Rick Green [00:00:07] Welcome to The WallBuilders Show. We take on the hot topics of the day from a biblical, historical, and constitutional perspective. Rick Green with David Barton and Tim Barton, and our website is wallbuilders.com. That's our main website. And then if you want to catch up on radio programs, wallbuilders.show. And that's the one to send to your friends and family so they can get educated as well. It's not a Friday, so we're not doing a Good News Friday. It's Wednesday. But it's kind of like we're just catching up on all the news today, guys. No interview today. But man, so much has happened even in the last 24 hours with the Iran thing, five day pause, we had Heidi on yesterday, Heidi St. John on yesterday talking about Joe Kent. And then, you know, he comes out saying he's going to testify for the defense in the Charlie Kirk assassination trial. Yeah, just a lot of crazy stuff happening, a couple of big Supreme court actions, one decision, and then one that they just had a hearing on. So. Let's get started. I, you know, I'm thinking left to right or, yeah, literally left to right west coast, left coast to right. David, you said before we came on something out of California. You want to talk about too. So why don't we start there? 

David Barton [00:01:13] That's the right coast, bro. It depends on whether you've got your back. 

Rick Green [00:01:15] Yeah, where’re you standing? 

David Barton [00:01:18] Yeah, that's right. It's a, what, whether you're looking toward Texas or away from Texas. It's, it's real easy. So this kind of, and to set this up, I want to go to the Supreme Court case because they both have to do with elections is what I got on both of these items, the Supreme Court case that they heard yesterday was out of Mississippi, and Mississippi allows you to count votes if they come in five days after the election as long as they're postmarked before the election. So, you have to wait five days before you announce your results and there's that that came through COVID and there was about 18 states that started doing that at that point in time. And so, the Republican National Committee, the Libertarian Party others have filed suit and said you can't do that it's election day, it's not It's not going to be after that. As a matter of fact, that was one of the points that Justice Alito made. He said, hey, we used to have election days. Now we have election week. Now we election month and several weeks. And so, this stuff can go on for a long time. So, the question was, do you just have elections on election day? And typically, they have left a lot of that decision up to the states. And that's one of areas that the states do have some latitude constitutionally. But it's gotten more and more where that system of having the elections that spread out a week or a week and a half after. It's really hard on candidates, everything else. Now, I'll point at the time of Thomas Jefferson and John Adams' election, their presidential vote counting went on for several months because the states all had different days of elections and they were weeks apart. And so, once you find out what one state does, you can go campaign in others. It's nothing like we think about today, that's for sure. 

Tim Barton [00:02:58] Well, it is probably also worth noting, even though as you're saying, when you have the opportunity to go campaign in the next state, that's not all that dissimilar from when you have some of the early primaries and you find out who wins in one state, et cetera, it's very different from election day today. And part of why I think it made sense that we actually had a formal date was because when you give people the opportunity, to go try to collect votes states for your person to win if those people are not grounded in biblical principles of truth and integrity, you have dishonest people that are going to do dishonest things. And that's part of what has happened now where, really not even saying now, I mean as long as there's been elections there's people trying to cheat so, this is not a brand-new thing. But it is why it makes sense that some states would want delay how they report and some, specifically, counties or precincts might delay getting in information and you know, all these things we've seen the shenanigans over the last decade easily as just finger pointers, but certainly back historically you can see why it would make a difference. But Dad, one of the things I was going to say is it also would have been different back in the day when you are having to ride horseback however far you're going and people don't really know what's happening until somebody gets there so just even the lines of communication would have made this very different back in the day from the way it is today, not take away from the fact, it makes sense there's one day, there's one time everybody gets them turned in. Because the longer you expand it, the more opportunities you give people to be dishonest, the most dishonest people are actually going to be dishonest. And we should try to minimize and eliminate that as much as possible. 

