Speaker 1: Welcome.
Speaker 2: It is Verdict with Senator Ted Cruz, the Weekend Review,
Speaker 2: Ben Ferguson with you, and these are the stories that
Speaker 2: you may have missed that we talked about this week.
Speaker 2: First up, Joe Biden goes to war with the State
Speaker 2: of Texas and now it's gone all the way to
Speaker 2: the Supreme Court over the issue of securing the southern border.
Speaker 2: So why did the Supreme Court actually go with the
Speaker 2: Biden administration? Cender Cruz will break that down for you. Also,
Speaker 2: China donating massive amounts of money to the Biden Pen Center.
Speaker 1: How much I'll give you the details on that.
Speaker 2: And finally, Senator Cruz shares his thoughts on the race
Speaker 2: for the GOP nomination. It's all over, So why is
Speaker 2: Nikki Haley still staying in?
Speaker 1: It is the week in Review and it starts right now.
Speaker 2: Can you explain exactly what just happened at the Supreme
Speaker 2: Court when it came to the Supreme Court ruling that
Speaker 2: the Biden administration in a five to four decision can
Speaker 2: resume removal of the razor wire that we installed by
Speaker 2: the State of Texas along the border, specifically near Eagle Pass.
Speaker 2: And they say at least while the litigation is ongoing.
Speaker 2: What was even more shocking, I think is the fact
Speaker 2: that Roberts and Amy Komy Barrett sided with left leaning
Speaker 2: justice to rule in Biden administration's favor and allow the
Speaker 2: border patrol to go in and remove the razor wire,
Speaker 2: which the Texas National Guard then put back up. At
Speaker 2: least from the latest videos we've seen from the border,
Speaker 2: this is a shocking moment. Many people in Texas are
Speaker 2: angry about this, saying, what about states' rights here and
Speaker 2: how could these two concerted justices side with the Biden administration.
Speaker 3: Look, this is a horrible decision. I'm angry about it.
Speaker 3: It is deeply disturbing. Fact Number one, we are seeing
Speaker 3: an invasion at our southern border. Nine point six million
Speaker 3: and illegal immigrants have crossed in under Joe Biden. It
Speaker 3: is deliberate. He wants this to happen. It is the
Speaker 3: worst illegal immigration in our nation's history. Number Two, it's deliberate.
Speaker 3: Biden wants this to happen. The Democrats want this to happen.
Speaker 3: They are facilitating it, they are accelerating it that they
Speaker 3: are actively wanting more and more and more of it.
Speaker 3: So Texas understandably is responding to defend ourselves. I commend
Speaker 3: our Governor. I commend our state legislature for acting to
Speaker 3: protect the sovereignty of Texas and for investing billions of
Speaker 3: dollars in border security and law enforcement and putting personnel
Speaker 3: in putting up barriers to try to stop this invasion
Speaker 3: of our state. Now, what happened on this case. It
Speaker 3: arose to the Supreme Court on an emergency appeal on
Speaker 3: an injunction. There was an injunction against the federal government
Speaker 3: to stop the federal government from cutting down the razor wire,
Speaker 3: the Constantino wire that Texas had erected, and the Fifth Circuit,
Speaker 3: the Federal Court of Appeals, had upheld the injunction. What
Speaker 3: happened today Tuesday, is the Supreme Court, by a vote
Speaker 3: of five to four, vacated that injunction. What that means is,
Speaker 3: right now, the federal government has the legal ability to
Speaker 3: cut down that razor wire to allow illegal immigrants to
Speaker 3: continue invading the state. Now, the good news, the merits
Speaker 3: of the appeal is still pending, and so the Fifth
Speaker 3: Circuit can still rule on the merits of the appeal
Speaker 3: as to whether Texas has the authority and by the way,
Speaker 3: the Supreme Court could still rule on the appeal.
Speaker 1: So it is.
Speaker 3: Possible that Texas prevails. That the results of an emergency
Speaker 3: appeal on an injunction are not always the same as
Speaker 3: the merits results on the substantive issue. So that's true.
