Jenna Ellis: U.S. constitution obligates government to protect biblical rights
: 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.
Jenna Ellis: Good morning.
The widening Iran conflict has upended oil production and shipping across Middle East
It is Tuesday, March 10, and as the conflict in Iran continues, oil prices are swinging wildly, according to the ap, and threatens, transport routes and production across the Middle East. And so the widening Iran conflict has upended oil production and shipping across the Middle east, straining energy supplies worldwide. Those disruptions caused oil to spread spike Monday, only for it to swiftly fall back after President Donald Trump suggested that the conflict, or the war as they're characterizing it, would be near an end. And so, what does this mean overall for oil prices? will we see prices affect, us at the gas pump? Well, let's welcome in tho Bishop, who is the comms director for the Mises Institute. And, so where are we at with, with oil?
Tho Bishop : I think that's, that's a good question. Uncertainty is the name of the game. and I don't think anyone knows at this point, how long this war is going to last. And ultimately, that's where everything comes down to. I mean, we saw in the course of 24 hours, the administration bring up, the draft being on the table to the president saying that he thinks the war might be mostly over. And so it's this conflict swinging from, you know, exactly where this conflict. What were the expectations needed for the conflict to end? what does an off ramp look like? Is Iran interested in off ramp in its own? retaliation. Right.
Tho Bishop : so until there's any sort of clear semblance of a result in this, conflict, then, you know, where the oil market can go with such a major vein, such a major highway of shipments, in the Strait, there is anyone's. Yes, to this point.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And, you know, it is fascinating how, unclear the White House is being about exactly what is going on. I mean, usually President Trump is, pretty precise, even if he articulates it in his kind of his own way. But, you know, to your point about the draft, I mean, the press secretary said, you know, President Trump, always keeps all options on the table. And, you know, he himself said, I believe it was during A press poll on Air Force One that you know, this would have to be something that would be an extraordinary circumstance for him to invoke that. But even just the possible hint and suggestion, is kind of in a sense playing into the left and trying to characterize this as more of an ongoing war instead of a strategic operation that will end in just a few weeks. I mean do we anticipate this kind of going the way of, of the Ukraine war where you know, everyone thought that would be over in a matter of weeks and now you know, here we are years and years into it and it seems like there's just no end forthcoming.
Tho Bishop : That's the scary thing right now is that, you know, I think it's clear going into it there was general objections, objectives in place. but it's one thing to launch, to blow things up and to destroy the infrastructure of a country and going after military installations and other. It's another thing to win the peace and to bring stability. And in particular you have an actor like Iran that has such extensive missile capabilities, that has a significant drone fleet, when we have so many allies and the area, not simply Israel but the Gulf states, when we have significant resources such as oil and such as the strait of her news and such, the amount of commerce and global traffic that comes into that and the ability to inflict pain relatively cheaply should you be in a situation where You know it's kind of a wounded animal effect. I mean it is something that you know, this is completely different than all the other in out operations from the administration and Venezuela, Iran in the past, et cetera, et cetera. and so I think that this is uncharted territory for what we've seen from the Trump doctrine of foreign policy. and with that there's an open ended possibilities of where things last. I think there's a lot of trust from, from the President's voters that this is something in and out that you know, I think there's, there's the interest, the support for a prolonged conflict even amongst the President's deep supporters. I think it starts running out very quickly if we start talking about months rather than weeks and you know, heaven forbid, years, the domestic cost, including on the energy front, and the way that it's eroding, the message of affordability and economic gains and things like that. Right.
Tho Bishop : You know, this is a very complicated and costly ah, conflict. Not simply you know, going to the gas pump right now, but there's Significant political cost, to speak nothing of, you know, the fact that we've already lost, you know, I reported seven, American service members. So yeah, this is. And again, within all of this is the global economy that is not the sort of environment, that you want to be disrupting going into midterms. so to put it crassly, yeah,
Jenna Ellis: that's a really interesting point. And I'm speaking with Tho Bishop, who's the content director for the Mises Institute. And you know, this kind of market instability, that Trump is willing to navigate, right ahead of the midterms is a little bit, counter intuitive to what's kind of always been the Trump doctrine. And yet, he clearly very strongly believes in the strategic objectives that he's outlined and you know, the ongoing win, however he might characterize that. And so, you know, when it comes to things like market instability like potentially gas prices, oil prices and all of that, how, assuming that this, this continues over the next, you know, say even several months, how much of this do you do you attribute to actual supply disruption versus like a geopolitical risk premium priced into markets specifically for oil? And then the economy just being an instability of not knowing exactly when this conflict will end.
Tho Bishop : I think it's impossible to pull apart those three factors there. But all of them I think go hand in hand. and that's, that's the difficulty of the entire situation. I know the administration has made attempts to try to offset the loss of insurance markets for shipping using, you know, basically using the federal government as a backstop, which I think is an interesting proposal within this sort of unique situation, that not have immediate payoff. Right.
Tho Bishop : Getting captains actually driving large vessels through with the threat of attack there is a little bit different than just simply making sure that their insurance is taken care of in that situation. and we're talking about economic decisions of massive investments. certainty in the course of weeks, months, years is a major factor for how capital is allocated. and that's the other dynamic to it, is that the disruptions in this region, and particularly if there is no clear, if say a post conflict Iraq, post war Iran is even more radical, more unhinged than it was prior to this conflict. I know that's difficult for people to even comprehend given the way that Khomeini and the perception of Iran. But if you have a hardliner, even crazier son taking over, then that elevates risk in the region generally, even if you had an end of direct military hostilities, that would certainly impact prices in terms of the immediate threats to fleets. But there's still the risk of regional uncertainty. So this is one of yet another major stress to the global economy. And it's hopefully, hopefully, there is a path to stability. There is a opportunity, for a deal on the table to not only reopen up commerce in the region, but to bring stability in Iran, even if it's the sort of leader that we typically would not like. Syria, for example, you've got a former ISIS leader that, you know, is a country that's been willing to play ball on geopolitical issues. There are paths out there that can resemble stability that could have lasting, positive impacts in the region, and particularly Donald Trump's legacy, which I think probably plays a major role in his ambitions here. But in the short term, the range of outcomes can go anywhere from several more weeks of, increased price of the pump to something much, much longer and much, m. More devastating, both to the global economy and to average Americans.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and it's interesting how all of this is being played out this, close to the midterms. And so assuming that this conflict does continue over the next couple of months instead of being resolved more quickly, where do you think, the sort of fault line lies in terms of the public perception and the voters perception of the impact of this conflict on the economy for purposes of the midterms. I mean, at what point do people. Is it kind of too late to say, okay, well, you know, whatever the economy is doing, anything that is potentially negative is now attributable to Iran and therefore President Trump, that may have a negative impact.
Tho Bishop : If war is measured in months and not, weeks, then I think it's going to be a disaster in the midterms personally, not only because of the economic cost, the relative lack of general, bringing, Americans on board this campaign, selling the campaign, and then also a massive, massive generational gap when it comes to this, conflict and really any sort of appetite for military adventurism overseas in general, you know, the way that this war is perceived by independents, by younger voters, by that large part of the 2024 coalition deeply, deeply in the red. And that's just right now, I think some of that. If we have it into the conflict by Friday, for example, just to pull a date out there and into something lasting. Right. It's not, okay, we're pulling out and Then all of a sudden we've got more attacks going in there and we're going to, we have to kind of play a peacekeeping role or some sort of follow up action. if you have something immediate, lasting, then maybe the opponents of the conflict kind of forget about it. the anxiety around what could be prices at the pump go back up. Maybe the political costs ignoring any, any arguments about the geopolitical benefits or the legacy benefits or the way history sees it. Right. Just the immediate political consequences. maybe it becomes less of an impact or maybe even a slight positive,
Tho Bishop : in the short term and this thing starts going on and on and on. then I think this is going to be a major political consequence because again, the appetite is just not there. And it's not simply going to be measured in terms of a disinterest in military adventurism overseas, but a real impact into how this is going to affect people's wallets. Because the longer it goes up, risk goes up, cost of the pump goes up. And so it's a very, dangerous situation politically, on top of everything that. Within the conflict itself.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah.
