Speaker 1: Welcome.
Speaker 2: It is verdict with Senator Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson with you, Senator.
Speaker 2: We have got a lot to talk about tonight, including
Speaker 2: a massive victory for the state of Texas when it
Speaker 2: comes to dealing with illegal immigrants at the southern border.
Speaker 3: Well, that's right.
Speaker 4: This week Texas won a huge victory at the Supreme
Speaker 4: Court by a six ' three vote. The Supreme Court
Speaker 4: is allowing Texas to enforce its immigration law to arrest
Speaker 4: and deport illegal aliens. Now, the victory is temporary, litigation
Speaker 4: is still ongoing. Nonetheless, it is a major, major step forward.
Speaker 3: Number two. This is a great week.
Speaker 4: This is a great week for sports fans, and it's
Speaker 4: March Madness. March Madness is always a lot of fun
Speaker 4: everyone who loves college basketball. It is a blast to
Speaker 4: see what's happening. I got to say there are a
Speaker 4: bunch of Texas teams that are in the mix. And
Speaker 4: we also have a moment in college athletics that is
Speaker 4: really remarkable. I think there's a crisis in college athletics
Speaker 4: with name image and likeness, with the trans for portal.
Speaker 4: We're seeing chaos and the wild West in college athletics. Well,
Speaker 4: last week I sat down with former Alabama head coach
Speaker 4: Nick Saban and several others at a round table discussing
Speaker 4: how to fix college athletics. We're going to get into
Speaker 4: that in depth. And finally, the media this past week
Speaker 4: suffered an utter blood bath of hypocrisy when it came
Speaker 4: to attacking Donald Trump. We're going to expose it all absolutely.
Speaker 4: That may be one of the most fun stories of
Speaker 4: the show today. Want to talk to you real quick
Speaker 4: about your retirement. Is the money you've been saving for
Speaker 4: retirement going to be enough? With inflation still well above
Speaker 4: the Fed's target rate and consumer prices much higher than
Speaker 4: they were three years ago. Union a financial plan that
Speaker 4: ensures the money you save today will be enough for
Speaker 4: you tomorrow.
Speaker 2: That's where gold and silver come in. Gold and silver
Speaker 2: have historically been good hedges against inflation and a great
Speaker 2: way to protect your hard earned retirement funds. And when
Speaker 2: it comes to buying gold and silver, you need a
Speaker 2: trusted partner. You need to reach out to Freedom Goold USA.
Speaker 2: Freedom Goold USA is all about educating their clients on
Speaker 2: how to invest in precious metals. They preach protection and
Speaker 2: diversifying your assets, and on average charge twenty five to
Speaker 2: thirty percent less than most major gold and silver firms
Speaker 2: out there. So take control of your financial future right now.
Speaker 2: Visit freedom gooldusa dot com slash verdict. That's freedom goold
Speaker 2: Usa dot com slash verdict, or you can call them
Speaker 2: one eight hundred sixty fifty five eight eight four three.
Speaker 2: That's one eight hundred sixty five five eight eight four
Speaker 2: to three. That's freedom goold USA dot com slash verdict
Speaker 2: or one eight hundred sixty five five eight eight four three.
Speaker 2: And when you call them, make sure you ask them
Speaker 2: about getting free silver in your account today one eight
Speaker 2: hundred and sixty fifty five eight eight four to three.
Speaker 1: Center.
Speaker 2: This may be one of the weirdest twenty four hour
Speaker 2: news stories I've seen in a long time that deals
Speaker 2: with the rights of the state of Texas. And this
Speaker 2: story that initially came out that the Supreme Court said, no,
Speaker 2: you cannot arrest people coming across the southern border who
Speaker 2: were here illegally. That's the job of the federal government.
Speaker 2: But then within twenty four hours it flipped. Please explain
Speaker 2: to everyone that's confused how this went from a massive
Speaker 2: you know, victory and celebration by the left all of
Speaker 2: a sudden, just kidding. Now Texas has the ability to
Speaker 2: protect its border from illegal immigrants that are invading.
Speaker 4: Well, it's a big victory, but it may be a
Speaker 4: temporary victory. So what's happened. Well, we all know that
Speaker 4: we've got an historic crisis of illegal immigration levels that
Speaker 4: have never been seen in the history of our country.
Speaker 4: Millions and millions, over ten point four million illegal immigrants
Speaker 4: crossing into this country, the vast majority crossing into Texas.
Speaker 4: We also know that Joe Biden is refusing to enforce
Speaker 4: federal immigration laws, is releasing millions and millions of illegal immigrants,
Speaker 4: is causing this crisis. My home state of Texas has
Speaker 4: said enough is enough, and Texas is taking extraordinary steps
Speaker 4: trying to address that crisis. One of those steps is
Speaker 4: Texas passed to bill Senate Bill for that was designed
Speaker 4: to give the State of Texas the authority to handle
Speaker 4: directly this crisis and in particular to arrest people who've
Speaker 4: crossed illegally into this country and to send them back. Now,
Speaker 4: when Texas passed that legislation, the governor justified it, the
Speaker 4: legislature justified it under the constitutional provisions giving the state
Speaker 4: to the authority to defend itself in the case of invasion. Well,
Speaker 4: of course, plaintiffs immediately went to court and sued, and
Speaker 4: a federal district court issued an injunction against Texas's law,
Speaker 4: ordered Texas do not enforce the law. That went up
Speaker 4: on appeal to the Fifth Circuit Federal Court Appeals. The
Speaker 4: Fifth Circuit Federal Court of Appeals vacated that injunction. In
Speaker 4: other words, it said, Texas, you can enforce the law.
