Speaker 1: A record number of unaccompanied miners at the southern border
Speaker 1: of the United States, Miners that we were told would
Speaker 1: not be held in detention facilities anymore. Now overflowing those facilities.
Speaker 1: A crisis you might call it at the border, but
Speaker 1: the Biden administration would not call it a crisis. We'll
Speaker 1: get into what's really going on. This is verdict with
Speaker 1: Ted Cruz. Welcome back to Verdict with Ted Cruz. I'm
Speaker 1: Michael Knowles, Senator. There is one issue above all that
Speaker 1: is dominating right now. It happens to have a lot
Speaker 1: to do with your state. There is no transparency whatsoever
Speaker 1: on this. You were having liberal reporters telling people that
Speaker 1: they had a greater access under Trump under Obama. Right
Speaker 1: now they are being shut out. What is going on
Speaker 1: at the border, Well, it's a crisis and it's not complicated.
Speaker 1: Call it that. We are saying the volume of the
Speaker 1: league crossings rising dramatically last month. In the month of February,
Speaker 1: we had over one hundred thousand illegal immigrants detained. We
Speaker 1: are seeing, in particular crisis with children. We're seeing unaccompanied children,
Speaker 1: the numbers rising and rising and rising. We're seeing detention
Speaker 1: facilities that are overcrowded, that are packed, that are at
Speaker 1: at you know, hundred six seven hunder capacity, and it
Speaker 1: keeps getting worse. And there are several things to understand
Speaker 1: about it. Number one, why it's happening. This is the
Speaker 1: direct result of a series of decisions the Biden administration
Speaker 1: is made. So Joe Biden gets selected to get sworn
Speaker 1: in on January twentieth. Within days he announces We're stopping
Speaker 1: construction of the wall. So border wall done. Within days,
Speaker 1: the Biden administration returns to catch and release. Now know
Speaker 1: what is catching release? Catch and releases the policy. It
Speaker 1: was the policy during the Obama administration where when an
Speaker 1: illegal immigrant was caught, they'd be given a court date
Speaker 1: sometime in the future and let go and said, hey,
Speaker 1: come to court and lo and behold a whole bunch
Speaker 1: of them never show up. This is not complicated to
Speaker 1: figure out. One of the most significant things the Trump
Speaker 1: administration was end catch and release. But the most important
Speaker 1: thing that the Biden administration did is they ended the
Speaker 1: remain in Mexico policy. Now, what is the remain in
Speaker 1: Mexico policy? It was one of the biggest foreign policy
Speaker 1: and immigration victories of the entire Trump administration and the
Speaker 1: Trump administration negotiated a deal with the government of Mexico.
Speaker 1: So the vast majority of the immigrants crossing illegally into
Speaker 1: this country are not Mexicans. They're Central Americans now who
Speaker 1: are crossing through Mexico. So they're illegal immigrants in Mexico
Speaker 1: crossing Mexico southern border illegally to get to the United States.
Speaker 1: They're largely coming from Guatemala, El Salvador, a couple of
Speaker 1: other countries, Nicaragua, and countries that have a lot of violence,
Speaker 1: that have a lot of criminal activity, that have a
Speaker 1: lot of poverty, and so they're fleeing that in large numbers.
Speaker 1: The remain in Mexico policy was an agreement with Mexico
Speaker 1: where where if these folks come and want to apply
Speaker 1: for asylum in the United States, they stay in Mexico
Speaker 1: while the case is proceeding. And what the Biden administration
Speaker 1: did is it took that really important international agreement and
Speaker 1: it essentially ripped it up, said nope, we don't want
Speaker 1: to remain in Mexico. We want them here and we
Speaker 1: want to let them go. And that consequence, we are
Speaker 1: seeing massive numbers of illegal immigrants being released into the
Speaker 1: United States, and in turn, Look, if you're sitting at
Speaker 1: home in Guatemala and you're trying to decide whether to
Speaker 1: come when you see people being released, when you see
Speaker 1: people getting to stay, that's when you jump in a
Speaker 1: caravan and had North. There was a liberal journalist, Martha
Speaker 1: Radditts on a liberal network ABC, interviewed an illegal alien.
Speaker 1: His face was covered because he's obviously committing a crime,
Speaker 1: and she said, would you have done this under Trump?
