know, become a topic around the country. Just kicked in, I think, today or yesterday, I can't remember. And you know, I had to, I had to stop for a second and think through this because, let's go to, let's go to some extremes. Okay. I like, I would argue that there are certain things that are immediately harmful and, and therefore there is a time, for either an outright ban or for government to at least limit Access or create some hurdles to get to that thing. So drugs, obviously is an easy one, right? There are certain drugs that are so powerful and so harmful immediately, like you can die the first time you do. Crack cocaine, fentanyl can kill you the first time. many, many examples. And so there are some drugs that makes sense from a health perspective that there are rare situations where it should be used and therefore you create hurdles to how it can be used. And, and it, and it reduces the, reduces the, damage that, that from just, you know, blanket use and anybody being able to get ahold of that thing. So that, that I hope puts it in context like that would be an extreme case of where it, it makes sense. and then there are some things that can be harmful, but they are not inherently harmful. In other words, they're not inherently evil. They just can be bad if you have too much of it. Sugar is a perfect example of that. Like, I don't, I think it's insane to outlaw Big Gulps like Mike Bloomberg wanted to do when he was mayor of NewSong York. I think, you know, dietary things are, not immediately harmful to and have no benefit whatsoever. So if there's some benefit and the risk of it being harmful, then I think you're getting out of government intervention and control to self government and of course with minors, parental government and so definitely on dietary stuff. Exactly that. Right? Sugar and fatty foods. you know, you shouldn't, you know, eat donuts, for three meals a day, and you shouldn't allow your kids to eat donuts for three meals a day. But I don't think we want to pass a law that starts regulating how many donuts per day you can have. I don't just not think that. I know that would be a stupid law and a ridiculous thing to try to even enforce, let alone whether or not that's the proper role of government. So with the social media thing, I think we're somewhere in that domain. All right, now let me first say, parents, listen, if you are letting your child use a device on social media without you being right there with them, every single time, not just to set it up, not just once in a while, every single time they're on there. If you're letting your child have access to a phone, a tablet, a computer and social media, without you being there every single time, sit down for this one. You are being a fool. Now, I say that in the nicest, most biblical way I possibly can. And here's what I mean by biblical. Proverbs 27:12. A wise person foresees danger and takes precaution. A simpleton or a fool. So, yes, I'm calling you a fool in a biblical sense. Proverbs 27:12. A simpleton or a fool walks blindly on and suffers the consequences. Now, I get it. I get the fact that parenting is hard. I get the fact that we're all busy. And I understand it is so easy to put the tablet in front of them and put them on YouTube and let them watch cat videos or horse videos or whatever it might be and have 15 minutes to clean the kitchen or, mow the lawn or whatever it is. I get the situations where it happens, but I'm telling you, if you don't foresee the danger of what your child or your grandchild is going to be exposed to in a split second, it happens that fast that something pops up or someone pops up and the horror stories are over and over and over and over and over again. It's, it's, it's so bad. So don't be the fool. Be the wise person. Don't, don't, be the simpleton that walks blindly on and suffers the consequences. The consequences, Meaning your child's brain being corrupted, your child getting hooked on porn at a very young age, your child being ended up, you know, connecting to some child predator somehow. And I'm telling you, it's, it is horrific stuff out there. So I'm trying to scare you and get, you to not be the fool, but to be the wise person.