Speaker 3: But at the end of the day, you had the
Speaker 3: three Liberals plus John Roberts plus Amy Cony Barrett ruling
Speaker 3: for the Biden administration saying you can cut down this
Speaker 3: razor wire. Now, on one level, I understand it that
Speaker 3: there is a heavy presumption in Washington in federal courts,
Speaker 3: which is that the federal government gets to trump the states,
Speaker 3: and that is part of the Constitution, is the supremacy
Speaker 3: clause that says the constitution of federal law is the
Speaker 3: supreme law of the land. I think it is a
Speaker 3: real problem that John Roberts is a creature of Washington.
Speaker 3: I don't think he understands what is happening at the
Speaker 3: southern border. I think Amy Coney Barrett is a law
Speaker 3: professor from Indiana. I don't think she has any understanding
Speaker 3: of what's happening at the southern border in ordinary times.
Speaker 3: If this were just a regular time and a state,
Speaker 3: we're trying to block what the federal government was doing.
Speaker 3: The Supreme Court would fairly routinely rule with fetes. What
Speaker 3: I don't think these justices have a real appreciation for
Speaker 3: is how horrifically bad it is, how lawless it is
Speaker 3: what the Biden administration is doing. There's never been a
Speaker 3: president who refuses to follow the law like Joe Biden did.
Speaker 3: So here's the statement that the Border Patrol Union put
Speaker 3: out today. Quote the Supreme Court's decision today is going
Speaker 3: to undoubtedly encourage more illegal immigration. Unfortunately, this means border
Speaker 3: patrol agents are going to be tied up dealing with
Speaker 3: give ups rather than going after the criminal elements that
Speaker 3: constantly cross our border illegally. The administration, no doubt will
Speaker 3: say this is a win for border security, but if
Speaker 3: they sought rank and file input, they would be told
Speaker 3: this will do the exact opposite. Agents support what Texas
Speaker 3: was trying to accomplish in the absence of true border
Speaker 3: security policies from this administration. I agree with the Border
Speaker 3: Patrol Union and so I am angry. I'm frustrated. I
Speaker 3: think the Court is out of touch. I think they're
Speaker 3: just reflexively agreeing with the federal government against the States,
Speaker 3: and I think it is a profound mistake that continues
Speaker 3: the invasion that's happening in a southern border.
Speaker 2: To be clear, one other thing on this is when
Speaker 2: you hear the Biden administration say that they are working
Speaker 2: to secure the border, I think everybody needs a lot
Speaker 2: remember this moment that they not only are they not,
Speaker 2: they went all the way to Supreme Court to make
Speaker 2: sure they could unsecure portions of the border where raids
Speaker 2: or wire was put up to secure the border.
Speaker 3: That's how I understand. Hold on, I want to underscore
Speaker 3: what you're just saying. So today in the capital, as
Speaker 3: I was walking to the Capitol, lots of reporters wanted
Speaker 3: to ask me about this decision, and they said, well, gosh,
Speaker 3: Biden just says if Congress will pass the supplemental bill,
Speaker 3: then we'll have the ability to secure the border. And
Speaker 3: I said, listen, understand, Biden doesn't want to secure the border.
Speaker 3: He wants this crisis. He wants more illegal immigrants. And
Speaker 3: I said, for Pete's sakes, Biden is actively litigating against
Speaker 3: the state of Texas to stop Texas from securing the border.
Speaker 3: That's what they want. They want this invasion, and that's
Speaker 3: exactly what the Biden administration is doing. With the emphatic
Speaker 3: support of essentially every Democrat member of the Senate and
Speaker 3: every Democrat member of the House.
Speaker 1: It will be a huge election your issue.
Speaker 2: We will keep covering it here that I can promise you,
Speaker 2: but I want to make sure that we got this
Speaker 2: out there for many people that were asked that same question,
Speaker 2: why do these two justices? A lot of people, you know,
Speaker 2: believe they were conservative and they screwed the state of Texas.
Speaker 2: They screwed conservatives, they sided with the Biden administration. Your
Speaker 2: explanation hopefully will make a little bit of sense to
Speaker 2: people and understanding of why this happened. And it's still
Speaker 2: being litigated. I think that's something else we need to
Speaker 2: be clear about. It's still being litigated and that will
Speaker 2: play out. How long will it take for this to
Speaker 2: get a final ruling through this litigation?
