Morning Wire XX
[0] General Mark Millie, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, reportedly promised a Chinese military leader that he would warn Beijing if then -President Donald Trump planned to attack the country.
[1] The accusation has led to calls for Millie's resignation.
[2] He needs to resign, and if he won't resign, he needs to be fired.
[3] We'll look at the allegations and Millie's response.
[4] I'm Georgia Howe with Daily Wire, editor -in -chief John Bickley.
[5] It's Thursday, September 16th.
[6] And this is Morning Wire.
[7] California governor, Gavin Newsom, says the recall results are a mandate for his progressive policies, while Republicans say the recall was a warning sign for Democrats.
[8] We are forcing them now to pay attention to the things they should have paid attention to two years ago.
[9] We'll look at how the Democratic Party worked to protect the governor, and how Republicans are responding to the results.
[10] And a pro -life group in Texas has been blocked from helping citizens sue planned pay.
[11] under the state's new heartbeat law.
[12] What does the judge's order mean for the national battle over abortion?
[13] Thanks for waking up with Morning Wire.
[14] Stay tuned.
[15] We have the news you need to know.
[16] This show is sponsored by MyBooky.
[17] It's winning season at MyBooky, and that means placing bets on NFL games has never been more profitable.
[18] Head to MyBooky .ag and choose from a variety of boosts, contest, and promotions up for grabs and use promo code Wire to double your first deposit and your winnings.
[19] The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff reportedly promised a Chinese military leader he would warn China in advance if then President Trump planned to attack the country.
[20] That has led to widespread calls for Mark Millie to resign, as his actions could amount to treason if the reports are accurate.
[21] Daily Wire reporter Ben Johnson has been following the story and has more details.
[22] So, Ben, based on this latest reporting, people on the left are hailing General Millie as a hero, but people on the right are calling him a traitor.
[23] First, where are these claims coming from?
[24] This story comes exclusively from Bob Woodward in Robert Costa's new book, Peril.
[25] According to them, General Millie was concerned President Trump might launch a nuclear attack on China, so twice he called his Chinese counterpart General Lee Zo Cheng of the People's Liberation Army.
[26] In one of the conversations, he reportedly said, and I quote, If we're going to attack, I'm going to call you ahead of time.
[27] It's not going to be a surprise.
[28] And he reportedly made his fellow military commanders swear an oath not to act unless Millie was involved.
[29] And why would he do this?
[30] The book says that Millie told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi he agreed President Trump was crazy.
[31] General Millie has confirmed that he made the calls, but he did not comment on their content.
[32] He also admits to holding a meeting to discuss nuclear weapons protocol, but he maintains that he did nothing illegal.
[33] President Trump's called for Millie to be tried for treason and said, quote, I never even thought of attacking China.
[34] So is the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff part of the chain of command?
[35] for a nuclear launch order?
[36] No, and critics say if Millie were to insert himself into the chain of command on nuclear issues, he'd be subverting the civilian command of the U .S. military.
[37] Prominent Republicans have called for Millie to resign, be fired, or even face court -martial.
[38] Here's Senator Josh Holler.
[39] So I hope these reports are inaccurate, but he does need to resign.
[40] He needs to resign, and if he won't resign, he needs to be fired.
[41] Opposition has come from some pretty surprising corners.
[42] Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman has written that if the report is true, General Millie should resign.
[43] He said if the general felt that strongly about the danger President Trump posed, he should have gone public as a whistleblower.
[44] Either way, he says, Miller should step down.
[45] There are better candidates to run the military, folks that are less polarizing.
[46] Colonel Vindman is no fan of Trump's.
[47] You may recall he was the one who initially reported President Trump's phone call with the president of Ukraine, which led to the first impeachment.
[48] Right.
[49] Now, is it unusual for U .S. generals to call foreign generals?
[50] No, in itself, a phone call is fairly routine.
[51] That's why Senator Tom Cotton said he wants to question Millie under oath about the details of the conversation.
[52] So the fact of the conversation is less important than the content of the conversation, and that's why we need to hear straight from the horse's mouth.
[53] Millie is scheduled to testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee on September 28th.
[54] Okay, so the scandal really hinges on whether Bob Woodward got the exact wording of the phone call right.
[55] Yes.
[56] And do we have any reason not to trust Woodward's reporting on this?
[57] We do.
[58] While Woodward is regarded as a journalistic god, several major revelations in his previous books have been disputed.
