Speaker 1: Welcome. It is Verdict with Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson here
Speaker 1: with you. Nice to have you, guys, and we have
Speaker 1: a lot of news to talk about. The Senator is
Speaker 1: on the road joining us as he is traveling from
Speaker 1: the last bus stop in Missouri heading to another very
Speaker 1: important state. Senator, I appreciate you joining us, and for
Speaker 1: everybody that's an audio quality geek like me, just no,
Speaker 1: he's on the phone because we're on the bus tour today. Senator,
Speaker 1: how's it going so far? Well, fantastic. As you mentioned,
Speaker 1: we're on the bus. We're headed down the freeway. We're
Speaker 1: going from Missouri up to the state of Iowa. After Iowa,
Speaker 1: we're head to do Ohio and then Virginia, Maryland, North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida,
Speaker 1: backup to Michigan, then to Wisconsin, and we're ending in
Speaker 1: the great state of Texas. You've been out there and
Speaker 1: you've obviously seen the crowds, and if you haven't been
Speaker 1: following the Senator on social media, you should look at
Speaker 1: the pictures. I think the crowds that you've been seeing
Speaker 1: are very indicative of what voter turnout could look like
Speaker 1: in just a few weeks on the Republican side of things.
Speaker 1: And while that's happening center, we're also noticing a very
Speaker 1: interesting new trend, and it's one I think is concerning
Speaker 1: for all Americans. That is, major Democrats are refusing to
Speaker 1: debate conservative candidates. You and I were talking about this
Speaker 1: before the show. Your concern the Democrats may stop debating
Speaker 1: Republicans if this continues to be an effective strategy for them. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's right. It's a really disturbing development. I've been with
Speaker 1: two of the Republicans who are facing it in the
Speaker 1: last few days. I was in Arizona with Kerry Lake,
Speaker 1: who's running for governor. I think she's going to be
Speaker 1: elected the Republican governor there, and her Democrat opponent, Katie Hobbs,
Speaker 1: refuses to debate. She said that there will be no
Speaker 1: gubernatorial debate in the state of Arizona. She won't do
Speaker 1: it up in Pennsylvania. Josh Shapiro, the Democrat nominee for governor,
Speaker 1: refuses to debate Mastriano. Again, no debate for you, He's
Speaker 1: not going to do it. And I just left Missouri
Speaker 1: last night, did a big rally with Eric Schmidt, who
Speaker 1: is the Republican nominee for Senate in Missouri. His Democrat opponent,
Speaker 1: Trudy Valentine, a gazillionaire an heiress of the Bush Beer fortune,
Speaker 1: refuses to debate as well. And then what I think
Speaker 1: it is is they are following the Joe Biden basement strategy.
Speaker 1: They saw that he basically hidden his basement for two
Speaker 1: years and the media got him elected president. And they're saying,
Speaker 1: wait a second, this is a great approach because every
Speaker 1: day of the week, the media carries our water, they
Speaker 1: repeat our attack lines, and they protect our candidates. The
Speaker 1: only time a candidate has never held to account is
Speaker 1: in a debate. So if we refuse to debate, will
Speaker 1: never be held to account. And I got to say,
Speaker 1: this is a really dangerous development. I think in two
Speaker 1: years or four years, you could see dozens or more
Speaker 1: major Democrat candidates saying we will not debate. And I
Speaker 1: got to admit I find it personally offensive. I think
Speaker 1: it contempt for the voters. I think it shows contempt
Speaker 1: for the democratic process. Listen, I've had debates against opponents
Speaker 1: who were not serious or strong or credible opponents. But
Speaker 1: I think you owe the voters the chance to see
Speaker 1: the candidate to make a decision. But this is yet
Speaker 1: another step in the Democrats and the corporate media getting
Speaker 1: in bed together and being corrupted. To be clear, it
Speaker 1: worn't for you know, the current president, Joe Biden, and
Speaker 1: it's something that I'm sure woke up a lot of
Speaker 1: Democratics try to saying, look, if we've got a candidate
Speaker 1: that's not good on stage, we've got a candidate can't
Speaker 1: defend the issues. And look at the issues now, they're
Speaker 1: a mile long for many of these campaigns, border security,
Speaker 1: the economy, inflation, interest rates. The list, unfortunately literally goes
Speaker 1: on and on. They just say, all right, we'll buy
Speaker 1: the election by buying ads and we just won't debate,
Speaker 1: and hopefully people will just believe us in the media
Speaker 1: will give us cover because the media center would have
Speaker 1: never allowed this to happen ten, fifteen, twenty years ago. Well,
Speaker 1: and it's even more than that. It's not just buying ads,
Speaker 1: it's it's they know that the media's news coverage twenty
Speaker 1: four hours a day will be an ad I mean,
Speaker 1: I mean, I mean everything they cover will be trying
Speaker 1: to advance the Democrat message, trying to elect the Democrats
Speaker 1: and right now, the corporate media is the biggest superpack
Speaker 1: in America. For the Democrats, on the other hand, and
Speaker 1: it's not even if your candidate is not that good
Speaker 1: at debates, even if they are. Look Josh Shapiro in Pennsylvania,
Speaker 1: one of the reasons he won't debate is the polls
Speaker 1: have him leading by a comfortable margin. And so I'm
Speaker 1: sure their attitude is, hey, we're gonna win if we
Speaker 1: don't do anything, so why screw it up. It's an arrogance.
