Speaker 1: Welcome to Verdict with Ted Cruz. I'm Ben Ferguson. Nice
Speaker 1: to have all of you with us, and Senator we
Speaker 1: have got a lot to discuss today, including this new
Speaker 1: news that Steve Bannon is going to spend in theory
Speaker 1: four months in jail. We also need to talk about
Speaker 1: some news, and that is the media is starting to
Speaker 1: actually tell the truth about the damage done to kids
Speaker 1: with school closures. We're gonna have that plus gun control
Speaker 1: in Canada and a very important Senate race in Utah. Now,
Speaker 1: before we get to those other story center, I want
Speaker 1: to get to the shocking headline, and that is that
Speaker 1: Steve Bannon is supposed to spend four months in jail.
Speaker 1: In prison for defying an outwardly partisan kangaroo court is
Speaker 1: how one tweet put it earlier. Today, there's a lot
Speaker 1: of people asking questions, how do you get four months
Speaker 1: when guys like Eric Holder didn't get any time in jail. Kleinsmith,
Speaker 1: for example, the former FBI sist in General counsel in
Speaker 1: all Been Crossfire Hurricane didn't get any any time in
Speaker 1: jail as well. Look, I think the news of Bannon's
Speaker 1: being sentenced to four months is absolutely outrageous, and I
Speaker 1: am furious about it. I'm furious because Merrick Garland has
Speaker 1: presided over a Department of Justice that it now consists
Speaker 1: of simply being a partisan weapon to attack the political
Speaker 1: opponents of Joe Biden and the Democrats. And Merrick Garland
Speaker 1: should be ashamed. He should resign in disgrace, and if
Speaker 1: he doesn't, he should be impeached and removed from office.
Speaker 1: What happened here the January sixth Committee subpoena Steve Bannon. Now,
Speaker 1: the January sixth Committee is not a real congressional committee.
Speaker 1: A real congressional committee has members from both parties, and
Speaker 1: the Democrats select the Democratic members of the party, the
Speaker 1: Republicans select the Republican members of the party. Nancy Pelosi
Speaker 1: wanted didn't want to have a real committee. She wanted
Speaker 1: to have a kangaroo court. So she selected the Democrat
Speaker 1: members of the committee, and the House Republican Majority Leader
Speaker 1: Kevin McCarthy selected the Republicans, and she promptly said, no,
Speaker 1: I don't like those Republicans. She didn't like Jim Jordan.
Speaker 1: She didn't want Republicans who actually would oppose the Democrat
Speaker 1: partisan agenda. So she vetoed the Republicans. Speaker doesn't get
Speaker 1: to do that. That is unprecedent. It's an abusive power.
Speaker 1: She literally tried to stack the deck. And so this
Speaker 1: committee consists of one hundred percent Democrats plus two now
Speaker 1: fake Republicans Liz Cheney and Adam Kenzing are both of
Speaker 1: whom will be gone in January, neither of whom are
Speaker 1: coming back as Republicans. And they're two Republicans who Donald
Speaker 1: Trump shattered into tiny little pieces of impotent rage. And
Speaker 1: they've conducted a year long TV commercial for the Democrats
Speaker 1: these hearings. I literally have not watched one second of
Speaker 1: these hearings for the same reason that I don't watch
Speaker 1: the Democratic National Convention every four years. It is a
Speaker 1: paid infomercial for the Democrat Party. So is this well,
Speaker 1: this kangaroo court subpoena Steve Bannon. He declined to testify,
Speaker 1: and the Department of Justice stepped forward and prosecuted him.
Speaker 1: He was voted in contempt of Congress, and the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice stepped forward and prosecuted him. And what just
Speaker 1: happened is the district court sentenced him to four months.
Speaker 1: The reason I'm furious Ben is the wildly double standard.
Speaker 1: You mentioned Eric Holder. Eric Holder was Attorney General under
Speaker 1: Barack Obama. Eric Holder defied Congress. He refused to give
Speaker 1: them documents on fast and furious, the incredibly scandalous situation
Speaker 1: where the Department of Justice ran guns to Mexico guns
Speaker 1: in turns that were used to murder US agents and
Speaker 1: to cover up the scandal. Eric Holder refused to turn
Speaker 1: over documents, refused to testify, just stiff armed Congress. Congress
Speaker 1: voted him in contempt. But here's the piece that was
Speaker 1: missing because it was the Obama Justice Department. The Obama
Speaker 1: Justice Department never prosecuted him, so Congress voted him in contempt.
Speaker 1: But look under our constitution, Congress, as the legislative branch
Speaker 1: defined by Article one of the Constitution, doesn't have the
Speaker 1: power to prosecute anyone. Only Article too, the executive branch
Speaker 1: can prosecute. So when Eric Holder was held in contempt,
Speaker 1: he wasn't prosecuted. The difference is now when it's Democrats
Speaker 1: controlling Congress and Democrats controlling the White House. Now they
Speaker 1: go after Steve Bannon and they want jail time. And
Speaker 1: you know you mentioned also Kevin Kline Smith. I want
Speaker 1: to focus on him a little a little bit and
Speaker 1: remind people of Kevin Kline Smith because you know they hear.
Speaker 1: And look, we saw this this weekend, the headlines that
Speaker 1: came out Center where it says Will's Steve Bann had
Speaker 1: just got what he always wanted, right, he wanted to
Speaker 1: be a martyr's house. CNN put it on their website.
Speaker 1: There was others that say Steve ban deserved what he
Speaker 1: got because he refused to testify. It's not abnormal for
Speaker 1: people to say they don't want to testify. Can we
Speaker 1: be clear about that and that doesn't mean that you
Speaker 1: deserve to go to jail. Well, I'll give you someone
Speaker 1: else who refused to testify, who pleaded the fifth who
Speaker 1: was held in contempt. Lois Lerner. Lois Lerner directed the
Speaker 1: section of the Irs under Barack Obama that targeted conservatives
Speaker 1: for their political beliefs. When it came out that Lois
Speaker 1: Lerner had targeted conservatives for their political beliefs, Barack Obama
Speaker 1: held a press conference. He said, I am angry and
Speaker 1: the American people have a right to be angry now
Speaker 1: what Barack Obama was doing there. There's a technical word
Speaker 1: for it that's called lying. How do we know it's
Speaker 1: lying Because Number one, Lois Lerner was never prosecuted. Number two,
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice a pointed a special prosecutor in
Speaker 1: charge of the case who was a major Democratic donor,
Speaker 1: to give in about six thousand dollars to Barack Obama
Speaker 1: and the Democrats, so she had a clear partisan bias.
Speaker 1: Number three, Lois Learner retired with full pension. But number four,
Speaker 1: when she defied Congress and was held in contempt once again,
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice refused to prosecute her because the
Speaker 1: Obama Department of Justice was thoroughly corrupted. As you know.
Speaker 1: Next week my book comes out on this topic, Justice Corrupted.
Speaker 1: How the Left weaponize the legal system. I walk through
Speaker 1: Lois Learner, I walked through Eric Holder, I walk through
Speaker 1: Kevin klein Smith. Let's do Kevin Kleine Smith because it
Speaker 1: gives another example. So Obama weaponizes DOJ, weaponizes the FBI,
Speaker 1: weaponizes the IRS, refuses to prosecute anyone for contempt of
Speaker 1: Congress even though they're voted in contempt to Congress. Fast
Speaker 1: forward to Trump, when Donald Trump becomes president. Under Obama,
Speaker 1: these hard partisans had burrowed in to senior positions at
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice, the FBI, the IRS, and all
Speaker 1: different agencies of the federal government. In the FBI, they launched,
Speaker 1: along with DOJ, what was called Operation Crossfire Hurricane. There's
Speaker 1: an entire chapter in my book explaining Crossfire Hurricane. Crossfire
Speaker 1: Hurricane was the hard partisans at DOJ at the FBI
Speaker 1: trying to target Donald Trump, trying to go after the
Speaker 1: newly elected president because they didn't want the American people
Speaker 1: to be able to elect Donald Trump. Now what did
Speaker 1: they do well? The Department of Justice Inspector General issued
Speaker 1: a report on all of the mistakes, all of the
Speaker 1: abuses of power of the FBI and the DOJ in
Speaker 1: Crossfire Hurricane. It outlined seventeen different major mistakes, the biggest
Speaker 1: one of which was committed by Kevin Kline Smith. Kevin
Speaker 1: Kline Smith was an Assistant General Counsel at the FBI.
Speaker 1: The FBI was seeking a wire tap on a guy
Speaker 1: named Carter Page. Carter Page was a professor, He was
Speaker 1: a peripheral foreign policy advisor to the Trump campaign, and
Speaker 1: the FBI wanted to get a wire tap on Carter Page.
Speaker 1: And the basis of their wire tap as they said, well,
Speaker 1: he's talking to some really shady Russians, and so he
Speaker 1: may be doing something bad because the Russians he's having
Speaker 1: conversations too with their questionable Well, the FBI sent an
Speaker 1: email to the CIA and they asked the CIA, Hey,
Speaker 1: this Carter Page guy, is he a source for the CIA?
Speaker 1: In other words, when he's talking to the shady Russians,
Speaker 1: is he doing it on behalf of the United States
Speaker 1: of America? Is he helping the CIA out? Now? If
Speaker 1: the answer is yes, then it's not suspicious that he's
Speaker 1: talking to shady Russians because we'se doing it on purpose
Speaker 1: on the half of the United States government, which is
Speaker 1: asking him to do it on their behalf and right,
Speaker 1: exactly right, And to ask that question, I want to
Speaker 1: know because there's so many people that are listening center,
Speaker 1: they may say, well, that's a weird question to ask. Right,
Speaker 1: For the FBI to talk this, there was obviously something
Speaker 1: that popped in Carter Page's file right that made them say, oh,
Speaker 1: he's an asset of the United States government to even
Speaker 1: think to go ask that question, Yeah, that that is
Speaker 1: a reasonable inference. We don't know what it was that
Speaker 1: prompted that question. Although if you are. We don't know
Speaker 1: what it was that prompted it. We know they asked it,
Speaker 1: and the CIA responded in writing, yes, he is a source.
Speaker 1: Thank you for asking. He's very helpful to us. Yes
Speaker 1: he is a source. Here's what Kevin Klein Smith did.
Speaker 1: He took that email and he fraudulently altered it and
Speaker 1: he changed the CIA's email so where they say yes,
Speaker 1: he is a source, he changed that to read no,
Speaker 1: he is not a source. He then took that counterfeit,
Speaker 1: fraudulent document and he submitted it to a federal court
Speaker 1: and used it as the basis to get the wire
Speaker 1: tap on Carter Page to go after Donald Trump. Now
Speaker 1: that is a felony. He created a fraudulent document and
Speaker 1: submitted it to a federal court. He was prosecuted when
Speaker 1: it became public. And you know what sentence Kevin Klein
Speaker 1: Smith got. You would assume if you do something that
Speaker 1: egregious to actually spy on somebody, that you would do years,
Speaker 1: if not a decade. That is absolutely right. If you
Speaker 1: create a fraudulent document to submit to a federal court,
Speaker 1: I'll tell you right now, Ben you or I do that,
Speaker 1: we're doing hard time. You don't get to submit fraudulent
Speaker 1: documents to a court on purpose, particularly when you were
Speaker 1: doing it to target the President of the United States
Speaker 1: and a partisan vendetta. Well here's what the DC district
Speaker 1: judge sentenced him to, twelve months probation and four hundred
Speaker 1: hours of community service. He did not serve a single
Speaker 1: day in jail, and by the way, his law license
Speaker 1: was restored as well. It was an absolute slap on
Speaker 1: the wrist. And what is infuriating is this is a
Speaker 1: blatant It is an obvious double standard. No one can
Speaker 1: defend it. Why did Bannon get sentenced Because the Democrats
Speaker 1: hate Steve Bannon and this is about punishing your political enemies,
Speaker 1: and I think it as completely indefensible. You go back
Speaker 1: to Steve Bannon for a second, and why they hate
Speaker 1: him so much. This is a guy number one center.
Speaker 1: I think you would agree with me. You cannot control him.
Speaker 1: He's a guy that went into the Trump White House
Speaker 1: and they couldn't even control him. He immediately comes out
Speaker 1: and starts exposing stories and issues and telling stories of
Speaker 1: media refuses to tell he was a guy, for example,
Speaker 1: that was on the front lines of the Laptop from
Speaker 1: Hell and the hard drive of Hunter Biden and was
Speaker 1: exposing that on a regular basis. Fast forward to January
Speaker 1: the sixth, and they say, well, Steve Bannon had to
Speaker 1: be involved, he had to orchestrate this, we want to
Speaker 1: We have no doubt that he was a part of it.
Speaker 1: And that's where the witch hunt happened against him, which
Speaker 1: is why they've decided to subpoena him. And he's like,
Speaker 1: I don't want to say anything to you. I have
Speaker 1: nothing to say to you. Well, and not only that,
Speaker 1: Steve Bannon has also protected He was a senior advisor
Speaker 1: to the President of the United States, and there is
Speaker 1: a privilege that is called executive privilege which protects senior
Speaker 1: advisors to the president of the United States. Why does
Speaker 1: it do that because we want the president to be
Speaker 1: able to get good and candidate advice. And if Congress
Speaker 1: could haul every senior advisor to the president down and
Speaker 1: force him to testify under oath, the president wouldn't get
Speaker 1: candid and real advice. And by the way, that's a
Speaker 1: privilege that has been asserted. George Washington asserted it. It
Speaker 1: has been asserted, I believe by every president since since
Speaker 1: George Washington Republicans and Democrats, and so Steve Bannon, in
Speaker 1: refusing to comply with Congress, was doing his job. And
Speaker 1: let me note Eric Holder was not. When Eric Holder
Speaker 1: defied Congress, he was just covering his own ass. He
Speaker 1: was not protecting executive privilege. He was just saying, I
Speaker 1: don't want you to catch the bad stuff I've done.
Speaker 1: I refused to participate. And why was he subpoened. A
Speaker 1: lot of people may not remember the story of why
Speaker 1: the Congress subpoenaed him and why Congress wanted to talk
Speaker 1: to Eric Holder in that capacity. So it was a
Speaker 1: battle over a program that was called Fast and Furious,
Speaker 1: and Fast and Furious is something that was started under
Speaker 1: the Obama Justice Department where they put illegal guns on
Speaker 1: the street and they essentially sold them to drug dealers,
Speaker 1: to Mexican drug cartels, and it was a ridiculous program.
Speaker 1: You should not have the federal government in the business
Speaker 1: of selling lots of guns to really dangerous people. And
Speaker 1: those guns, in turn were used to murder federal agents.
Speaker 1: So SODJ literally provided and supplied the murder weapons, and Congress,
Speaker 1: once it was a Republican Congress, Democrats didn't care about
Speaker 1: it at all. They thought that was just fine that
Speaker 1: DJ was selling guns to Mexican drug cartels when we
Speaker 1: had a Republican Congress. They said, gosh, this seems like
Speaker 1: a problem. We want to see all the documents. We
Speaker 1: want to see what you discussed. We want to see
Speaker 1: what the hell will you think thinking saying guns to
Speaker 1: drug cartel members and drug wards in Mexico. That's exactly right.
Speaker 1: And Eric Holder was covering his own rear end Kevin
Speaker 1: Klein Smith was deceiving and committing a fraud on the
Speaker 1: court in order to carry out a partisan vendetta against
Speaker 1: someone he hated. Look you look at Steve Bannon. I
Speaker 1: know Steve Bannon very very well. He and I've been
Speaker 1: friends for a long time. I've worked very very closely
Speaker 1: with Steve for years. Steve is smartest hell number one.
Speaker 1: But Steve is also a bull in a China closet, says,
Speaker 1: Steve does not move gently, and anything he does and
Speaker 1: in Washington he broke some China. He ticked off a
Speaker 1: lot of Democrats because he's not afraid of the Democrats,
Speaker 1: he's not afraid of the media, and so they want
Speaker 1: to destroy him, but not because of anything he did.
Speaker 1: They want to destroy him because they hate him. That
Speaker 1: is what this is about. This is about corrupting the
Speaker 1: machinery of government to target your political enemies and idiots. Outrageous.
Speaker 1: Anyone who cares remotely about the integrity of the Justice
Speaker 1: Department or the FBI should be horrified and speak out.
Speaker 1: And by the way, every Democrat, former attorney general, every
Speaker 1: Democrat prosecutor ought to come out and say this if
Speaker 1: they have a shred of integrity. And I got to say,
Speaker 1: the silence on the left, combined with the gloating from
Speaker 1: the media, has been truly stomach turney. This idea that
Speaker 1: he wanted this as the headline from CNN is their
Speaker 1: analyst said, Steve Bannon just got what he's always wanted.
Speaker 1: They claim that the sentence of four months was his
Speaker 1: own fault for his refusal to comply with that subpoena,
Speaker 1: and he did it on purpose. They said, this is
Speaker 1: exactly what he wanted to be looked at as a
Speaker 1: quote martyr, and he deserves to get more time than
Speaker 1: even four months. He obviously is going to appeal this.
Speaker 1: I don't think anyone quote deserves to go to jail
Speaker 1: just because you don't like him. Politically. If you actually
Speaker 1: commit a crime, that's a different story. But what they're
Speaker 1: saying is we hate him so much that he deserves
Speaker 1: this and more. You know, that is maybe among the
Speaker 1: most ridiculous words ever uttered by CNN. And that's quite
Speaker 1: a distinction, because CNN has a daily business of uttering
Speaker 1: ridiculous words. But their argument is, look, he really wanted
Speaker 1: to go to jail, because you know, that's really what
Speaker 1: Steve Bannon wants is to be locked up with a
Speaker 1: bunch of bad guys and have to worry about don't
Speaker 1: bend over for the soap. It is ridiculous. It is outrageous.
Speaker 1: And to suggest, you know what, maybe CNN oh to
Speaker 1: be locked up, isn't that what they've always wanted? I mean,
Speaker 1: what garbage to say, Well, yeah, I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: we're throwing someone in jail for four months, but but gosh,
Speaker 1: they get to be a martyr. That's like buying someone
Speaker 1: to the steak and burning them and saying, but hey,
Speaker 1: they got to be a martyr, so congratulations. It's pure
Speaker 1: partisan spin now, And to say that somebody wants it
Speaker 1: or deserves it because they want it, that's the way
Speaker 1: they want to spend this so he won't feel sorry
Speaker 1: for him. And look at the double standard with Eric
Speaker 1: Holder and the others that we mentioned. I think is
Speaker 1: another example of the media is no longer a media
Speaker 1: in this kind of mean Let me ask you on
Speaker 1: CNN's analysis, did Joan of Arc get what she always wanted?
Speaker 1: She did become a martyr. She became a martyr, but
Speaker 1: she also got tied to a wooden steak and burned
Speaker 1: to death. I mean the cynicism of well, he wants
Speaker 1: to be a martyr. I promise you Steve Bannon does
Speaker 1: not want to go to jail. They know that, but
Speaker 1: they are reveling in using government power to punish their enemies.
Speaker 1: I want to move to another story center, one that
Speaker 1: I think is very important ahead of the midterms, and
Speaker 1: that is American school test scores are in We've got
Speaker 1: a wealth of knowledge now and information and the student
Speaker 1: test scorers have plummeted in math and reading and science
Speaker 1: since the pandemic, since we went to remote learning. Now.
Speaker 1: Also to be clear, we have comparing contrast numbers now
Speaker 1: on private schools that did not shut down and private
Speaker 1: schools that did not go to remote learning. And what
Speaker 1: we're seeing is is not only did those kids flourish
Speaker 1: continue to flourish in the private schools where they continue
Speaker 1: to go to school, but now the public school kids
Speaker 1: that are traditionally even behind the private schools to begin with,
Speaker 1: are now possibly multiple grade levels behind the kids they're
Speaker 1: basically going to be graduating with that they're having to
Speaker 1: compete with in the private sector. And Jake Tapper on
Speaker 1: CNN actually said this in a conversation. I want everyone
Speaker 1: to hear it. I have to say, I'm surprised that
Speaker 1: there hasn't been a national conversation about the damage done
Speaker 1: to kids because of these school closures and the virtual
Speaker 1: learning and everything, because I mean, I'm not saying that
Speaker 1: there should be a national do over, but we can't
Speaker 1: just pretend that fifth graders who are now seventh graders
Speaker 1: that that didn't happen, you know, Like I feel like
Speaker 1: there should be and not with a blame game. Look
Speaker 1: it happened, people did it. It was criticized, the school closures,
Speaker 1: the virtual learning, etc. But here we are there needs
Speaker 1: to be like a like a bipartisan movement. You know.
Speaker 1: I love that he calls it bipartisan center because he says, well,
Speaker 1: I don't want to get in the blame game. Of
Speaker 1: course you don't, because we know who closed down the schools.
Speaker 1: It was the teachers unions. It was the public administrators
Speaker 1: and the private schools that had to keep running their
Speaker 1: schools like a business and made the right decision, which
Speaker 1: was the kids at rate of infection is low, even
Speaker 1: if you get it that the health condition are not
Speaker 1: as near as life threatening as adults. They did the
Speaker 1: right thing, and the public schools said, nope, we're gonna
Speaker 1: go virtual. We demand all this federal government money. Every
Speaker 1: kid's going to get a free computer or laptop, whatever,
Speaker 1: free internet. And it was a disaster. And if you
Speaker 1: know anyone that was teaching the public school systems, they
Speaker 1: were telling you in real time it was a disaster.
Speaker 1: And yet now they say, well, shouldn't this be a
Speaker 1: bipartisan issue where they all agree we shouldn't have done this.
Speaker 1: Republicans were never in favor of this senator. Well, that's
Speaker 1: certainly true. But but let me say, Jake Tapper is
Speaker 1: being so dishonest and hypocritical there that that that clip
Speaker 1: infuriates me as well. I know Jake very well. I've
Speaker 1: been interviewed by him many many times Jake is a
Speaker 1: very smart guy, and he used to be a journalist.
Speaker 1: He's one of the few people in the corrupt corporate
Speaker 1: media who actually had a journalistic bone in his body.
Speaker 1: He cared about being a journalist. And when Donald Trump
Speaker 1: became president, it shattered Jake into a million different little pieces.
Speaker 1: And he's no longer a journalist. He has these occasional pangs,
Speaker 1: but but his role for the last six years is
Speaker 1: to be a dishonest and lying partisan hack, a propagandist.
Speaker 1: So when Democrats were shutting down schools, and let's be clear,
Speaker 1: it was Democrats and only Democrats that shut down schools
Speaker 1: across the country for a year or more, Republicans did not.
Speaker 1: It was only Democrats who did so. They did so,
Speaker 1: as you noted, at the behest of the teachers union,
Speaker 1: the teachers union bosses, Randy Weingarten, is directly responsible for this.
Speaker 1: The head of one of the biggest teachers unions, she
Speaker 1: was urging, among other things, the Biden administration to keep
Speaker 1: the schools shutdown. And not only that, Democrats in Congress,
Speaker 1: every single Democrat in Congress supported the school shutdowns. I
Speaker 1: forced vote after vote on the Senate floor to re
Speaker 1: open the schools. In the middle of COVID, I forced
Speaker 1: to vote on the Senate floor with the first big
Speaker 1: so called COVID relief bill from the Biden administration. They
Speaker 1: were giving tens of billions of dollars to schools, and
Speaker 1: I introduced an amendment, and I said, Okay, I'll tell
Speaker 1: you what. If you're a school you can get all
Speaker 1: of this new money that is just being showered upon you,
Speaker 1: with one requirement that you actually be open and teaching
Speaker 1: students in person. If you're teaching them in person, all
Speaker 1: this money is yours. Go have a party. You got
Speaker 1: all this money that the Democrats are in power. But
Speaker 1: if you're not open, if you have shut down the schools,
Speaker 1: if you are not teaching in person. At the time
Speaker 1: we were voting, there were more. There were fifty percent
Speaker 1: of the kids in America were not in in person
Speaker 1: school five days a week. I said, if you're not open,
Speaker 1: you still get all the money you got yesterday. You
Speaker 1: get all the billions of dollars you got before. But
Speaker 1: the new money, We're not going to pay you extra
Speaker 1: money if you're not doing the damn job you're supposed
Speaker 1: to be doing. Instead, the new billions of dollars will
Speaker 1: go to a scholarship to the child, ten thousand dollars
Speaker 1: per child. So if you shut your school down, that
Speaker 1: child can go somewhere else and actually get an education.
Speaker 1: Ben Every single Democrat voted no. It was a party
Speaker 1: line vote. It failed by one vote. I went, I'll
Speaker 1: tell you. I went and begged Joe Mansion. Joe Mansion,
Speaker 1: back in twenty seventeen briefly voted with me on my
Speaker 1: legislation expanding college five twenty nine savings plans to K
Speaker 1: through twelve education. It was the most far reaching federal
Speaker 1: school choice legislation that has ever passed. Mansion voted with
Speaker 1: me for five minutes until Schumer yelled at him and
Speaker 1: he flipped his vote. I went and asked Joe. I said, Joe,
Speaker 1: you know this is the right thing to do. Every
Speaker 1: single Democrat voted no. They are all responsible for the
Speaker 1: school shutdowns. And let me tell you what you mentioned
Speaker 1: the test scores. I want to explain that a little bit.
Speaker 1: So every year there's a test done by a group
Speaker 1: that is called NAPE and it's the National Association of
Speaker 1: Educational Progress and it does National Test on Reading in math.
Speaker 1: September first, they release the NAPE scores for fourth graders.
Speaker 1: The NAPE scores showed an average decline of five points
Speaker 1: in reading and seven points in math for fourth graders
Speaker 1: for nine year olds compared to twenty twenty. That was
Speaker 1: the largest decline in reading score since nineteen ninety and
Speaker 1: the first ever decline in math scores for fourth graders.
Speaker 1: That was the result of the Democrats shutdowns. Not only that,
Speaker 1: the racial divide. Unfortunately, we have a divide where African
Speaker 1: American students and Hispanic students don't perform as well on
Speaker 1: these tests as white students, and obviously a lot of
Speaker 1: time and energy has been spent into trying to correct
Speaker 1: that racial divide. Well, guess what, The race divide grew
Speaker 1: bigger under the Democrats shutdowns. In particular, mass scores for
Speaker 1: black students declined thirteen points, mass scores for Hispanic students
Speaker 1: declined eight points, and mass scores for white students declined
Speaker 1: five points. So the effect of the Democrats was to
Speaker 1: hurt kids across the country, but especially hurt low income
Speaker 1: and minority kids. And for Jake to say, I'm surprised
Speaker 1: no one is having a conversation. I and many others
Speaker 1: were screaming on the Senate floor. We're forcing votes on
Speaker 1: the Senate floor. And you know what Jake didn't do.
Speaker 1: He never covered the vote on the Senate floor. It
Speaker 1: wasn't news well and not going to say, but Jake
Speaker 1: didn't even look at all the parents in real time
Speaker 1: when the school closures were carrying on that we're talking
Speaker 1: about how far behind their kids had gotten. That they
Speaker 1: were saying it was clear they were behind. They were
Speaker 1: worried that their kids are going to be socially promoted.
Speaker 1: There were parents that were saying, I know my kid
Speaker 1: is not at the level where they should be graduating
Speaker 1: the grade that they just said they graduated with bees
Speaker 1: or a's. They were saying, this is a fraud. This
Speaker 1: is a fraud. I referred to it as a form
Speaker 1: of child abuse when you set a kid up for failure.
Speaker 1: Right to me, I called it the educational Ponzi scheme
Speaker 1: in this country center because you're taking money, you're claiming
Speaker 1: you're doing something with the kids, and you're not giving
Speaker 1: them what they paid for, what the money was intended
Speaker 1: to pay for. That to me is a Ponzi scheme
Speaker 1: and the worst kind. Because these kids are going to
Speaker 1: graduate and they're going to go onto society and they're
Speaker 1: going to realize they're not at a twelfth grade level.
Speaker 1: They're at a tenth grade or a ninth grade level
Speaker 1: at that point in time. Look, that's exactly right. And
Speaker 1: by the way, this is not just a problem that
Speaker 1: happened in the past. This is a problem that is
Speaker 1: happening right now today. So the DC Public schools have
Speaker 1: imposed a COVID vaccine mandate. They've announced they're going to
Speaker 1: throw out a school any student that doesn't have a
Speaker 1: COVID vaccine. It's supposed to go into effect in January.
Speaker 1: Let me give you some stats that show you just
Speaker 1: how idiotic this vaccine mandate is. The DC Public schools,
Speaker 1: roughly eighty percent of the kids have received the COVID vaccine.
Speaker 1: That means, for those of you doing math, although after
Speaker 1: the last two years, doing math is harder for people,
Speaker 1: that means twenty percent of the students have not had
Speaker 1: the COVID vaccine. Now, let's look on racial lines, because
Speaker 1: it's even more exacerbated when you look on racial lines.
Speaker 1: In the DC Public schools, roughly sixty percent of the
Speaker 1: students have received the COVID vaccine. That means forty percent
Speaker 1: of the black students have not received the COVID vaccine.
Speaker 1: Just a couple of months ago, I forced to vote
Speaker 1: on the Senate floor and I stood up and said,
Speaker 1: we should block this vaccine mandate. Why because it's idiotic
Speaker 1: to throw out of school forty percent of the black
Speaker 1: kids in the district of Columbia. And I stood on
Speaker 1: the Senate floor and I argued for the amendment, and
Speaker 1: I forced an amendment, and Ben every single Democrat voted,
Speaker 1: not all of them, every one of them, Raphael Warnock
Speaker 1: and Georgia voted to throw forty percent of the black
Speaker 1: kids out of DC public schools. And by the way,
Speaker 1: this is not some abstract point. Let's say you're a thirteen, fourteen,
Speaker 1: fifteen year old kid the DC public schools. If they
Speaker 1: throw you out, if they make you a school dropout involuntarily,
Speaker 1: the chances skyrocket that you go down a road of crime,
Speaker 1: of substance, abuse, of violence, of incarceration, and you have
Speaker 1: a very good chance of early death. It is cruel.
Speaker 1: I cannot imagine. I gotta tell you. I literally was
Speaker 1: looking at my colleagues and wondering, like, what in the
Speaker 1: hell is going through your mind when you cast a
Speaker 1: vote to throw forty percent of the black kids out
Speaker 1: of the DC public schools. And you know what Jake
Speaker 1: Tapper didn't do. He didn't cover it, he didn't discuss it.
Speaker 1: He's never asked one Democrat, not a single Democrat. He
Speaker 1: has Democrats on a show every week. He's never asked
Speaker 1: one of them, why don'd you vote to throw forty
Speaker 1: percent of the black kids out of the DC public schools.
Speaker 1: That's what's amazing for Tapper to say, I'm surprised they're
Speaker 1: not a conversation about this. There has been a conversation
Speaker 1: all across America. There's just not a conversation on CNN
Speaker 1: because CNN is not a journalistic outlet. It is a
Speaker 1: pure propaganda tool for the hard left. And so just
Speaker 1: because Jake ain't talking about it, that is a choice
Speaker 1: trying to silence and ignore the real conversation that was
Speaker 1: happening and should have been happening on CNN. I think
Speaker 1: one of the interesting points is going to end up
Speaker 1: coming out of this center is the fact that there's
Speaker 1: going to be many, many, many parents. They're gonna now
Speaker 1: start looking at school choice and vouchers through a very
Speaker 1: different lens, and conservatives like you, who have been talking
Speaker 1: about this for decades are going to have to remind
Speaker 1: them of how important it is to give parents the
Speaker 1: ability to take their children to the school that best
Speaker 1: serves them. And that is where I think conservatives can
Speaker 1: capitalize on this absurdity, and they're going to be parents
Speaker 1: are not going to want to get their kids vaccinated,
Speaker 1: and they deserve to have their kids get a quality
Speaker 1: education and have the choice to go to school that's
Speaker 1: willing to serve their children, and that's something that needs
Speaker 1: to be on the ballot in the midterms. We'll tell you,
Speaker 1: by the way, is a bit of good news, given
Speaker 1: these idiotic school shutdowns, given the abuses we've seen from
Speaker 1: school boards and blue state politicians, the national numbers and
Speaker 1: supportive school choice have skyrocketed. That there was always a
Speaker 1: majority and in fact a supermajority of voters supportive school choice.
Speaker 1: And by the way, that's true not just Republicans. It's
Speaker 1: true of independence and it's true of Democrats. It's true
Speaker 1: sixty to seventy percent of African Americans in the United
Speaker 1: States sports school choice, same number seventy to eighty percent
Speaker 1: of Hispanic supports school choice, and those numbers keep going
Speaker 1: up because so many parents have seen the disaster that
Speaker 1: their kids, unfortunately were subjected to. I want to move
Speaker 1: to this other issue real quick center, and that's coming
Speaker 1: out of Canada. I wouldn't be here if it wasn't
Speaker 1: for my right to carry a firearm. I was a
Speaker 1: target of a gang initiation. They it was two people
Speaker 1: that shot at us. I was able to shoot back
Speaker 1: and save my life. I know how important it is
Speaker 1: to be able to protect and defend yourself. But what's
Speaker 1: happening in Canada right now is truly unprecedented, and Trudeaux
Speaker 1: announced it implying that the country and the rest of
Speaker 1: the world should be envious of them. Take a list
Speaker 1: and I'll get your reaction. In May, our government introduced
Speaker 1: measures to implement a national freeze on handgun ownership. Today,
Speaker 1: our national freeze on handguns is coming into force from
Speaker 1: today forward. It is no longer legal to buy, sell
Speaker 1: or transfer a handgun in Canada. Senator, this is something
Speaker 1: that you heard. You would hear back in Nazi Germany,
Speaker 1: to be honest, and now they're saying it in Canada
Speaker 1: like you should cheer it on. Well, A couple of
Speaker 1: things come to mind. First of all, this is the
Speaker 1: Democrat vision for America. This is what my colleagues in
Speaker 1: the Senate wants. This is what Diane Feinstein wants. This
Speaker 1: is what Chuck Schumer wants. This is what Bernie Sanders wants.
Speaker 1: This is what Elizabeth Warren wants. This is what AOC wants.
Speaker 1: This is what Beato O'Rourke wants, where he says, hell, yes,
Speaker 1: we're going to take your guns. This is what they want.
Speaker 1: This is their desire. They are pretending sometimes they don't
Speaker 1: want this, but they are looking at Justin Trudeau with
Speaker 1: envy because this is their objective. Now, why have they
Speaker 1: not been able to implement it so far in the
Speaker 1: United States? Two reasons. One, Politically, there are tens of
Speaker 1: millions of Americans who care about defending our right to
Speaker 1: keep in bear arms, about defending our right to protect
Speaker 1: our homes and our families and our children. Secondly, we
Speaker 1: have the Second Amendment to the Constitution. Canada obviously is
Speaker 1: not bound by our constitution. They don't have a Second Amendment,
Speaker 1: and the left hates the Second Amendment. They wish it
Speaker 1: didn't exist. And it is hard to find a more
Speaker 1: powerful current example of why the Second Amendment is important.
Speaker 1: Democrats in Congress would do what Justin Trudeau is doing
Speaker 1: today if they could. They can't because the Second Amendment
Speaker 1: says the right of the people to keep in bear
Speaker 1: arms shall not be infringed. And it's important emphasized. The
Speaker 1: reason the Second Amendment is in the Constitution is right obviously,
Speaker 1: right after the First Amendment, right at the top of
Speaker 1: the Bill of Rights. It's not about target shooting, it's
Speaker 1: not about hunting, it's not about skeet shooting. The Second
Speaker 1: Amendment is fundamentally about the right to protect your life
Speaker 1: and your family. It is about the right that if
Speaker 1: someone comes into your home seeking to harm your children,
Speaker 1: seeking to harm your wife, that you have a fundamental right,
Speaker 1: a god given right, to defend your life and to
Speaker 1: defend your family. And that's what the right to keep
Speaker 1: in bare arms is all about. Look, Ben, what you
Speaker 1: went through. You you were attacked by criminals with guns,
Speaker 1: and the fact that you exercise your right to keep
Speaker 1: in bare arms saved your life. How old were you
Speaker 1: when that happened, Ben, I was twenty three or four
Speaker 1: at the time, if I remember correctly. That's a fundamental
Speaker 1: right that the left doesn't want you to have. And
Speaker 1: I'll give you a statistic from the Obama White House,
Speaker 1: not normally a source of right wing statistics. The Obama
Speaker 1: White House laid out that every year in the United States,
Speaker 1: firearms are used defensively to stop a crime between five
Speaker 1: hundred thousand and one million times every year. That's a
Speaker 1: stat from the Obama White House. Yours was one of them.
Speaker 1: So you were one of that five hundred thousand to
Speaker 1: a million that year. What Trudeau is saying in Canada,
Speaker 1: and what liberals and Democrats in America are saying is
Speaker 1: they want that number to drop to zero. And you
Speaker 1: know what will happen as a result. If you don't
Speaker 1: have a right to keep in bear arms, if you
Speaker 1: don't have a right to protect yourself. There will be
Speaker 1: more murders because the murderers will have their guns, but
Speaker 1: no one will have the ability to defend themselves. There
Speaker 1: will be more rapes because the rapists will have their
Speaker 1: weapons and no one will have the ability to defend themselves.
Speaker 1: There will be more violent assaults. Look, when you saw
Speaker 1: Antifa and Black Lives Matter riots all across the country,
Speaker 1: it was the people that had the ability to defend
Speaker 1: themselves who had at least some check to the lawless
Speaker 1: violence that was waging outside. And Democrats want to take
Speaker 1: away your ability to keep yourself safe. And and this
Speaker 1: is a really chilling reminder that this is not fanciful.
Speaker 1: This is reality. And we're saying it just to our
Speaker 1: northern neighbor center. One last thing, and I want to
Speaker 1: bring this up. And I know you got to run
Speaker 1: to the airport in a second, but I think this
Speaker 1: is very important that we mentioned it to everyone listening
Speaker 1: to Verdict today and that's this, Uh, the balance of
Speaker 1: the Senate very likely, there's a real possibility could come
Speaker 1: down to a race in Utah. There is a race
Speaker 1: in Utah with Senator Mike Lee. We mentioned it on
Speaker 1: this show last week. This is a race that Democrats
Speaker 1: understand the value of this fake democrat he's running is
Speaker 1: an independent. They understand that he's valuable to them possibly
Speaker 1: holding control of the Senate. The amount of money that's
Speaker 1: coming in from outside to say Utah is gonna end
Speaker 1: up being historic in Utah politics. And this is a
Speaker 1: race that many of you listening to Verdict right now,
Speaker 1: if you can donate to Senator Mike Lee. He's a
Speaker 1: good friend of yours. He's a good man running for
Speaker 1: office there. Get involved. If you have family or friends
Speaker 1: in Utah, you need to be reaching out to them
Speaker 1: and advocating for Senator Mike Lee. And this is a
Speaker 1: race that Democrats are going all in on. This is
Speaker 1: also a race that may end up taking you back
Speaker 1: to Utah, even though you were just with him on
Speaker 1: that bus trip, because it's going to be so important. Now,
Speaker 1: that's exactly right. This race is dangerous. It's a real race.
Speaker 1: There's a real possibility that Mike could lose. And the
Speaker 1: reason is what is happening in Utah is one of
Speaker 1: the most dishonest and deceptive things I've ever seen in politics.
Speaker 1: And it's several things coming together. You have Evan McMullen,
Speaker 1: who you remember in twenty sixteen ran as an independent
Speaker 1: against Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, and he claimed he
Speaker 1: was kind of a nice Republican. He wasn't Trump and
Speaker 1: he was just a nice guy, and he ended up
Speaker 1: getting a lot of votes in Utah. He's Mormon, and
Speaker 1: folks in Utah that that didn't like what Trump said
Speaker 1: and how he talked, they voted for McMullen. All right
Speaker 1: fast forward to now. McMullen is one of the many
Speaker 1: never Trump Republicans who are broken, who are shattered, who
Speaker 1: are so filled with hate for Donald Trump that they've
Speaker 1: abandoned everything they claim to believe. So McMullan is now
Speaker 1: running as a quote independent in Utah. He is not
Speaker 1: an independent. Evan McMullen is a Democrat who will elect
Speaker 1: Chuck Schumer. My confidence level on that is one hundred percent.
Speaker 1: Let me lay out why so McMullen is claiming. He says,
Speaker 1: I will not conference with either side. I'm not going
Speaker 1: to caucus with the Republicans. I'm not going to caucus
Speaker 1: with the Democrats. I'm going to be a happy independent,
Speaker 1: floating like a be just peaceful and happy. Well, let
Speaker 1: me give you some data points. Number one, the Democrat
Speaker 1: Party in Utah did not run a Democrat. They chose
Speaker 1: let's not have a Democrat at all, so they didn't
Speaker 1: nominate anyone. Number two, the Democrat Party in Utah formally
Speaker 1: endorsed Evan McMullan, so they're telling all the Democrats vote
Speaker 1: for McMullan. Number three, McMullen is raising his money using
Speaker 1: Act Blue, which is the online portal that you have
Speaker 1: left wingers and socialists and Democrats from all of the
Speaker 1: country refueling millions and millions of dollars into the race.
Speaker 1: He's being funded by the same people that fund Bernie Sanders,
Speaker 1: an AOC, and Elizabeth Warren. Number four. Just in the
Speaker 1: last quarter, Evan McMullan spent one point six million dollars
Speaker 1: going to Democrat consultants and operatives who are running his campaign.
Speaker 1: Number five. In the last few days, he had a
Speaker 1: fundraiser hosted by John Tester, who used to lead the
Speaker 1: Democratic Senatorial Committee, the political arm of Chuck Schumer that
Speaker 1: is devoted to electing Democrats into keeping Schumer as majority leader.
Speaker 1: John Tester knows exactly what he's doing, which is trying
Speaker 1: to put in place someone who will vote for Chuck Schumer. Now,
Speaker 1: why is it dangerous? Why is bright Red Utah even competitive? Well,
Speaker 1: the reason it's dangerous is McMullen is getting all of
Speaker 1: the Democrats and their forty some odd percent of voters
Speaker 1: in Utah Democrats, and then he is picking up some
Speaker 1: of the moderate Republicans, of the more moderate Republicans. So
Speaker 1: if you look at McMullen's campaign ads, he looks like
Speaker 1: a Republican. He talks about securing the border, he talks
Speaker 1: everything he talks about is Republican because he knows the Democrat.
Speaker 1: If he was a real Democrat, he couldn't win this thing.
Speaker 1: That's why they've had to lie to the people and
Speaker 1: imply that he's actually somehow an independent conservative Republican asked candidate,
Speaker 1: that's that's why this is a big lie. Well, and Ben,
Speaker 1: let me tell you the question that Evan McMullin should
Speaker 1: should be forced to answer. But because we have a
Speaker 1: corporate media that are not actually journalist, he hasn't been
Speaker 1: forced to answer it. He says, well, I'm not going
Speaker 1: to cauc us with either side, So isn't that wonderfully independent?
Speaker 1: That's not the question. Let's suppose in January we have
Speaker 1: fifty Republican senators that are elected, and we have forty
Speaker 1: nine Democrats senators that are elected, and Evan McMullan. If
Speaker 1: that happens, McMullen will have a choice and he will
Speaker 1: have to vote. It doesn't matter who he caucuses with,
Speaker 1: doesn't matter he has lunch with at the opening of
Speaker 1: the Senate. He will have a vote, and he have
Speaker 1: one of two choices. If he does nothing, if he abstains,
Speaker 1: if he votes for Mickey Mouse, then Republicans will be
Speaker 1: the majority of the Senate. On the other hand, if
Speaker 1: he votes for Chuck Schumer, Kamala Harris as Vice President
Speaker 1: will break the fifty fifty tie and the Democrats will
Speaker 1: be the majority. Now, if Chuck Schumer is the majority leader,
Speaker 1: what will that mean? That will mean that Bernie Sanders
Speaker 1: will remain the Budget chairman. That will mean that Dick
Speaker 1: Durbin will remain the Chairman of Judiciary, which means we
Speaker 1: will do nothing to have oversight of the Biden administration.
Speaker 1: We will do nothing to have oversight of the corruption
Speaker 1: of this administration. We would do nothing to examine the
Speaker 1: origins of COVID nineteen and the Wu Hunt Institute for
Speaker 1: Virology will do nothing to examine the evidence of Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden Joe Biden's corruption with China. We will do nothing
Speaker 1: to secure the border, just like the Democrats have done
Speaker 1: nothing for the last two years. And by the way,
Speaker 1: if you think that that is an outcome that McMullen
Speaker 1: doesn't like, he voted for Joe Biden. He voted for
Speaker 1: Joe Biden. He actively defends Joe Biden, and yet they
Speaker 1: are deceiving the voters because the voters are thinking, well,
Speaker 1: he's kind of sort of Republican. No, he is a
Speaker 1: Democrat through and through, and no reporter has asked him
Speaker 1: the question. Mister McMullen, if there are fifty Republicans and
Speaker 1: forty nine Democrats, your vote will determine who has the majority.
Speaker 1: It doesn't matter who you caucus with. That's not an answer.
Speaker 1: Which way will you vote? And the odds I believe
Speaker 1: are one hundred point zero zero zero percent he will
Speaker 1: vote for Chuck Schumer and empower the lawless corruption we
Speaker 1: have seen in Washington. If you want to help Senor Lee,
Speaker 1: you can go to Lee for Senate dot com, Lee
Speaker 1: for Senate dot Com and tell your family and friends,
Speaker 1: if they are out there and able to vote in Utah,
Speaker 1: about the importance this race. If you want to take
Speaker 1: articles I've written about Lee, post him on social media,
Speaker 1: Tell your friend just support Lee and help that go viral.
Speaker 1: It's so important in this race. And Ben, let me
Speaker 1: say two other things. Number one, so let's take the
Speaker 1: question of life. When McMullan was running for president twenty sixteen,
Speaker 1: he claimed to be pro life. He claimed to want
Speaker 1: to see roversus weight overturned. Now that it actually has
Speaker 1: been overturned, McMullan has had a change of heart. He
Speaker 1: suddenly realizes, Oh crap, I need to get all the
Speaker 1: Democrats to vote for me. So he's now against Roe
Speaker 1: versus Wade being overturned. Just today online Robbie George. Robbie
Speaker 1: George is a professor at Princeton University. He was my
Speaker 1: thesis advisor in college. He is one of the most
Speaker 1: respected conservatives in the country. He is a man of
Speaker 1: impeccable character, a man of impeccable judgment. He wrote a
Speaker 1: detailed description about Evan McMullin calling him in twenty sixteen
Speaker 1: and trying to get his support in the twenty sixteen campaign,
Speaker 1: and Robbie wrote how he asked him at great length
Speaker 1: about life and about his support for life, and he
Speaker 1: said McMullin swore up and down he was opposed to
Speaker 1: row and he would fight against it. And Robbie just
Speaker 1: just recounts how everything he said to me either he
Speaker 1: was lying through his teeth then, or he believes nothing
Speaker 1: and is willing to change it for convenience. Now it
Speaker 1: really is a devastating indictment because it shows. What it
Speaker 1: shows is that he's a Democrat, that he's an opportunist,
Speaker 1: and he's taking advantage of deception. I'll say, secondly, you
Speaker 1: want to understand what the stakes are in this race.
Speaker 1: If Schumer is still majority leader, because people in Utah
Speaker 1: have been fooled into voting for Evan McMullen, and there's
Speaker 1: another vacancy on the Supreme Court, the Democrats will ram
Speaker 1: through another left wing ideologue who will undermine our free
Speaker 1: speech rights, our religious liberty rights, our Second Amendment, all
Speaker 1: of our fundamental rights. So when you are voting, if
Speaker 1: you vote for Aman McMullan, you are voting to take
Speaker 1: away religious liberty from Americans and from people in Utah.
Speaker 1: Not only that, McMullen has said that he supports S one.
Speaker 1: What is S one? S one is Chuck Schumer's number
Speaker 1: one priority. It is the federal takeover of elections. It
Speaker 1: strikes down virtually every voter integrity law in the country.
Speaker 1: It strikes down photo id laws, It strikes down's prohibitions
Speaker 1: on ballot harvest. It automatically registers millions of illegal aliens
Speaker 1: to vote. The purpose of S one is to ensure
Speaker 1: that Democrats will remain in power forever and that it
Speaker 1: becomes effectively impossible to vote them out. The fact that
Speaker 1: McMullan supports that makes perfectly clear that if you vote
Speaker 1: for him, you are voting for Chuck Schumer, and that
Speaker 1: is absolutely tragically unacceptable. I think to a large majority
Speaker 1: of people from Utah, even very moderate people from Utah,
Speaker 1: they don't like what the Democrats are doing, and they
Speaker 1: need to understand McMullen and the media are lying to
Speaker 1: them by suggesting that he would be anything other than
Speaker 1: a Democrat foot soldier for Chuck Schumer. Yeah, get involved,
Speaker 1: go to the website leaf Senate dot com. Senator I
Speaker 1: appreciate it. As always, our conversations were remindered everybody listening,
Speaker 1: we now do this three day a week, So make
Speaker 1: sure that you hit that subscribe or auto download button
Speaker 1: so you get the show three days a week. You
Speaker 1: can say to Syria or Alexa, just play Verdict with
Speaker 1: Ted Cruz. That will do it automatically and write us
Speaker 1: a five star review. Please to make sure we can
Speaker 1: reach more conservatives ahead of the election day. Senator, a pleasure.
Speaker 1: I'll talk to you again and we'll do this in
Speaker 1: a couple of days. Fantastic