Speaker 1: Welcome.
Speaker 2: It is verdict with center, Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson with you, Senator.
Speaker 2: It was a very very lively day in the Senate
Speaker 2: and it deals with the Majorcus impeachment. Get everybody up
Speaker 2: to speed on what we're going to be seeing over
Speaker 2: the next day.
Speaker 3: Well, this week is an historic week in the United
Speaker 3: States Senate. Yesterday, on Tuesday, the House of Representatives delivered
Speaker 3: articles of impeachment for Alejandro Majorcas to the Senate. This
Speaker 3: is only the twenty second time in our nation's history
Speaker 3: that articles of impeachment have been delivered to the Senate. Today,
Speaker 3: on Wednesday, the Senate will commence the hearing at one
Speaker 3: pm to day. Under the Senate rules, we will convene,
Speaker 3: we will be sworn in as jurors in the trial.
Speaker 4: I expect a battle.
Speaker 3: I expect some fireworks, and sadly, I expect the Democrats
Speaker 3: to try to utterly dodge the issue and throw it
Speaker 3: out and refuse to hold a trial. But today is
Speaker 3: going to be a big battle, because this is going
Speaker 3: to be all about the Democrats being willing to throw
Speaker 3: the Constitution in the trash in order to avoid any
Speaker 3: national attention on the disaster that is playing out on
Speaker 3: our southern border and in order to avoid any accountability
Speaker 3: for their responsibility for the lives that are being lost
Speaker 3: because of Joe Biden and the Democrats' open borders.
Speaker 2: Democratic leadership said they were hoping this would take about
Speaker 2: a day. I want to get your take on how
Speaker 2: this is going to play out and will it be
Speaker 2: just a quote day trial and that is it. But
Speaker 2: first let me tell you about our friends over at
Speaker 2: Patriot Mobile. If you have a cell phone, and about
Speaker 2: nine nine percent of you do, you want to make
Speaker 2: sure you know where your money's going when you pay
Speaker 2: your bill. You may not realize this, but with Big
Speaker 2: Mobile you are supporting hardcore leftist causes organizations including Planned Parenthood.
Speaker 2: That's right, when you pay your bill, Big Mobile is
Speaker 2: giving big donations and they've been doing this now for decades.
Speaker 2: That is the reason why I want you to know
Speaker 2: about Patriot Mobile. Now here's the best part. I've switched
Speaker 2: and I can tell you my coverage perfect Why because
Speaker 2: I use the same exact cell towers I was using before.
Speaker 2: With Big Mobile, yeah, nothing changes for you. You get
Speaker 2: the same service you're accustomed to. But this is the
Speaker 2: best part. Every time you use your phone, every time
Speaker 2: you send a text, and every time you pay that bill,
Speaker 2: you are actually standing with other conservatives. And when you
Speaker 2: pay that bill, about five percent of that bill every
Speaker 2: month actually goes back to support your rights to free speech,
Speaker 2: really just freedom, the Second Amendment, and supporting conservative candidates
Speaker 2: and causes. They also stand with the rights of unborn children,
Speaker 2: with major donations going to right to life organizations. That's
Speaker 2: why I love Patriot Mobile and I want you to
Speaker 2: check them out.
Speaker 1: Nine to seven to two Patriots are number.
Speaker 2: When you call them, use a promo code verdict, you're
Speaker 2: gonna get free activation nine to seven to two Patriot. Now,
Speaker 2: if you've got a business or a small business, you
Speaker 2: can call them and switch all of your lines. It's easy.
Speaker 2: One hundred percent US based customer service team makes switching easy.
Speaker 2: Patriot Mobile dot com slash verdict. That's Patriot Mobile dot
Speaker 2: com slash verdict or nine to seven to two Patriot
Speaker 2: promo code Verdict Center. There was a prediction that came
Speaker 2: from the Democrats. They made it very queer. Chuck Schumer said, Hey,
Speaker 2: we think we can get done with this thing and
Speaker 2: maybe a day.
Speaker 1: Is that a possibility now, yes?
Speaker 5: Or no?
Speaker 3: Well, sadly yes, and in fact, I would say it's
Speaker 3: likely right now. So let me describe what happened yesterday
Speaker 3: on Tuesday and what's likely happened today. So yesterday, on Tuesday,
Speaker 3: at about two point thirty in the afternoon, the House
Speaker 3: Managers arrived at the Senate. When they did, virtually every
Speaker 3: Senator was sitting at their desks on the Senate floor.
Speaker 3: The House managers came in. Under the Senate rules, so
Speaker 3: the Senate exists in three different states. One is considering
Speaker 3: the legislative calendar, one is considering the executive calendar, which
Speaker 3: is nominations, and the third is considering impeachment. Those are
Speaker 3: the only three states of the Senate. Whenever articles of
Speaker 3: impeachment arrive, there are special rules that apply to impeachment
Speaker 3: that automatically kick in. So we knew that the articles
Speaker 3: of impeachment were being delivered. And so Patty Murray, who
Speaker 3: is the President pro tem, she is the senior Democrat.
Speaker 3: The Democrats are in the majority, so she's the President
Speaker 3: pro tem. She was presiding. And what happened was the
Speaker 3: House Clerk came in and said, the House managers are
Speaker 3: here to present articles of impeachment and the Speaker pro
Speaker 3: Tem Patty Murray said, they shall be welcomed on the floor.
Speaker 3: They came onto the floor and you had about a
Speaker 3: dozen House managers. They're all House members who were selected
Speaker 3: to present the case, to try the case.
Speaker 4: Mark Green is the leader.
Speaker 3: Of the House managers. Mark Green is the one who
Speaker 3: presided over the committee that considered the impeachment. Mark Green
Speaker 3: is from Tennessee. He's a good friend. He's a West
Speaker 3: Point graduate, he's an Army veteran. He's a terrific guy.
Speaker 3: And under the the Senate rules, the first step is
Speaker 3: that he reads the articles of impeachment. The articles of
Speaker 3: impeachment are they are printed out, They're a document that's
Speaker 3: actually what was voted out of the House.
Speaker 4: And they are.
Speaker 3: What are they nineteen pages long? So he read those
Speaker 3: nineteen pages on the floor of the Senate. That took
Speaker 3: probably thirty five to forty minutes. Virtually every senator sat
Speaker 3: there listening, the press sat there listening. It was important
Speaker 3: to walk through the facts. And one of the things
Speaker 3: I want to do on this podcast is read through
Speaker 3: some of the facts that were laid out in the
Speaker 3: articles of impeachment that Mark Green read. We all sat
Speaker 3: there and just listened. And the Democrats had to listen
Speaker 3: to the facts to the disaster of Biden's open border.
Speaker 3: They had to listen to that be presented. That was
Speaker 3: the first step. The next step is that under the
Speaker 3: Senate rules of impeachment, on Wednesday today, the Senate will
Speaker 3: come in into set at one pm as a court
Speaker 3: of impeachment. The very first thing that will happen is
Speaker 3: we will all be sworn in as jurors. We will
Speaker 3: sign a book that signs that we are participating as jurors. Now,
Speaker 3: what would ordinarily happen. So this has happened twenty two
Speaker 3: times in our nation's history. The other twenty one times,
Speaker 3: here's what would happen. The Senate would consider and would
Speaker 3: adopt a resolution laying out a trial schedule. That's ordinarily
Speaker 3: how this happens. And you lay out a schedule, Okay,
Speaker 3: the House will present their case on xt date. They
Speaker 3: will have why hours. It will go this way. Then
Speaker 3: the defense will present their case. They will have the
Speaker 3: following hours. Here are the motions that will be in order.
Speaker 3: It's very much like if you're in a trial court,
Speaker 3: if you're litigating a case, you'll often have a scheduling
Speaker 3: order at the front end. That's typically the first step.
Speaker 3: In this instance, we are anticipating that's not going to
Speaker 3: happen because the Democrats, Chuck Schumer has decided he does
Speaker 3: not want to have a trial. He desperately wants to
Speaker 3: avoid a trial, and he doesn't want the House managers
Speaker 3: to present any evidence. Schumer and the Democrats are terrified
Speaker 3: of the evidence of the suffering of the people who've died,
Speaker 3: of the people, of the children who've been sexually assaulted,
Speaker 3: of the women who've been sexually assaulted, of the fentanyl deaths,
Speaker 3: and the drug overdose deaths. He doesn't want that evidence
Speaker 3: to put before the American people. Understand, the Democrats have
Speaker 3: no defense on this. They don't have a counter argument.
Speaker 3: They don't have an alternative narrative on almost every other issue.
Speaker 3: If I'm in the Senate and I lay out an
Speaker 3: argument for lower taxes, the Democrats will present their counter argument, No, no, no,
Speaker 3: we need higher taxes.
Speaker 4: Stick it to the rich, make them pay more.
Speaker 3: If we're discussing the issue of abortion and I talk
Speaker 3: about the importance of protecting life, they'll step in and say, no, no, no,
Speaker 3: we must have abortions everywhere. We love them all. Almost
Speaker 3: every issue they have a counter argument. What is remarkable, Ben,
Speaker 3: is they do not have a counter argument on the
Speaker 3: open borders. They don't dispute any of the facts. Their
Speaker 3: entire strategy is simple, hide from the facts because they
Speaker 3: are indefensible, and so they're counting on the corporate media
Speaker 3: covering up the facts. They're counting on the fact that
Speaker 3: CNN ignores the border crisis, ABC ignores the border crisis, CBSNBC,
Speaker 3: MSNBC ignore the border crisis, and their entire strategy is
Speaker 3: don't talk about it, pretend it doesn't exist, and count
Speaker 3: on the media that are shameless shills for the Democrats
Speaker 3: to cover it up. As a result, I fully expect
Speaker 3: tomorrow Chuck Schumer intends to file either a motion to
Speaker 3: table or a motion to dismiss. We don't know which
Speaker 3: one yet, but when he does so, right now, the
Speaker 3: expectation is that every single Democrat will vote with him.
Speaker 3: I hope they don't, and I have been leading the fight.
Speaker 3: We had a long press conference on Tuesday with multiple Senators,
Speaker 3: with multiple of the House managers, trying to put heat
Speaker 3: on the Democrats to press them to fulfill their constitutional
Speaker 3: obligation to hold a trial. But right now, Schumer's intention
Speaker 3: he doesn't want a trial, he doesn't want any evidence.
Speaker 3: He wants to make this go away because he's terrified
Speaker 3: of the issue.
Speaker 2: So how do they proceed so quickly to just shut
Speaker 2: it down? I mean, you mentioned and I want people
Speaker 2: to understand what it would normally look like you were
Speaker 2: talking about the House would be presenting their evidence if
Speaker 2: this went the traditional way. When you say the House
Speaker 2: presents their evidence, who actually does that? How would that
Speaker 2: normally look and so paint that picture real quick.
Speaker 3: Yeah, So twenty one times the House has delivered articles
Speaker 3: of impeachment to this country to the Senate before Tuesday,
Speaker 3: in all twenty one of those times. In four of
Speaker 3: them the Senate lacked jurisdiction. The very first one, William Blount,
Speaker 3: was a Senator, and the Senate concluded right that under
Speaker 3: the Constitution, impeachment only lies against either executive branch.
Speaker 4: Officials or judicial branch officials.
Speaker 3: In other words, impeachment you can remove someone the president,
Speaker 3: you can remove a cabinet member, you can remove a judge.
Speaker 3: But the Senate concluded you cannot remove a member of Congress.
Speaker 3: That it's only each body. The Senate can throw senators out,
Speaker 3: the House can throw House members out, but impeachment's not
Speaker 3: a mechanism that applies to members of Congress. That was
Speaker 3: the first impeachment. After that, there were three other instances
Speaker 3: where the person who was impeached either died or resigned
Speaker 3: from office, but they weren't in office, and so the
Speaker 3: Senate concluded, Okay, they're out of office, we're done. There's
Speaker 3: nothing to do here. So those four cases, the Senate
Speaker 3: lacked jurisdiction. In one hundred percent of the instances where
Speaker 3: the individual remained in office and the Senate had jurisdiction,
Speaker 3: what the Senate did is conducted a trial. They hurt evidence,
Speaker 3: and the way it proceeds is the House managers present
Speaker 3: the evidence. Actually, the Senate sit there silently. We're not
Speaker 3: allowed to engage, unlike a hearing, unlike an argument on
Speaker 3: the floor, we're not allowed to speak. We sit there
Speaker 3: and listen. Both of the Trump impeachments, you'll recall, Verdict
Speaker 3: got started the first night of the first Trump impeachment.
Speaker 3: That's why this podcast was born to explain what was happening.
Speaker 3: But the way it operates in the Trump impeachments. For example,
Speaker 3: I couldn't speak, no other senator could speak. We're jurors,
Speaker 3: although actually we're not just jurors. We're also we decide
Speaker 3: the law as well, and we're entitled to take political considerations.
Speaker 3: We're entitled to take any considerations we want. So it's
Speaker 3: not it's not a jury in the ordinary sense. And actually,
Speaker 3: in the impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton, Tom Harkin, a
Speaker 3: Democrat from Iowa, actually stood up and raised a point
Speaker 3: of order and had Chief Justice William Renquist clarify that
Speaker 3: senators are not jurors in the purest sense of the word.
Speaker 3: But rather they are granted by the Constitution the responsibility
Speaker 3: and the authority to adjudicate and to consider matters of
Speaker 3: fact and law and consider every other factor. So you know, look,
Speaker 3: senators have connections to the people being impeached in ways
Speaker 3: that no juror ever would. So, for example, for President's
Speaker 3: being impeached, all the senators know the president. Half the
Speaker 3: senators are of the party the president half or not.
Speaker 3: In a jury, you could never have that. You could
Speaker 3: never have people who know the criminal defendant and have
Speaker 3: a relationship with them. But the framers established something different
Speaker 3: for impeachment. They established that it would be the Senate
Speaker 3: that adjudicates it. But the way it ordinarily plays out
Speaker 3: is the House Managers, and that's a group of typically
Speaker 3: about a dozen House members that are selected by the
Speaker 3: House to present the evidence. They present the evidence, and
Speaker 3: we listen to it.
Speaker 2: So, Senator, the next question that some of people are
Speaker 2: going to ask is is how on earth do we
Speaker 2: feel like we're living in these times where we have
Speaker 2: an open border. We're witnessing cities they're saying they're going
Speaker 2: bankrupt and they're taking away from American citizens or tax
Speaker 2: dollars giving them to I legal immigrants. We have the
Speaker 2: Fetnah crisis coming across the southern border, and we clearly
Speaker 2: have an administration that is not abiding by the laws
Speaker 2: that are already on the book, specifically my Orcis, and
Speaker 2: it seems by based on what you're saying, Majorcis is
Speaker 2: probably sitting around a table laughing right now at this
Speaker 2: because he knows he's safe.
Speaker 3: Well, he knows that the Democrats are going to rubber
Speaker 3: stamp everything he's doing, because every Democrat in the Senate
Speaker 3: supports these open borders. Understand, this is not just Joe Biden.
Speaker 3: This is not just Kamala Harris, this is Chuck Schumer,
Speaker 3: this is every single Democrat, this is the entire house.
Speaker 3: They all, every one of the Democrats supports this invasion.
Speaker 3: And so Schumer wants to make this go away quickly.
Speaker 3: He wants no attention, he wants no press, he wants
Speaker 3: none of the facts. And I will say, watching the
Speaker 3: House present the article of impeachment, so I'm going to
Speaker 3: read some of the articles of impeachment that were read
Speaker 3: on the Senate floor. And the reason I'm going to
Speaker 3: is because these facts were laid out and it was
Speaker 3: interesting watching the Democrat senators listen to it. So, for example,
Speaker 3: here's one portion, so that the articles of impeachment go
Speaker 3: through all the different statues, the statutes that may Orcus defied.
Speaker 3: So for example, here's a quote Alejandro Mayorcus willfully refuse
Speaker 3: to comply with the detention mandate set forth in section
Speaker 3: two thirty five B one B two of such Act,
Speaker 3: requiring that an alien who's placed in expedited removal proceedings
Speaker 3: and determined to have a credible fear of persecution quote
Speaker 3: shall be detained for further consideration of the application for
Speaker 3: asylum shall be detained. It's mandatory terms over and over again.
Speaker 3: They go through all sorts of Section two thirty six
Speaker 3: CE of the Act, which requires that a criminal alien
Speaker 3: who is inadmissible or deportable on certain criminal and terrorism
Speaker 3: related grounds, quote, shall be taken into custody when the
Speaker 3: alien is released from law enforcement. Aljandra Mayorcus issued Guidelines
Speaker 3: for the Enforcement of civil Immigration Laws, which instructs the
Speaker 3: Department of Homeland Security that the fact that an individual
Speaker 3: is removable a removable non citizen should not alone be
Speaker 3: the basis of an enforcement action against them, and that
Speaker 3: DHS personnel should not rely on the fact of a
Speaker 3: conviction alone that's directly violating federal law. It goes through
Speaker 3: instance after instance after instance of federal law federal statutes
Speaker 3: that Majorcis has defied. Aljandro Majorcis. This is quoting more
Speaker 3: from it. Aljandro Mayorcus willfully exceeded his release authority set
Speaker 3: force in section two thirty six A of such Act
Speaker 3: that permits, in certain circumstances, the release of aliens arrested
Speaker 3: on administrative warrant, in that he released aliens arrested without
Speaker 3: a warrant despite being subject separate applicable mandatory detention requirements,
Speaker 3: over and over and over again. All right, here's some
Speaker 3: basic stats that it lays out during fiscal year twenty
Speaker 3: seventeen through twenty twenty. In other words, the Trump administration,
Speaker 3: an average about five hundred and ninety thousand aliens each
Speaker 3: fiscal year were encountered as inadmissible aliens at ports of
Speaker 3: entry or on the Southwest border, apprehended in between.
Speaker 4: Ports of entry.
Speaker 3: During Alijandro Mayorcus's tenure in office, the number of skyrocketed,
Speaker 3: so it was five hundred ninety thousand a year first year.
Speaker 3: It's skyrocketed to one point four million and fiscal year
Speaker 3: twenty twenty one, and then to two point three million
Speaker 3: in fiscal year twenty twenty two, and then to two
Speaker 3: point four million in fiscal year twenty twenty three, those numbers.
Speaker 3: It goes on to talk about New York City and
Speaker 3: it says, for instance, this is quoting for instance, twenty
Speaker 3: twenty two, more than one hundred and fifty thousand migrants
Speaker 3: have gone through New York City's shelter intake system. Indeed,
Speaker 3: the Mayor of New York City has said that quote,
Speaker 3: we are past our breaking point and that quote this
Speaker 3: issue will destroy New York City. In fiscal year twenty
Speaker 3: twenty three, New York City spent one billion, four hundred
Speaker 3: and fifty million addressing Alojandro Mayorcis's migrant crisis, and city
Speaker 3: officials fear it will spend another twelve billion dollars over
Speaker 3: the following three years, causing painful budget cuts to important
Speaker 3: city services. If you look at it, goes on to say,
Speaker 3: for example, during a Mayorcus's tenure Secretary of Homeland Security,
Speaker 3: the US Border Patrol has encountered an increasing number of
Speaker 3: aliens on the terrorist watch list. In the fiscal years
Speaker 3: twenty seventeen through twenty twenty. In other words, the Trump
Speaker 3: administration combined eleven non citizens on the terrorist watch list
Speaker 3: were caught attempting to cross the Southwest border. So, in
Speaker 3: other words, in four years, a total of eleven people
Speaker 3: on the terror watch list crossed. That number increased to
Speaker 3: fifteen in the fiscal year twenty twenty one, ninety eight
Speaker 3: in fiscal year twenty twenty two, one hundred and sixty
Speaker 3: nine in fiscal year twenty twenty three, and forty nine
Speaker 3: so far in fiscal year twenty twenty four. Those numbers
Speaker 3: are staggery, and I think it was important to see
Speaker 3: them read and presented on the Senate floor and to
Speaker 3: watch every Senate Democrat have to listen to them.
Speaker 2: When you say it was interesting to see their reaction.
Speaker 2: Was it a reaction of let's hurry up and get
Speaker 2: through this. Was it a reaction from some that they
Speaker 2: didn't even know this, or was it the reaction of
Speaker 2: this is not my problem, I don't care.
Speaker 1: I mean, what did the room look like? And were
Speaker 1: there different reactions?
Speaker 3: So it was the latter. The Democrats were all staring ahead,
Speaker 3: they didn't care at all. They were enduring it. They
Speaker 3: were sitting there for appearances. You know what was the
Speaker 3: most revealing reaction?
Speaker 1: What was that?
Speaker 3: John Tester? So, John Tester, everyone recognizes is almost certainly
Speaker 3: the most vulnerable Democrat on the ballot in November. John
Speaker 3: Tester is the senator from Montana. Montana's going to vote
Speaker 3: for Donald Trump. He's Montana's gonna vote for Donald Trump
Speaker 3: by double digits. John Tester gets re elected every six
Speaker 3: years because he looks like a good old boy Montana farmer.
Speaker 3: He's a big old guy with a flat top haircut,
Speaker 3: and you figure he's got to be reasonable middle of
Speaker 3: the road.
Speaker 4: He votes exactly like Chuck Schumer. He's hard left.
Speaker 3: If Tester had a different haircut, he would never have
Speaker 3: gotten elected in Montana. But because he's got a flat
Speaker 3: top haircut, he gets elected. Tester knows he's got a
Speaker 3: heck of a fight. What was interesting is Tester was
Speaker 3: on the Senate floor before the house managers arrived. As
Speaker 3: soon as the house managers arrived, Tester disappeared. Almost every
Speaker 3: single Democrat were sitting in their seats. Tester was gone.
Speaker 3: I assume he went to the cloak room. He ran away.
Speaker 3: He's like, oh my goodness, I cannot be on the
Speaker 3: floor to hear this.
Speaker 4: So he was gone. His seat was empty.
Speaker 3: The house managers read the articles of impeachment. It takes,
Speaker 3: as I said, thirty or forty minutes. We all sat
Speaker 3: there listening. And then as soon as the house manager's
Speaker 3: finished and they left, you know who was back on
Speaker 3: the Senate floor.
Speaker 4: That John Tester.
Speaker 3: Wow, he I guess was sitting back in the cloakroom.
Speaker 3: I don't know if he was on his phone playing
Speaker 3: video games. I don't know what he was doing, but
Speaker 3: he was not willing to sit on the Senate floor
Speaker 3: and listen to it. And by the way, when he
Speaker 3: goes back to Montana, he says, I care so much
Speaker 3: about illegal immigration. We've got to secure the board. It's
Speaker 3: a problem. And every word he's saying is not true,
Speaker 3: because today he intends to vote to throw the damn
Speaker 3: thing out to say, I don't want to hear a trial.
Speaker 3: I don't want to hear any evidence. I don't want
Speaker 3: to know what's going on. It's not even like an
Speaker 3: Ostrich sticking his head in the sand, at least stays
Speaker 3: in the room. He's an Ostrich who runs his ass
Speaker 3: out of there. And it's emblematic. Why does Chuck Schumer
Speaker 3: want to avoid a trial because he's desperate to protect
Speaker 3: the Democrat senators on the ballot from the consequences from
Speaker 3: the deaths and suffering and people who are suffering misery
Speaker 3: because of their open border politics and policies which they
Speaker 3: intend to continue. And Schumer, this is all about political camouflage.
Speaker 2: I want to talk to you about our friends over
Speaker 2: at AMOS Squared. If you're like me and you want
Speaker 2: to make sure you have AMMO, and you saw what
Speaker 2: happened when we had a massive AMO shortage, that lasts
Speaker 2: for well over a year during COVID.
Speaker 1: Well, you need to know what ammo Square does.
Speaker 2: You get great AMMO at a phenomenal price, ordered automatically.
Speaker 2: Ammo Square helps you stay stocked up on ammunition automatically
Speaker 2: every single month. Amo's delivered on demand or when you
Speaker 2: need it, and stored for free when you don't.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Ammo Squared is family owned and operated, started by a
Speaker 2: husband and wife team, Dan and Danielle. They said, look,
Speaker 2: we need a budget friendly way to build a stockpile
Speaker 2: of AMMO, and it's a unique way to invest in ammunition.
Speaker 2: You can buy low and dollar cost average over time,
Speaker 2: then cash out when prices rise without ever taking delivery
Speaker 2: of any physical ammunition. So, in other words, if you've
Speaker 2: got a big stockpile and you don't need it all
Speaker 2: and prices go through the roof, you sell it at
Speaker 2: a premium. You can buy as little as a few
Speaker 2: dollars a month, and you get to let it grow
Speaker 2: over time or buy a bunch all at once so
Speaker 2: you have it when you need it. Typically, customers will
Speaker 2: accumulate three to six months and then ship it, but
Speaker 2: some ship every month and others accumulate thousands of dollars
Speaker 2: with of Ammo and ship every few years, or if
Speaker 2: the price skyrockets, they sell it back. And twenty twenty,
Speaker 2: when the store shelves went empty and everyone had trouble
Speaker 2: finding Ammo locally or online, ammo squared customers just need
Speaker 2: to ship their Ammo stored at ammo squared and they
Speaker 2: got it automatically delivered with just the click of a button.
Speaker 2: You need to check them out. Go to amosquared dot
Speaker 2: com slash verdict. That's ammo squared dot com slash verdict
Speaker 2: to sign up and you're gonna get free Ammo in
Speaker 2: your account right now. Amosquare dot com slash verdict to
Speaker 2: sign up and get free Amo in your account today.
Speaker 1: Senator, let's move forward.
Speaker 2: If the Democrats get this victory, and there's a very
Speaker 2: good chance it sounds like they're going to get this victory,
Speaker 2: which is a show trial at best and kind of
Speaker 2: a mockery of the system, how much of an issue
Speaker 2: is this going to be for them to come back
Speaker 2: and bite them come election day? And I say that
Speaker 2: because it just came out that, for example, Colorado in Denver,
Speaker 2: they defunded the police and they're now giving the money
Speaker 2: which they took from police to illegal immigrant services. I
Speaker 2: can't imagine that's going to sit well with the voters there.
Speaker 2: For example, I just came back from New York City
Speaker 2: a couple hours ago, and in New York City, I
Speaker 2: was there when the protests were happening. They were protesting
Speaker 2: at City Hall illegal immigrants demanding better hotels like four
Speaker 2: star hotels, and demanding more money and more food from
Speaker 2: the New York City government. It's insane, but this is
Speaker 2: what's happening in liberal cities right now.
Speaker 3: Look the left, the hypocrisy is enormous. You ask how
Speaker 3: big an issue this is going to be. I think
Speaker 3: this is going to be the number one issue in November,
Speaker 3: in every election in the country that Joe Biden and
Speaker 3: every Democrat member of Congress has willfully presided over and
Speaker 3: aided into betting in the criminal invasion of this country.
Speaker 3: That what is unfolded has been staggering. And understand, the
Speaker 3: consequence is this is not some TICKI tack violation of law. Rather,
Speaker 3: the consequences of this we are seeing thousands upon thousands
Speaker 3: of people die. We are seeing migrants die every year,
Speaker 3: multiple migrants a day dying We're seeing dead bodies all
Speaker 3: over Texas, farms and ranches occurring over and over again.
Speaker 3: We're seeing thousands of children brutalized by human traffickers. We
Speaker 3: are seeing thousands of women sexually assaulted by human traffickers.
Speaker 3: We are seeing over one hundred thousand Americans dying of
Speaker 3: drug overdoses every year. The traged is enormous, and I
Speaker 3: think this is going to be front and center. The
Speaker 3: Democrats are going to try to avoid accountability. I don't
Speaker 3: think they're going to succeed. I think this impeachment trial
Speaker 3: is exceptionally important, and I will say today it's going
Speaker 3: to play out one of two ways. What the Democrats
Speaker 3: have proposed it is a scheduling order that will allow
Speaker 3: votes on several motions. So there is an organizing resolution
Speaker 3: that Mike Lee is presented that is modeled after the
Speaker 3: Trump impeachment trial that would set it up where the Senate,
Speaker 3: the entire floor of the Senate is the trial, and
Speaker 3: we conduct the trial on the floor.
Speaker 4: I'm going to vote for that.
Speaker 3: I think all the Republicans are most, if not all,
Speaker 3: the Republicans tend to vote for it, and all the
Speaker 3: Democrats vote. Now I have a scheduling order that I
Speaker 3: put in that instead of having the full Senate conduct
Speaker 3: the trial, that would point a point a trial committee.
Speaker 3: And the way the Senate is operated when it is
Speaker 3: the impeachment of the President of the United States, it
Speaker 3: occurs on the floor of the Senate and the Chief
Speaker 3: Justice of the United States presides. But for lesser impeachment, So,
Speaker 3: for example, may Orcis is only the second cabinet member
Speaker 3: in history to be impeached. The last cabinet member was
Speaker 3: the Secretary of War in eighteen seventy six. But this
Speaker 3: is exceptionally rare. The bulk of the impeachments have been judges,
Speaker 3: and the way it's typically worked when a judge is
Speaker 3: impeached is that the Senate has appointed an impeachment committee
Speaker 3: with an equal number of members of each party, and
Speaker 3: the committee has conducted the trial. So the committee, here's evidence,
Speaker 3: The House managers present evidence, it's public, the American people
Speaker 3: can see it, and then the committee makes a recommendation
Speaker 3: of the full Senate, and the Senate in turns Every
Speaker 3: Senator has to vote guilty or not guilty on each
Speaker 3: of the articles. That's the way it's historically works. So
Speaker 3: I've got an organizing resolution. I filed to do that.
Speaker 3: I would rather it be on the floor of the Senate.
Speaker 3: I think it's important enough it should be on the
Speaker 3: floor of the Senate. If Republicans had a majority in
Speaker 3: the Senate, I'm confident we would hold the trial on
Speaker 3: the floor of the Senate. But given Democrats have control,
Speaker 3: I think it is reason for them to say, Okay,
Speaker 3: we'll do this the way every other sub presidential impeachment
Speaker 3: has been done through an impeachment committee, so that would
Speaker 3: be the reasonable way to do it. They're going to oppose,
Speaker 3: and so what Schumer has suggested is scheduling order to
Speaker 3: will allow a vote on Mike Lee's resolution, a vote
Speaker 3: on my resolution, and then a number of points of
Speaker 3: orders raising problems with what the Democrats are trying to
Speaker 3: do of throw out the matter, prevent the House managers
Speaker 3: from presenting the evidence, and prevent a trial. The Democrats
Speaker 3: intend to vote against all of those. What the scheduling
Speaker 3: order that's been proposed by the Democrats would give some
Speaker 3: time for debate Right now, it's an hour and a half.
Speaker 3: An hour and a half is not a ton of time,
Speaker 3: but it's better than zero. It is not clear if
Speaker 3: that will be agreed to. Right now, there are a
Speaker 3: couple of Republicans who are objecting. If Republicans object to
Speaker 3: that scheduling order, then here's what will probably happen. Will
Speaker 3: come in at one o'clock today. We will not get
Speaker 3: a vote on Mike Lee's scheduling order. We will not
Speaker 3: get a vote on my scheduling order. I and several
Speaker 3: others will rise on points of order and try to
Speaker 3: challenge this, and what I expect is fairly quickly Chuck
Speaker 3: Schumer to file a motion to table and try to
Speaker 3: put this whole thing away. Now, the frustrating thing about
Speaker 3: doing it that way is under the rules, when we
Speaker 3: make a point of order, you're not allowed to argue,
Speaker 3: so we won't have debate. We won't be able to
Speaker 3: stand up and state the reasons for our point of order.
Speaker 3: You can get maybe twenty thirty seconds to say, I
Speaker 3: raise a point of order that X, but you've got
Speaker 3: a couple of sentences and that's it.
Speaker 4: So in my view, it's much.
Speaker 3: Better to take a scheduling order that gives us a
Speaker 3: period of time to lay out the argument, because the
Speaker 3: entire purpose of this is to put the evidence before
Speaker 3: the American people. But we may see one or more
Speaker 3: Republicans object, in which case we won't get any debate
Speaker 3: time at all, and this will just get rammed through
Speaker 3: very quickly.
Speaker 2: There's also the fact that I think a lot of
Speaker 2: people believe, and I think you would agree with this,
Speaker 2: that there has been zero accountability for Secretary my archists
Speaker 2: just flat out lying to Congress. Uh, this is something
Speaker 2: that he said, and I want to get your take.
Speaker 4: I've adhered to the oath.
Speaker 6: To which I have sworn, and I have abided by
Speaker 6: the law each and every step of the way.
Speaker 1: That's not true, is it. That's a lie.
Speaker 4: It's an absolute lie.
Speaker 3: And actually there's a whole provision of these articles of
Speaker 3: impeachment that lay out how may Orcus has repeatedly lied
Speaker 3: to Congress. Now, now it's interesting. One of the things
Speaker 3: that the articles of impeachment also lay out is that, Okay,
Speaker 3: so the Democrats are going to take the position, this
Speaker 3: is a policy difference, that that that Okay, the Biden
Speaker 3: administration just they won't quite say it, but believes in
Speaker 3: open borders. So they're going to let people go. But
Speaker 3: it's not impeachable, it's it's it's it's not an offense.
Speaker 3: What is interesting is that was not the position of
Speaker 3: the Biden Justice Department. So you had litigation in front
Speaker 3: of the court where Texas sued the Biden administration trying
Speaker 3: to get the court to say, the Biden administration is
Speaker 3: refusing to refusing to follow immigration law. And I'm going
Speaker 3: to read from the articles of impeachment the dissenting justice
Speaker 3: in that case noted quote. The court holds that Texas
Speaker 3: lacks standing to challenge a federal policy that inflicts substantial
Speaker 3: harm on the state and its residents by releasing illegal
Speaker 3: aliens with criminal convictions for serious crimes. In order to
Speaker 3: reach that conclusion, the court holds that the only limit
Speaker 3: on the power of the president to disobey a law
Speaker 3: like the important provisions at issue is Congress's power to
Speaker 3: employ the weapons of inner branch warfare. As the descending
Speaker 3: justice explained, quote, Congress may wield what the Solicitor General
Speaker 3: described as political tools, which presumably mean such things as
Speaker 3: impeachment and removal. Indeed, during oral arguments, the justice who
Speaker 3: authored the majority opinion stated to the Solicitor General, quote,
Speaker 3: I think your position is instead of judicial review, Congress
Speaker 3: has to resort to shutting down the government or impeachment
Speaker 3: or dramatic steps. That is what the Biden Justice Department argued,
Speaker 3: is that impeachment is the remedy when a president a
Speaker 3: cabinet member refuses to follow the law, defies the law.
Speaker 3: The Biden Justice Department argued that in front of the
Speaker 3: US Supreme Court. And yet you know what today, the
Speaker 3: Democrats are going to say, no, impeachment's not the remedy.
Speaker 3: If you have an executive who defies the law, it
Speaker 3: doesn't matter. We're going to rubber stamp it and we're
Speaker 3: not even going to hold a trial. And by the way,
Speaker 3: every Democrat will tell the reporters there was no evidence
Speaker 3: of a high crime and misdemeanor. Now, of course they'll
Speaker 3: say there was no evidence because they're about to vote
Speaker 3: to block all the evidence, so they don't hear any evidence.
Speaker 3: So then they can say we didn't hear any evidence.
Speaker 3: And the reason they didn't hear any evidence is because
Speaker 3: they're going to refuse to hear any evidence. And why
Speaker 3: are they going to refuse to hear any evidence, Because
Speaker 3: they don't want the American people to hear the evidence.
Speaker 2: And part of what they don't want them to hear
Speaker 2: is the reality of what it's like out there on
Speaker 2: the streets. Bill Malusian did some great reporting yesterday on
Speaker 2: Fox News Channel about Elite Ice unit is tracking down
Speaker 2: migrant criminals, specifically child rapists. This is while Mayorkas stared
Speaker 2: at Congress and said the border is secure, the border
Speaker 2: is secure. He said that to Congress, he was lying,
Speaker 2: take a list of this from Fox.
Speaker 5: A short time later, I took down their final target,
Speaker 5: a Brazilian gang member also charged with child rape. Just
Speaker 5: this morning today, four accused child rapists and one MS
Speaker 5: thirteen gang member. Those are the kind of people you're
Speaker 5: going after.
Speaker 1: That's every day up here in Boston.
Speaker 5: If those are the public safety threats that we really
Speaker 5: want to get off the street, it was a great
Speaker 5: day for the teams.
Speaker 1: That's five public safe threats that are on in the community,
Speaker 1: going go ahead and victimize anyone else.
Speaker 6: And I says, all of those arrests you just saw
Speaker 6: happen because local authorities ignored their detainer request to keep
Speaker 6: these guys in custody due to sanctuary policies. I says,
Speaker 6: all of those suspects will remain in federal custody until
Speaker 6: their local charges are resolved, then ICE.
Speaker 5: Will seek to deport every single one of them.
Speaker 2: Four alleged child rapists arrested in the morning, and they
Speaker 2: said they're doing this every day, and local law enforcement
Speaker 2: is not working with them because local municipalities have said
Speaker 2: we're sanctuary cities. So these child rapists that are that
Speaker 2: should have been held by local authorities or not. And
Speaker 2: yet this administration says, no, no, no, We're following the law.
Speaker 1: Everything's fine.
Speaker 3: Every single week, the Biden administration is releasing thousands upon
Speaker 3: thousands of illegal aliens, that includes murders, that includes rapists,
Speaker 3: that includes child molesters. Every single week, we are seeing
Speaker 3: another horrific crime committed by an illegal alien released by
Speaker 3: Joe Biden and the Democrats, week after week after week.
Speaker 3: Whether it was Laken Riley and Georgia and the horrific
Speaker 3: murder that occurred from an illegal alien that Joe Biden
Speaker 3: the Democrats released, whether it was Jeremy Cassaris, a beautiful
Speaker 3: two year old boy in Prince George's County, Maryland, just
Speaker 3: a few miles from where I am right now in
Speaker 3: d C. Murdered by an eelgalalien that Joe Biden released,
Speaker 3: or whether it was a fifteen year old girl in Boston, Massachusetts,
Speaker 3: severely disabled, who was raped by an illegal alien that
Speaker 3: not only did Biden released, he flew from Haiti to America.
Speaker 3: So we've covered on this podcast how three hundred and
Speaker 3: twenty thousand illegal immigrants were flown into America by the
Speaker 3: Biden administration. He literally imported in a child rapist who's
Speaker 3: now been arrested for raping the severely disabled fifteen year
Speaker 3: old teenager. This is happening week after week after week.
Speaker 3: This is why the Democrats don't argue on the other side.
Speaker 3: What's the counter argument of, no, it's good a two
Speaker 3: year old boy is murdered, No, it's good that we
Speaker 3: have teenage girls being raped. That there is no counter argument.
Speaker 3: So their counter argument is see no evil. Their counter
Speaker 3: argument is John Tester running from the Senate floor and
Speaker 3: hiding in the cloak room because he doesn't want to
Speaker 3: listen to what's happening. Why because he intends to vote
Speaker 3: today to say no trial, no evidence. I don't want
Speaker 3: to know. I do not care about the people dying.
Speaker 3: I'm a Democrat. I want Democrats to be in power.
Speaker 3: Ten point four million illegal immigrants meets more Democrat voters.
Speaker 3: So if people have to die for me to stay
Speaker 3: in power as a Democrat, I'm okay with that.
Speaker 4: I got to say, Look, it.
Speaker 3: Is difficult for me not to get really angry about
Speaker 3: this because as a Texan, I see I've looked in
Speaker 3: the eyes when you get down to the border, as
Speaker 3: I have over and over again, and you look in
Speaker 3: the eyes of these little children have been brutalized. It
Speaker 3: makes you angry that these people. Tomorrow, more children will
Speaker 3: be brutalized, Tomorrow, more women will be raped. And not
Speaker 3: a one of these democrats cares. Not a one of
Speaker 3: them will do anything to change and they'll tell you
Speaker 3: I care, but if you cared, you.
Speaker 4: Would change it. And not a one of them is
Speaker 4: willing to do that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's very true.
Speaker 2: I want to take a moment and say thank you
Speaker 2: to so many of you guys that are listeners of
Speaker 2: Verdict for getting involved with the IFCJ that's the International
Speaker 2: Fellowship of Christians and Jews. You know that Israel is
Speaker 2: under attacked by Iran directly now, and it's already been
Speaker 2: six months since the brutal attack by Hamas on our
Speaker 2: brothers and sisters in Israel. Now, since then, the attack
Speaker 2: on Israel's on Israel and the Israelis and Jewish people
Speaker 2: have only increased, especially in the North, and that is
Speaker 2: where the need is. The International Fellowship of Christians and
Speaker 2: Jews is on the ground now addressing all the needs
Speaker 2: as they come in. Now, your life saving donation today
Speaker 2: can help provide a bomb shelter in an area in
Speaker 2: Israel that needs it the most. When the sirens go off,
Speaker 2: people have fifteen second weekends or less to get to safety.
Speaker 1: Let me say that again.
Speaker 2: When the sirens go off and those three hundred plus
Speaker 2: rockets that were headed towards Israel happened just a few
Speaker 2: nights ago, people have fifteen seconds or less to get
Speaker 2: into safety. Twenty people can fit inside each mobile bomb shelter.
Speaker 2: They are constructed to a stand rocket attacks and meet
Speaker 2: standards approved by the IDF. IFCJ has helped renovate and
Speaker 2: install now nearly three thousand bomb shelters because of people
Speaker 2: like you. Now, the cost of one bomb shelter is
Speaker 2: fifteen thousand dollars and the goal for April is five
Speaker 2: bomb shelters that we can help install. We're asking listeners
Speaker 2: to get fifty dollars. Three hundred of you give fifty dollars,
Speaker 2: we'll have a new bomb shelter installed immediately. And if
Speaker 2: you're able to increase your generosity and give five hundred
Speaker 2: to more, your name will be included on a special
Speaker 2: plaque placed on a bomb shelter in Israel to help.
Speaker 2: I want you to visit support IFCJ dot org. That's
Speaker 2: one word, support if CJ dot org. One more time,
Speaker 2: support if CJ dot org and help install bomb shelters
Speaker 2: now in Israel Center. I want to play something else,
Speaker 2: and there's two things I actually want to play. I
Speaker 2: want to go back in time and this is my
Speaker 2: orcus in front of the White House. And then I'm
Speaker 2: going to compare it to what Schumer said last week.
Speaker 4: Do you believe that right now this is a crisis
Speaker 4: at the border. I think that the answer is no.
Speaker 4: I think there is a challenge at the border that
Speaker 4: we are managing, and we have our resources dedicated to
Speaker 4: managing it.
Speaker 2: That was Mark's first twenty twenty one secretary of my
Speaker 2: ork Is insisting there's no crisis of the border, despite
Speaker 2: that millions of illegal immigrants coming across and literally thousands
Speaker 2: of illegal crossings per day. Then you go to last week,
Speaker 2: Chuck Schumer making it clear this is a policy now
Speaker 2: of the Democratic Party to have an open border collage.
Speaker 4: Say you're going to.
Speaker 6: Offer a motion to dismiss the impeachment charges on Thursday.
Speaker 6: Are you at all concerned that if some Democrats and
Speaker 6: tough Races both for that, you can come back.
Speaker 5: To follow on Campaigndro.
Speaker 2: Look, we're going to try and resolve this issue as
Speaker 2: quickly as possible. Impeachment should never be used to settle
Speaker 2: policy disagreements. Leadership never be used to settle policy disagreements.
Speaker 2: This is the policy of the Democratic Party. And my
Speaker 2: archists lied to your face in March of twenty twenty
Speaker 2: one saying that there's no crisis the border, and in
Speaker 2: their mind from a policy viewpoint center, I think it's
Speaker 2: abundantly clear. Now they're on the record saying a wide
Speaker 2: open southern border and millions of illegals coming across is
Speaker 2: not a is not a crisis, it's just a policy disagreement.
Speaker 3: And it's the policy they support. And Schumer repeated those
Speaker 3: those two lines at the press conference about four more
Speaker 3: times that said, we're going to try to get rid
Speaker 3: of us as quickly as possible, and impeachment should never
Speaker 3: be used policy dispute. What's interesting he didn't have a
Speaker 3: third line. He was reading those talking points. He was
Speaker 3: being very precise. He's not defending, he's not saying, hey,
Speaker 3: this is a good policy. I agree with the policy
Speaker 3: the Biden administration. I think it's great we have an
Speaker 3: open border. I think it's terrific that we're releasing murderers.
Speaker 3: I think it's terrific that we're releasing rapists. I think
Speaker 3: it's terrific we're releasing child molesters, we're releasing drunk drivers.
Speaker 3: I think it's terrific that one hundred thousand people have
Speaker 3: died of drug overdose every year and we keep allowing
Speaker 3: more and more. I think it's terrific that in twenty eighteen,
Speaker 3: the Mexican drug cartels made five hundred million dollars from
Speaker 3: human trafficking. In twenty twenty two, they made thirteen billion dollars.
Speaker 3: I think it's fabulous that we, the Democrats, have produced
Speaker 3: a two six hundred percent increase in the revenue for
Speaker 3: the Mexican drug cartels. The biggest friends the human traffickers
Speaker 3: have ever had in the history of humanity have been
Speaker 3: Joe Biden and Alejandro Majorcis. That is the simple reality,
Speaker 3: and none of that does Chuck Schumer say. Instead says, hey,
Speaker 3: this is it's just a policy dispute.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 3: They the other side believes in securing the border, and
Speaker 3: we want this country invaded.
Speaker 2: It is the policy of the Democratic Party. And it's sad,
Speaker 2: but we're witnessing the demise of this country, our borders
Speaker 2: and our laws at the hands of these people, and
Speaker 2: it is their America will come back. Though America will
Speaker 2: come back. We are not witnessing the demise. We are
Speaker 2: witnessing the attempted demise. And I believe in this country.
Speaker 2: I think we will come back. I think millions of
Speaker 2: Americans are looking this and saying, holy crap, this is horrific,
Speaker 2: This is inhuman, this is wrong. That's why this trial
Speaker 2: is so important is there are a lot of people that
Speaker 2: still don't know what's happening.
Speaker 4: They don't understand.
Speaker 3: If you watch CNN every day, God help you, but
Speaker 3: you have no idea because the media or propagandists. That's
Speaker 3: why this trial is important. But I think people's eyes
Speaker 3: are opening up.
Speaker 1: I hope you're right, and it's going to be very
Speaker 1: important come November. Don't forget.
Speaker 2: That's exactly why we do the show Monday, Wednesday and Friday,
Speaker 2: and we do a week in review of what you
Speaker 2: may have missed during the week. We know many of
Speaker 2: you are busy and you may miss a show, so
Speaker 2: that's why we put that out there on Saturdays as well.
Speaker 2: Make sure you get that subscriber auto downloadle button, and
Speaker 2: don't forget grab my podcast as well. I'll keep you
Speaker 2: up to date on what's going on with breaking news
Speaker 2: on those in between days, the Ben Ferguson Podcasts wherever
Speaker 2: you get your podcasts, and The Senator and I will
Speaker 2: see you back here on Friday morning.