Speaker 1: Welcome. It is Verdict with Ted Cruz week in Review.
Speaker 1: Ben Ferguson with you in mao mind. Did we have
Speaker 1: a week filled with some major stories? First up, Anthony
Speaker 1: Founci was in front of Congress this week with exactly
Speaker 1: what you would expect from him, a man filled with arrogance,
Speaker 1: especially now as he's having to deal with the facts
Speaker 1: of how many things he got wrong when it came
Speaker 1: to COVID nineteen in the lockdowns, Jim Jordan and others
Speaker 1: went after him.
Speaker 2: We're going to talk about that.
Speaker 1: Also this week, the judge and the Donald Trump trial
Speaker 1: made it very clear to the jury, I'm going to
Speaker 1: let you find any path you want to give me
Speaker 1: a guilty verdict in that Donald Trump trial. We'll break
Speaker 1: down that a little bit as well. And finally, the
Speaker 1: eightieth anniversary of D Day was this week. Senator Cruz
Speaker 1: was in Normandy for that anniversary, a special day, and
Speaker 1: now many are criticizing Biden, claiming that his speeches have
Speaker 1: been politicized guys to go after Donald Trump. Did it
Speaker 1: really happen that way? We'll talk to the center about it.
Speaker 1: Who is there? It is the Weekend Review and it
Speaker 1: starts right now. You mentioned that he's unapologetic. Congressman Jim
Speaker 1: Jordan a good friend of the show. Here he questioned
Speaker 1: Fauci on US tax dollars going to a grant recipient
Speaker 1: to the lab directly in China. I want you to
Speaker 1: hear what he had to say when he was asked
Speaker 1: about this. It was honestly a little bit shocking to
Speaker 1: hear just the arrogance from Fauci as.
Speaker 2: Prior to that call would have been on the call. Well,
Speaker 2: the call was arranged by Jeremy Farrar. You should ask him.
Speaker 3: Okay, did US tax dollars flow through a grant recipient
Speaker 3: to the lab in China? I'm sorry, did US tax
Speaker 3: dollars flow through a grant recipient to the lab in China?
Speaker 2: Yes?
Speaker 4: Of course it was a sub award to the one
Speaker 4: who approved that award.
Speaker 2: Excuse me? And who approved that award? What agency approved
Speaker 2: that award?
Speaker 4: National Institute of Alogy and Infectious Disease.
Speaker 2: You're agency approved that, right, Yes it did.
Speaker 3: After does that have anything to do with this downplaying
Speaker 3: the lab Leeku theory?
Speaker 2: No, nothing to do with it. Nothing.
Speaker 1: What This is a guy that still wants you to
Speaker 1: believe that the lab week theory was a theory and
Speaker 1: not reality, and that this somehow came from a wet market.
Speaker 1: There and then the other question that was asked of
Speaker 1: him was from Representative Brad Winthrop, a Republican from Ohio.
Speaker 1: This was the question he asked, and listen to the
Speaker 1: anger from Fauci.
Speaker 5: The vaccine saved millions of lives and I want to
Speaker 5: thank you for your support and engagement on that. However,
Speaker 5: despite statements to the contrary, it did not stop transmission
Speaker 5: of the virus. Did the COVID vaccine stop transmission of
Speaker 5: the virus?
Speaker 4: That is a complicated issue because in the beginning, the
Speaker 4: first iteration of the vaccines did have an effect, not
Speaker 4: one hundred percent, not a high effect. They did of
Speaker 4: prevent infection and subsequently obviously transmission. However, it's important to
Speaker 4: point out something that we did not know early on
Speaker 4: that became evident as the months went by, is that
Speaker 4: the durability of protection against infection and hence transmission was
Speaker 4: relatively limited, whereas the duration of protection against severe disease,
Speaker 4: hospitalization and deaths was more prolonged.
Speaker 2: We did not know that in the beginning. In the beginning,
Speaker 2: it was.
Speaker 4: Felt that in fact, it did prevent infection and thus transmission,
Speaker 4: but that was proven as time went by to not
Speaker 4: be a durable effect.
Speaker 1: I mean, just there, He's like, well, I didn't really
Speaker 1: get it wrong. It was just, you know, the science
Speaker 1: that I'm in charge of was not what we thought
Speaker 1: it was. They'll never admit they really screwed up on
Speaker 1: any of this.
Speaker 6: So listen, let me give a moment of benefit of
Speaker 6: the doubt to Fauci.
Speaker 2: I agree.
Speaker 6: When this pandemic was starting, people didn't know what we
Speaker 6: were facing, and people were concerned, and there were people dying,
Speaker 6: and in the face of a pandemic, I understand the decisions. Look,
Speaker 6: Donald Trump signed off on shutdowns early, on the decision
Speaker 6: to have shutdowns for a week or two. Yeah, it
Speaker 6: was two weeks, remember, to stop the spread. Two weeks
Speaker 6: to stop the spread. In hindsight, that was a mistake,
Speaker 6: but I can understand why people made the decision. At
Speaker 6: the time. We didn't know, We didn't know what the
Speaker 6: spreading was, we didn't know about what the lethality was,
Speaker 6: and it was trying to save lives. If Fauci said, listen,
Speaker 6: we had limited information. We were trying to do steps
Speaker 6: to stop the spread of a contagious virus, and these
Speaker 6: were steps that made sense. That would not be a
Speaker 6: crazy thing to say. But by the way, he doesn't
Speaker 6: admit any mistakes. And what Fauci did that was fundamentally
Speaker 6: wrong is he elevated politics above science. If he admitted
Speaker 6: we didn't know at the time we made those decisions.
Speaker 6: In hindsight, some of those decisions were right, some were wrong,
Speaker 6: that would be rational. But his position is everything we
Speaker 6: did was right. Be glad we shut your schools down.
Speaker 6: Be glad your children didn't go to school for a year.
Speaker 6: Be glad their mass scores and reading scores have dropped.
Speaker 6: Be glad that they will face learning loss for the
Speaker 6: rest of their lives. Be grateful that we, the benevolent dictators,
Speaker 6: did that. There is an arrogance this man. Look, he
Speaker 6: publicly says, when you attack me, you are attacking the science,
Speaker 6: because I am the science. There is an arrogance. He
Speaker 6: embodies the leftist arrogance. And to be clear, look here
Speaker 6: early on, when when people asked him, okay, our masks
Speaker 6: do they make sense, he said, no, you shouldn't wear masks.
Speaker 6: They don't do any good. A mask is not going
Speaker 6: to stop the spread of a virus, and then going forward,
Speaker 6: he said everyone's got to be masked, and he didn't
Speaker 6: explain the change. And by the way, when it came
Speaker 6: to the Wuhan lab, leap understand Anthony Fauci personally funded
Speaker 6: the research that I believe created the COVID virus. He
Speaker 6: was desperate to cover his own ass. He was desperate
Speaker 6: to argue no came from a wet market. We now
Speaker 6: know that is false. But he reached out. He asked
Speaker 6: Mark Zuckerberg, will Facebook suppress any allegations that this came
Speaker 6: from a Chinese government lab? And to be clear, I
Speaker 6: want you to go back if you look at this podcast.
Speaker 6: In March and April of twenty twenty, right at the
Speaker 6: beginning of COVID, we did two different podcasts on Verdict
Speaker 6: where we let out the evidence then early on that
Speaker 6: I thought the clear evidence was this virus escaped from
Speaker 6: a government lab. I think that is now overwhelming. It
Speaker 6: is almost indisputable as strong, but it is clearly the
Speaker 6: overwhelming way to the evidence is that it escaped from
Speaker 6: a Chinese government lab. And I think the majority of
Speaker 6: the evidence this is not as strong, but I think
Speaker 6: it is greater than fifty percent is that this virus
Speaker 6: was deliberately created by the Chinese government. Now I don't
Speaker 6: think they created it because they wanted people to die.
Speaker 6: I think they were creating it because they were engaged
Speaker 6: in research and they were irresponsible and reckless. But they
Speaker 6: took viruses and they made them that they engaged in
Speaker 6: gain a function research, which is they made them more deadly,
Speaker 6: and they made them more transmissible to humans, and then
Speaker 6: I think the virus escaped in the world faced pandemic.
Speaker 1: There's something else that's also very shocking, and that is
Speaker 1: Doctor Fauci was asked a very simple question and I'll
Speaker 1: wrap with this, but it's an important one, and that
Speaker 1: was about the unvaccinated, and I want you to hear
Speaker 1: just some of the kind of disdain they're still shaming
Speaker 1: the unvaccinated.
Speaker 4: Yes, it's proven that, and.
Speaker 7: Do you also agree that it saved hundreds of thousands
Speaker 7: and possibly millions of lives in America and across the world.
Speaker 4: That is absolutely correct, and it's very clear that it's
Speaker 4: saved millions of lives here and throughout the world. The
Speaker 4: Europeans have done the same studies that we have, and
Speaker 4: the data are incontrovertible that they save lives.
Speaker 7: Certain, do you think the American public should listen to
Speaker 7: America's brightest and best doctors and scientists or instead listen
Speaker 7: to podcasters, conspiracy theorists, and unhinged Facebook memes.
Speaker 4: Now, listening to people who you just described is going
Speaker 4: to do nothing but harm people because they will deprive
Speaker 4: themselves of life saving interventions, which has happened. And you
Speaker 4: know some have done study, but he's Fidehotz has done
Speaker 4: an analysis of this and shows that in people who
Speaker 4: refuse to get vaccinated for any a variety of reasons
Speaker 4: probably responsible for an additional two to three hundred thousand
Speaker 4: deaths in this.
Speaker 1: An additional two to three hundred thousand deaths in this country.
Speaker 1: They're still shaming anyone that asks a question. Remember the ivermectino.
Speaker 1: You guys are getting horse to warmers. I mean, the
Speaker 1: list goes on and on.
Speaker 6: And by the way, in a subsequent pod we should
Speaker 6: play Chris Cuomo when he was called out for his
Speaker 6: lying on ivermectin. But it is the corporate media crawled
Speaker 6: in bed with Anthony Fauci, crawled in bed with with
Speaker 6: with the left wing, dishonest political scientific medical world, and
Speaker 6: they just lied to people. And I will say, if
Speaker 6: you look at something like COVID vaccines for children, for
Speaker 6: children under six, there was zero scientific evidence to back that.
Speaker 6: I get why someone who was eighty or ninety, or
Speaker 6: even someone who was fifty or sixty made the decision
Speaker 6: to get the COVID vaccine because, look, you could make
Speaker 6: a rational cost benefit analysis that we don't know everything
Speaker 6: about this vaccine. There are risk to it, but we
Speaker 6: also know this is a very infectious disease and they're
Speaker 6: particularly for people who are health compromised, it can be
Speaker 6: really damaging. And so people who are older could make
Speaker 6: a rational decision to get the vaccine for a five
Speaker 6: or six year old. I think there was no rational
Speaker 6: decision to give a child that because the rate of.
Speaker 1: Fatalities behind that, as there was behind the six foot rule,
Speaker 1: which apparently he's admitted.
Speaker 2: Now, yeah, we just kind of made it up. He
Speaker 2: just made it up.
Speaker 6: And this was all about politics and power, and Fauci
Speaker 6: was willing to put politics in power above medicine and science.
Speaker 1: Now, if you want to hear the rest of this conversation,
Speaker 1: you can go back and listen to the full podcasts.
Speaker 1: From earlier this week. Now onto story number two.
Speaker 6: The jury was just told, well, if if it could
Speaker 6: influence the election, you got to find it's a violation
Speaker 6: of law that has flat out false. And they were
Speaker 6: not told if Trump had done what Alvin Bragg said
Speaker 6: he needed to do, the FEC would have charged him
Speaker 6: with a personal use violation with using campaign funds illegally.
Speaker 6: The jury didn't know that because the judge didn't want
Speaker 6: him to know that.
Speaker 1: And that's why they said you can't come and testify.
Speaker 6: Yes, and he also prevented the lawyers from arguing this.
Speaker 6: But by the way, so that was one ground. The
Speaker 6: other two grounds that could be unlawful means, and you
Speaker 6: could have three jurors on one and five on another
Speaker 6: and four other like they could mix and match the
Speaker 6: other ground.
Speaker 2: Have you ever heard of a jury where that was
Speaker 2: it okay? This don't think you understand weird that.
Speaker 1: Usually it's you either got to be all in lockstep, yeah,
Speaker 1: or you're not. So it's either your innocent or guilty
Speaker 1: because a twelve agree, and or if they disagree, one
Speaker 1: of them disagrees.
Speaker 2: We're done. Find the elements of the crime.
Speaker 1: He said, find your own path.
Speaker 2: To guilty. Yeah, whatever you want. The objective is guilty.
Speaker 6: You come up with however you want to get there,
Speaker 6: all right, So one was the federal campaign finance. On
Speaker 6: his instructions are wonefully deficient. He only includes part of
Speaker 6: the rule. He leaves out the other half, which is
Speaker 6: explains why Trump shouldn't have done so. And it would
Speaker 6: have been a mistake to do it the way the
Speaker 6: prosecutor wanted him to do, and he would have been
Speaker 6: charged with it. I mean it would have been he
Speaker 6: would have been violating the law to do what Alvin
Speaker 6: Bragg is saying he should have done. Another supposed basis
Speaker 6: of unlawful means was falsification of other business records. The
Speaker 6: second of the people's theories. This is from the jury instruction.
Speaker 6: The second of the people's theories of unlawful means, which
Speaker 6: I will define for you now, is the falsification of
Speaker 6: other business records for purposes of determining whether falsifizing business
Speaker 6: to records, and the second degree was an unlawful means
Speaker 6: used by a conspiracy to promote or prevent election. Here
Speaker 6: you may consider the bank records associated with Michael Cohen's
Speaker 6: account formation. The bank records association with Michael Cohens wired
Speaker 6: to Keith Davidson, the invoice from Investor Advisory Services, and
Speaker 6: the ten ninety nine MISK form of the Trumpet Organization issued
Speaker 6: to Michael Cohenes. So, in other words, they're thirty four
Speaker 6: counts of false business records. They're all the identical charge.
Speaker 6: They just occur thirty four different times, thirty four different
Speaker 6: entries in the bookmarks. What he's saying is, you know what,
Speaker 6: every one of these is a misdemeanor. But if you
Speaker 6: say you made one of these entries to assist in
Speaker 6: another of these entries, then they're all felonies. Wow, Like
Speaker 6: it is the most circular reasoning that just makes no sense.
Speaker 6: And by the way, let's go to the third one,
Speaker 6: because the third one just makes me laugh out loud.
Speaker 6: The people's third theory of unlawful means, which I will
Speaker 6: define for you now, is a violation of tax laws.
Speaker 6: Under New York State and New York City law, it
Speaker 6: is unlawful to knowingly supply or submit materially false or
Speaker 6: fraudulent information in connection with any tax return. Likewise, under
Speaker 6: federal law, it is unlawful for a person to willfully
Speaker 6: make any tax return, statement or other document that is
Speaker 6: fraudulent or false as at any material matter, or that
Speaker 6: the person does not believe to be true and correctess
Speaker 6: to every material matter. I listened to this last sentence.
Speaker 6: Under these federal, state, and local laws, such conduct is
Speaker 6: unlawful even if it does not result in the underpayment
Speaker 6: of taxes. So, in other words, he told the jury,
Speaker 6: by the way, you can find a violation of tax
Speaker 6: laws even if you paid you didn't pay any less taxes,
Speaker 6: even if you didn't defraud anyone, even if you're not
Speaker 6: using it to cheat on your taxes, if you think
Speaker 6: there's something in the tax laws. And by the way,
Speaker 6: there is no person on planet Earth who understands all
Speaker 6: of the tax laws. You know, there was a book
Speaker 6: that was written years ago called three Felonies a Day,
Speaker 6: and it argues that all of us living in this
Speaker 6: complex world commit three felonies a day. Between tax laws
Speaker 6: and environmental laws. There's just so much regulations. If you
Speaker 6: are doing anything, if you're filling out a credit card application,
Speaker 6: an aggressive prosecutor can find three felonies a day that
Speaker 6: Ben Ferguson has committed. In this instance, that jury instruction
Speaker 6: says well, if you can figure out if you think
Speaker 6: there was.
Speaker 2: Any come up with your own theory. Basically, come up
Speaker 2: with your own theory.
Speaker 6: And by the way, the violation of tax law doesn't
Speaker 6: have to have taken a penny of taxes from New
Speaker 6: York City, New York State of the federal government. And
Speaker 6: if you think there was some amorphous violation of tax
Speaker 6: law that didn't result in any underpayment of taxes, suddenly,
Speaker 6: presto chanjoh. These misdemeanors that we can't prosecute the statute
Speaker 6: of limitations that extended. They're now felonies, and we can
Speaker 6: sentence Donald Trump to one hundred years in jail.
Speaker 2: One hundred and thirty four years in jail.
Speaker 1: In other words, orange man bad, find your way to
Speaker 1: figure out out how to say he's guilty.
Speaker 6: That's exactly what this was all about. This is politics.
Speaker 6: It'll get reversed on appeal, but the judge doesn't care.
Speaker 6: He knows that The purpose is what Alex Soro said,
Speaker 6: The purpose is what Joe Biden said. The purpose is
Speaker 6: all the Democrats at all the media get to call
Speaker 6: him a felon over and over and over again between
Speaker 6: now an election day. This is a five month battle.
Speaker 6: It's not a five year battle. The purpose is not
Speaker 6: to put Donald Trump in jail. They know that's not
Speaker 6: going to happen cost the election they are trying to win.
Speaker 6: This is about keeping Joe Biden the Democrats in power
Speaker 6: because it's all they care about, and they're willing to
Speaker 6: burn the justice system to the ground.
Speaker 1: Center. Final question for you, and this goes back to
Speaker 1: the last podcast. You were conflicted on what Trump's plan
Speaker 1: should be next? Do you go to the Supreme Court?
Speaker 1: Do you try to get their quickly? Is there a
Speaker 1: way to force this case moving forward? Now knowing the
Speaker 1: jury instructions and what they were given and most importantly,
Speaker 1: what they had admitted from them, does this open up
Speaker 1: any different legal pathway for the Trump team to say, Okay,
Speaker 1: we need to get this scene even quicker. So it
Speaker 1: isn't hey, we got what we wanted. We get to
Speaker 1: say you're a convicted felon all the way through election day.
Speaker 1: Can this speed up the process or no?
Speaker 2: So let me answer that.
Speaker 6: But let me answer that in connection to a question
Speaker 6: that people ask quite a bit, which is what's the
Speaker 6: sentence going to be? We've got the sentence, we know
Speaker 6: that is just a few days before the Republican Convention,
Speaker 6: and a lot of folks are asking, is the judge
Speaker 6: going to sentence Trump to jail time. I think there's
Speaker 6: a very real chance the judge sentenced Trump to jail time.
Speaker 6: I think this is a vicious partisan. I think he
Speaker 6: hates Donald Trump. I think he's willing to abuse his power.
Speaker 6: But I will wager large sums of money regardless of
Speaker 6: what he sentences him to jail time or something else,
Speaker 6: that if if there is incarceration, he will suspend it
Speaker 6: pending appeal. I think that I could see the judge
Speaker 6: at sentencing saying I sentence you to four years in
Speaker 6: jail or no, No, I don't think he would. I
Speaker 6: do think you've got four years for each of these
Speaker 6: thirty four.
Speaker 2: Counts is the maximum amount.
Speaker 6: Typically they would run concurrently, which means they would all
Speaker 6: run at the same time. You could run them consecutively,
Speaker 6: which is how you get over one hundred years in
Speaker 6: any ordinary circumstance. Number One, a judge of Trump's age
Speaker 6: that does not have any prior offenses in New York
Speaker 6: would never serve a day of jail time in any
Speaker 6: other case. I mean, look, you can physically assault someone.
Speaker 6: You can repeatedly violently beat people up. You can engage
Speaker 6: in all sorts of crimes and not serve jail time
Speaker 6: in New York. That being said, I think it's entirely possible.
Speaker 6: This judge is enough of a partisan to say, you're
Speaker 6: the president, what you did mattered, I'm sentencing you to
Speaker 6: four years in jail. I could see him, he would
Speaker 6: love that. That would be the crowning moment of his
Speaker 6: life to utter those words.
Speaker 1: It also be useful politically, because then not only can
Speaker 1: you say he's convicted felon, but then you say, do
Speaker 1: you want a guy going to the White House, it's
Speaker 1: about to go to jail.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 6: So what I do not think he will do is
Speaker 6: sentenced him to jail and say take him into custody
Speaker 6: and put him there right now. He could, but I
Speaker 6: think if he did that, it would prompt an immediate
Speaker 6: emergency appeal and he would get reversed. I assume this
Speaker 6: guy is smart enough to know that he doesn't want
Speaker 6: to get reversed, and he especially does not want to
Speaker 6: get reversed before election day. He's engaged in politics, so
Speaker 6: he's not going to do something. I think that will
Speaker 6: prompt an immediate reversal because that undermines the political value
Speaker 6: of the charade that he's conducting. So if the sentence
Speaker 6: is in prisonment or it could be home confinement. If
Speaker 6: the sentence is something like that, I I think he'll
Speaker 6: suspend it pending the resolution of the appeal. In that case,
Speaker 6: I think the odds are quite high. This appeal will
Speaker 6: have to go through the New York state system. First
Speaker 6: we talked about in Friday's pod, and by the way,
Speaker 6: you should go back and listen to Friday's pod. We
Speaker 6: did Friday's pod late Thursday night. We did it on
Speaker 6: the road as I was driving from Dallas to Houston.
Speaker 6: It was right after the verdict came down, and it
Speaker 6: was analyzing the next steps and in much greater detail
Speaker 6: than we have in this pod. And so you ought
Speaker 6: to listen to the two pods together. But the ordinary
Speaker 6: course of appeal would be to appeal from the trial
Speaker 6: court to the intermediate appellate court in New York in
Speaker 6: the state court system, and then if you lose in
Speaker 6: the intermediate appellate court, to appeal to the top appellate
Speaker 6: court in New York called the New York Court of Appeals,
Speaker 6: and then finally, if you lose there, then you could
Speaker 6: appeal to the U. S. Supreme Court. That's normally how
Speaker 6: a criminal case would proceed. It is possible you can
Speaker 6: file an extraordinary writ to ask the US Supreme Court
Speaker 6: to intervene right now, but it is very very very rare.
Speaker 6: There is a chance, and I'm sure the Trump legal
Speaker 6: team is debating this right now. There's a chance the
Speaker 6: court would say yes, but I think it's probably unlikely.
Speaker 6: I think the court's instinct, particularly if a sentence is suspended,
Speaker 6: if the judge order Trump put in jail, the Supreme
Speaker 6: Court would say yes. It would force the court to
Speaker 6: say yes. So if the sentence is suspended and Trump
Speaker 6: is free to campaign, for you, to debate, for you
Speaker 6: to go to the convention, I think the justice's instincts
Speaker 6: will be, you know what. The New York state courts
Speaker 6: might correct this. The Court of Appeals might reverse this,
Speaker 6: The Intermediate Court of Appeals might reverse this. They might
Speaker 6: get it right. And there's a long ethos at the court,
Speaker 6: which is, if we.
Speaker 2: Don't need to act, we don't need to act.
Speaker 6: If someone else can fix this, if another level of
Speaker 6: the justice system can fix this.
Speaker 2: The U. S.
Speaker 6: Supreme Court doesn't need to step in. That's their jail approach.
Speaker 6: If they were to deny the extraordinary writ, I suspect
Speaker 6: you would have some justices right and say something like
Speaker 6: there are lots of reasons to be concerned here, but
Speaker 6: right now the sentence is suspended. The verdicts can be
Speaker 6: overturned on appeal, and so will allow the state proceedings
Speaker 6: to go forward. If there was an order of immediate incarceration,
Speaker 6: it would force their hands. I think the whole game
Speaker 6: here from the DA and from the judge is the
Speaker 6: political advantage, not actually sending Trump to jail. They know
Speaker 6: these jury instructions will never survive an appeal. If you
Speaker 6: had anything resembling fairness in the judicial system, the New
Speaker 6: York Courts of Appeals should reverse it. I got to say,
Speaker 6: based on the absolute disgrace we just saw play.
Speaker 2: Out, I have no confidence of that.
Speaker 6: The New York justice system is, I suspect forever a
Speaker 6: global laughing stock. And you put this on top of
Speaker 6: the prior civil case where they took a half billion dollars,
Speaker 6: they're trying to take a half billion dollars from Trump.
Speaker 6: The combination the message New York has said is if
Speaker 6: we don't like you, if you are politically disfavored, welcome
Speaker 6: to communist Cuba. We will treat you the same and
Speaker 6: you have the same rights as you would have locked
Speaker 6: in a gulac as before.
Speaker 1: If you want to hear the rest of this conversation
Speaker 1: on this topic, you can go back and dow the
Speaker 1: podcast from earlier this week to hear the entire thing.
Speaker 1: I want to get back to the big story number
Speaker 1: three of the week you may have missed. I want
Speaker 1: to go to the president's speech. Lloyd Austin spoke, and
Speaker 1: then the President spoke, and I actually played some of
Speaker 1: that on my show, and I said this at the beginning.
Speaker 1: I said, I always root for the President of the
Speaker 1: United States of America on moments like this, on today's
Speaker 1: like this to have an amazing speech, and I root
Speaker 1: for the president always, my president always when it comes
Speaker 1: to national secure issues, especially and when it comes to
Speaker 1: honoring our men and women in uniform. And the President
Speaker 1: gave a speech, and I was watching it with the
Speaker 1: best of intentions. I wanted to root for this speech,
Speaker 1: but there were some moments in that speech that caught
Speaker 1: me a little bit by surprise, and I wanted to
Speaker 1: know your thoughts on this. There was a couple points
Speaker 1: where Biden tried to invoke Ukraine, and he also said this,
Speaker 1: which the media even picked up on. Here's what he
Speaker 1: had to say during the speech about democracy in America.
Speaker 8: Now, the question for us is in our our trial,
Speaker 8: will we do ours? We're living at a time when
Speaker 8: democracy had more risk across the world than a point
Speaker 8: since the end of World War Two, since these beaches
Speaker 8: were stormed in nineteen forty four. Now we have to
Speaker 8: ask ourselves, will we stand against tyranny, against evil, against
Speaker 8: crushing brutality of the iron fist? Will we stand for freedom?
Speaker 8: We defend democracy? We stand together? My answer is yes,
Speaker 8: all we can be yes.
Speaker 1: That was an interesting point for me because he said
Speaker 1: democracy is more at risk now than at any point since
Speaker 1: World War Two. He talked about it on a domestic side,
Speaker 1: which was implying I think Donald Trump is a threat
Speaker 1: to democracy, and then he implied it with obviously Russia
Speaker 1: and Ukraine. And I wanted your reaction to that.
Speaker 9: You know, I'm going to say, this is an interesting
Speaker 9: example of having a different reaction to something when you're
Speaker 9: physically there versus watching it on TV or watching it
Speaker 9: on Twitter. Look, I know, on the way after the speech,
Speaker 9: like looking at Twitter and people's reactions, I know people
Speaker 9: are upset that they view Biden asizing. I got to say,
Speaker 9: it didn't feel that political being there in person, and
Speaker 9: and and maybe it's because frankly, you're paying attention to
Speaker 9: the veterans and the heroes you're in front of, and
Speaker 9: it's so dominated things that you know what Biden said,
Speaker 9: I barely paid attention to it, like it was not
Speaker 9: it wasn't the dominant events of the day. And you know,
Speaker 9: it was fine, he said, Okay, you know what was
Speaker 9: actually stood out much more to me than anything Biden said.
Speaker 1: Who was that was?
Speaker 9: But prone did something that was really cool, which is
Speaker 9: he awarded the French Legion of Honor to It was
Speaker 9: about eight or ten American gis and and he, you know,
Speaker 9: he and each of them, you know, they were almost
Speaker 9: all the wheelchairs. Each of them would stand for it,
Speaker 9: and they're teetering and they'd have someone helping them, but
Speaker 9: they wanted to stand and he would pin on their
Speaker 9: chest the friend legion of Honor that I wasn't expecting,
Speaker 9: And that was just powerful. That was just like he
Speaker 9: was literally and then it was funny Macron would lean
Speaker 9: in and he would kiss them on both cheeks as
Speaker 9: the French way. You could kind of see these old
Speaker 9: dudes being like, hey, why is this French guy kissing?
Speaker 9: But you know it's your big awarded the French Legion
Speaker 9: of Honor. That's a pretty damn big deal. And you
Speaker 9: think about it for someone who was nineteen and was
Speaker 9: right there, I mean, understand, we're doing this like right
Speaker 9: next to the beaches where they saw their friends die,
Speaker 9: right next to the beaches where I'm going to have
Speaker 9: to assume that was the most hellish day they've ever experienced,
Speaker 9: or was certainly one of them, although those that continue
Speaker 9: to fight in the war there may have been others
Speaker 9: that rivaled it. But you know, you think about it.
Speaker 9: Imagine being one hundred years old and the president of
Speaker 9: France thanking you for liberating France and pinning the Legion
Speaker 9: of Honor on your chest. It was most of us
Speaker 9: had tears in our eyes during this.
Speaker 1: Anthony Blincoln came out afterwards. He did an interview from
Speaker 1: Normandy with the backdrop behind him of many of the
Speaker 1: heroes and the crosses of those tombstones of somebody that
Speaker 1: lost their lives. He had this to say, Mark in
Speaker 1: the eightieth anniversary of D Day, and I want to
Speaker 1: get your reaction.
Speaker 10: And joining us now from Normandy, the United States Secretary
Speaker 10: of State Anthony Blincoln, thank you very much for joining
Speaker 10: us here on morning.
Speaker 6: Joe.
Speaker 10: What should our allies and enemies take away from the
Speaker 10: President's speech this morning in Normandy?
Speaker 11: The same resolve that the extraordinary men and women that
Speaker 11: were celebrating today showed then, he's showing now. Because they
Speaker 11: did what they did, we're here today and we not
Speaker 11: only have we responsibility to honor what they did, but
Speaker 11: the real way to honor it is to make sure
Speaker 11: that we're good in our time, in our moment, in
Speaker 11: standing up to the challenges that we face. And one
Speaker 11: of those we see now is aggression from Russia, not
Speaker 11: only against Ukraine, but against the very principles at the
Speaker 11: heart of the international system that were put in place
Speaker 11: after World War Two to try to make sure that
Speaker 11: we didn't have another World war, that we maintained peace
Speaker 11: and security. And President's determined to make sure we're standing
Speaker 11: up today just as they stood up eighty years ago.
Speaker 10: And the President talked about Ukraine as one of the
Speaker 10: current challenges that exemplify the fight against dark forces that
Speaker 10: never fade, and he made another, yet another commitment. He
Speaker 10: reinforced the commitment to Ukraine. And by the way, if
Speaker 10: I may, we're watching live pictures right now of President
Speaker 10: Biden and the First Lady walking through the cemetery in Normandy, France.
Speaker 10: And as we look at these pictures which really symbolize
Speaker 10: the losses eighty years ago on d Day, and talk
Speaker 10: about the losses that Ukraine is incurring right now from
Speaker 10: the same type of aggression, the President did say that
Speaker 10: the support for Ukraine would continue, that we will be
Speaker 10: there for Ukraine. How does that parallel with some of
Speaker 10: the reticents we have seen in Washington that actually delayed
Speaker 10: the much needed aid Ukraine needed to push back against
Speaker 10: Russian aggression.
Speaker 11: Well, you don't make it that age should have gotten
Speaker 11: there a long time ago. But I'm glad it's there
Speaker 11: now and it's making a difference every single day. We're
Speaker 11: pushing it out to the front lines, making sure the
Speaker 11: Ukrainians who need it against this Russian aggression have it
Speaker 11: and can use it. But you know, there's a really
Speaker 11: powerful parallel too, between what we're commemorating today and what
Speaker 11: we're doing now. Back then, it wasn't just the United States.
Speaker 11: Here in Normandy, Twelve countries came together, one hundred and
Speaker 11: sixty thousand men coming to this beach, coming to start
Speaker 11: the final fight that ultimately, eleven months later led to
Speaker 11: victory in World War Two.
Speaker 2: In Ukraine, we have more than.
Speaker 11: Fifty countries standing up, standing together, making sure that Ukraine
Speaker 11: has what it needs to defend itself and to push
Speaker 11: back this aggression. And that's the power of our alliances.
Speaker 11: And that's the biggest difference maker we have in the world.
Speaker 11: Our adversaries are competitors. They don't have the same kind
Speaker 11: of voluntary alliances. Yeah, sometimes they course countries into helping them,
Speaker 11: or maybe they pay them off. Here we have country
Speaker 11: after country that volunteers to stand together, stand together in
Speaker 11: defensive principles that we share and no need defending.
Speaker 3: We're seeing that in Ukraine.
Speaker 11: We saw that eighty years ago here in Normandy.
Speaker 1: You listened to that. It was very clear that NBC
Speaker 1: was wanting to make that and Blincoln wanted to make
Speaker 1: that connection. And this deals with the reality of foreign
Speaker 1: policy center. He said, it is exact quote, there's a
Speaker 1: really powerful pairer between D Day and the Ukraine War.
Speaker 9: He had, no, there's not. That's Look, this White House
Speaker 9: does all politics all the time. It's what they do.
Speaker 9: They spin, spin, spin, and the two are fundamentally different.
Speaker 9: You know. I wish they would treat a solemn commemoration
Speaker 9: like this for what it is, a solemn commemoration, and
Speaker 9: not treat it as another day in politics. Now, I
Speaker 9: will say President Zolensky was there, He was at the events,
Speaker 9: and so that did add some of the focus to it.
Speaker 9: And actually I think tomorrow we're maybe sitting down a
Speaker 9: meeting with prensident Elynsky and listen, I agree that we
Speaker 9: want Russia to loose, that Russia is our enemy. Now,
Speaker 9: Vladimir Kutin is not Adolf Hilery. He's our enemy, but
Speaker 9: he doesn't have to concentrate cancer. He's murdering six million
Speaker 9: people right now. He is our enemy and he does
Speaker 9: not wish us well. And so I think Vladimir Putin
Speaker 9: is a KG because it's an America's interest for Russia
Speaker 9: to lose. But and we've talked about this at great
Speaker 9: length on the pods. It is Joe Biden's fault and
Speaker 9: Tony B. Lincoln's fault. The Ukraine War happened in the
Speaker 9: first place. Joe Biden gave multi billion dollar gifts to
Speaker 9: Vladimir Putin when he weighs sanctions on the North String
Speaker 9: two pipeline sanctions that I authored. I wrote the legislation,
Speaker 9: wrote them into law, and Putin stopped building that pipeline
Speaker 9: the day President Trump signed my sanctioned legislation in the law.
Speaker 9: If Biden had not weighed those sanctions, the war in
Speaker 9: Ukraine would not have happened. If Donald Trump were still
Speaker 9: in the White House, the war in Ukraine would not
Speaker 9: have happened. It's Joe Biden's weakness that caused the war
Speaker 9: in Ukraine. And by the way, as much as Biden
Speaker 9: and Blincoln want to see themselves as Churchill and Fdr,
Speaker 9: if there isn't, If there is a World War Two analogy,
Speaker 9: then Biden is Neville Chamberlain. He is the one who
Speaker 9: is weak. He is the appeaser. He is the one
Speaker 9: who gave billions to Russia. He is the one who
Speaker 9: gives billions to Iran. He's the one that constantly shows
Speaker 9: weakness to our enemies, which is why we went from
Speaker 9: peace and prosperity when he inherited three and a half
Speaker 9: years ago to two simultaneous wars playing out across the
Speaker 9: face of the globe. And look, I'm glad Biden says
Speaker 9: he stands for freedom against tyranny. He can't seem to
Speaker 9: figure that out in Israel because he's blocking weapons going
Speaker 9: to Israel and at the same time blowing money to
Speaker 9: Iran that goes to Hamams, and so when it comes
Speaker 9: to freedom and tyranny, he manages to be on the
Speaker 9: wrong site of that.
Speaker 1: An awful lots Yeah, no doubt about it. I'm really
Speaker 1: thankful that you got to be there and we got
Speaker 1: to talk about this and honor our our amazing brave
Speaker 1: men who went and fought and the women that were
Speaker 1: involved as well.
Speaker 9: By the way, you know who I met, I met
Speaker 9: the original Rosie.
Speaker 2: The Riveter No way, no way.
Speaker 9: That was really cool. She's like one hundred years old,
Speaker 9: but she was the original Rosie the Riveter in in
Speaker 9: those ads, you know, drumming up support for the military,
Speaker 9: and that was very cool.
Speaker 1: As always, thank you for listening to Verdict with Center.
Speaker 1: Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you don't forget to deal
Speaker 1: with my podcast, and you can listen to my podcast
Speaker 1: every other day you're not listening to Verdict or each
Speaker 1: day when you listen to Verdict. Afterwards, I'd love to
Speaker 1: have you as a listener to again the Ben Ferguson podcasts,
Speaker 1: and we will see you back here on Monday morning.