Speaker 4: Now understand, the Fifth Circuit has not answered the question
Speaker 4: whether it thinks Texas's law is consistent with federal law
Speaker 4: the Constitution. It simply said, while this appeal is pending,
Speaker 4: Texas because it can enforce the law. The Biden Department
Speaker 4: of Justice appealed that decision to the U. S.
Speaker 3: Supreme Court.
Speaker 4: The Supreme Court initially stayed the enforcement of the law
Speaker 4: while it considered what to do, but that was a
Speaker 4: temporary administrative stay. And then yesterday the Supreme Court concluded
Speaker 4: it was not going to impose an administrative stay. Now
Speaker 4: that was a six to three decision. The three liberal
Speaker 4: justices dissented. Justice Soda Mayor dissented along with Katanji Brown
Speaker 4: Jackson along with Atlana Kagan.
Speaker 3: Those three dissented.
Speaker 4: Justice Barrett and Justice Kavanaugh wrote a brief concurring opinion.
Speaker 4: Their concurring opinion, they said, listen, we're not resolving whether
Speaker 4: this law is constitutional. We're not resolving whether this law
Speaker 4: is consistent with federal law. We're simply saying that while
Speaker 4: the appeal is pending, it's up to the Federal Court
Speaker 4: of Appeals whether to stay the effect of the law
Speaker 4: or not. The three to center said, that's terrible. This
Speaker 4: is going to upend all of immigration law. And what
Speaker 4: Justice Barrett and Kavanaugh said is, listen, the Fifth Circuit
Speaker 4: is going to resolve this issue quickly. If they don't
Speaker 4: resolve it quickly, the United States might come back to us.
Speaker 4: What does all of this mean, Well, the challenge to
Speaker 4: this law, the biggest challenge is a decision from the
Speaker 4: Supreme Court called Arizona versus United States. Arizona versus United
Speaker 4: States is a twenty twelve decision of the Supreme Court.
Speaker 4: You remembered back during Barack Obama when an illegal immigration
Speaker 4: got bad. Under Obama, Arizona passed a law that had
Speaker 4: some similarities to Texas's Senate Billfore and the Obama DOJ
Speaker 4: took that to the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court
Speaker 4: struck it down. Supreme Court concluded in Arizona versus United States, quote,
Speaker 4: the government of the United States has broad, undoubted power
Speaker 4: over the subject of immigration and the status of non citizens.
Speaker 4: And the Court continued in that case, quote, it is
Speaker 4: fundamental that foreign country is concerned about the status, safety
Speaker 4: and security of their nationals in the United States must
Speaker 4: be able to confer and communicate on the subject with
Speaker 4: one national sovereign, not fifty separate states. Texas, in bringing
Speaker 4: this case, is trying to challenge the case of Arizona
Speaker 4: versus the United States, and it's trying to get the
Speaker 4: Supreme Court to overturn it. The Supreme Court said that quote,
Speaker 4: the removal process is entrusted to the discretion of the
Speaker 4: federal government because removal decisions touch on foreign relations and
Speaker 4: must be made with one voice. And so what Texas
Speaker 4: is trying to do is is get the court to
Speaker 4: overturn that decision. I don't know if they will or not.
Speaker 4: I can tell you a central argument in this case
Speaker 4: is the circumstances are different. So there's a way for
Speaker 4: the Supreme Court to uphold the Texas law without overturning
Speaker 4: the early Arizona case. And what it could conclude is
Speaker 4: the Arizona case is usually the rule, which is that
Speaker 4: states cannot deport people under normal times, but the mass
Speaker 4: of the invasion is so great, and the invasion Clause
Speaker 4: the Constitution gives state special powers that in an instance
Speaker 4: where the federal government, where the executive is defying the
Speaker 4: federal immigration laws refusing to enforce it, when it is
Speaker 4: an order of magnitude worse than it's ever been, then
Speaker 4: a state has the extraordinary powers to defend itself and
Speaker 4: defend its sovereignty. Now, to be clear, that would be
Speaker 4: making new law. That would be a landmark decision. And
Speaker 4: so Texas is pushing the bounds of jurisprudence. But it's
Speaker 4: doing so because this crisis has never happened before. The
Speaker 4: long and short of it is, this victory could go away.
Speaker 4: It could go away in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Speaker 4: It could go away on a subsequent appeal to the
Speaker 4: US Supreme Court. But right now, the Supreme Court has
Speaker 4: concluded that Texas has the authority to arrest the legal
Speaker 4: immigrants and to send them back and that is a
Speaker 4: big damn victory, not just for Texas, but for the
Speaker 4: whole country.
Speaker 1: All right, So let's talk about the timeline here.
Speaker 2: And you said that this could be a short lived victory,
Speaker 2: So let's talk about the timeline. When could this in
Speaker 2: theory be heard and possibly go in the other direction
Speaker 2: if that is the scenario that plays out hypothetically.