The question here is whether or not the government should be policing this
Now back to the public policy issue. The question here is whether or not the government should be the one policing this, or parents, and whether or not the government even can police this. Like, I don't even see how the government. Well, I take that back. I mean, we passed a law in Texas where you have, age restrictions on pornography, and so there is a way to at least limit the access. and so I'm assuming you could do the same thing with a Facebook or Twitter or whatever access. So I guess government could do it. It's still going to be very, very difficult, to truly police it and enforce it. I think more importantly than whether or not you can do it, is, should you do it, is this an area that has immediate harm, like, immediate danger and harm, and therefore, you know, there is, there is no good. Yeah, let me back up and rephrase that. So from a principal perspective, when something creates immediate danger and harm and cannot be used in a healthful, positive way, that's kind of my two part test for when government should step in. So like I would argue fentanyl is a perfect example of that. It is immediately harmful. There is not any positive use of it other than in some medical situations where you do need the hurdle and the blockage, blocking individuals from having access to it and going through, you know, the health professional to do it. So that makes sense to me. Outlaw fentanyl. Okay. And, and, and I think you can make arguments for alcohol becoming something that it is not as, as immediate though you could get alcohol poisoning, you know, if a kid were to chug a, you know, a fifth of Jack Daniels or something, and die. but, but for most people it's not going to be an immediate like death defying, it's going to be a taste of, of something. But, but you're starting to get into that area where I think you can justify having laws to say, you know, even parents should not allow an 8 year old to be drinking alcohol. Now I do think you get over, you know, 14, 15, there might be some arguments for a glass of wine. Possibly people are gonna hate on me for that. But, but I'm just saying you should at least have that discussion. I've never had that discussion. So I've never, never thought about, I've didn't, certainly didn't give that to my kids at 14 or 15. But but, but there's some line there. Okay. So the point is there are things that, yes, government I think should be able to, when I say government, remember that's just us. So that just means we as a neighborhood are going to get together and say for this particular thing, it's so bad and so harmful and immediately harmful even upon the first use for a child that we want to keep it away from them. So like pornography would fit in that category. Drag queens and that kind of, you know, you know, sexual perversion stuff rewires the brain for an 8 year old or even a 12 year old or a 15 year old. And so yeah, we want to say no, you can't have that stuff. Now social media, I don't think is that clear because is there not a good use of social media? Right. Is there not a way to use social media without it being immediately harmful and addictive and dangerous and, and actually for good. Let me give you an example. I mean if you had a, if you had a private Facebook type page, so you have some other, some other, you know, software, and company that's not Facebook. It's, it's some private, you know, but. But designed like a Facebook, if that makes sense. So it's a, It's a social media, a, social networking, software. And you made it available to homeschoolers, and it allowed them to network with other homeschoolers their age and talk about even the class that they're in. So, for instance, I do a government class. I do a class called a Republic. If you can keep it. It's a middle school, high school, essentially meet your high school requirement for government, and, then you can go take the CLEP test and get college credit for it. It's available at patriotacademy.com if you want to try it. Okay. But I think one of the cool things that we've, toyed around with is where you have kids taking that class all over the country and then having some sort of a social media tool where they can, it's like they're in class together and they can talk about it and they can, they can exchange ideas. So to me, that is a, Is a positive. That's a good thing. And so you could, you could extrapolate that out. It could be, it could be sports, it could be. It could be all kinds of topics that you're allowing these kids to discuss. now obviously I get the danger of where that can still go with access to the Internet, but my point is that social media itself is not inherently evil and in an imminent danger instantly the first time. So that's why I don't think that this ban makes sense. And I get, you know, listen, I got friends like Ted Cruz and others that are absolutely for doing this in the US I just don't. I think it's too far. I think it's not possible for government, to do a better job of this than parents. And, and, and, and if, and again, I'll go back to parents. Please don't unleash this on your children without your direct supervision. So even if you're doing a, you know, homeschool network or a church youth group network, there's still some level of, of, of, monitoring on your part. so anyway, that's my, that's my two cents on that. I did not at all intend to take up our entire first segment on that topic. But I got, I got carried away with how to apply. But maybe that was helpful to some people of how to apply the principles of when government should get involved and when it. When it shouldn't. We're gonna take a quick break, 888-589-8840. If you got a comment, question or insult, would love to hear from you. 888-589-8840. We'll be right back on.
Tim Wildmon: American Family association will offer spiritual heritage tours in 2026
>> Caroline: Hello, everyone.
>> Tim Wildmon: I'm Tim Wildmon, president of American Family association and American Family Radio. A vacation with a purpose. That's what we call our tours here at American Family Radio. American Family association, because we go and we see and we do, and we, we have great fellowship and fun and food, but we also have a purpose in visiting the places we go to. A spiritual purpose, a historical purpose. And that's going to include our tours in 2026. Here are the tours. We're going to Washington, D.C. we're going to George Washington's Mount Vernon. We're going to Colonial Williamsburg, Jamestown and Yorktown. We're going to Boston, Massachusetts. So if you want information on any of Those tours for 2026, the dates, the prices, the itinerary, go to this website, wildmangroup.com w I l d m m o n group.com and we hope to see you on one of our 2026 spiritual heritage tours.