David Barton [00:04:50] Yeah, and I think that's part of where it's heading. Based on what the justices did talking today, it looks like that they're leaning towards saying, no, election day is election day. Now, the other side said, well, if you're gonna do that, what's wrong? Why don't you just eliminate early voting as well? And the argument was, well, nobody's arguing about that. That's not part of this case. This case is, does elections end on election day? They tried to go off and I thought one of the things that really happened, Paul Clement is the guy who argued it for the RNC and Paul has argued so many religious liberty cases and won. He's one of guys that Kelly Shackelford uses fairly often and it was really, I think, kind of humorous. So, Sotomayor came and she said to Clint, she said, well, maybe we just need a new president, maybe that's it. And she pointed to the fact that Bush won in 2000. With military ballots that came in late after the election ship from overseas. And Clement just really pretty much dissed her. He said, that was the reddest of red herrings I've ever heard. And so, to talk to a Supreme Court justice in that manner and kind of call them and put them back into place is fairly unusual. I mean, Clement, we can see doing that. But nonetheless, it looks like that that's gonna be what happens is the Court would probably make it more election day than in election month. And in line with that, out in California, they got a big race with Newsom not going for governor again. They now have 10 candidates in the race, 10 major candidates, a bunch of smaller candidates, but 10 major ones, and it's a jungle primary. So, there's no primary, no party primary either side. The top two vote getters advanced to the general. And so, what happened was in Riverside County, which is kind of a conservative county in California. The sheriff there just went in and seized 611,000 ballots from the last election. Now he seized, it may be more than that, he seized the ballots and he seized them because the handwritten logs that keep up with the ballots say that they processed 611,000 ballots. So, we got that, 611,000, but yet what they reported to the state was 657,000 ballots. That's a difference of 46,000 ballot somewhere between taking them in the boxes and reporting the results to the State. And when the sheriff said, what's going on here? And they said, oh. It's just, it's a trivially human era. It's machine stuff, machine counts. It's no big deal. So essentially 50,000 votes. And he went in because they can destroy those votes in about another month. They have to keep them for a certain period of time. So, he's gone in to investigate. And of course, that's set off a political fear because he's one of the Republicans, one of two Republicans running for governor. And so, he's going after this election integrity kind of stuff and say, let's make sure this was really done right. And we're going to uphold the ballot. And et cetera. And so, it's interesting to see where that's leading because the state attorney general came after him and said, you can't do that. That's not your authority. That's what we do. And a judge ruled against the attorney general and ruled for the sheriff and it's a California judge. So, some good drama going out in California. 

Tim Barton [00:08:13] Well, and guys, this is further compounded in a funny way to me that California does not require you to have any kind of voter ID or be registered really to even vote. You just show up and vote. Don't show your ID, doesn't matter. And they give IDs to non-US citizens and not just IDs. They have driver's licenses to non-US citizens. The whole thing just seems very sham oriented. When they are fighting specifically against any kind of integrity to make sure you have us citizens that are registered to vote, which is a very simple process, really all you have to do to vote is be a U S citizen, be registered, and then be 18 or older. That's it. And they say, no, that's too much. We don't want people to have to have IDs. We want anybody to show up and vote that wants to. So, then Dad, it's not surprising that when they identified 611,000 ballots, but found 650,000 people that voted, yeah, there might be some easy explanations for that. And certainly, I would not point to some kind of rounding error. I do agree with the human error, but it was not a unforced error. It was an intentional error is what occurred in that situation. 

David Barton [00:09:30] Yeah, if you have a plus or minus 10% and call that human error on an election, plus or, what would 10% have been in your election, Rick, that you had the recount on? Did you have 30,000 votes cast? 

Rick Green [00:09:42] Yeah, so three. 

David Barton [00:09:43] Plus or minus three thousand. 

Rick Green [00:09:45] Three thousand votes. Yeah. Yeah 

David Barton [00:09:48] Yeah, it's not a big deal, plus or minus 10%. So, I mean, I don't know who was affected in that election. I didn't look to see if someone could be pulled out of office, you know, if they overturn, who knows what, but it's just interesting to see that people are now starting to focus on getting elections, maybe better. And by the way, this next election should be much different because you've had, I think 220 election laws passed in the last two years. And so a lot of states have tightened up their election rules and requirements. There's still some loose stuff out there. It's interesting that the red states are tightening up more than the blue states. So red states are even doing better. They tend to do a little better anyway. But nonetheless, there's a lot of election changes, so it won't be the same we've been used to for the last two or three election cycles. It'll be real different this time. 