Speaker 3: Potentially years. It could take a long time, and if
Speaker 3: Trump wins, it'll become mooded because Trump will stop litigating.
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 two.
Speaker 2: This is an issue at the University of penn and
Speaker 2: the University of pen To remind people is what hosts
Speaker 2: the Biden think tank, and we are seeing now through
Speaker 2: the Biden Pen Center, Chinese donations have skyrocketed, including money
Speaker 2: directly from the CCP linked sources. This coming from Fox News.
Speaker 2: It says the University of Pennsylvania, home of President Biden's
Speaker 2: think tank, recently tripled its donations originating from China. Records
Speaker 2: reviewed by Fox News Digital show the Washington You See
Speaker 2: office of Biden's think tank, the Penn Biden Center for
Speaker 2: Diplomacy and Global Engagement, previously found itself under a microscope
Speaker 2: after confidential documents top zecret documents were found at the center.
Speaker 2: The discovery led to questions regarding Chinese donations to the
Speaker 2: University of Pennsylvania, which harbors that think tank. And that's
Speaker 2: just the beginning of this story.
Speaker 3: Well it is and the numbers are stunning. So from
Speaker 3: twenty twenty one to twenty twenty two, penn received eight
Speaker 3: point six million dollars from communist China. Eight point six
Speaker 3: million in one year. Now that number is staggering, but
Speaker 3: actually the next year they tripled their hull. So between
Speaker 3: mid twenty twenty two and mid twenty twenty three, Penn
Speaker 3: pulled in twenty five million dollars from entities and individuals
Speaker 3: in China, so they tripled the amount, and overall Penn
Speaker 3: has amassed nearly one hundred and thirty million dollars in
Speaker 3: donations from China between mid twenty eighteen and mid twenty
Speaker 3: twenty three, which is a massive, massive increase. Why is
Speaker 3: China investing so heavily in Pen and Penn? Just quinky
Speaker 3: Dinky happens to be the place that was paying Joe
Speaker 3: Biden before he was president nearly a million dollars a
Speaker 3: year for a no show job where he occasionally showed
Speaker 3: up to teach a class at other than that jetted
Speaker 3: around the world living like the idle rich coincidentally is
Speaker 3: a university where we now know that Joe Biden I
Speaker 3: legally had classified documents stored. And all of this is intertwined.
Speaker 3: We know that Hunter Biden and the Biden family made
Speaker 3: millions of dollars from Communist China, that Hunter Biden shook
Speaker 3: down the Chinese communists for personal enrichment, and the obvious
Speaker 3: inference is it wasn't just in rich men of their family.
Speaker 3: It was also enrichment of pen which in turn was
Speaker 3: enriching the Biden family.
Speaker 2: And the part that also is so frustrating is there's
Speaker 2: really no one that's covering this story. Stuart Varney on
Speaker 2: Fox Business, he did cover it and this is what
Speaker 2: it sounded like.
Speaker 1: But the rest of the media is silent on this.
Speaker 2: Now, this is the University of Pennsylvania seeing a big
Speaker 2: surch in Chinese donations.
Speaker 1: Lauren, how much are we talking about? And do we
Speaker 1: know why we got this big zoo? How much?
Speaker 4: Twenty five million dollars in one year between mid twenty
Speaker 4: twenty two and the middle of last year.
Speaker 1: That was triple the year before. Why. Good question.
Speaker 4: One donor is actually a political consultant for the CCP.
Speaker 4: Another a private equity founder in China with ties to
Speaker 4: President She President Biden was a professor at penn After
Speaker 4: he was vice president, the school paid him seven hundred
Speaker 4: and seventy six thousand dollars. That is way more than
Speaker 4: a professor makes it hosts his think tank.
Speaker 1: Okay, you know you know where we're going, kiddo. I mean,
Speaker 1: the Biden family has taken a great deal of money
Speaker 1: from China. Yeah.
Speaker 4: Yeah, And now the Chinese are giving money to the
Speaker 4: school where his thing tank is and where his personal
Speaker 4: doc classified documents were found, remember in the office there.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: One of the things that in that reporting there that
Speaker 2: I think we should talk about is you're getting a
Speaker 2: donation from someone that devises the Chinese Communist Party. Senator,
Speaker 2: you deal with a lot of donations when you're running
Speaker 2: for office. If somebody gives you a massive donation and
Speaker 2: they're advising the Chinese Commist Party, I'm assuming you're not
Speaker 2: going to accept that in you or you're going to
Speaker 2: give it back. Of course, this is not hard, and
Speaker 2: there's nobody asking the White House, hey, are you guys
Speaker 2: going to give this money back to communists that are
Speaker 2: trying to clearly buy influence.