Bishop: How much do you think inflation will play into November elections
and one last question for you though, Bishop, and I really appreciate your time this morning breaking this down in the 2022 midterms infl. And we heard about, you know, Biden inflation and all of this through the 2024 presidential election, but we're not talking about that nearly as much as we are oil prices and other things related to Iran. And so, how much do you think that inflation may, play into the voters mindset, come November?
Tho Bishop : Well, I think that's, that's the interesting part in all this is that, you know, one of the most positive, things that the administration has had, has been oil prices. And the effect that oil prices has such a dramatic impact on so many other goods because of transportation costs, because of a variety of reasons there, you know, the extent to which Trump administration policies were able to significantly decrease, oil prices, which helped offset in some ways some of the cost of tariffs and things like that. And so if you had, you know, a meaningful, a reduction in the rate of price inflation, that is why this particular thing is so dangerous, is because this is hitting at perhaps the strongest aspect of the American economy. We still have issues with spending, we still have uneven job performances, we still have issues with, housing affordability and the like, but it's the gains on deregulation and energy prices, that has been the best part of the Trump economy. So this goes right into that. and that's again why this is such a particularly big deal. M. For the economy, both for consumers and for political fallout.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, well, we got to take a break here, but really fascinating stuff. And it's going to be interesting though, Bishop, to see how all of this plays out the closer we get to November and where the economy is actually situated. that of course is going to be a key voting issue like it always is. but hopefully Americans will turn their attention more toward the, the values voting of understanding who exactly will protect the American way of life, our law, our culture, all of that. M. You know, over handing over power to you know, the extreme leftist regime. So a lot to be praying for and focused on heading in to November. And so you can always follow though, Bishop on X. And we will be right back with more here on Jenna Ellis in the Morning.
Kansas City International Airport terminal reopened Sunday after being evacuated due to security threat
: Welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. Well, amid the conflict in the Middle east, tensions are rising here on the home front, with several reports of domestic terrorism and this report that a Southwest flight diverts to an Atlanta airport and an armed tactical unit detains a man in a frightening security scare. This coming from Fox News. Southwest passengers held their hands up as armed officers boarded a plane on Friday following a reported security threat. Threat. And then on on Sunday, the Kansas City International Airport terminal reopened, hours after it was evacuated while authorities looked into a potential threat. That coming from ap. The airport spokeswoman said in an email that shortly after 2pm the terminal was reopened. The evacuation began after a threat that surfaced around 11:15am Flights that landed after the evacuate evacuation were held on the taxiway during the shutdown, which the spokesperson said lasted over or about two hours. So in a social media post Sunday afternoon, U.S. transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said the incident was clear and normal operations are resuming. FBI Director Cash Patel said on social media Sunday afternoon that the FBI reviewed the threat and determined it to not be credible. So that's at least you know, somewhat relieving. But what, what's going on here really, in, in terms of the domestic front. Let's welcome in Ray Alexander, who is a retired naval officer. And Ray, it seems like you know, in the midst of this Middle east conflict, it's just providing opportunities for perhaps terror cells or you know, others who don't have the best interests of the US And American citizens, at heart to show themselves and these incidents, Seem to be on the increase. That's true.
Ray Alexander: for the. On the positive side, they, most of them, an overwhelming majority of them, appear to be or have proven to be false. Ah, false bomb claims, false, bomb threats, false other kinds of false physical threats. so on the positive side, almost none of them have proven to be an actual threat. There was that NewSong York, that incident in NewSong York City in response to a protest where a couple handheld, what appeared to be IEDs were thrown in a crowd and then at the police, that. Then there was a firebombing of a. A synagogue in Beverly hills recently on March 2nd. there have been some real threats, but most of them have been proven to be false.
Jenna Ellis: Well, and so that is encouraging that most of them have proven to be false and you know, the ones that were credible have at least been successfully neutralized. But what does this mean in terms of you know, ongoing security concerns, particularly I think for airlines because you know, in stories like this where you have you know, especially the video footage that goes viral and you know, these kinds of really scary incidents, quite frankly, it makes people kind of nervous about air travel and other concerns about you know, going to largely populated events and some of these things. how should people analyze the. The current, The, the current tensions in terms of their decision making?
Ray Alexander: You're correct. it is so much. It requires very, very little to affect
Ray Alexander: an operation of disruption in psychological warfare on the American people. We live in a free society and so it's difficult for the American government and police forces to sort of suppress, these kinds of, these kinds of efforts, these kinds of attacks, without significantly degrading our American liberties. and that is part of the double edged sword of living in a free country is that our liberties do allow the freedoms that also make it possible for people, the various forces and just malign actors, to kind of institute these, or establish or affect these disruption in psychological operations. Operations. Unfortunately it's so easy to call in a bomb threat and then you. And then you cause a disruption of air travel and say the Kansas City, International Airport for hours, low, low investment, low risk, but, but over the course of thousands of calls, has an actual disruptive effect on the American life, everyday life for American citizens. How to respond, understand, just generally big picture, understand that the world is a dangerous place and that we are attempting our best to address one major U.S. enemy, in Iran, and that will have cascading effects. fortunately we are addressing that, addressing Iran before it becomes a much larger and more violent regional and global, confrontation. but it does have effects on everyday lives. And many, most people will experience this as inconvenience and anxiety. very few, because we are addressing it in the way we are proactively, it will be far fewer people that will experience actual violence as a result.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and that's encouraging. And you know, we were talking in the last segment about you know, some of the economic concerns and you know, some of these reactions. And I think, you know, while people are very concerned about the economy, when it comes to risk of personal safety, that becomes sort of paramount. And especially in a post 911 security culture, particularly with you know, airlines and some of these other security operations. I mean they've intentionally lowered the threshold for diverting flights or involving law enforcement when, there is a potential threat or uncertainty involving an unruly passenger. And you know, does that kind of risk, of over response here, especially in this environment that now we're navigating in the midst of the Iran conflict, does this tend to lead to more false flags that are maybe quickly neutralized but is actually a good thing of an over response rather than kind of a more cavalier attitude towards security?
Ray Alexander: Yeah, I'm all for reducing the inconveniences of dhs, ah, you know, security checks at airports and making it quicker to access and easier to move. however, that being said, I think actually some of our increased awareness right now during this Iranian conflict is beneficial and should provide folks a greater sense of comfort. Although I have to say that when a conflict is over, we should go back to scaling back those disruptive DHS inspections at airports and, and other types of bureaucratic kind of inspections that have proven over time to be essentially not very useful in preventing, in preventing accidents or in preventing attacks. So to summarize, I agree that DHS does more than I think it should, generally speaking under normal conditions. However, now it is a useful tool to help prevent real attacks.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and you know, and I'm thinking of things like we finally can keep our shoes on at the airport, you know, DHS just finally, you know, change that. And I'm just waiting in the midst of all of this for that rule to be rescinded and to kind of go back to, you know, some of these post 9 11. But I think you, you raise a really, a valid point. Ray Alexander. That you know, while some perhaps heightened, temporary security measures need to be or should be in place. Temporary is kind of the key word. And it seems like whenever we change security protocols or we do this even for you know, a, a temporary reason, then those often become permanent without kind of any logic or reason behind it. And so it becomes so cumbersome, all kind of in the name of security. And we've seen a lot of of, of privacy and you know, some of this kind of you know, Big Brother, sort of government intrusion, be the price that we've paid for more of an illusion of security in the kind of a post 911 culture. And so you know, how should we consider, you know, balancing that? Because obvious, obviously the American people want to remain safe. I mean that's clearly a priority. But we also don't want to give over too much to the government in exchange for privacy and security.
