Jenna Ellis: When a mother meets her baby on ultrasound she chooses life
Jenna Ellis: We would like to take a moment to thank our sponsor, PreBorn. When a mother meets her baby on ultrasound and hears their heartbeat, it's a divine connection. And the majority of the time she will choose life. But she can't do it without our help. Preborn needs us, the pro life community, to come alongside her. One ultrasound is just $28, and to donate, dial £250 and say the keyword baby or visit preborn.com afr Jenna Ellis in the morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: I love talking about the things of God. Because of truth and the biblical worldview. The U.S. constitution obligates our government to preserve and protect the rights that our founders recognize come from God, our creator, not our government. I believe that scripture in the Bible is very clear that God is the one that raised up each of you, and God has allowed us to be brought here to this specific moment in time. This is Jenna Ellis in the Morning.
All eyes are on Texas as kind of a bellwether for midterms
Jenna Ellis: Good morning. It is Monday, August 31, and all eyes are on Texas as kind of a bellwether for how the midterms are going to go. what is in the mind of the gop. And Texas has been a reliably red state for decades, but Democrats are insisting that this is the cycle they can finally break. I mean, they're insisting that in places like Florida as well, where the, governor's race is shaping up. Very interesting. I, don't think that's gonna happen for, for Democrat David Jolly for governor over Byron Donalds. But, in Texas this year, they may have found a candidate who at least looks different from the usual Texas Democrat, although Democrat, candidates all over the country have, been very unusual and a lot more socialist. But of course, we're talking about Democrat James Talarico, who is young and extremely comfortable on social media. He's raising serious money and blanketing the airwaves as he tries to take the Senate seat being vacated by Jon Cornyn. On the Republican side, of course, is Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. He's nationally known as a conservative fighter who's won statewide, races repeatedly, but who, even fellow Republicans and have criticized, as a lackluster campaigner, even though there are a lot of people who support him personally. So it's interesting to see. And even the Wallnua Street Journal, this morning led with the headline about the Texas race and, Louisiana, Senator Jon Kennedy was on Fox News, Sunday briefing this weekend saying that Senate, Republicans in the GOP don't have any plans to, to spend on Ken Paxton. In the Texas Senate race. Listen to what he had to say.
Tony Ortiz: It, didn't sound from his answer
Jenna Ellis: that the President made any commitments, either
Tony Ortiz: himself or through his, super pac,
Jenna Ellis: to write checks for Paxton, at least right now. does Senate Leadership Fund or NRSC have any plans for TV ads, you know, to support him because he's down in spending there.
Jenna Ellis: Well, I listened to your interview. It was very good, by the way, with, the Attorney General. Look, there's no sense bubble wrapping it. We've got a race in Texas, and the Attorney General is going to have to do two things. He's going to have to point out the deficiencies of Mr. Taller Rico. he really is a looney, a Lulu Lennon, and he's a little bit of a weenie. But at the same time, Mr. Paxton is going to have to talk about what he's going to do. A positive platform for the United States Senate. You can't win an election by saying the other guy is worse than me. Money is an issue. Mr. Talarico has been raising bucket loads of money from California, Hollywood, all the beautiful people who partied with Harvey Weinstein. we don't have. We in the Senate don't have the money budgeted for Texas. We need help for the President from the president. President says he has $850 million in his campaign accounts. that's a lot of jack. I'm hoping that the President's going to spend 100 or 200 million in Texas, but he hasn't committed to it yet. but in the meantime, you know, we've got a race and I'm not going to play act and say that we don't.
Tony Ortiz: Ken Paxton and James Talarico face off in Texas AG race
Jenna Ellis: Well, the Federal Election Commission as of June 30, is saying that James Talarico has $21.5 million cash on hand compared to Ken Paxton, 1.8 million. So let's welcome in, Tony Ortiz, who is the editor and founder of Current Revolt. And Tony, you know, this is really fascinating to me because, you know, Senator Kennedy is recognizing, I think rightly, that there is a race in Tex. but the, the gop, the nrfc, and perhaps even Donald Trump don't seem too eager to jump in. At least backing with, with money, which is really what it actually takes in these races. I mean, we can talk about how, you know, ridiculous and insane James Talarika's positions and, you know, a lot of these Democrat candidates, how ridiculous their positions in policy are all day long, but unless you get in front of the voters saying those things, which takes money that doesn't necessarily translate into votes. So what is the GOP thinking in Texas?
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, you're 100% right. Right.
Tony Ortiz: And the phrase like we've got a race is 100% accurate as well. I think that conservatives, and people that are supporting, Ken Paxton would do well to understand that, like, we shouldn't be overconfident here. This is, this is a real race. And as far as what the GOP is thinking, I think, I think a lot of, I think we're going to see a big ramp up on spending Paxton and more involvement in his race post, Labor Day. At least that's what I've been signaled to at least myself, is that a lot of post Labor Day work is going to be done. But, that being said, it's not a good position for Paxton to be in. It shouldn't be this close. you know, when, when Senator, Cruz had a race against Beto o', Rourke, you know, years and years ago, it was never this close. the polling was a lot more, there was a bigger spread and the enthusiasm was for Beto was a little bit. And you know, Senator Cruz had a lot less scandals and drama associated with him during his race.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And you mentioned, the previous high profile Texas Democrats, you like Beto o'. Rourke. And so what is James Talarico doing differently or does it matter more who the opponent is?
Tony Ortiz: I think it's a little bit of both. Right. I think a big chunk of it is who the opponent is. Right.
Tony Ortiz: You, you didn't have a very big primary difference between Paxton and Cornyn, and Paxton like pretty much walked into that victory. however, what I think is forgotten is there is, there is a large chunk of independent voters that are somewhat moderate in Texas. And you know, they do find some issue with, with Ken Paxton, whether it's, you know, the affairs or the, or the money issues, the property. You know, they find this stuff kind of, off putting. And James Talarico, for all of the weird stuff he's, he said, and it's a lot of weird stuff. You know, a lot of people are attracted to the fact that he at least projects that he's Christian and that he projects that he's moderate. And I don't agree with those projections, but I think the independent voters kind of see that and maybe lean towards that way or they may just undervote that race.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And it's really interesting because, you know, as you mentioned, Talarico Talks extensively about his so called Christian faith, but is well outside of traditional Christian theology and orthodoxy. I mean including even saying God is non binary. I m mean just some really wild statements. But but by contrast, you know, Paxton has had obviously some, you know, personal issues, but he has been a champion at least in, in terms of what he's done as the AG for you know, a lot of really solid conservative positions. He's done a lot of really high profile cases as the Attorney General there in Texas. And so how much of the personal baggage I think from, from both candidates and we can say that fairly, do the voters know compared to a Paxton record that frankly, I mean Texan should be very proud of at least what he's done, what Paxton has done in his capacity as Attorney General. Right.
Tony Ortiz: And I think they are, which is why he won the primary. Right. very easily. Ken Paxton has gotten an insane amount of victories for Texans and for Americans really. but what was displayed or what was recorded earlier, which you played over your show is the saying like, you know, it's not enough to just talk about how bad your opponent is. You actually have to get in front of voters. And you know, you've seen some events posted on social media where Paxton's speaking to, you know, at an event and there's nobody in this room. I mean it's empty and given like, you know, a lot of this is just, you know, going to so many events. You're going to have some short ended, or short attended events. But I think the matter is, you know, Paxton's great. I still think he's, he's estimated to win this, projected to win this, at least from my point of view. But it's, it's, it's definitely closer than it should be and then it needs to be.
Jenna Ellis: And, and how accurate then do you think polling is? Because we've, we've seen this in several high profile races that you know, polling says one thing and you know, people say, oh, this race is so close and of course, you know, all sides are going to say that when they want to project that there's actually an opportunity to win and of course fundraise all of that. But then, you know, a lot of these races end up being, you know, absolute landslides. And so how much can we really trust the polling, particularly in Texas?
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, I don't think you could trust it that much. I think that they're heavily oversampling Democrats. I think that polling pollsters have constantly shown this. They highly Oversample Democrats. So I think you could probably, you know, just, just estimate here. You probably take any generic mainstream poll and add like plus three to plus five for, for Republicans on whatever poll being produced, which would put Paxton, you know, over Talarico at least at that rate, win by four, four or five in each. In however, again, it just, it's just, to me it's just way too, for Texas being a red state and for Paxton being such a phenomenal candidate with such great wins, it's way too close. It's way closer than it needs to be.
Jenna Ellis: And I'm speaking with Tony Ortiz, who is founder of the current revolt. And you know, Texas has changed demographically though, but Republicans have made, simultaneously, you know, some significant gains, particularly for example with Hispanic voters. So does all of this complicate maybe the old Democrat theory that demographic change inevitably turns Texas blue? I mean, they've been suggesting that, you know, for over a decade now that with all the people moving in as well, you know, that Texas is going to start shifting.