>> Rick Green: This is at the CORE on American Family Radio with your host, Rick Greene.
Rick Green: President should be able to hire and fire anyone in executive branch
Welcome back to CORE with Walker Wildmon and Rick Green. I'm Rick Green, America's Constitution coach. Thanks for staying with us here on this Thursday and thanks for letting me rant about the social media ban for kids and hopefully get us all thinking through, not just jumping on a bandwagon. We know that social media has become addictive for these kids. It's rewiring their brains. It's terrible. They're getting connected to all kinds of evil things. I get that part. The question is whether or not the tool itself is evil or the way that it's being used and whether or not parents can be a better, Well, I know parents should be a better monitor of that and decide, at what point, to let their child have a tool like that. So, anyway, interesting topic, I think, worth worth at least discussing on the program and thinking through and, you know, because it's definitely debated here in the U.S. i mean, so this is Australia that's implementing this thing. And, Ted Cruz, as I mentioned, my U.S. senator, who's normally spot on, especially on constitutional issues and trying to balance all these things, he is for it. So I, you know, I'm, I'm kind of, I guess I'm on the other side because I have not been convinced that this should be done through government, but that it should in fact be a parental rights issue or parental control issue. I don't think I mentioned Tuesday I was running through some of the Supreme Court decisions and some of the victories on the vaccine issue and all of that. And I think I missed. I might have mentioned it briefly, but there's also a case that, based on the hearing and based on what some of the justices were saying, could definitely go President Trump's way and I think go for the Constitution to make sure that the president can, in fact hire and fire these people in the executive branch. And, the case is, is dealing with a, an FCC commissioner. And the real question here is whether or not Congress can set up these fiefdoms and set up these agencies that are technically run through the executive, which is what the Constitution requires, but yet, sort of insulates the commissioners and the people in that, in that, agency from being able to be held accountable by the President. So the president's not able to hire and fire. And I am very much against that. I've said it many, many times. I'll say it over and over and over again. The president should be able to hire and fire, anyone in the executive branch. Now they're arguing that these commissioners are sort of like judges, so they're sort of an Article 3. Person and therefore shouldn't be able to be hired or fired by the President. Well, you know what? Then make it an article 3. If you want to create another level of the judiciary and give them judicial power, then you should have to do it that way. Don't create this pseudo executive branch bureaucratic agency and call the people in charge of the commissioners, you know, somehow sort of a judge and sort of an executive. Now you're mixing the two branches. That's not okay. Nobody gave. We didn't amend the Constitution to give you the power to do that. So I am hoping, that the, that the Supreme Court gives, you know, makes it clear the president has the power to hire and fire any of these executive branch people. Now, the case is not actually that broad. It's specifically dealing with a particular agency and a particular position, a commissioner that refuses to be, to, you know, step, down after the President said, you're gone. but I hope it starts us down that road to make it clear that the president can hire and fire anyone in the executive branch. that's absolutely. This whole civil service thing, protecting employees because of, you know, political retribution, yada, yada, yada, that's all that's all in my opinion, nothing, but protection of employees that then makes them lazy and not responsive. And, and, and actually is, is, is undermining future administrations. It's, it's a way for a party when they're in power to create these fiefdoms and make them off limits so they last forever. And there's never accountability to the American people through the elected officials that we actually can vote for. So I'm against it all the way. I think again hire and fire all of them. 888-589-8840 is the phone number. If you've got a comment, question or insult.
