Speaker 1: What an unbelievable week.
Speaker 2: Welcome it is Verdict with Ted Cruz, the Week in Review,
Speaker 2: Ben Ferguson with you, and we've got some incredible stories
Speaker 2: that you may have missed that we talked about. First up,
Speaker 2: Joe Biden now being accused of witness tampering. The Senator
Speaker 2: and I talked about that as he went to go
Speaker 2: meet one of the key witnesses in the case against
Speaker 2: his son. What do they talk about and what does
Speaker 2: it mean for the court case that starts this coming week.
Speaker 1: We'll deal with that.
Speaker 2: Also, the Attorney General, Mary Garland says he is proud
Speaker 2: of the Marlago raid. Will that come back to haunt him?
Speaker 2: And finally, how will Donald Trump handle the Felon rap
Speaker 2: when it comes to the Democrats using it against him?
Speaker 2: What is the strategy to fight back? It's the weekend
Speaker 2: Review and it starts right now, Senator. I want to
Speaker 2: get to the other big case, and it is a
Speaker 2: very big case. It is a case that apparently is
Speaker 2: so Joe nerve wracking the White House. It looks like
Speaker 2: the President could have been involved in witness tampering ahead
Speaker 2: of the trial of his son Hunter Biden.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about that yeah, that's right.
Speaker 3: So this trial begins on Monday, June third. Hunter Biden
Speaker 3: is going to face a federal trial for his gun
Speaker 3: crimes and one of the key witnesses is going to
Speaker 3: be Halle Biden. Now who is Halle Biden. Halle Biden
Speaker 3: is the widow of Bo Biden, Hunter's older brother who
Speaker 3: tragically passed away of cancer, and also the ex girlfriend
Speaker 3: of Hunter Biden, and Halle Biden is expected to be
Speaker 3: a key witness. And Sunday night, Joe Biden stopped by
Speaker 3: Halle's house. It was about eight pm on Sunday night.
Speaker 3: Joe Biden came by and Halle was dating Hunter at
Speaker 3: the time of the crimes and one of the expected witnesses.
Speaker 3: She was married to Bo Biden. He died in twenty
Speaker 3: fifteen of brain cancer. And the prosecutors alleged that Hunter
Speaker 3: lied about his drug use on the gun purchase forms
Speaker 3: and then that he illegally possessed at least one gun,
Speaker 3: which Hallie is alleged to have thrown in a public
Speaker 3: dumpster in twenty eighteen. So she's the one who allegedly
Speaker 3: got rid of the evidence, and so she's not just
Speaker 3: a witness. She is a central witness in the case,
Speaker 3: and the White House spokesman when asked about, gosh, why
Speaker 3: is Joe Biden visiting one of the key witnesses in
Speaker 3: the case against his son eight days before the trial,
Speaker 3: they said, no, no, no, he visited her because of
Speaker 3: the approaching ninth anniversary of Bo's passing. Now, I got
Speaker 3: to say that is that strikes me as a highly
Speaker 3: dubious explanation. It naturally raises the question, gosh, did he
Speaker 3: did he visit Halley before the eighth anniversary? Before the
Speaker 3: seventh anniversary is sixth, fifth, fourth, third, second, first, And
Speaker 3: if he did, I'm unaware of it. And you certainly
Speaker 3: would think the White House if if that was their
Speaker 3: line and he had a visitor at any time previously,
Speaker 3: you sure do think the White House would have pointed
Speaker 3: it out. But they didn't. And I got to say,
Speaker 3: for the President of the United States, listen, when the
Speaker 3: president travels, the president never travels quietly. It's not subtle.
Speaker 3: You come in with a motorcade with secret service, and
Speaker 3: so for him to go it's it's brazen. It is
Speaker 3: Joe Biden, and the Biden family feels that they are
Speaker 3: not bound. They behave as if they feel that they're
Speaker 3: not bound by criminal law, by any any restrictions, that
Speaker 3: that he's entitled to go. And the natural prison sumption
Speaker 3: is that he had a conversation with her about what
Speaker 3: she was going to say when she testifies.
Speaker 2: Yeah, right, it would be important. Hey we want to
Speaker 2: know what you're going to say, or Hey, here's what
Speaker 2: we need you to say. If anyone else was in
Speaker 2: this scenario, what traditionally would happen when before a trial
Speaker 2: if everyone found out about the same way we did,
Speaker 2: regardless of an alibi, If Trump would have done this
Speaker 2: if I was on trial or you were on trial
Speaker 2: and we were going to meet with somebody that's about
Speaker 2: to be a witness and testimony for a kid, like,
Speaker 2: what would happen?