Speaker 1: It's I'm entitled to be elected, and the voters are
Speaker 1: too stupid. They don't even deserve to see a hard
Speaker 1: question get asked of me, you know, the flip side.
Speaker 1: And part of the reason Democrats do this. So the
Speaker 1: Atlanta Journal Constitution, we just had a debate between herschel
Speaker 1: Walker and Raphael Wardock. The front page of the Atlanta
Speaker 1: Journal Constitution says, quote herschel Walker's debate performance scores points
Speaker 1: for his campaign. Well, Raphael Warnock is probably wondering why
Speaker 1: did I get herschel Walker a platform when every other
Speaker 1: day the corporate media hacks just attack herschel Walker all
Speaker 1: day long. And suddenly Warnock had to answer difficult questions
Speaker 1: which he hasn't had to answer any day of the
Speaker 1: year when the press refuses to do the job of
Speaker 1: a journalist, refuses to ask Democrats difficult questions or really
Speaker 1: any questions, that it's only during a debate that a
Speaker 1: Democrat is forced to defend his or her record or
Speaker 1: answer a hard question. And you mentioned previously that the
Speaker 1: media would have lost their minds because, look, the journalists
Speaker 1: make a lot of money. Media companies make a lot
Speaker 1: of money on these political debates. They are so complicit
Speaker 1: that they're willing to give up millions of dollars to
Speaker 1: make sure Democrats win. Because the media in Arizona and
Speaker 1: Missouri and Pennsylvania ought to be going nuts every single
Speaker 1: day pounding these candidates. Look, it's so bad that there
Speaker 1: was a reporter from Project Veritas who was trying to
Speaker 1: get Katie Hobbs to answer a question. She literally ran
Speaker 1: away and hid in the bathroom rather than answer a
Speaker 1: reporter's question. Because Democrats believe that they're entitled never to
Speaker 1: have to answer a hard questions. It's really interesting, Senator,
Speaker 1: where we are as a country. And I'm talking about
Speaker 1: on transparency, and I'll move from democrats refusing to debate
Speaker 1: to the other side of the coin, which is Republicans
Speaker 1: are willing to have a grand debate. You do college campuses,
Speaker 1: you do a lot of public speaking events, and now
Speaker 1: what we see is the left is trying to cancel us.
Speaker 1: A perfect example of this is is doctor Phil had
Speaker 1: an interesting conversation with Tomy Lauren who is over at
Speaker 1: Fox News, about cancel culture and where Republicans show up,
Speaker 1: they don't want to allow you to speak, but when
Speaker 1: Republicans demand Democrats speak, they don't want to do it.
Speaker 1: And I want you to hear part of this that
Speaker 1: was put out about her being canceled. Take a listen.
Speaker 1: I came here to speak in Albuquerque, University of New Mexico.
Speaker 1: I know that there was a protest planned. You know,
Speaker 1: usually when I speak, there's protest planned, and usually it's small,
Speaker 1: it's manageable, just some rowdy people, disgruntled liberals, you know
Speaker 1: the standard. That's not what happens in night. It turned violent.