Ray Alexander: Yeah, I think there's, I think there's room, I think there's room for disruptive, disruptive policies, practices and procedures in security to disrupt planning, for nefarious actors. So in the military we call them random anti terrorism measures or ram. And basically you rely on the fact that ah, real nefarious actors, malign actors will observe, they will gather information and intelligence and then they'll build their tactics and plan their attacks. And you disrupt that planning cycle by instituting sort of random protective measures. I can't go into great detail on some of the, some of the measures that we do but for example, you might have an airport, say this is, this is just an example, that I might, that I might institute. Let's say we go back to, we peel back some of our security measures at airports after this conflict is over. but every once in a while at say a given airport you institute a random, random controls in some way. Maybe you pull more people out of the line, maybe you ask them a few additional questions or different questions. There are very subtle ways in which security forces can disrupt planning cycles from aligned actors. That does not have a massive impact on the public. Of course you'd have to communicate the intent, and you can do so openly while still maintaining the effectiveness of your random anti terrorism measures. But by communicating it, you could potentially maybe soften the blow if you happen to be caught up in that additional questioning or you know, increased, increased security measures, understanding that generally speaking everything is going to flow more smoothly for the American public.
Jenna Ellis: So overall, you know, with, and then that totally makes sense.
Ray Alexander: There is an increased risk with increased border access
do you think that the American public should, you know, think about, okay, maybe we're at, you know, heightened, security status right now, but, overall, should. Should we just consider this kind of business usual and, be okay with, you know, flying and just kind of carrying on about our day as normal?
Ray Alexander: I do think that there is an increased risk. I think that we'd be foolish, you know, not to. Not to acknowledge that there's increased risk right now, you know, over the last 10 years or so with. With increased, unmitigated, access through our border. Specifically in the last, you know, during the Biden Harris administration.
Todd Starnes: It is very difficult.
Ray Alexander: We basically have, limited information on the number of people that have floated across the border. I know the Trump administration has been doing their best to catch up on that. We have to assume that there are malign actors in the United States, who may, you know, attempt a violent attack. so things like, being out in public, if you're out, say, for, fourth of July party, if this thing goes that long, or if you're out for some kind of public gathering, just be aware of what's going on around you. try to have an escape route planned. Kind of standard stuff that military is trained on. just be aware of your surroundings and have a plan for escape. you know, have a way to get out, especially when you're lined up along roads. Because a very obvious method of attack is vehicle rammings. Stay behind bollards, trees, you know, light posts, things that would disrupt the vehicle, things like that. Take practical measures, but don't. But still go to the parade, you know.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And still, you know, still live your life. I mean that. Because that's part of, you know, the rise of, the social media kind of viral video, is the unfortunate, perhaps unintended, maybe intended consequence is that, you know, any incident then suddenly has viral attention and people, respond often, you know, out of fear of something like that happening again. And so, you know, there's a balance, I think, Ray Alexander, between being, you know, cautious and prudent, but also not, being so concerned that you end up, not being able to go about your daily life and your. Your daily business, especially when it comes to air travel.
Ray Alexander: Yeah, I agree. I agree.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. So,
Ray Alexander: I think the administration is handling Iran conflict well
So in just the last couple of minutes that we. That we have with you, you know, you'd mentioned that, you know, this is. This conflict in Iran is, happening now, so that we don't Have a, a bigger enemy down the road. And so in your opinion, you know, is this a, is this going to be more of a short term conflict? I mean I know these are just projections but you know, do you think that the administration's handling it? Well?
Ray Alexander: Yes, ah, I think, I think the administration has not only put into its national ah, defense strategy the expressed lack of interest in democracy building, interventionism, undefined wars, you know, nation building, that's in the actual national defense strategy and I believe they put that into effect. I think Midnight Hammer was a good example. I think that the removal of the Venezuelan dictator is a good example. now we will affect change in foreign countries to our positive in our national interests and they may have cascading local effects that we have to deal
Ray Alexander: with later, or you know, but the immediate removal of the threat is the key and I think this administration understands, have learned the lessons of the past two decades, two and a half decades of nation building attempts in our, in our post Cold War hubris, that, that intervention, military interventionism overseas,
Jenna Ellis: sometimes, sometimes you need it and we gotta leave it there. Ray Alexander. But really appreciate your commentary this morning and we will be right back with more to talk to you. Todd Starnes, about some more interesting headlines that you're gonna want to hear about. Stay tuned.
Federal prosecutors say suspect in New York City attack planned larger attack
: Welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio Welco.
Jenna Ellis: And in more controversy and problems for the US Amid all of the ongoing conflict in Iran, Todd Cearns.com provided an update that a suspect in the NewSong York City weekend terrorist attack near Gracie Mansion allegedly planned an assault, quote bigger than the Boston Marathon bombing. Federal prosecutors said in a criminal complaint Monday. And so Todd Stearns joins me now and you know this is really concerning on a number of levels and we've been talking throughout the show this morning about how not only you know, the right is fractured over the the escalations in Iran, whether to support President Trump or not, but it seems like there are active terror cells in the United States and then just also some other individuals who clearly do not have an allegiance to the United States that are using this conflict as an opportunity to really take out aggression and terror across the United States. So what do you make of this particular attack overall?
Todd Starnes: Well yeah, they're not allegations. they actually said this on police body cam footage, that was then transcribed into the official police report. So these are the actual words of the Islamic Jihadists What I find really fascinating here is these individuals, 18 and 19 years old from Pennsylvania. they came from very well off families. we understand one of the young men, lived in a home with his parents valued at more than $2 million. the other lived in a home valued at more than $600,000. And it certainly appears as though they had something much larger planned. we understand that police in the Philadelphia area had raided a warehouse or rather a storage facility where they found something. eyewitnesses, they're not saying what it is, but eyewitnesses heard loud bangs and pops, as they were possibly defusing or dismantling possibly more of these explosive devices. But Jenna, I think it's a warning and it should be a wake up call that yes, there are people in this country, many of them Islamists, who want to harm Christians and Jews. Yesterday on my Newsmax TV show, we interviewed a NewSong York City councilwoman, Joanne Arreola, and she said flat out that Christians and Jews are simply not safe at this time in NewSong York City.
Jenna Ellis: That is really scary. And of course, you have a, mayor who is a communist and who's someone who clearly, you know, is not for American values, in terms of his own personal life. And how much do you think that Mamdani's leadership has played into this? So you know, for example, if we had a different, perhaps Republican mayor of NewSong York City, then Jews and Christians might be safer.