Speaker 3: Well, you would expect the judge to make an inquiry
Speaker 3: of why were you Why were you meeting with this person?
Speaker 3: Who expect the prosecutor to make an inquiry as to
Speaker 3: why were you meeting with this witness? Did you discuss
Speaker 3: did you discuss what her testimony was going to be?
Speaker 4: So?
Speaker 3: Witness temp tampering is attempting to improperly influence or change
Speaker 3: the testimony of a witness within criminal proceedings, and it
Speaker 3: we don't know that that happened. But the United States
Speaker 3: a federal crime of witness tampering. It's decided defined by statute.
Speaker 3: It's eighteen USC. Section fifteen twelve, which is entitled quote
Speaker 3: tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant, and it
Speaker 3: describes witness tampering is a crime even if the proceeding
Speaker 3: is not pending, and it is a criminal offense even
Speaker 3: if you are unsuccessful in your attempt to tamper. In
Speaker 3: other words, if you try to convince the witness, hey,
Speaker 3: you know, it really help if you testify to X,
Speaker 3: even though X isn't the case. The witness might not
Speaker 3: do what you said, but it is still witness tampering.
Speaker 3: And and that's a natural question. Now, I'm quite confident
Speaker 3: the Department of Justice is not going to inquire of
Speaker 3: Joe Biden. What conversation did you have with a witness?
Speaker 3: They might ask her, It is possible they ask her,
Speaker 3: but I think there's no indication that the DOJ or
Speaker 3: the trial court is goet even ask what Joe Biden
Speaker 3: said to her.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And the media was silent on this, excluding Fox News,
Speaker 2: which broke this story.
Speaker 1: Here's how they reported it.
Speaker 5: President Biden also made a surprise, unannounced stop at Halle
Speaker 5: Biden's house in Delaware last night. She is bo Biden's
Speaker 5: widow and Hunter Biden's ex girlfriend, who was also set
Speaker 5: to testify in Hunter Biden's gun trial in Delaware that
Speaker 5: begins next week. White House officials are saying this presidential
Speaker 5: visit to her house had nothing to do with that testimony.
Speaker 5: They say it has to do with the upcoming ninth
Speaker 5: anniversary of bo Biden's passing.
Speaker 2: Jillian all Right, by the way, how often does the
Speaker 2: President United States of America make a surprise, unannounced visit
Speaker 2: in and around Washington, d C. In a massive motorcade.
Speaker 2: That has not happen very often.
Speaker 3: So, look, it is certainly possible. Presidents do have family,
Speaker 3: they visit their family. So I don't know the frequency
Speaker 3: with which Joe Biden visits other members of the family,
Speaker 3: and that presidents do that. What they don't do with
Speaker 3: great frequency is do it right before you do it
Speaker 3: when you're meeting with a key witness who is about
Speaker 3: to testify in the trial against your son. That that
Speaker 3: is a dramatically different context, and it raises obvious questions,
Speaker 3: questions that the media seems completely uninterested in asking, and
Speaker 3: that I expect the Biden Department of Justice is completely
Speaker 3: uninterested in asking.
Speaker 2: I was asked this question the other day and I
Speaker 2: hadn't actually thought about it yet. And I was asked
Speaker 2: this question when I was on Fox and they said,
Speaker 2: if Hunter Biden is convicted at either of these trials,
Speaker 2: will it have any impact on the presidential election. My
Speaker 2: personal opinion, I said, is instantly, I was like, no,
Speaker 2: I don't think so. I think most people know who
Speaker 2: Hunter Biden is. They know he clearly has been trading
Speaker 2: off the family's name. They know he's a drug He
Speaker 2: was a drug addic and did a lot of really
Speaker 2: bad things. We've seen the laptop. It's pretty darn clear.
Speaker 2: Well it knows believe it's going to make a difference.
Speaker 2: So in the presential action, do you believe that it
Speaker 2: will or won't.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: And there's a second trial that is set to begin
Speaker 3: in September. It's in Los Angeles and it's for allegedly
Speaker 3: failing to pay more than one point four million dollars
Speaker 3: in federal taxes from twenty sixteen to twenty nineteen. So
Speaker 3: you'll have two different trials that are scheduled. Listen, if
Speaker 3: the president's son is convicted. And now remember, initially DOJ
Speaker 3: tried to give him a sweetheart deal where he wouldn't
Speaker 3: go to jail, and ultimately that fell apart. Hunter originally
Speaker 3: agreed to a probation only deal to both the gun
Speaker 3: and tax crimes in June, but he walked away from
Speaker 3: the sweetheart deal at a July court hearing where his
Speaker 3: attorneys demanded broad immunity a past conduct of all past conduct,
Speaker 3: including violations of the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which could
Speaker 3: implicate his father. And so he walked away from a
Speaker 3: deal that would have gotten him largely scott free, but
Speaker 3: it wasn't. And remember, I think that the judge may
Speaker 3: well have signed off on that deal, but there was
Speaker 3: enormous public scrutiny on it, and I think that the
Speaker 3: judge decided, now, we can't do this well.