Speaker 1: They started pushing the officers that were guarding the door,
Speaker 1: trying to bust in the door. I was escorted away
Speaker 1: for my safety by officers. The emergency unit had to
Speaker 1: be called in because that's how bad it got. We
Speaker 1: were barricaded in the kitchen, or probably about a half
Speaker 1: an hour to forty five minutes. I mean, you hear that,
Speaker 1: and you hear Tony describe this. And the scary thing is,
Speaker 1: now this is normal. You talk to many college campus speakers,
Speaker 1: you do this. The security apparatus has changed for all
Speaker 1: conservatives that go on campuses. And so while we're saying
Speaker 1: let's have a grand debate, they're saying, not only do
Speaker 1: we not want to debate you, we don't even want
Speaker 1: to allow you to speak. Yeah. So when when Democrat
Speaker 1: candidates are skipping debates and refusing to debate, they're trying
Speaker 1: to silence any public discourse, They're trying to silence their
Speaker 1: ideas being questioned. When you just played there what happened
Speaker 1: to Tommy Lauren on the University to Mexico is a
Speaker 1: step even further, which is many on the left or
Speaker 1: willing to use violence to stop an opposing view. They're
Speaker 1: willing to threaten violence, they're willing to harass, they're willing
Speaker 1: to intimidate the fact that that a young woman had
Speaker 1: to hide and it was law enforcement that told her
Speaker 1: to hide that fur her safety for forty five minutes
Speaker 1: because violent leftists were threatening to physically injure her. That
Speaker 1: I mean, that is, it's completely wrong. It happens on
Speaker 1: college campuses far too often. Happened, by the way, a
Speaker 1: number of months ago at Yale Law School where a
Speaker 1: lawyer for the Alliance Defending Freedom who had won a
Speaker 1: major Supreme Court case on religious liberty in front of
Speaker 1: the US Supreme Court. She was there speaking and hundreds
Speaker 1: of angry leftists at Yale began screaming and shut the
Speaker 1: event down, And of course the Yale Law School campus
Speaker 1: did nothing to punish to reprimand those students. I will say,
Speaker 1: by the way, as an aside, a very interesting development
Speaker 1: for that A good friend of mine is a federal
Speaker 1: judge in the Fifth Circuit, Judge Jim Hoe, and he
Speaker 1: gave a long speech in which he said, given Yale
Speaker 1: Law schools willingness to tolerate, cancel culture and to tolerate violence,
Speaker 1: shutting down free speech from this point forward, he is
Speaker 1: not going to hire law clerks who go to Yale
Speaker 1: Law School. And his announcements caused a lot of the
Speaker 1: blue check mark lefties to lose their mind and get
Speaker 1: very very upset. Joe was a very prestigious judge. He's
Speaker 1: a phenomenal judge, and not being able to clerk for
Speaker 1: him is a big deal for young aspiring lawyers. Since then,
Speaker 1: more than a dozen other federal judges that followed suit
Speaker 1: and said we're not going to hire clerks from Yale also,
Speaker 1: And so I'm glad to see people are pushing back
Speaker 1: against this use of violence to censor and silence views
Speaker 1: the left doesn't like. It's getting dangerous, and you look
Speaker 1: at even parents. Now we've started to see a very
Speaker 1: clear trend. It's now normal for the FBI and the
Speaker 1: DOJ to be weaponized to attack people that they don't
Speaker 1: agree with, aka conservatives. We saw this start. You and
Speaker 1: I had this discussion the other day about under the
Speaker 1: Obama administration. But now it's gone to the point of
Speaker 1: just total rogue nation. I would describe it where anything
Speaker 1: you don't like, or anybody you don't like, you call
Speaker 1: them a domestic terrorist. And it's not just people saying it,
Speaker 1: it's the actual government saying it. Parents showed up to
Speaker 1: talk about their kids what they're being taught in schools,
Speaker 1: they were labeled domestic tears, the same as al Qaeda
Speaker 1: or ISIS, and you just came out and this is
Speaker 1: a new group of people they're treating like their terrorists.
Speaker 1: The AMA. You slammed the AMA's call to prosecute people
Speaker 1: exposing radical transgender surgery providers and demands to know and
Speaker 1: thank you for doing this. If the DOJ actually prompted
Speaker 1: this letter, break down this story of how now they're
Speaker 1: saying we'll just take kids away from parents. Well, it's
Speaker 1: yet another escalation of violence. So a second ago we
Speaker 1: were talking about the use of violence from just individual
Speaker 1: actors and institutions turning a blind eye and allowing threats
Speaker 1: of violence to be carried out. There's a further escalation
Speaker 1: of violence, which is the use of state violence, the
Speaker 1: use of state power to threaten, to criminally prosecute it
Speaker 1: and incarceerate people on the under basic principles of our constitution,
Speaker 1: the state that the government has a monopoly on violence.