Todd Starnes: Well, even Andrew Cuomo, who was the scandal plagued former governor of NewSong York who ran against MDAMI and lost, even he said that he was disgusted by the mayor's reaction, response. The mayor's initial statement, by the way, attacked the victims, that would be victims calling them white supremacists, when in fact these were victims who were peacefully protesting, you may not like their message. And the message was that NewSong York City is being overrun by the Islamist and it is time to do something. So you may disagree with that message, but it is still protected free speech. And the mayor completely dismissed these concerns early on and was forced to backtrack. But even still, he refuses to call out Islamic terrorism. And if you remember a couple of weeks ago, Jenna, when there was a big snowstorm and NewSong York City police officers were injured when they were pelted by chunks of ice and snowballs, and the mayor simply dismissed it, refused to allow charges to be filed against those who attacked the police officers.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and this is just escalating at a really alarming rate. And it seems like, at least based on the conservative side, recognizing the. The threat, that Islam poses to American values. I mean, this is actually nothing new. I think that this is just something that has, gotten into the. The media a little bit more because of the conflict in Iran, of course, but because, you know, we're actively seeing, some of this worldview play out. And you know, these two initial, Muslim men that we were talking about, I mean they're only 18 and 19. I mean this. These are really young, individuals who are now, you know, committing these acts of terrorism. This isn't just, you know, people who, who have, been here a really long time. and it's. It's really concerning to see this. And yet there's. There's a, A perception, among some on the right and increasingly on the left that we just have to be completely tolerant as a society of anyone who wants to be here. Any worldview, if we say anything against Muslims, then, you know, the First Amendment protects them. And anything about Islam, well, then you're an Islamophobe. And that's obviously a mischaracterization and misunderstanding of what the First Amendment actually protects. But I don't know if you saw this, Todd. yesterday, Representative, Andy Ogles from Tennessee posted, Muslims don't belong in American Society. Pluralism is a lie. And of course that went viral. it got community noted because people are, you know, calling him out for undermining the First Amendment. And it kind of became a big controversy. But, obviously he was trying to be bombastic there. But the point remains that, you know, Islam and Western values and Sharia law and US Constitutional law are fundamentally in conflict. And that is okay for Americans to consider and perhaps reconsider, especially who we let into this country and who is and is not following our laws.
Todd Starnes: You know, it's a fair point. And I did, I did hear, what the Congressman had to say. And I think that there is, that there is a concern about the numbers of, Muslims that have been allowed into the country. I do believe that we are watching in real time the colonization of America when you see the proliferation rather of mosques that are being built across the nation. You know, many several years ago, the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission came under fire from Southern Baptist because they actually defended the building of a mosque and I believe in the NewSong Jersey area, somewhere up in the Northeast. And it became, there was a court battle and the Southern Baptist came alongside the Muslims and said, yes, they should be allowed to build their mosque. again this is a very troubling thing because as you pointed out, the teachings of Islam, which is really more of a theocracy, they do not mesh with the founding documents. So there is already a conflict there. And as we have seen in places like Patterson, NewSong Jersey and Dearborn, Michigan, when push comes to shove, Islam and Sharia takes precedent. And the concern I would have is, okay, what happens when the Islamists become the majority force in this country? And Jenna, when you look at the data out there, it will not be terribly long before that happens.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and we don't want to go the way of, of Europe and and basically have a takeover and an invasion from within. I mean this is exactly what the founders warned by domestic enemies. And you know, this is this is where they were talking about, you know, if there was any, if there was any concern about hostile takeover, it would come likely from within.
Todd Starnes: Yes. And again, you know, the challenge here is this is totally self inflicted. the fact is the previous administration allowed millions and millions of Islamists to come into this country. So the question now is, okay, what happens? And I, it's just really shocking to me that we've allowed this to go on so far, you know, so long without taking any sort of action, without really considering the ramifications. I know Senator Tommy Tuberville from Alabama, has been. And also Congressman Chip Roy out of Texas. both men have been incredibly vocal expressing grave concerns they have about the rise of Islam here in America. I actually write about this in my new book, it'll be out in May called the Golden Age How Trump Saved America. And the concern is we celebrate all the great things that have happened, but in the distance looming are these dark billowing clouds which would be the rise of Islam in America.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And it's really incredible. Todd Stearns. I think that we've allowed it to go this far under the name of religious pluralism and in the name of tolerance and somehow Christians and, and I think a lot of the leftist, Christians like I'm thinking of, you know, the, the David French, sort of brand of you know, modern woke evangelical, who, you know, who are, who are looking at religious freedom from this lens that pluralism is actually a good and healthy thing. And it used to be that having you know, discriminating taste, was actually a good thing, that was a virtue. And now suddenly if you say that there's any standard at all Then somehow you're discriminating against a certain segment of religion or a population. And yet, here we are in 2026 having this conversation, reading headlines about these types of terrorist attacks and m, you know, all of these other things that we now have to be concerned about on the home front simply because perhaps, perhaps conservatives and Republicans were too hesitant to actually stand up for American virtue and biblical values, back you know, 20 and 30 years ago.
Todd Stearns: Congress needs to pass immigration reform before America goes Islamic
So the question for today I think is, you know, have, have we lost the plot so far that now there has been too much of an infiltration, or since we're at least not as far gone as Europe, is there still hope that if, if Congress, writes this ship, that you know, there are mass deportations, we do at least have a reclaiming of American law and virtue, there's still hope perhaps that we can right the ship before, we go the way of an Islamic country?
Todd Starnes: Well, I hope so. And that was the point of you know, really sounding the alarm bells. in the book I sat down, for the Golden Age with our good friend Dr. Micah Yousef. And he has, he is really one of the nation's experts on issues regarding Islam and Christianity. And you know, he says that this is a clear and present danger to the Republic and it's something that has to be addressed. And again, when you, when you take the oath, when you become an American citizen, you vow, you swear to renounce, your previous, your previous country and your previous ways and you embrace the American way of life. And if, you know, people are in the country and they cannot do that or they have not done that, I think we do need to take a very long hard look at whether or not they should be allowed to remain here in the United States.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, absolutely. And I really hope that Congress is serious about this and that they don't take all of this leftist rhetoric and and the attacks that of course are forthcoming regardless of anything they do. I mean the Democrats aren't going to like what the Republicans do and they haven't for a while. And so it, it, it's shocking to me that Republicans still care about any of these name calling or you know, any of these false accusations. It's like just go and do the right thing regardless of what the Democrats say. but this seems to be a matter of political will for Republicans in Congress. and I have some hope that the, the newly founded you know, Sharia Law Caucus is going to be spearheading, hopefully some legislation on this front, but really, immigration overhaul for our legal system needs to happen. And I just don't know if this current Congress or whatever we have after the midterms is going to have that political will sufficiently, Todd Stearns, to actually make any kind of meaningful reform.
Todd Starnes: I have very little hope of that happening. And, I was quite frustrated. The President yesterday speaking to Congressional Republicans in, Florida and Miami, and it was almost as if the President had to beg his own party, members of his own party, just to pass the SAVE act, through the Senate. And yet the Majority Leader, John Th, Simply refuses to do that. So clearly there are Republicans, Republicans in Congress who have their own agenda. It is not the President's agenda. And they know that ultimately they do hold the upper hand because they have demonstrated in the past they're willing to lose their majority, if it means stopping President Trump's agenda. They did that in the first Trump term in office and it certainly looks as though they're trying to do that now. So I hope they get it together, Jenna. But I am not, I don't think that's going to happen.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, I, unfortunately I agree with you on that front. And it seems like Republicans are so willing to be in the minority because they simply don't want to govern. I mean, they, they prefer, it seems like, to be in the minority because then they can just go on, you know, news programs like yours and mine and complain about the state of the world. But then when they actually have power, they don't actually govern and they don't get the job done that needs doing because they have all kinds of other priorities instead of actually serving the American people, upholding the U.S. constitution and getting done what needs to get done. So, we can pray on that front. But Todd Starnes, really appreciate your commentary, as always. You can follow him on X at Todd Starnes and, and of course Todd, Stearns.com is, his media. And as always, you can reach me and my team JennaAFR. Com.
Jenna Ellis: U.S. constitution obligates government to protect biblical rights
: 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.
Jenna Ellis: Good morning.