Speaker 2: And even then he was going to admit he was
Speaker 2: guilty in that deal. So there's also it's been out
Speaker 2: there in the media like, hey, he was going to
Speaker 2: to get the deal. Many he was guilty of these
Speaker 2: two crimes, which in many ways insulated his father.
Speaker 1: So if he's convicted this.
Speaker 2: Time, I'm not sure with a lot of Democratic voters
Speaker 2: it'll matter.
Speaker 6: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Look, I don't think that that Hunter Biden is guilty
Speaker 3: of gun crimes and tax evasions. Any rational person knows
Speaker 3: that our ready, that's kind of maked into the cake.
Speaker 3: I agree with you, It doesn't alter the election. What
Speaker 3: this has always been about is protecting Joe and the relevance.
Speaker 3: We've talked about this a lot, although it's been a
Speaker 3: while since we've talked about on the podcast. Look, Hunter
Speaker 3: Biden is not someone of public interest, separate and apart
Speaker 3: from his father. You know, he is a troubled soul
Speaker 3: who seems to have struggled his whole life, which is
Speaker 3: the entire White House defense that he has substance abuse
Speaker 3: problems and he's just had a hard time. And I
Speaker 3: don't have no reason to doubt that. That surely seems
Speaker 3: to be the case. But the reason it is a
Speaker 3: public import is that the evidence at this point keeps
Speaker 3: piling up that his entire business model was selling favors
Speaker 3: from his father, was corruption. The reason this matters is
Speaker 3: Joe Biden, not Hunter Biden, and these two trials are
Speaker 3: designed to insulate and protect Joe Biden, not to bring
Speaker 3: him in at all, And as long as Joe Biden
Speaker 3: is not directly implicated, I don't think Hunter's being convicted
Speaker 3: will have any material effect on the election. Listen, if
Speaker 3: his son goes to jail, that may be a very
Speaker 3: difficult thing personally for Joe Biden and emotionally for Joe Biden.
Speaker 3: But at the end of the day, the Biden doj
Speaker 3: succeeded in what I think its principal goal was, which
Speaker 3: is protecting the big guy and ensuring that there's no
Speaker 3: investigation into corruption by the sitting president.
Speaker 2: Final question on this, what is the possibility of pardons
Speaker 2: for Hunter Biden by his father.
Speaker 3: Before the election? I think zero. After the election. I
Speaker 3: think if Trump wins, I would wager large sums of
Speaker 3: money before he leaves off as Joe Biden pardons his son.
Speaker 2: And there'd be no political fallout for him because he's
Speaker 2: not running for reelection again.
Speaker 3: Yeah, if he's leaving, it would be I would be
Speaker 3: a Bill Clinton Midnight pardon special. And I think, particularly
Speaker 3: if he loses, it's almost a no brainer that Joe
Speaker 3: Biden would do it. He might even do it if
Speaker 3: he wins but there it's a more costly decision because
Speaker 3: he'd pay a political price for it, even if as
Speaker 3: he was starting a second term.
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. Now onto story number two, Let's
Speaker 2: remind people of Merrick Garland's own words. He was very
Speaker 2: proud of this raid. In August, yes twenty twenty two.
Speaker 2: He went out there, Justice Department insignia behind him, the
Speaker 2: just Department flag to his left, the American flag to
Speaker 2: his right, and he told the world in a live report,
Speaker 2: everyone carried it this.
Speaker 7: There are, however, certain points I want you to know. First,
Speaker 7: personally approve the decision to seek a search warrant in
Speaker 7: this matter. Second, the department does not take such a decision.
Speaker 2: Lately, clearly not, Senator, because they were planning for the
Speaker 2: use of deadly force to possibly be used.
Speaker 3: So let me give a caveat defending this in a
Speaker 3: tiny respect, and then let me take that caveat away.
Speaker 3: The caveat I would give is this sort of authorization.