2.5 million illegal aliens deported in first year of Trump administration
Let's go to back to illegal immigration. We've talked about this one quite a bit, of course, hottest topic out there. I am surprised by the numbers. It looks like based on this end of year report, we're actually not even to the end of the year yet. We still got not a whole month, but two thirds of a month here. 2.5 million illegal aliens deported. Now, I think about 600,000 of that is actual physical D. You know, actually DHS and ICE putting their hands on somebody and removing them from the country and then 1.9 million that self deported. based on the policies and based on you know, seeing the deportation physically of the other illegal aliens. This is why I think it's important for ICE to be seen as they are in Chicago and NewSong Orleans and all these places. I think this is good. I think the more that's covered on the news and the more you see them go in and physically deport these people. And when I say these people, I mean yes, the worst of the worst. The rapists, the murderers, the thugs, the gang members, all of that, that's an easy low hanging fruit. It's shocking to me that Democrats are actually defending the rapist murderers and thugs. They actually are on the side of stopping us from removing these people. We even had the school district or the college up in Minnesota I think it was that was saying that the ICE couldn't come in and remove someone that was a child predator. I mean, unbelievable. The Democrats are digging their own grave here. They're killing their own party. it's, it's, it's insane. But when I say these people, I mean all illegal aliens, not just the worst of the worst, even, even the quote unquote good people that just wanted to come here and work and didn't wait in line, didn't do it legally. They just wanted a better place for Their family. I get all that. Okay. And they came here illegally, they broke the law, they came across the open border that auto pen administration gave to them. Those people too have to be removed. So when I say these people, I mean anyone who came here illegally, gone, remove them and hopefully get more and more of them. I mean, what is this ratio? 600,000. That's almost 25%. A little more than 25% actually, that were physically removed. So 75%. That means if for every, every hands on deportation, you get, another three that, that leave on their own because they're watching this on the news and they don't want to be physically deported like that. That's good, that's good policy. Okay. That's good implementation. It's actually gonna take that. Cause it's gonna be hard to put your hands on, you know, 20 to 30 million, which is what need to be deported by the end of Trump's administration. So, so he's got another few weeks to round this out. Maybe. I don't know if they can push it up to 3 million for the, for the first year, that'd be greater, actually, let's say 3 million if, by January 20th of 2026. So that would be one full year of the Trump administration. If, if, if he can remove 3 million illegals in the first full year, that's a pretty awesome benchmark. And so if he does that and can repeat that in the remaining three years so that he actually ends up with 12 million, okay, that to me would be the bare minimum. I, I, I've been saying 20 to 30 million, I'm going to stick with that. I think it should be 20 to 30 million they get deported. But if he can get to 12 million, that's setting a pretty good standard and I think helps both with the midterms, if he can keep that up in 2026 and in 2028 with either, DeSantis or, or Vance or Rubio or whoever, it's going to be on the, on the Republican side to, to take the mantle from, from President Trump. So anyway, all that to say 2.5 million. Pretty good. Pretty good. And, and, and I'm not bothered by the fact that, that, you know, 75% of those were self deportations. But you gotta keep the pressure up. You gotta make it to where it's impossible, or at least near impossible for illegal aliens to operate in the U.S. just keep the pressure up. I mean, everywhere you go, start giving all kinds of incentives to, to states and local governments to you know, put their law enforcement on this and help, I, continue this. And the more you keep the pressure up and the more you do it, the more self deportations you'll get and the fewer that will come across illegally, which we pretty well shut that down, at least to where it's, it's not as much of a factor. so I think that's definitely in the good column on our good, bad and the ugly for the day. Same on the good column and somewhat in the same category.
US Seizes Venezuelan oil tanker; President Trump says we'll keep it
US Seizes a Venezuelan oil tanker. An oil tanker. And of course, in typical President Trump fashion. Let me see if I can quote him exactly. it's large. It's a large tanker. Very large. Largest one ever. You just gotta love Trump's salesmanship. okay, maybe it is, the largest taker ever seized. but it is definitely large. Very large. and, you know, so here we go. This is going to be. Okay. What, why is it being seized? What were they doing illegally? And apparently it's, it's breaking, you know, sanctions that were, placed for. I think it's going to Iran, if I remember right. and then when asked, what are we going to do with it, President Trump says, well, I guess we're going to keep it. We're going to keep the oil and we're going to keep the tanker. Okay, I know this is not a small thing, all right? So I shouldn't be laughing, but I'm just so glad we have a president that's willing to do these kind of things. I'm all for the. Blowing them out of the water for the drug cartels that, that get caught trying to sneak this stuff in, to our country. If you're not fed up with the lives that have been ruined, the families that have been just decimated by the fentanyl and everything else that these thugs bring into our country. And I also understand it's not just a supply problem, it's a demand problem. So I know you can't just try to cut off the supply. You have to also deal with demand issue on this side of the border. But when you find these thugs and you find these cartels and they're, and, and, and you can blow them out of the water and yes, I mean, completely wipe them out. And yes, I fully support second strike. You kill the ones that are getting, you know, out of the, out of the boat and, and trying to escape. This is war. This is an absolute war. And you don't, let them scurry away and come back another day in another boat with more of this, death that they are deploying to our children across this country. So I'm actually absolutely thrilled that the President is doing this. I've said for a long time, you should declare the cartels, to be enemy combatants. You should declare them to be terrorist organizations. And you should unleash our Special Forces and let them practice on the cartels. Let them go across the border into Mexico and hunt down these cartels and train our Special Forces on these guys. Let them make this their first mission and just unleash them. I'm talking about people that will behead you and burn your carcass in front of your children and laugh while they're doing it. That's the kind of people we're talking about blowing out of the water here.