The widening Iran conflict has upended oil production and shipping across Middle East
It is Tuesday, March 10, and as the conflict in Iran continues, oil prices are swinging wildly, according to the ap, and threatens, transport routes and production across the Middle East. And so the widening Iran conflict has upended oil production and shipping across the Middle east, straining energy supplies worldwide. Those disruptions caused oil to spread spike Monday, only for it to swiftly fall back after President Donald Trump suggested that the conflict, or the war as they're characterizing it, would be near an end. And so, what does this mean overall for oil prices? will we see prices affect, us at the gas pump? Well, let's welcome in tho Bishop, who is the comms director for the Mises Institute. And, so where are we at with, with oil?
Tho Bishop : I think that's, that's a good question. Uncertainty is the name of the game. and I don't think anyone knows at this point, how long this war is going to last. And ultimately, that's where everything comes down to. I mean, we saw in the course of 24 hours, the administration bring up, the draft being on the table to the president saying that he thinks the war might be mostly over. And so it's this conflict swinging from, you know, exactly where this conflict. What were the expectations needed for the conflict to end? what does an off ramp look like? Is Iran interested in off ramp in its own? retaliation. Right.
Tho Bishop : so until there's any sort of clear semblance of a result in this, conflict, then, you know, where the oil market can go with such a major vein, such a major highway of shipments, in the Strait, there is anyone's. Yes, to this point.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And, you know, it is fascinating how, unclear the White House is being about exactly what is going on. I mean, usually President Trump is, pretty precise, even if he articulates it in his kind of his own way. But, you know, to your point about the draft, I mean, the press secretary said, you know, President Trump, always keeps all options on the table. And, you know, he himself said, I believe it was during A press poll on Air Force One that you know, this would have to be something that would be an extraordinary circumstance for him to invoke that. But even just the possible hint and suggestion, is kind of in a sense playing into the left and trying to characterize this as more of an ongoing war instead of a strategic operation that will end in just a few weeks. I mean do we anticipate this kind of going the way of, of the Ukraine war where you know, everyone thought that would be over in a matter of weeks and now you know, here we are years and years into it and it seems like there's just no end forthcoming.
Tho Bishop : That's the scary thing right now is that, you know, I think it's clear going into it there was general objections, objectives in place. but it's one thing to launch, to blow things up and to destroy the infrastructure of a country and going after military installations and other. It's another thing to win the peace and to bring stability. And in particular you have an actor like Iran that has such extensive missile capabilities, that has a significant drone fleet, when we have so many allies and the area, not simply Israel but the Gulf states, when we have significant resources such as oil and such as the strait of her news and such, the amount of commerce and global traffic that comes into that and the ability to inflict pain relatively cheaply should you be in a situation where You know it's kind of a wounded animal effect. I mean it is something that you know, this is completely different than all the other in out operations from the administration and Venezuela, Iran in the past, et cetera, et cetera. and so I think that this is uncharted territory for what we've seen from the Trump doctrine of foreign policy. and with that there's an open ended possibilities of where things last. I think there's a lot of trust from, from the President's voters that this is something in and out that you know, I think there's, there's the interest, the support for a prolonged conflict even amongst the President's deep supporters. I think it starts running out very quickly if we start talking about months rather than weeks and you know, heaven forbid, years, the domestic cost, including on the energy front, and the way that it's eroding, the message of affordability and economic gains and things like that. Right.
Tho Bishop : You know, this is a very complicated and costly ah, conflict. Not simply you know, going to the gas pump right now, but there's Significant political cost, to speak nothing of, you know, the fact that we've already lost, you know, I reported seven, American service members. So yeah, this is. And again, within all of this is the global economy that is not the sort of environment, that you want to be disrupting going into midterms. so to put it crassly, yeah,
Jenna Ellis: that's a really interesting point. And I'm speaking with Tho Bishop, who's the content director for the Mises Institute. And you know, this kind of market instability, that Trump is willing to navigate, right ahead of the midterms is a little bit, counter intuitive to what's kind of always been the Trump doctrine. And yet, he clearly very strongly believes in the strategic objectives that he's outlined and you know, the ongoing win, however he might characterize that. And so, you know, when it comes to things like market instability like potentially gas prices, oil prices and all of that, how, assuming that this, this continues over the next, you know, say even several months, how much of this do you do you attribute to actual supply disruption versus like a geopolitical risk premium priced into markets specifically for oil? And then the economy just being an instability of not knowing exactly when this conflict will end.
Tho Bishop : I think it's impossible to pull apart those three factors there. But all of them I think go hand in hand. and that's, that's the difficulty of the entire situation. I know the administration has made attempts to try to offset the loss of insurance markets for shipping using, you know, basically using the federal government as a backstop, which I think is an interesting proposal within this sort of unique situation, that not have immediate payoff. Right.
Tho Bishop : Getting captains actually driving large vessels through with the threat of attack there is a little bit different than just simply making sure that their insurance is taken care of in that situation. and we're talking about economic decisions of massive investments. certainty in the course of weeks, months, years is a major factor for how capital is allocated. and that's the other dynamic to it, is that the disruptions in this region, and particularly if there is no clear, if say a post conflict Iraq, post war Iran is even more radical, more unhinged than it was prior to this conflict. I know that's difficult for people to even comprehend given the way that Khomeini and the perception of Iran. But if you have a hardliner, even crazier son taking over, then that elevates risk in the region generally, even if you had an end of direct military hostilities, that would certainly impact prices in terms of the immediate threats to fleets. But there's still the risk of regional uncertainty. So this is one of yet another major stress to the global economy. And it's hopefully, hopefully, there is a path to stability. There is a opportunity, for a deal on the table to not only reopen up commerce in the region, but to bring stability in Iran, even if it's the sort of leader that we typically would not like. Syria, for example, you've got a former ISIS leader that, you know, is a country that's been willing to play ball on geopolitical issues. There are paths out there that can resemble stability that could have lasting, positive impacts in the region, and particularly Donald Trump's legacy, which I think probably plays a major role in his ambitions here. But in the short term, the range of outcomes can go anywhere from several more weeks of, increased price of the pump to something much, much longer and much, m. More devastating, both to the global economy and to average Americans.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and it's interesting how all of this is being played out this, close to the midterms. And so assuming that this conflict does continue over the next couple of months instead of being resolved more quickly, where do you think, the sort of fault line lies in terms of the public perception and the voters perception of the impact of this conflict on the economy for purposes of the midterms. I mean, at what point do people. Is it kind of too late to say, okay, well, you know, whatever the economy is doing, anything that is potentially negative is now attributable to Iran and therefore President Trump, that may have a negative impact.
Tho Bishop : If war is measured in months and not, weeks, then I think it's going to be a disaster in the midterms personally, not only because of the economic cost, the relative lack of general, bringing, Americans on board this campaign, selling the campaign, and then also a massive, massive generational gap when it comes to this, conflict and really any sort of appetite for military adventurism overseas in general, you know, the way that this war is perceived by independents, by younger voters, by that large part of the 2024 coalition deeply, deeply in the red. And that's just right now, I think some of that. If we have it into the conflict by Friday, for example, just to pull a date out there and into something lasting. Right. It's not, okay, we're pulling out and Then all of a sudden we've got more attacks going in there and we're going to, we have to kind of play a peacekeeping role or some sort of follow up action. if you have something immediate, lasting, then maybe the opponents of the conflict kind of forget about it. the anxiety around what could be prices at the pump go back up. Maybe the political costs ignoring any, any arguments about the geopolitical benefits or the legacy benefits or the way history sees it. Right. Just the immediate political consequences. maybe it becomes less of an impact or maybe even a slight positive,
Tho Bishop : in the short term and this thing starts going on and on and on. then I think this is going to be a major political consequence because again, the appetite is just not there. And it's not simply going to be measured in terms of a disinterest in military adventurism overseas, but a real impact into how this is going to affect people's wallets. Because the longer it goes up, risk goes up, cost of the pump goes up. And so it's a very, dangerous situation politically, on top of everything that. Within the conflict itself.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah.
