Speaker 1: Welcome. It is Verdict with Senator Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson
Speaker 1: with you. Senator, nice to chat with you today, and
Speaker 1: let's start with the big headline that so many people,
Speaker 1: especially in the Catholic faith, are talking about, and that
Speaker 1: is the fact that it looks like the FBI was
Speaker 1: trying to infiltrate Catholic groups and using trying to use
Speaker 1: people in the church to basically become, you know, FBI informants.
Speaker 1: There's also a lot of people that are asking the question, now,
Speaker 1: did the FBI lie to Congress about this, saying I
Speaker 1: don't know, we didn't do this, and now it's coming
Speaker 1: to light that, in fact, this was actually happening. Your
Speaker 1: initial reaction to that, well, I think these reports are
Speaker 1: very concerning. We have seen that the Biden Justice Department
Speaker 1: has a persistent animosity to religious faith and that they
Speaker 1: are willing to weaponize the Department of Justice in the
Speaker 1: FI to target people of faith. We've seen that in
Speaker 1: a host of different context We've seen that, for example,
Speaker 1: in their unwillingness to prosecute the protesters who are committing
Speaker 1: federal crimes by protesting outside the homes of Supreme Court
Speaker 1: justices and because the Attorney General disagrees with the dab's decision,
Speaker 1: he refuses to prosecute even a single one of them.
Speaker 1: At the same time, we've also seen the Attorney General
Speaker 1: in the Department of Justice and the FBI bring very
Speaker 1: limited prosecutorial resources to going after violent terrorists who are attacking,
Speaker 1: who are vandalizing, who are firebombing crisis pregnancy centers. Again,
Speaker 1: because they're politics, they don't prioritize those acts of violence.
Speaker 1: And now the latest news we knew publicly because of
Speaker 1: a whistleblower who had leaked it that one of the
Speaker 1: field officers the Richmond Field Office of the FBI had
Speaker 1: written a document that was entitled interest of racially or
Speaker 1: ethnically motivated violent extremists in radical traditionalist Catholic ideology almost
Speaker 1: certainly presents new mitigation opportunities. And so this this memo
Speaker 1: was called a domain perspective, was leaked by a whistleblower,
Speaker 1: and when Chris Ray, the head of the FBI, was
Speaker 1: asked before the Senate Judiciary Committee about it, he denounced
Speaker 1: the document and he said the document was appalling and
Speaker 1: that it had been withdrawn. Well, what has now broken
Speaker 1: this week is that Jim Jordan and the House Committee
Speaker 1: on the Weaponization of Law Enforcement has a public that
Speaker 1: the FBI and in particular the Richmond Field Office was
Speaker 1: using undercover agents and in particular at least one undercover
Speaker 1: employee to try to penetrate local Catholic churches. And so,
Speaker 1: for example, this is a quote from the Opportunities that
Speaker 1: part of the memo. It says, in addition to redaction,
Speaker 1: we don't know what's under the redaction, engage an outreach
Speaker 1: to the leadership of other Society of Saint Pious, the
Speaker 1: tenth Chapels in the FBI Richmond Area of responsibility to
Speaker 1: sensitize these congregations to the warning signs of radicalization and
Speaker 1: to enlist their assistance to serve as suspicious activity trip wires.
Speaker 1: And so this piece, Chris Ray had not indicated before
Speaker 1: that the FBI was was placing undercover operatives. Well, I
Speaker 1: don't know whether they were trying to recruit undercover sources
Speaker 1: from within the Catholic Church or whether they were trying
Speaker 1: to place agents undercover. Either way, that that is a
Speaker 1: major escalation from what was known previously, and it's very concerning.
Speaker 1: It also has to concern you the fact that we're
Speaker 1: not getting straight answers yet again from the DOJ and
Speaker 1: the FBI. And this isn't the first time that's happening.
Speaker 1: We've had reports even they have come out recently about
Speaker 1: the White House may have actually been involved or at
Speaker 1: least read in on the Donald Trump Marlago raid. We
Speaker 1: know that they lied about, you know, having parents be
Speaker 1: labeled as domestic terrorists is another example there that we're
Speaker 1: going to school boards. I mean, there have been quite
Speaker 1: a few instances now where the documents call into question
Speaker 1: the FBI and the DOJ on their explanations when they
Speaker 1: come before you and your fellow members of Congress, where
Speaker 1: their stories don't add up. You can be old fashioned
Speaker 1: to say, it seems like they're lying to you guys
Speaker 1: on a pretty regular basis. Well, unfortunately, neither the FBI
Speaker 1: nor the Department of Justice have shown really any willingness
Speaker 1: to be held accountable by Congress or the American people.
Speaker 1: In with both the Attorney General and the head of
Speaker 1: the FBI, they are highly resistant to answering questions. They
Speaker 1: typically will stonewall, they'll refuse to answer any specifics. By
Speaker 1: the way that they've done this persistently concerning January six.
Speaker 1: When I've questioned the Department of Justice, when I've questioned
Speaker 1: the FBI about undercover agents that were involved in January six,
Speaker 1: they refuse to answer. When I've questioned them about ray Epps,
Speaker 1: they refuse to answer. They simply stonewall. When I asked
Speaker 1: the FBI if undercover agents were involved in inciting acts
Speaker 1: of violence, they refuse to answer. And I think that
Speaker 1: is highly concerning. That there's an attitude within the FBI
Speaker 1: and the Department of Justice that they get to decide
Speaker 1: the rules, they get to decide what's acceptable, and that
Speaker 1: no one, no one can hold them to account. And
Speaker 1: I think it's producing an enormous lack of trust in
Speaker 1: law enforcement. It's it's the reason I wrote the book
Speaker 1: a few months ago, Justice Corrupted, How the Left is
Speaker 1: weaponize the legal system, because in that book, I outlined
Speaker 1: how under Joe Biden, the Department of Justice and the
Speaker 1: FBI have deliberately been turned into weapons to target the
Speaker 1: political opponents of this administration. And with regard to the
Speaker 1: to the targeting of the Catholic Church. Look, these documents
Speaker 1: indicate that they see as a quote warning sign people
Speaker 1: who attend Latin masses. Now, now that that is Latin
Speaker 1: masses are something attended by millions of people across the
Speaker 1: world and simply being following traditional Catholic beliefs. The idea
Speaker 1: that that is indicative of being a criminal, or being
Speaker 1: violent or being a terrorist, it is absurd. But but
Speaker 1: it also it demonstrates a deep animosity and distrust to
Speaker 1: people of faith and and and and this is it's
Speaker 1: a pattern that that that's sadly, the FBI director seems
Speaker 1: to have little or no interest in in drilling down
Speaker 1: and holding the people accountable who are demonstrating this animosity. Center.
Speaker 1: On Tuesday, I was hosting out Numbered on Fox. I
Speaker 1: was in New York and we were sitting there talking
Speaker 1: about this exact now, Ben, Ben, is that is that
Speaker 1: known as a humble bragg? That's a humble bragg right
Speaker 1: there right? You know the other day when I was
Speaker 1: piling around with my buddies, you know, Jay Z and Beyonce,
Speaker 1: and then you know, Frank Sinatra wandered in and and uh,
Speaker 1: I'm sorry, go ahead, Ben, I didn't interrupt now, but
Speaker 1: we were sitting there on set and they were talking
Speaker 1: about this, and I said the question that I now
Speaker 1: want Congress to ask forget the Catholic part just for
Speaker 1: a moment, because I think now the question has to be, Okay,
Speaker 1: if you're now an extremist in the eyes of the
Speaker 1: FBI and the Biden administration, because you go to a
Speaker 1: very traditional Catholic Mass, then who else is on this list?
Speaker 1: And how many other religions are they trying to infiltrate
Speaker 1: right now? Are they going after Baptists, Are they going
Speaker 1: after Methodists? Are they going after Presbyterians? My question now is, well,
Speaker 1: if they're doing this with Catholics and and and those
Speaker 1: that are traditional their words traditional Catholics right now, but
Speaker 1: now you're an extremist traditionalist Catholic, all right? You used
Speaker 1: to just be a traditionalist Catholic. Now you're an extremist.
Speaker 1: If they're doing this and labeling this on Catholics, I
Speaker 1: just want to know who else is on this list
Speaker 1: and who else are they sitting these guidance out on
Speaker 1: their religions or conservative groups. If you're on the Tea Party,
Speaker 1: if you used to be a member of the Tea Party,
Speaker 1: if you've gone to Republican convention, if you've gone to
Speaker 1: a Ted Cruise event, a rally, are you now on
Speaker 1: a list as well. Well. We know that they define
Speaker 1: extremist by politics, and their definition of extremist is anyone
Speaker 1: who disagrees with their politics. With regard to Tea Party groups,
Speaker 1: we know that the Obama IRS explicitly targeted Tea Party
Speaker 1: groups and went after them. We know that they tea Party,
Speaker 1: that they targeted groups that defended the Constitution because they
Speaker 1: viewed the Constitution and Bill of Rights as as a threat,
Speaker 1: and that all of that is detailed. There's an entire
Speaker 1: chapter in Justice Corrupted called the Irs Comes Knocking that
Speaker 1: walks through chapter and verse. And it's worth remembering. When
Speaker 1: that story broke that the Obama IRS was targeting Tea
Speaker 1: Party groups and conservative groups, Barack Obama publicly gave a
Speaker 1: press conference where he said that he was angry, and
Speaker 1: he said the American people have a right to be angry.
Speaker 1: So he recognized, at least he pretended to recognize that
Speaker 1: it was appalling, that it was wrong, that it was
Speaker 1: an abusive power. And then what happened was the Obama
Speaker 1: Department of Justice stonewalled over and over and over again.
Speaker 1: Lois Lerner pleaded the fifth refused, it refused to testify
Speaker 1: and the Department of Justice refused to prosecutor, so that
Speaker 1: they stonewalled across the board. If you look at this
Speaker 1: this recent FBI memo, they explicitly focus on politics. So
Speaker 1: for example, this is a quote from the memo. The
Speaker 1: ongoing convergence of the far right white nationalist movement and
Speaker 1: RTCs RTCs of their fancy acronym for quote radical Traditionalist
Speaker 1: Catholics was further demonstrated through the increase in hostility toward
Speaker 1: abortion rights advocates on social media in the run up
Speaker 1: and the aftermath of the Supreme Court's Dobbs League. In
Speaker 1: other words, if you're pro life, that is an indication
Speaker 1: that you are a dangerous radical. And the document at
Speaker 1: for appendices, one of which was a list from the
Speaker 1: Southern Poverty Law Center, which is widely denounced for smearing
Speaker 1: conservative groups as hate groups and for being a hard
Speaker 1: left political advocacy organization. And now you have the FBI
Speaker 1: relying on that to target people they politically disagree with.
Speaker 1: That is highly, highly concerning. Well, let's talk about another
Speaker 1: aspect of this, and I want to go back to
Speaker 1: the FBI. I remember, you're a boot guy. You love
Speaker 1: cowboy boots. I love cowboy boots. By the way, I
Speaker 1: got a new pair. I'll show you on set this week.
Speaker 1: I'm upping my game. You're going to be jealous, but
Speaker 1: you've got some pretty nice boots. And you used one
Speaker 1: of those to make a point of the absurdity of
Speaker 1: FBI guidelines on quote symbols that they also put a
Speaker 1: list together that indicate extremist groups. I guess now, maybe
Speaker 1: you know if you have a Catholic symbol that's going
Speaker 1: to get on there too. You got a rosary that's
Speaker 1: gonna get you on the list. And I want to
Speaker 1: play that for everybody to go back, because this is
Speaker 1: not something new. This is a year ago when this happened.
Speaker 1: I'm going to play that. But first, let me tell
Speaker 1: you about our friends at Patriot Mobile. If you've got
Speaker 1: a cell phone and nine of you listening do you're
Speaker 1: probably using it right now to listen to this podcast.
Speaker 1: How would you like to know that every time you
Speaker 1: use your phone, every time you pay your bill, every
Speaker 1: time that you are texting or calling someone, you're actually
Speaker 1: fighting for the values you believe in. Well, Patriot Mobile,
Speaker 1: that's exactly what they do. They're different. Stop giving your
Speaker 1: money to woke companies and give it to companies that
Speaker 1: are aligned with your values. Now, here's what's cool about
Speaker 1: Patriot Mobile. Patriot Mobile actually takes a percentage of your
Speaker 1: bill every single month and they give it back to
Speaker 1: conservative causes and organizations that you helped choose to support.
Speaker 1: We're talking about First and Second Amendment groups. We're talking
Speaker 1: about protecting the life of unboard children. We're talking about
Speaker 1: helping with adoptions in a post roevweight world. This is
Speaker 1: what Patriot Mobile does. So make the switch. You get
Speaker 1: to keep your same cell phone number you have right now,
Speaker 1: and you get to make a difference every single time
Speaker 1: you pay your bill. Call them, use the promo code Verdict.
Speaker 1: You'll get the best savings and promotions of the day
Speaker 1: eight seven eighth Patriot eight seven eight Patriot eight seven
Speaker 1: eight Patriot or online at patriotmobile dot com slash verdict
Speaker 1: use a promo code Verdict center. When this happened with
Speaker 1: a Catholic church, it was immediately reminded me of that
Speaker 1: moment where you were questioning Ray before the Senate and
Speaker 1: you used your actual boot, put it on the table
Speaker 1: because of a symbol that is on your boot. And
Speaker 1: this is what it sounded like, and this is a
Speaker 1: text that I was particularly struck. Is the Gonzales battle flag?
Speaker 1: Come and take it as indicative of being a violent
Speaker 1: extremist militia. Well, I will self report right now that
Speaker 1: every day in the Senate I wear my boots that
Speaker 1: have the Gonzales battle flag on the back of them.
Speaker 1: Director Ray, what are y'all doing? This makes no sense.
Speaker 1: Do you agree with this FBI guidance that the Betsy
Speaker 1: Ross flag and the Gadson flag and the Gonzales battle
Speaker 1: flag are signs of militia violent extremism. Well, Cent, I'm
Speaker 1: not familiar with the particular document you have behind you,
Speaker 1: and I'm not in the practice of trying to comment
Speaker 1: on documents that I haven't recognized. But I will tell
Speaker 1: you that when we put out intelligence products, including ones
Speaker 1: that reference symbols, which we do across a wide variety
Speaker 1: of contexts, we usually make great pains, take great pains
Speaker 1: to put caveats and warnings in the document to make
Speaker 1: clear that a symbol alone is not considered evidence of
Speaker 1: our extremism. I mean, Center. Some of these symbols are
Speaker 1: on license plates and states, for goodness sakes, including the
Speaker 1: Great State of Texas and look that that exchange. There
Speaker 1: I had behind me a poster board showing this document
Speaker 1: from the FBI that was in identifying these symbols as
Speaker 1: signs of extremism. And there are things like literally the
Speaker 1: Betsy Ross flag, the Gonzales battle flag. It's it's worth
Speaker 1: for those who are not familiar with Texas history, the
Speaker 1: history of the Gonzales Battle flag. That there is a
Speaker 1: town in South Texas to the town of Gonzales, and
Speaker 1: in the eighteen hundreds, Texas was part of Mexico and
Speaker 1: the dictator of Mexico was General Santa Anna, and General
Speaker 1: Santa Anna issued an order to the Texians who lived
Speaker 1: in Gonzales, and at the time Texans were called Texians,
Speaker 1: and the order was for the Texians to hand over
Speaker 1: their guns and also to hand over the cannon that
Speaker 1: guarded the city. And in response, what the Texians did
Speaker 1: is is they erected a battle flag. And the battle
Speaker 1: flag simply has a picture of the cannon with a
Speaker 1: star and underneath it the legend come and take it.
Speaker 1: And that battle flag became the beginning of the Texas
Speaker 1: War for Independence, where Texas Sam Houston was Texas's George Washington,
Speaker 1: he led the army of the Texians. Santa Anna came
Speaker 1: and attacked Gonzales, attacked Goliad, attacked the Alibo. And just
Speaker 1: like the Continental Army under George Washington, who lost nearly
Speaker 1: every battle of the American Revolution to the Red Coats,
Speaker 1: to the British, the Texans likewise lost nearly every battle
Speaker 1: to the Mexican army, which was much bigger, much better armed,
Speaker 1: right up until the Battle of San Jacino, where we
Speaker 1: won a decisive victory and won our independence and Texas
Speaker 1: became an independent nation, the Republic of Texas for nine years.
Speaker 1: Texas was its own nation from eighteen thirty six to
Speaker 1: eighteen forty five until in eighteen forty five Texas joined
Speaker 1: the United States and became a state in the Union.
Speaker 1: That's the history of of the Gonzales Battle flag, and
Speaker 1: the reason I wear it on my boots is I
Speaker 1: admire that rugged independence, that spirit of freedom. It's been
Speaker 1: really an unofficial flag of when I first ran for
Speaker 1: the Senate, that that standing up for freedom is a
Speaker 1: fundamentally a quintessentially American value. And for the FBI to
Speaker 1: identify that and say, well, that shows that you're an extremist.
Speaker 1: What that really shows is an antipathy to anything other
Speaker 1: than far left democrats and and and all. The Gadson
Speaker 1: flag also flag from the American Revolution. It's if you're
Speaker 1: a patriot, if you believe in America, that makes you suspicious.
Speaker 1: And you know, I'll say this, So you heard Chris
Speaker 1: Ray's response where he said, well, gosh, I don't know
Speaker 1: what that memo is. Well, you know what Chris Ray
Speaker 1: hasn't done, to the best of my knowledge, gone and
Speaker 1: figured out who wrote that memo, Gone and figured out
Speaker 1: why they were targeting symbols of American patriotism and freedom.
Speaker 1: Gone and figured out who has that partisan animosity and bias.
Speaker 1: And likewise, with the demonstrated antipathy to traditional Catholics, as
Speaker 1: best as I can tell, nobody's been held accountable. Now,
Speaker 1: it is possible that that that the antipathy to Catholics
Speaker 1: was was particularly concentrated in the Richmond Field office that's
Speaker 1: where this memo originated, and the FBI did retract the
Speaker 1: memo targeting Catholics the peace though That's new that just
Speaker 1: came out is that, in addition to the memo that
Speaker 1: the FBI had relied on at least one undercover agent
Speaker 1: to spy on the Catholic Church and at least one
Speaker 1: other at least where George is concerning to everybody listening,
Speaker 1: it is so. So here's how Jim Jordan put it.
Speaker 1: Based on the limited information produced by the FBI to
Speaker 1: the committee, we now know that the FBI relied on
Speaker 1: at least one undercover agent to produce use its analysis,
Speaker 1: and that the FBI proposed that its agents engage in
Speaker 1: outreach to Catholic parishes to develop sources among the clergy
Speaker 1: and church leadership to inform on Americans practicing their faith.
Speaker 1: So they're trying to enlist priests, they're trying to enlist
Speaker 1: church leadership to be FBI informants to spam their own congregations.
Speaker 1: And that you know, we've talked before about Chris Ray.
Speaker 1: I do not believe Chris Ray is as a hardcore leftist.
Speaker 1: He was appointed to that position by Donald Trump. The
Speaker 1: problem with Chris Ray as directors so he's not nearly
Speaker 1: as bad as James Comey was. James Comey abuse the
Speaker 1: power of the FBI and effectively waged war on President
Speaker 1: Trump from within the administration. Chris Ray has not been
Speaker 1: nearly as abusive as Comy, But I think Chris Ray
Speaker 1: is fundamentally a company man. I think he views his
Speaker 1: job as defend everyone at the FBI, even if they
Speaker 1: are hardcore partisans who burrowed into senior career positions and
Speaker 1: are corrupting the machinery of justice with a partisan lens
Speaker 1: or a lens of antipathy to people of faith. And
Speaker 1: what Director Ray is not doing is digging down and saying, Okay,
Speaker 1: I may not have known about this memo when it issued,
Speaker 1: but I know about it now and I want to
Speaker 1: see who wrote it. I want to see what we've done.
Speaker 1: I want to go in and stop it. And we
Speaker 1: don't see any of that. And that's if he's not
Speaker 1: doing that. He's not doing his job, and he's allowing
Speaker 1: the FBI to continue to be abused politically. Oh L
Speaker 1: ask question for you, if you're the person that wrote
Speaker 1: this memo at the FBI, should you lose your job
Speaker 1: over this? Look? Probably we need to see. We don't
Speaker 1: seem to have any accountability anymore. It's like everybody in
Speaker 1: government can do whatever the hell they want and then
Speaker 1: when they get busted. And I think this is where
Speaker 1: Americans are getting really frustrated. Center is that they see
Speaker 1: this happen. We keep seeing these stories and no one
Speaker 1: loses their job. Lois Learner another example that you mentioned earlier.
Speaker 1: I mean over and over when they admit something happens
Speaker 1: and they're like, Okay, this memo went out and it
Speaker 1: shouldn't have. No one seems together get fired. Well Lois
Speaker 1: Lerner was allowed to retire and she kept her pension. Yeah,
Speaker 1: look at the Biden administration. Can you name one person
Speaker 1: who's lost his job. That's my point. Look, the last
Speaker 1: podcast we did, we did a deep dive on Afghanistan
Speaker 1: where at the time of our disastrous surrender to the
Speaker 1: Taliban and the catastrophe that unfolded, everyone recognized that it
Speaker 1: was a catastrophe. Now you have the Biden White House
Speaker 1: trying to whitewash the whole thing and pretend it was
Speaker 1: all terrific and we should be proud of the great
Speaker 1: surrender Joe Biden did. There not a single person, as
Speaker 1: far as I know, has lost his or her job
Speaker 1: because of that screw up. And so this is a
Speaker 1: consistent pattern, which is the people who are weaponizing the
Speaker 1: machinery of justice, not only are not held accountable. They
Speaker 1: don't have any fear of being held accountable because the
Speaker 1: White House is certainly not willing to actually demonstrate that
Speaker 1: the buck stops here or anywhere else. I want to
Speaker 1: get to another big issue, and that is I was
Speaker 1: really excited Center because I thought that you were going
Speaker 1: to get us to hook up with Spurs tickets at
Speaker 1: some point when we were doing this podcast, that we
Speaker 1: definitely get to go to see the Spurs play, and
Speaker 1: we're gonna get great seats for that. Apparently that's not
Speaker 1: going to happen now because Coach Craig had some words
Speaker 1: for you. I'm going to play that for you to
Speaker 1: moment and sag it your fault that we got all
Speaker 1: these guns in America. Before we get to that, though,
Speaker 1: I want to tell you about our friends I guess
Speaker 1: is Precious Metals. You know what's happening in the economy
Speaker 1: right now. You know it's been happening on Wall Street.
Speaker 1: You've been watching what's been happening with banks. It's getting
Speaker 1: a little crazy. So you may be thinking yourself, Hey,
Speaker 1: I need to make sure I can protect my hard
Speaker 1: earned dollars. I want to protect my assets. Well, that's
Speaker 1: exactly what a Gust of Precious Metals does for me.
Speaker 1: You can buy gold and silver through them, through an
Speaker 1: IRA or a four oh one k. This is about
Speaker 1: diversifying and protecting your hard earned dollars. Here's the other
Speaker 1: cool thing right now, they're going to give away free gold. Yes,
Speaker 1: get free gold and get some peace of mind at
Speaker 1: the same time. How does it work? If you've saved
Speaker 1: one hundred thousand dollars or more for retirement, a gusts
Speaker 1: will actually pay you in pure gold. To learn how
Speaker 1: a gold IRA can protect you. That's a big deal.
Speaker 1: A pure gold coin for free. Reach out to a
Speaker 1: Gust of precious a day. Get started with gold. Don't
Speaker 1: let the bank failures get you down or Wall Street
Speaker 1: get you down. Get the free gold guide and get
Speaker 1: some peace of mind. Call them eight seven seven the
Speaker 1: four gold Ira the number four eight seven seven four
Speaker 1: gold Ira. To learn how to protect your retirement and
Speaker 1: get your free gold coin. That's a Gust of Precious
Speaker 1: Medals dot com. Use my name Ben by the way,
Speaker 1: and you can get your fees for up to ten
Speaker 1: years for free. Eight seven seven the number four gold
Speaker 1: I r ah there. If you don't know about the
Speaker 1: spurs coach. He made me hate the Spurs after I
Speaker 1: used to love them because he's become such a hardcore
Speaker 1: woke activists and he now is taking aim at you. Senator,
Speaker 1: I got to play this for people. Take a listen.
Speaker 1: Are you in this room? When we were in school,
Speaker 1: we worried if Nancy you would dance with us on
Speaker 1: Friday after the football game or something. That was anxiety.
Speaker 1: But they're going to cloak all this stuff. You know,
Speaker 1: the second of the myth of the Second Amendment, the freedom,
Speaker 1: you know, it's just it's a myth. It's a joke.
Speaker 1: It's just a game they play. I mean that's freedom.
Speaker 1: Is it freedom for kids to go to school and
Speaker 1: try to socialize and try to learn and be scared
Speaker 1: to death that they might die that day? With Ted
Speaker 1: Cruzel fiction because he's going to double the number of
Speaker 1: cops into schools. That's what he wants to do. Well,
Speaker 1: that'll create a great environment. Is that freedom? Or is
Speaker 1: it freedom to have a congressman who can make a
Speaker 1: postcard with all his family holding rifles including ay or
Speaker 1: fifteen or whatever. Is that cool? All right? Centator? He
Speaker 1: says the Second Amendment is a myth and this is
Speaker 1: a guy that has the Alamo Is in the town
Speaker 1: where he lives, and for the team that he represents,
Speaker 1: you'd think he can learn a little bit of history
Speaker 1: before he starts saying stuff like this. Well, look, we've
Speaker 1: seen for a long time that there are a lot
Speaker 1: of institutions in sports that don't really like their fans
Speaker 1: very much, don't really like their customers, don't respect their customers,
Speaker 1: that look down on them. Popovich is someone who has
Speaker 1: been a partisan for a long time. He's a liberal Democrat.
Speaker 1: He is someone who listened to Spurs are a terrific team. Uh.
Speaker 1: In twenty fourteen, I had the great joy of taking
Speaker 1: my dad on Father's Day to see the Spurs win
Speaker 1: the NBA Finals, and I happily cheered them on. They've
Speaker 1: had some terrific players on the teams over the years.
Speaker 1: I am first and foremost say a Rockets fan. But
Speaker 1: but but I happily cheer on every Texas team. But
Speaker 1: you know, I do wish you know the end. You
Speaker 1: see this in the NBA. You see at the NFL
Speaker 1: these incredibly rich athletes who hypocritically dis dane their fans
Speaker 1: and customers and who lecture them almost inevitably from a
Speaker 1: point of ignorance. So Greg Popovitch is telling you that
Speaker 1: that that it's a myth that the Second Amendment protects
Speaker 1: your rights. It's a myth that the Second Amendment protects
Speaker 1: your freedoms. I mean, I mean, that's a fairly astonishing proposition.
Speaker 1: And I would note, Uh, you've been to NBA games.
Speaker 1: I've been to NBA games. You know what, there are
Speaker 1: a lot of at NBA games, a lot of security,
Speaker 1: armed police officers with weapons strapped in their holsters. Uh.
Speaker 1: You know, Popovich is surrounded by armed security most of
Speaker 1: the time. And and this is true, This is true
Speaker 1: with so many Hollywood liberals that have armed bodyguards protecting them.
Speaker 1: And they say, you little people, you don't have a
Speaker 1: right to defend your family. You don't have a right
Speaker 1: to defend your children. But me, I'm gonna be surrounded
Speaker 1: in perfect safety and take away your rights to defend yourself.
Speaker 1: I mean that Unfortunately, that that kind of condescension is
Speaker 1: all too common. But beyond that, he also, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: went after me by name. Now listen, this is not new. Uh.
Speaker 1: You know, this is the same guy who supported Beto
Speaker 1: O'Rourke when he ran against me. And you know when
Speaker 1: when Beto O'Rourke said, damn right, we're going to take
Speaker 1: your guns. You know, I guess Popovich was cheering because
Speaker 1: you know, he has his police officers to protect him,
Speaker 1: so what does he care about if you can defend
Speaker 1: your family. But but I thought it was really striking
Speaker 1: what what he went after me at in this this
Speaker 1: little rant. He went after me for proposing that we
Speaker 1: double the number of police officers in schools. He says,
Speaker 1: do you want that? Let me be clear, yes, I
Speaker 1: want that. Look, I don't get this, this recent conceit
Speaker 1: of leftists that police officers don't may us more safe.
Speaker 1: But like it is a bizarre view. Listen, it is
Speaker 1: horrific the rise in violent crime that we've seen across
Speaker 1: this country. But leftists like Popovich put none of the
Speaker 1: blame on George Soros DA's that are releasing murderers. They
Speaker 1: put none of the blame on the leftist that they
Speaker 1: support who are calling for abolishing the police. Instead, they
Speaker 1: put the blame on you for exercising your right to
Speaker 1: keep in bare arms to protect your family and your children.
Speaker 1: And and it is Look, if you look at the
Speaker 1: number one factor that stops a violent crime. It is
Speaker 1: an armed police officer who stops that crime. And look,
Speaker 1: I gotta say, it's a very strange thing for the
Speaker 1: left that they just they have decided cops are bad.
Speaker 1: Let me tell you this right now. I guarantee you
Speaker 1: if someone stood up and said we're gonna pull all
Speaker 1: the police officers from Greg Popovich's neighborhood, he'd be horrified.
Speaker 1: I'll tell you, I'd be horrified someone announced they were
Speaker 1: pulling the police officers from my neighborhood. I'd be like,
Speaker 1: that's a terrible idea. I want officers to keep my
Speaker 1: family safe. I want officers to keep his family safe.
Speaker 1: But there's a political talking point now that if you
Speaker 1: want to keep our kids safe, clearly police officers are
Speaker 1: not going to do anything to help. That's just weird
Speaker 1: and it's stupid and it's counterfactual. Yeah, I gotta tell you.
Speaker 1: I texted why you were talking there to a buddy
Speaker 1: of mine that played in the NBA, actually played for Papovich,
Speaker 1: and I asked him, I said, I got to ask
Speaker 1: you quickly. I said, I won't use your name. What
Speaker 1: was a security like when you were at the Spurs
Speaker 1: specifically around you and the team, and he wrote back,
Speaker 1: I'm reading this exactly like this is. I just got
Speaker 1: this in real time. He said. One, all, at all
Speaker 1: times on the road, we had a security detail with us.
Speaker 1: When we were at practice, there were security details with us.
Speaker 1: As soon as you got to the facility, there was
Speaker 1: security detailed there. There was heavy security at every away
Speaker 1: and or home game, security in the tunnel, security outside
Speaker 1: the locker room, and security to our cars that included
Speaker 1: the coaching staff after games. And of course there is look,
Speaker 1: I just criticized that. My point is your hypocrisy that
Speaker 1: you're mentioning. Yep, this is a coach that has and
Speaker 1: again it's a former player saying this. He had security
Speaker 1: around him all the time when he traveled, all the
Speaker 1: time when he's on the bench. He also just said
Speaker 1: there were three police officers around their bench at all times,
Speaker 1: at least three. He's still texting me as we speak.
Speaker 1: He said. On the road, they had a head of
Speaker 1: security that was with them at all times. We planned
Speaker 1: all of their security with the hotels, me and two
Speaker 1: and from the arenas on the road. He said, In essence,
Speaker 1: we had twenty four hour security around us for all
Speaker 1: operations around the team that included the coach. So he's
Speaker 1: got basically twenty four hour security for him, but he
Speaker 1: mocks your idea of having that for our children. Yeah. Yeah,
Speaker 1: for some reason, the protection that that is suitable to
Speaker 1: ultra wealthy left wing athletes is not suitable for our children.
Speaker 1: They deserve less protection beyond that. So so I'll say
Speaker 1: two two stories. One, you know, I just went a
Speaker 1: week ago to a Rockets game, um where where the
Speaker 1: Rockets were playing. And actually my daughter Katherine, who's twelve
Speaker 1: h was was one of the dancers at halftime. She's
Speaker 1: in a girl's dance troupe and they had a bunch
Speaker 1: of a bunch of kids dancing at halftime. She did awesome.
Speaker 1: It was I I was chaired her on and had
Speaker 1: a blast and she really that they did a fantastic
Speaker 1: job at halftime. But at the game, which was just
Speaker 1: in the last week, you know, there were I must
Speaker 1: have talked with myself thirty police officers maybe more. And
Speaker 1: and that's great. You want police officers at something like
Speaker 1: a like a game because you don't want anyone to
Speaker 1: commit an act of violence. That keeps us safe. That's
Speaker 1: a good thing. I'll also tell you a few months ago,
Speaker 1: I was visiting a friend of mine on the East
Speaker 1: Coast and he's someone who who every week trains doing
Speaker 1: jiu jitsu, and somehow he talked me into joining him
Speaker 1: doing jiu jitsu, which which is not something I do
Speaker 1: as a kid, I took judo for several years. But
Speaker 1: I'm trying not to laugh right now. Center. You know
Speaker 1: this is how you get real injuries. Well I know,
Speaker 1: and like I'm sitting there going, Okay, I'm gonna get
Speaker 1: at tendon hyper extended, I'm gonna get something. But he
Speaker 1: brought me in to train with where he trains regularly,
Speaker 1: and I said it was actually it was really really fun.
Speaker 1: But the guy who who was who was doing the
Speaker 1: training was a police officer who traveled with an NBA
Speaker 1: team doing security for them. And say was, you know,
Speaker 1: a very high level black belt in Brazilian jiu jitsu
Speaker 1: and a police officer and he helped leave the security
Speaker 1: for an NBA team. That's a good thing, But explain
Speaker 1: to me why what's good for the rich guys is
Speaker 1: not good for everybody else. Maybe you should have just
Speaker 1: described as I want the same security for our kids
Speaker 1: that coach Popovitz kids, and then it would then he
Speaker 1: wouldn't have said anything. Maybe that's how we should move forward,
Speaker 1: saying I just want the same protection that the NBA
Speaker 1: gives to their players and at the arenas for our children.
Speaker 1: You know, Unfortunately part of it is the social pressure.
Speaker 1: You notice that there are not NBA coaches. Look Steve
Speaker 1: Kerr as another one who is a very loud and
Speaker 1: outspoken leftist, and he usually pops off, you know, pops
Speaker 1: off with with inane leftist, hyperpartisan statements, and they are
Speaker 1: rarely carefully reasoned. Um. You know, I remember some years
Speaker 1: back Steve Nash, who was a great player but when
Speaker 1: he was a coach, had a quote. And I'm doing
Speaker 1: this for a memory, so I may get it slightly wrong,
Speaker 1: but my recollection is his quote was something to the
Speaker 1: effect of all wars are immoral. There have never been
Speaker 1: any good wars. And I remember thinking at the time
Speaker 1: he said it that that was a very odd statement.
Speaker 1: I look, I am, I don't like war. I think
Speaker 1: we should avoid war. But but I really wish some
Speaker 1: reporter had asked him, excuse me, coach, could you name
Speaker 1: five wars? I mean, I mean, you've just given us
Speaker 1: a statement about history. In the history of just name
Speaker 1: five wars. Now, what's interesting is very quickly like if
Speaker 1: he had to name five wars, I don't know if
Speaker 1: he could, but let's assume hypothetically he could. Maybe he
Speaker 1: goes to the Civil War, maybe he goes to the
Speaker 1: American Revolutionary War, maybe he goes to World War One
Speaker 1: or World War Two. I'll bet you twenty bucks if
Speaker 1: you ask him to name five wars. He can't do
Speaker 1: it without naming World War Two. Yeah, and he can.
Speaker 1: And he can't do it without naming the Civil War.
Speaker 1: And I would challenge any leftist give me your argument
Speaker 1: for why World War Two was an immoral war. Why
Speaker 1: stopping Adolf Hitler and the Nazis, why stopping the Holocaust,
Speaker 1: why stopping the face of evil was an immoral war?
Speaker 1: Because I'll tell you, when our boys scaled the cliffs
Speaker 1: of Normandy, I think it was one of the greatest
Speaker 1: acts of heroism the world is ever seen. In the
Speaker 1: Civil War, I'd be very interested to hear a leftists
Speaker 1: explain why it was immoral to fight a war that
Speaker 1: resulted in ending the abomination of slavery in the United States,
Speaker 1: and the problem is all of the political dynamics in
Speaker 1: modern sports. Tell players, tell coaches, you can get involved
Speaker 1: in politics if it goes to the radical left. If
Speaker 1: you're Colin Kaepernick and you're taking a knee during the
Speaker 1: flag and disrespecting our soldiers and sailors and veterans, that's fine.
Speaker 1: If you're disrespecting our police officers, that's great. But you
Speaker 1: certainly can't say anything pro America, pro police, pro anything
Speaker 1: that is other than left of center. Yeah, and it's
Speaker 1: really sad, but this is the NBA now, and this
Speaker 1: is what's happening with all these teams are trying to
Speaker 1: go woke in it's it's amazing they continue to say
Speaker 1: things like this, I got it. And by the way,
Speaker 1: you look at edis Cantor Freedom Cantor who spoke out
Speaker 1: against genocide and over a million weekers imprisoned in China
Speaker 1: in concentration camps. And his reward for doing that as
Speaker 1: he was fired and he's unemployable in the NBA. His
Speaker 1: numbers were strong. He was putting up double digit scoring average,
Speaker 1: double digit rebounding average, his numbers, he was producing at
Speaker 1: an NBA level, but they decided, if he stays on
Speaker 1: our Team China won't allow us to broadcast our games
Speaker 1: in China, so we care more about the money, So
Speaker 1: that politics was not acceptable. But you could put Black
Speaker 1: Lives Matter on the on the NBA court and never
Speaker 1: mind that it's a Marxist group that is rapidly anti American.
Speaker 1: That's perfectly okay. Yeah, I got you bring up talking
Speaker 1: about this something I have to ask you about quickly,
Speaker 1: and it's a it may be a woke backfire with
Speaker 1: bud Light. But before we get that, let me tell
Speaker 1: you about our friends over at Chalk. If you are
Speaker 1: a guy, you're getting a little bit older and you
Speaker 1: feel like you're losing a little bit of that edge.
Speaker 1: You're feeling a little fatigued and tired in the day.
Speaker 1: You just don't feel like yourself when you're working out
Speaker 1: and things like that. That is where Chalk comes in.
Speaker 1: Chalk can help you get your edge back. They can
Speaker 1: help you maximize your masculinity by boosting to stop storm
Speaker 1: levels up to twenty percent over ninety days. Now, I've
Speaker 1: been talking about Chalk. I've been using Chalk now for
Speaker 1: a couple of months. I can tell you it works.
Speaker 1: If you are a guy and you're just sick and
Speaker 1: tired of not having that strength of vitality used to have,
Speaker 1: and you're tired of being weak and just having that
Speaker 1: fatigued complacency. Try Chalk. I've been taking the mail of
Speaker 1: Vitality Stack. You can do it as well. Maximize your
Speaker 1: masculinity today at chalkhoq dot com Choq dot com use
Speaker 1: the promo code Ben. You're gonna get thirty five percent
Speaker 1: off any Chuck subscription for life and you can cancel
Speaker 1: at any time. So check them out. Chalk choq dot
Speaker 1: com get thirty five percent off of your order chalk
Speaker 1: cchoq dot com. There's a backfire that it seems to
Speaker 1: be taking place. I'm happy it's happening. Budweiser decided to
Speaker 1: go really woke center. They decided to put a chick
Speaker 1: dress or a dude dressed like a chick on a
Speaker 1: beer can and give them a deal to go woke.
Speaker 1: This is part of their new marketing campaign. Are you
Speaker 1: gonna throw away your bud light and go to white call? Now?
Speaker 1: What happens? Well, look, it is an amazing phenomenon. How
Speaker 1: woke corporations have decided that their customers are idiots that
Speaker 1: they look down on their customers. We're seeing big business
Speaker 1: after big business in brace the radical left, embrace a
Speaker 1: left wing and Jenda in this case and Drey embrace
Speaker 1: someone who's transgender. Put them forth as this is the
Speaker 1: spokesperson for bud Light. What when I saw this whole thing,
Speaker 1: my first thought was, have they ever met a typical
Speaker 1: bud Light drinker? But yeah, there's any dumb move and
Speaker 1: I'm just talking about just straight up dumb beer drinker,
Speaker 1: especially dudes at drink Beer. They do not want a
Speaker 1: can with a dude dress like a chick. That's just nothing.
Speaker 1: That's something you want. And listen, if it were you know,
Speaker 1: you know, dark cherry flavored hard cider, maybe maybe that's
Speaker 1: a marketing play that makes sense. But this is bud Light,
Speaker 1: and you know the idea that it's like they're not
Speaker 1: interested in what the customers want. They want to be
Speaker 1: praised on Twitter or they want their ad executives. Boy, look,
Speaker 1: part of the problem is Madison Avenue is hardcore left wing.
Speaker 1: You look and you look at this across the board
Speaker 1: over and over and over again. Um. By the way,
Speaker 1: we saw this with the NFL. The NFL likewise looks
Speaker 1: down on the typical fan who goes to an NFL game. Um,
Speaker 1: and I got to say, it's it's it's making people
Speaker 1: pissed off. What's interesting is the backlash In a lot
Speaker 1: of instances, it seems that the right is not very
Speaker 1: good at Boycott's and so companies feel they can do
Speaker 1: this with impunity. Um, this spud light issue is getting
Speaker 1: some some real traction, it seems to me. And and
Speaker 1: the phrase go woco broke listen, I think this is
Speaker 1: this has gone beyond just Twitter to two people saying,
Speaker 1: you know what, there are other beers on the market.
Speaker 1: And I got to tell you in my instance, so
Speaker 1: a company that pushed me over the edge was Nike,
Speaker 1: and Nike I didn't. I didn't like the Colin Kaepernick
Speaker 1: thing at all. It really pissed me off. But even
Speaker 1: then it didn't it didn't push me away from Nike.
Speaker 1: It wasn't until that they began actually to go back
Speaker 1: to the FBI story we started the podcast with the
Speaker 1: FBI identified the Betsy Ross flag as a symbol of extremism. Well,
Speaker 1: you remember Nike decided to pull the Betsy Ross flag
Speaker 1: off one of their sneakers because people like Colin Kaepernick
Speaker 1: wine happy with it. And that was the point where
Speaker 1: I said, all right, enough is enough, and I got
Speaker 1: to tell you that, look, they don't care if I
Speaker 1: buy their products. But I was not only a Nike consumer.
Speaker 1: I was an incredibly loyal Nike consumer. Like every pair
Speaker 1: of tennis shoes I had owned from being a kid
Speaker 1: till my mid forties was a Nike that that's just
Speaker 1: what I bought. I bought Nikes. Every pair of athletic
Speaker 1: shorts and T shirts that I wore to play basketball
Speaker 1: or sports or do whatever. Almost everything single thing I
Speaker 1: owned were Nikes. And I just finally said, enough is enough.
Speaker 1: I'm not going to support a company that has decided
Speaker 1: it's business model is mock an attack America. The problem
Speaker 1: is that, you know it's not. Nike stock has continued
Speaker 1: to do fine. They're continuing to make profits. Part of
Speaker 1: it is they also do this. One of the reasons
Speaker 1: they virtue signal is to cover up from their otherwise
Speaker 1: questionable practices. So Nike figures if they're showing how leftists
Speaker 1: and woke they are, maybe you won't ask about the
Speaker 1: child labor that's assembling their tennis shoes. But what's interesting
Speaker 1: about this bud issue is is it at least appears
Speaker 1: right now? You know, you probably saw the video online
Speaker 1: of Kid Rock shooting up several cases of bud Light
Speaker 1: and expressing his uh, his, his sentiments. I would say,
Speaker 1: clearly and unambiguously. Yeah, that's a good way of putting it. Um.
Speaker 1: It seems to be getting some real traction. And and
Speaker 1: I hope this serves as as as a warning to
Speaker 1: other companies just stay out of politics. Just just sell
Speaker 1: your damn beer, Like, like you don't have to have
Speaker 1: of you on on transsexuals one way or the other,
Speaker 1: Like why does a beer company get to engage in that. Look,
Speaker 1: if you're a makeup company, I can understand a makeup
Speaker 1: company saying we're going to decide to advertise to people
Speaker 1: who are transsexual. That that could be a marketing decision
Speaker 1: that is not nuts. But for bud Light, it is
Speaker 1: hard to imagine the ad exactly said this, Yeah, this
Speaker 1: is really tap it into our demographic. Yeah. This is
Speaker 1: one of those moments where for me, when I as
Speaker 1: soon as I saw the can and saw the promotion
Speaker 1: during March Madness, I was I was like, yeah, I'm done,
Speaker 1: Like I have no doubt I will never drink a
Speaker 1: bud light again in my life. If you bring me one,
Speaker 1: I will refuse it. That's how That's how offended I
Speaker 1: was by it, and I was like, now, SCREWT. And
Speaker 1: then you watch where they Nike doubles down and brings
Speaker 1: the same dude dress like a chicken to sell Nike
Speaker 1: Sports braws, and I'm like, yeah, the hell with you
Speaker 1: guys too. It'll be interesting, like you said, how this
Speaker 1: plays out, don't forget down with the podcast on Monday, Wednesday,
Speaker 1: and Fridays. We do this show three days a week.
Speaker 1: We do one podcast a week that's on videos, so
Speaker 1: you can watch it on YouTube and also on Facebook.
Speaker 1: Follow us there. Right, it's a five star review as
Speaker 1: well that I hope us reach more people and we'll
Speaker 1: see it back here in a couple of days