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, I think, I think that, that, that does happen. Right. you know, during the, during a lot of people cite that all the people moving here to Texas, just the general people moving here turns into stay blue. And in fact, you know, if you look at the old Cruz beto ra more Texas, I want to say immigrants, as in the sense of people that moved to Texas voted for Cruz than Texas natives actually. so that was quite surprising. But as far as demographics, as far as like Hispanics and whatnot. Yeah. I think that the Republicans and people who are involved in politics should be well aware that the trope that Hispanics are natural conservatives, that's just not true. And I say this as a Hispanic myself, that's just, it's not true. getting Hispanics to vote conservative, vote Republican is an effort, a full time effort that I think that the party should be well aware of. But, they should stop buying to this trope that Hispanics are naturally conservative because it's just not the case. And as more Hispanics move to Texas, you will see, it lean more blue. Absolutely.
President Trump endorsed Ken Paxton in the Texas Senate race
Jenna Ellis: And so then, you know, with that and obviously having to outreach and appeal to voters again, I mean this just the bottom line is it takes money. And so Senator Kennedy, had identified, you know, President Trump's really ginormous war chest. I mean, that's a huge and incredibly significant amount of money. So how does President Trump factor into this race? Because, you know, he's the one that has Been, for Ken Paxton, I mean, ended up endorsing him in the primary. Paxton is very closely, identified with the MAGA movement. I mean, he's been a good friend of the President for a long time. so that really surprised nobody. I think maybe the, the lateness of the endorsement was really, to me, the, the most surprising thing, for President Trump. I actually expected him to endorse Paxton a lot earlier over Cornyn. but. But with him, with Paxton being so closely identified with the MAGA movement first, how does that factor with President Trump maybe being willing to open the war chest, now that we're, you know, in the last couple of months before the primaries. And does Paxton's association with the MAGA movement actually help him in Texas? Because I think, I mean, President Trump is still really phenomenally popular in Texas.
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, I think his association with the MAG movement does help. Right, of course. I think it's one huge thing. Definitely helping him. And Trump has signaled that. President Trump has signaled that. He signaled that he is going to be doing events, and he has been doing events, very recently, in Pax's benefit. And again, I do think that a lot of what you see as far as spending and outreach and ads and events, you will see post Labor Day, we've got an RNC midterm convention that's happening here in a couple weeks here in Dallas, Texas. And I think, as I'm aware, it's pretty unique and it hasn't been done in a very long time, if ever. And I do think that, you're probably going to see a lot of drumbeating, ah, for that race, for the Senate race, for getting out the vote for Ken Paxton and making voters and attendees aware of James, Talarico's history.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And so what voter coalition would Talarico actually have to assemble in Texas to win?
Tony Ortiz: Well, he's got to get, obviously the majority of the Democrat votes. He does have to get the female, white, moderate, or left lean. So you have to get the female vote out pretty dramatically. And he would have to take a lot of the independent vote, the independent moderate or even the independent, right. To win. And unfortunately, you know, there is, you know, there are a lot of moderates that are seeing Talarico as a viable option. they think that his tone is great and he at least, at least publicly comes off as moderate despite his voting record and despite, you know, the clips that people have been able to, unearth of him talking about God is non binary and he loves trans kids. There's lots of weird stuff. But of course the tall ego camp doesn't project this because they know that in Texas he needs to at least appear moderate in order to get those votes. And so, it's definitely an uphill battle for, for Talarico, whereas in Paxton, you know, he just needs to get the majority of the Republican vote for that win.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. So, I mean, if you, if you had to. All things, you know, right now, as of August 31st, if, if you're looking and projecting out to November, do you think that this race more closely will end up like a Beto o' Rourke versus Ted Cruz in the sense that people thought that was going to be really close. And then, you know, Beto was just not the Democrat celebrity that his party projected him to be. I mean, he's just totally failed and you know, hasn't gone on to do anything, significant. I mean, is. Is Talarico probably going to shape up to be something like that, or is this, seriously, you know, somebody who is, becoming a national celebrity, in part, at least in Republican circles because of his absolutely absurd statements. or is. Is this actually, you know, a potentially viable candidate?
Tony Ortiz: I think it's, you know, I think it's. I think it's wise to view him as a potentially viable candidate for sure. Especially over Beto. I do think that the, the amount of money and the turnout and at least some of the hype is a little bit more. There's more substance to it than there was with Beto. You know, as somebody who's been living in Texas for, for. I've seen it and you know, I was here during the Beto cruise race and you know, Beto just came off as very artificial, was very fake. And while Talarico off of that like that, in some cases the, the the hype for him and the turnout for him and the people talking about him do seem to have a little bit more substance. And so, I, as it is currently, I think the race were held today, I think that Ken Patterson would win. However, I do think that, again, it's, it's still, it's still way. It's still way more close. And I'm definitely way more concerned about this race versus what it was like with, Beto versus Cruz.
Jenna Ellis: Interesting.
Tony Ortiz says Texas Senate race could become an endangered Republican Senate seat
Well, last question for you on this topic. and Tony Ortiz, and you're gonna be staying with us through the break. but if you had to identify maybe a single thing or, you know, series of things that could turn this from, you know, an interesting race that everybody's talking about into truly an endangered Republican Senate seat. I mean, what, what would that be? Would it be more on the Talarico side or Paxton potentially failing, you know, to make the spend or to get out the message? you know, what would be where you would see the tide shifting based on, the current bellwether in Texas?
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, I think if the spending and the money coming in remained what it is now all the way through November, it would be a disaster. If things do not ramp up after Labor Day, we're going to have a problem. The Paxton camp is going to have a problem. And then additionally, if Talarico just maintains cruise control on what he's got now and the spending doesn't increase, it would be not a great outcome.
Jenna Ellis: All right, well, so fascinating for a lot of these. We're going to head to break now, but Tony Ortiz, as I said, is sticking with us through the break, because we have a couple of other things, to talk about here this morning, in terms of headlines. But you know, it's, it's so interesting to see some of these races, but this is why we need to be paying attention ahead of time. so often, even, you know, even regular listeners, you know, like, you know, friends and family of mine, who listen to the program, you know, sometimes you don't pay attention until you're to your ballot, until, you know, the week or so beforehand. these are things that we need to know what is on the ballot, who is on the ballot, and make sure that, we can vote in the best possible way to preserve the conservative agenda and hopefully give, the last two years of President Trump's turn term the best opportunity, especially in Congress and particularly in the Senate. So we will be right back with more here on Jenna Ellis in the Morning.
Tony Ortiz joins American Family Radio to discuss immigration policy ahead of midterm elections
Hi, I'm Jenna Ellis. Did you know that this content is listener supported? Without people like you, this podcast would not exist. And that's why we need you. A generous monthly gift of any amount will help sustain American Family Radio and specifically this podcast. Please consider becoming a monthly financial partner today by visiting afr.netforward/give. That's afr.net give welcome back to
Tony Ortiz: Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. Well, Tony Ortiz, who is the editor and founder of current Revolution Volt, is still with us to talk about where we stand with immigration. so turning from candidates now into policy and what some of these issues are. Obviously, you know, affordability in the economy is a really big topic for both sides heading into the midterms. But immigration still remains kind of at the top. There was a headline over the weekend that Milo, Yiannopoulos, who's a far right critic of US Immigration was actually deported from the United States. So he's a pretty. A British, A commentator who enthusiastically supported President Trump's immigration crackdown and he was arrested and deported for allegedly living in the US Illegally. So ah, that coming from npr. So that that headline kind of, you know, renewed some focus, on immigration. But then there's also a really interesting thread on X. And obviously you know, this, this topic has been discussed. But after Mark, Wayne Mullin took over for Kristi Noem as you know, as, as the head and the secretary, there hasn't been as much emphasis and not nearly as many incidents at least that have been reported kind of mainstream. So this is more now, going back into the policy realm and a lot of focus on the immigration issues have centered on the H1B fight. And it's, and it's not necessarily framed as immigration versus no immigration. It seems like that kind of, you know, binary has been what at least the left has tried to reduce the rights argument to. But with respect to H1B, it's. It's more of a dispute over whom American immigration and labor policy exists to serve. Should the overriding objective be maximizing economic growth by giving American companies access to in theory, the world's best workers, which is what H1B arguably is designed to do? Or should the government deliberately structure a system to advantage American citizens first, even when a foreign worker might be cheaper, more productive or more qualified? So this has been a really open debate. so Tony, what do you think about the H1B factor into the overall concern that I think the right largely and generally has saying we're kind of done with importing Muslims. We're done, you know, importing people who undermine American values. We're done importing our demise essentially. And do we still have. Tony?