>> Rick Green: Okay. These are not sweet little fishermen. Oh, my goodness. The people that describe them as just a bunch of fishermen on a boat. Unreal. So, anyway, this tanker. I don't. This is just. I've never seen this before. I'm sure it's happened. It's probably happened a lot, but this is the first time I've seen it. And I just. I'm getting a kick out of the fact that President Trump is doing this. And, thank you to Pete Hexseth for, enforcing, these kind of things. This is good. This is good. Okay, next headline, and then we'll try to get to the phones. 8885-8988-4088-8589-8840.
Rick Green says elections are report cards on how well the church is discipling
there is a, Oh, I think a renewed effort in churches at this point to talk about, the biblical application of how we treat our neighbor in the context of. Politics. And I said that carefully because, you know, when you start saying, you know, the pulpit and politics, people get nervous and they're like, oh, I don't want politics in my. Politics is nothing more than how you treat your neighbor. And the Bible has a lot to say about that. And, of course, how we do that in a constitutional republic depends on how the church disciples on this issue. it hit me about a year ago, actually, on election night last year, that elections are report cards on how well the church is discipling. So if the church is doing a good job of discipling fully, like, not just saying, walk the aisle and fill out the card. Not just saying, here's how you live your life as a Christian with regard to how you treat your spouse or your kids, but also saying, here's how you live your life as a Christian. Here's how to disciple, how to live your life as a Christian. In how you treat your neighbor, in how you perform at your job, in how you run your business and yes, how you choose your leaders and how you organize your government and how you you know, what you make illegal and legal. All those things. The Bible has something to say about every single one of those things. So if we're teaching that and we're discipling well, then people will go out and vote based on that discipleship. And therefore you'll get public servants elected to your county commission, to your city council, to your state legislature, to congress and to the White House based on how well the church discipled. So I think the report card on how well we are discipling I think is mixed. Obviously we're not discipling well in NewSong York City. I mean, if we elect a socialist Muslim, we're not discipling well. In fact, we probably didn't disciple at all. Now this is clearly an indictment on the woke churches in NewSong York. All these, you know, lovey dovey, the Bible is Jesus sitting around petting lambs all the time. And we're just going to love everybody no matter what they do. And we're not going to try to get them to change based on the gospel or any of that. I mean that report card, that election is a F on the report card for the churches in NewSong York. Now in other places in the country, I think we're doing a little bit better. We're starting to see a lot more pastors running for office. We're starting to see a lot more you know, people out of the church running to be good biblical citizens and good stewards of what we've been given. And so I'm kind of setting up our efforts in 2026 to be good biblical citizens and rebuild liberty and make sure that the report card in November of 2026 is a good one and that we don't have a big F all across the country. You failed as a church to disciple. I don't want to hear that in November. I am praying that we're going to see a good report card. Now the first report card will be the primaries. You absolutely have more influence in the primary than you will in November. Fewer people show up. You have a chance to basically get in the kitchen and decide what's going to be laid out on the table for everybody else when, when they show up for the party in November to Vote, you get to decide what's going to be on the table when you vote in the primary. So let's be getting ready right now. Like the deadline in Texas for filing for office was just two days ago. Most, most states, it's happening now. And so we're, we're, we're now kind of setting the slate for the primary. What are we going to do to make sure that who gets chosen in the primary is good for November? Lots to talk about on that one. All right, we got some calls coming up when we we come back from the break. 888-589-8840. If you want to join that queue, I'm Rick Greene, America's constitution coach. You're listening to at the Core with Wackawa Min. This is at the Core on American Family Radio with your host, Rick Greene.