Bishop: How much do you think inflation will play into November elections
and one last question for you though, Bishop, and I really appreciate your time this morning breaking this down in the 2022 midterms infl. And we heard about, you know, Biden inflation and all of this through the 2024 presidential election, but we're not talking about that nearly as much as we are oil prices and other things related to Iran. And so, how much do you think that inflation may, play into the voters mindset, come November?
Tho Bishop : Well, I think that's, that's the interesting part in all this is that, you know, one of the most positive, things that the administration has had, has been oil prices. And the effect that oil prices has such a dramatic impact on so many other goods because of transportation costs, because of a variety of reasons there, you know, the extent to which Trump administration policies were able to significantly decrease, oil prices, which helped offset in some ways some of the cost of tariffs and things like that. And so if you had, you know, a meaningful, a reduction in the rate of price inflation, that is why this particular thing is so dangerous, is because this is hitting at perhaps the strongest aspect of the American economy. We still have issues with spending, we still have uneven job performances, we still have issues with, housing affordability and the like, but it's the gains on deregulation and energy prices, that has been the best part of the Trump economy. So this goes right into that. and that's again why this is such a particularly big deal. M. For the economy, both for consumers and for political fallout.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, well, we got to take a break here, but really fascinating stuff. And it's going to be interesting though, Bishop, to see how all of this plays out the closer we get to November and where the economy is actually situated. that of course is going to be a key voting issue like it always is. but hopefully Americans will turn their attention more toward the, the values voting of understanding who exactly will protect the American way of life, our law, our culture, all of that. M. You know, over handing over power to you know, the extreme leftist regime. So a lot to be praying for and focused on heading in to November. And so you can always follow though, Bishop on X. And we will be right back with more here on Jenna Ellis in the Morning.
Kansas City International Airport terminal reopened Sunday after being evacuated due to security threat
: Welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio.
Jenna Ellis: Welcome back. Well, amid the conflict in the Middle east, tensions are rising here on the home front, with several reports of domestic terrorism and this report that a Southwest flight diverts to an Atlanta airport and an armed tactical unit detains a man in a frightening security scare. This coming from Fox News. Southwest passengers held their hands up as armed officers boarded a plane on Friday following a reported security threat. Threat. And then on on Sunday, the Kansas City International Airport terminal reopened, hours after it was evacuated while authorities looked into a potential threat. That coming from ap. The airport spokeswoman said in an email that shortly after 2pm the terminal was reopened. The evacuation began after a threat that surfaced around 11:15am Flights that landed after the evacuate evacuation were held on the taxiway during the shutdown, which the spokesperson said lasted over or about two hours. So in a social media post Sunday afternoon, U.S. transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said the incident was clear and normal operations are resuming. FBI Director Cash Patel said on social media Sunday afternoon that the FBI reviewed the threat and determined it to not be credible. So that's at least you know, somewhat relieving. But what, what's going on here really, in, in terms of the domestic front. Let's welcome in Ray Alexander, who is a retired naval officer. And Ray, it seems like you know, in the midst of this Middle east conflict, it's just providing opportunities for perhaps terror cells or you know, others who don't have the best interests of the US And American citizens, at heart to show themselves and these incidents, Seem to be on the increase. That's true.
Ray Alexander: for the. On the positive side, they, most of them, an overwhelming majority of them, appear to be or have proven to be false. Ah, false bomb claims, false, bomb threats, false other kinds of false physical threats. so on the positive side, almost none of them have proven to be an actual threat. There was that NewSong York, that incident in NewSong York City in response to a protest where a couple handheld, what appeared to be IEDs were thrown in a crowd and then at the police, that. Then there was a firebombing of a. A synagogue in Beverly hills recently on March 2nd. there have been some real threats, but most of them have been proven to be false.
Jenna Ellis: Well, and so that is encouraging that most of them have proven to be false and you know, the ones that were credible have at least been successfully neutralized. But what does this mean in terms of you know, ongoing security concerns, particularly I think for airlines because you know, in stories like this where you have you know, especially the video footage that goes viral and you know, these kinds of really scary incidents, quite frankly, it makes people kind of nervous about air travel and other concerns about you know, going to largely populated events and some of these things. how should people analyze the. The current, The, the current tensions in terms of their decision making?
Ray Alexander: You're correct. it is so much. It requires very, very little to affect
Ray Alexander: an operation of disruption in psychological warfare on the American people. We live in a free society and so it's difficult for the American government and police forces to sort of suppress, these kinds of, these kinds of efforts, these kinds of attacks, without significantly degrading our American liberties. and that is part of the double edged sword of living in a free country is that our liberties do allow the freedoms that also make it possible for people, the various forces and just malign actors, to kind of institute these, or establish or affect these disruption in psychological operations. Operations. Unfortunately it's so easy to call in a bomb threat and then you. And then you cause a disruption of air travel and say the Kansas City, International Airport for hours, low, low investment, low risk, but, but over the course of thousands of calls, has an actual disruptive effect on the American life, everyday life for American citizens. How to respond, understand, just generally big picture, understand that the world is a dangerous place and that we are attempting our best to address one major U.S. enemy, in Iran, and that will have cascading effects. fortunately we are addressing that, addressing Iran before it becomes a much larger and more violent regional and global, confrontation. but it does have effects on everyday lives. And many, most people will experience this as inconvenience and anxiety. very few, because we are addressing it in the way we are proactively, it will be far fewer people that will experience actual violence as a result.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and that's encouraging. And you know, we were talking in the last segment about you know, some of the economic concerns and you know, some of these reactions. And I think, you know, while people are very concerned about the economy, when it comes to risk of personal safety, that becomes sort of paramount. And especially in a post 911 security culture, particularly with you know, airlines and some of these other security operations. I mean they've intentionally lowered the threshold for diverting flights or involving law enforcement when, there is a potential threat or uncertainty involving an unruly passenger. And you know, does that kind of risk, of over response here, especially in this environment that now we're navigating in the midst of the Iran conflict, does this tend to lead to more false flags that are maybe quickly neutralized but is actually a good thing of an over response rather than kind of a more cavalier attitude towards security?
Ray Alexander: Yeah, I'm all for reducing the inconveniences of dhs, ah, you know, security checks at airports and making it quicker to access and easier to move. however, that being said, I think actually some of our increased awareness right now during this Iranian conflict is beneficial and should provide folks a greater sense of comfort. Although I have to say that when a conflict is over, we should go back to scaling back those disruptive DHS inspections at airports and, and other types of bureaucratic kind of inspections that have proven over time to be essentially not very useful in preventing, in preventing accidents or in preventing attacks. So to summarize, I agree that DHS does more than I think it should, generally speaking under normal conditions. However, now it is a useful tool to help prevent real attacks.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and you know, and I'm thinking of things like we finally can keep our shoes on at the airport, you know, DHS just finally, you know, change that. And I'm just waiting in the midst of all of this for that rule to be rescinded and to kind of go back to, you know, some of these post 9 11. But I think you, you raise a really, a valid point. Ray Alexander. That you know, while some perhaps heightened, temporary security measures need to be or should be in place. Temporary is kind of the key word. And it seems like whenever we change security protocols or we do this even for you know, a, a temporary reason, then those often become permanent without kind of any logic or reason behind it. And so it becomes so cumbersome, all kind of in the name of security. And we've seen a lot of of, of privacy and you know, some of this kind of you know, Big Brother, sort of government intrusion, be the price that we've paid for more of an illusion of security in the kind of a post 911 culture. And so you know, how should we consider, you know, balancing that? Because obvious, obviously the American people want to remain safe. I mean that's clearly a priority. But we also don't want to give over too much to the government in exchange for privacy and security.
