1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:02,840
Speaker 1: You're listening to a special interview of The Cloakroom, a

2
00:00:03,000 --> 00:00:06,480
Speaker 1: serious with Liz Wheeler and Senator Ted Cruise, exclusively for

3
00:00:06,640 --> 00:00:10,120
Speaker 1: Verdict Plus subscribers. Each week, Liz is joined by Senator

4
00:00:10,160 --> 00:00:12,760
Speaker 1: Ted Cruise to pull back the curtain on the philosophy

5
00:00:12,800 --> 00:00:16,440
Speaker 1: that informs our political debates, the stories that are reshaping

6
00:00:16,440 --> 00:00:19,599
Speaker 1: our culture, and the legal principles at play on America's

7
00:00:19,640 --> 00:00:23,000
Speaker 1: stage and beyond. To hear more of the Cloakroom, become

8
00:00:23,040 --> 00:00:26,119
Speaker 1: a Verdict Plus subscriber at Verdict with Ted Cruise dot

9
00:00:26,120 --> 00:00:30,200
Speaker 1: Com slash Plus. All right, welcome back everyone. I'm Liz Wheeler.

10
00:00:30,280 --> 00:00:32,440
Speaker 1: This is the Cloak Room on Verdict Plus. I'm sitting

11
00:00:32,479 --> 00:00:35,639
Speaker 1: here with Senator Ted Cruz and this is such an amazing,

12
00:00:35,880 --> 00:00:39,000
Speaker 1: insane time to be alive in our country. Rovie Wade

13
00:00:39,040 --> 00:00:41,880
Speaker 1: has just been overturned by the Supreme Court. And I

14
00:00:41,920 --> 00:00:44,400
Speaker 1: don't know about you, Senator, but when I saw this news,

15
00:00:44,440 --> 00:00:46,600
Speaker 1: I was I was obviously following the Supreme Court issuing

16
00:00:46,640 --> 00:00:49,199
Speaker 1: their opinions. And I'm on the West coast right now.

17
00:00:49,200 --> 00:00:51,080
Speaker 1: I'm out in Santa Barbara, California. So it was early

18
00:00:51,080 --> 00:00:53,159
Speaker 1: in the morning. It was just after seven am, and

19
00:00:53,200 --> 00:00:56,000
Speaker 1: I start frantically texting our producers. Are you awake? Are

20
00:00:56,080 --> 00:00:59,120
Speaker 1: you asleep? Do you see what's happening? This is absolutely bananas.

21
00:00:59,280 --> 00:01:01,400
Speaker 1: I don't think we're going to forget that moment. Yeah, no,

22
00:01:01,520 --> 00:01:04,240
Speaker 1: it was. It was extraordinary. Um. I was in DC

23
00:01:04,360 --> 00:01:06,480
Speaker 1: at the time. I had the night before, we had

24
00:01:06,480 --> 00:01:11,759
Speaker 1: been late on the Senate floor battling over gun control. Uh.

25
00:01:11,760 --> 00:01:15,440
Speaker 1: And then after that I had gone and filmed a verdict.

26
00:01:15,440 --> 00:01:17,520
Speaker 1: So so we had Thursday night. We we did a

27
00:01:17,600 --> 00:01:20,360
Speaker 1: verdict at twelve thirty at night, and so we finished

28
00:01:20,360 --> 00:01:23,480
Speaker 1: at h I think I got home about two in

29
00:01:23,520 --> 00:01:26,959
Speaker 1: the morning. Uh. And so Friday morning, I was still

30
00:01:26,959 --> 00:01:29,840
Speaker 1: in DC. I was in my apartment and saw the

31
00:01:29,880 --> 00:01:32,960
Speaker 1: opinion came down, and shortly thereafter I had a flight

32
00:01:33,400 --> 00:01:37,080
Speaker 1: to Milwaukee. I'm in Milwaukee right now at a political

33
00:01:37,120 --> 00:01:42,320
Speaker 1: conference to energize and mobilize grassroots activists here in Wisconsin.