Speaker 4: Well, it could be very fast. So the briefing on
Speaker 4: the motion to stay pending appeal has already been briefed
Speaker 4: in the Fifth Circuit. It was fully briefed by March fifth.
Speaker 4: It is set to be argued on April third, So
Speaker 4: just for a couple of weeks. The Fifth Circuit could
Speaker 4: issue an opinion on that motion to stay very soon.
Speaker 3: Thereafter.
Speaker 4: There's also briefing on the underlying merits of the appeal,
Speaker 4: whether or not the law is constitutional and consistent with
Speaker 4: federal law. That will take longer. But what the Supreme
Speaker 4: Court said, what Justice Parritt and Justice Kavanaugh said, is
Speaker 4: if the Fifth Circuit does not issue a decision on
Speaker 4: the stay pending appeal soon, the Biden administration could go
Speaker 4: back to the Supreme Court. So I would expect to
Speaker 4: see a decision from the Fifth Circuit within sixty days
Speaker 4: and potentially shorter than that, potentially a couple of weeks
Speaker 4: to a month, and depending on what the Fifth Circuit concludes,
Speaker 4: it could go back to the Supreme Court. All of
Speaker 4: which is to say this issue is not over. There's
Speaker 4: a whole lot more litigation to come. Nonetheless, this victory
Speaker 4: yesterday was significant and I'm glad for it.
Speaker 2: Final question on this for you, and I want people
Speaker 2: to understand what this allows Texas to do. The Supreme
Speaker 2: Court is saying, we're going to allow the law right
Speaker 2: that would allow the Texas National Guard to who arrests
Speaker 2: into port of legal aliens within the state of Texas.
Speaker 1: How would that work and play out?
Speaker 2: And would that be something that they can basically jump
Speaker 2: on and start enforcing right away or could that take
Speaker 2: weeks or months?
Speaker 3: Yeah, look, they could jump on it right away.
Speaker 4: So Senate Bill four makes it a crime for a
Speaker 4: non citizen to enter or attempt to enter Texas directly
Speaker 4: from a foreign nation or any location other than a
Speaker 4: lawful port of entry. It also makes it a crime
Speaker 4: for a non citizen to enter, attempt to enter, or
Speaker 4: be found in Texas after having previously been denied admission
Speaker 4: to or excluded to, ported, or removed from the United States.
Speaker 4: These crimes are punishable by thousands of dollars in fines
Speaker 4: and up to one year in prison. Once Texas charges
Speaker 4: a non citizen under Senate Bill four, a state judge may,
Speaker 4: with the consent of the non citizen, enter an order
Speaker 4: that quote requires the person to return to the foreign
Speaker 4: nation from which the person entered or attempted to enter
Speaker 4: before any conviction. Once the non sense sentences non citizen
Speaker 4: is convicted, the judge quote shall enter on order requiring
Speaker 4: the person to return to the foreign nation from which
Speaker 4: the person entered or attempted to enter. So it gives
Speaker 4: the State of Texas the authority to arrest illegal aliens
Speaker 4: and to send them back to where they came from. Historically,
Speaker 4: that has always been the federal government's province. And so
Speaker 4: this litigation is going to turn on whether the circumstances
Speaker 4: are so extraordinary that Texas is justified legally at acting here.
Speaker 4: And it's also ultimately going to turn on whether the
Speaker 4: Arizona decisions should be overturned. Of course, the Court of
Speaker 4: Appeals can't overturn a Supreme Court decision, so that would
Speaker 4: have to be the Supreme Court of the United States
Speaker 4: that would overturn that.
Speaker 1: You just think about the visual of this.
Speaker 2: We've seen so many illegals you've watched then when you've
Speaker 2: been at the border, come across the border, they run
Speaker 2: and turn themselves into board patrol. That could all change
Speaker 2: in Texas, where all of a sudden, these individuals aren't
Speaker 2: turning themselves in, they're being arrested. We haven't seen this
Speaker 2: in the last three years.
Speaker 4: Yeah, And what it may well do is accelerate what
Speaker 4: we're seeing already, which is illegal aliens and cartels moving
Speaker 4: to California or Arizona or New Mexico in avoiding Texas.
Speaker 4: And I'll tell you that's not great for the country's perspective.
Speaker 4: But from Texas, I'm glad if we secure our damn
Speaker 4: border and let California worry about their open borders.
Speaker 2: Yeah, puts pressure on other states to realize they got
Speaker 2: to do something to fight this problem and start standing
Speaker 2: up to the President and the Department of Home in Security,
Speaker 2: no doubt about that. Want to talk to you real
Speaker 2: quick about your cell phone service. For ten years, Patriot
Speaker 2: Mobile has been America's only Christian conservative wireless provider. And
Speaker 2: when I say only, I mean the only one. And
Speaker 2: Patriot Mobile is incredible because they actually take your money
Speaker 2: when you pay your bill and they fight for conservative causes.
Speaker 1: That's right.
Speaker 2: When you switch to Patriot Mobile, you're sending a clear
Speaker 2: message to Big Mobile that you are standing behind free speech,
Speaker 2: religious freedom, standing up and fighting for sanctity of life
Speaker 2: as well as our Second Amendment. And when you support
Speaker 2: the military, our veterans, our first responder heroes.
Speaker 1: As well as our wounded warriors.
