Make my documentary, using real interviews and videos. Using the internet to upload my final video to youtube, i think to myself, the future of Cloud Computing is bright indeed. To watch this and all winning entries, visit our website at studentcam. Org. Wade miller joins us for the first time on the washington journal, the executive director of citizens for renewing america. For folks who havent heard of your group, what is it and what is your mission . Guest the center for renewing american distance and citizens is the active arm of the c3 which is a traditional think tank. It was started by russ vote, the director for President Trump and created a Mission Statement for god, country, community. It is really to carry on the policy visions of an America First agenda and to make sure those ideas continue to be developed, discussed, debated and they are in the lexicon of Public Policy of formulation and we bury that up with the c4 which is to educate grassroots people so they can support congressman and influence them in whatever way the activists do to vote certain ways. So it is a critical part of our structure. Host what are the key components of an America First agenda . Guest there has been what people say a unity party consensus. There is domestic and Foreign Policy and part of the America First division is that we have been way too involved in foreign entanglements. I am a marine veteran and served in iraq three times in combat. Looking back, i wonder was that the wisest expenditure of our human life and treasure and our way too entangled in Foreign Affairs . Do we need to think more methodically about when we decide to engage in foreign conflicts and when we decide to apply military power. We think that is the case and we need to focus on the interior of the United States. This is isolationism. We are saying to ignore the world. There are times we will need to be active. On the domestic front is prioritizing the american priorities first. Whether it is the border, securing the border because of all of the spillover effects, additional crime, drugs, Cartel Activity. It is also fair to ask, is this what is best for the American Labor market . If youre are an american citizen or here illegally that you should have first dibs on the jobs. It will help American Workers and those here illegally to make sure their interests are here legally to make sure their interests are prioritized. And whether it is trade. What does trade policy look like on the right if you are thinking in terms of what is in the best interest of american manufacturing, and not by might be slightly different than traditional responses to freemarket. We dont really believe in freemarket absolution is him. There are logical limits. If china is stripping the wealth of america, should we not have policies that safeguard . America first is at its core about interest for the american people, whether republican, democrat. We want policies that help americans. Host the first hour of our program we put a question to our viewers because we found out this week that the u. S. Is considering 18 billion in additional arm sales for israel fighters and other weapons and munitions. Do you support that . Is that part of the America First agenda . Guest it is certainly a debate where the to have it. I think it is in our interest that israel come out on top. There are israels interests in the United States interests. I think it is our interest that israel wrap up the war it is in, defeat, and dish soap in a way that doesnt risk serious escalation. I do not think it is in the United States interest to be drawn into the conflict there when we are seeing an aggressive chinese regime expanding in various ways. I think it is in our interest to minimally assist and provide and hope they can win and wrap this up in a timely manner so we can refocus our attention to other issues in the world. Host what about russias invasion of ukraine . Guest a very complicated issue. The short version is i dont think we should be as involved in the ukrainian situation as we have been. I dont think either country is naturalized. Both had some of the most corrupt regimes in the world. I think the original containment strategy was to create they created nato and then they had the concept of a buffer states. The whole idea of containment was we need to make it politically possible for russia to bepossible for russia to be isolated. I think with what we have seen over the last decade is the n eocon and foreign intervention list left encouraging encroachment towards washup russias borders and is is to not cast blame on ukraine. It is that we have helped provide political conditions in the interior of russia that putin would have needed to facilitate an invasion and sustain it. I think those are mistakes already made. What do we do. Host what actions did we help to do to provide that environment . Guest we were involved transitioning from a prorussian Ukrainian Government to a more western one. Some applications potentially in our best interests and i do not know if that was, especially in a regime that had previously been hostile to american interests you know, and that provides putin the interior political will and support for him to then have an incursion. All of the discussion about expanding nato into ukraine, that did not help at all. Nato to the degree that we are involved in it and i think we should be ratcheting it down somewhat. In the original form was something we should have a spot we