Rick Green, American's constitution coach, welcomes back at the Core
Welcome back to at the Core with Walker Wabin and Rick Greene. I'm Rick Greene, American's constitution coach. Thanks for staying with us. Phone number is 8885-8988-4088-8589-8840. We're going to start in Texas because all great things come from Texas. And, Gina's up first. Gina, go ahead. What's your comment, question or insult today? Go ahead.
>> Gina: Oh, Rick, I could never insult you. I'm your neighbor up here in Tyler, Texas and, and I love Tyler. It is a wonderful place. Mary Christmas.
>> Rick Green: Yes, right back at you. by the way, I recorded my first, well, the first filming of our Constitution Alive class was in Tyler. We did that 15, years ago.
>> Gina: Yeah, I think I may have been there. I know I saw you in, it was an awesome, awesome presentation.
>> Rick Green: Thank you.
President Trump and his administration have worked miracles finding thousands of lost children
>> Gina: Well, back to, our President Trump and thank God for him. I don't know what's worse, promising illegal immigrants, the land of milk and honey and they end up in some crime ridden Democrat run city or trafficking thousands of children. And I think in God's eyes, the children would be the worst.
>> Rick Green: I agree.
>> Gina: And from what I've been reading, Trump has actually and his administration have worked miracles finding thousands of these lost children.
>> Rick Green: Yes.
>> Gina: And I just feel like we need to focus on that as well.
>> Rick Green: I'm so glad you mentioned that, Gina. Excellent, excellent call. Yes. 62,000 so far, that have been located. And Tom Holman, you know, it's hard to talk about, I mean, he talked about some of the things they were, yeah, definitely. Some of them being sex trafficked, some of them in very abusive situations. a ton of these Kids were turned over to single males, with no relationship to the kid. we. And I say we because we're responsible for our government. Our government participated in child sex trafficking. We took these kids in, we flew them across the country. we handed them over to people. It's evil, evil, evil, evil stuff. And, you know, I was. I was on a show the other. I do this show called Flashpoint a couple times a week with my friend Gene Bailey and, other friends. And my buddy Mark Meckler was on. And Mark runs, convention estates dot com. He's also very involved with, you know, news networks and all this stuff. Anyway, Mark had put together a rally, I want to say, two years ago, it might have been three years ago, but it was a big rally here in Texas during the. When it was just, it starting to become so obvious the evil that was being perpetrated by the Otto Penn administration with these open borders. And they knew. They knew that this was happening with these kids. and Mark was on the show the other night, and this topic came up, and I. And I reminded Mark. I didn't have to remind him. when he was telling me what he learned behind the scenes from law enforcement and the folks that were dealing with this, he literally just broke down. Man was just crying. And, it is that bad, folks. It is that bad. And so the rescuing of 62,000 of them, ah, is huge. I think the best way to try to. What Gina just said is so important. Being thankful and having a heart of gratitude as we go into the Christmas season for what President Trump has done, just reverse it, right? Not only have we deported 2.5 million illegal aliens and. And, found and rescued 62,000 children. If President Trump had not been elected and the. And the same policies had continued, which they would have under Kamala Harris or if Joe Biden had somehow managed to get reelected, it would be. Instead of 2.5 million deported, it would be another probably 5 million coming across the border with, you know, and infiltrating our country. So that's a. That's a 7.5 million difference in what we would have here in the country. And then Instead of having 62,000 kids rescued, it'd be another 50 or 60,000 kids sex trafficked right across our border or, you know, trafficked incident. Anyway, I mean, folks, that's a massive, massive turnaround. Not only did we stop the evil, we're now reversing. That's why the reverse migration is so important. So, anyway, Gina, great Call. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for calling in.
Rick: Isn't there a law that checks businesses for hiring illegals
Susan's up next in Virginia. Susan, you're up. Go ahead.
>> Susan: Hi, Rick. Thank you for taking my call. I have a question about, Can you hear me?
>> Rick Green: I hear you. Go for it.