Rick Green [00:10:41] Yeah, and going back to the Supreme Court, there was a decision, a 7-2 decision on just having standing to question an election. And we've always said, you know, the best way to rebuild confidence in elections is you've got to have transparency and paper for ballots so people know what happened, verification process. But then you've gotta have remedies when you think there might have been something, either whether it was nefarious or a mistake, but there was something that went wrong. And back in 2020, you had all these states that changed election law violating the Constitution by not having the legislature involved and people tried to sue for that and they were told they had no standing, even though they were on the ballot like a congressman sued or someone running for Congress and other people that were on the ballot sued and they told they have no standing. Well, the Supreme Court just said yesterday or Monday I can't remember in a 7-2 decision yes, you have standing if you're on the ballot. That's great guys I mean at least now whatever happens in the future, you know, you can challenge it and try to improve that election law by at least filing suit 

Tim Barton [00:11:41] Now, Rick, I have not read all those yet, and I don't mean to put you on the spot, but I know you're really good at dodging. You played a lot of dodgeball growing up. You're fine. But which one of the crazy liberal ladies voted with the six more normal people than it was seven, two? 

Rick Green [00:12:02] No, I looked at it yesterday and I can't remember. It wasn't Kagan. I think it might've been Sotomayor I will say Amy Coney Barrett filed a concurring opinion where she did disagree with some of it. She thought some of that went too far. So, she had gotten some of wrong before, because you remember there were challenges that went all the way to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court, the same Supreme Court said you don't have standing five years ago. So, I'm just glad to see them change their minds, but man, I wish I could remember cause yes, so you have the three crazy ladies. I don't think it was Katanji Brown Jackson, man. So it might have been.... I'll look it up on the break 

Tim Barton [00:12:38] Well, and in fairness, really, there's only two or three sane people, conservative-wise speaking on the Supreme Court. You have three pretty good ones. You have 3 in the middle and you have 3 on the far left and they all just happen to be liberal leftist Democrat ladies. So that's why I would say the crazy leftist ladies. But the fact that one of them joined is interesting because I've seen some 6-3 decisions recently that I felt like should have been 9-0. And they just wanted to have a protest vote in general, just because they could, which was nonsensical on some of the things they were opposing. But I'm curious which one actually cited. 

Rick Green [00:13:18] I was wrong. I just looked it up. I looked it up while you I was wrong. It was Kagan that was actually with them. So, Sotomayor and Jackson dissented and so there you go. You could have thrown a dart at the wall in guessing which one it would have been but 

Tim Barton [00:13:34] Well, I felt like it wasn't going to be Ketanji Brown Jackson, because if you can't define what a woman is, you can define what standing is. I figure. So, you know, all those things, just definition problems. 

Rick Green [00:13:48] That's funny. All right. So, listen, let's take a break guys. I know we still haven't even gotten to Iran. That's probably the biggest news of the week is this, this five day pause and who it is that president Trump's actually negotiating with, he seems confident that it's the right person. So big, big thing that happened in the market yesterday. I mean, wow, huge swings in terms of the market, just based on this, this short pause, we'll talk about that when we come back, you're listening to the WallBuilders Show. 

Rick Green [00:15:20] Welcome back to the WallBuilders Show. Thanks for staying with us. And guys, we've said this a lot. We trust the guy in the room. I mean, President Trump's got the right information and, and tends to make the right decision on these kinds of things. Were you guys surprised as I was literally in class with the students at Patriot Institute and somebody said, there's a five day pause on there. I had no idea that it happened. So, I think most people didn't expect it, but what do y'all think? 

David Barton [00:15:43] Well, it's not a surprise at all. And by the way, kind of a ceasefire of kinds, but Israel is still bombing and pounding. Israel is going after a lot of the internal facilities and Israel is targeting just a whole lot of the things that would be their internal enforcement network. Israel's kind of doing the things that would let them have a revolution if they were going to have one. If it's possible for them to have a revolution, Israel has kind of taken out the infrastructure of the ones that might try to step in, but the fact that you've had 9,000 precision targets hit so far by Israel and America, they've got nothing to fight back with. They've got no infrastructure. Now, I say that they're fighting back, but they know that if they got, that if we really went after them, we're going after their strategic stuff. If we went after him, they would not stand a chance. They've gotten no way of defending at this point. So it makes sense that they want to do something to negotiate. 

Tim Barton [00:16:42] But it's also worth pointing out what has been uniquely different about America and Israel for decades is that in war scenarios, that oftentimes, there's not even oftentimes, there's, there has not been two nations that have been more intentional about trying to protect innocent civilians than America and Israel. And so, Dad, to your point, if they wanted to wipe Iran off the map, They could. But they are actually trying to preserve, and I say they, America and Israel, both have done very targeted and limited strikes in specific locations to try to preserve people. We talked about it, man, was it yesterday, earlier this week, sometime we talked about the, the underground church in Iran and how it's considered one of the fastest growing, if not the fastest growing church anywhere in the world where Christianity is exploding. Where, no pun intended, that's not what we're saying, Christianity is growing rapidly. They're not like, never mind. I'm not gonna digress in that, but it's growing rapidly! 

Rick Green [00:17:47] I read your mind on that one, Tim. I think we just read your mind. You didn't have to say it. 

Tim Barton [00:17:51] Yeah, it's, you know, contrasting. I was thinking for a minute, but no, it is growing so rapidly. And this is something that, you know, Dad, when you pointed out that. Israel is doing something that is creating a little bit of a gap in a window or broadening that gap in window for the people that are in Iran that don't like the regime, it's creating space for them maybe to be more vocal. Now they're obviously they have to do it at their own risk because when you take someone who is a champion wrestler, like their young athlete, the 19-year-old that they execute, hung in public, they are very clear that if you oppose them, they will crush and destroy you with the women's soccer team. The reason that some of the people had to go back home is because some of their families were captured. This is a very evil regime. And this is something that used to not be politically divisive to say that Democrats and Republicans both said for decades, that Iran was evil an evil regime, et cetera, et cetera. But what Israel is continuing to do is what also Donald Trump has done is try to create space for not just the limitation of the evil that's occurring by this regime and also what that means even for the downstream effects that they're not able to get China all the oil that China needs. And if China had start buying at the regular market instead of getting the reduced rates they were getting from Venezuela and Iran, that can change. Some of the, the global perspective as well of China's standing and the strength of their military, et cetera. So, there's a lot of factors at play. And guys, I also think the fact that Israel is not part of the ceasefire. When, when people talk about Israel controlling America, et cetera, that we're Israel's puppet or whatever the case is. And you see, actually you have two autonomous nations, Israel and America doing something very different right now. And... Certainly, they probably are in conversations and they're working together to some extent, but there's just so much of people would look at what's going on and recognize Iran incredibly evil President Trump is trying to bring peace where he can but there's probably bigger global perspective with hindering China, etc. There's a lot of moving pieces and then not to take away from the fact that God is on the move even in Iran In really special ways the fact, that Christianity is growing faster than anything else over there, it's an underground church. But if the revolution and I say that loosely if if this overthrow is able to be accomplished, then the church might be able to come out from underground and really impact Iran in incredible ways. So, there's a lot of big stuff happening right now 