Tony Ortiz: Sorry about that. I think we're on the right path with this crackdown in H1B. the fact is a lot of these, the only people that are truly benefiting from H1B are the people who are capitalizing on this cheap labor. And frankly, it's not a mistake to call called slave labor. You're bringing in people that are willing to work at pennies on the dollar compared to how Americans should be paid for that same position. the conservatives and Republicans and even see this actually with the left, it's kind of interesting that the left's not really fighting this as much as you would anticipate. they're not happy with the fact that Americans are struggling. They're getting laid off, from their jobs and they're being replaced or their jobs are being shipped overseas or they're being replaced by groups of people that are here on H1BS and they're willing to work for insanely cheap. And it's not just the job replacements. But just looking at that is the problem. But the amount, the amount of fraud that's happening in the H1B program, you've seen conservative commentators, ah, Sarah Gonzalez from the Blaze has done exposes on a lot of these almost fake companies that have applied for H1B status for their, for people to come over here and work these like fake jobs. And so the program's rife with fraud. And so I think it's really good that they're finally cracking down on this.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And I think that even those on the right who are arguing for some level of, you know, of H1B, they would not be against cracking down on the fraud. And so I think that at least generally, everyone on the right doesn't want illegal immigration. They don't want fraud in the system. They don't want the loopholes like amnesty and then people just come and overstay. They don't want the people who, you know, maybe have come legally on student visas and so forth to just overstay. I mean all of that is what is what I think the right is all solidified on. But then the debate on H1B, as sort of this, and there's a really good argument on social media from Palmer, Luckey, who is essentially arguing against framing this H1B debate as a binary choice between sort of open ended, meritocratic immigration and anti immigrant protectionism. And so I mean he's basically arguing, and I think he's right, that American immigration policy should benefit Americans. And so you know, and then though the question is, does the H1B status when used appropriately, and you know obviously there's not fraud in it, that does benefit some American companies, but it then disadvantages some of the American workers. So which Americans then are we prioritizing in our policies?
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, and you know, Americans should be prioritized in any policy that gets set up in America, it should always, it should always be what's best for America and what's best for Americans. And frankly, policy should be looked at as growing and securing the middle class. again, a lot of these, A lot of these H1B programs and a lot of people currently using H1B, they target the middle class directly. Yes. I'm not against, you know, me personally, I'm not against bring, using H1B to bring in highly, highly skilled people when we, when we lack them. Right. Everyone talking like doctors or engineers. But you've got cases. There was a case here in Texas where you had a vape shop, a smoke shop, applying for 3H, AH1BS for manager positions to manage a vape shop. I mean, this is just unneeded. This, this program drives down wages for the middle class. it's rife with fraud and it's frankly being used for the wrong types of positions.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And I think that, that overall, when we look at the prolific use of H1B, it's completely overused. And when we're talking about, you know, highly skilled worker, I mean, this isn't, And I would reject the idea that jobs should simply go to whoever is most qualified, quote, unquote, globally, because, you know, that metric can depend perhaps on the employer. But, but the premise that the US Government has a legitimate obligation to structure labor and immigration policy for the benefit of American citizens, I think is valid, not to create a perfectly level, global labor market. And that's where H1B is really overused. And the categories of who qualifies, I, think should be heavily limited beyond what it has been.
Tony Ortiz: Absolutely. America is the greatest country in the world and it should be, with that knowing that and that being a fact, it should be the hardest to get into. And that is just true. If, is it, if we are so great, it should be incredibly hard to immigrate here and to work here legally. And so yeah, this program, it's made it far too easy for people to come here and just take middle class type jobs and to get here and then bring in the rest of their family. I mean, you talk about turning a country blue. that's the quickest way to do it. You talk about degrading a country's culture. That's another quick way to do it is through this H1B program and just driving down wages. You know, the left is constantly talking about this failed, this failed policy of them saying we need to raise the minimum wage. If the left really cared about the wages of the middle and lower class, what they would do is get rid of programs like this that drive it down. So I think the end of the H1B issue and the criticisms of it, ironically, I think this is a bipartisan issue. And again, at least here on the ground in Texas, you're not seeing a lot of effort by the left to counter signal, you know, cramping, down the program and, you know, talks of getting, rid of a lot of the loopholes here. I think it's even the left voters, and voting base is not happy with the H1B program.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah.
Silicon Valley is arguing that hiring foreign workers is better overall for economy
And do you think that, in this whole debate, Silicon Valley and, you know, the bigger corporations have an unfair lobbying advantage just because, you know, corporations. You're talking about corporate versus the little guy. I mean, kind of classic, setup there. Because, Silicon Valley is essentially arguing that if a foreign engineer is better qualified than an American engineer, why shouldn't an American company want to hire that person? And so they're essentially saying this is better overall for the economy because, we can hire the cheapen or maybe better skilled labor. And that ultimately allows more productivity and some of those things. But, you know, obviously the counter is that that's too simplistic of an argument because employment overall has broader national consequences beyond the productivity of one worker for one company. But do you think that there's kind of a bargaining disparity when we're talking about, lobbying policy and maybe why even the GOP hasn't taken some of these policy changes as seriously?
Tony Ortiz: Absolutely. I think that there is a huge disparity. I think that, you know, the tech world and their lobbyists, are going to lobby for making, H1B really easily accessible. You know, again, if you're a tech company, H1B is a huge advantage for you. Not only for which I think is a bad excuse for having access to what they would call. What they would call, maybe better engineers or better tech workers, but the biggest gain for them is just their access to cheap labor, to slave labor, essentially. That's the real issue. We've got insanely talented Americans here in this country. And if the argument is that we don't have enough, well, I think they should invest in making more. I think that if you're truly a patriot and you're a company that's operating in the United States, you should want the best talent for your company to come from the American worker pool. And if it doesn't Exist then should create it or invest in it. Right. rather than shipping, a job overseas or bringing in, somebody overseas to replace, ah, an American worker. So I think that we will see, you will likely see some kickback from the tech industry as far as lobbying and whatnot to try to get this H1B program, maybe back to where it was. If the Trump administration is cracking down on it. I'm worried that the, you know, the Trump administration is doing some phenomenal things with this program, you know, after the midterms. I'm worried that maybe some of this will get reversed. I sure hope not, but I guess that's to be seen.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and it's really interesting because, you know, even the, the purely economic calculation is, is complicated because, you know, even if, Silicon Valley and kind of the, you know, the big tech argument is saying, you know, this will be better overall for productivity, you know, for economic stimulation, all of that. I mean, immigrants who eventually return to their home countries taking accumulated savings or vested equity and all of that, with them aren't merely just foreign workers earning American wages. It's that policymakers should also consider how much of the resulting wealth ultimately remains and circulates within the United States. I think Silicon Valley is presupposing that their workers will just advantage, the company overall and that will advantage specifically the United States. But I think the underlying philosophical disagreement is over whether the, the stimulus to the economy and how we look at labor is more of a globalist perspective and kind of seeing the the labor pool as, as more open and globalized or whether we are actually supporting America first and we're looking at what Americans can achieve and what Americans should do. And do you think that the right needs to even, you know, the companies on the right, like for example, you know, Tesla and SpaceX and you know, Elon Musk and you know, I m mean he's prolifically used H1B visas. you know, but in his own conversations, on this topic, even, you know, American companies like that need to consider more of the broader philosophical implications, not just the bottom line.
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, they need to consider am I going to sell out my country in exchange for the economy or exchange for better, better, you know, more, more, more better stock portfolio. Right. so yeah, I think that the country, the company need to consider, you know, what is patriotic, what is my, what is my duty as an American to my fellow Americans. And again, I think if the argument from them is like, we just don't have the talent pool. Well, invest in the talent pool then. stop taking the easy route out and selling out your country. I guarantee you our enemies, like China, they don't do that. You're not seeing them import Americans to replace Chinese jobs. Right. They are building out infrastructure or the schools or the education needed to train their workers. Right. especially for these higher, upper, higher up jobs. And so, you know, again, these tech CEOs, they need to consider what's best for the country, not what's best for their pocketbook.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And that's where, you know, it's interesting all of these policy arguments, then overlap with each other because, you know, you can't talk about this without talking about education and why, you know, our higher education system. It seems like a lot of these universities are focused more on, you know, diversity, equity and inclusion. They're focused more on, you know, getting student activists to go out and be, you know, these leftist liberals that you know, stage these walkouts and you know, whether it's high school to higher education and instead of incentivizing and recruiting more students to actually do some of these high level jobs, you know, like the engineers and you know, like some of these things that are, that are highly skilled workers so that we can have that kind of competition. And so, so overall in this topic, I mean how much of this is, do you think being communicated to the voter to understand really the difference not just within the Republican kind of in House debate, but more broadly that if Democrats regain control, I mean there are going to be a lot of changes that, that are not America first just by definition and how much that actually matters, to the midterms and who people vote for in every state across the country.
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, I think you bring up a phenomenal point and a phenomenal maybe campaign, campaign strategies to bring up the fact that, you know, if you're pro American, if you're a voter, and you don't want your job shipped off to another country, you need to consider voting for the Republican Party or you need to get out and vote. And a lot of these wins that we've gotten, on H1B and these bad immigration programs are at risk of getting reversed if you don't get out and vote for Republicans in the midterms. I think that that is not currently being said, and probably needs to be added as an emergency, talking point for political campaigning.
Jenna Ellis: Well, anyone listening to this, you can send this conversation and show when it's posted on afr.net to your senator and to your, your member of Congress. because I think these types of issues need to be talked about more. And it isn't just about, you know, personality, which I think, unfortunately a lot of these campaigns become and, you know, personal is important. Obviously, like what we were talking about in the, in the last segment, you know, what James Talarico believes is kind of a big deal because then that shows, you know, where he is going to be at in terms of policy. But we also have to understand the issues overall and understand why, it's not just a personality context contest. We're not just, you know, electing a prom king or queen. You know, we're not electing, a press secretary. We're not electing somebody just to go on, you know, the mainstream media and talk about this. We, we need to elect people who understand these issues, how they interplay with one another and how to advance the actual conservative agenda. Why? For the purpose of protecting and preserving the rights that come from God, our creator, so that we can here in America advance freedom and liberty for the individual. That's the responsibility of government. And people in government need to understand that. So, Tony Ortiz, really appreciate your time talking about all of this. And we will be right back with more.