Speaker 3: Well, they're clearly trying to buy influence at pen and
Speaker 3: nobody gives that kind of money for nothing. They don't
Speaker 3: give that kind of money without expecting to get a
Speaker 3: benefit in return. And the inner connection of the Bidens.
Speaker 3: Look the Bidens. All of the evidence indicates that the
Speaker 3: Bidens made a decision decades ago that there were going
Speaker 3: to get rich by shaking down the enemies. Of Americans
Speaker 3: shaking them down, demanding millions of dollars in exchange either
Speaker 3: for favors from Joe Biden or millions of dollars in
Speaker 3: order not to be targeted for retribution by Joe Biden. Now,
Speaker 3: if that is correct, that it's called bribery, and it
Speaker 3: is a felony. It is also explicitly enumerated in the
Speaker 3: Constitution as grounds for impeachment. And the entire corporate media
Speaker 3: could not care one iota. The New York Times cannot
Speaker 3: be bothered to worry if the president of the United
Speaker 3: States has been bribed by communist China. That is not
Speaker 3: news in their politicized world. CNN can't be bothered to
Speaker 3: worry about an MSNBC not news there, the NBCCBS, why
Speaker 3: is it that you had to play Fox Business because
Speaker 3: none of the corporate media is willing even to cover it.
Speaker 3: Facts be damned, they have a political mission uphold.
Speaker 2: Will there be any of this that you think will
Speaker 2: be used to actually expose the Biden family in this
Speaker 2: campaign cycle? I mean, when you're talking about this much money,
Speaker 2: it's not a little bit of money, it's a hell
Speaker 2: of a lot of money. And the other part here
Speaker 2: is they mentioned the numbers tripled right when we got
Speaker 2: closer to this election, when he announced he was running
Speaker 2: for reelections like, oh wait, he's stilling the game.
Speaker 1: Okay, we better send money.
Speaker 3: Look, I think there needs to be a serious investigation.
Speaker 3: There needs to be enhanced federal scrutiny of universities that
Speaker 3: are on the take from communist China. One of the
Speaker 3: very first pieces of legislation that I ever authored and
Speaker 3: passed when I was a brand new baby senator was
Speaker 3: legislation focusing on exactly this issue, in particular what.
Speaker 1: Are called confused institute.
Speaker 3: So Confucius institutes have been started at US universities all
Speaker 3: across the country, and they're funded by communist China. They're
Speaker 3: controlled by communist China. And China goes to the schools
Speaker 3: and say, hey, we'll start this institute and your students
Speaker 3: can learn Chinese and they'll get educated on China. And
Speaker 3: China uses them number one for espionage and number two
Speaker 3: for propaganda to push the messages that they want US
Speaker 3: college students to hear from communist China. And so when
Speaker 3: I was newly elected to the Senate, I introduced legislation
Speaker 3: that prohibited federal Department of Defense dollars from going to
Speaker 3: a university that has a Confucius institute, that if you're
Speaker 3: going to take the Chinese money, you don't get DoD money.
Speaker 3: And I was on the Senate Armed Services Committee at
Speaker 3: the time I introduced it. I ended up getting bipartisan
Speaker 3: support for it, and it was adopted with both Democrats
Speaker 3: and Republicans supporting it. It passed through the Harry Reid Senate,
Speaker 3: so we had a Democrat majority Senate, and ultimately Baraco
Speaker 3: I'm assigned it in the law, and my legislation resulted
Speaker 3: in dozens of Confucius institutes shutting down because university has
Speaker 3: made the very reasonable decision that they wanted DoD dollars
Speaker 3: more than the Chinese money for Confucius institutes. We need
Speaker 3: to do more on this. We need to cut off
Speaker 3: this Chinese money that is going to universities across the board.
Speaker 1: But with PEN.