David Barton [00:20:34] You know, if you go back to the Iranian Revolution back under Jimmy Carter and the hostages and all the stuff that happened in '79, before Reagan came in, that's when the Iranian Revolutionary Guard got set up and that's where Ayatollah Khomeini came in as the Ayatollah, the head of Iran, very bloody, very coercive regime. Iran had not been a hardcore Muslim nation; there was just a real different thing. It was a Western nation. We had Iran, we had our F-16s over there. We had our planes over there; they were an ally. And then Khomeini comes in and changes it. Now, it's his son that got killed in that initial first day of bombing. And then Ayatollah Khomeini's, the original one, his grandson is the one that's supposedly leader now, but as Trump's pointed out, we keep seeing posts from him. But we haven't heard a thing from him. And when Trump's talking to these folks on the ceasefire, he's not talking to Khomeini. So, he may literally be dead. That was an early report. Then they said, well, you know, he had a leg blown off, so he's in the hospital. But whatever it is, there's no indication there that he's talking. So, the one Trump is talking to now, Trump says actually is fairly sane. We'll see. But I don't think the Revolutionary Guard wants to try to lose control of that nation in any way, shape, fashion, or form. They would be out of power under a different type of regime unless it is another hardcore Muslim regime. The IRGC is kind of conducting an internal revolution in the middle of a war right now to keep from losing control. And they have been the thugs that have done all the enforcement stuff for Iran. So, they've got really a civil war kind of going inside. And again, I think that's significant what Israel is doing. If they're going to have a civil war all the weapons are on one side, but now with what Israel is doing, they're making it more of a possibility for an uprising of the people to do something. If the IRGC is going to stay a target, I would bet now with doing what they've done, trying to exert their force and will, they'll now be targeted by Israel and maybe even by U.S. If we get back in bombing. 

Rick Green [00:22:49] Well, David, you know, you said something that I think is really the big unknown is that is will the people of Iran rise up like, will it be a true regime change at the end of the day where it's not this Islamic, you know, cleric situation? But they actually have elections or even a constitutional monarch or something. And I guess that's the part we just don't know yet, right? We don't if there's enough there left from 47 years ago. If the soil is still good enough that the seeds of liberty can be and it and and you're saying that Israel's still doing some of the work to dismantle that Islamic cleric machine in order to give the people of Iran more room to rise up. Is that what I heard? 

David Barton [00:23:30] Yeah, but you know what surprises me is after 9,000 specific spot location strikes by Israel and America and four weeks into this war, and Iran is still firing missiles. How much ammunition do they have put aside? And if they do, man, how hard is it going to be for the people to rise up if they've got that kind of stuff stored away?  

Tim Barton [00:23:55] Well, how much oil did they give Russia and China in exchange for those very things? Cause I, I would absolutely think that the vast majority of what they have, and we actually know to some extent, from some of these things, like even in Venezuela, when Trump was doing the Maduro raid and had the team go down, that they bragged about that the Chinese and Russian technology couldn't stop them. Of course, Venezuela trading oil with Russian China. Well, the same thing with Iran. And so it's interesting, the way that president Trump has been able to flex in some ways to Russia and China, signaling not only that we're cutting off some of your oil supply, but also that your technology, not really great for us, and of course we would expect that China and Russia probably did not give Iran their best military technology, but they probably gave them decent technology and it's done pretty much nothing, relatively speaking, against what's been coming against it. So definitely interesting. And Rick, to your question about the good soil, I think this is one of the interesting things with the growth of Christianity, where so many people in Iran right now reported having dreams and visions of a man in white, and it was Jesus. That they're dreaming about Jesus, they're coming to find out who this guy is, they're converting to Christianity. And I think, the growth of Christianity, and then you can back up to the fact that these Persians, right, Iran, who they were, they were not predominantly Muslim until a lot of this revolution happened, and they went a different direction. So, I do think between some of their traditional roots and the growth in Christianity right now, I do there is some fertilizer going in that soil to create a better opportunity for some of those seeds to take root. 

Rick Green [00:25:52] It's amazing what's happening guys. And, and, and of course it reshapes the globe no matter what. And even if I was thinking of that at the end of the five-day truth or, you know, pause, whatever we want to call it, even if Trump decides, all right, we've done all we can do, it's up to them now, it was still a good thing to do. We still set them back on the nuclear thing. We still stopped a lot of the, you know, head of the snake terrorism and everything, but we're still praying for an even better outcome when this thing is over. And that's another thing to encourage everybody home to do, make sure you're praying for this pray for President Trump's wisdom right now. Because. I can't imagine a bigger negotiation in his presidency than what's happening right now. And it could very well determine a lot of what's gonna happen in the midterms and in the future as well. So anyway, thanks for the update guys. We've got, let's see tomorrow, Foundations of Freedom Thursday, and then good news on Friday. So don't miss either of those. Tune in at wallbuilders.show. You've been listening to The WallBuilders Show.