[59] The most consequential is his claim that he got former CIA director William Casey to admit on his deathbed that he knew about the Iran -Contra affair.
[60] Even Woodward's former editor, Ben Bradley, has admitted he had doubts about some of the minor details in Woodward's Pulitzer Prize -winning reporting on Watergate.
[61] It certainly sounds like further investigation is in order.
[62] Ben, thanks for reporting.
[63] Anytime.
[64] That's Daily Wire media reporter Ben Johnson.
[65] Coming up, Democrats and Republicans spar over the meaning of the recall vote in California.
[66] Relief ban is the number one FDA cleared anti -naja risk ban, clinically proven to relieve and prevent nausea and vomiting while remaining 100 % drug -free.
[67] It's the only all -natural, over -the -counter wearable device used by professionals to treat nausea and vomiting.
[68] After the conclusion of the California recall election, the race has been called for Gavin Newsom, who is projected to remain as governor.
[69] Here to discuss his daily wires, Ian Haworth.
[70] Ian, so we've watched the results as they started coming in Tuesday night and the response from both sides.
[71] First, can you unpack the results for us?
[72] Sure, with over 9 million votes counted so far, the race has been called for Gavin Newsom, with the no vote leading the yes vote by almost 30%, or well over million votes.
[73] There's still around 30 % of the expected vote to be counted, but he's being projected to stay in office, given his comfortable lead.
[74] The second question on the ballot asked voters who should replace Gavin Newsom if he was recalled, and Larry Elder vastly outperformed the poll estimates, leading all other candidates by well over 30 percentage points.
[75] But these results are, of course, irrelevant given that the recall failed.
[76] Right.
[77] So what should we make of Newsom's level of support?
[78] Well, in August, the race was pretty tight, but on the eve of the election, the Keep vote had rocketed up to 57 .3 % compared to the 41 .5 % in favor of removing Newsom.
[79] And there are three key reasons for this.
[80] One, Gavin Newsom basically mobilized the entire Democratic Party apparatus to protect his position.
[81] Two, the Democratic Party successfully repositioned the election from being a referendum on Newsom's performance as governor to being a referendum on their characterization of Larry Elder as Donald Trump 2 .0.
[82] And then three, cash.
[83] Because of California's recall policies, Newsom was able to amass over $70 million, while Elder had about a quarter of that amount to get out his message.
[84] Okay, so the Democratic Party turned the tide in a really short space of time.
[85] Obviously, Democrats have a huge advantage in the state, something like what, two to one ratio?
[86] But how specifically did they mobilize people here in the last few weeks?
[87] Well, the Democratic Party really threw all they had at this recall election in the final days.
[88] President Joe Biden flew into California to rally for Newsom, who shifted the goalposts by focusing on former President Donald Trump.
[89] This year, the leading Republican running for governor is the closest thing to a Trump clone that I've ever seen in your state.
[90] Vice President Harris also campaigned for Newsom, as did Jamie Harrison, the chair of the DNC, who presented Newsom as a success story, saying that California is a leader in the fight against COVID -19.
[91] Democrats deliver.
[92] And thanks to Governor Newsom, nowhere is that more true than in the great state of California.
[93] He's made California a leader in beating back this pandemic, and he has been a champion for the president's build back better agenda.
[94] So it's fair to say this recall election was positioned by Democrats as a national referendum against the memory of Trump rather than really Newsom's performance.
[95] Yes, and we should also point out that Harrison's claim that California led the way in fighting COVID -19 is not really accurate.
[96] Despite imposing some of the strictest COVID -19 lockdown restrictions, which had devastating effects on the economy and education, California had the highest number of total cases and deaths from COVID -19 in the country.
[97] When we adjust for population size, California was middle of the pack when it comes to cases and deaths.
[98] Again, despite having some of the strictest lockdown measures in the nation.
[99] the governor has framed this as a mandate for his progressive policies.
[100] Is he right?
[101] Well, two things are true here.
[102] First, Governor Newsom emerged victorious from the recall election with a healthy majority, and this can't be ignored.
[103] But he did only do so by leveraging a huge amount of money from influential donors, as well as influence and support from the Democratic Party at the national level.
[104] So the fact that a recall election even happened in a deep blue state like California should be viewed as a warning sign for Democrats, especially since the policies being promoted by Gavin Newsom and President Biden aren't as popular in other areas of the country as they are in LA or San Francisco, for example.
[105] After the results came in late on Tuesday, Larry Elder made the argument that while this election didn't go the way many conservatives would have hoped, this is just the start.