Speaker 1: He said, no way, I'm doing this because Biden said
Speaker 1: that basically I would not face any consequences. He said,
Speaker 1: the primary reason I'm flaeing is my country is no
Speaker 1: good and it's violent and I want to get out
Speaker 1: of there. But I would never have done this if
Speaker 1: not for the Biden administration. Well, what we're saying is
Speaker 1: really the mirror image of what we saw in late
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen. In early twenty seventeen, when Trump was elected,
Speaker 1: we saw illegal crossings plummet by two thirds, and it
Speaker 1: plummeted by January and February of twenty seventeen. And at
Speaker 1: the time Trump had just been sworn in. To be honest,
Speaker 1: he hadn't done anything yet. I mean I mean he
Speaker 1: literally was just moving in. Yeah, and it is actually
Speaker 1: an astonishing thing. Think back to the presidential debates, the
Speaker 1: race of twenty fifteen, twenty sixteen. If any Republican had said,
Speaker 1: if you elect me, the sheer act of electing me
Speaker 1: will drop illegal immigration by two thirds, you'd have been
Speaker 1: laughed out of the room, like every reporter would have
Speaker 1: laughed at you. Everyone said, that is absurd. So Trump,
Speaker 1: but January February twenty seventeen, hadn't hired new border patrol agents,
Speaker 1: he hadn't built a wall, he hadn't done anything. And
Speaker 1: the numbers plummeted. And the reason they plummeted is that
Speaker 1: people believe Trump was going to enforce the law. And So,
Speaker 1: if you're making the decision, do I leave my country,
Speaker 1: do I pay thousands of dollars to a human traffic
Speaker 1: or do I engage in a life risking journey only
Speaker 1: to be apprehended and saying home, No, I think I'll
Speaker 1: just stay here. We're seeing the mirror image of that
Speaker 1: now right now, people making that same calculation are looking
Speaker 1: at Joe Biden saying, you know what, if I get there,
Speaker 1: I get to stay. So Ali, Ali Oxen free. Let's
Speaker 1: go right right, because you know, this is a very
Speaker 1: basic matter. But when you incentivize certain behavior, you get
Speaker 1: more of it, and you disincentivize a certain behavior, you
Speaker 1: get you know, Michael, if you say things like that,
Speaker 1: you're going to identify yourself as a conservative, and they're
Speaker 1: going to require you to wear like a patch or something.
Speaker 1: Liberals don't understand incentives. It's one of the most fundamental
Speaker 1: divides between left and right. It is the concept of incentives.
Speaker 1: So let's take kids and kids in cages. Remember, for
Speaker 1: four years we heard the press harping on kids and cages,
Speaker 1: kids and cages, kids and cages under Trump. Well, the
Speaker 1: cages were built by Barack Obama. To quote the former
Speaker 1: president who built the cages, Joe right, that a lot
Speaker 1: of these photos that had gone viral, they were from
Speaker 1: the Obama Obama administration. And here's why. So if you
Speaker 1: go back to what broke the system was was DACA,
Speaker 1: which now the press loves and the Democrats love. It
Speaker 1: was President Obama's illegal executive amnesty and what had happened there.
Speaker 1: If you go back and remember, and this feels like
Speaker 1: a long time ago, this is twenty twelve, but if
Speaker 1: you remember, Mamma had been asked over and over and
Speaker 1: over again by immigration activists, will you just declare amnesty?
Speaker 1: Use an executive order to declare amnesty? And Obama said repeatedly,
Speaker 1: I can't do that. It's against the law. He said,
Speaker 1: I'm not a king. I'm not an emperor. That's how
Speaker 1: Obama put it. I'm not a king, I'm not an emperor.
Speaker 1: And then one day he woke up and he was
Speaker 1: an emperor, and he issued a lawless order directed his
Speaker 1: administration never mind federal immigration law. We're not going to
Speaker 1: follow it anymore. If you came to this country as
Speaker 1: a kid, we're going to grant you amnesty. Now. The
Speaker 1: year before he did that, there were roughly six thousand
Speaker 1: unaccompanied miners came into this country. Six thousand significant number.
Speaker 1: The next year, you know how many there were more.
Speaker 1: I'm going to guess ninety three thousand. Wow. I didn't
Speaker 1: realize it was that high. And it goes back to
Speaker 1: what you just said incentives, which is kids and parents realized, Okay,
Speaker 1: the president just announced if you came as a kid,
Speaker 1: you get to stay. What's going to happen. Well, let's
Speaker 1: send a whole bunch of kids, and actually the Obama
Speaker 1: Department Homeland Security, they interviewed a number of these kids.
Speaker 1: They ask them, why are you coming? And the kids said,
Speaker 1: because I get a bettermisso, which is if I come,
Speaker 1: I get to stay. Fast forward to today, we're seeing
Speaker 1: the exact same thing you're you're seeing the Obama administration,
Speaker 1: or rather than the Biden administration. Right, tomato tomato. Now
Speaker 1: it's worse. It's tomato versus like massive bright red tomato paste.