Speaker 3: There appears to be more than simple influence peddling. China's
Speaker 3: doing this in a lot of universities, and it's a
Speaker 3: broad problem, but with PEN, the volume is so great
Speaker 3: that on the face of it, it seems to be
Speaker 3: deeply intertwined with Joe Biden and the fact that Penn
Speaker 3: gave a home for him, and so giving money to
Speaker 3: Pen was a way to give money directly to Joe Biden.
Speaker 2: Do you believe that Joe Biden will dodge the debates
Speaker 2: against Donald Trump because now he's going to have to
Speaker 2: answer these questions on stage. I mean if he's much
Speaker 2: more vulnerable now than he was when they ran against
Speaker 2: each other last time, because last time he could just say, hey,
Speaker 2: it's all a lie.
Speaker 1: The laptop's a lie.
Speaker 2: I got fifty plus people they're saying it's a lie.
Speaker 2: None of this is real. Now you can't do that
Speaker 2: this time. Yeah, I actually don't.
Speaker 3: I think Biden, if he is the nominee, will debate.
Speaker 3: I think we'll have a couple of debates. I think
Speaker 3: their strategy will be to hide Joe Biden in the
Speaker 3: basement for the entirety of the campaign, and so the
Speaker 3: debates may be about the only time you see Biden
Speaker 3: during the entire campaign. And I think for the debates
Speaker 3: they'll pump him full of a bunch of drugs and
Speaker 3: try to make him alert for an hour, for ninety minutes, and.
Speaker 1: That'll be it.
Speaker 3: And look, will they debate internally will they discuss internally?
Speaker 3: Does Joe Biden skip the debate? Sure, they would love to.
Speaker 3: And by the way, we saw precedent last cycle, the
Speaker 3: governor of Pennsylvania refuse to debate a Democrat, the governor
Speaker 3: of Arizona refuse to debate a Democrat. It's a very
Speaker 3: dangerous precedent. I think the Democrats will conclud that if
Speaker 3: Biden ducks the debate, the American people will assume he's
Speaker 3: too feeble and mentally diminished to be able to debate.
Speaker 3: And so I think that will scare them enough that
Speaker 3: they will end up producing Biden for a couple of
Speaker 3: debates pumped full of drugs for a little while.
Speaker 2: As before, if you want to hear the rest of
Speaker 2: this conversation on this topic, you can go back and
Speaker 2: dow the podcast from earlier this week to hear the
Speaker 2: entire thing. I want to get back to the big
Speaker 2: story number three of the week you may have missed.
Speaker 2: I think anyone that runs for president that's a serious
Speaker 2: candidate and drops out. People have asked me, what's it
Speaker 2: like on a president's campaign when it's over, Mike, it's
Speaker 2: like a funeral. Yeah, if you're a true believer, in
Speaker 2: the campaign, in the candidate, you're giving it, you're all
Speaker 2: you're a staffer, you want your guy to win, and
Speaker 2: it's over.
Speaker 1: It's like a funeral it and.
Speaker 3: I spend a lot of time after like our team.
Speaker 3: I still think the team reassembled, and I'm not impartial,
Speaker 3: but I think the team we assembled is the best
Speaker 3: campaign team certainly that I've ever seen. And they were
Speaker 3: like family. And so I went and assembled the entire team.
Speaker 3: Our headquarters was here in Houston, and I thanked all
Speaker 3: the staff. This is like a day or two later.
Speaker 3: I thanked everyone and brought them in and just just
Speaker 3: talked about reflected on what the campaign meant and what
Speaker 3: they'd accomplished. And when we started, nobody thought I had
Speaker 3: a prayer. Nobody thought we could win a single state.
Speaker 3: And we came with an inches of winning the whole thing,
Speaker 3: and I will tell you we had so our campaign
Speaker 3: office was like an entire floor of cubicles here in Houston,
Speaker 3: not far from where we are right now, very close,
Speaker 3: very close to where we are right now. And as
Speaker 3: everyone went home, I remember walking through that campaign office
Speaker 3: and just all the empty cubicles, and you know the
Speaker 3: song from Le Miz empty chairs and empty table. Yeah,
Speaker 3: that was the song I kept here in my mind.