80% of abortion vulnerable women choose life after seeing their baby on ultrasound
We're living in a defining moment in history. Today, a woman facing an unexpected pregnancy can order the abortion pill online, often before anyone has had the chance to tell her she is loved, that she's not alone, or that there is hope. That's why you are needed right now. You were made for this moment. At preborn network clinics, mothers are welcomed with compassion, practical support, and a free ultrasound. And when she sees her baby and hears that tiny heartbeat for the very first time, fear often gives way to hope. In fact, more than 80% of abortion vulnerable women choose life after seeing their baby on an ultrasound at a preborn network clinic. That one moment can save a baby's life and open a mother's heart to the hope of Jesus Christ. This is our moment to stand for those who cannot speak for themselves. Just $28 provides one life saving ultrasound. $140 helps rescue five babies. Please don't wait. Dial 250 and say the keyword baby. That's 250 baby. Or [email protected] AFR that's preborn.com AFR Together we can save lives one heartbeat at a time.
US Forces strike Iranian rocket launchers on the Strait of Hormuz
welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Well, stop me if You've heard this before. We're talking about Iran yet again. so for the last six months, this conflict has moved through a seemingly endless cycle of escalation, retaliation, threats, pauses, talks of negotiation, economic pressure, and then, inevitably, more military action. So this coming from the ap. US Forces struck Iranian rocket launchers on the Strait of Hormuz in their first military action in a month yesterday on Sunday, breaking a lull in fighting during an intermittent war that has lasted more than six months. So, vowing to retaliate for what it called a deadly attack, Iran later said it had launched missiles at U.S. sites in Jordan. So. So, exactly where are we at? And I think the question still remains, as we continue to move through this and talk about Iran again, what is the actual US Objective in this moment?
Scott Eulinger says economic blockade against Iran has been very effective
So, to talk yet again, let's welcome in Scott Eulinger, who's a retired CIA officer. And, Scott, I appreciate, you sticking with us through the months of this Iranian conflict, to continue to ask this question. You know, what. What really is the US Objective right now?
Scott Uehlinger: I think the US Objective is basically, economic strangulation to either force them to the table or perhaps more likely, force a regime change. it's interesting, like, the administration doesn't really like to talk about regime change that much. I guess it's because if they talk about it too much, then they know that the present regime will not even think about talking to them. So, I think that's part of their strategy. But there's no doubt at all that the economic blockade has been extremely effective. And actually, another sign that the war is going well is that it's been very quiet. The press has been very quiet about the conduct, let's say, the last 10 days or so. You haven't heard much until yesterday with this latest, attack. And I think, it's because the war is being won slowly through economic. Through blockade. You know, the same tactic that starved Germany in World War I, the same tactic that starved Napoleon in 1812. And so, it's very effective. And another thing that we've seen is in slow motion, is pipelines have been starting to supplant the Straits of Hormuz. Now, that's not something that's going to, It's like maybe 30% of the deliveries are now via pipeline or more, but they're increasing. And what is the Strait of Hormuz going to look like in about five years? In about five years, it's going to be considerably different. Maybe instead of moving 20% of the world's oil, it'll be moving 10%. So what's happening is Iran is losing its leverage. Iran knows that. And that's another reason why it, you know, because they're a snake and they cannot help themselves. That's why they were getting ready to launch some mines via rockets actually, which is a rather interesting technical innovation. They're actually going to use rocket launchers that would be launching seaborne mines that can go into the water. That was what was attacked on the island, on those islands, yesterday by US military. So Iran is running out of cards. apparently now it's 2 million riyals to the dollar and basic groceries are getting hard to find in Iranian shops. And so it's very possible that the end is coming. We're coming to the end of this
Jenna Ellis: and I hope and pray that we are coming to the end of this. but it is fascinating that you know, you raised the point that Iran really hasn't been in the news as much. I mean even in the mainstream kind of anti trauma media. And it's not just because, you know, they're sick and tired of talking about it, as much as I am. I mean they're not doing that out of the goodness of their hearts, at all. And so probably the reason is that it is a, it is at least right now better for Trump. however there are a lot of people even in, you know, kind of the Republican conservative circles that are saying, you know, this needs to be wrapped up quickly and you know, we're getting to just a couple months before the midterms and with all of the economy affordability issues, if this continues past November, and into the election, that could be very damaging for Trump and the Republicans. so why, why do you think, you know, with all of those factors considered that perhaps, you know, the leftist press isn't talking about that more or they just more wrapped up in, you know, kind of affordability domestically and they're not looking at all of the issues that you are, in terms of the overall strategy and objective in Iran.
Scott Uehlinger: Well, there's no. You are right, you're right, Jenna. There is no doubt that the reason the mainstream media is not covering this is because there's nothing to hang Trump with in the last like 10 days. By the way. There was another thing that came out, I forget the name of the information source, but a prominent information source that was talking, that was constantly putting out data which the Democrats were Using about oil flows out of the Straits was basically, unlike Friday or something, corrected itself and said, oh, yeah, by the way, we've made a huge mistake in the last, like two months and, you know, we've underestimated by, you know, 70% how much oil is going out of the Gulf. So in other words, the Democrats for the past few months have been using talking points which have been proven now to be totally false. And even Lloyds of London has come out and said, you know, there has always been much more oil flow out of the streets of Hormuz, in the past two months or more than we've been told.
Scott Uehlinger: Because the basis for all of these articles was, was false information that was being put out and then it was corrected, you know, just a few days ago that, oh yeah, we were wrong about the oil flows. Which is the whole reason they're trying to hang Trump is by saying, oh, you know, you're restricting the world's energies, oil flows and stuff. Well, it's not as bad as they have been portraying.
Jenna Ellis: And so how much of this do you think, Scott Ewlinger, is ultimately more of an economic war compared to, you know, the initial, rationale that the Trump administration gave of saying this is all about making sure that Iran doesn't get nuclear capabilities and more of the national, strategic interests.
Scott Uehlinger: I mean, it's all tied together. You really can't separate it. The nuclear question is a problem. I think, though, with what has been done militarily, we don't really have to worry about that, for like three years, and we bought three years with that, at least. So, that is not the immediate concern. But it's clear that, looking at history, they decided that the blockade is the easiest way to do this. There's less bloodshed, but also it will perhaps force more, the Iranian people to act. Now, we don't know what's going on behind the scenes as far as, the arming of, different Iranian groups and stuff. I mean, it must be being done at some level. To me, I would be astonished if it were not being done by Israel, by the United States, or by both combined. And so that combined with the, with the, basically the inability of the Iranian regime to pay its foreign legions. Iran has imported a lot of enforcers. They can't trust their own people, so they're importing mercenaries from, like, Afghanistan, from Iraq, et cetera, to terrorize the population because they can't even trust their own people. They can't trust Even, elements of their security forces to do that anymore, they don't trust them. But when the money dries up and you can't get yourself bread and a gallon of milk, that's a real problem. And so, the regime itself has been making some rather surprising admissions that they are feeling the pressure big time. And now there are some rumors amongst the, Iranian expatriate population about different people are getting ready to flee the country because now they see that it's not working out and they're fearing rebellion by the people. So, that's the hope.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And so is regime stability still a realistic question here?
Scott Uehlinger: I think so. With this economic, with what is going on economically, that is the reason that Trump is going, for this, to force them to the table again. Although I think that he, realizes he's been fooled so many times that that's really not worth it. So I think he's pursuing a regime out, saying regime change, because this is probably the least messy way to do it. And I don't blame them for doing it, because this regime is absolutely evil and cannot be trusted. They've been at war with us for 47 years, and it's clear everything that they've done that they cannot be trusted. So what do you do? You either ignore the problem and then, you know, whatever, Paris gets nuked in three years, or you deal with it. And he is dealing with it. And I'm sure that President Trump hopes that, he can get the, you know, he can wrap this up by November, but I'm not sure if that's going to happen. But he is determined to, improve the security situation in the Middle east permanently. And so if it takes longer than the midterm elections, it's going to happen.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And that really is the interest. Interesting question. Are we moving toward a resolution or just resetting the clock to the next escalation? And where will this factor in? And does Trump necessarily care that the midterms may be affected? Well, Scott Ulinger, really appreciate it, as always. You can reach me and my team. Jennaafr.net preborn has rescued over 400,000 babies from abortion. And every day their network clinics rescue 200 babies lost lives. Will you join PreBorn in loving and supporting young moms in crisis? Save a life today. Go to preborn.com afr.
Jenna Ellis: When a mother meets her baby on ultrasound she chooses life
Jenna Ellis: We would like to take a moment to thank our sponsor, PreBorn. When a mother meets her baby on ultrasound and hears their heartbeat, it's a divine connection. And the majority of the time she will choose life. But she can't do it without our help. Preborn needs us, the pro life community, to come alongside her. One ultrasound is just $28, and to donate, dial £250 and say the keyword baby or visit preborn.com afr Jenna Ellis in the morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: I love talking about the things of God. Because of truth and the biblical worldview. The U.S. constitution obligates our government to preserve and protect the rights that our founders recognize come from God, our creator, not our government. I believe that scripture in the Bible is very clear that God is the one that raised up each of you, and God has allowed us to be brought here to this specific moment in time. This is Jenna Ellis in the Morning.