Ray Alexander: Yeah, I think there's, I think there's room, I think there's room for disruptive, disruptive policies, practices and procedures in security to disrupt planning, for nefarious actors. So in the military we call them random anti terrorism measures or ram. And basically you rely on the fact that ah, real nefarious actors, malign actors will observe, they will gather information and intelligence and then they'll build their tactics and plan their attacks. And you disrupt that planning cycle by instituting sort of random protective measures. I can't go into great detail on some of the, some of the measures that we do but for example, you might have an airport, say this is, this is just an example, that I might, that I might institute. Let's say we go back to, we peel back some of our security measures at airports after this conflict is over. but every once in a while at say a given airport you institute a random, random controls in some way. Maybe you pull more people out of the line, maybe you ask them a few additional questions or different questions. There are very subtle ways in which security forces can disrupt planning cycles from aligned actors. That does not have a massive impact on the public. Of course you'd have to communicate the intent, and you can do so openly while still maintaining the effectiveness of your random anti terrorism measures. But by communicating it, you could potentially maybe soften the blow if you happen to be caught up in that additional questioning or you know, increased, increased security measures, understanding that generally speaking everything is going to flow more smoothly for the American public.
Jenna Ellis: So overall, you know, with, and then that totally makes sense.
Ray Alexander: There is an increased risk with increased border access
do you think that the American public should, you know, think about, okay, maybe we're at, you know, heightened, security status right now, but, overall, should. Should we just consider this kind of business usual and, be okay with, you know, flying and just kind of carrying on about our day as normal?
Ray Alexander: I do think that there is an increased risk. I think that we'd be foolish, you know, not to. Not to acknowledge that there's increased risk right now, you know, over the last 10 years or so with. With increased, unmitigated, access through our border. Specifically in the last, you know, during the Biden Harris administration.
Todd Starnes: It is very difficult.
Ray Alexander: We basically have, limited information on the number of people that have floated across the border. I know the Trump administration has been doing their best to catch up on that. We have to assume that there are malign actors in the United States, who may, you know, attempt a violent attack. so things like, being out in public, if you're out, say, for, fourth of July party, if this thing goes that long, or if you're out for some kind of public gathering, just be aware of what's going on around you. try to have an escape route planned. Kind of standard stuff that military is trained on. just be aware of your surroundings and have a plan for escape. you know, have a way to get out, especially when you're lined up along roads. Because a very obvious method of attack is vehicle rammings. Stay behind bollards, trees, you know, light posts, things that would disrupt the vehicle, things like that. Take practical measures, but don't. But still go to the parade, you know.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And still, you know, still live your life. I mean that. Because that's part of, you know, the rise of, the social media kind of viral video, is the unfortunate, perhaps unintended, maybe intended consequence is that, you know, any incident then suddenly has viral attention and people, respond often, you know, out of fear of something like that happening again. And so, you know, there's a balance, I think, Ray Alexander, between being, you know, cautious and prudent, but also not, being so concerned that you end up, not being able to go about your daily life and your. Your daily business, especially when it comes to air travel.
Ray Alexander: Yeah, I agree. I agree.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. So,
Ray Alexander: I think the administration is handling Iran conflict well
So in just the last couple of minutes that we. That we have with you, you know, you'd mentioned that, you know, this is. This conflict in Iran is, happening now, so that we don't Have a, a bigger enemy down the road. And so in your opinion, you know, is this a, is this going to be more of a short term conflict? I mean I know these are just projections but you know, do you think that the administration's handling it? Well?
Ray Alexander: Yes, ah, I think, I think the administration has not only put into its national ah, defense strategy the expressed lack of interest in democracy building, interventionism, undefined wars, you know, nation building, that's in the actual national defense strategy and I believe they put that into effect. I think Midnight Hammer was a good example. I think that the removal of the Venezuelan dictator is a good example. now we will affect change in foreign countries to our positive in our national interests and they may have cascading local effects that we have to deal
Ray Alexander: with later, or you know, but the immediate removal of the threat is the key and I think this administration understands, have learned the lessons of the past two decades, two and a half decades of nation building attempts in our, in our post Cold War hubris, that, that intervention, military interventionism overseas,
Jenna Ellis: sometimes, sometimes you need it and we gotta leave it there. Ray Alexander. But really appreciate your commentary this morning and we will be right back with more to talk to you. Todd Starnes, about some more interesting headlines that you're gonna want to hear about. Stay tuned.
Federal prosecutors say suspect in New York City attack planned larger attack
: Welcome back to Jenna Ellis in the Morning on American Family Radio Welco.
Jenna Ellis: And in more controversy and problems for the US Amid all of the ongoing conflict in Iran, Todd Cearns.com provided an update that a suspect in the NewSong York City weekend terrorist attack near Gracie Mansion allegedly planned an assault, quote bigger than the Boston Marathon bombing. Federal prosecutors said in a criminal complaint Monday. And so Todd Stearns joins me now and you know this is really concerning on a number of levels and we've been talking throughout the show this morning about how not only you know, the right is fractured over the the escalations in Iran, whether to support President Trump or not, but it seems like there are active terror cells in the United States and then just also some other individuals who clearly do not have an allegiance to the United States that are using this conflict as an opportunity to really take out aggression and terror across the United States. So what do you make of this particular attack overall?
Todd Starnes: Well yeah, they're not allegations. they actually said this on police body cam footage, that was then transcribed into the official police report. So these are the actual words of the Islamic Jihadists What I find really fascinating here is these individuals, 18 and 19 years old from Pennsylvania. they came from very well off families. we understand one of the young men, lived in a home with his parents valued at more than $2 million. the other lived in a home valued at more than $600,000. And it certainly appears as though they had something much larger planned. we understand that police in the Philadelphia area had raided a warehouse or rather a storage facility where they found something. eyewitnesses, they're not saying what it is, but eyewitnesses heard loud bangs and pops, as they were possibly defusing or dismantling possibly more of these explosive devices. But Jenna, I think it's a warning and it should be a wake up call that yes, there are people in this country, many of them Islamists, who want to harm Christians and Jews. Yesterday on my Newsmax TV show, we interviewed a NewSong York City councilwoman, Joanne Arreola, and she said flat out that Christians and Jews are simply not safe at this time in NewSong York City.
Jenna Ellis: That is really scary. And of course, you have a, mayor who is a communist and who's someone who clearly, you know, is not for American values, in terms of his own personal life. And how much do you think that Mamdani's leadership has played into this? So you know, for example, if we had a different, perhaps Republican mayor of NewSong York City, then Jews and Christians might be safer.
Todd Starnes: Well, even Andrew Cuomo, who was the scandal plagued former governor of NewSong York who ran against MDAMI and lost, even he said that he was disgusted by the mayor's reaction, response. The mayor's initial statement, by the way, attacked the victims, that would be victims calling them white supremacists, when in fact these were victims who were peacefully protesting, you may not like their message. And the message was that NewSong York City is being overrun by the Islamist and it is time to do something. So you may disagree with that message, but it is still protected free speech. And the mayor completely dismissed these concerns early on and was forced to backtrack. But even still, he refuses to call out Islamic terrorism. And if you remember a couple of weeks ago, Jenna, when there was a big snowstorm and NewSong York City police officers were injured when they were pelted by chunks of ice and snowballs, and the mayor simply dismissed it, refused to allow charges to be filed against those who attacked the police officers.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and this is just escalating at a really alarming rate. And it seems like, at least based on the conservative side, recognizing the. The threat, that Islam poses to American values. I mean, this is actually nothing new. I think that this is just something that has, gotten into the. The media a little bit more because of the conflict in Iran, of course, but because, you know, we're actively seeing, some of this worldview play out. And you know, these two initial, Muslim men that we were talking about, I mean they're only 18 and 19. I mean this. These are really young, individuals who are now, you know, committing these acts of terrorism. This isn't just, you know, people who, who have, been here a really long time. and it's. It's really concerning to see this. And yet there's. There's a, A perception, among some on the right and increasingly on the left that we just have to be completely tolerant as a society of anyone who wants to be here. Any worldview, if we say anything against Muslims, then, you know, the First Amendment protects them. And anything about Islam, well, then you're an Islamophobe. And that's obviously a mischaracterization and misunderstanding of what the First Amendment actually protects. But I don't know if you saw this, Todd. yesterday, Representative, Andy Ogles from Tennessee posted, Muslims don't belong in American Society. Pluralism is a lie. And of course that went viral. it got community noted because people are, you know, calling him out for undermining the First Amendment. And it kind of became a big controversy. But, obviously he was trying to be bombastic there. But the point remains that, you know, Islam and Western values and Sharia law and US Constitutional law are fundamentally in conflict. And that is okay for Americans to consider and perhaps reconsider, especially who we let into this country and who is and is not following our laws.
Todd Starnes: You know, it's a fair point. And I did, I did hear, what the Congressman had to say. And I think that there is, that there is a concern about the numbers of, Muslims that have been allowed into the country. I do believe that we are watching in real time the colonization of America when you see the proliferation rather of mosques that are being built across the nation. You know, many several years ago, the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission came under fire from Southern Baptist because they actually defended the building of a mosque and I believe in the NewSong Jersey area, somewhere up in the Northeast. And it became, there was a court battle and the Southern Baptist came alongside the Muslims and said, yes, they should be allowed to build their mosque. again this is a very troubling thing because as you pointed out, the teachings of Islam, which is really more of a theocracy, they do not mesh with the founding documents. So there is already a conflict there. And as we have seen in places like Patterson, NewSong Jersey and Dearborn, Michigan, when push comes to shove, Islam and Sharia takes precedent. And the concern I would have is, okay, what happens when the Islamists become the majority force in this country? And Jenna, when you look at the data out there, it will not be terribly long before that happens.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, and we don't want to go the way of, of Europe and and basically have a takeover and an invasion from within. I mean this is exactly what the founders warned by domestic enemies. And you know, this is this is where they were talking about, you know, if there was any, if there was any concern about hostile takeover, it would come likely from within.
Todd Starnes: Yes. And again, you know, the challenge here is this is totally self inflicted. the fact is the previous administration allowed millions and millions of Islamists to come into this country. So the question now is, okay, what happens? And I, it's just really shocking to me that we've allowed this to go on so far, you know, so long without taking any sort of action, without really considering the ramifications. I know Senator Tommy Tuberville from Alabama, has been. And also Congressman Chip Roy out of Texas. both men have been incredibly vocal expressing grave concerns they have about the rise of Islam here in America. I actually write about this in my new book, it'll be out in May called the Golden Age How Trump Saved America. And the concern is we celebrate all the great things that have happened, but in the distance looming are these dark billowing clouds which would be the rise of Islam in America.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah. And it's really incredible. Todd Stearns. I think that we've allowed it to go this far under the name of religious pluralism and in the name of tolerance and somehow Christians and, and I think a lot of the leftist, Christians like I'm thinking of, you know, the, the David French, sort of brand of you know, modern woke evangelical, who, you know, who are, who are looking at religious freedom from this lens that pluralism is actually a good and healthy thing. And it used to be that having you know, discriminating taste, was actually a good thing, that was a virtue. And now suddenly if you say that there's any standard at all Then somehow you're discriminating against a certain segment of religion or a population. And yet, here we are in 2026 having this conversation, reading headlines about these types of terrorist attacks and m, you know, all of these other things that we now have to be concerned about on the home front simply because perhaps, perhaps conservatives and Republicans were too hesitant to actually stand up for American virtue and biblical values, back you know, 20 and 30 years ago.
Todd Stearns: Congress needs to pass immigration reform before America goes Islamic
So the question for today I think is, you know, have, have we lost the plot so far that now there has been too much of an infiltration, or since we're at least not as far gone as Europe, is there still hope that if, if Congress, writes this ship, that you know, there are mass deportations, we do at least have a reclaiming of American law and virtue, there's still hope perhaps that we can right the ship before, we go the way of an Islamic country?
Todd Starnes: Well, I hope so. And that was the point of you know, really sounding the alarm bells. in the book I sat down, for the Golden Age with our good friend Dr. Micah Yousef. And he has, he is really one of the nation's experts on issues regarding Islam and Christianity. And you know, he says that this is a clear and present danger to the Republic and it's something that has to be addressed. And again, when you, when you take the oath, when you become an American citizen, you vow, you swear to renounce, your previous, your previous country and your previous ways and you embrace the American way of life. And if, you know, people are in the country and they cannot do that or they have not done that, I think we do need to take a very long hard look at whether or not they should be allowed to remain here in the United States.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, absolutely. And I really hope that Congress is serious about this and that they don't take all of this leftist rhetoric and and the attacks that of course are forthcoming regardless of anything they do. I mean the Democrats aren't going to like what the Republicans do and they haven't for a while. And so it, it, it's shocking to me that Republicans still care about any of these name calling or you know, any of these false accusations. It's like just go and do the right thing regardless of what the Democrats say. but this seems to be a matter of political will for Republicans in Congress. and I have some hope that the, the newly founded you know, Sharia Law Caucus is going to be spearheading, hopefully some legislation on this front, but really, immigration overhaul for our legal system needs to happen. And I just don't know if this current Congress or whatever we have after the midterms is going to have that political will sufficiently, Todd Stearns, to actually make any kind of meaningful reform.
Todd Starnes: I have very little hope of that happening. And, I was quite frustrated. The President yesterday speaking to Congressional Republicans in, Florida and Miami, and it was almost as if the President had to beg his own party, members of his own party, just to pass the SAVE act, through the Senate. And yet the Majority Leader, John Th, Simply refuses to do that. So clearly there are Republicans, Republicans in Congress who have their own agenda. It is not the President's agenda. And they know that ultimately they do hold the upper hand because they have demonstrated in the past they're willing to lose their majority, if it means stopping President Trump's agenda. They did that in the first Trump term in office and it certainly looks as though they're trying to do that now. So I hope they get it together, Jenna. But I am not, I don't think that's going to happen.
Jenna Ellis: Yeah, I, unfortunately I agree with you on that front. And it seems like Republicans are so willing to be in the minority because they simply don't want to govern. I mean, they, they prefer, it seems like, to be in the minority because then they can just go on, you know, news programs like yours and mine and complain about the state of the world. But then when they actually have power, they don't actually govern and they don't get the job done that needs doing because they have all kinds of other priorities instead of actually serving the American people, upholding the U.S. constitution and getting done what needs to get done. So, we can pray on that front. But Todd Starnes, really appreciate your commentary, as always. You can follow him on X at Todd Starnes and, and of course Todd, Stearns.com is, his media. And as always, you can reach me and my team JennaAFR. Com.
Jenna and Tho Bishop discuss the political ramifications of prolonged military engagements, especially as the midterms approach, and how public perception might shift in response to rising oil prices and economic uncertainty.
Jenna welcomes retired naval officer Ray Alexander to address recent domestic security threats amid the international chaos.
Todd Starnes joins Jenna to discuss alarming developments regarding a thwarted terrorist plot in New York City.
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:
