Speaker 1: Welcome.
Speaker 2: It is Verdict with Senator Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson with you, Senator,
Speaker 2: We've got a pack show today.
Speaker 3: Well, there's a lot happening right now. We've all seen
Speaker 3: the blockbuster verdict that came out against Donald Trump over
Speaker 3: three hundred and fifty five million dollars. We're going to
Speaker 3: talk about what that means and what's next. We've also
Speaker 3: seen the news that Joe Biden and his team believe
Speaker 3: they did nothing, absolutely nothing wrong with Afghanistan, that that
Speaker 3: disgraceful withdrawal and surrender was a model of success. We'll
Speaker 3: talk about that. And then the breaking news that Alexi Navolney,
Speaker 3: the dissident in Russia, has died in jail, and we're
Speaker 3: going to talk about what caused that, what Joe Biden
Speaker 3: could have done to prevent it. And all three of
Speaker 3: these stories we're going to explain have a common theme,
Speaker 3: a thread intertwined between them all.
Speaker 2: But first I want to tell you about a friends
Speaker 2: over at Patriot Mobile. If you are sick and tired
Speaker 2: of giving your money to woke companies that literally hate
Speaker 2: your values, hate your family values, hate your faith, it
Speaker 2: is time for you to vote with your dollars and
Speaker 2: switch to a company that stands by what you believe in.
Speaker 1: That is Patriot Mobile.
Speaker 2: When I look down at my phone, I see the
Speaker 2: word Patriot in the top left. Why because I switched
Speaker 2: to Patriot Mobile. Now I get the same great service
Speaker 2: that I had with Big Mobile. But the biggest difference
Speaker 2: is every time I make a call, every time I
Speaker 2: send a text, and every time I pay my bill,
Speaker 2: I know I'm standing with a company that's actually fighting
Speaker 2: for my values. Patriot Mobile offers you dependable nationwide coverage,
Speaker 2: giving you the ability to access all the major network towers,
Speaker 2: which means you get the same coverage you've been accustomed
Speaker 2: to without funding that left and when you switch to
Speaker 2: Patriot you're sending a message because five percent of your
Speaker 2: bill every month is given back and no charge to you,
Speaker 2: to causes that you help choose the support we're talking
Speaker 2: about supporting free speech, religious freedom, the sanctity of life,
Speaker 2: our Second Amendment, as well as supporting our military, our veterans,
Speaker 2: our first responder heroes, and our wounded warriors.
Speaker 1: How easy is it to switch?
Speaker 2: Just go to Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict that's Patriotmobile
Speaker 2: dot com slash Verdict or call them nine seven to
Speaker 2: two Patriot. Make the switch and make a difference with
Speaker 2: that bill every month free activation when you use the
Speaker 2: offer code Verdict. That's nine seven to two Patriot nine
Speaker 2: seven two Patriot or Patriot mobile dot com.
Speaker 1: Slash verdict Centator. Let's start with Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: As you mentioned a moment ago, there are a lot
Speaker 2: of complicated financial issues with this massive Basically, he's on
Speaker 2: the hook for nearly half a billion dollars across these
Speaker 2: three civil cases combined, but it's even more than that
Speaker 2: from the interest payments as he waits to appeal, and
Speaker 2: bonds and money that he's gonna have to tie up
Speaker 2: just to protect himself.
Speaker 1: Break all of this down for us.
Speaker 3: Well, that's exactly right. And we've talked a lot in
Speaker 3: this podcast about the lawfair that has directed at Donald Trump,
Speaker 3: about the effort to use the courts, to use the
Speaker 3: justice system to try to destroy Donald Trump. And understand,
Speaker 3: the objective here is fundamentally attack on democracy. The objective
Speaker 3: here is to stop the American people from electing Donald
Speaker 3: Trump once again as president of the United States. We've
Speaker 3: seen in the last nine months three different verdicts against Trump,
Speaker 3: all in New York, one for seven figures, one for
Speaker 3: eight figures, and now one for nine figures. We saw
Speaker 3: initially a five million dollar verdict last year, then we
Speaker 3: saw an eighty three point three million dollar verdict against
Speaker 3: Trump last year, and then just this past week we
Speaker 3: saw a three hundred and fifty four million dollar verdict. Now,
Speaker 3: of all of them, this latest one is the most disgraceful.
Speaker 3: Why is that because there was no victim in this
Speaker 3: entire case. There is literally not a person injured, nobody injured.
Speaker 3: Not only was nobody injured, the alleged victims made money,
Speaker 3: were happy about it, and wanted to do it again.
Speaker 3: So understand what this claim is. So Donald Trump is
Speaker 3: a real estate developer. He's developed a lot of real estate.
Speaker 3: When he develops real estate, he takes a lot of loans.
Speaker 3: Like every other real estate developer on planet Earth, he
Speaker 3: takes loans from banks. Now, Letitia James, who is a
Speaker 3: left wing partisan Democrat. She ran for office promising to
Speaker 3: get Donald Trump. That was her campaign promise, You elect me,
Speaker 3: and I'm going after Donald Trump. I'm gonna get him.
Speaker 3: So this was not a fair and objective application of
Speaker 3: the law. This was a political vendetta from day one.
Speaker 2: Let me ask you this, how is that not against
Speaker 2: the law to run for office saying that when you
Speaker 2: become what is supposed to be a steward of law
Speaker 2: and order, that you're actually running to lock up someone
Speaker 2: you disagree with politically? How is that legal in America today?
Speaker 3: Well, I think that's going to be a very serious
Speaker 3: claim on appeal. Uh and and I think there is
Speaker 3: a significant chance this gets overturned on appeal, but that's
Speaker 3: going to take a long time. The prosecutor, on her
Speaker 3: on her face, is not fair, is not impartial, but
Speaker 3: is engaged in a partisan political vendetta. She said that
Speaker 3: before she knew the facts of anything, she had her target.
Speaker 3: Her target was Donald Trump, and because partisan Democrats in
Speaker 3: New York hate Donald Trump, that that was a good
Speaker 3: election year message that got her elected. But understand, so
Speaker 3: this theory is actually not seeking to put him in jail.
Speaker 3: It's simply trying to take his money and and and
Speaker 3: trying to shut down his business and destroy his business.
Speaker 3: And and the argument is that when he was getting
Speaker 3: loans from giant global banks, that he overstated the value
Speaker 3: of his real estate. And look, I don't know if
Speaker 3: he did or not. If he did, he's probably like
Speaker 3: every other real estate developer on planet Earth, and in
Speaker 3: my experience, real est state developers pretty much all think
Speaker 3: their development is worth a ton of money, and reasonable
Speaker 3: minds can differ. That's part of the real estate business.
Speaker 3: Now to whom did he allegedly overstate the value of
Speaker 3: his properties? Well, it is to these global banks who
Speaker 3: mind you didn't take his word for it. It's not
Speaker 3: like they said, oh, okay, he says it's worth this,
Speaker 3: let's just give him the money. No, they have appraisers.
Speaker 3: They're sophisticated. They go in and say, yeah, yeah, be quiet,
Speaker 3: we're gonna look at the property, we're gonna figure out
Speaker 3: what we think it's worth, and we're going to value it.
Speaker 3: That's exactly what they did. The testimony at trial was
Speaker 3: that the loans he took out, he paid every penny
Speaker 3: of it with interests. The banks made money. They were
Speaker 3: very happy about it. They made their own independent assessment
Speaker 3: of the values of the property, and in fact, internally
Speaker 3: they considered him a quote will. That was their term,
Speaker 3: and they wanted to do more loans because they were
Speaker 3: very profitable loans for these banks. And yet Letitius James's
Speaker 3: theory as well, we think the values were overstated, and
Speaker 3: so therefore we're going to make him pay three hundred
Speaker 3: and fifty four million dollars. Now we also know the
Speaker 3: trial was conducted in front of a partisan Democrat trial
Speaker 3: judge who was smirking and condescending and self righteous and
Speaker 3: clearly loathes Donald Trump and loved every minute of being
Speaker 3: in the limelight that he and Letitia James are getting
Speaker 3: to go after and hammer Donald Trump. And what we
Speaker 3: saw was a travesty. It was an abuse of justice.
Speaker 3: It was using the legal system to attack your political enemies.
Speaker 3: It was not a fair and neutral application of the law.
Speaker 2: Well, let's talk also about there's a big X factor here.
Speaker 2: And there's so many that asked me this question on
Speaker 2: my show, which is where does this three hundred plus
Speaker 2: million go if there's no one that says that they
Speaker 2: were defrauded by Donald J. Trump or his sons or
Speaker 2: his businesses. There was no one. There's no one to
Speaker 2: make coal here. There's no one claiming that they are
Speaker 2: deserving of those dollars. So how do they say that
Speaker 2: Donald Trump defrauded somebody when no one claims they're being defrauded.
Speaker 2: And the people that in theory would have been defrauded
Speaker 2: were actually in court defending Donald Trump saying we were
Speaker 2: not defrauded.
Speaker 3: Well, it goes to the State of New York, and
Speaker 3: so Letitia James is just trying to take the money
Speaker 3: for the State of New York. And understand that even
Speaker 3: if even if this is overturned on appeal, the impact
Speaker 3: on Trump is very significant. Why is that because in
Speaker 3: order to appeal it, you have one of two options.
Speaker 3: Either you have to put the money up. So you're
Speaker 3: looking at, with interest, over four hundred million dollars that
Speaker 3: he's got to write a check into escrow for. He's
Speaker 3: got to put up a bond. Now, a bond you
Speaker 3: go to a bonding company and typically you put up
Speaker 3: twenty percent of the amount of the bond, and then
Speaker 3: you put up collateral to back up the bond. And
Speaker 3: either way it is a very expensive proposition. Now, Trump
Speaker 3: testified that his cash on hand right now is about
Speaker 3: four hundred million dollars. So assuming that testimony is accurate,
Speaker 3: and he had to here was the quote he said, quote,
Speaker 3: we have I believe four hundred plus and going up
Speaker 3: very substantially every month. My biggest expense is probably legal fees. Unfortunately,
Speaker 3: so if you assume he has roughly four hundred million dollars,
Speaker 3: this verdict would take all of his liquid cash, and
Speaker 3: that is a big blow for anyone, even for someone
Speaker 3: with the resources Trump has. And that's what it's intended
Speaker 3: to do. And not only that, this judge went after
Speaker 3: and penal find Donald Trump Junior, find Eric Trump, and
Speaker 3: barred all three of them from doing business in New
Speaker 3: York from serving on the board of their own company
Speaker 3: for three years. This is a punitive result born out
Speaker 3: of spite, and it is yet another example of the
Speaker 3: weaponization of our legal system and the willingness of partisan democrats.
Speaker 3: We talk a lot on this podcast about what the
Speaker 3: radical left accuses their opponents of doing is in fact
Speaker 3: what they are doing themselves, and this instance, their favorite
Speaker 3: line is we must defend democracy. This is an assault
Speaker 3: on democracy. It is intended to be an assault on democracy.
Speaker 3: They are going after him for the same reason that
Speaker 3: Colorado and Maine are trying to pull him off the ballot,
Speaker 3: because they're terrified that the American people in November are
Speaker 3: going to pull the lever for Donald J. Trump and
Speaker 3: reelect him as president.
Speaker 2: How significant center will it be on appeal that New
Speaker 2: York's Democratic governor came out over the weekend and assured
Speaker 2: quote real estate developers that they won't be targeted for
Speaker 2: real estate valuations like Trump.
Speaker 1: That the governors told.
Speaker 2: New York businesses not to fear about Trump verdict nothing
Speaker 2: to worry about, meaning we're just doing it to him,
Speaker 2: but don't worry, we won't do it to you.
Speaker 3: So number one, I'm not sure businesses are going to
Speaker 3: trust that, because what the governor is really saying is
Speaker 3: so long as you stay on our good side, so
Speaker 3: long as you contribute to Democrats, so long as you
Speaker 3: don't piss us off, we won't go after you and
Speaker 3: try to bankrupt you too. But let's be clear, if
Speaker 3: this verdict is upheld, every real estate development in New
Speaker 3: York City, the Attorney General can go after and hit
Speaker 3: with a similar verdict. I mean, this is a power.
Speaker 3: The only thing that keeps them, keeps them from this
Speaker 3: happening to them, is the leniency, is the kindness of
Speaker 3: the Attorney General. That's not very comforting to anyone. But
Speaker 3: I got to say beyond that, you know the governor,
Speaker 3: you know I really do think the governor needs to
Speaker 3: send a letter to the Federal Election Commission acknowledging an
Speaker 3: inkind contribution to the Donald J. Trump campaign, and in
Speaker 3: particular her statements, I guarantee you are going to feature
Speaker 3: prominently in Trump's appeal, because on the face of it,
Speaker 3: what she's saying is no, no, no, don't worry. This is
Speaker 3: a selective prosecution. We only do this to people we hate.
Speaker 3: This is not applying the law fairly. This is because
Speaker 3: he's Donald Trump. As long as you're not Donald Trump,
Speaker 3: you'll be safe. Well that that might be good politics
Speaker 3: in New York, bare knuckle politics, but that is not
Speaker 3: the due process of law or the equal protection of laws. Instead,
Speaker 3: that is deliberately abusing power and then the governor brazenly
Speaker 3: admitting it.
Speaker 2: I want to talk to you about how you start
Speaker 2: your morning off. If you're like me and you're a
Speaker 2: coffee drinker, I get up early, I get on the
Speaker 2: radio at seven am, and I have got to have
Speaker 2: not just a cup of coffee, a really good cup
Speaker 2: of coffee.
Speaker 1: And I have a twenty twenty four New Year's resolution.
Speaker 2: I am not giving my money to woke coffee companies
Speaker 2: that is something I have gotten rid of. Blackout Coffee
Speaker 2: is the coffee that I drink. It is amazing. This
Speaker 2: is one hundred percent America and zero percent woke coffee.
Speaker 2: Blackout Coffee is one hundred percent committed to conservative values
Speaker 2: as a company, from sourcing their beans to the roasting process,
Speaker 2: customer support and shipping, they embody true American values and
Speaker 2: they accept no compromise on premium taste and premium quality.
Speaker 2: If you want a great cup of coffee, not good,
Speaker 2: not kind of good, not pretty good, but amazing, you
Speaker 2: need to go to Blackout Coffee slash verdict.
Speaker 1: Now here's the cool part.
Speaker 2: Use the promo code vertict for twenty percent off your
Speaker 2: first order.
Speaker 1: So try it.
Speaker 2: You're gonna be hooked like I am, and you'll never
Speaker 2: go back to those other woke brands. Blackoutcoffee dot com
Speaker 2: slash vertict, be awake, not woke. That's Blackoutcoffee dot com
Speaker 2: slash vertict. Promo code vertict for twenty percent off your
Speaker 2: first order. Senator, I want to move to the other
Speaker 2: big story we mentioned earlier, and that is Joe Biden
Speaker 2: and Afghanistan. I know Joe Biden's got a lot of gaffs.
Speaker 1: He's gone pro in that.
Speaker 2: But we're now finding out about the inside of the
Speaker 2: Biden administrations, not just Afghanistan policy, but specifically they're in
Speaker 2: difference towards rescuing American citizens that we're in Afghanistan when
Speaker 2: the pullout happened, which we know was a disaster.
Speaker 1: How frustrated are.
Speaker 2: You now to find out that this administration pretty much like,
Speaker 2: oh yeah, all right, there's some Americans there.
Speaker 1: We might figure that out later.
Speaker 3: Well, look, it is consistent with a pattern with the law,
Speaker 3: fair with the abuse of power we see against Trump.
Speaker 3: What is happening is Democrats are putting their own partisan
Speaker 3: interest above the rule of law. They are putting politics
Speaker 3: above doing what's right. The same thing is happening with Afghanistan.
Speaker 3: We've talked a long time about how when it comes
Speaker 3: to foreign policy, this White House views everything as a
Speaker 3: domestic political issue. They view everything through a partisan political lens.
Speaker 3: So why was Afghanistan such a train wreck? Well, a
Speaker 3: lot of reasons, but one of the biggest is Joe
Speaker 3: Biden decided he wanted to have a press release of
Speaker 3: a complete and total withdrawal by the anniversary of September eleventh,
Speaker 3: so he set an arbitrary deadline, we must be out
Speaker 3: by September eleventh. And once he set that political deadline
Speaker 3: that was not driven by military realities on the ground,
Speaker 3: it was driven by a political objective to make the
Speaker 3: left in the Democrat Party happy. He then disregarded military advice,
Speaker 3: and in particular military advice that told him that it
Speaker 3: would require a significant number of troops to secure and
Speaker 3: keep secure Bogram Airfield, and Bogram Airfield was necessary to
Speaker 3: have safe evacuations of Americans. Now, the problem is Biden
Speaker 3: apparently really didn't care. He had a political objective and
Speaker 3: national security was not going to get in the way
Speaker 3: of that political objective. And so he dictated that the
Speaker 3: troop draw drown must be significant. And the military was
Speaker 3: faced with a choice the number of troops they were
Speaker 3: allowed to keep. They could either keep Bogram or they
Speaker 3: could have troops to go at Kabble International Airport, and
Speaker 3: they chose the airport in Kabble. They gave up Bogram. Now,
Speaker 3: Bogram was a multi billion dollar secure military airfield the
Speaker 3: United States had built. If we had done the evacuation
Speaker 3: from Bogram, we would not have seen thirteen servicemen and
Speaker 3: women killed because Bogram was built to be secure where
Speaker 3: terrorists could not murder our American servicemen and women, But
Speaker 3: because the Biden White House puts politics above national security,
Speaker 3: they didn't care. Now what happened here. What happened here
Speaker 3: is that Biden believed they'd done nothing wrong. And in fact,
Speaker 3: Politico reported after Afghanistan, quote no one offered to resign,
Speaker 3: in large part because the President didn't believe anyone had
Speaker 3: made a mistake, ending the war was always going to
Speaker 3: be messy. And in fact, they continue and say quote
Speaker 3: Biden told his top aides that he stood by them
Speaker 3: and that they had done their best during a tough situation. Quote.
Speaker 3: There wasn't even a real possibility of a shakeup, a
Speaker 3: White House official told the reporter. Now understand that this
Speaker 3: was universally acknowledged by everyone as a complete, massive screw up.
Speaker 3: We saw planes taking off in Afghanistan with people clinging
Speaker 3: to the wheels, running in desperation. We saw terrorists murdering
Speaker 3: not just thirteen servicemen and women, but murdering Afghans who
Speaker 3: had helped America, torturing Afghans who had helped America. Every
Speaker 3: fair and neutral observer watching this recognized it was an
Speaker 3: absolute debacle, and yet Biden's view was nothing to see here, Hey,
Speaker 3: this was all great.
Speaker 2: I get frustrated because people's lives were changed because these decisions,
Speaker 2: Their family trees were changed. There are people that never
Speaker 2: got to see their kids, their boyfriends, their wives or
Speaker 2: husbands ever again because of what happened, and they're used
Speaker 2: to be We've talked about this before in the show
Speaker 2: that if you were an American there was almost like
Speaker 2: an invisible bubble around you when you're around the world
Speaker 2: because you don't mess with Americans because if you did,
Speaker 2: there was going to be major consequences. We are seeing
Speaker 2: that center that imaginary bubble has basically disappeared. The terrorists
Speaker 2: aren't afraid of messing with us, They're not afraid of
Speaker 2: going after American troops in the Middle East. We've seen
Speaker 2: these one hundred and fifty plus one hundred and sixty
Speaker 2: hundred and seventy attacks whatever the newest number is since
Speaker 2: the attacks on Israel against Americans, and we have a
Speaker 2: president now that they know you can mess with us
Speaker 2: and we will not respond. How do you gauge the
Speaker 2: national security threat of just that mindset change, and how
Speaker 2: do you hold this administration responsible for that?
Speaker 3: Well. This story gives more details, and in particular, it
Speaker 3: says that the Pentagon pushed hard to keep troops in Afghanistan,
Speaker 3: and Biden gave a withdrawal order in April of twenty
Speaker 3: twenty one, and the sides fought about what to do.
Speaker 3: On May eighth, twenty twenty one, they were doing a
Speaker 3: rehearsal for the evacuation offer operation with Jake Sullivan, who's
Speaker 3: Biden's National Security advisor, with Lloyd Austin, who's the Defense Secretary,
Speaker 3: and with the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Speaker 3: at the time, General Mark Milly, and the Defense Department
Speaker 3: argued that it would be too dangerous to have the
Speaker 3: embassy to continue to try to do business as usual,
Speaker 3: and Brian McKeon, who was the Deputy Secretary of State,
Speaker 3: jumped in. He said the diplomats would be just fine,
Speaker 3: and his quote was, quote we at the State Department
Speaker 3: have a much higher risk tolerance than you guys. And
Speaker 3: the writer at Politico rights that quote Milly, that would
Speaker 3: be General Mark Milly, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs
Speaker 3: of Staff. Quote Milly nearly jumped out of his chair,
Speaker 3: but restrained himself from shouting. Now he and many serving
Speaker 3: in the armed forces had lost friends in war. Austin,
Speaker 3: the Defense Secretary, showed no signs of anger, but later
Speaker 3: told colleagues that he was offended by McKeon's remark. That
Speaker 3: was the attitude of this administration. And in fact it
Speaker 3: wasn't just just the attitude. There is simultaneously a story
Speaker 3: that is in the Spectator that says, and this is
Speaker 3: by Matthew Foldy quote. At the time of the Afghanistan withdrawal,
Speaker 3: Biden administration officials said behind closed doors that the Secretary
Speaker 3: of State Anthony Blincoln and the National Security Advisor Jake
Speaker 3: Sullivan quote don't give a F and F was not abbreviated.
Speaker 3: It was spelled out fully about rescuing a Americans from
Speaker 3: the clutches of the Taliban. The admission came on a
Speaker 3: late August twenty twenty one phone call held between the
Speaker 3: Department Offense and Congressional Democrats. Based on The Spectator's review
Speaker 3: of contemporaneous text messages. During the conversation, a Pentagon official acknowledged,
Speaker 3: in response to frustration from Democrats that the two of
Speaker 3: the senior most officials working on the evacuation, Blincoln and
Speaker 3: Sullivan were indifferent to the plight of their fellow Americans.
Speaker 3: Think about that for a second. That is reporting that
Speaker 3: the Biden White House didn't give I'm going to sanitize
Speaker 3: it and say a damn about rescuing Americans from the Taliban.
Speaker 3: That is this partisan political white house.
Speaker 2: You know. This also goes to the next topic we
Speaker 2: were going to talk about, and that deals obviously with
Speaker 2: Russia and Vladimir Putin killing his in essence top political
Speaker 2: adversary this past week. But before I get that, I
Speaker 2: want to go back to does this also explain when
Speaker 2: we were getting out a WNBA player because it was
Speaker 2: high profile, we left another American behind there in Russia.
Speaker 2: Why would you be afraid of Joe Biden if this
Speaker 2: is your mentality in Afghanistan with Americans, does an American
Speaker 2: life in a jail in prison really matter?
Speaker 3: Well, unfortunately for Biden, it's all politics. And so the
Speaker 3: Biden administration focused on a WNBA player because that was
Speaker 3: high profile and that was consistent with their political objectives.
Speaker 3: But we're more than happy to leave other Americans, including
Speaker 3: servicemen and women behind because that was not their priority.
Speaker 3: There's a consistent theme about it. It's an elevation of
Speaker 3: partisan politics. And look at the time of the Afghanistan withdrawal,
Speaker 3: I said then that the weakness and the incompetence displayed
Speaker 3: by the Biden White House has made the world much
Speaker 3: much more dangerous. That every enemy of America is looking
Speaker 3: to the Oval Office and it's taking the measure of
Speaker 3: the commander in chief. And I believe that all of
Speaker 3: them concluded that the commander in chief was weak and
Speaker 3: feckless and ineffective. In other words, they concluded what the
Speaker 3: Biden Department of Justice just argued in writing that he
Speaker 3: was a feeble old man with a limited memory. And
Speaker 3: what I said at the time of the Afghanistan debacle
Speaker 3: is the chances of Russia invading Ukraine just increased tenfold,
Speaker 3: and the chances of China invading Taiwan just increased tenfold.
Speaker 3: Bad guys do not fear weakness. Weakness encourages them to
Speaker 3: be worse. And that's what Biden has done to every
Speaker 3: enemy of America.
Speaker 2: Let's talk about what's happening also with this adversary to
Speaker 2: Vladimir Putin and give a little context here so people
Speaker 2: understand the Russian regime has been trying to murder Alexi
Speaker 2: for now years. You go back to Joe Biden, and
Speaker 2: he even went on the record in Geneva, Switzerland, back
Speaker 2: on June the sixteenth of twenty twenty one, saying that
Speaker 2: there would be major consequences if he died in captivity
Speaker 2: by the Russians by Putin. I want to play this
Speaker 2: from June sixteen, twenty twenty one, mister.
Speaker 1: Presidents a quick following the same theme of consequences you
Speaker 1: said just now, do you spoke to him a lot
Speaker 1: about human rights? What do you say would happen if
Speaker 1: opposition later Alexi Navanni dies.
Speaker 4: I made it clear to him that I believe the
Speaker 4: consequences of that would be devastating for Russia. I'll go
Speaker 4: back to the same point. What do you think happens
Speaker 4: when he's saying and it's not about hurting navale all
Speaker 4: the stuff he says to rationalize the treatment of Navalny,
Speaker 4: and then he dies in prison. I pointed out to
Speaker 4: him that it matters a great deal.
Speaker 1: I mean, Senator, that was twenty twenty one.
Speaker 3: What changed, Well, actually nothing changed, And I'm going to
Speaker 3: explain in a minute that he didn't believe what he
Speaker 3: was saying then. But before I explain that, let's play
Speaker 3: what Biden is saying now, because even he is admitting
Speaker 3: today that what he said then was full of crap.
Speaker 3: Listen to what he's saying right now.
Speaker 4: Now's the time for even greater unity among our NATO
Speaker 4: allies to stand up to the threat that Putin's rush
Speaker 4: of poses. You know, I sent my deepest condolence as
Speaker 4: Alexi staff and supporters are going to continue his work
Speaker 4: despite this loss, despite all of Putin's desperate attempts to
Speaker 4: stamp out the opposition, and most of all, to his family,
Speaker 4: especially to his wife, his daughter, and his son. We've
Speaker 4: already sacrificed so much for their family and a shared
Speaker 4: dream for a better future for Russia.
Speaker 2: Now, that was him making his first statement at the
Speaker 2: White House. But then the media asked him that question, Hey,
Speaker 2: what happened to what you said three years ago? First?
Speaker 1: Was this assassination?
Speaker 4: The answer is that we don't know exactly what happened,
Speaker 4: but there is no doubt that the death of the
Speaker 4: Volny was the consequence of something that Putin and his
Speaker 4: thugs did.
Speaker 3: And to be clear, you warned Vladimir Putin when you
Speaker 3: were in Geneva, of devastating consequences.
Speaker 1: If Navali died.
Speaker 3: In Russian custody, what consequences should he and Russia face?
Speaker 1: That was three years ago.
Speaker 4: In the meantime, they faced a hell of a lot
Speaker 4: of consequences. They've lost and or had wounded over three
Speaker 4: hundred and fifty thousand Russian soldiers.
Speaker 2: I mean sinator. He doesn't answer the questions. He says,
Speaker 2: that was three years ago, and now because of the
Speaker 2: war with Ukraine. Well, they've had some somehow some consequences
Speaker 2: that have.
Speaker 1: Nothing to do with killing this individual.
Speaker 3: Well he did answer the question, actually, and his answer
Speaker 3: is nothing. That he's so weak, that he's so ineffective,
Speaker 3: that he's not going to do anything. And Putin knows
Speaker 3: that everybody else knows that Navalney knew that. So last week,
Speaker 3: when the news of Navalney's death broke, here's the statement
Speaker 3: that I put out. Quote. The Russian regime has been
Speaker 3: trying to murder Alexi Navalny for years to stop his
Speaker 3: criticism of Vladimir Putin's corruption and ontocracy and to intimidate
Speaker 3: the Russian people from similar criticism. Tragically, they appear to
Speaker 3: have finally succeeded in murdering him. We must ensure that
Speaker 3: they will never succeed in silencing him. The regime interprets
Speaker 3: weakness from the United States as appeasement and has only
Speaker 3: escalated its oppression in recent years. Russian people are entitled
Speaker 3: to express their views peacefully without fear of retribution, and
Speaker 3: I will work with my colleagues to hold accountable those
Speaker 3: in the Russian regime responsible for this atrocity. So that's
Speaker 3: what I put out. But I want to go back
Speaker 3: because I said that Biden didn't mean the tough consequences
Speaker 3: when he said that. How do I know that, Because
Speaker 3: if you go back to twenty twenty one, you go
Speaker 3: back to the beginning of the Biden administration where Vladimir
Speaker 3: Putin poisoned Alexi Nevaldi actually poisoned him in August of
Speaker 3: twenty twenty, and he was poisoned with a Novachok class
Speaker 3: nerve agent, which is the same class that was used
Speaker 3: by Russia in the twenty eighteen Assassin assassination attempt against
Speaker 3: a former British intelligence agency. It's a strategy of murder
Speaker 3: that the Russians are fond of. Poisoning, and at the
Speaker 3: time time Biden announced really mild sanctions on Russia, said okay,
Speaker 3: we're going to slap your hand. And what I called
Speaker 3: for at the time was sanctioning and shutting down the
Speaker 3: nord Stream two pipeline. Now remember nord Stream two pipeline
Speaker 3: was a pipeline that Putin was building that went straight
Speaker 3: from Russia to Germany. It circumvented Ukraine. The entire point
Speaker 3: of the nord Stream two pipeline was to enable Russia
Speaker 3: to get its natural gas to Europe without needing to
Speaker 3: go through the pipelines in Ukraine. Why did Putin want
Speaker 3: the nord Stream two pipeline so he could invade Ukraine.
Speaker 3: I authored the sanctions that shut nord Stream two down.
Speaker 3: I passed them into law in December of twenty nineteen,
Speaker 3: got overwhelming bipartisan support in the Senate, got overwhelming bipartisan
Speaker 3: support in the House. Donald Trump signed my sanctions legislation
Speaker 3: into law and listened to this. Putin stopped building the
Speaker 3: nord Stream two pipeline literally the day, the very same
Speaker 3: day that Donald Trump signed my sanctions legislation, the pipeline
Speaker 3: was done. That was December of twenty nineteen December of
Speaker 3: twenty twenty, I passed another set of sanctions legislation on
Speaker 3: nord Stream two, again with overwhelming bipartisan support. Again, Donald
Speaker 3: Trump signed it to law. The pipeline remained dead. Now
Speaker 3: fast forward to January twenty twenty one. On January twentieth,
Speaker 3: Joe Biden takes the oath of office. He becomes president.
Speaker 3: Four days later, four January twenty fourth, twenty twenty one,
Speaker 3: Putin resumes deep sea construction of the nord Stream two pipeline,
Speaker 3: literally four days into the Biden presidency.
Speaker 1: Why.
Speaker 3: Because Biden was already showing weakness. Putin understood Biden was weak,
Speaker 3: and by the way, that foreshadowing of weakness was true,
Speaker 3: it was accurate. Why do we know that, because several
Speaker 3: months later Biden formally waived the sanctions on nord Stream two.
Speaker 3: He gave Vladimir Putin a multi billion dollar gift. He
Speaker 3: let him complete that pipeline. And that pipeline waving those
Speaker 3: sanctions is why Putin invaded Ukraine. It is Biden's fault.
Speaker 3: But when Navalney, when Putin went after Navalney, I called
Speaker 3: on Biden. I said, all right, you gave Biden this
Speaker 3: gift of Nordstream two. How about now, when Navalney's in jail,
Speaker 3: how about now impose the sanctions on Nordstream two. How
Speaker 3: about now grow a backbone and stand up to Putin?
Speaker 3: And Biden refused to do so. Instead put little slap
Speaker 3: of the wrist sanctions on it. And so when he
Speaker 3: said severe consequences, he didn't meet it in twenty twenty one,
Speaker 3: and he's admitted it now. The consequences he has in
Speaker 3: mind are nothing. And you know what. Putin will continue
Speaker 3: to behave worse, will continue to be more oppressive, will
Speaker 3: continue to be more of a threat China. She will
Speaker 3: continue to behave worse, to be more oppressive, to be
Speaker 3: more of a threat North Korea. Will Thanezuela, will Iran,
Speaker 3: will every enemy of America Hamas, will Hesbalow, will all
Speaker 3: of them. When we have a weak commander in chief,
Speaker 3: America is at greater peril, and every one of our
Speaker 3: allies is at greater peril.
Speaker 2: I want to ask you one question about sanctions real quickly.
Speaker 2: Before I do that, let me remind you right now,
Speaker 2: if you want to get the best cup of coffee
Speaker 2: in your life, take advantage of blackout coffee and the
Speaker 2: twenty percent off your first order right now by going
Speaker 2: to Blackoutcoffee dot com slash verdict. It is a premium
Speaker 2: cup of coffee that you're going to love to drink
Speaker 2: each and every day without the woke agenda of many
Speaker 2: of the left coffee companies you know the ones I'm
Speaker 2: talking about, and if you are not willing to settle
Speaker 2: for an average cup of coffee.
Speaker 1: I start my day early.
Speaker 2: Every day, I'm on the radio at at seven o'clock
Speaker 2: in the morning.
Speaker 1: I have got to.
Speaker 2: Make sure I have a really good cup of coffee
Speaker 2: in front of me. And that is why I love
Speaker 2: Blackout Coffee and I want you to try it. The
Speaker 2: coffee is one hundred percent of America, zero percent woke.
Speaker 2: Blackout Coffee committed to conservative values from the source of
Speaker 2: the beans, the roasting process, customer support and shipping. They
Speaker 2: embody true American values and accept no compromise on taste
Speaker 2: or quality. Go to Blackoutcoffee dot com slash vertict use
Speaker 2: the promo code vertict.
Speaker 1: You'll get twenty percent off your first order. You're going
Speaker 1: to love it. I promise you.
Speaker 2: Check them out Blackoutcoffee dot com slash vertict be awake,
Speaker 2: not woke, with your dollars and your.
Speaker 1: Cup of coffee.
Speaker 2: That's Blackoutcoffee dot com slash vertict twenty percent off your
Speaker 2: first order promo code vertict cend. Our final question for
Speaker 2: you on sanctions, what is the point of having sanctions?
Speaker 2: And you mentioned multiple countries there that we have sanctions
Speaker 2: on that we're not doing anything. We're not enforcing the sanctions.
Speaker 2: And if the president and his administration will not enforce
Speaker 2: the sanctions, is is there any checks and balances that
Speaker 2: can come into play on the House, the Senate, congressional oversight,
Speaker 2: Because if you've got the sanctions and they're worthless because
Speaker 2: you don't enforce them, who does that fall on And
Speaker 2: can it change?
Speaker 3: Well, it certainly can't change, and Congress can force the
Speaker 3: president to do it. And the best example of that,
Speaker 3: Let's go back to Nordstream two and I'll finish the
Speaker 3: story when Biden waived the sanctions. My response as I
Speaker 3: put a hold on every single nominee at the State Department.
Speaker 3: I block them in the Senate and it caused the
Speaker 3: Biden administration to go nuts. It caused Senate Democrats to
Speaker 3: go nuts, and I said, listen, Joe Biden is handing
Speaker 3: a massive gift of Vladimir Putin. He is causing war
Speaker 3: in Europe. He is causing Russia to prepare to invade Ukraine.
Speaker 3: This makes no sense, and it is endangering Europe, our allies,
Speaker 3: and it's endangering America. For all of twenty twenty one,
Speaker 3: I had those holes in place. In December of twenty
Speaker 3: twenty one, I cut a deal with Chuck Schumer. I
Speaker 3: let I think it was thirty four of those holds
Speaker 3: go in exchange four scheduling a vote on new sanctions
Speaker 3: on Nordstream two in January of twenty twenty two. Schumer agreed,
Speaker 3: so I forced the vote on the Senate floor. Now
Speaker 3: when the vote came up in January of twenty twenty two.
Speaker 3: The week before the vote, President Zelensky and Ukraine publicly
Speaker 3: begged the United States Senate please please please pass cruises
Speaker 3: sanctions legislation. This legislation is the last best hope to
Speaker 3: stop Russia from invading Ukraine to avoid war. That same week,
Speaker 3: the government of Poland put out a formal statement pleading
Speaker 3: with the United States Senate to pass my sanctions legislation.
Speaker 3: Poland said, if you do not do so, Russia will
Speaker 3: invade Ukraine. Now, Ben That is highly unusual. Foreign countries
Speaker 3: generally do not out statements on particular votes in the
Speaker 3: Senate asking the Senate to do something. In this case,
Speaker 3: both Ukraine and Poland put out those statements. The day
Speaker 3: of the vote, Joe Biden came sixteen blocks from the
Speaker 3: White House down to Capitol Hill and he went to
Speaker 3: the Democratic Senate lunch and he personally lobbied the Democrats senators.
Speaker 3: This was the first time he had done so since
Speaker 3: he became president, and he came there to lobby them.
Speaker 3: His request was, please, please, please vote against Cruz's sanctions legislation.
Speaker 3: Please vote for Russia and Putin. So twice, when I
Speaker 3: had introduced my legislation and passed it to law, all
Speaker 3: the Democrats had come together and supported it. So they
Speaker 3: were on record twice supporting my sanctions. In January twenty
Speaker 3: twenty two, because Biden's personal lobbying, forty four Democrat senators
Speaker 3: flipped their votes. They voted against sanctions, they voted in
Speaker 3: favor of Russia, they voted in favor of Putin, and
Speaker 3: as a result, a month later, Russia invaded Ukraine, and
Speaker 3: we have still today the biggest war in Europe since
Speaker 3: World War II. Look, I'm someone who hates war. I
Speaker 3: am very reluctant to go to war. But I agree
Speaker 3: with Ronald Reagan. I agree with Winston Churchill. I agree
Speaker 3: with Donald Trump in the philosophy of peace through strength
Speaker 3: that the best way you avoid war is being strong
Speaker 3: enough your enemies don't want to mess with you, and
Speaker 3: sanctions can be a very powerful tool for avoiding war.
Speaker 3: What the Biden White House is all about when it
Speaker 3: comes to our enemies is weakness and appeasement, and waiving
Speaker 3: these sanctions directly cause the war. Once the pipeline was complete,
Speaker 3: Putin's view was he could invade because he could still
Speaker 3: get his guests to Europe even if the pipelines in
Speaker 3: Ukraine were.
Speaker 2: Destroyed, no doubt. Don't forget this week. It's gonna be
Speaker 2: a big week with breaking news. We're going to keep
Speaker 2: you updated on all of it. Monday, Wednesday, Friday. We
Speaker 2: need this show and don't forget. You can listen to
Speaker 2: my podcast as well, the Ben Ferguson podcasts and those
Speaker 2: in between days. I'll keep you updated on the latest
Speaker 2: breaking news. So makes you subscribe to that The Ben
Speaker 2: Ferguson podcasts as well, and we will see you back
Speaker 2: here on Wednesday morning.