All eyes are on Texas as kind of a bellwether for midterms
Jenna Ellis: Good morning. It is Monday, August 31, and all eyes are on Texas as kind of a bellwether for how the midterms are going to go. what is in the mind of the gop. And Texas has been a reliably red state for decades, but Democrats are insisting that this is the cycle they can finally break. I mean, they're insisting that in places like Florida as well, where the, governor's race is shaping up. Very interesting. I, don't think that's gonna happen for, for Democrat David Jolly for governor over Byron Donalds. But, in Texas this year, they may have found a candidate who at least looks different from the usual Texas Democrat, although Democrat, candidates all over the country have, been very unusual and a lot more socialist. But of course, we're talking about Democrat James Talarico, who is young and extremely comfortable on social media. He's raising serious money and blanketing the airwaves as he tries to take the Senate seat being vacated by Jon Cornyn. On the Republican side, of course, is Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. He's nationally known as a conservative fighter who's won statewide, races repeatedly, but who, even fellow Republicans and have criticized, as a lackluster campaigner, even though there are a lot of people who support him personally. So it's interesting to see. And even the Wallnua Street Journal, this morning led with the headline about the Texas race and, Louisiana, Senator Jon Kennedy was on Fox News, Sunday briefing this weekend saying that Senate, Republicans in the GOP don't have any plans to, to spend on Ken Paxton. In the Texas Senate race. Listen to what he had to say.
Tony Ortiz: It, didn't sound from his answer
Jenna Ellis: that the President made any commitments, either
Tony Ortiz: himself or through his, super pac,
Jenna Ellis: to write checks for Paxton, at least right now. does Senate Leadership Fund or NRSC have any plans for TV ads, you know, to support him because he's down in spending there.
Jenna Ellis: Well, I listened to your interview. It was very good, by the way, with, the Attorney General. Look, there's no sense bubble wrapping it. We've got a race in Texas, and the Attorney General is going to have to do two things. He's going to have to point out the deficiencies of Mr. Taller Rico. he really is a looney, a Lulu Lennon, and he's a little bit of a weenie. But at the same time, Mr. Paxton is going to have to talk about what he's going to do. A positive platform for the United States Senate. You can't win an election by saying the other guy is worse than me. Money is an issue. Mr. Talarico has been raising bucket loads of money from California, Hollywood, all the beautiful people who partied with Harvey Weinstein. we don't have. We in the Senate don't have the money budgeted for Texas. We need help for the President from the president. President says he has $850 million in his campaign accounts. that's a lot of jack. I'm hoping that the President's going to spend 100 or 200 million in Texas, but he hasn't committed to it yet. but in the meantime, you know, we've got a race and I'm not going to play act and say that we don't.
Tony Ortiz: Ken Paxton and James Talarico face off in Texas AG race
Jenna Ellis: Well, the Federal Election Commission as of June 30, is saying that James Talarico has $21.5 million cash on hand compared to Ken Paxton, 1.8 million. So let's welcome in, Tony Ortiz, who is the editor and founder of Current Revolt. And Tony, you know, this is really fascinating to me because, you know, Senator Kennedy is recognizing, I think rightly, that there is a race in Tex. but the, the gop, the nrfc, and perhaps even Donald Trump don't seem too eager to jump in. At least backing with, with money, which is really what it actually takes in these races. I mean, we can talk about how, you know, ridiculous and insane James Talarika's positions and, you know, a lot of these Democrat candidates, how ridiculous their positions in policy are all day long, but unless you get in front of the voters saying those things, which takes money that doesn't necessarily translate into votes. So what is the GOP thinking in Texas?
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, you're 100% right. Right.
Tony Ortiz: And the phrase like we've got a race is 100% accurate as well. I think that conservatives, and people that are supporting, Ken Paxton would do well to understand that, like, we shouldn't be overconfident here. This is, this is a real race. And as far as what the GOP is thinking, I think, I think a lot of, I think we're going to see a big ramp up on spending Paxton and more involvement in his race post, Labor Day. At least that's what I've been signaled to at least myself, is that a lot of post Labor Day work is going to be done. But, that being said, it's not a good position for Paxton to be in. It shouldn't be this close. you know, when, when Senator, Cruz had a race against Beto o', Rourke, you know, years and years ago, it was never this close. the polling was a lot more, there was a bigger spread and the enthusiasm was for Beto was a little bit. And you know, Senator Cruz had a lot less scandals and drama associated with him during his race.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And you mentioned, the previous high profile Texas Democrats, you like Beto o'. Rourke. And so what is James Talarico doing differently or does it matter more who the opponent is?
Tony Ortiz: I think it's a little bit of both. Right. I think a big chunk of it is who the opponent is. Right.
Tony Ortiz: You, you didn't have a very big primary difference between Paxton and Cornyn, and Paxton like pretty much walked into that victory. however, what I think is forgotten is there is, there is a large chunk of independent voters that are somewhat moderate in Texas. And you know, they do find some issue with, with Ken Paxton, whether it's, you know, the affairs or the, or the money issues, the property. You know, they find this stuff kind of, off putting. And James Talarico, for all of the weird stuff he's, he said, and it's a lot of weird stuff. You know, a lot of people are attracted to the fact that he at least projects that he's Christian and that he projects that he's moderate. And I don't agree with those projections, but I think the independent voters kind of see that and maybe lean towards that way or they may just undervote that race.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And it's really interesting because, you know, as you mentioned, Talarico Talks extensively about his so called Christian faith, but is well outside of traditional Christian theology and orthodoxy. I mean including even saying God is non binary. I m mean just some really wild statements. But but by contrast, you know, Paxton has had obviously some, you know, personal issues, but he has been a champion at least in, in terms of what he's done as the AG for you know, a lot of really solid conservative positions. He's done a lot of really high profile cases as the Attorney General there in Texas. And so how much of the personal baggage I think from, from both candidates and we can say that fairly, do the voters know compared to a Paxton record that frankly, I mean Texan should be very proud of at least what he's done, what Paxton has done in his capacity as Attorney General. Right.
Tony Ortiz: And I think they are, which is why he won the primary. Right. very easily. Ken Paxton has gotten an insane amount of victories for Texans and for Americans really. but what was displayed or what was recorded earlier, which you played over your show is the saying like, you know, it's not enough to just talk about how bad your opponent is. You actually have to get in front of voters. And you know, you've seen some events posted on social media where Paxton's speaking to, you know, at an event and there's nobody in this room. I mean it's empty and given like, you know, a lot of this is just, you know, going to so many events. You're going to have some short ended, or short attended events. But I think the matter is, you know, Paxton's great. I still think he's, he's estimated to win this, projected to win this, at least from my point of view. But it's, it's, it's definitely closer than it should be and then it needs to be.
Jenna Ellis: And, and how accurate then do you think polling is? Because we've, we've seen this in several high profile races that you know, polling says one thing and you know, people say, oh, this race is so close and of course, you know, all sides are going to say that when they want to project that there's actually an opportunity to win and of course fundraise all of that. But then, you know, a lot of these races end up being, you know, absolute landslides. And so how much can we really trust the polling, particularly in Texas?
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, I don't think you could trust it that much. I think that they're heavily oversampling Democrats. I think that polling pollsters have constantly shown this. They highly Oversample Democrats. So I think you could probably, you know, just, just estimate here. You probably take any generic mainstream poll and add like plus three to plus five for, for Republicans on whatever poll being produced, which would put Paxton, you know, over Talarico at least at that rate, win by four, four or five in each. In however, again, it just, it's just, to me it's just way too, for Texas being a red state and for Paxton being such a phenomenal candidate with such great wins, it's way too close. It's way closer than it needs to be.
Jenna Ellis: And I'm speaking with Tony Ortiz, who is founder of the current revolt. And you know, Texas has changed demographically though, but Republicans have made, simultaneously, you know, some significant gains, particularly for example with Hispanic voters. So does all of this complicate maybe the old Democrat theory that demographic change inevitably turns Texas blue? I mean, they've been suggesting that, you know, for over a decade now that with all the people moving in as well, you know, that Texas is going to start shifting.
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, I think, I think that, that, that does happen. Right. you know, during the, during a lot of people cite that all the people moving here to Texas, just the general people moving here turns into stay blue. And in fact, you know, if you look at the old Cruz beto ra more Texas, I want to say immigrants, as in the sense of people that moved to Texas voted for Cruz than Texas natives actually. so that was quite surprising. But as far as demographics, as far as like Hispanics and whatnot. Yeah. I think that the Republicans and people who are involved in politics should be well aware that the trope that Hispanics are natural conservatives, that's just not true. And I say this as a Hispanic myself, that's just, it's not true. getting Hispanics to vote conservative, vote Republican is an effort, a full time effort that I think that the party should be well aware of. But, they should stop buying to this trope that Hispanics are naturally conservative because it's just not the case. And as more Hispanics move to Texas, you will see, it lean more blue. Absolutely.