Speaker 1: Like I it's all the bad ideas like because and
Speaker 1: they don't understand incentives, or perhaps they do understand incentives,
Speaker 1: but actually they desire this sort of behavior because they
Speaker 1: think it gives an advantage. You know. It reminds me
Speaker 1: of years ago. I was reading a newspaper article and
Speaker 1: I think it was a city council member in San
Speaker 1: Francisco who said, I don't understand we have the most
Speaker 1: generous almost benefits in the country and we keep getting
Speaker 1: more and more homeless people. It's so strange. Remember reading it, going, yeah,
Speaker 1: you're right, you don't understand, Like if you pay people
Speaker 1: to do something, they'll do it, right, And we're saying
Speaker 1: this with it with these kids but you know, to
Speaker 1: play devil's advocate a little bit, to give the devils
Speaker 1: their due in the Biden administration. Jensaki said something the
Speaker 1: other day that I was sort of exasperated when she
Speaker 1: said it, because they said, Okay, you're you said you
Speaker 1: wouldn't put the kids in cages, and you're putting the
Speaker 1: kids in cages, and you're letting some of them go,
Speaker 1: but you're you have to separate them because you've got
Speaker 1: to verify that the adults that they're with actually are
Speaker 1: their relatives. And the things you're doing, it's basically just
Speaker 1: what the Trump administration did. Accept it, it it would seem
Speaker 1: to be to a much greater degree. And she said, well,
Speaker 1: there just aren't a lot of options. I said, well,
Speaker 1: where was that kind of understanding when Resident Trump was
Speaker 1: doing that? And I guess though, I would want to
Speaker 1: take her question seriously, what are you going to do
Speaker 1: when there aren't a lot of options? So, look, there
Speaker 1: are some Democrats. I think there are a lot of
Speaker 1: Democrats across the country who want to genuinely be compassionate,
Speaker 1: and I understand that that's the right instinct. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's not a little kid's fault, and so you know,
Speaker 1: Jen Saki has also said, you know, we're just we're
Speaker 1: not going to lock up kids now, never mind that
Speaker 1: they are locking up kids to a much greater degree,
Speaker 1: to a massive degree. It comes down to incentives. Look,
Speaker 1: during the Obama administration, I remember traveling down to Texas
Speaker 1: and a lot of you know, of our two thousand
Speaker 1: mile border that we have been with Mexico, twelve hundred
Speaker 1: of those miles are along the border of the state
Speaker 1: of Texas, so we've got more than half the borders
Speaker 1: in Texas. And I remember visiting going to Lackland Air
Speaker 1: Force Base outside of San Antonio, where they were housing
Speaker 1: they had built facilities, built the early cages four kids.
Speaker 1: This is the Obama administration. I was there visiting, and
Speaker 1: I remember I was talking to an official from the
Speaker 1: Health and Human Services Department, And mind you, this is
Speaker 1: the Obama administration, so it's the Obama HHS. And this
Speaker 1: official described to me how the cartels were putting guns
Speaker 1: to the heads of little kids and forcing children to
Speaker 1: cut off the fingers or the ears of other kids.
Speaker 1: And what would happen is a family in Nicaragua, Honduras
Speaker 1: or El Salvador would give three four or five thousand
Speaker 1: dollars to a human trafficker. These human traffickers are not
Speaker 1: nice people. They're not they don't love children. They are vicious,
Speaker 1: horrific criminal cartels. And what they would do once the
Speaker 1: family given three four five thousand dollars to the cartel,
Speaker 1: to the trafficker, they would then deliver to the family
Speaker 1: their child's finger or ear and say give us another
Speaker 1: three thousand dollars, and they would extract more money from
Speaker 1: the parents. And so the Obama HHS official told me
Speaker 1: that they were getting number one, kids that were horribly deformed,
Speaker 1: had fingers cut off or ears cut off, and they
Speaker 1: were getting other kids who were psychologically traumatized because they
Speaker 1: had a gun put to their forehead. It wasn't even
Speaker 1: the traffickers that were cutting off the fingers and ears,
Speaker 1: it was the other kids. And my view that the
Speaker 1: Democrats say we need to grant amnesty, we need to
Speaker 1: let kids come because we're compassionate, I'm sorry if you're
Speaker 1: creating a system that is incentivizing tens of thousands or
Speaker 1: even hundreds of thousands, and the Biden Department of Homeland
Speaker 1: Security is projecting over one hundred thousand kids coming in
Speaker 1: the country on a company little boys, little girls. If
Speaker 1: you're putting little boys and little girls in the hands
Speaker 1: of human traffickers, you're not compassionate, You're not humane. You
Speaker 1: are a monster. And every one of those kids that
Speaker 1: is sexually assaulted, and I remember, you know, I think
Speaker 1: it's horrific. Huffington Posts some years ago with Fusion, published
Speaker 1: a survey. I believe that the number was between sixty
Speaker 1: and eighty percent of women and girls who cross the
Speaker 1: border illegally were raped or sexually assaulted along the way.
Speaker 1: It is. It's staggering, and it's not humane or compassionate.
Speaker 1: And I will say I get frustrated with Democrats who
Speaker 1: virtue signal about how much they love immigrants that they
Speaker 1: support a policy that involves a bunch of immigrant children
Speaker 1: being physically and sexually abused. It is grotesque. And the
Speaker 1: real compassionate policy is what we have had, which is
Speaker 1: to say we're going to enforce the law, we're not
Speaker 1: going to do catch and release, and if you come
Speaker 1: here illegally, we're going to send you home. And the
Speaker 1: reason that is compassionate is you don't end up with
Speaker 1: kids being handed over to traffickers. Those numbers dropped dramatically,
Speaker 1: and we're seeing that, and it seems like Biden the
Speaker 1: Democrats don't understand because there is an effect. There's the
Speaker 1: question of the justice in and of itself of saying
Speaker 1: people has a right to have its own borders. Yeah,
Speaker 1: but then there is this secondary effect, which is you're
Speaker 1: going to see those numbers plummet. You know, obviously in
Speaker 1: six thousand to ninety three thousand, we're not talking a
Speaker 1: small effect, right, I mean, we're talking orders of magnitude.
Speaker 1: And so I'll tell you on Friday of this week,
Speaker 1: I'm going down to the border and I'm bringing a
Speaker 1: number of senators. Right now, the current numbers seventeen senators
Speaker 1: are coming down. So I invited I invited John Cornyon,
Speaker 1: my colleague from Texas. I invited the other Republican senators.
Speaker 1: We've got a total of seventeen senators coming down. We're
Speaker 1: gonna go and tour the facilities where they're detaining the kids.
Speaker 1: We're gonna tour, We're gonna meet with the Border Patrol.
Speaker 1: We're gonna meet with the Border Patrol Union. I know
Speaker 1: those guys very very well. We're gonna go out on
Speaker 1: a boat with Texas STPs on the Rio Grand And
Speaker 1: let me tell you something amazing. The Biden administration has
Speaker 1: refused to allow any reporters to attend, which was this
Speaker 1: was not true during the Trump administration, or you got
Speaker 1: all that flat from the press. The press had bet
Speaker 1: much better access under the Trump administrator. Trump adminis the
Speaker 1: press had access to all these facilities. Obama administration the
Speaker 1: press had access. Look, the Biden administration is already worse
Speaker 1: than the Obama administration on this front. You know the
Speaker 1: picture of kids in cages that for four years was
Speaker 1: blamed on Trump, that was actually a picture taken during
Speaker 1: the Obama administration. It's because they actually, you know, Biden
Speaker 1: promised to have the most transparent administration ever. We sent
Speaker 1: a letter and here's the ridiculous justification the Biden administration
Speaker 1: is doing. They say, well, we'd love to have reporters there,
Speaker 1: but we can't because of COVID. Oh so you've got
Speaker 1: facilities with hundreds of illegal immigrants packed into them at
Speaker 1: many hundreds of percent greater than their capacity. You've got
Speaker 1: kids almost stacked upon each other, and their view is
Speaker 1: there's no risk of COVID there. But one reporter, if
Speaker 1: you are So ABC News wants to embed with us,
Speaker 1: wants to come and we invited an ABC News offered
Speaker 1: to bring a TV camera and be a pool camera. No,
Speaker 1: what is a camera pull camera is what they call
Speaker 1: a TV camera that will share its footage with all
Speaker 1: the other networks. So they could literally have one reporter
Speaker 1: and one cameraman. Yeah, no, that would be a risk,
Speaker 1: and there is a risk for COVID. And it's such
Speaker 1: an obvious lie. You know Alejandro Mayorchis, who's the Secretary
Speaker 1: of Homeland Security, he went on the Sunday shows this
Speaker 1: weekend and he repeated the obvious lie. Well, it's just
Speaker 1: because of COVID, we intend to do it. And look,
Speaker 1: some of the press is getting agitated. So this week
Speaker 1: I have been a vigorous defender of the press, which
Speaker 1: is an odd position for me today. This is very strange.
Speaker 1: I'm biting my tongue on all the great jokes I
Speaker 1: could make about the press right now because I actually
Speaker 1: do sort of defend them against the Biden administration. So
Speaker 1: I actually believe in a free press. I believe in
Speaker 1: the Fresh Amendment and what the Biden if Trump had
Speaker 1: done with the Biden administration had done, the press would
Speaker 1: be lighting themselves on fire. Yeah, of course. Instead they're
Speaker 1: just shilling for and defend ending at the Trump administration.
Speaker 1: Let me get the most absurd part about all of this.
Speaker 1: So they're releasing thousands upon thousands of illegal immigrants into
Speaker 1: my home state of Texas. They're setting up detention facilities
Speaker 1: downtown Dallas, the Convention Center. They're detaining illegal immigrants Middland, Texas.
Speaker 1: They're detaining illegal immigrants, much against the wishes of the community,
Speaker 1: they're releasing them. Here's an amazing stat in Harlingen, Texas.
Speaker 1: The illegal immigrants they're releasing are testing positive for COVID
Speaker 1: nineteen at a seven times greater rate than the US population.
Speaker 1: I also did not realize it was that severe. All
Speaker 1: I noticed was that the administration is now admitting that
Speaker 1: it is releasing people into the United States who have
Speaker 1: not been illegal aliens, who have not been tested for COVID.
Speaker 1: And you saw the DHS secretary was sort of backed
Speaker 1: into a corner on this and he said, well, it
Speaker 1: is the official policy to test, is right, but are
Speaker 1: you doing that? Well, we are doing our best, and
Speaker 1: it's an admission, it's all but an admission that they
Speaker 1: are releasing people in the midst of this pandemic where
Speaker 1: we're not allowed to leave our homes, and they're releasing
Speaker 1: in Texas, my home state, right and the communities in
Speaker 1: Texas are not happy about that. And it's one of
Speaker 1: the things that is frustrating about watching the Biden administration
Speaker 1: is the absolute hypocrisy on COVID. So they're perfectly willing
Speaker 1: to release illegal immigrants who may be criminals into Texas,
Speaker 1: into the United States, even if they may have COVID nineteen,
Speaker 1: and not test them. But yet they won't allow a
Speaker 1: single reporter with a camera to see anything on the
Speaker 1: border because that reporter might have COVID. And you know what,
Speaker 1: I'm willing to bet even if that reporter tested negative
Speaker 1: that day and had been vaccinated. Yeah, they still say no,
Speaker 1: it's not the COVID risk that they're worried about. It
Speaker 1: is the risk we don't want anyone to see the
Speaker 1: Biden cages. I have to ask you this, with regard
Speaker 1: to being able to go out and do things once
Speaker 1: we're vaccinated, His Royal Highness, Doctor Anthony Faucci has come
Speaker 1: out and suggested that sure we all get vaccinated, we're
Speaker 1: still going to have to wear the masks socially distanced,
Speaker 1: not gather. Maybe we can have a few friends over
Speaker 1: for the fourth of July. Senator, We're now on day
Speaker 1: what three hundred and seventy two of fifteen days to
Speaker 1: slow the spread? When can we return to normal? Come
Speaker 1: to Texas? You can do it right now. Look, Look,
Speaker 1: it is assinine and insane. So I've been vaccinated. Members
Speaker 1: of Congress were offered the vaccine early in January. I
Speaker 1: actually didn't take it. Then there were number of members
Speaker 1: of Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, who got the vaccine
Speaker 1: early and ostentatiously. I didn't. I didn't think it was right. Look,
Speaker 1: I'm relatively young, I'm healthy. I didn't want to cut
Speaker 1: in line. Yea. And so my view at the time,
Speaker 1: as I said, we need to wait and let seniors,
Speaker 1: let frontline workers get the vaccine first, and I don't
Speaker 1: want to hurry. Ultimately, in the last couple of weeks,
Speaker 1: I went ahead and got the vaccine. It had been
Speaker 1: you know, there'd been tens of millions of vaccines administered,
Speaker 1: many of the seniors, many of the frontline workers had
Speaker 1: gotten it. And you know, I mean, I do have
Speaker 1: My mom is eighty six. My dad my dad actually
Speaker 1: turned eighty two today. And so given my parents, I said,
Speaker 1: I'm given that. I'm out a lot. As a senator,
Speaker 1: I went ahead and got the vaccine in the Senate.
Speaker 1: I think it's the case that all one hundred senators
Speaker 1: have the vaccine. Now I think Rand Pall may may
Speaker 1: not have gotten it, although Rand had COVID so so
Speaker 1: he's got the natural immunity from having had it. CDC's
Speaker 1: guidance today is that people who are vaccinated can gather
Speaker 1: in small groups. The most ascinining thing is senators still
Speaker 1: gather all wearing masks, and it's just like, okay, wait,
Speaker 1: this may be the safest place on the planet. Like
Speaker 1: every person you're all vaccinated. But it's a virtue signal.
Speaker 1: And you get Democrats that are wearing two masks and
Speaker 1: it's coming three four five, They're just gonna walk around
Speaker 1: with bags on their head. I mean, and it is.
Speaker 1: And I'm not one of the Like there are people
Speaker 1: who are crazies who say it's all a hoax, it
Speaker 1: doesn't make any sense, do nothing. It's going to give
Speaker 1: you five g which frankly I could use the better
Speaker 1: cell service. If I became a hotspot, that'd be perfectly fine.
Speaker 1: This is Look, this is serious disease. We've had over
Speaker 1: half million Americans killed, We've had over forty seven thousand
Speaker 1: Texans killed. I think we need to treat it seriously.
Speaker 1: But we have for God's sakes, has there been an
Speaker 1: infectious disease certainly not in our lifetime that we've treated
Speaker 1: this seriously and it has become this this irrational zellatry
Speaker 1: and a means of control. I gotta say, if you've
Speaker 1: had the vaccine, the idea that you must wear a
Speaker 1: mask forever is idiotic. The whole point of getting the
Speaker 1: vaccine is to go back to normal. Well, this gets
Speaker 1: back to incentives. If you're if you're going to say,
Speaker 1: all right, we want you all three hundred plus million Americans,
Speaker 1: you need to all get the vaccine. But also, nothing
Speaker 1: about your life can change once you get the vaccine.
Speaker 1: It doesn't make any sense. And look, I think a
Speaker 1: lot of people. There are people on the extremes. There
Speaker 1: are people that are like, shut down everything and they're
Speaker 1: terrified to breathe. There are people who are like doesn't matter,
Speaker 1: licking door knobs and things like that door knobs are delicious,
Speaker 1: but most people are somewhere in the middle of like,
Speaker 1: take reasonable precautions, but let's not be nuts about it.
Speaker 1: If you look at how this is, this is playing out.
Speaker 1: Those who want government control don't want to let go
Speaker 1: of it. And I think a lot of people recognize
Speaker 1: there's an irrationality to so, for example, restaurants. You know,
Speaker 1: when Houston opened up, Heidi and I began going out
Speaker 1: to eat at restaurants. So we tried to do it
Speaker 1: preregularly because we want to support the small businesses in
Speaker 1: our community. And the rules you're walking along you got
Speaker 1: to wear a mask. And I guess the virus is
Speaker 1: somehow connected to the tension in your thigh muscles. Because
Speaker 1: under the rules in a restaurant, if you and I
Speaker 1: stood up, yes, then you have to put on a mask.
Speaker 1: You're dangerous then, But as soon as we sit down
Speaker 1: and take off the mask, and we can be here
Speaker 1: for three hours, sitting right here, and there's no risk
Speaker 1: of the it gets absorbed into your hamstrings. What happens
Speaker 1: it's I think it's because your your thighs are no
Speaker 1: longer tense, or maybe it's an altitude thing at three
Speaker 1: feet the virus can't transmit, but at six feet it
Speaker 1: can't thinner up there are you? Like most people realize,
Speaker 1: come on, this is crap. Of course, I mean it airplane.
Speaker 1: So you know, I flew from Houston to DC today,
Speaker 1: So on the airplane, I gotta get on the plane.
Speaker 1: I'm on the plane. I'm wearing my mask. I gotta
Speaker 1: wear my mask. I'm sitting next to someone. They're wearing
Speaker 1: their mask. But there's the drink exception. So you got
Speaker 1: in trouble for the drink exception. Oh my, they went nuts.
Speaker 1: So when I drink my coffee, now I hang my
Speaker 1: mask from my ear, so it's like visibly there. But
Speaker 1: but I want you to think of the logic of this.
Speaker 1: If I'm sitting there, I've got to get the mask
Speaker 1: because it's going to kill people. Yeah, but if I
Speaker 1: have a cup of coffee in my hand, the coffee
Speaker 1: absorbs it. The virus. I think it's and it works
Speaker 1: for a coke. It wears for orange juice, water, it's liquid.
Speaker 1: The virus doesn't like liquid or food, yes, liquid or solid.
Speaker 1: It only likes like At some point, everyone's going this
Speaker 1: doesn't make any sense. Oh, it's an obviously arbitrary exercise
Speaker 1: in power. And it does actually get to something that
Speaker 1: I guess relates, but it gets to this abuse of
Speaker 1: power more broadly, though I have to ask you about
Speaker 1: it's from the mail bag question from Prudence who asks
Speaker 1: if HR one passes, So HR one you've referred to
Speaker 1: it as the Corrupt Politicians Act. Yeah, if HR one passes,
Speaker 1: is there any legal case to fight back against it?
Speaker 1: So not not a political case to defeat it before
Speaker 1: it passes. But let's say God forbid it happens. Can
Speaker 1: you fight it in court? Of course, And if the
Speaker 1: crup Politicians Act passes, there will be lots of legal
Speaker 1: cases challenging it. But I gotta say, if it passes,
Speaker 1: we're going to lose all those cases. And tell me
Speaker 1: that I don't really end on a high note. Don't
Speaker 1: don't count on the courts to save us. And here's why. Yeah,
Speaker 1: if the Corrupt Politicians Act passes, it will pass because
Speaker 1: the Democrats have ended the filibuster. The filibuster is the
Speaker 1: rule that requires sixty votes to pass legislation. If they've
Speaker 1: ended it and dropped it to fifty votes, that's the
Speaker 1: only way they'll pass the Corrupt Politicians Act designed to
Speaker 1: keep Democrats in power for the next hundred years. If
Speaker 1: that happens, they will then add two new states to
Speaker 1: the Union. They'll add the District Columbia, the lad Puerto Rico.
Speaker 1: That's because Democrats believe they will elect four Democratic senators.
Speaker 1: DC clearly will Puerto Rico might or might not. Republicans.
Speaker 1: We'd fight for Puerto Rico and try to win. But
Speaker 1: if Democrats are right that that elects four new Democratic Senators,
Speaker 1: they will then pack the United States Supreme Court. They
Speaker 1: will add four left wing judicial activists the Supreme Court,
Speaker 1: take it from nine justices to thirteen. If that happens,
Speaker 1: the odds are one hundred point zero zero zero percent
Speaker 1: that the packed left wing Supreme Court will uphold the
Speaker 1: Corrupt Politicians Act, because the Democrats will only appoint left
Speaker 1: wing activists who will uphold the Corrupt Politicians Act. So
Speaker 1: the key them now that you've taken away that hope
Speaker 1: that we might be able to fight in court. But
Speaker 1: I think rightly so if you have to fight it
Speaker 1: before it's past, then that requires keeping the filibuster, and
Speaker 1: that requires winning over one of the moderate semi moderate Democrats.
Speaker 1: So where we stand right now in the Senate, they're
Speaker 1: fifty Republicans and fifty Democrats, so it's evenly divided. That
Speaker 1: means that any tie vote, the Vice President Kamala Harris
Speaker 1: breaks the time of the fifty Democrats. If all of
Speaker 1: them vote together, they can end the filibuster. They can
Speaker 1: do what it's called the nuclear option. Now what does
Speaker 1: that mean. Look, the filibuster has written into the rules
Speaker 1: of the Senate that it takes sixty votes to go forward.
Speaker 1: But the way you exercise the nuclear option is the
Speaker 1: majority leader, Chuck Schumer moves to proceed to a bill.
Speaker 1: You have a vote. The vote is fifty fifty Vice
Speaker 1: President votes yes, and the presiding Officer rules that fifty
Speaker 1: one votes not being sixty, you can't proceed to it.
Speaker 1: And in the Senate rules, any senator can appeal the
Speaker 1: ruling of the chair. So what would happen is Chuck
Speaker 1: Schumer would appeal the ruling of the chair and would say,
Speaker 1: the chair just ruled that we need sixty votes to
Speaker 1: proceed to this. I appeal the ruling of the chair,
Speaker 1: and if all fifty Democrats vote in favor of the appeal,
Speaker 1: and if the Vice President votes in favor of the appeal.
Speaker 1: That's fifty one votes. You can appeal the ruling of
Speaker 1: the chair with fifty one votes, and under the Senate,
Speaker 1: that becomes a precedent. So it breaks the rules of
Speaker 1: the Senate that are written. Because you have fifty one
Speaker 1: votes to appeal the ruling of the chair, that becomes
Speaker 1: the new precedent. That it no longer takes sixty even
Speaker 1: though that's what's written in the rules, it takes fifty one.
Speaker 1: Of the fifty Democrats, only two have suggested that they
Speaker 1: wouldn't end the filibuster. The Tube suggested it, or Joe Mansion,
Speaker 1: he's a Democrat from West Virginia, and Kirsten Cinema, who
Speaker 1: is a Democrat from Arizona Bright. Now both of them
Speaker 1: are making lots of noise like we're going to stand
Speaker 1: up and not end the filibuster. I gotta admit I
Speaker 1: am very skeptical. YEA, let's take Joe Mansion. So Joe,
Speaker 1: who's the governor of West Virginia, has been Senator. Joe
Speaker 1: is a very nice, affable, likable guy who's a college
Speaker 1: football quarterback, just like me and you football quarterback. You know,
Speaker 1: we were the geeks in the Debate Club. He was
Speaker 1: the star quarterback, exactly the same. Everybody likes Joe. You
Speaker 1: can't not like Joe. He just has a personality that
Speaker 1: is easy and affable. When I first got elected to
Speaker 1: the Senate, I remember Jim Demant told me. He said, Ted,
Speaker 1: Joe Mansion is like a purple unicorn. He will always, always,
Speaker 1: always be there for you until you need him. I
Speaker 1: can tell you nine years in the Senate, I do
Speaker 1: not know of a single issue of consequence on which
Speaker 1: Joe Mansion was the deciding vote. So basically, what Joe
Speaker 1: has done is if Republicans going to win, if we
Speaker 1: had fifty one votes, he might give you a fifty seconds.
Speaker 1: So he might make it bipartisan, but he's not going
Speaker 1: to be that. He has never on any issue that
Speaker 1: matters in the nine years I've served with it, I've
Speaker 1: never seen him willing to stand up to Chuck Schumer.
Speaker 1: What about cinema? She hadn't been there that long. She's
Speaker 1: only been there a couple of years. I like her,
Speaker 1: She's very nice. I haven't seen her stand up to Schumer. Now,
Speaker 1: who knows. She hadn't been there long enough that we
Speaker 1: don't have as long a track history with her. But
Speaker 1: I don't know what Schumer has the degree to which
Speaker 1: Democrats are terrified to cross him. And so here's my
Speaker 1: concern is that Cinema caves and Mansion finds a cute
Speaker 1: game to pretend he didn't cave. It seems like he's
Speaker 1: already setting that up. So he's talking about the talking filibuster. Now,
Speaker 1: the talking filibuster is to say, well, any senator can
Speaker 1: speak as long as they want, but at the end
Speaker 1: of the talking filibuster, we're going to vote. And insisting
Speaker 1: on the talking filibuster is away to break the filibuster.
Speaker 1: By the way, if they insist on a talking filibuster,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna spend some time talking. You have a little
Speaker 1: bit of a track record on it. I have I
Speaker 1: think the fourth longest in history, twenty one hours. Could
Speaker 1: we do verdict from the Senate floor. They won't let
Speaker 1: us do that. But you know, last time I read
Speaker 1: Green Eggs and Ham, I will tell you a friend
Speaker 1: of a very dear friend of mine suggested said, if
Speaker 1: the Democrats forced the talking filibuster, Republicans should stand up
Speaker 1: and read the Bible from cover to cover. I think
Speaker 1: many on the other side of the alt would go
Speaker 1: screaming out of the room. It actually is a great
Speaker 1: way to clear democrats off the floor. But look, we'll
Speaker 1: see what happens. But insisting on the talking filibuster is
Speaker 1: frankly a game to say I haven't ended the filibuster.
Speaker 1: But at the end, when eventually you collapse and can
Speaker 1: talk no longer, then you vote in it's fifty and
Speaker 1: you pass the Corrupt Politicians Act, and you pack the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court, and you do lasting structural damage to the country.
Speaker 1: You know that. It would seem to me you have
Speaker 1: seen a lot of these things coming, and we've talked
Speaker 1: about it on the show. You can go back and
Speaker 1: see the tape, and a lot of them have really
Speaker 1: come to pass, and they seem closer to passing right now.
Speaker 1: We're focused on that crisis on the border. Seems to
Speaker 1: me there is a crisis just as serious, maybe much
Speaker 1: more serious, with the Corrupt Politicians Act, with with other
Speaker 1: other legislation they're trying to force through. By the way, Michael,
Speaker 1: is there a way for people to subscribe or like
Speaker 1: this show? Oh that you're talking about this well as
Speaker 1: speaking of crises that we're facing in the private sector, here.
Speaker 1: We're certainly going to be booted off of all the
Speaker 1: platforms at a certain point, but in the meantime it's
Speaker 1: actually a wonderful recommendation. You can subscribe at Apple Podcasts,
Speaker 1: Google Play, Stitcher, YouTube, any and every social platform that
Speaker 1: will still have us to Verdict. We also really appreciate
Speaker 1: it when you leave a five star review they give six.
Speaker 1: You can try it will not be successful, but you
Speaker 1: don't turn it into one because you think that's like
Speaker 1: five plus. No, no, you've got it. I would say,
Speaker 1: just to be safe, maybe go with the five. And
Speaker 1: thank you to everybody who has been listening, and you
Speaker 1: know we're we're going to keep up bringing this to you,
Speaker 1: even I I hate to admit that they didn't know
Speaker 1: all of this going in. And by the way, we
Speaker 1: had a big announcement last show, Oh are you referring
Speaker 1: to what happens once they do boodh us off of
Speaker 1: these social platforms. We will be taking Verdict on the road.
Speaker 1: We will be doing a wonderful partnership with the Young
Speaker 1: America's Foundation, now being run by Governor Scott Walker. We
Speaker 1: will be coming to six campuses around the country. But
Speaker 1: we have not yet decided which campuses we will be
Speaker 1: going to. So we already did one event in Miami
Speaker 1: that was a ton of fun. We have six live
Speaker 1: events that are going to be going on over the
Speaker 1: next year. Please submit either to mailbagat Verdict podcast dot
Speaker 1: com or you know, just tweet one of us which
Speaker 1: schools you believe that we should go to. We would
Speaker 1: appreciate that while you subscribe. By the way, some people
Speaker 1: have written in to me, I'm not kidding, Senator. They
Speaker 1: subscribe and then for some reason they're unsubscribed and they
Speaker 1: don't keep doing it again. Keep doing it again and again,
Speaker 1: big tech overlords, and don't let them unsubscribe. Absolutely, we
Speaker 1: will see you next time. I'm Michael Knowles. This is
Speaker 1: Verdict with Ted Cruz. This episode of Verdict with Ted
Speaker 1: Cruz is being brought to you by Jobs, Freedom and
Speaker 1: Security Pack, a political action committee dedicated to supporting conservative causes, organizations,
Speaker 1: and candidates across the country. In twenty twenty two, Jobs
Speaker 1: Freedom and Security Pack plans to donate to conservative candidates
Speaker 1: running for Congress and help the Republican Party across the nation.