[106] We recognize that we lost the battle, but we are certainly going to win the war.
[107] We are forcing them now to pay attention to the problem of homelessness.
[108] We are forcing them now to do a better job on schools.
[109] We are forcing them now to do a better job on clearing our forests.
[110] We're forcing them now to do a better job about energy.
[111] We are forcing them now to pay attention to the things they should have paid attention to two years ago.
[112] Thanks for breaking that down for us, Ian.
[113] DailyWire's Ian Howarth.
[114] A Texas judge temporarily blocked some pro -life groups from enforcing the state's new abortion law.
[115] The law bans most abortions after six weeks and allows citizens to take legal action against abortion providers.
[116] Here to tell us what this could mean for the future of the law and for potential future lawsuits is Daily Wire's Charlotte Pence Bond.
[117] So Charlotte, tell us about this judge's order.
[118] Absolutely.
[119] So a judge in Texas issued a temporary injunction preventing Texas right to life and others from suing specific Planned Parenthood facilities or their doctors and staff until a final judgment is handed down.
[120] A trial on the merits of the case has been set for April of next year, so the injunction will likely last until at least that time.
[121] Okay, so this particular organization is prevented from suing specific Planned Parenthood locations and staff.
[122] Yes.
[123] And remind us what this law says.
[124] Yeah, so the law bans most abortions after fetal cardiac activity is detected, which is usually around six weeks.
[125] It also allows everyday people to sue abortion providers and those who quote aid and abet illegal procedures.
[126] As we've discussed in the past, abortion activists are especially upset because the Supreme Court didn't grant a stay to block it from taking effect, which is something that's happened many times in the past with similar laws.
[127] Right, and other heartbeat laws have been struck down by the courts.
[128] Correct.
[129] While heartbeat bills or laws that prevent abortion after a fetal heartbeat have been passed in other states, they typically don't actually go into effect because the courts block them as abortion providers sue.
[130] This is because past Supreme Court rulings have decided that states have to allow pre -viability abortions, which is typically up to 20 weeks of pregnancy.
[131] It's important to note, though, that the Supreme Court didn't rule on the constitutionality of the Texas law.
[132] So they can still make a decision on that as more people sue and push back against it.
[133] So going back to that recent Texas court ruling, what is each side saying about it?
[134] Abortion activists are somewhat relieved about the decision, but they're definitely not entirely happy about it.
[135] The ruling only applies to the group named in the lawsuit, so the law is still in effect for everyone else in the state.
[136] So to be clear, aside from the organizations named in that suit, abortion after six weeks is still banned in Texas.
[137] Yes, which is why the pro -life side, Texas Right to Life, actually spoke about it as somewhat of a win, even though the judge sided with the abortion groups in this case.
[138] Texas Right to Life pointed out that even though they are prevented from suing at this time, the law still remains in effect more broadly, which they consider a win.
[139] Not to mention, Planned Parenthood was also attempting to reveal the names of pro -life advocates, which Texas Right to Life says was also defeated by this ruling.
[140] Now, what's the response been from the federal government?
[141] Well, last week, the Biden administration announced it's taking legal action and suing the state of Texas over the new law.
[142] They're claiming it's unconstitutional and, among other things, conflicts with federal law, specifically by blocking federal agencies from carrying out their responsibilities under federal abortion statutes.
[143] Got it.
[144] Well, we'll be watching to see how it develops.
[145] Charlotte, thanks for reporting.
[146] Anytime.
[147] That's Daily Wires, Charlotte Pence Bond.
[148] Other stories we're tracking this week.
[149] In New York City, protesters marched across the Brooklyn Bridge, some shouting chance against President Biden.
[150] The demonstrations come after Mayor Bill de Blasio announced last month that all public school teachers and staff must get vaccinated by September 27.
[151] On Tuesday, the U .S. Soccer Federation, agreed to the demands of female soccer players by offering identical pay structures for both the men's and women's national teams.
[152] The organization said in a press release that U .S. soccer firmly believes that the best path forward for all involved and for the future of the sport is a single pay structure for both teams.
[153] If you like this episode and are interested in hearing more, subscribe to Morning Wire on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you're listening, and give us a five -star review.
[154] That's all the time we've got this morning.
[155] Thanks for waking up with us.
[156] We'll be back tomorrow with the news you need to know.
[157] If you like this podcast, get the Morning Wire newsletter delivered straight to your inbox when you join at Dailywire .com slash subscribe.