President Trump endorsed Ken Paxton in the Texas Senate race
Jenna Ellis: And so then, you know, with that and obviously having to outreach and appeal to voters again, I mean this just the bottom line is it takes money. And so Senator Kennedy, had identified, you know, President Trump's really ginormous war chest. I mean, that's a huge and incredibly significant amount of money. So how does President Trump factor into this race? Because, you know, he's the one that has Been, for Ken Paxton, I mean, ended up endorsing him in the primary. Paxton is very closely, identified with the MAGA movement. I mean, he's been a good friend of the President for a long time. so that really surprised nobody. I think maybe the, the lateness of the endorsement was really, to me, the, the most surprising thing, for President Trump. I actually expected him to endorse Paxton a lot earlier over Cornyn. but. But with him, with Paxton being so closely identified with the MAGA movement first, how does that factor with President Trump maybe being willing to open the war chest, now that we're, you know, in the last couple of months before the primaries. And does Paxton's association with the MAGA movement actually help him in Texas? Because I think, I mean, President Trump is still really phenomenally popular in Texas.
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, I think his association with the MAG movement does help. Right, of course. I think it's one huge thing. Definitely helping him. And Trump has signaled that. President Trump has signaled that. He signaled that he is going to be doing events, and he has been doing events, very recently, in Pax's benefit. And again, I do think that a lot of what you see as far as spending and outreach and ads and events, you will see post Labor Day, we've got an RNC midterm convention that's happening here in a couple weeks here in Dallas, Texas. And I think, as I'm aware, it's pretty unique and it hasn't been done in a very long time, if ever. And I do think that, you're probably going to see a lot of drumbeating, ah, for that race, for the Senate race, for getting out the vote for Ken Paxton and making voters and attendees aware of James, Talarico's history.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And so what voter coalition would Talarico actually have to assemble in Texas to win?
Tony Ortiz: Well, he's got to get, obviously the majority of the Democrat votes. He does have to get the female, white, moderate, or left lean. So you have to get the female vote out pretty dramatically. And he would have to take a lot of the independent vote, the independent moderate or even the independent, right. To win. And unfortunately, you know, there is, you know, there are a lot of moderates that are seeing Talarico as a viable option. they think that his tone is great and he at least, at least publicly comes off as moderate despite his voting record and despite, you know, the clips that people have been able to, unearth of him talking about God is non binary and he loves trans kids. There's lots of weird stuff. But of course the tall ego camp doesn't project this because they know that in Texas he needs to at least appear moderate in order to get those votes. And so, it's definitely an uphill battle for, for Talarico, whereas in Paxton, you know, he just needs to get the majority of the Republican vote for that win.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. So, I mean, if you, if you had to. All things, you know, right now, as of August 31st, if, if you're looking and projecting out to November, do you think that this race more closely will end up like a Beto o' Rourke versus Ted Cruz in the sense that people thought that was going to be really close. And then, you know, Beto was just not the Democrat celebrity that his party projected him to be. I mean, he's just totally failed and you know, hasn't gone on to do anything, significant. I mean, is. Is Talarico probably going to shape up to be something like that, or is this, seriously, you know, somebody who is, becoming a national celebrity, in part, at least in Republican circles because of his absolutely absurd statements. or is. Is this actually, you know, a potentially viable candidate?
Tony Ortiz: I think it's, you know, I think it's. I think it's wise to view him as a potentially viable candidate for sure. Especially over Beto. I do think that the, the amount of money and the turnout and at least some of the hype is a little bit more. There's more substance to it than there was with Beto. You know, as somebody who's been living in Texas for, for. I've seen it and you know, I was here during the Beto cruise race and you know, Beto just came off as very artificial, was very fake. And while Talarico off of that like that, in some cases the, the the hype for him and the turnout for him and the people talking about him do seem to have a little bit more substance. And so, I, as it is currently, I think the race were held today, I think that Ken Patterson would win. However, I do think that, again, it's, it's still, it's still way. It's still way more close. And I'm definitely way more concerned about this race versus what it was like with, Beto versus Cruz.
Jenna Ellis: Interesting.
Tony Ortiz says Texas Senate race could become an endangered Republican Senate seat
Well, last question for you on this topic. and Tony Ortiz, and you're gonna be staying with us through the break. but if you had to identify maybe a single thing or, you know, series of things that could turn this from, you know, an interesting race that everybody's talking about into truly an endangered Republican Senate seat. I mean, what, what would that be? Would it be more on the Talarico side or Paxton potentially failing, you know, to make the spend or to get out the message? you know, what would be where you would see the tide shifting based on, the current bellwether in Texas?
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, I think if the spending and the money coming in remained what it is now all the way through November, it would be a disaster. If things do not ramp up after Labor Day, we're going to have a problem. The Paxton camp is going to have a problem. And then additionally, if Talarico just maintains cruise control on what he's got now and the spending doesn't increase, it would be not a great outcome.
Jenna Ellis: All right, well, so fascinating for a lot of these. We're going to head to break now, but Tony Ortiz, as I said, is sticking with us through the break, because we have a couple of other things, to talk about here this morning, in terms of headlines. But you know, it's, it's so interesting to see some of these races, but this is why we need to be paying attention ahead of time. so often, even, you know, even regular listeners, you know, like, you know, friends and family of mine, who listen to the program, you know, sometimes you don't pay attention until you're to your ballot, until, you know, the week or so beforehand. these are things that we need to know what is on the ballot, who is on the ballot, and make sure that, we can vote in the best possible way to preserve the conservative agenda and hopefully give, the last two years of President Trump's turn term the best opportunity, especially in Congress and particularly in the Senate. So we will be right back with more here on Jenna Ellis in the Morning.
Tony Ortiz joins American Family Radio to discuss immigration policy ahead of midterm elections
Hi, I'm Jenna Ellis. Did you know that this content is listener supported? Without people like you, this podcast would not exist. And that's why we need you. A generous monthly gift of any amount will help sustain American Family Radio and specifically this podcast. Please consider becoming a monthly financial partner today by visiting afr.netforward/give. That's afr.net give welcome back to
Tony Ortiz: Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. Well, Tony Ortiz, who is the editor and founder of current Revolution Volt, is still with us to talk about where we stand with immigration. so turning from candidates now into policy and what some of these issues are. Obviously, you know, affordability in the economy is a really big topic for both sides heading into the midterms. But immigration still remains kind of at the top. There was a headline over the weekend that Milo, Yiannopoulos, who's a far right critic of US Immigration was actually deported from the United States. So he's a pretty. A British, A commentator who enthusiastically supported President Trump's immigration crackdown and he was arrested and deported for allegedly living in the US Illegally. So ah, that coming from npr. So that that headline kind of, you know, renewed some focus, on immigration. But then there's also a really interesting thread on X. And obviously you know, this, this topic has been discussed. But after Mark, Wayne Mullin took over for Kristi Noem as you know, as, as the head and the secretary, there hasn't been as much emphasis and not nearly as many incidents at least that have been reported kind of mainstream. So this is more now, going back into the policy realm and a lot of focus on the immigration issues have centered on the H1B fight. And it's, and it's not necessarily framed as immigration versus no immigration. It seems like that kind of, you know, binary has been what at least the left has tried to reduce the rights argument to. But with respect to H1B, it's. It's more of a dispute over whom American immigration and labor policy exists to serve. Should the overriding objective be maximizing economic growth by giving American companies access to in theory, the world's best workers, which is what H1B arguably is designed to do? Or should the government deliberately structure a system to advantage American citizens first, even when a foreign worker might be cheaper, more productive or more qualified? So this has been a really open debate. so Tony, what do you think about the H1B factor into the overall concern that I think the right largely and generally has saying we're kind of done with importing Muslims. We're done, you know, importing people who undermine American values. We're done importing our demise essentially. And do we still have. Tony?
Tony Ortiz: Sorry about that. I think we're on the right path with this crackdown in H1B. the fact is a lot of these, the only people that are truly benefiting from H1B are the people who are capitalizing on this cheap labor. And frankly, it's not a mistake to call called slave labor. You're bringing in people that are willing to work at pennies on the dollar compared to how Americans should be paid for that same position. the conservatives and Republicans and even see this actually with the left, it's kind of interesting that the left's not really fighting this as much as you would anticipate. they're not happy with the fact that Americans are struggling. They're getting laid off, from their jobs and they're being replaced or their jobs are being shipped overseas or they're being replaced by groups of people that are here on H1BS and they're willing to work for insanely cheap. And it's not just the job replacements. But just looking at that is the problem. But the amount, the amount of fraud that's happening in the H1B program, you've seen conservative commentators, ah, Sarah Gonzalez from the Blaze has done exposes on a lot of these almost fake companies that have applied for H1B status for their, for people to come over here and work these like fake jobs. And so the program's rife with fraud. And so I think it's really good that they're finally cracking down on this.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And I think that even those on the right who are arguing for some level of, you know, of H1B, they would not be against cracking down on the fraud. And so I think that at least generally, everyone on the right doesn't want illegal immigration. They don't want fraud in the system. They don't want the loopholes like amnesty and then people just come and overstay. They don't want the people who, you know, maybe have come legally on student visas and so forth to just overstay. I mean all of that is what is what I think the right is all solidified on. But then the debate on H1B, as sort of this, and there's a really good argument on social media from Palmer, Luckey, who is essentially arguing against framing this H1B debate as a binary choice between sort of open ended, meritocratic immigration and anti immigrant protectionism. And so I mean he's basically arguing, and I think he's right, that American immigration policy should benefit Americans. And so you know, and then though the question is, does the H1B status when used appropriately, and you know obviously there's not fraud in it, that does benefit some American companies, but it then disadvantages some of the American workers. So which Americans then are we prioritizing in our policies?