should aspire to. That also provided putin the interior arguments that he needed. I hope putin loses and i would like ukraine to prevail. I do not think it is in our interest to be involved. I have been in combat and i have seen how bad it is. I do not have any ill will towards the ukrainian people and i feel for them. I do not think it is in the american peoples interest. I do not think we on the precipice of putin with an Island HoppingCampaign Across europe. I do not think he has the intent or capability. The fact that he has been bogged down in ukraine for so long, he will not stand a chance against a european nato style military force, so i think that fear mongering of we have to stop putin or else he will invade europe, i do not think that is accurate. Host when and where did you serve . Guest marine corps 2022 through 2027 and then we served in iraq three times. Once in the southern part of iraq, once outside of baghdad and then the last deployment was outside of a little area. Host how did you get from there to here . Guest the new g. I. Bill had kicked in and the and i moved to texas and i started going to school and working and then i got an internship that led me to washington, d. C. And that is where i first met russ hope, and i was fascinated by the way he straight he thinks about policy. And then i went on to become a political director for a current United States senator and then i was a chief of staff and then shipped basically kind of pushed me over to go help run this organization. Host that current United States senator . Guest ted cruz. Host wed wade miller taking your phone calls and questions. Democrats, 2027488000. Republicans, 2027488001. The independents, 2027488002. Though ahead and start calling in. It is the citizens for renewing america. What is the specific role that the group will play, the months leading up to november, the 2024 election . Ms. Prelogar guest we want to impact the discussion of Public Policy. We are not a pack. But anyway those conversations elevate paradigms or Public Policy itself, we want to be impactful and mindful that we are not trampling into the space of campaigns, necessarily. But you cannot avoid talking about Public Policy in the six months prior to a general election. Host what will be the key issue this november . Immigration or Foreign Policy . Guest both. I think that the border will be there is a little bit of a lull with numbers historically join or miss. After in the warmer months you will see a flow of humans to the north and you will see a step up in Cartel Activity along the border. They effectively have operational control and there are issues with inflation to contend with and talks about what are we going to do to improve the labor situation, the job situation and domestic manufacturing. I think those will all be big issue topics that need to be discussed in the general election period. Host in the papers there is a lot of discussion about the impact of the Supreme Court abortion ruling and how that could affect the already precarious landscape in a lot election 2024. Abortion as an issue in 2024 . Guest absolutely. I think the left is going to try and focus on that issue. I think that, you know, life is paramount. It matters. We cannot retreat from the concept of conserving and saving all human life and treating all life with human dignity. We will have to confront that issue and convince voters that that issue matters and all babies matter and that all babies should be taken care of. And not just during the nine months that they are in the womb but afterwards. We need to make sure that there is a education opportunities, robust opportunities to get advance education as they get older. That parenting is done right. So either way, education will play a key role in a lot of the state races. So i think that the topics of Critical Race Theory, diversity, equity, and inclusion, pornography in schools, those will be big talking points although there is a little bit less of a federal nexus. Primarily people think of these issues are state or local base. I do think we need to nationalize it and we need more federal action. Currently most of the action you see when you are talking about the subset of conversations under woke ideology, people think local and state. Host this is independent line, good morning. Go ahead. Caller thank you. I was calling to ask if they still have jeff clark on their board or as their litigation specialists . Guest we absolutely do. A great man and i am proud to work with him and i think he has one of the top legal minds in the United States of america and we look forward to continue to working with him for the season the foreseeable future . Caller isnt he the one that was taken out in his pjs by the police . Guest yes. He is currently it is my opinion and i think there is strong evidence to support it, that the Justice System is being weaponized against him because he dared to provide legal opinions to a sitting president in his capacity under the doj, i think that is the job of lawyers. People can debate whether legal opinions are correct or not. I think it was correct and i think time will demonstrate that. I think what is currently happening to jeff is a threat to democracy showing that you can use the Justice System basically politically target opponents, trying to get them put in jail because they did their job. Essentially what he did is he was asked are there issues with elections and what are the options . He provided counsel on that, draft memos. Some were never submitted. Just gave various options. Sometimes lawyers were wrong and i do not think he was. Being wrong is not a crime or grounds on which to disbar or put people in jail. Host youre talking in the weeks and months after the 2020 election . Guest he was tasked with seeking should we investigate this and what claims are being made. This claim is spurious and this claim might be worth investigating. He was having advisory opinions on things like that and then writing memos on options at the president might have. As i would say that any lawyer who worked in any white house would be tasked to do. Host do you think the 2020 election was a Fair Election . Guest i do not. I do not know there is a difference between being certain and was it conducted fairly and was the outcome exactly correct . I think that if you look at a number of issues whether it be mailin ballot product, problems, clean ballot roles, i do not think that the elections that we have are optimized to be as accurate as they could be. And so, it is impossible to determine any election until we have substantial reforms to election law that those outcomes are substantially accurate. And i think what we have seen in the last four years are a number of states who have taken steps to do that. And in light of 2016 was a close election and 20 20 was a close election. I think we need people to go to the booth and then on Election Night and the morning after they need to look at the results and know that we lost or won and i am substantially confident of that results. I do not think we are there that yet. Host and you do not think we will be there by november 2024 . Guest i do not. I have not focused on this in the last month and i know that there are some good maps giving grades on this but i do not think georgias election laws are fully up to speed. I do not think that texas has done everything that it could. There is more work to be done in florida. But there is not a state that has all of the systems and processes and laws in place, i think we have a lot of work to do. Heritage action put out a scorecard that had some really good information on it. We looked at like for instance, i looked at North Carolina and did a deep dive, do not need to demonstrate that you are a nut United States citizen to sign up to vote. If you do not have a number of the state database will not detect you. You could be an illegal alien in the United States, registered to vote in North Carolina and be undetectable when they tried to audit the voter rolls because the same database only picks up anumber. Host what is that number . Guest if you encounter a federal agent you will be assigned a number. If you do not have that you will not be in the system. If you are not needed to provide any form of proof of citizenship on the Voter Registration process and you are on the voter rolls then they will not find you and remove you. That is one small thing. The problem is, that could be zero problems, or it could be 500,000 problems. I think it is 500,000 . I do not. Do i think it is zero . I do not. That leaves a lot of americans to ask are our election safe. I think there are technical laws that states need to consider in implements and until then i think there will always be a little bit of a question. I have not encountered an election where ive been able to look at it and say in any state these are the two numbers and the outcome, i know that both of those are 100 . Host you felt that way before 2020 . Guest in my lifetime i have always seen the need for increased integrity laws. If the difference is 2 million votes to one million votes, they are pretty certain that the outcome was accurate. If the difference is 1000 votes do not know. There is a declared winner and the person will be certified and will assume office but i do not know if that was correct. And i think until mobile more voters can look at the outcome and say i know it is correct that i think we will always have this suspicion over any election outcomes, and that is something that elected officials and voters need to take seriously on both sides. This affects both ways. If the voter rolls are not clean and you are in a democrat state in a purple district and a republican wins, it is perfectly reasonable for democrats to ask did we do everything that we could possibly do to make this election and this out, certain to be correct. And i think republicans have plenty of opportunities and instances where they can look at them election and say i do not know and whether that be georgia or arizona last time. I think that is on the table and i do not think it is unreasonable for people to posit the question was that election decided accurately. Host carl, charlston. South carolina. Independent. Good morning. Caller yes. I am an old retired veteran and everything, and i talked to a lot of people through the masonic order and veterans associations and stuff. And i know a lot of black veterans mostly, and i heard i never heard anyone talk about Critical Race Theory. And i always thought that black people just meant stay aware of your surroundings and what was going on in the world and everything. But now i hear it and i am just confused. Where does this stuff come from . Critical race theory was on with brian kelly and the crew on the fox channel. And they were talking about it for a long time. But even they do not talk about it anymore. Can you explain to us what Critical Race Theory is and what woke is aside from being aware of your surroundings . Because that is what black people think. Guest this is a great question and thank you for your service. I love talking to fellow veterans. By the way this is what i love about the military. And i was in the military did not have the stuff going on. One of my best friends to this day a fellow marine who was my roommate, joshua dulles. I was attacked texting with another buddy, we would watch football and none of these issues that we see as divisive in america were problems. We would hang out and watch football and have a good time. You are right. The original iteration of woke coming out of the 1930s was just being aware of Racial Injustice or social injustice around you. If that is all it meant today, i would largely agree. I think it is i think at the time period that it came out it was a valid l yellow and term to you ideology and a term to use because that was pervasive racial and sexual discrimination and i think that the term was properly applied. What you saw on the 70s and 80s were selfadmitted marxists that had determined that classbased marxism was not working in the United States oh they moved towards identitarian which were to use immutable characteristics as dividing factors in political debate and to use identity area arian issues to drive wedges between people. They admit this. So woke adopted over time this identitarian mindset. And most of the left and academia embrace this change. Out of that came a different ideologies. You have Critical Race Theory which started as a legal concept in law schools to discuss if i am a black woman and discriminated against is it because i am black, woman, or a black woman. And the concept of civil rights law and litigation and lawsuits in unemployment law, how does that differentiate between just being discriminated against because you are black or a woman. In that identiarian biology was infused as well. They talk about this in the 1980s and people came up with this legalist concept of we need to ensure infuse the praxis. During the entire debate, and schools, the argument was my kid is in eighth grade there is no Critical Race Theory. It was never about a course but the idea and the ideology of infusing it. That is why you go to academia. Edu you can do a Google Search of Critical Race Theory k12 and it will return 840,000 results. And this is a collection of academic papers and Research Papers and thesis is. So roughly one million pieces of literature have been written on Critical Race Theory in k12 education. In k12 and they instruct this stuff. There are all sorts of books and you can look at Critical Race Theory in education. Just type that into amazon and google and there are books written on this. They teach teachers how to infuse the concepts into k12. This teaches that america is systemically and irredeemably racist, sexist and blah, blah ,blah and most white people are irredeemably racist and encourages children to see themselves as different categories between wedges to drive wedges between one another. We oppose that. That is different than saying race does not exist and the children on your right and left are your brothers and sisters in christ or fellow humans. They should not be judged on the basis of skin or sex, or any other immutable trait certainly. Treat everyone with respect and you can certainly teach that slavery is terrible. There are ways to teach about everything without using the cultural marxist ideas into k12 education and beyond and we are seeing other iterations of dei in Corporate America, antiracism which can actually be defined as Racial Discrimination is for the purposes of equity is antiracism. So, he is arguing that racism is antiracism if it elevates equity in society. He has also famously quoted as saying the solution to past discrimination is present discrimination and the solution to present discrimination is future discrimination. We oppose racism but i oppose the ideology of antiracism because it is inherently supported supportive of a newer form of systemic racism. One last thing i will add, there are people who have historically been disadvantaged. It is fine to acknowledge that and think how do we help those communities out of the historical hole that they have been put in and the answer is better schools, better education options, a stronger economy so when people have an education they have a job. There are a lot of peoples that did a good education and they do not have a good job opportunity and that is something that President Trump should be talking about, how will he fix the jobs market and provide opportunity. Host i have plenty of calls waiting. So taking you through your thoughts on affirmative action. Guest as the Supreme Court itself said if you are in a systemically racist system then affirmative action as a corrective against institutions of america being used to actually be systemically discriminatory than affirmative action is justified until the systemic racism is gone. Now there is a difference between racism and systemic racism. I do not think anybody can look at the United States government and most state and local governments and say these are institutions of systemic racism. You can certainly say this individual is racist or maybe they said something racist. Do not elect them. But they are not all encompassing a power. I do not think george bush was systemically racist. I do not think that donald trump was systemically racist. I think that they actually sought to uplift allamericans and make sure that everyone had an opportunity. I think that if the left wants to argue that joe biden is systemically racist, i do not think that is the case. I think he is wrong on embracing a lot of the woke ideologies and being friendly to that that i do not think he wakes up and thanks how can we disadvantage communities that have been historically disadvantaged. And he has the most powerful elected official in the country. Affirmative action no longer applies and is no longer legally tenable because it is saying we will positively benefit you over someone else on the basis of race and sex. That does not work when the United States government is no longer systemically racist. We no longer have laws that affirmatively identify certain individuals and say they are going to be disadvantaged. That does not occur so we do not have a systemicly racial system. They pointed it out when they originally approved affirmative action and we have long been passed that point. Host getting back to calls. Susan, pennsylvania. Democrat, thank you for waiting. Caller thank you for taking my call. My questions have been answered listening to my desk to the guest and my first question was is is project involved in 2025. But the caller already talked about jesse clark and then asked about him. So my first question still stands and my second would be just a comment on the comment on systemic racism. It still exists. Just look at the banking industry. People of color do not get the same type of loans or mortgages or get lower valuations on their homes. There is still systemic racism in the country and you cannot deny that. Guest thank you for the question and i would disagree. If you are talking about bank loans, those decisions are being made on the basis of Economic Conditions and if you are a disadvantaged community, that will impact you more. The banks are not saying this loan applicant is asian or hispanic or black, and therefore i will not give them a loan. That occurred at one point and that is not occurring today. I do not think there is any major bank of america especially those who have dei programs who would agree with you either, not that i am a huge fan of the financial industry. I think they need reforms. The question about project 2025, i view that as every president ial every single cycle we have a president ial election there are going to be entities that prepare for if their side wins. Project 2025 is that. They do not speak for the president or the campaign, but they are people who have been in the nexis and the sphere of donald trump. They have an idea of the types of policies that he likes and would approve of. It is not a perfect science. There will be some things that you cannot do and does not want to do and things that he will. I think this is probably one of the best transitions, i would refer to it more as preparation because the candidate himself will do his own transition. There are people coming up with ideas, policies and rules and executive orders and whenever the president gets to that point and says i want to do something on the border what do you guys have these are part of the thing submitted and it will be up to the president and those around to make decisions. Host are you a part of that effort . Guest a rough vote is part of that and we have another staff on our team working on that. They are involved. They are coming up on coming up with and submitting ideas. So, yes to a certain degree we are involved. Host beverly, idaho. Republican. Thank you for waiting. Caller hello, i have a couple of questions. On the integrity of the ballot, the only question should be whether biden one or trump won are the things on the ballot are the things that you vote for and then those came into question so that does not make sense for me. The second part is you think congress should pass the border bill because it is their responsibility. And they will and anything the president does is temporary. The third thing is that donald trump instead of pushing off these court cases why cant he be a man and go ahead and go to court. If he is innocent like you say, which he is not, why cant he be judged by federal courts like anyone else and take his punishment . Thank you and goodbye. Guest on the first question, every state ballot is different even in federal elections dates might have ballot propositions. I do not know what your ballot looked like so i cannot answer your question. On your second question i think that congress should pass the border bill. It is a comprehensive border bill and probably the best one i have seen. The house passed that and it has been sitting in the senate for months. The senate had what i consider a not very well written bill. It had a lot of magnets which would increase the flow north. It has fake caps so that enough people would say it would allow the president to shut down the border. Cartels are not, this is a 1 billion operation, they will meter the caps and then send the flow elsewhere. If you got away or undetected you would have not counted. My assessment of the other border bill is that it actually would have increased illegal immigration north and you would have more legal crossings and it would have made the border less secure. I think the president himself was right to reject that bill. I think the senate should take up hr two and it is the best security bill written. If the senate decides not to then President Trump, should he when will take on a lot of those initiatives and he will take Decisive Action on the border and quickly secure it. On the last point i have not yet seen a case where i think that donald trump needs to apologize for anything. I think he is innocent of everything he has been charged with. You know, it is not illegal to have an opinion about the outcome of an election. I think that no one can with a straight face say that from a legalistic standard that the president incited insurrection. He gave a speech about his viewpoints and encourage people to protest peacefully. By its very nature you cannot pass a legal distinction of insurrection if you are encouraging protesters to be peaceful in their protest. That is a First Amendment protected free speech. I think it is completely understandable that americans would disagree with the president on his viewpoints on the election. We cannot weaponize courts to then target political opposition because they have different viewpoints on an election outcome than we do. I think it is a grave threat to democracy what is currently unfolding and happening to people like President Trump, jeff clark, john eastman and a whole slew of other people. You can disagree with the legal conclusions of others without wanting or needing to weaponize the judicial system to destroyer opposition. I think that is a dangerous precedent being set right now. And i think it should be talked about more in the press. I think joe biden should have to answer for this that the courts are being used for de facto run interference operations against the top political opposition for the next president ial election. That is a huge story that i do not think it is getting fairly covered. Host one more time. Mark has been waiting for a while in florida. No ahead, you are on. Caller good morning, youve have contradicted donald trump at least twice since i have been listening to you. Donald trump was quoted as saying there is systemic racism in the United States, and i guest you are absolutely right and i did contradict. Let me correct this. Donald trump is right there is systemic racism and it is being implemented through dei and other leftwing ideologies and it being used to systemically discriminate against both men and then also white men and women. It is being used to discriminate against Asian Americans in the United States. And i do think it is systemic and that the government has processes in writing and governmental institutions and it is making decisions on promotions, hirings and admissions on the basis of race and sex and if it is governmental it is a violation of title vi. If it is in Corporate America it is a violation of corporation seven. And it could be a violation of title ix and these are all systemic in nature happening in america. In that vein, donald trump is absolutely right. Host finisher question. Caller yes. Didnt trump bring over 60 cases challenging the election . I would like to know the answer to two questions. Was job island joe biden duly elected because you said the last two elections were close and donald trump called his win in 2016 a landslide. And also, why was donald trump at the rally on january 6 . What was he there for and what was the purpose of the rally if he had already lost . Guest i will start with the last one. I do not think any american needs to apologize for protesting in public and making their voice heard. I do not think donald trump needs to answer why he was publicly speaking in a Public Square about a public issue such as an election. I do not know how many cases were brought, i did not follow that closely. I know that a lot of them were never advanced. Some of them lacked standing, not dismissed on the merits but they were not filed before the election occurred and various outcome so i cannot answer questions on that. And i apologize but i think there was a third one. Host was joe biden duly elected . Guest the process was followed through. The process that we had to appoint a president was followed. The Electoral College met, congress certified them and the president was sworn into office. I think he was duly elected but the question is was the outcome correct and fair. And i cannot state with certainty either way. I have serious concerns that the outcomes that we saw in a number of states and potentially all states that some of them were decided by such a difference that did not matter. In the close states i feel like there are serious questions of whether it was right or not. I cannot say yes or no but i can say i know that whatever the numbers are not accurate. If they were the outcome might have been the same or it might not have been. It was a long road to get there but there were a lot of different forms of issues that occurred. I do not think anyone can say yes, that outcome in the numbers that we saw were accurate because i do not think that logic and facts dictate that. The question is if corrected the outcome would be the same . And that is up for a lot of debate and we are seeing it. This was happening in the trial that jeff was having. They have a lot of witnesses that said signature verification never occurred. It was an Expert Witness contrary to the state law. If that does not occur and i am and hundreds of things do not occur can anyone say that this outcome is determinedly and factually, can we say that the outcome was what it was. I do not think anyone can say yes to that. Host wade miller is the executive director for citizens renewing america. It is citizensrenewingamerica. Com. And