Speaker 3: In fact, I'm sure Ron in case, you're feeling the
Speaker 3: same thing. And it's it is a hard thing because
Speaker 3: everyone pours themselves into it. You know, years ago someone
Speaker 3: told me there's a reason that both politics and war
Speaker 3: used the word campaign because it's all consuming. There is
Speaker 3: nothing else in life like when you are on a campaign.
Speaker 3: It is one hundred percent of your will and your
Speaker 3: heart and your mind and your soul and everything. And
Speaker 3: and you know, you do feel like you've let people down.
Speaker 3: You know, you're getting people that are there uprooting their lives,
Speaker 3: they're moving their families, they're giving sacrificially. They believe in you.
Speaker 3: And look, at this point, I've won elections, I've lost elections.
Speaker 3: Winning is much better. Yeah, those nights are a lot better.
Speaker 3: But the reality here, I think this outcome was ordained.
Speaker 3: The night of the Iowa Caucuses, when Trump won a
Speaker 3: dominating victory, it was clear to Santis had no oxygen
Speaker 3: and Haley, as I mentioned, she will likely be competitive
Speaker 3: in New Hampshire, but I see no path for her
Speaker 3: beyond that, and so now we are going to test. Look,
Speaker 3: there are some big donors in the Republican Party that
Speaker 3: are never Trumpers, that who do not like Trump and
Speaker 3: are writing millions of dollars to try to change the outcome.
Speaker 3: I don't think the money can do it at this point.
Speaker 3: You know, they've got enough money in New Hampshire they
Speaker 3: could practically send a masseuse to give everyone a back
Speaker 3: rub and a foot rub on the way to the polls.
Speaker 3: But as you get on to South Carolina, I think
Speaker 3: Trump's lead weight is way too large for Haley to
Speaker 3: have a chance. And from there, I don't think there's
Speaker 3: any path beyond.
Speaker 2: Final question your advice to Nikki Haley. If you don't
Speaker 2: have that pathway that you just described, what's the point
Speaker 2: of staying in Oh?
Speaker 3: Look, you know, I actually try to refrain from giving
Speaker 3: advice to other candidates that everyone's got to follow their
Speaker 3: own heart and do what they think is right in
Speaker 3: their own timeline. Yeah, I mean, it's you know, calling
Speaker 3: on people to get out. I don't think let it
Speaker 3: play out. Yeah, it will play out. It's going to
Speaker 3: play out naturally. It's going to play out naturally, and
Speaker 3: and pretty quickly, I think, and so you know, I
Speaker 3: recognize the decision to suspend a campaign is not easy,
Speaker 3: and look, depending on when it occurs, it can often mean.
Speaker 3: So in twenty sixteen, you know, a bunch of the
Speaker 3: candidates suspended early, long before Iowa, and so I ended
Speaker 3: up of my opponents, five of my opponents ended up
Speaker 3: endorsing me in that race. And so I got endorsed
Speaker 3: by Rick Perry, and Carly Fiorina and Scott Walker and
Speaker 3: Jeb Bush and Lindsay Graham all all backed me. And
Speaker 3: you know, you go out and campaign. So you know,
Speaker 3: Rick Perry, you know, went and campaigned with me, and
Speaker 3: in Iowa, you know, and knew, you know, I remember
Speaker 3: being in Barnes there and and look, Rick Perry was
Speaker 3: was my governor, someone who I knew and respected. He's
Speaker 3: older than I am. So it was a little surreal
Speaker 3: having having someone like Rick Perry come and campaign and say,
Speaker 3: go go vote for Ted. Uh. You know Lindsey Graham,
Speaker 3: my colleague, you know, he had famously said that if
Speaker 3: you killed me on the floor of the Senate and
Speaker 3: the jury were other senators, you couldn't find a jury
Speaker 3: to convict me, to convict the murderer. And so when
Speaker 3: Lindsay endorsed me, I, you know, I jumped on on,
Speaker 3: you know, and he helped raise the money for me,
Speaker 3: and I remember saying saying at the time, I said, Wow,
Speaker 3: this is the first time in my life I've ever
Speaker 3: been endorsed by someone who's publicly called for my murder.
Speaker 3: You know, politics can be a strange and Lindsay and
Speaker 3: I have have had become friends since then, But it
Speaker 3: was you get interesting Carl Ferina, who I thought was
Speaker 3: a terrific candidate that cycle. You'll recall I announced that
Speaker 3: if I'd won, she would have been my VP. Yeah,
Speaker 3: that was an unusual step to do it early, but frankly,
Speaker 3: I was trying to break through the narrative, the wall
Speaker 3: of the three billion dollars of free media, and I
Speaker 3: was trying to find something that actually would be heard
Speaker 3: by the voters. But the corporate media had no interest
Speaker 3: in anything being heard. Frankly, I think most of the
Speaker 3: media wanted Trump to be the nominee because they wanted
Speaker 3: Hillary to win.
Speaker 2: And they thought that was what all of them are saying,
Speaker 2: was give us Trump, he's the easiest to beat, and
Speaker 2: Hillary Quinton will become the president United It's America and
Speaker 2: will break that glass ceiling of that beautiful building.
Speaker 3: I think that was a very deliberate strategy, and I
Speaker 3: will say for all those back masters, it kind of backfire.
Speaker 3: They got four years of Donald Trump as president and
Speaker 3: they may be about to get four more years of
Speaker 3: Donald Trump as president. And it's you know, the self
Speaker 3: declared media overlords that there is an old saying, be
Speaker 3: careful what you.
Speaker 2: Wish for, no doubt about it. I love these conversations.
Speaker 2: I love that we get do this. Thanks for pulling
Speaker 2: back the curtain on sixteen and explaining it from a
Speaker 2: candidate's perspective, because, as you mentioned, what people go through
Speaker 2: when they have to drop out, especially DeSantis right now,
Speaker 2: it's tough. It can take months to come out from
Speaker 2: that fog of war afterwards, because all of a sudden,
Speaker 2: you go from night to nothing till it's all over,
Speaker 2: as you mentioned. And how long does it take to
Speaker 2: get out of that fog? I think it depends on
Speaker 2: the candidates.
Speaker 3: It depends a lot. Look, everyone has a period where
Speaker 3: you just kind of.
Speaker 1: A morning.
Speaker 3: I assume Ron will do this, but just about everyone
Speaker 3: goes and go somewhere on vacation. And my advice when
Speaker 3: I talk to a candidate after they've lost.
Speaker 1: And this is true.
Speaker 3: I've talked to lots of candidates who are running for
Speaker 3: Senate in the House, and some win, some lose. But
Speaker 3: for the ones that lose, I say, go somewhere, unplug,
Speaker 3: get off email, get off your phone, get off Twitter.
Speaker 3: Just just go sit by the beach with a pinacolata
Speaker 3: and and just recharge. Recharge, be with your family, hug
Speaker 3: your kids, just just get away for a while and
Speaker 3: and look, the world gets a lot quieter, you know.
Speaker 3: In a presidential campaign, it's deafening. And then when you
Speaker 3: suspend it, it's like, Okay, I'm out of this crazy
Speaker 3: game at least for now. And then to come out
Speaker 3: of the funk list in every presidential candidate that loses,
Speaker 3: I think, without exception, goes into a funk. I mean
Speaker 3: you you have a bit of depression and grieving. Yeah,
Speaker 3: And the key to kind of I was no exception
Speaker 3: to that. I had a period where I was just kind.
Speaker 1: Of in a funk.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And I think the key to coming out of
Speaker 3: it is finding something to lean in that you love
Speaker 3: that you and gauge in and you know, listen, I
Speaker 3: have a day job of representing thirty million Texans, which
Speaker 3: I love doing and pour all of my heart, mind
Speaker 3: and soul into it. And that became go. And then
Speaker 3: when Trump became president, you had everybody to work with,
Speaker 3: and I rolled up my sleeves and said, I am
Speaker 3: going to lead the fight in the Senate for us
Speaker 3: to deliver on our promises we got. We have work
Speaker 3: to do, and so pouring yourself into the fight and
Speaker 3: into the work is I think a really important part
Speaker 3: of coming out of it. And some candidates do that
Speaker 3: more quickly than others at varies person by person.
Speaker 2: As always, thank you for listening to Verdict with Center
Speaker 2: Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you don't forget to down
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, Ben Ferguson Podcasts,
Speaker 2: and we will see you back here on Monday morning.