34
00:01:43,400 --> 00:01:47,119
Speaker 1: But my flight wasn't until late afternoon. So I actually

35
00:01:47,760 --> 00:01:52,360
Speaker 1: played basketball for two hours, uh, Friday morning with several

36
00:01:52,400 --> 00:01:55,560
Speaker 1: guys on my staff, and we we did played three

37
00:01:55,560 --> 00:01:57,360
Speaker 1: on three and four on four for a couple hours

38
00:01:57,360 --> 00:02:00,760
Speaker 1: and then uh, and then I up from the shower

39
00:02:00,840 --> 00:02:02,760
Speaker 1: and wet and did a Fox hitt talking about the

40
00:02:02,840 --> 00:02:04,720
Speaker 1: DABS ruling, and then jumped on a plane and flew

41
00:02:04,720 --> 00:02:08,320
Speaker 1: to Milwaukee. It's first basketball game in a post row America.

42
00:02:08,440 --> 00:02:10,400
Speaker 1: But you never thought that would happen. There you go.

43
00:02:10,480 --> 00:02:13,480
Speaker 1: And in fact, on the plane I had with me

44
00:02:13,720 --> 00:02:16,760
Speaker 1: this binder with the full text of all of DABS,

45
00:02:16,760 --> 00:02:19,760
Speaker 1: and so I spent the entire flight just reading carefully

46
00:02:20,560 --> 00:02:22,800
Speaker 1: word for word the opinion and DABS, which was which

47
00:02:22,840 --> 00:02:26,200
Speaker 1: was pretty cool too to go through it and to

48
00:02:26,280 --> 00:02:29,400
Speaker 1: try to although I will say a three wing binder

49
00:02:30,639 --> 00:02:32,920
Speaker 1: on Southwest Airlines with a guy in the middle seat

50
00:02:32,960 --> 00:02:34,680
Speaker 1: next to you is a little hard to like not

51
00:02:34,880 --> 00:02:37,399
Speaker 1: jab him in the leg with, so you try to

52
00:02:37,440 --> 00:02:39,840
Speaker 1: somehow managed to hold it and your diet coke call

53
00:02:39,880 --> 00:02:41,960
Speaker 1: at the same time. It wasn't easy. That's when your

54
00:02:42,000 --> 00:02:44,560
Speaker 1: Senate negotiation skills come in. You say, I get I'll

55
00:02:44,600 --> 00:02:46,240
Speaker 1: give you the arm rest if you don't mind that

56
00:02:46,400 --> 00:02:48,640
Speaker 1: my binder is going to be blacking you the whole time.

57
00:02:49,520 --> 00:02:53,080
Speaker 1: I want to talk about what the most unpopular part

58
00:02:53,120 --> 00:02:55,240
Speaker 1: of this opinion. I read all two hundred and thirteen pages.

59
00:02:55,280 --> 00:02:57,280
Speaker 1: I think it was of the ruling as well. It's

60
00:02:57,320 --> 00:03:00,560
Speaker 1: it's beautifully written. Not the Descent the Mage already opinions

61
00:03:00,560 --> 00:03:03,680
Speaker 1: beautifully written. But I want to talk about Roberts. Robert's

62
00:03:03,760 --> 00:03:07,880
Speaker 1: ruling for a second. He voted to uphold the Mississippi

63
00:03:07,960 --> 00:03:10,840
Speaker 1: law which bands abortion at fifteen weeks. He voted not

64
00:03:10,919 --> 00:03:15,480
Speaker 1: to overturn Rove Wade. His reasoning is absurd, It's ridiculous.

65
00:03:15,520 --> 00:03:18,320
Speaker 1: You and Michael talked about that in depth on Verdict.

66
00:03:18,360 --> 00:03:20,400
Speaker 1: I highly recommend if anybody hasn't watched that, it's a

67
00:03:20,400 --> 00:03:23,280
Speaker 1: really good episode that you guys just filmed. It hasn't

68
00:03:23,320 --> 00:03:24,919
Speaker 1: aired yet, but I said here and watched the whole

69
00:03:24,960 --> 00:03:28,079
Speaker 1: thing behind the scenes. But Alan Dershowitz, Harvard law professor,

70
00:03:28,400 --> 00:03:31,079
Speaker 1: went on Fox News and on Newsmax last night and

71
00:03:31,160 --> 00:03:34,000
Speaker 1: said that Roberts was correct. Now, Dershowitz is the only

72
00:03:34,040 --> 00:03:36,520
Speaker 1: person that I've heard in the entire country who says

73
00:03:36,560 --> 00:03:40,280
Speaker 1: that Roberts is correct. But his reasoning is kind of

74
00:03:40,360 --> 00:03:42,480
Speaker 1: legalistic and something that I want us to dig into.