Speaker 2: Because five percent of your bill every month when you're
Speaker 2: with Patriot Mobile goes back to support conservative causes, you
Speaker 2: may not realize that Big Mobile is in bed big
Speaker 2: time with the left. They get massive donations of Democratic
Speaker 2: causes candidates, including Planned Parenthood. So don't give your money
Speaker 2: to companies that hate your values. Make the switch to
Speaker 2: Patriot Mobile. They're one hundred percent US based customer service
Speaker 2: team make switching easy. When you look down to your phone,
Speaker 2: you're going to see Patriot in the epp or left
Speaker 2: hand corner, and you know you're making a difference. You
Speaker 2: have to keep your same cell phone number you have.
Speaker 2: Now you can keep your same phone or upgrade to
Speaker 2: a new one. And their team will help you save
Speaker 2: money and get the best planned for you, your family
Speaker 2: or your business needs. Just go to Patriot Mobile com
Speaker 2: slash verdict It's Patriot Mobile dot com slash verdict, or
Speaker 2: call them nine to seven to two Patriot. It's nine
Speaker 2: seven to two Patriot. You'll get free activation when you
Speaker 2: use the offer code Verdict as well. So join me,
Speaker 2: make the switch today, get rid of the woke phone companies.
Speaker 2: Patriot Mobile dot Com slash verdict or nine seven to
Speaker 2: two Patriot Center. This is a fun time of year
Speaker 2: when it comes to the issue of sports, and you're
Speaker 2: a big basketball fan. I know that you have actually
Speaker 2: filled out your bracket. People can go check that out
Speaker 2: on social media. They can follow you on social media
Speaker 2: and check it out there. In fact, one of you
Speaker 2: can even get a chance to play basketball with you
Speaker 2: if you pick the winning team. So you can find
Speaker 2: all that on search social media. It's really cool. But
Speaker 2: you also had a very serious conversation addressing what's happening
Speaker 2: now with student athletes rights, specifically with their name, image
Speaker 2: and likeness. And you had a very interesting conversation with
Speaker 2: a legendary football coach in Washington.
Speaker 1: Tell us a little bit about this.
Speaker 4: Well, sure, I'll say, first of all, I filled out
Speaker 4: my bracket this week. I have to admit it's a
Speaker 4: bit of a Homer bracket. We've got some great Texas
Speaker 4: team playing. So my final four is Yukon against Baylor
Speaker 4: and Houston against University of Texas. In the finals, I
Speaker 4: have Baylor against Houston and I'm predicting you of h
Speaker 4: to win the whole thing.
Speaker 5: So I will.
Speaker 4: Readily confess to being a Texan and biased for my
Speaker 4: home state teams. But I got to say I think
Speaker 4: they've got the game to potentially deliver. And it's always fun.
Speaker 4: I mean, the joys of March madness. Sharing on your
Speaker 4: teams is always fun. I will say this is a
Speaker 4: particularly unusual time because although it, you know, college athletics
Speaker 4: bring people together from all sorts of different walks of life,
Speaker 4: I think they've never been under greater threat than they
Speaker 4: are right now. And we've got with the current state
Speaker 4: of AffA with name, image and likeness, is that athletes
Speaker 4: are being paid by schools vast sums of money, sometimes
Speaker 4: millions of dollars. You combine that with a transfer portal,
Speaker 4: and you have right now the wild West, and it threatens,
Speaker 4: I think, to really jeopardize the competitiveness of college athletics,
Speaker 4: to jeopardize the loyalty that fans have to their teams,
Speaker 4: that players have to their teams. If it becomes just
Speaker 4: a mad bidding war, that there's a real threat of
Speaker 4: a handful of super schools and a bunch of other
Speaker 4: schools that are also runs that can't afford to compete financially.
Speaker 4: And so I think there's a real need to assess
Speaker 4: what do we do to ensure that college athletics continues
Speaker 4: for a long time. Last week I hosted a roundtable
Speaker 4: in the Senate. I'm the ranking member of the Senate
Speaker 4: Commerce Committee, and the Commerce Committee has jurisdiction, among other things,
Speaker 4: over athletics, and so it is squarely within our committee's
Speaker 4: jurisdiction and the roundtable, I was joined by coach Nick Saban,
Speaker 4: the former coach of Alabama Legendary College. Coach was also
Speaker 4: joined by the ACC Commissioner, was joined by the athletic
Speaker 4: director of Alabama, was joined by the Cavender Twins, two
Speaker 4: star women basketball players who both participated, and then by
Speaker 4: an NIL attorney and by the Collective Association president. And
Speaker 4: we spent a couple of hours talking about these issues.
Speaker 4: I got to tell you, Ben, I think it is
Speaker 4: really critical that Congress acts that if we don't act,
Speaker 4: we're risking seeing enormous damage done to college athletics. And
Speaker 4: that would be a tragedy. Number one for all the
Speaker 4: fans who love cheering on their teams, but number two
Speaker 4: for all the young men and women who for whom
Speaker 4: college athletics gives them a path to get an education.
Speaker 4: If we let this get get screwed up, it would
Speaker 4: be be tragic. I don't want to see that happen.
Speaker 1: Santa.
Speaker 2: You mentioned this round table, and I want to play
Speaker 2: some of your opening remarks. You were sitting there next
Speaker 2: to Nick Saban, which is, by the way, if you're
Speaker 2: a sports fan.