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, and you know, Americans should be prioritized in any policy that gets set up in America, it should always, it should always be what's best for America and what's best for Americans. And frankly, policy should be looked at as growing and securing the middle class. again, a lot of these, A lot of these H1B programs and a lot of people currently using H1B, they target the middle class directly. Yes. I'm not against, you know, me personally, I'm not against bring, using H1B to bring in highly, highly skilled people when we, when we lack them. Right. Everyone talking like doctors or engineers. But you've got cases. There was a case here in Texas where you had a vape shop, a smoke shop, applying for 3H, AH1BS for manager positions to manage a vape shop. I mean, this is just unneeded. This, this program drives down wages for the middle class. it's rife with fraud and it's frankly being used for the wrong types of positions.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And I think that, that overall, when we look at the prolific use of H1B, it's completely overused. And when we're talking about, you know, highly skilled worker, I mean, this isn't, And I would reject the idea that jobs should simply go to whoever is most qualified, quote, unquote, globally, because, you know, that metric can depend perhaps on the employer. But, but the premise that the US Government has a legitimate obligation to structure labor and immigration policy for the benefit of American citizens, I think is valid, not to create a perfectly level, global labor market. And that's where H1B is really overused. And the categories of who qualifies, I, think should be heavily limited beyond what it has been.
Tony Ortiz: Absolutely. America is the greatest country in the world and it should be, with that knowing that and that being a fact, it should be the hardest to get into. And that is just true. If, is it, if we are so great, it should be incredibly hard to immigrate here and to work here legally. And so yeah, this program, it's made it far too easy for people to come here and just take middle class type jobs and to get here and then bring in the rest of their family. I mean, you talk about turning a country blue. that's the quickest way to do it. You talk about degrading a country's culture. That's another quick way to do it is through this H1B program and just driving down wages. You know, the left is constantly talking about this failed, this failed policy of them saying we need to raise the minimum wage. If the left really cared about the wages of the middle and lower class, what they would do is get rid of programs like this that drive it down. So I think the end of the H1B issue and the criticisms of it, ironically, I think this is a bipartisan issue. And again, at least here on the ground in Texas, you're not seeing a lot of effort by the left to counter signal, you know, cramping, down the program and, you know, talks of getting, rid of a lot of the loopholes here. I think it's even the left voters, and voting base is not happy with the H1B program.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah.
Silicon Valley is arguing that hiring foreign workers is better overall for economy
And do you think that, in this whole debate, Silicon Valley and, you know, the bigger corporations have an unfair lobbying advantage just because, you know, corporations. You're talking about corporate versus the little guy. I mean, kind of classic, setup there. Because, Silicon Valley is essentially arguing that if a foreign engineer is better qualified than an American engineer, why shouldn't an American company want to hire that person? And so they're essentially saying this is better overall for the economy because, we can hire the cheapen or maybe better skilled labor. And that ultimately allows more productivity and some of those things. But, you know, obviously the counter is that that's too simplistic of an argument because employment overall has broader national consequences beyond the productivity of one worker for one company. But do you think that there's kind of a bargaining disparity when we're talking about, lobbying policy and maybe why even the GOP hasn't taken some of these policy changes as seriously?
Tony Ortiz: Absolutely. I think that there is a huge disparity. I think that, you know, the tech world and their lobbyists, are going to lobby for making, H1B really easily accessible. You know, again, if you're a tech company, H1B is a huge advantage for you. Not only for which I think is a bad excuse for having access to what they would call. What they would call, maybe better engineers or better tech workers, but the biggest gain for them is just their access to cheap labor, to slave labor, essentially. That's the real issue. We've got insanely talented Americans here in this country. And if the argument is that we don't have enough, well, I think they should invest in making more. I think that if you're truly a patriot and you're a company that's operating in the United States, you should want the best talent for your company to come from the American worker pool. And if it doesn't Exist then should create it or invest in it. Right. rather than shipping, a job overseas or bringing in, somebody overseas to replace, ah, an American worker. So I think that we will see, you will likely see some kickback from the tech industry as far as lobbying and whatnot to try to get this H1B program, maybe back to where it was. If the Trump administration is cracking down on it. I'm worried that the, you know, the Trump administration is doing some phenomenal things with this program, you know, after the midterms. I'm worried that maybe some of this will get reversed. I sure hope not, but I guess that's to be seen.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and it's really interesting because, you know, even the, the purely economic calculation is, is complicated because, you know, even if, Silicon Valley and kind of the, you know, the big tech argument is saying, you know, this will be better overall for productivity, you know, for economic stimulation, all of that. I mean, immigrants who eventually return to their home countries taking accumulated savings or vested equity and all of that, with them aren't merely just foreign workers earning American wages. It's that policymakers should also consider how much of the resulting wealth ultimately remains and circulates within the United States. I think Silicon Valley is presupposing that their workers will just advantage, the company overall and that will advantage specifically the United States. But I think the underlying philosophical disagreement is over whether the, the stimulus to the economy and how we look at labor is more of a globalist perspective and kind of seeing the the labor pool as, as more open and globalized or whether we are actually supporting America first and we're looking at what Americans can achieve and what Americans should do. And do you think that the right needs to even, you know, the companies on the right, like for example, you know, Tesla and SpaceX and you know, Elon Musk and you know, I m mean he's prolifically used H1B visas. you know, but in his own conversations, on this topic, even, you know, American companies like that need to consider more of the broader philosophical implications, not just the bottom line.
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, they need to consider am I going to sell out my country in exchange for the economy or exchange for better, better, you know, more, more, more better stock portfolio. Right. so yeah, I think that the country, the company need to consider, you know, what is patriotic, what is my, what is my duty as an American to my fellow Americans. And again, I think if the argument from them is like, we just don't have the talent pool. Well, invest in the talent pool then. stop taking the easy route out and selling out your country. I guarantee you our enemies, like China, they don't do that. You're not seeing them import Americans to replace Chinese jobs. Right. They are building out infrastructure or the schools or the education needed to train their workers. Right. especially for these higher, upper, higher up jobs. And so, you know, again, these tech CEOs, they need to consider what's best for the country, not what's best for their pocketbook.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And that's where, you know, it's interesting all of these policy arguments, then overlap with each other because, you know, you can't talk about this without talking about education and why, you know, our higher education system. It seems like a lot of these universities are focused more on, you know, diversity, equity and inclusion. They're focused more on, you know, getting student activists to go out and be, you know, these leftist liberals that you know, stage these walkouts and you know, whether it's high school to higher education and instead of incentivizing and recruiting more students to actually do some of these high level jobs, you know, like the engineers and you know, like some of these things that are, that are highly skilled workers so that we can have that kind of competition. And so, so overall in this topic, I mean how much of this is, do you think being communicated to the voter to understand really the difference not just within the Republican kind of in House debate, but more broadly that if Democrats regain control, I mean there are going to be a lot of changes that, that are not America first just by definition and how much that actually matters, to the midterms and who people vote for in every state across the country.
Tony Ortiz: Yeah, I think you bring up a phenomenal point and a phenomenal maybe campaign, campaign strategies to bring up the fact that, you know, if you're pro American, if you're a voter, and you don't want your job shipped off to another country, you need to consider voting for the Republican Party or you need to get out and vote. And a lot of these wins that we've gotten, on H1B and these bad immigration programs are at risk of getting reversed if you don't get out and vote for Republicans in the midterms. I think that that is not currently being said, and probably needs to be added as an emergency, talking point for political campaigning.
Jenna Ellis: Well, anyone listening to this, you can send this conversation and show when it's posted on afr.net to your senator and to your, your member of Congress. because I think these types of issues need to be talked about more. And it isn't just about, you know, personality, which I think, unfortunately a lot of these campaigns become and, you know, personal is important. Obviously, like what we were talking about in the, in the last segment, you know, what James Talarico believes is kind of a big deal because then that shows, you know, where he is going to be at in terms of policy. But we also have to understand the issues overall and understand why, it's not just a personality context contest. We're not just, you know, electing a prom king or queen. You know, we're not electing, a press secretary. We're not electing somebody just to go on, you know, the mainstream media and talk about this. We, we need to elect people who understand these issues, how they interplay with one another and how to advance the actual conservative agenda. Why? For the purpose of protecting and preserving the rights that come from God, our creator, so that we can here in America advance freedom and liberty for the individual. That's the responsibility of government. And people in government need to understand that. So, Tony Ortiz, really appreciate your time talking about all of this. And we will be right back with more.
80% of abortion vulnerable women choose life after seeing their baby on ultrasound
We're living in a defining moment in history. Today, a woman facing an unexpected pregnancy can order the abortion pill online, often before anyone has had the chance to tell her she is loved, that she's not alone, or that there is hope. That's why you are needed right now. You were made for this moment. At preborn network clinics, mothers are welcomed with compassion, practical support, and a free ultrasound. And when she sees her baby and hears that tiny heartbeat for the very first time, fear often gives way to hope. In fact, more than 80% of abortion vulnerable women choose life after seeing their baby on an ultrasound at a preborn network clinic. That one moment can save a baby's life and open a mother's heart to the hope of Jesus Christ. This is our moment to stand for those who cannot speak for themselves. Just $28 provides one life saving ultrasound. $140 helps rescue five babies. Please don't wait. Dial 250 and say the keyword baby. That's 250 baby. Or [email protected] AFR that's preborn.com AFR Together we can save lives one heartbeat at a time.
US Forces strike Iranian rocket launchers on the Strait of Hormuz
welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Well, stop me if You've heard this before. We're talking about Iran yet again. so for the last six months, this conflict has moved through a seemingly endless cycle of escalation, retaliation, threats, pauses, talks of negotiation, economic pressure, and then, inevitably, more military action. So this coming from the ap. US Forces struck Iranian rocket launchers on the Strait of Hormuz in their first military action in a month yesterday on Sunday, breaking a lull in fighting during an intermittent war that has lasted more than six months. So, vowing to retaliate for what it called a deadly attack, Iran later said it had launched missiles at U.S. sites in Jordan. So. So, exactly where are we at? And I think the question still remains, as we continue to move through this and talk about Iran again, what is the actual US Objective in this moment?
Scott Eulinger says economic blockade against Iran has been very effective
So, to talk yet again, let's welcome in Scott Eulinger, who's a retired CIA officer. And, Scott, I appreciate, you sticking with us through the months of this Iranian conflict, to continue to ask this question. You know, what. What really is the US Objective right now?
Scott Uehlinger: I think the US Objective is basically, economic strangulation to either force them to the table or perhaps more likely, force a regime change. it's interesting, like, the administration doesn't really like to talk about regime change that much. I guess it's because if they talk about it too much, then they know that the present regime will not even think about talking to them. So, I think that's part of their strategy. But there's no doubt at all that the economic blockade has been extremely effective. And actually, another sign that the war is going well is that it's been very quiet. The press has been very quiet about the conduct, let's say, the last 10 days or so. You haven't heard much until yesterday with this latest, attack. And I think, it's because the war is being won slowly through economic. Through blockade. You know, the same tactic that starved Germany in World War I, the same tactic that starved Napoleon in 1812. And so, it's very effective. And another thing that we've seen is in slow motion, is pipelines have been starting to supplant the Straits of Hormuz. Now, that's not something that's going to, It's like maybe 30% of the deliveries are now via pipeline or more, but they're increasing. And what is the Strait of Hormuz going to look like in about five years? In about five years, it's going to be considerably different. Maybe instead of moving 20% of the world's oil, it'll be moving 10%. So what's happening is Iran is losing its leverage. Iran knows that. And that's another reason why it, you know, because they're a snake and they cannot help themselves. That's why they were getting ready to launch some mines via rockets actually, which is a rather interesting technical innovation. They're actually going to use rocket launchers that would be launching seaborne mines that can go into the water. That was what was attacked on the island, on those islands, yesterday by US military. So Iran is running out of cards. apparently now it's 2 million riyals to the dollar and basic groceries are getting hard to find in Iranian shops. And so it's very possible that the end is coming. We're coming to the end of this
Jenna Ellis: and I hope and pray that we are coming to the end of this. but it is fascinating that you know, you raised the point that Iran really hasn't been in the news as much. I mean even in the mainstream kind of anti trauma media. And it's not just because, you know, they're sick and tired of talking about it, as much as I am. I mean they're not doing that out of the goodness of their hearts, at all. And so probably the reason is that it is a, it is at least right now better for Trump. however there are a lot of people even in, you know, kind of the Republican conservative circles that are saying, you know, this needs to be wrapped up quickly and you know, we're getting to just a couple months before the midterms and with all of the economy affordability issues, if this continues past November, and into the election, that could be very damaging for Trump and the Republicans. so why, why do you think, you know, with all of those factors considered that perhaps, you know, the leftist press isn't talking about that more or they just more wrapped up in, you know, kind of affordability domestically and they're not looking at all of the issues that you are, in terms of the overall strategy and objective in Iran.
Scott Uehlinger: Well, there's no. You are right, you're right, Jenna. There is no doubt that the reason the mainstream media is not covering this is because there's nothing to hang Trump with in the last like 10 days. By the way. There was another thing that came out, I forget the name of the information source, but a prominent information source that was talking, that was constantly putting out data which the Democrats were Using about oil flows out of the Straits was basically, unlike Friday or something, corrected itself and said, oh, yeah, by the way, we've made a huge mistake in the last, like two months and, you know, we've underestimated by, you know, 70% how much oil is going out of the Gulf. So in other words, the Democrats for the past few months have been using talking points which have been proven now to be totally false. And even Lloyds of London has come out and said, you know, there has always been much more oil flow out of the streets of Hormuz, in the past two months or more than we've been told.
Scott Uehlinger: Because the basis for all of these articles was, was false information that was being put out and then it was corrected, you know, just a few days ago that, oh yeah, we were wrong about the oil flows. Which is the whole reason they're trying to hang Trump is by saying, oh, you know, you're restricting the world's energies, oil flows and stuff. Well, it's not as bad as they have been portraying.
Jenna Ellis: And so how much of this do you think, Scott Ewlinger, is ultimately more of an economic war compared to, you know, the initial, rationale that the Trump administration gave of saying this is all about making sure that Iran doesn't get nuclear capabilities and more of the national, strategic interests.
Scott Uehlinger: I mean, it's all tied together. You really can't separate it. The nuclear question is a problem. I think, though, with what has been done militarily, we don't really have to worry about that, for like three years, and we bought three years with that, at least. So, that is not the immediate concern. But it's clear that, looking at history, they decided that the blockade is the easiest way to do this. There's less bloodshed, but also it will perhaps force more, the Iranian people to act. Now, we don't know what's going on behind the scenes as far as, the arming of, different Iranian groups and stuff. I mean, it must be being done at some level. To me, I would be astonished if it were not being done by Israel, by the United States, or by both combined. And so that combined with the, with the, basically the inability of the Iranian regime to pay its foreign legions. Iran has imported a lot of enforcers. They can't trust their own people, so they're importing mercenaries from, like, Afghanistan, from Iraq, et cetera, to terrorize the population because they can't even trust their own people. They can't trust Even, elements of their security forces to do that anymore, they don't trust them. But when the money dries up and you can't get yourself bread and a gallon of milk, that's a real problem. And so, the regime itself has been making some rather surprising admissions that they are feeling the pressure big time. And now there are some rumors amongst the, Iranian expatriate population about different people are getting ready to flee the country because now they see that it's not working out and they're fearing rebellion by the people. So, that's the hope.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And so is regime stability still a realistic question here?
Scott Uehlinger: I think so. With this economic, with what is going on economically, that is the reason that Trump is going, for this, to force them to the table again. Although I think that he, realizes he's been fooled so many times that that's really not worth it. So I think he's pursuing a regime out, saying regime change, because this is probably the least messy way to do it. And I don't blame them for doing it, because this regime is absolutely evil and cannot be trusted. They've been at war with us for 47 years, and it's clear everything that they've done that they cannot be trusted. So what do you do? You either ignore the problem and then, you know, whatever, Paris gets nuked in three years, or you deal with it. And he is dealing with it. And I'm sure that President Trump hopes that, he can get the, you know, he can wrap this up by November, but I'm not sure if that's going to happen. But he is determined to, improve the security situation in the Middle east permanently. And so if it takes longer than the midterm elections, it's going to happen.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And that really is the interest. Interesting question. Are we moving toward a resolution or just resetting the clock to the next escalation? And where will this factor in? And does Trump necessarily care that the midterms may be affected? Well, Scott Ulinger, really appreciate it, as always. You can reach me and my team. Jennaafr.net preborn has rescued over 400,000 babies from abortion. And every day their network clinics rescue 200 babies lost lives. Will you join PreBorn in loving and supporting young moms in crisis? Save a life today. Go to preborn.com afr.
Jenna Ellis discusses the critical political landscape in Texas as the midterm elections approach. Joined by Tony Ortiz, editor of Current Revolt, they analyze the fierce Senate race between Republican Ken Paxton and Democrat James Talarico. With Talarico's surprising fundraising efforts and Paxton's struggle to gain support, the conversation delves into the implications of these dynamics on the Republican party and the broader implications for the nation.
Jenna Ellis discusses the critical political landscape in Texas as the midterm elections approach. Joined by Tony Ortiz, editor of Current Revolt, they analyze the fierce Senate race between Republican Ken Paxton and Democrat James Talarico. With Talarico's surprising fundraising efforts and Paxton's struggle to gain support, the conversation delves into the implications of these dynamics on the Republican party and the broader implications for the nation.
Live
Did you know American Family Radio is listener-supported? Your monthly financial support will allow us to continue upholding Godly values through our numerous channels, like American Family Radio, One Million Moms, The Stand magazine, and many more.
Become a Great Commission Partner TODAY to help AFR transform culture by rebuilding the family. When you donate today, you’ll get access to:
