Speaker 1: Welcome.
Speaker 2: It is a verdict with Ted Cruz and it's the
Speaker 2: week in Review. Ben Ferguson with you, and we had
Speaker 2: some major stories this week that you may have missed.
Speaker 2: First up, voters, you've heard it before about the idea
Speaker 2: of draining the swamp. What does it actually look like
Speaker 2: this time with a Trump presidency and will it be
Speaker 2: different than twenty sixteen. The answer is yes, and we'll
Speaker 2: explain just how big of a difference it could be. Also,
Speaker 2: Kamala Harris was cornered about lying to the American people
Speaker 2: on the cognitive decline of Joe Biden. She now has
Speaker 2: a new date when she says she noticed a difference
Speaker 2: but also defended him as being a brilliant man. It
Speaker 2: didn't go well in an NBC interview, and we're going
Speaker 2: to play that for you. And finally, Kamala Harris, just
Speaker 2: days away from election day, is in Texas. Why well,
Speaker 2: she wants to tell you Texas is evil and that
Speaker 2: you should be able to kill your babies whenever you
Speaker 2: want to on demand with abortion. Is that going to
Speaker 2: play with voters across the country. It's the Weekend Review
Speaker 2: and it starts right now, yet not at all and
Speaker 2: This goes back to the cover up. I don't think
Speaker 2: this was an accident. This was deliberate by them because
Speaker 2: they knew they needed this to be a campaign issue
Speaker 2: that hey, things aren't that bad, right, Inflation's actually not
Speaker 2: that bad.
Speaker 1: Immigration.
Speaker 2: We saw them do this deal with Mexico to make
Speaker 2: the numbers artificially go down in August, in September, going
Speaker 2: into the election, going see, we're securing the border. It's
Speaker 2: no different with the violent crime status here. This is
Speaker 2: why so many Americans now don't trust the government, certainly
Speaker 2: the deep state, certainly unfortunately the FBI. And yet no
Speaker 2: one's going to get fired for screwing up their job
Speaker 2: this bad because it wasn't a screw up, it was
Speaker 2: done deliberately.
Speaker 3: Well, you may be wrong that no one's going to
Speaker 3: get fired, because.
Speaker 2: Well that would be amazing in a first in my lifetime.
Speaker 3: Well, I mean, if we have a good election. I
Speaker 3: think if Donald Trump gets elected, we will see a
Speaker 3: new attorney general. I think we will see a new
Speaker 3: head of the FA oh for sure. And I am
Speaker 3: praying the people involved in this will be fired. If
Speaker 3: we win a majority in the Senate. I think we're
Speaker 3: likely to win and the Republicans are likely to win
Speaker 3: a majority in the Senate. As you know, I'm on
Speaker 3: the Senate Judiciary Committee. I'm going to press the Judiciary
Speaker 3: Committee to launch an investigation into the FBI as to
Speaker 3: who specifically put out the false data. And I think
Speaker 3: we should push to get every email, exchange, every conversation.
Speaker 3: I think it is likely that this was partisan, but
Speaker 3: we need to get to the bottom of it. And
Speaker 3: the fact that the FBI is not even providing any
Speaker 3: explanation when they're caught red handed really does damage. And
Speaker 3: by the way, look I'll tell you something again. As
Speaker 3: I travel around campaigning regularly, people ask me should we
Speaker 3: abolish the FBI? And I got to tell you that,
Speaker 3: actually that question concerns me because the FBI does a
Speaker 3: lot of things that are incredibly important. The FBI is
Speaker 3: designed to battle terrorism, to catch terrorists before they commit
Speaker 3: another nine to eleven that the FBI catches serial killers,
Speaker 3: the FBI catches child predators, the FBI helps with kidnap children.
Speaker 3: I mean, there is a very very important law enforcement
Speaker 3: mission of the FBI. And I'll tell you with first
Speaker 3: James Kate Comy and now Chris Ray running the FBI,
Speaker 3: I think the integrity and the reputation of the FBI
Speaker 3: has been so profoundly tarnished that half the country wants
Speaker 3: to get rid of the damn thing altogether. That is
Speaker 3: really bad from a law enforcement perspective, from a perspective
Speaker 3: and stopping terrorists and stopping criminals. And I'll tell you
Speaker 3: I have chewed out Chris Ray that when he circles
Speaker 3: the wagons and defends the hardcore partisans who have politicized
Speaker 3: the FBI, he is lighting on fire the FBI's credibility
Speaker 3: and its reputation. And I think if Trump wins, there
Speaker 3: needs to be a wholesale cleaning house getting rid of
Speaker 3: the wildly partisan, uh career bureaucrats who burrowed into senior
Speaker 3: leadership positions at the FBI.
Speaker 2: All right, let's let's dive into this even on a
Speaker 2: on a more intense level, because this is one of
Speaker 2: those moments where I think there's a lot of voters
Speaker 2: that are listening right now. They're saying, Okay, my worry
Speaker 2: is we've heard this before, that there's going to be
Speaker 2: a real draining of the swamp. What how different do
Speaker 2: you think a Trump administration will be this time? Compared
Speaker 2: to twenty sixteen, when there was a lot of people
Speaker 2: that were on a list. And you've done transitions. I've
Speaker 2: done it before. When when people win, and what you
Speaker 2: go through is you say, okay, well, there's a certain
Speaker 2: group people over here. These are non political, we don't
Speaker 2: mess with them, right, they stay throughout administrations, and then
Speaker 2: here's your support, here's your political ones, and you can
Speaker 2: deal with them how you want. But there's these certain
Speaker 2: areas we don't touch it. I think Donald Trump learned
Speaker 2: there's a lot of these quote non political positions that
Speaker 2: have become highly political.
Speaker 1: Yes, and this is a great example of that.
Speaker 2: So do you believe that there is is the political
Speaker 2: will to actually clean house the way that many voters
Speaker 2: are expecting? And I'd say that I think there's a
Speaker 2: lot of voters that are expecting it. They're like, Okay,
Speaker 2: if we're going to put you back in there, Republicans
Speaker 2: aka Trump, then you guys better do what you said
Speaker 2: you're going to do this time in clean house, because
Speaker 2: that's what we're voting for.
Speaker 3: Well, as you know, this is the topic of the
Speaker 3: third book that I wrote, which is called Justice Corrupted.
Speaker 3: How the left has weaponized the legal system. And then
Speaker 3: the book Justice Corrupted, I lay out how Barack Obama
Speaker 3: weaponized the Department of Justice, of the FBI and the
Speaker 3: IRS and the alphabet soup of federal agencies to target
Speaker 3: and attack his political enemies. And then when Trump became president,
Speaker 3: by that point, many of these hard parts since had
Speaker 3: burrowed into senior career positions in the agency, and they
Speaker 3: spent the four years of the Trump presidency waging war
Speaker 3: on Donald Trump. They hated him, they tried to destroy
Speaker 3: the president. They tried to frustrate and oppose every aspect
Speaker 3: of his agenda. And now under Joe Biden and Kamala Harris,
Speaker 3: they're brazen it out in the open. They are nakedly
Speaker 3: politicized that they repeatedly are employed to target and persecute
Speaker 3: the political opponents of the White House, and it is disastrous.
Speaker 3: I think it is one of the most important things
Speaker 3: in a Trump administration to depoliticize the Department of Justice
Speaker 3: in the FBI. I've said a lot of times, I
Speaker 3: don't want a Republican DJ, I don't want a Democrat DJ.
Speaker 3: I want a DJ that follows the law and that
Speaker 3: prosecutes people when they break the law, regardless of their party.
Speaker 3: I want an FBI that does the same thing, and look,
Speaker 3: will it be better the second time around?
Speaker 1: Absolutely?
Speaker 3: I don't think Trump, and I know his senior team
Speaker 3: in the White House, they didn't realize what it is
Speaker 3: they were fighting. They didn't realize how the swamp operated,
Speaker 3: and they left in place a lot of people who
Speaker 3: actively waged war against the Trump administration. Look, classic example
Speaker 3: of that is James Comy. I believe that the Trump
Speaker 3: White House should have fired James Comy on January twentieth,
Speaker 3: twenty seventeen. No one would have blinked. First day Trump
Speaker 3: comes in office, mister kmy, thank you for your services.
Speaker 3: He was the old head of the FBI. You're gone.
Speaker 3: They didn't. They thought, oh, we can co opt this
Speaker 3: guy and get him to work with us. Well, it
Speaker 3: was a disaster and the whole Russia Russia, Russia nonsense.
Speaker 3: James Comy was behind a lot of that. And so
Speaker 3: this time around, I think there certainly they realize the
Speaker 3: threat now fighting it's not easy. I'm not going to,
Speaker 3: you know, just blow smoke at you and say it's
Speaker 3: all going to be rosy if Trump wins again. Fighting
Speaker 3: the swamp and the career bureaucrats is incredibly difficult. But
Speaker 3: I do think you will see a much much greater
Speaker 3: seriousness of purpose from the Trump White House time around.
Speaker 3: I think they realize much more the magnitude of the
Speaker 3: threat they're dealing with.
Speaker 2: Final question for you, sender, there's a story and we're
Speaker 2: getting more details on it, but we're going to talk
Speaker 2: about this one on Wednesday, I'm sure. But there is
Speaker 2: a headline that just popped and it says big tech
Speaker 2: censoring ahead of the elections. I was not surprised by this.
Speaker 2: I think it's a no brainer. But we're seeing now
Speaker 2: that this is a real problem yet again.
Speaker 1: Weeks before election.
Speaker 3: Day, Yeah, the Washington Post had an investigation that said
Speaker 3: that Instagram, which is part of Meta, buries political posts
Speaker 3: and it slashes the audience by sixty three percent when
Speaker 3: the word vote is posted, and one influencer faced, as
Speaker 3: I said, a sixty three percent drop. And this is
Speaker 3: an investigation done by Washington Post tech columnist Jeffrey Fowler
Speaker 3: that showed that Meta cross its platforms, including Instagram, Facebook
Speaker 3: and Threads, actively suppressed content related to the upcoming twenty
Speaker 3: twenty four election and it affects partisan political posts, but
Speaker 3: it also just nonpartisan content like vote that they are
Speaker 3: suppressing it. And Fowler found that whenever an Instagram account
Speaker 3: creator named missus Frazzld, whose real name is Aeriel Fodar,
Speaker 3: whenever vot mentioned anything related to politics over the last
Speaker 3: six months, her audience size decreased by about forty percent
Speaker 3: compared to her non political posts. And when she used
Speaker 3: the word vote in a captured across eleven posts, the
Speaker 3: average audience was sixty three percent smaller, and her experience
Speaker 3: is not isolated. Fowler, this is a Washington Post investigative reporter,
Speaker 3: found several other Instagram creators who noticed a similar pattern,
Speaker 3: and it's not unique to individual accounts. There was a
Speaker 3: wider study by an advocacy group called Accountable Tech that
Speaker 3: quantified the audience drops for five prominent leftist Instagram accounts,
Speaker 3: including the Human Rights Campaign and Feminist and over ten
Speaker 3: weeks this spring, their average audiences fell by sixty five percent.
Speaker 3: The study found that conservative accounts experienced a similar drop
Speaker 3: in engagement when discussing political topics and metas. Suppression of
Speaker 3: political content happened when Zuckerberg in twenty twenty one decided
Speaker 3: to pull back on political content and just try to
Speaker 3: avoid politics. Now, look, I'd rather they avoid politics than
Speaker 3: actively be biased, which is how they were in the
Speaker 3: twenty twenty election. But silencing the ability of citizens to
Speaker 3: talk about politics is a really bad dynamic. And you
Speaker 3: contrast that to X, which I think X, with Elon
Speaker 3: Musk's having purchased it is the new town Square. But
Speaker 3: Facebook and Instagram have huge reaches and silencing politics it
Speaker 3: is really harmful for democracy.
Speaker 2: Now, if you want to hear the rest of this conversation,
Speaker 2: you can go back and listen to the full podcast
Speaker 2: from earlier this week.
Speaker 1: Now onto story number.
Speaker 3: Two, MSNBC pushes her on Joe Biden's cognitive state, and
Speaker 3: again her answer is terrible.
Speaker 1: Give a listen.
Speaker 4: Can you say that you were honest with the American
Speaker 4: people about what you saw in those moments with President
Speaker 4: Biden as you were with him again and again repeatedly
Speaker 4: in that time.
Speaker 5: Of course, Joe Biden is an extremely accomplished, experienced and
Speaker 5: capable in every way that anyone would want if they're president,
Speaker 5: and you never saw anything like.
Speaker 4: What happened at the debate night behind closed doors with him.
Speaker 1: It was a bad debate. People have bad debates. He
Speaker 1: is absolutely that's.
Speaker 4: The reason why you're here. And he's not running for
Speaker 4: the top of the ticket.
Speaker 5: Well, you'd have to ask him if that's the only reason, why,
Speaker 5: what do you think I am running for president in
Speaker 5: the United States? Joe Biden is not. And my presidency
Speaker 5: will be about bringing a new generation of leadership to
Speaker 5: America that is focused on the work that we need
Speaker 5: to do to invest in the ambitions and aspirations of
Speaker 5: the American people.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's just a bad answer, Like it's an
Speaker 2: answer that you're sitting there and if you work on
Speaker 2: her staff, you can't think that this is going well well.
Speaker 3: And she continued to get pressed on the fact that
Speaker 3: Biden has obviously diminished and she dug it even more.
Speaker 3: Give a listen to how she continued, It's.
Speaker 4: A judgment question. That's why I ask, can the American
Speaker 4: people trust you in these moments even when it's maybe
Speaker 4: uncomfortable for Americans to have to level with Americans in
Speaker 4: that way?
Speaker 1: So that's why I ask.
Speaker 4: And it sounds like what you're saying is you feel
Speaker 4: like you never saw anything like that from President Biden.
Speaker 5: I have worked with Joe Biden, whether hours and hours
Speaker 5: and hours over these four years, whether it be in
Speaker 5: the situation, rumor of the Oval Office, Joe Biden is
Speaker 5: the one who was able to bring NATO together during
Speaker 5: a crisis where for the first time in seventy years,
Speaker 5: Europe saw and has seen war. Joe Biden has done
Speaker 5: the work that has been about being a leader on
Speaker 5: what we have done to fix so much of what
Speaker 5: has been broken in terms of the economy because of
Speaker 5: Donald Trump's mismanagement. I speak with not only sincerity, but
Speaker 5: with a real first hand account of watching him do
Speaker 5: this work. I have no reluctance in saying that, no,
Speaker 5: of course I don't.
Speaker 2: She, by the way, was not happy at the end
Speaker 2: of that question, because I think she knew this was
Speaker 2: a screw.
Speaker 1: Up for her.
Speaker 3: Well, look, in a lot of ways, it's an impossible
Speaker 3: question for her. Because let's assume for a second that
Speaker 3: Kamala Harris hires Ben Ferguson to coach here on this question.
Speaker 3: And let's assume that Ferguson his brain is cup captured
Speaker 3: by body snatchers and he decides he's willing to work
Speaker 3: for Kamala Harris. I ask you, in all seriousness, what
Speaker 3: would you tell her, because there's nothing she can say.
Speaker 3: There is no answer to give to this question because
Speaker 3: the truth of the matter. Okay, here's the honest answer. Yes,
Speaker 3: of course I knew he was senile. Of course I
Speaker 3: knew he was incompetent. Every person in the room knew
Speaker 3: he was incompetent. The guy couldn't tie his shoes. He
Speaker 3: was utterly and completely in the full throes of dementia.
Speaker 3: That was obvious to every person there. Now, that would
Speaker 3: have the advantage of being true, but it would also
Speaker 3: be an admission that she spent four years lying to
Speaker 3: the American people on a daily basis, So she can't
Speaker 3: say that, So she has to instead say Nope, nothing
Speaker 3: seemed wrong to me. Everything seemed fine. He was the smartest,
Speaker 3: most handsome, most amazing leader I've ever seen. Huh Who knew?
Speaker 3: Who knew that there were issues there? Mind you, You
Speaker 3: and I were talking about this years ago. Anyone observing knew.
Speaker 1: This year ago.
Speaker 3: But she is trapped by her own misconduct because the truth,
Speaker 3: I guess she figures is more damning than the lie.
Speaker 3: I mean, seriously, what would you advise or bet if
Speaker 3: she hired you?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I would have told her a. Look, I think
Speaker 2: you can say, hey, I saw the man this. If
Speaker 2: I was writing a response, I would have said, do
Speaker 2: it this way. I look, I worked with the man
Speaker 2: every day. When you see somebody every day, sometimes you
Speaker 2: may not realize how much there is a decline. But
Speaker 2: when I watched him during the debate, many of us
Speaker 2: privately after that knew that we need to have a conversation.
Speaker 2: That conversation took place, and he did the right thing
Speaker 2: for the country. And that's why I'm sitting here in
Speaker 2: front of you today. But you also have to understand
Speaker 2: then she had give him smack. Did he did this well?
Speaker 2: And this well well, and this well? And I think
Speaker 2: even now Joe Biden understands it's time for riend to retire.
Speaker 2: That's why I'm sitting in front of you. That would
Speaker 2: have been a better answer to straight up lying to
Speaker 2: the American people saying I saw nothing at all, because
Speaker 2: that's when they don't believe you.
Speaker 3: Yeah, look, yours is the Sergeant Schultz answer from Hogan's hearing,
Speaker 3: I see nothing, I know nothing that That was her answer.
Speaker 1: Yeah it is.
Speaker 2: And this goes back to the trustworthy aspect of Kamala.
Speaker 2: And if you look at her. She was confronted, for example,
Speaker 2: on Bidenomics, which she's touted as being amazing. Right, she's
Speaker 2: obsessed with it. It was awesome, We've got a great economy.
Speaker 2: Bidenomics is everything. It's doing well. And then she's asked
Speaker 2: about it now because the majority of American voters, and
Speaker 2: minority voters especially are going, no, it's not great. We're suffering,
Speaker 2: we're hurting, and.
Speaker 4: I wonder are the last four years an obstacle to
Speaker 4: you in this race.
Speaker 5: Here's how I look at it. First of all, let
Speaker 5: me be very clear. Mine will not be a continuation
Speaker 5: of the Biden administration. I bring my own experiences, my
Speaker 5: own ideas to it, and it has informed a number
Speaker 5: of my areas of focus, most of which are on
Speaker 5: to your point, lowering costs. So part of my plan
Speaker 5: includes what we need to do to bring down the
Speaker 5: price of groceries, including the work I will do dealing
Speaker 5: with price gouging, something I dealt with when I was
Speaker 5: Attorney General, something I will deal with going forward.
Speaker 4: Then why do you think that's not landing with voters,
Speaker 4: because in the numbers it's the opposite. Former President Trump
Speaker 4: leads you on this issue.
Speaker 1: Well, when I'm out.
Speaker 5: This is why I'm going out to Wisconsin, Pennsylvania.
Speaker 6: And.
Speaker 1: In Michigan. Michigan, excuse me.
Speaker 5: Just got in lately this morning, actually, but going to
Speaker 5: three states yesterday, and I'm going to continue being on
Speaker 5: the road.
Speaker 1: I have to earn the vote.
Speaker 2: That's breaking news. My administration will not be a continuation
Speaker 2: of his. In other words, yes, what we did was
Speaker 2: what sucked. It was bad for the American people, and
Speaker 2: so therefore I don't want to be connected in But
Speaker 2: then I want to immediately tell you that I'm proud
Speaker 2: of what we've done together while I was in office.
Speaker 2: It's like, if you say that to the American people
Speaker 2: that are hurting, I don't see how that ends well
Speaker 2: for you.
Speaker 3: Well, and remember that's the exact opposite of what she
Speaker 3: told the view. If you asked her, how will your
Speaker 3: administration be different from the Byday administration? She said, Oh,
Speaker 3: I can't think of a thing I do differently. I
Speaker 3: can't think of anything. And yet now she's saying mine
Speaker 3: will not be continuation of the Biden administration. How is
Speaker 3: it different? Well, I'm me, I'm not him. I'll just
Speaker 3: do exactly the same thing he was doing. But we're
Speaker 3: different people. That's how it's different.
Speaker 1: Senner.
Speaker 2: One other question I want to ask you about this
Speaker 2: interview with Harris is they say that she took a
Speaker 2: day off when you ran for president. Did you ever
Speaker 2: take a day off in the last two weeks when
Speaker 2: you're running in a primary to get ready for an interview?
Speaker 2: The whole entire campaign right now seems to be in
Speaker 2: at least a strategy in shambles, Like you're coming to
Speaker 2: Texas where you're not competitive because you want to highlight
Speaker 2: abortion issues. I get it, But why not do that
Speaker 2: in Pennsylvania? Why not do in a swing state? Why
Speaker 2: not doing a place that you think you're going to
Speaker 2: win but it's gotten tight in the polls.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'll confess I am a lot less critical of
Speaker 3: her on that front than some folks are. Even in
Speaker 3: the most intense campaigning times. I try to take it
Speaker 3: down day a week. I try to take Sundays down
Speaker 3: and be home with the kids, home with Heidi, home
Speaker 3: with the girls. And look, do I do that one
Speaker 3: hundred percent of the time. No, So, for example, like
Speaker 3: right before election day, I might not do that a
Speaker 3: day or two before election day, but even through a
Speaker 3: long campaign. A campaign is a grind a campaign. You're
Speaker 3: going fourteen fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen hours a day. It's exhausting,
Speaker 3: and so I actually think it matters to take a
Speaker 3: down day, to be with your family, to unplug, to
Speaker 3: sleep in, to go to church at home, to sleep
Speaker 3: in your own bed, and I find you come back
Speaker 3: a better candidate. So on that piece, I'm not particularly critical.
Speaker 3: I think almost every candidate you're better off. If you
Speaker 3: just grind yourself to where you can't see anymore, it
Speaker 3: ends up doing more harm than good.
Speaker 2: Well, and the last thing I want to ask you
Speaker 2: is the news that is come out and it's quietly broken.
Speaker 2: The mainstream media is not talking about it. But Harris's
Speaker 2: town hall moderator admitted the questions were quote pre determined.
Speaker 2: The moderator, Maria Shriver, admitted that the questions again were
Speaker 2: pre determined.
Speaker 1: This is her in her own words.
Speaker 5: You're not unfortunately, we have some pre determined questions, and
Speaker 5: I hopefully I'll be able to ask.
Speaker 4: Some of the questions that might be in your head.
Speaker 1: I hope.
Speaker 2: So that was her talking to the audience. That video
Speaker 2: has been leaked. Someone said we're going to be able
Speaker 2: to ask her own questions, and she says, no, you can't,
Speaker 2: They've been predetermined, meaning the campaign's got them. Kamla knew it.
Speaker 2: This whole thing was a ruse from the very beginning.
Speaker 2: It wasn't an authentic or real town hall.
Speaker 3: Well, look, I could tell you I've done hundreds of
Speaker 3: town halls. I don't think I've ever known the questions
Speaker 3: before in any of them. It is not one hundred
Speaker 3: percent clear from what Maria Shriver's said, whether they were
Speaker 3: predetermined by the network or by the Kamala Harris campaign.
Speaker 3: And I will say those are different. It is possible
Speaker 3: that she's saying no, no, no, We the network picked
Speaker 3: which one of the audience questions we want to ask
Speaker 3: because we wanted to divvy up the topics and not
Speaker 3: have nineteen questions on abortion. We wanted to talk about
Speaker 3: something else that's possible and that might be more understandable.
Speaker 3: But I'll tell you if that's the case, they certainly
Speaker 3: haven't clarified it. It absolutely raised the inference of the
Speaker 3: Kamala Harris campaign had information about what the predetermined questions were.
Speaker 3: And if that's true, then it completely it makes a
Speaker 3: laughing stock about what is supposed to be journalism, because
Speaker 3: that's certainly not like any town hall I've ever done
Speaker 3: as before.
Speaker 2: If you want to hear the rest of this conversation
Speaker 2: on this topic, you can go back and dow the
Speaker 2: podcast from earlier this week to hear the entire thing.
Speaker 2: I want to get back to the big story number
Speaker 2: three of the week.
Speaker 1: You may have missed this is I.
Speaker 2: Do believe going to be the Achilles Hill for her
Speaker 2: on election day, and that is this overall lack of
Speaker 2: cohesion of ideas. I think the flip flopping is hurting her,
Speaker 2: which brings me to what she's doing today in Texas.
Speaker 2: She's not coming to campaign necessarily in Texas, because I
Speaker 2: don't think she believes she's going to win in Texas.
Speaker 2: She is coming, however, to attack Texas and Texas laws
Speaker 2: to say to the rest of the country, better vote
Speaker 2: for me, so that you don't have people and things
Speaker 2: and ideas that actually are brought to light like they've
Speaker 2: done in Texas that go against what we believe in,
Speaker 2: which is, for example, abortion on demand. This is a
Speaker 2: very interesting and radical strategy all at the same time.
Speaker 1: Do you believe it's going to work? Well? I don't.
Speaker 3: And I think Kamala one of the things that Left
Speaker 3: has decided is that they're going to describe Texas as
Speaker 3: this horrible hell hole and like her messages to be
Speaker 3: vote for me to avoid America becoming like Texas. And
Speaker 3: I got to say, you do have sort of facts
Speaker 3: in reality that crashes into that, which is, for more
Speaker 3: than a decade, Texas has had over one thousand people
Speaker 3: a day moving to our state. People are voting with
Speaker 3: their feet. They want to be here. And where do
Speaker 3: they come from. They come from bright blue states. They
Speaker 3: come from her state, they come from California, they come
Speaker 3: from Illinois, they come from New York, they come from
Speaker 3: New Jersey, they come from Connecticut. They come from states
Speaker 3: that have adopted these high tax, high regulation, terrible environment
Speaker 3: for small businesses, terrible environment for jobs. And then soft
Speaker 3: on crime. And by the way, let's listen to her
Speaker 3: answer when she was confronted about her soft on crime policies.
Speaker 3: Let's listen to what she says on that.
Speaker 5: On the issue of law and order, as you mentioned,
Speaker 5: I think there's just a whole lot of misinformation. To
Speaker 5: be honest with you, I have personally prosecuted very serious
Speaker 5: crime it's how I started my career. I spent most
Speaker 5: of my career as a prosecutor, not in Washington, d C.
Speaker 5: And as my first priority had and remains as a
Speaker 5: first prior to me, the safety of the American people.
Speaker 1: So that has not changed.
Speaker 5: And sadly, I think that there's a bit of misinformation,
Speaker 5: if not more than a bit, But I'm glad that
Speaker 5: you raised the subject so that I can address it.
Speaker 2: She again generalities, no actual real answer the question.
Speaker 3: Yeah, does she address True or false. You have repeatedly
Speaker 3: called for defunding the police. Answer true, true or false.
Speaker 3: You've voted for defunding the police. Answer true, true or false.
Speaker 3: You've called for abolishing and defunding ICE. Answer true, true
Speaker 3: or false. You've called for shutting down ICE detention centers
Speaker 3: and pledged to do so on your first day as president.
Speaker 3: Answer true, true or false. You've advocated for releasing violent
Speaker 3: criminals from jail true true or false. You've advocated for
Speaker 3: ending cash bail and letting criminals out without even paying bail.
Speaker 3: True true or false. You have advocating for decriminalizing illegal
Speaker 3: border crossings true all true or false. You raised bail
Speaker 3: money to bail out violent rioters in Minneapolis answer true. Now,
Speaker 3: in the face of all those facts, what does she
Speaker 3: say misinformation, by the way, with no counter narrative, she
Speaker 3: just says, no, no, no, I'm a prosecutor. Look, I was
Speaker 3: raised in the middle class. Look, I'm a prosecutor. Those
Speaker 3: are her two crutches that she goes to repeatedly, but
Speaker 3: then she actually does not address anything that resembles facts.
Speaker 2: Let me also ask you another question about this town
Speaker 2: hall and it dealt with her plan, and it's the
Speaker 2: socialist plan, her plan on groceries.
Speaker 1: She's now tripling down. She tried to run away from it.
Speaker 2: That didn't work, so now she's back at it again, saying,
Speaker 2: if you vote for me, I'm going to give you
Speaker 2: communist price control. She was actually asked a question from
Speaker 2: someone in the audience about this.
Speaker 7: Prices have gone up quite a bit in the last
Speaker 7: four years, and some people blame former President Trump, some
Speaker 7: people blame President Biden. Who would you say is correct
Speaker 7: and what would you do to bring prices down for Americans?
Speaker 5: Thank you, Eric, And you're absolutely right. You know what,
Speaker 5: I know what I think most Americans know it. Price
Speaker 5: and grocery is still too high, and we need to
Speaker 5: address it in a number of ways. One of my
Speaker 5: aspects of doing what we need to do to bring
Speaker 5: down the cost of living for working people in the
Speaker 5: middle class in America is to address the issue of
Speaker 5: grocery prices. Part of my background and how I come
Speaker 5: to it is probably a new approach grounded in a
Speaker 5: lot of my experiences as a former attorney general where
Speaker 5: I took on price gouging, and part of my plan
Speaker 5: is to create a new approach. That is the first
Speaker 5: time that we will have a national ban on price gouging.
Speaker 2: I mean, that seems like the most ridiculous answer, this
Speaker 2: national ban on price gouging.
Speaker 1: We already have a lot of laws on price gouging.
Speaker 2: A lot of states have those laws, and they're the
Speaker 2: ones that usually are implementing them. So what is she
Speaker 2: actually offering up here that everybody that has that's as
Speaker 2: a big store is evil If I don't like their
Speaker 2: price today.
Speaker 3: Well, and listen, in the grocery context, it's it's particularly absurd.
Speaker 3: So states that have price gouging laws, and by the way,
Speaker 3: Texas has a price gouging laws law, they are typically
Speaker 3: focused on emergency. So if you have say a hurricane
Speaker 3: price gouging laws are if if you know, ordinarily you
Speaker 3: charge a dollar for a bottle of water, and a
Speaker 3: hurricane hits and you decide you're going to charge fifty
Speaker 3: dollars for a bottle of water. That's when price gouging
Speaker 3: kicks in. Is that when you're taking a disaster and
Speaker 3: just taking advantage of people in a time of crisis.
Speaker 3: And states do have laws for that, they don't apply
Speaker 3: just to day in, day out the ordinary pricing of
Speaker 3: goods and services, and particularly in the grocery context, that
Speaker 3: the average profit margin in a grocery store it is
Speaker 3: typically one or two percent. So the idea that the
Speaker 3: Feds are going to come like forced grocery stores, it's
Speaker 3: it's it's you know, big grocery that that is the
Speaker 3: cause of inflation rather than the disastrous policy's she has
Speaker 3: led is asinine. But I will say, look look to
Speaker 3: Anderson Cooper's question. You know, to his credit, he pointed out,
Speaker 3: wait a second, you're in the White House right now.
Speaker 3: If this is a good idea, why aren't you doing it?
Speaker 3: And listen to her response about why she hasn't done
Speaker 3: what she's proposing, despite the fact that she's been in
Speaker 3: the White House four years and in power.
Speaker 2: Take a listen, simple question from Anderson Cooper asked to
Speaker 2: Kamwa Harris, and her response is laughable. Some voters, though,
Speaker 2: might ask, you've been in the White House for four years.
Speaker 2: You were vice president, not the president, But why wasn't
Speaker 2: any of that done in the.
Speaker 1: Last four years?
Speaker 5: Well, there was a lot that was done, but there's
Speaker 5: more to do, Anderson, and I'm pointing out things that
Speaker 5: need to be done that haven't been done but need
Speaker 5: to be done.
Speaker 2: You couldn't write a better script for Saturday Night Live.
Speaker 1: There you go.
Speaker 3: I'm pointing out the things that need to be done
Speaker 3: that haven't been done, that need to be done. And
Speaker 3: by the way, I'm the one that didn't do them,
Speaker 3: but I'm the one you can count to do them.
Speaker 3: But actually compare that and combine that with let's remember
Speaker 3: her biggest mistake. But when she's asked, look, people want
Speaker 3: to change the page. They want to turn the page.
Speaker 3: They recognize that the Biden Harris record is a disaster.
Speaker 3: So when she's asked how she's different from Joe Biden,
Speaker 3: take a listen to her answer.
Speaker 6: Considering you've been in the position of Vice president for
Speaker 6: the past four years under the Biden administration. How can
Speaker 6: we expect you to deviate from the direction of that
Speaker 6: administration compared to your own. How can we differentiate your
Speaker 6: policy and your beliefs from that of Biden's.
Speaker 5: That's a great question, and thank you well. First of all,
Speaker 5: my administration will not be a continuation of the Biden administration.
Speaker 5: To this role, my own ideas and my own experience.
Speaker 5: I represent a new generation of leadership on a number
Speaker 5: of issues and believe that we have to actually take
Speaker 5: new approaches. For example, what we talked about in terms
Speaker 5: of housing. My experience that leads to that priority includes
Speaker 5: what I did to take on the big banks around
Speaker 5: the foreclosure crisis, when I brought billions of dollars to
Speaker 5: homeowners that were the subject of predatory lending. I know
Speaker 5: what homeownership means to the American people, not to mention
Speaker 5: what it meant to my mother, who worked very hard
Speaker 5: and saved up so that by the time I was
Speaker 5: a teenager, she was able to buy our first home.
Speaker 5: I bring to it my experience actually taking care of
Speaker 5: my mother when she was sick, and it was, as
Speaker 5: it turned out, dying from cancer, and so I know
Speaker 5: what it means and have the experience of taking care
Speaker 5: of an elderly relative, and I have raised children, and
Speaker 5: so I bring to my priorities and will as president
Speaker 5: a new approach and a new idea frankly, about what
Speaker 5: we need to do to deal with the Sandwich generation.
Speaker 2: There it is. It's it's I'm not him. His policies
Speaker 2: are terrible. I'm different. But a month ago I told
Speaker 2: you we were amazing together and his policies were amazing.
Speaker 3: And the difference is I'm a new generation. I actually
Speaker 3: care about people, unlike that old geezer. By the way,
Speaker 3: I know what it's like to care for old geezers.
Speaker 3: Look at the one I care for in the White
Speaker 3: House right now that I lied to you about and
Speaker 3: said was brilliant engage when he actually isn't. I mean,
Speaker 3: I mean it truly is it. It is a miracle
Speaker 3: of circularity. But but we actually should close on what
Speaker 3: we opened on. We talked about how she held a
Speaker 3: press conference to say that Trump is a fascist and
Speaker 3: Trump is hitler. She's not running away from that. That
Speaker 3: that that that's her big October surprise. So so give
Speaker 3: a listen when when when she's asked asked whether she
Speaker 3: thinks Trump is a fascist?
Speaker 1: Do you think Donald Trump is a fascist?
Speaker 5: Yes?
Speaker 1: I do, Yes, I do.
Speaker 5: And I also believe that the people who know him
Speaker 5: best on this subject should be trusted.
Speaker 1: Senator, I go back to the dog whistle.
Speaker 2: This is so concerning to me because all I hear is, Hey,
Speaker 2: if there's someone out there that wants to finish the job,
Speaker 2: these other two attempted assassins were trying to finish. The
Speaker 2: President's already been shot once. We've dehumanized him to the
Speaker 2: point where we're right back to calling him a fascist,
Speaker 2: and earlier today in front of the official American flag
Speaker 2: at the home of the Vice President, I'm telling you
Speaker 2: he's hitler. I cannot believe the level of hatred and
Speaker 2: irresponsibility from Kamwa Harris in this moment.
Speaker 3: At the same time that they're sending out Barack Obama
Speaker 3: to say we need more civility and decency in this
Speaker 3: bitterness is too much. And by the way, my opponent
Speaker 3: is hitler. They managed to say those without taking a
Speaker 3: breath between those two statements.
Speaker 2: As always, thank you for listening to Verdict with Sentner,
Speaker 2: Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you don't forget to deal
Speaker 2: with my podcast, and you can listen to my podcast
Speaker 2: every other day you're not listening to Verdict or each
Speaker 2: day when you listen to Verdict. Afterwards, I'd love to
Speaker 2: have you as a listener to again the Ben Ferguson podcasts,
Speaker 2: and we will see you back here on Monday morning.