Speaker 1: It's just cool. He's a legendary coach.
Speaker 2: I'm so glad he retired so I don't have to
Speaker 2: deal with him playing him every year because he's a
Speaker 2: brilliant mind in football.
Speaker 1: But here's part of what you had to say.
Speaker 4: Fear and many others, Fear threatens to jeopardize all that
Speaker 4: is working so well with college athletics. More and more
Speaker 4: there is agreement that Congress needs to act to ensure
Speaker 4: that we have a level playing field, that we have
Speaker 4: real competition, that college sports can continue to thrive in
Speaker 4: the decades going forward. And this roundtable is designed to
Speaker 4: be a discussion with numerous stakeholders who are engaged in
Speaker 4: the process to get perspectives on what is needed and
Speaker 4: what is not Right now, we have the brave new
Speaker 4: world of nil and college athletes, now, many of them
Speaker 4: earning very significant sums of money.
Speaker 3: I for one, think that's a good thing.
Speaker 4: I think it is good that young men and young
Speaker 4: women have worked incredibly hard to develop fantastic skills that
Speaker 4: in turn can generate enormous economic activity. Should be entitled
Speaker 4: to enjoy the fruits of their labor, should be entitled
Speaker 4: to benefit. But we also need a system where we
Speaker 4: have real competition and fair competition, and not just one
Speaker 4: or two monster schools and everyone else as a hanger on,
Speaker 4: but real competition throughout the league to make for good games.
Speaker 4: We also need to make sure the rules that are
Speaker 4: in place don't just focus on Power five conferences, don't
Speaker 4: just focus on football and basketball, which generate most of
Speaker 4: the revenue.
Speaker 3: But we need to.
Speaker 4: Keep in mind and keep our focus on smaller schools,
Speaker 4: Division two schools, Division three schools, and we need to
Speaker 4: focus on the many other sports that are not going
Speaker 4: to be playing on ESPN, but nonetheless provide an avenue
Speaker 4: for young women and young men to go to school
Speaker 4: and to get an edge. We now have a patchwork
Speaker 4: of nil laws state by state that makes it difficult
Speaker 4: to navigate. We have multiple active litigation going on that
Speaker 4: prevents the NCAA and conferences and universities from enforcing the
Speaker 4: rules or even knowing what the rules are.
Speaker 3: And we have a lot of uncertainty.
Speaker 4: For student athletes and for agents and collectives who are
Speaker 4: trying to navigate the evolving and unpredictable rules but uncertain
Speaker 4: what they're going to be today and even more so,
Speaker 4: what they're going to be tomorrow.
Speaker 3: The purpose of this discussion is to listen.
Speaker 4: If we do it right, a number of senators are
Speaker 4: expected to join us. We have with us today Senator
Speaker 4: Moran and Senator Tillis, and I think others will be
Speaker 4: coming in and out throughout the day. There are many members,
Speaker 4: both Republicans and Democrats, very interested in this topic. And
Speaker 4: I will say if we're going to go forward, and
Speaker 4: I very much want Congress to pass meaningful legislation addressing ANIL.
Speaker 4: But if we're going to go forward, it is going
Speaker 4: to take bipartisan cooperation. If this simply becomes a partisan
Speaker 4: exercise of shirts and skins, we know how that ends.
Speaker 4: That ends with a vote that doesn't pass through Congress.
Speaker 4: So we have and I will say many of us
Speaker 4: here at this table have had multiple good, productive conversations
Speaker 4: with senators on the other side of the aisle, and
Speaker 4: I think we are coming towards some outlines of consensus,
Speaker 4: but we're not there yet, and I'm hopeful this conversation
Speaker 4: will help move the process forward.
Speaker 2: You talked about this being bipartisan. Senator, rarely in Congress
Speaker 2: do you get something. I think everybody kind of agrees, Hey,
Speaker 2: we need to make sure this is done right. And
Speaker 2: you mentioned every different state's got different things, and this
Speaker 2: has become the and I kind of become the wild
Speaker 2: wide West. But having this discussion, does there seem to
Speaker 2: be a lot of consensus here on both sides of
Speaker 2: the aisle and pretty easy to get people of the
Speaker 2: table here and say, hey, let's do this in a
Speaker 2: responsible manner.
Speaker 4: Well, yes, and no, I would say there's bipartisan agreement
Speaker 4: that Congress needs to act, and I think senators on
Speaker 4: both sides are realizing, Hey, we've got a real problem here.
Speaker 4: What is not clear is if we can reach consensus
Speaker 4: on what acting looks like. I think there's a need
Speaker 4: for a federal legislation. We've got a bunch of states
Speaker 4: stepping in passing their own nil legislation, but you end
Speaker 4: up having this conflicting patchwork. So, for example, Texas has
Speaker 4: passed nil legislation. It did something I've never seen the
Speaker 4: state of Texas do before, or for that matter, any
Speaker 4: state legislature. In the Texas State Bill, it explicitly calls
Speaker 4: on Congress to act. It says, Look, it's not great
Speaker 4: for each of the states to be doing this. This
Speaker 4: ought to be a federal rule that applies to everyone.
Speaker 4: And so I've drafted legislation, I've circulated it. I spent
Speaker 4: the better part of a year listening to stakeholders, listening
Speaker 4: to universities, listening to athletic conferences, listening to players, listening
Speaker 4: to all sorts of players across across the world of
Speaker 4: college athletics, and trying to capture their best practices. Legislation
Speaker 4: that I've put forward number one. Number one, it protects
Speaker 4: the ability of student athletes to earn from their name, image,
Speaker 4: and likeness. And I think it's only fair. If you've
Speaker 4: worked incredibly hard, you've developed fantastic skills, you should be
Speaker 4: able to reap the rewards the fruits of your labor.
Speaker 4: But number two, it empowers the NC double A to
Speaker 4: set rules and set standards. Now, there have been some
Speaker 4: other senators that have introduced legislation that would put the
Speaker 4: federal government in charge of setting the rules and standards,
Speaker 4: either the government or a quasi governmental organization.
Speaker 3: I think that's a mistake.
Speaker 4: I think if you have politicians or bureaucrats, I mean,
Speaker 4: can you imagine what a nightmare would be to have
Speaker 4: congressional hearings on what constitutes pass interference?
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean be bad. That's bad. So it would
Speaker 1: never get it would never get agreed upon ever.
Speaker 4: Right, are there problems with the NC double A, Yes,
Speaker 4: but it's the least worst option out there, and so
Speaker 4: my legislation protects the ability of the NC DOUBLEA to
Speaker 4: set rules. It also provides for things like the redis
Speaker 4: of agents. Right now, you have seventeen, eighteen, nineteen year
Speaker 4: old students who are being represented by agents. They don't
Speaker 4: know if these guys are honest, they don't know their background.
Speaker 4: There's no transparency, and it's really setting kids up to
Speaker 4: be swindled by people taking advantage of them. So it
Speaker 4: sets up for a system of registration of agents. It
Speaker 4: also sets up a system of transparency where you can
Speaker 4: see what the name, image and likeness market is. You
Speaker 4: can see what other schools, what other positions are paying,
Speaker 4: so that you're not operating in the dark. And I've
Speaker 4: introduced this legislation. I put it out there, and I
Speaker 4: have been in the process of negotiating with several Democrats
Speaker 4: to see if we can get to common ground. One
Speaker 4: of the important things my legislation also provides is that
Speaker 4: student athletes are not employees. This is a big question.
Speaker 4: It's being litigated right now. I think it'd be a
Speaker 4: disaster if student athletes were treated as employees. I think
Speaker 4: if that happeneddent athletes were treated as employees, it would
Speaker 4: end up badly damaging particularly smaller schools Division two schools,
Speaker 4: Division three schools, and it would badly damage non revenue sports.
Speaker 4: So football and basketball would be fine. But look, you
Speaker 4: played men's tennis women's golf, volleyball, swimming, track and field.
Speaker 4: You know, universities are saying across the board those sports
Speaker 4: would be obliterated by treating student athletes as employees. I'll say,
Speaker 4: the historically black colleges and universities have come in and said, likewise,
Speaker 4: please do not make student athletes employees. It will decimate
Speaker 4: our athletic programs. And so I'm in the process of
Speaker 4: negotiating and trying to find Democrats who are willing to
Speaker 4: find common ground on this. If we can't get common ground,
Speaker 4: the bill's not going to pass. I think we're close,
Speaker 4: but we're not there yet. But I will say, you know,
Speaker 4: sitting at the roundtable with Nick Saban, it was striking.
Speaker 4: I asked Coach Saban, I mean, he just stepped down
Speaker 4: from being one of the most successful college football coaches
Speaker 4: in all time. And I asked him, I said, coach,
Speaker 4: was the current chaos of NIL and the transfer portal
Speaker 4: and everything? Was that a factor in your stepping down?
Speaker 4: And listen to what Nick Saban said in response to
Speaker 4: my question.
Speaker 6: All the things that I believed in for all these
Speaker 6: years fifty years of coaching no longer exist in college athletics.
Speaker 6: So it's always about developing players. It was always about
Speaker 6: helping people move more successful in life. My wife even
Speaker 6: said to me, we'd have all the recruits over on
Speaker 6: Sunday with their parents for breakfast, and she would always
Speaker 6: meet with the mothers and talk about how she was
Speaker 6: going to help and impact their sons and how they
Speaker 6: would be well taken care of. And she came to me,
Speaker 6: you know, like right before I retired, and said, why
Speaker 6: are we doing this? And I said, what do you mean?
Speaker 6: She said, all they care about is how much you're
Speaker 6: going to pay them. They don't care about how you're
Speaker 6: going to develop, which is all what we've always done.
Speaker 6: So why are we doing this?
Speaker 1: I mean it drove him, I think from the game.
Speaker 4: Yeah, no, it's striking. And listen, if Nick Saban can't
Speaker 4: stand it anymore, how the heck is anyone else supposed
Speaker 4: to it? And I got to say, the genuine concern
Speaker 4: I've heard from coach after coach after coach, rom athletic
Speaker 4: director after an athletic director, from the heads of conferences,
Speaker 4: they are genuinely afraid that we've got a short window
Speaker 4: of maybe a year or two to act to preserve
Speaker 4: college sports or else we are risking major and permanent damage.
Speaker 4: So I hope we see Congress Act. I'll tell you
Speaker 4: I put the odds at about fifty to fifty. I
Speaker 4: think we're close to getting bipartisan agreement. I'm spending a
Speaker 4: lot of time talking with several Democrats and we're close.
Speaker 3: And it was good.
Speaker 4: A number of Republicans and Democrats came to this roundtable participated.
Speaker 4: It was a good conversation. And what was nice about
Speaker 4: it is it wasn't a hearing where there was show
Speaker 4: voting in grandstands. It was a real conversation. And I
Speaker 4: do think there's a desire to act to make sure
Speaker 4: we preserve something amazing because I got to say, when
Speaker 4: you're cheering for your school, it brings people together across
Speaker 4: party lines, across races, across ethnicities, across everything when you're
Speaker 4: cheering together, and that's something amazing and special. And it's
Speaker 4: also such a powerful pipeline. There's so many young men
Speaker 4: and women who are getting college educations who wouldn't get
Speaker 4: it without college athletics that if we screw this up,
Speaker 4: it would be enormously.
Speaker 1: Damaging, no doubt about it.
Speaker 2: I want to get into this other big issue, and
Speaker 2: that is there has been a lot of oops is
Speaker 2: with the media when it comes specifically to their obsession
Speaker 2: with the President of the United States of America saying
Speaker 2: something that they took out of context and lie of
Speaker 2: the American people about bloodbath.
Speaker 1: I'm going to have more on that in just a moment.
Speaker 2: Every morning, I wake up early, I go on the
Speaker 2: radio at seven o'clock, and I have to have a
Speaker 2: rate cup of coffee, not average, not below average. And
Speaker 2: I've had plenty of those in my life. I want
Speaker 2: a premium cup of coffee. The problem is in the
Speaker 2: coffee industry there's a whole lot of woke companies, a
Speaker 2: lot of liberal companies that fight against my values. Well,
Speaker 2: that's why I want you to know about an America
Speaker 2: first cup of coffee that I start my day every
Speaker 2: day with Blackout Coffee. This coffee is one hundred percent America,
Speaker 2: zero percent woke. Blackout Coffee is committed to conservative values
Speaker 2: from sourcing the beans, the roasting process, customer support and shipping.
Speaker 2: They embody true American value and accept no compromise on
Speaker 2: taste or quality. Now, look, I'm gonna have a good
Speaker 2: cup of coffee every morning. Blackout coffee next level, and
Speaker 2: I want you to try it, all right. You can
Speaker 2: go to Blackoutcoffee dot com slash verdict, and when you
Speaker 2: use the promo code vertict, you're gonna get twenty percent
Speaker 2: off your first order and you're gonna be hooked because
Speaker 2: it is truly a premium cup of coffee. Go to
Speaker 2: Blackoutcoffee dot com slash verdict. He's promo code vertict twenty
Speaker 2: percent off your first order. Get away from those woke
Speaker 2: coffee companies. Be awake, just not woke. That's Blackoutcoffee dot com,
Speaker 2: slash verdict. Blackoutcoffee dot com slash verdict, promote code verdict
Speaker 2: for twenty percent off your first order. Senator you and
Speaker 2: I mentioned this in a previous show. There was a
Speaker 2: lot of lying about what Donald Trump actually said when
Speaker 2: he said the words bloodbath. We played that clip here
Speaker 2: for people. Then I'll give a quick reminder. He wasn't
Speaker 2: threatening civil war in this country if you don't vote
Speaker 2: for him, which is what the media implied and kept
Speaker 2: writing stories and losing their minds over it. What he
Speaker 2: was saying was, hey, as president, we got to get
Speaker 2: at our house and order, especially on trade, automobile manufacturing.
Speaker 2: If we don't, there's gonna be a bloodbath for the
Speaker 2: American consumer. Here's Trump in his own own words.
Speaker 7: Mexico has taken over a period of thirty years, thirty
Speaker 7: four percent of the automobile manufacturing business in our country.
Speaker 5: Think of it went to Mexico.
Speaker 7: China now is building a couple of massive plans where
Speaker 7: they're going to build the cars in Mexico. And think
Speaker 7: they think that they're going to sell those cars into
Speaker 7: the United States with no tax at the border.
Speaker 5: Let me tell you something to China.
Speaker 7: If you're listening, Presidency, and you and I are friends,
Speaker 7: but he understands the way ideal those big monster car
Speaker 7: manufacturing plants that you're building in Mexico right now, and
Speaker 7: you think you're going to get that, you're going to
Speaker 7: not hire Americans and you're going to sell the cars US. Now,
Speaker 7: We're going to put a one hundred percent twer for
Speaker 7: in every single car that comes across the.
Speaker 5: Line, and you're not going to be able to.
Speaker 7: Sell those cars if I get elected. Now, if I
Speaker 7: don't get elected, it's going to be a blood bath
Speaker 7: for the whole That's going to be the least of it.
Speaker 5: It's going to be a blood bath for the country.
Speaker 7: That'll be the least of it. But they're not going
Speaker 7: to sell those cars. They're building massive factories of center.
Speaker 2: There's the president's words, nothing close to what the media
Speaker 2: actually said. They freaked out over the word bloodbath in general.
Speaker 2: But now we've we kind of got him right, Like
Speaker 2: we have the media saying the word blood bath.
Speaker 1: That's the best part of this show. We get to
Speaker 1: play that for you.
Speaker 4: Yeah, look, that's exactly right. And we talked about this
Speaker 4: in Monday's podcast, which if you didn't listen to, you
Speaker 4: how to go back and listen to. But the media
Speaker 4: went crazy attacking Donald Trump because he used the word bloodbath,
Speaker 4: and they took it wildly out of context, and they
Speaker 4: suggested the headlines all suggested that Trump threatened a blood bath,
Speaker 4: in other words, violence in the streets if he didn't win. Now,
Speaker 4: you just heard what he said. He was talking about
Speaker 4: auto imports and American jobs and manufacturing jobs, and in context,
Speaker 4: it was a perfectly normal position for him to take
Speaker 4: concerning concerning protecting American jobs. And the media and the
Speaker 4: Democrats they knew they were taking him out of context
Speaker 4: and they were just scare mongering, and so they were
Speaker 4: really caught in a lie. But I got to say
Speaker 4: it's not just a lie, it is brazen hypocrisy. So
Speaker 4: in the media's defense, I guess using the word bloodbath
Speaker 4: is some sort of mortal sin that means you're really
Speaker 4: advocating violent revolution. Well if that's the case, listen to
Speaker 4: how many gazillion left wing media talking heads have used
Speaker 4: the exact same language talking about politics.
Speaker 1: But as politico dot com reports tonight on the quote
Speaker 1: bloodbath at the RNC headline's calling it a quote bloodbath,
Speaker 1: blood bath, not only is it going to be a
Speaker 1: blood bath, but after they leave of.
Speaker 3: New Hampshire, it's a bloodbath on her home turf.
Speaker 5: That's really tough.
Speaker 3: Has left a lot of corpses in his wake. I mean,
Speaker 3: we haven't count in the body.
Speaker 4: As part of the quote MAGA drive to take over
Speaker 4: Maricoopa County, and the headline refers to it as an
Speaker 4: impending blood.
Speaker 1: Bath, calling as Charles blow As a new piece for
Speaker 1: The New York Times entitled a Biden blood.
Speaker 4: Bath ony eighteen mitrums, you can bet the A one
Speaker 4: hundred percent of fearing a slaughter.
Speaker 5: In fact, the word blood bath and massacre come up frequently.
Speaker 3: The Republican Party will be destroyed. It's going to be
Speaker 3: a bloodbath. There's going to be a bloodbath one way
Speaker 3: or the other.
Speaker 5: Bloodbath for Bernie Sanders.
Speaker 3: It's been a bloodbath.
Speaker 4: They're shaping up to be a blood bath.
Speaker 6: Head off a blood bath in next year's crucial midterm
Speaker 6: off Your elections are often a blood bath.
Speaker 4: This week's bloodbath for Democrats, a blood bath at the
Speaker 4: ballot box.
Speaker 5: There could be a Republican blood bath. We'll talk about
Speaker 5: a blood bath. It's a bloodbath.
Speaker 3: I have to talk about you and at least it's
Speaker 3: going to be a bloodbath all day long.
Speaker 1: Is in for a bloodbath? Has it been a blood
Speaker 1: bath on the way down?
Speaker 3: With Donald Trump?
Speaker 5: Blood bath?
Speaker 4: Be a blood bath, predicted to be a blood bath.
Speaker 3: May not be the blood bath. It would be a
Speaker 3: blood bath, more of a blood bath. It's going to
Speaker 3: be a blood bath in November as well.
Speaker 2: Biden blood bath this November, a blood bath.
Speaker 5: On Wall Street. There's gonna be a blood bath in Alabama.
Speaker 5: Into a bloodpath.
Speaker 3: Obviously there was a blood bath.
Speaker 1: It was a blood bath. We're down eight hundred point
Speaker 1: this blood bath.
Speaker 5: As Department Homeland Security.
Speaker 1: And it's a blood bath today. There was going to
Speaker 1: be this blood bath election blood bath.
Speaker 3: It could be a bloodpath for that blood bath.
Speaker 4: Possibly bloodbath went through with the Attorney general blood bath
Speaker 4: ninety nine days out. The blood bath that's going to
Speaker 4: look like resided over a bloodbath in the diplomatic corelute.
Speaker 5: In my opinion, bud blood bath.
Speaker 3: The Democrats are calling it a ticket sales turn into
Speaker 3: a blood bath.
Speaker 4: Ticket sales for singer Taylor Swift's latest tour. It's safe
Speaker 4: to say the fans had a blood bath for the company.
Speaker 5: Off to the gasket.
Speaker 2: I hope everybody takes that center shares it on social
Speaker 2: media because it's just such a perfect example of the
Speaker 2: scumbaggery of the media. They freak out when Trump says it,
Speaker 2: but they'll use it every day.
Speaker 3: That's absolutely right. We've got the receipts.
Speaker 4: We've got them, and I got to say the media's hypocrisy.
Speaker 4: It's just an absolute blood bath.
Speaker 2: Don't forget we did this show Monday, Wednesdays and Fridays.
Speaker 1: We promise it will never be a blood bath.
Speaker 2: Hit that subscribe or auto download button and I'll keep
Speaker 2: you up to date on the breaking news on those
Speaker 2: in between days. So down with the Ben Ferguson podcasts
Speaker 2: as well, and I'll keep you update there and the
Speaker 2: Sunday and I will see you back here Friday morning.