>> Susan: Okay, so, I wondered, isn't there a law or a way that they can check businesses for hiring illegals? I, am right outside of, Washington D.C. in that area. I'm a retired public health nurse. so of course we couldn't turn people in because of the health issue, whatever, but these people would have jobs and they're hired because they'll work for nothing practically. And so people like that, and so that encourages them to stay. It encourages people not to turn them in. Is there not a law that requires you to hire citizens or how does that work?
>> Rick Green: Yeah, no, Susan, you're actually hitting on a great subject here. and first of all, side note, on something you said before, I get to the main thing you're asking about. I think it's crazy that you can't report. I think whether you come in for health care or, or whatever it might be, once someone's identified as an illegal alien, we should be deporting them. I get the policy reason why you want them to be able to come in and get care and not fear being reported. But that m. Probably means you shouldn't be there in the first place. And you're also a drain on our society if you're getting care, and not paying taxes. So anyway, but to your point, absolutely. And of course the law is there. It already exists that they're not supposed to be employing illegals. And we're already hearing phenomenal reports across the country where because of ICE intervention and because of so many self deportations in specific pockets in the country that jobs are opening up. And I saw one guy talking about how he had had more calls for, I can't remember what he does, but more business in the last couple of months than in the five years previous combined. And so Americans are getting those jobs and getting those contracts and getting those opportunities. So 100%, yes, to your point, it should be illegal or, it is illegal for them to be employing illegal aliens and there should be more enforcement of that. And that kind of fits with the whole drug thing too, right? Not only do you have to stop the supply coming in, you have to do something about on the demand side. And that's why you have this unfortunate unholy alliance, between the Democrats wanting, to bring in illegals in order to cheat in elections. And employers that are, you know, big companies, not just. Not just small companies, but big companies working with them to get cheap labor. And, So, yes, to your point, we got to work on both fronts there for sure.
I think there's more talk of going after illegal immigrants
Okay, let's see. I think I had Jacob up next. Jacob, back to Texas. You're up next. Go ahead, Ben. Hey, Jacob. Yeah, go ahead. Hello. So, I'm. I'm wondering how, like, so those mayors and all those people that said during Biden, like, and all that stuff that they're a safe haven for illegal immigrants, how is. How is. How is that not illegal? Because aren't they sworn to protect America? And those illegal immigrants are doing something illegal. So by saying they're going to protect them, they are doing something illegal, aren't they? Yeah. Yeah, man. No, you're spot on, Jacob, 100%. I think there's even now more and more talk of going after them. I mean, if you're actually telling your law enforcement. And I forget, I'm blanking on which, Oh, it was Jacob Frey, the Fay. Whatever his name is, the guy that started the, Summer of Love, and cities being burned down all across the country by encouraging the police to give up their precinct, and let the, rioters burn it down in, Minneapolis. Anyway, he was literally saying, telling his law enforcement to fight ice to stop ICE from being able to come in and deport the criminals. Not even. Anyway, yes, I think we. Absolutely. And it wasn't him. It was someone else, another mayor, or maybe even a. Might even been a police chief. I can't remember some leader in one of these blue cities saying, that we will not help law enforcement enforce the law. Now just stop and think about that sentence for a second. They're going to stop law enforcement from enforcing the law. I mean, at that point, you're anarchy. I mean, at that point, you are definitely rebelling against what society, the society where you live is saying, this is the law. This is what you're. We're supposed to be doing as law enforcement, and you're now rebelling against that 100%. They should also be, locked up and maybe even deported. How about that? Wouldn't that be interesting?
>> Jacob: I don't know.
L.S. disagrees with Obama on hiring and firing
>> Rick Green: All right, let's go to, Tennessee. I just have an L.S. i don't have a name, so. L. S in Tennessee. Go ahead.
>> LF: Yeah, my name is actually LF. Veteran.
>> Rick Green: Gotcha.
>> LF: That is my name. Yeah, I was in Vietnam when The American soldiers got there sitting on the right side, rice sack with a Thompson submachine gun. but, the last, the second time Barack Obama ran for president, I did not vote. I voted, but I did not vote for either one, either M. Man for president because I disagree to both of them. This last election you had, I would, I would disagree with both people that, that ran. I believe in America. I believe in laws. I believe that laws should be obeyed. I, I don't think that a president should be able to fire anybody wants to fire. We've had rules set up for who you can and can't fire and who do the hiring. He put people in charge, and those people didn't do the hiring. When it comes to the sinking of, of the drug boats, I'm, 100% for that. when it comes to, people bringing drugs across the border.