75
00:03:44,200 --> 00:03:46,000
Speaker 1: I do, and I think it should never be done

76
00:03:46,080 --> 00:03:48,840
Speaker 1: under any circumstances. But I do think the Supreme Court

77
00:03:49,160 --> 00:03:52,560
Speaker 1: should never have had to reach beyond the fifteen weeks.

78
00:03:52,640 --> 00:03:55,640
Speaker 1: That's what was before the Subreme Court, and everybody on

79
00:03:55,680 --> 00:03:59,200
Speaker 1: this show seems to think that fifteen weeks is reasonable.

80
00:03:59,280 --> 00:04:02,640
Speaker 1: Senator Ruby thinks fifteen weeks. The Europeans think fifteen weeks.

81
00:04:03,000 --> 00:04:05,560
Speaker 1: Why did the Supreme Court have to jump into this

82
00:04:05,920 --> 00:04:08,320
Speaker 1: and say, we're not going to decide the case before us,

83
00:04:08,480 --> 00:04:12,160
Speaker 1: We're gonna ban. We're gonna ban ROVERSUS way to overrule

84
00:04:12,240 --> 00:04:16,120
Speaker 1: it and allow states, allow states to be sure, allow

85
00:04:16,279 --> 00:04:22,320
Speaker 1: states to abolish abortion completely. That was judicial activism, overreaching,

86
00:04:22,360 --> 00:04:26,520
Speaker 1: and seoan you oppose judicial activism, you should join me

87
00:04:26,880 --> 00:04:31,880
Speaker 1: and agree with Justice Roberts that judicial activism was at

88
00:04:31,920 --> 00:04:35,719
Speaker 1: play here and it was unnecessary. I would take issue

89
00:04:35,720 --> 00:04:39,760
Speaker 1: with Sippi case. So, Liz, it may surprise you. I

90
00:04:39,800 --> 00:04:44,680
Speaker 1: actually don't think either Roberts or Dershowitz are crazy and

91
00:04:44,760 --> 00:04:46,680
Speaker 1: what they're saying, and I think they have a reasonable

92
00:04:46,720 --> 00:04:48,640
Speaker 1: basis for what they're saying. I don't agree with it,

93
00:04:49,920 --> 00:04:55,880
Speaker 1: but it's not It's not a shocking thing for them

94
00:04:55,880 --> 00:04:58,680
Speaker 1: to be advocating for. And the reason I say that,

95
00:04:58,720 --> 00:05:02,000
Speaker 1: I mean, let's look at Roberts's re Robert's approaches cases,

96
00:05:02,720 --> 00:05:06,000
Speaker 1: and he's an incrementalist, and there is a principle of

97
00:05:06,080 --> 00:05:10,360
Speaker 1: judicial restraint which is that the court should not decide

98
00:05:10,520 --> 00:05:13,960
Speaker 1: any more than is necessary to resolve the issue before

99
00:05:14,000 --> 00:05:18,479
Speaker 1: it in the case that is being litigated. That is

100
00:05:18,520 --> 00:05:22,400
Speaker 1: a sound principle of judicial restraint and it is a

101
00:05:23,160 --> 00:05:29,560
Speaker 1: right way to approach most issues. That's what Dershawitz is

102
00:05:29,600 --> 00:05:33,120
Speaker 1: focusing on there as well. Now, what I especially don't

103
00:05:33,160 --> 00:05:36,159
Speaker 1: agree with is Dershawitz saying this is judicial activism. I

104
00:05:36,160 --> 00:05:41,599
Speaker 1: think that is that's being provocative. And as you know,

105
00:05:40,960 --> 00:05:44,600
Speaker 1: I know Dershawitz very well. He was my criminal law

106
00:05:44,640 --> 00:05:48,080
Speaker 1: professor and he's a friend. I think he's being deliberately

107
00:05:48,120 --> 00:05:52,280
Speaker 1: provocative with that. I don't think he's right. But the

108
00:05:52,520 --> 00:05:56,480
Speaker 1: instinct of don't do more than is necessary is a

109
00:05:56,760 --> 00:06:01,120
Speaker 1: sound judicial instinct. So why do I think it wasn't

110
00:06:01,240 --> 00:06:05,080
Speaker 1: right here? Well, I would commend people to read the

111
00:06:05,200 --> 00:06:08,880
Speaker 1: majority opinion, where on pages seventy two and the next

112
00:06:08,960 --> 00:06:13,520
Speaker 1: several pages of the opinion, the majority opinion squarely addresses

113
00:06:14,440 --> 00:06:18,720
Speaker 1: what Chief Justice Roberts advocated for, which was uphold the

114
00:06:18,720 --> 00:06:23,040
Speaker 1: Mississippi Statute but don't overturn rug And I think the

115
00:06:23,120 --> 00:06:27,440
Speaker 1: majority opinion dismantles the argument as a legal matter. What

116
00:06:27,560 --> 00:06:29,720
Speaker 1: does the majority point out? It points out Number one,

117
00:06:29,839 --> 00:06:34,480
Speaker 1: Roberts doesn't attempt to defend rose reasoning nobody does. Number

118
00:06:34,520 --> 00:06:39,960
Speaker 1: two Roberts doesn't even pretend to defend Casey's reason. Instead,

119
00:06:40,080 --> 00:06:43,120
Speaker 1: he grounds his argument on starry decisis, which Casey did

120
00:06:43,160 --> 00:06:50,000
Speaker 1: as well. But starry decisis means not overturning decisions, and

121
00:06:50,120 --> 00:06:58,000
Speaker 1: what Roberts advocates would overrule much of RUG. So what

122
00:06:58,240 --> 00:07:03,760
Speaker 1: he says is well, Okay, Row prohibited restrictions on abortion

123
00:07:03,880 --> 00:07:07,040
Speaker 1: before viability. He said, we should get rid of the

124
00:07:07,160 --> 00:07:14,120
Speaker 1: viability requirement, but we should. Here's what the majority. How

125
00:07:14,120 --> 00:07:16,720
Speaker 1: the majority puts it. The Concurrence would leave for another

126
00:07:16,880 --> 00:07:20,600
Speaker 1: day whether to reject any right to an abortion at all,

127
00:07:20,840 --> 00:07:24,760
Speaker 1: and would hold only that if the Constitution protects any

128
00:07:24,840 --> 00:07:29,120
Speaker 1: such right, the right ends once women have had a

129
00:07:29,320 --> 00:07:34,080
Speaker 1: quote reasonable opportunity to obtain an abortion. The Concurrence does

130
00:07:34,120 --> 00:07:37,640
Speaker 1: not specify what period of time is sufficient to provide

131
00:07:37,680 --> 00:07:42,000
Speaker 1: such an opportunity, but it would hold that fifteen weeks,

132
00:07:42,080 --> 00:07:45,960
Speaker 1: the period allowed under Mississippi's law, is enough at least

133
00:07:46,160 --> 00:07:54,280
Speaker 1: quote absent rare circumstances. So Roberts is proposing overrule a

134
00:07:54,320 --> 00:08:01,840
Speaker 1: big chunk of Row, but create this new reasonable opportunity rule, which, notably,

135
00:08:03,520 --> 00:08:07,760
Speaker 1: he doesn't find anywhere in the Constitution, he doesn't find

136
00:08:07,800 --> 00:08:10,680
Speaker 1: anywhere in the Supreme Courts precedence, he doesn't find anywhere

137
00:08:10,720 --> 00:08:15,400
Speaker 1: in anything resembling law. He just makes it up, says, well, gosh,

138
00:08:15,440 --> 00:08:18,880
Speaker 1: if we make up this rule, then we don't have

139
00:08:18,960 --> 00:08:26,840
Speaker 1: to over rule Row. That isn't that being a legislator? Though, yes,

140
00:08:27,440 --> 00:08:30,640
Speaker 1: that's exactly what and it's what Row did. He's got

141
00:08:30,720 --> 00:08:33,360
Speaker 1: a new standard. He thinks he's smarter than Harry Blackman.

142
00:08:33,440 --> 00:08:39,199
Speaker 1: He is unquestionably smarter than Harry Blackman, and so he

143
00:08:39,440 --> 00:08:42,920
Speaker 1: likes he likes his standard, and his standard, this reasonable

144
00:08:42,960 --> 00:08:46,920
Speaker 1: opportunity standard. But it is not you know. The majority

145
00:08:47,000 --> 00:08:53,599
Speaker 1: opinion points out the rule that Roberts is advocating. The

146
00:08:53,720 --> 00:08:57,520
Speaker 1: Concurrence would do exactly what it criticizes Row for doing,

147
00:08:58,240 --> 00:09:02,480
Speaker 1: pulling quote out of thin air a test that quote

148
00:09:02,559 --> 00:09:06,240
Speaker 1: no party or amicus asked the court to adopt. So

149
00:09:06,480 --> 00:09:08,640
Speaker 1: neither of the parties in this case asked for that.

150
00:09:09,600 --> 00:09:11,280
Speaker 1: None of the amiki, I think there were one hundred

151
00:09:11,280 --> 00:09:13,800
Speaker 1: and thirty amiki, none of them put forward this theory.

152
00:09:14,240 --> 00:09:16,920
Speaker 1: But look, John Roberts is a very smart man. He

153
00:09:17,040 --> 00:09:18,760
Speaker 1: came up with his own theory. It's like, well, let's

154
00:09:18,800 --> 00:09:29,760
Speaker 1: go with this one instead. And it's based on the

155
00:09:30,000 --> 00:09:36,440
Speaker 1: idea that they don't have to do anything that will

156
00:09:36,480 --> 00:09:40,679
Speaker 1: be seen as politically as traumatic as overturning Row. But

157
00:09:40,960 --> 00:09:46,280
Speaker 1: Roberts is advocating overturning what the court and Casey called

158
00:09:46,360 --> 00:09:50,760
Speaker 1: the central holding of Row, which is the viability standard.

159
00:09:52,120 --> 00:09:55,120
Speaker 1: And Roberts wants to get rid of the central holding. Well,

160
00:09:55,720 --> 00:09:58,680
Speaker 1: if you're getting rid of the central holding of a case,

161
00:10:00,000 --> 00:10:06,600
Speaker 1: you're overturning the case. Like his proposed minimalism isn't very minimal,

162
00:10:08,720 --> 00:10:12,120
Speaker 1: and it would create a whole new host of problems

163
00:10:12,240 --> 00:10:15,840
Speaker 1: that are likewise not found in the law or the constitution.

164
00:10:16,000 --> 00:10:19,120
Speaker 1: This is why Liz what Dershowitz says is wrong. He

165
00:10:19,240 --> 00:10:22,760
Speaker 1: calls it activism. Activism is a court imposing its own

166
00:10:22,880 --> 00:10:27,760
Speaker 1: policy preferences and not following the law. Let me ask

167
00:10:27,800 --> 00:10:29,640
Speaker 1: you about the leaker. Though this has gone out of

168
00:10:29,679 --> 00:10:31,959
Speaker 1: the news very quickly, the left was not interested in

169
00:10:32,040 --> 00:10:36,040
Speaker 1: discussing the identity of who this person that publicized gave

170
00:10:36,080 --> 00:10:38,880
Speaker 1: to the media the draft majority opinion, which by the way,

171
00:10:39,080 --> 00:10:42,760
Speaker 1: is very very similar to Aldo's final draft of his

172
00:10:42,880 --> 00:10:45,240
Speaker 1: majority opinion, which I was glad to see that they

173
00:10:45,280 --> 00:10:48,760
Speaker 1: weren't bullied into into changing any of their verbiage, any

174
00:10:48,760 --> 00:10:50,559
Speaker 1: of their language, any of their arguments based on this.

175
00:10:51,400 --> 00:10:53,079
Speaker 1: What do you think the proper course of action is

176
00:10:53,200 --> 00:10:55,839
Speaker 1: now regarding this leaker? Should we continue to investigate? Should

177
00:10:55,840 --> 00:10:57,959
Speaker 1: the name be revealed publicly? Should they be should this

178
00:10:58,040 --> 00:11:01,360
Speaker 1: person be prosecuted? And will they yes? Yes, yes, And

179
00:11:01,480 --> 00:11:07,000
Speaker 1: I don't know. Look, the investigation should continue. Roberts has

180
00:11:07,000 --> 00:11:10,120
Speaker 1: announced that the Court has launched an investigation. The Marshall's

181
00:11:10,160 --> 00:11:14,360
Speaker 1: Office is leading the investigation. I think it's critical that

182
00:11:14,440 --> 00:11:16,120
Speaker 1: we fight out who the leaker is. I think their

183
00:11:16,200 --> 00:11:18,120
Speaker 1: name needs to be made public. I think they need

184
00:11:18,160 --> 00:11:25,400
Speaker 1: to be criminally prosecuted to the maximum extent possible. Will

185
00:11:25,440 --> 00:11:29,920
Speaker 1: it happen? I don't know. The Marshall's Office, generally speaking,

186
00:11:30,000 --> 00:11:33,800
Speaker 1: doesn't have a whole lot of experience investigating crime. That's

187
00:11:33,880 --> 00:11:37,439
Speaker 1: not there. Their principal focus is protecting the court, which

188
00:11:37,520 --> 00:11:39,719
Speaker 1: is a different It is a law enforcement function, but

189
00:11:39,840 --> 00:11:46,719
Speaker 1: it is not It is not typically investigatory, So I

190
00:11:46,840 --> 00:11:50,600
Speaker 1: don't know how effective the Marshall's Office will be at

191
00:11:50,679 --> 00:11:54,319
Speaker 1: the investigation. I also don't know there's been no public

192
00:11:54,400 --> 00:11:56,800
Speaker 1: reports about how much the law clerks are cooperating. So

193
00:11:56,960 --> 00:11:59,880
Speaker 1: for example, it's been reported that the clerks were at

194
00:12:00,040 --> 00:12:03,320
Speaker 1: We're asked to sign a statement, presumably saying they did

195
00:12:03,400 --> 00:12:06,079
Speaker 1: not hand the opinion over to anyone. I don't know

196
00:12:06,160 --> 00:12:08,199
Speaker 1: if they're clerks who refused to side it don't. I

197
00:12:08,320 --> 00:12:11,719
Speaker 1: don't know that, and nobody knows outside the court what

198
00:12:11,800 --> 00:12:16,160
Speaker 1: has happened. But I think it is critical both for

199
00:12:16,280 --> 00:12:17,920
Speaker 1: the long term integrity of the court and for the

200
00:12:18,000 --> 00:12:20,400
Speaker 1: rule of law, that we find and prosecute the leaker.

201
00:12:20,480 --> 00:12:24,920
Speaker 1: I hope that happens. On the question of prosecution, it

202
00:12:25,000 --> 00:12:29,240
Speaker 1: will depend on Merritt Garland's Justice Department, And unfortunately, this

203
00:12:29,520 --> 00:12:34,080
Speaker 1: Justice Department has been so political that I could easily

204
00:12:34,160 --> 00:12:37,120
Speaker 1: see the Department of Justice refusing to prosecute it. I

205
00:12:37,320 --> 00:12:41,120
Speaker 1: hope they don't, but I think that's a risk. Step

206
00:12:41,240 --> 00:12:45,120
Speaker 1: number one is find the leaker, and then step number

207
00:12:45,200 --> 00:12:49,120
Speaker 1: two should be ensuring that there are real and meaningful

208
00:12:49,200 --> 00:12:54,640
Speaker 1: consequences for the gross violation of duty to the court

209
00:12:54,720 --> 00:12:57,040
Speaker 1: and to the rule of law. All right, verdic Clause

210
00:12:57,080 --> 00:12:59,240
Speaker 1: members wigh in post below. Do you think that we're

211
00:12:59,240 --> 00:13:01,160
Speaker 1: gonna find out who the leaker is the identity of

212
00:13:01,200 --> 00:13:03,400
Speaker 1: this person and if so, do you think that they

213
00:13:03,440 --> 00:13:05,719
Speaker 1: will be prosecuted? Do you think Mary Garland will do

214
00:13:05,800 --> 00:13:08,640
Speaker 1: anything or not, and if so, what do you think

215
00:13:08,679 --> 00:13:11,600
Speaker 1: the charges will be or should be? Comment below way,

216
00:13:11,600 --> 00:13:14,320
Speaker 1: and I'm really interested in everybody's opinion. Also, a little

217
00:13:14,440 --> 00:13:16,679
Speaker 1: behind the scenes going on here. The Senator is at

218
00:13:16,800 --> 00:13:20,199
Speaker 1: an activism conference in Wisconsin right now and his staff

219
00:13:20,280 --> 00:13:21,559
Speaker 1: is about to pull him up out of the chair

220
00:13:21,600 --> 00:13:24,480
Speaker 1: because we've run so late talking about this topic. So Senator,

221
00:13:24,520 --> 00:13:27,160
Speaker 1: I'm going to let you go. Thank you everyone for watching.

222
00:13:27,200 --> 00:13:29,719
Speaker 1: This was a really great discussion. I'm Liz Wheeler. This

223
00:13:29,960 --> 00:13:31,400
Speaker 1: is the Cloakroom on Verdict Plus