Speaker 1: It should be used only in rare circumstances, in other words,
Speaker 1: to physically prevent someone from committing a crime or to
Speaker 1: punish them from committing a crime. Well, what has happened
Speaker 1: under Barack Obama and what has metastasized even worse under
Speaker 1: Joe Biden is the law enforcement agencies, DOJ, FBI, the
Speaker 1: intelligence agency. He's had a m weaponized. It is now
Speaker 1: a tool that they used to go after their enemies
Speaker 1: and to threaten criminal consequences. And so, as you noted,
Speaker 1: we had a number of months ago, the National Association
Speaker 1: of school Boards wrote a letter to President Biden saying,
Speaker 1: will you please target moms and dads who are going
Speaker 1: to school boards and speaking out because they're unhappy about
Speaker 1: critical race theory, They're unhappy about radical transgender ideology. They're
Speaker 1: unhappy about as was the case in Latin County a
Speaker 1: little girl, a fourteen year old girl who was sexually
Speaker 1: assaulted in the bathroom by a boy wearing a skirt,
Speaker 1: and the school board then covered it up, insisted it happened,
Speaker 1: and actually had the father of the little girl arrested
Speaker 1: when he went to the school board meeting expressing his
Speaker 1: understandable deep displeasure. Well Merrick Garland, the Attorney General, five
Speaker 1: days later, immediately wrote a memo to the FBI directing
Speaker 1: them target parents, the NASH Association, the school board and
Speaker 1: aspect that they be targeted under the Patriot Act as
Speaker 1: domestic terrorists and the Biden DJ saluted and said, sir, yes, sir,
Speaker 1: and they are doing it right now. Their parents across
Speaker 1: the country that the FBI is interviewing is going after
Speaker 1: because they've exercised their First Amendment rights. Well, what's happened next?
Speaker 1: The American Medical Association decided to get in on the game,
Speaker 1: and the leftists who control the AMA are unhappy that
Speaker 1: a handful of intrepid reporters had begun reporting on these
Speaker 1: hospitals that are making big business millions and up to
Speaker 1: billions of dollars performing genital mutilations, performing surgeries where they
Speaker 1: sterilize children, little girls, little boys, They cut off their genitals,
Speaker 1: they remove their uterus, they make it so they cannot
Speaker 1: have children, and it is a money making endeavor. And
Speaker 1: the corporate institution of medicine is embarrassed and mad that
Speaker 1: anyone caught them at it. And so the AMA asked,
Speaker 1: DOJ what did they did? They ask them, Hey, go
Speaker 1: after people that are for someone that that are sterilizing
Speaker 1: children who don't have the ability to consent and are
Speaker 1: not mature enough to make those kind of life decisions. No,
Speaker 1: they're asking, DOJ prosecute the journalists prosecute people who are
Speaker 1: exposing the truth. And so I joined. A week ago,
Speaker 1: I brought together five senators and writing a letter to
Speaker 1: DOJ telling Merrick Garland do not do this, this would
Speaker 1: be an abusive power and asking DOJ to give us
Speaker 1: every communication they've had with the AMA. And it's sheet
Speaker 1: another example of using government power to silence those who
Speaker 1: disagree with And in this instance, it's even worse because
Speaker 1: the corporate media won't do its job, but Left is
Speaker 1: trying to literally put in jail anyone who will do
Speaker 1: the job of journalism and report on the horrific activities
Speaker 1: that are being carried out on children and and and
Speaker 1: they're barbaric, and the media supports it all. And I
Speaker 1: suspect the White House and DAJA does as well. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it brings me to another part of this story. A
Speaker 1: Virginia Democrat Center has decided to introduce legislation they would
Speaker 1: allow a parents who don't affirm their child generalinity to
Speaker 1: actually be criminally prosecuted. The local news media put out
Speaker 1: this story. I'm going to play it for everybody, and
Speaker 1: then I want to get your reaction. Yeah, delegate is
Speaker 1: introducing a new bill centered around parents and how they
Speaker 1: handle their child sexual orientation and gender identity. Seven News
Speaker 1: reporter Nick Manak explains why this is controversial right now,
Speaker 1: Parents writes in LGBTQ protections are a big focus in Virginia.
Speaker 1: Thousands of students in Virginia have walked out of class
Speaker 1: protesting Governor Glen Yungkan's newly proposed model policies on the
Speaker 1: treatment of transgender students at school, and Governor Young can
Speaker 1: argue schools shouldn't keep parents in the dark about their
Speaker 1: child's sexual orientation and gender identity. These same progressives in
Speaker 1: Fairfax County I actually believe that they should lock parents
Speaker 1: out of their children's lives. They think that parents have
Speaker 1: no right to know what your child is discussing with
Speaker 1: their teacher or their counselor. Democratic Virginia Delegate Elizabeth Guzman
Speaker 1: is a social worker, and she's planning on reintroducing the
Speaker 1: bill in Richmond that she says would help protect LGBTQ
Speaker 1: children from their parents and guardians who may not be
Speaker 1: affirming of their child's sexual orientation and gender identity. This
Speaker 1: is how we're going to push back her bill, what
Speaker 1: expand the state's definition of child abuse and neglect to
Speaker 1: include parents who do not affirm their child's gender identity
Speaker 1: or sexual orientation. I mean, I'm just going to stop
Speaker 1: at their senator. You hear this, delegate say this. If
Speaker 1: you don't agree with what your child tells you at
Speaker 1: the age of two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten,
Speaker 1: anywhere in there about their sexual orientation or gender identity,
Speaker 1: then you could be charged criminally with child abuse. It
Speaker 1: is one of the most terrifying news stories I have
Speaker 1: ever read. And this is where the modern left is.
Speaker 1: So what they are saying, So let me stop and
Speaker 1: say that the words gender affirming really deserve to be
Speaker 1: in the Hall of Fame for absurd euphemisms. And by
Speaker 1: the way, gender affirming. Every corporate media hack uses gender
Speaker 1: affirming gender affirming. Let's be clear. What they mean is
Speaker 1: not saying to your kid, oh, you're so awesome, I
Speaker 1: love you, kiddo. No. No. What they mean by gender
Speaker 1: affirming care is, look, Ben, you're you're the father of sons.
Speaker 1: If your son comes to you and says, Daddy, I
Speaker 1: feel like a girl. What they mean by gender affirming
Speaker 1: care is to take it to some hospital that will
Speaker 1: cut his penis off and make it so you can
Speaker 1: never have grandkids from him because they will sterilize him.
Speaker 1: And you know what, your child and no child has
Speaker 1: the maturity to make a decision like that when they
Speaker 1: are a minor, a decision that is life altering. Once
Speaker 1: you cut it off, you don't get it back. It
Speaker 1: is permanent, it is gone. And if adult wants to
Speaker 1: do that, adults can make decisions that affect the rest
Speaker 1: of their life. And that's part of the consequence of adulthood.
Speaker 1: But kids, kids don't have that writer ability. And what
Speaker 1: that I'm sorry I have to use the word lunatic death.
Speaker 1: Democrat has proposed in Virginia is that if your son
Speaker 1: says that to you, Ben, and you have the misfortune
Speaker 1: of living in Virginia, that they will come and arrest you,
Speaker 1: Ben and charge you with a felony. She said a
Speaker 1: little bit later in that interview, it would be a
Speaker 1: felony and lock you up in jail because you refused
Speaker 1: to remove your child's genitals. That is well you and
Speaker 1: I have used the phrase cultural Marxism, and I recognize
Speaker 1: to some people that that might seem harsh, that might
Speaker 1: seem extreme. But when you have democrats literally proposing we're
Speaker 1: going to lock moms and dads in jail unless they
Speaker 1: are willing to permanently sterilize and mutilate their children. We
Speaker 1: have really gone over the edge. And that Democrat, I'll
Speaker 1: tell you, I've watched the video of that TV news interview.
Speaker 1: She's quite proud of herself saying this. She believes it
Speaker 1: is a wonderful thing that that that that if you
Speaker 1: won't do it, you should be charged with child abuse,
Speaker 1: prosecuted with a felity, and serve a long prison sentence. Well,
Speaker 1: and let's go down that road. What this also is about, Senator,
Speaker 1: is about then taking your children away from you, putting
Speaker 1: them in foster care. That is obviously going to have
Speaker 1: to be by their definition of what breaking the law
Speaker 1: is would have to be someone that is in favor
Speaker 1: of gender affirming surgeries, right of changing someone's gender, because
Speaker 1: if you're a traditional family at that point, as a
Speaker 1: foster family, I guess technically you could be charged with
Speaker 1: the crime if you didn't go down that road with
Speaker 1: the kid as well. So it's not just about putting
Speaker 1: the parent in jail. It's about the ultimate victory for
Speaker 1: them of if you're in jail and we've charged you
Speaker 1: with child abuse, then by default, child Protective Services would
Speaker 1: come in and take your child away from you and
Speaker 1: put them with a family that will be advocating for
Speaker 1: this lifestyle change. Yeah, you're exactly right. Now. Let me
Speaker 1: be clear, this bill has not passed in Virginia yet,
Speaker 1: but it was proposed by an elected Democrat representative. She
Speaker 1: introduced the bill, and Virginia has been ground zero for
Speaker 1: a lot of these battles because if you remember back
Speaker 1: the gubernatorial race when Glen Yonkan was running, I endorsed
Speaker 1: Glenn early on. He's been a friend of mine a
Speaker 1: long time. He and I barnstormed the state of Virginia
Speaker 1: for two entire days right before election day. And a
Speaker 1: big part of why he won is that parents got
Speaker 1: fed up in that election. Terry mcculliffs the Democrat in
Speaker 1: the debate and by the way, no, he had a debate,
Speaker 1: Terry mcculliff, and hindsight probably wishes he didn't have a
Speaker 1: debate and followed the Joe Biden hide the basiness strategy
Speaker 1: because in the debate, Terry mcculloffs said parents have no
Speaker 1: business telling schools what their children are being taught, and
Speaker 1: a whole bunch of Mama bears, a whole bunch of
Speaker 1: Virginia moms got pissed off. And they were moms who
Speaker 1: had voted for Joe Biden, who turned around and voted
Speaker 1: for a Republican Glen Youngcan and flipped the state. This
Speaker 1: is the next step of where the radicals want to go.
Speaker 1: They believe what Terry mcculluff said, which is, your children
Speaker 1: are not yours, they're theirs, as they have the power
Speaker 1: to control what has taught to your children and now
Speaker 1: even what permanent life altering medical treatments and mutilations are
Speaker 1: done to your children, even against your wishes as a
Speaker 1: mom or death. Let's look at another crazy story that
Speaker 1: has come out. There are two former leaders in the
Speaker 1: mainstream media senator of x C and N chief boss
Speaker 1: Jeff Zucker and the ax MSNBC chief Phil Griffin, who
Speaker 1: have both come out over the weekend defended ignoring the
Speaker 1: Hunter Biden's story, not reporting on both their networks, refused
Speaker 1: to touch it, refused to report on it when it broke,
Speaker 1: even when they had people to them telling them it
Speaker 1: was it was a legitimate news story. They said during
Speaker 1: this the quote unconvention it's a media convention thing. That
Speaker 1: and while they were speaking on a panel together, they
Speaker 1: both said, look, CNN, Zucker said claim they researched in
Speaker 1: the story of Hunter Biden's laptop, but at the network
Speaker 1: quote did not spend enough time vetting the authenticity of
Speaker 1: the story. Then CNN finally admitted Center five hundred and
Speaker 1: thirty two days later that the Hunter Biden's Laptop from
Speaker 1: Hell was authentic after the initial story broke a couple
Speaker 1: of days before that. They also said it was They
Speaker 1: did call it over and over again Russian disinformation and
Speaker 1: made up. They said that for the entire time they
Speaker 1: refused to admit it was a real story. But now
Speaker 1: when they were asked about it, they both said, you
Speaker 1: got to understand something. We did the right thing here.
Speaker 1: We did the right thing because quote Hunter Biden was
Speaker 1: never arrested. So that is their new standard of I guess,
Speaker 1: covering corruption in the media until some are in politics,
Speaker 1: until someone is arrested, Until someone is arrested for a crime,
Speaker 1: we don't cover the story. Did they do that with
Speaker 1: anybody around Donald Trump? By the way, I'm pretty sure
Speaker 1: that's not their standard. Well, Ben lying, liars, lie and
Speaker 1: with the corrupt corporate media. That's what they do. Look
Speaker 1: when they say that, they know it's b Yes, they
Speaker 1: know they're lying when they say that. Obviously, that's not
Speaker 1: their standard, that they will only cover evidence of corruption
Speaker 1: when someone's arrested. Donald Trump. Last I checked, Donald Trump
Speaker 1: had not been arrested, And I think they've covered every
Speaker 1: minute of every hour of every day for the last
Speaker 1: seven years, every allegation directed at Donald Trump. By the way,
Speaker 1: you know that they're right now doing the same thing
Speaker 1: to herschel Walker. Last I checked, herschel Walker wasn't arrested,
Speaker 1: but there have been all sorts of of personal and
Speaker 1: nasty allegations against herschel Walker, which they've breathlessly covered. You know,
Speaker 1: they cover every attack directed at me, They covered breathlessly,
Speaker 1: every attack directed at any other Republican they covered breathlessly.
Speaker 1: By the way, they ignore attacks on Democrats across the board.
Speaker 1: So the herschel Walker personal attacks are nasty. I wish
Speaker 1: politics didn't get into intra family disputes. But at the
Speaker 1: same time, Raphael Warnock has some nasty intra family disputes
Speaker 1: that are pretty ugly that I don't think we should
Speaker 1: get into either. But the media play the very selective
Speaker 1: game where they're willing to drag all of one side's
Speaker 1: dirty laundry in public, but not the other side. When
Speaker 1: they sent that at this convention, that well, the reason
Speaker 1: we didn't cover it as he wasn't arrested. Every molecule
Speaker 1: in their body knew they were lying, and they didn't
Speaker 1: care because they were in a room full of other liars,
Speaker 1: and it was simply a pretense to cover up their
Speaker 1: real reason, which is we wanted Joe Biden to win.
Speaker 1: We wanted Donald Trump to lose, and we were willing
Speaker 1: to lie in order to make that happen. It was
Speaker 1: I mean the quote and I still laugh at it.
Speaker 1: Quote he was never arrested, The Justice Department was looking
Speaker 1: into it, never reported it until until he is the
Speaker 1: son of a candidate. I don't think it's a main
Speaker 1: story quote until that happens. The head of MSNBC said,
Speaker 1: defending themselves on stage, say mean, well, you guys need
Speaker 1: to calm down. We did our job. We were brilliant
Speaker 1: journalists in this matter. We just waited five hundred something
Speaker 1: days until until we admitted the laptop was real. But
Speaker 1: before that, and I'm like, well, then you just contradicted
Speaker 1: your own standard. Because if your own standard is Senator
Speaker 1: that we don't report the story until someone's arrested. Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden has still not been arrested, So then why did
Speaker 1: you report on it after five hundred days? You contradicted
Speaker 1: your own journalistic standard. Well, and the important thing to understand,
Speaker 1: they're not journalists anymore. They're not pretending to be journalist anymore.
Speaker 1: They are partisans. They're not just Democrats. They're the left
Speaker 1: wing of the Democrat Party. You know, what it reminds
Speaker 1: me of is what we talked about in our last podcast,
Speaker 1: which is Joe Biden asking Saudi Arabia, hey, will you
Speaker 1: delay the output cut in oil for a month just
Speaker 1: to lay it into laster election. In other words, Joe Biden,
Speaker 1: I'm not interested in fighting for the American people. Biden's
Speaker 1: not going to fight for lower jasoline prices for families
Speaker 1: that can't afford to provide for their kids. He wants
Speaker 1: thirty days. Let me get past the election. Just get
Speaker 1: me past the election. Do me a political solid here.
Speaker 1: That's what CNN and MSNBC we're doing. They looked at
Speaker 1: this story and said, oh, this is bad for our guy.
Speaker 1: We've got an election coming up. If we report on this,
Speaker 1: people won't like it, and they might not vote for
Speaker 1: our guide. If they don't vote for our guy, the
Speaker 1: guy we don't like might win. So you know what,
Speaker 1: Unlike Saudi Arabia who said we're not going to be
Speaker 1: the political henchman for Joe Biden, thank you for the
Speaker 1: invitation CNN, MSNBC happily said, of course, or the political
Speaker 1: henchman for Joe Biden. That is our job. They do
Speaker 1: not behave any differently. Here's a question to ask yourself.
Speaker 1: Would MSNBC behave any differently if the Biden for President
Speaker 1: campaign literally signed their paychecks and if every word they
Speaker 1: say on TV every day is identical to what they
Speaker 1: would say if their paycheck every two weeks came from
Speaker 1: Biden for President. That tells you they're not journalists. They're
Speaker 1: political hacks. And sadly that's the that's the reality of it.
Speaker 1: You even tweeted about this. It was an interesting point.
Speaker 1: There are people that are now demanding that a reporter
Speaker 1: that talked about how in the conversation she was having
Speaker 1: with a politician didn't believe that he was co hearrent
Speaker 1: in this conversation, and now she's been reprimanded and people
Speaker 1: are demand that she be fired. So even when the
Speaker 1: media does do their job, their own industry and their
Speaker 1: own network seems to turn on them like automatically because
Speaker 1: they didn't tote the line of propaganda. It really is stunning.
Speaker 1: They had this young NBC reporter who interviewed John Fetterman
Speaker 1: and listen. Fetterman apparently is so mentally diminished that he
Speaker 1: required closed captioning, so not only would he hear the questions,
Speaker 1: but he had to read them to understand what the
Speaker 1: questions were. And this young reporter said afterwards said, wow,
Speaker 1: he really is mentally diminished. I mean it was I
Speaker 1: was trying to talk to him and he couldn't. He
Speaker 1: didn't understand what I was saying and what was going on. Now,
Speaker 1: in any ordinary world, that would be called news, and
Speaker 1: for a young reporter, that's a big breaking story. She
Speaker 1: ought to be commended for actually reporting on news. But
Speaker 1: several things happened. Number One, f RAN's wife has publicly
Speaker 1: called that this reporter be fired. Why go back to
Speaker 1: the question I said before, how would things be different
Speaker 1: if all of the corporate media's paycheck came from in
Speaker 1: this case, instead of the Biden for President's campaign, the
Speaker 1: John Federman for Senate campaign. Well, if this reporter had
Speaker 1: done this and she worked for the John Federman for
Speaker 1: Senate campaign, they would have fired her. So in some ways,
Speaker 1: I don't fault Missus Federman for saying one of our
Speaker 1: employees said something that was harmful to our candidate, fired them.
Speaker 1: And it is interesting the mandarins of the corrupt corporate
Speaker 1: media all jumped on board attacking this poor young reporter
Speaker 1: absurdly enough. The View, you know, the show, The View
Speaker 1: you had Whoopee and Sonny going on and on about
Speaker 1: how terrible it was that this reporter actually reported on
Speaker 1: what she saw and how offensive it was. And I
Speaker 1: will say, Ben, I bring up that example with kind
Speaker 1: of a in HCA A week for today from today,
Speaker 1: we're gonna break some big news. Everybody, get your DVRs ready,
Speaker 1: because you're about to break some news. One week from today,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna be on the View, and I'm gonna be
Speaker 1: sitting there, uh with with those wonderfully fair and impartial
Speaker 1: arbitrares of journalism, having a conversation about my new book,
Speaker 1: Justice Corrupted, which comes out next week and I am confident. Uh,
Speaker 1: we're gonna see some fireworks a week from today on
Speaker 1: the View. I'm looking forward to it. But but I
Speaker 1: will also welcome advice from from Verdict listeners uh as
Speaker 1: as as to what I should say and how I
Speaker 1: should handle it when they they descend upon me. Uh
Speaker 1: with with with with knives drawn? Yeah, send your send
Speaker 1: your questions. You can do it on social media. You
Speaker 1: can write us a five star review and and and
Speaker 1: put your thoughts on the on the View and what
Speaker 1: the senders should say. Wherever you're listening to this podcast,
Speaker 1: make sure obviously you share this podcast on social media.
Speaker 1: And lastly, center, you're on the bus tour right now.
Speaker 1: As we mentioned, you're going to be heading to a
Speaker 1: few more states. The bus tours online at tc bustour
Speaker 1: dot com. What's the next week look like for you
Speaker 1: on the on the tour? The next week is just
Speaker 1: straight on the road. We're heading right now to Iowa
Speaker 1: Falls doing a rally this evening for Ashley Henson, who
Speaker 1: is a first term member of Congress in a tight
Speaker 1: re election battle. I think she's gonna win, but I
Speaker 1: want to make sure she wins. Well. I was a
Speaker 1: big rally there. Then we're headed over to Ohio next
Speaker 1: doing a big rally with JD Vance, which should be great.
Speaker 1: I think Jad's gonna win that Senate seat in Ohio.
Speaker 1: And from there we continue on to Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, Michigan, Wisconsin, Texas.
Speaker 1: As Ben said, you can go to tcbustour dot com.
Speaker 1: You can find out the dates of the stops and
Speaker 1: and and come see us, Come get free tickets because
Speaker 1: it's every rally we've done has been packed and the
Speaker 1: energy is awesome. I think we're doing rallies with a
Speaker 1: total of thirty seven candidates all across the country, and
Speaker 1: we're about half way through. It's been really strong so far.
Speaker 1: It's really fun to see out there on the road
Speaker 1: and doing this for so many other Conservatives because you know,
Speaker 1: you've got to have a team when you get back
Speaker 1: to Washington, even though it's not an election year for you,
Speaker 1: you're out there getting the work done for so many others,
Speaker 1: and we all appreciate that. We'll see all of our
Speaker 1: listeners back here in just a couple of days. As
Speaker 1: we have expanded to three days a week. Make sure
Speaker 1: you tell your family and friends about it. Grab those
Speaker 1: tickets online tcbustour dot com, and don't forget set that
Speaker 1: DVR for next Monday, the Senator Cruz will be on
Speaker 1: the view. You're not gonna want to miss that, And Sentator,
Speaker 1: I'll talk to you again in just a couple of days.
Speaker 1: Take care,