>> Rick Green: Yeah.
>> LF: You know, if something happened to him, I, I would see nothing wrong with it because I've seen, I've seen people lose that. I've seen a, a policeman go to a house and, and put this guy owed $1200 in taxes, use crack every day. Policeman went there, put him out because he would not pay his taxes. If he didn't have crack, he would have paid his taxes, he'd kept his house.
>> Rick Green: Yeah.
>> LF: So, I mean, our country is being destroyed by these people and what they're doing.
>> Rick Green: Yeah. Let me ask you this. Lf, on, on the, on the, hiring and firing thing, if, if you had, if you had a company, and, and, and a new CEO came in, or a new, new manager at that, at that, at that branch that's supposed to make it, you know, more, efficient and do whatever that business is better, should that person be able to hire and fire in order to make the business operate?
>> LF: Well, if he follow the rules, yes.
>> Rick Green: But isn't that what the president.
>> LF: But guess what? There are rules, there are rules for the president to hire and fire and who he can hire and fire. The president can't fire anybody he wants to according, to the rules that are there.
>> Rick Green: But shouldn't he be able to, like, if he's the president over the executive branch and everybody in the executive branch, he's trying to make all of those agencies more efficient or to do their job better. Somebody's got to have the authority to hire and fire. Otherwise you end up with employees that just stick around forever whether they do a good job or not.
>> LF: When I came back to America, they sent me to Fort Hollaburg Maryland, which, which was the spy school. They now go. Go to colleges and teach children to spy. College kids, high school kids, they told me that they wanted me to teach these, kids how to spy. I told him, I said, I. I said, if you get. I'll teach people how to kill with a knife or a gun. I said, I don't want nothing to do with teaching a person how to spy. They let me get away with it. Now, if they'd ordered me to do it, I would have did it, but I wanted nothing to do with teaching people how to spy. And so, yeah, you got rules. You know, if you. If you're not going to follow the rules, what good is it? Washington D.C. i believe, is constant. $1 million a day for the National Guard.
>> Rick Green: Yeah.
>> LF: What would happen if he gave that $1 million a day to the Washington D.C. police? They could psychologically evaluate, new policemen, put new policemen on the street, and it would be forever.
>> Rick Green: Oh, there's no doubt they need more policemen on the street there for sure. But, you know, I mean, I agree. You got to play by the rules. You got to. You got to play. But what I'm saying is the rules should be that. That when you come in to. To take over a company that's failing and messed up, you got to be able to hire and fire to be able to make that thing work. almost out of time. One other thing I wanted to say, too, I forgot who the caller was right before that. But on. On the back, on the immigration thing, you know, part of. Part of what, we used to do, we did this program called the Bracero program, back in the 40s and 50s, and, and, and it was where if you needed to fill a labor gap in the country, that, that people could come in and work here, but they came in legally and you knew who they were. They paid a fee to be able to do that. So instead of illegal immigration that's costing you, you have legal immigration that's actually making money. And, I know I've mentioned it on the program before, but it's something somebody said earlier in one of the questions made me think of that. just a reminder, we have had programs in the past that did actually work, but it still comes back to, M. Even what LF Is saying that you got to have the rules in place and you got to play by those rules. And so on the immigration side of things, we've just kind of ignored those rules, and now we're letting people violate them openly. And we got to come back to following those rules. And on the hiring and firing thing, I think the rules have to be very clear. And that's actually what the fight is at the Supreme Court level. What are the rules? Because Congress passes the law, that's the rules. And are they allowed to pass rules that violate the constitutional separation of powers? So the ultimate rule book for us as Americans is the Constitution. Now obviously for us as individuals, it's the Bible. But as citizens, the ultimate rulebook is the Constitution. So Congress cannot pass rules that violate the Constitution. They have to pass rules that are in line with the Constitution. And that's what this debate is about on who the president can hire and fire. So we'll see how the Supreme Court comes down on what those rules should be. Great call. I love appreciate all of you that called in today. Appreciate you listening to at the Core with Walker Wildmon and Rick Green. The views and opinions expressed in this broadcast may not necessarily reflect those of the American Family association or American Family Radio.