Speaker 3: An authorization of use of deadly force is standard when
Speaker 3: the FBI is exercising a search warrant. Look, if you're
Speaker 3: exercising a search warrant in any context, if you're going
Speaker 3: to a drug dealer's house or something else, there is
Speaker 3: a risk of armed resistance, and so an authorization of
Speaker 3: deadly forces is typical with a search warrant. That's the
Speaker 3: caveat Now I'm going to take back every syllable of
Speaker 3: every word of what I just said. Holy crap, this
Speaker 3: was the President of the United States. Are you out
Speaker 3: of your mind? Like like like this is And for
Speaker 3: Merrick Garland to say I personally approved it the absolute
Speaker 3: hubris of this administration. Listen, Merrick Garland is drunk with power.
Speaker 3: He believes he should be on the Supreme Court, and
Speaker 3: he is engaged in a global revenge tour against everyone
Speaker 3: he thinks who wronged him. But is there no judgment
Speaker 3: on the part of the Attorney General. Is there no
Speaker 3: judgment on the part of the Deputy Attorney General? Is
Speaker 3: there no judgment on the part of any advisors anywhere
Speaker 3: at DOJ? Is there no judgment on the part of
Speaker 3: the head of the FBI. Is there no judgment on
Speaker 3: the on the part of anyone involved in this process
Speaker 3: to say, you know this guy was the president of
Speaker 3: the United States Secret Services guarding him for a reason. Yeah,
Speaker 3: maybe we should not be authorizing deadly forced like can
Speaker 3: you imagine listen, well, can you teach.
Speaker 2: You the chain of command? Just for people to understand this.
Speaker 2: Merrick Garland's over the FBI. But also isn't he over
Speaker 2: the Secret Service as well?
Speaker 1: Is that not under his No?
Speaker 3: No, Actually, Secret Service reports us, so they're in different
Speaker 3: different silos.
Speaker 2: So but wouldn't he be talking or realizing that he's
Speaker 2: setting them up for a war?
Speaker 3: You know, I don't know, and listen, it is difficult
Speaker 3: to imagine. Look, who knows what happens. But the idea
Speaker 3: that okay, if Secret Service resists, you guys go like that,
Speaker 3: there is no sense. And this reminds me back at
Speaker 3: the beginning of Crossfire Hurricane. Crossfire Hurricane, you remember, was
Speaker 3: the DOJ and FBI targeting the Trump campaign back when
Speaker 3: he was a candidate. They went after him, and they
Speaker 3: went in and wire tapped him, and they went after
Speaker 3: Carter Page and they created fraudulent documents that they use
Speaker 3: to get a warrant from the FISA court. I mean,
Speaker 3: it was a grotesque abuse of power that the Department
Speaker 3: of Justice Inspector General detailed in very painstaking detail, and.
Speaker 2: The media gave cover because they said Donald Trump was
Speaker 2: crazy to imply that he was being spied on, his
Speaker 2: campaign was being spied on.
Speaker 1: They said he was a lunatic. In fact, he was right,
Speaker 1: the entire team.
Speaker 3: He was exactly right. But look, when you go back
Speaker 3: to the launch of Crossfire Hurricane part of the problem,
Speaker 3: and this goes to DOJ during Obama when this all
Speaker 3: started an FBI during Obama, there were no adults in
Speaker 3: the room. Listen, there are circumstances you could imagine where
Speaker 3: a criminal investigation, a search, warrant of prosecution has to
Speaker 3: be authorized against a high level government official, but especially
Speaker 3: when that high level official is in the opposing party,
Speaker 3: especially when that high level official is the leading candidate
Speaker 3: for the party and the likely opponent for the sitting president.
Speaker 3: When you're going after your political opposition, the threshold for
Speaker 3: anything should be extraordinarily high. And it wasn't at all
Speaker 3: based on some ridiculous, half baked OPO research paid for
Speaker 3: by the Hillary Clinton campaign that contained the notorious p
Speaker 3: tape and all that nonsense, which has all been debunked.
Speaker 3: We now know it was all made up. But look,
Speaker 3: when the Hillary Clinton campaign pays over a million bucks
Speaker 3: to make up OPO research, they come up with some
Speaker 3: creative stuff.
Speaker 2: When you look at this, this is going to be
Speaker 2: and it has to be. I would assume a major
Speaker 2: campaign issue, especially in the presidential campaign. I can't imagine
Speaker 2: this not coming up with the presidential debates.
Speaker 1: But there also seems to be panic right now.
Speaker 2: In response to this, Jim Comey went on MSNBC and
Speaker 2: said this, take a listen.
Speaker 8: Are you concerned that it may get a test unlike
Speaker 8: any other if Donald Trump is reelected. I mean, when
Speaker 8: you think about a second Trump administration, what do you
Speaker 8: think the implications would be for the FBI?
Speaker 4: Oh? Serious, for the Justice Department and the FBI, because
Speaker 4: Trump is coming for those institutions. He knows their power,
Speaker 4: and I think he has regrets that he didn't work
Speaker 4: hard enough to corrupt them last time. So he's coming
Speaker 4: for them, and that's a danger for all Americans. He's
Speaker 4: going to put people in positions in those organizations. He
Speaker 4: didn't have all stars the last time. He'll have the
Speaker 4: bottom of the barrel this time, but people who will
Speaker 4: want to do his will, and that should weary every American.
Speaker 4: This election matters because of a reason like that. People
Speaker 4: have to participate. You cannot sit on the sideline. I
Speaker 4: don't care how you feel about Joe Biden. You must
Speaker 4: vote for him because the consequences on the other side
Speaker 4: are too severe.
Speaker 2: I don't care how you feel about Joe Biden, you
Speaker 2: must vote for him. That's the former FBI director saying
Speaker 2: that Senator.
Speaker 3: Well, and when he talks about corrupting the FBI, I
Speaker 3: will say, you know, listen, I would admit Jim Comy
Speaker 3: as an expert witness at any trial on the planet
Speaker 3: on corrupting the FBI, because he was front and center.
Speaker 3: He did exactly that. He was the point person behind
Speaker 3: weaponizing the FBI. Jim Comy is someone who fancies himself
Speaker 3: I believe to be j Edgar Hoover. He had delusions
Speaker 3: of power. It is one of the gravest mistakes of
Speaker 3: the first term of the Trump presidency that Trump did
Speaker 3: not fire Jim Comy on January twentieth, twenty seventeen, the
Speaker 3: first day in office. He should have said, thank you
Speaker 3: for your service to the nation. Your services are no
Speaker 3: longer needed. Nobody would have blinked but the White House
Speaker 3: foolishly thought they could get Komy to be part of
Speaker 3: the administration to do his job, to not be a disloyal,
Speaker 3: power hungry snake, and they were wrong. He's continuing to
Speaker 3: do that. And by the way, let's understand there's an
Speaker 3: enormous amount of CYA in Komy and that he's very
Speaker 3: afraid if they have accountability at the FBI that his
Speaker 3: personal rear end is in the sling. And so that's
Speaker 3: he's like, please, please, please make sure you put people
Speaker 3: in power that cover up for me and that continue
Speaker 3: the corruption of the FBI and continue weaponizing it to
Speaker 3: attack their enemies, because that's what I did, and I
Speaker 3: don't want to be held for account That's among the
Speaker 3: most self interested testimony I've ever heard.
Speaker 2: Final question on this now, knowing what we know about
Speaker 2: the raid, is it warranted and justifiable if Donald Trump
Speaker 2: is elected again, for him to go in in thoroughly
Speaker 2: clean house in these institutions?
Speaker 3: Warranted, justifiable, and incredibly necessary. What has happened is we
Speaker 3: have hardcore partisans who have corrupted these institutions from the inside.
Speaker 3: They occupy senior positions in the career bureaucracy and If
Speaker 3: Trump is reelected, and I hope and pray that he is,
Speaker 3: he needs to point serious, strong leaders at DOJ, at
Speaker 3: the FBI, and the rest of the alphabet soup of
Speaker 3: the administration who understand what they're doing, who have the
Speaker 3: seriousness of purpose to go in and clean them out,
Speaker 3: because we need to restore the institution. Listen that there
Speaker 3: are some some Republican, some conservatives that say things like
Speaker 3: abolish the FBI. I'm not in that camp. Why Because
Speaker 3: the FBI is enormously important. The FBI does hugely important
Speaker 3: things like finding and catching terrorists and stopping them from
Speaker 3: killing Americans. It does hugely important things like finding kidnappers
Speaker 3: and child predators and going after the mafia and mobsters
Speaker 3: and going after Mexican drug cartels like all of that
Speaker 3: is really damn important, and I don't want to blow
Speaker 3: that up. What I want to do is restore the
Speaker 3: integrity of the FBI and the DOJ by getting the
Speaker 3: partisans out of office who have corrupted it. As you know,
Speaker 3: Chris Ray, the current director of the FBI, I've known
Speaker 3: for twenty five years.
Speaker 1: Chris.
Speaker 3: Interestingly, Chris is not a liberal, He's a Republican. He
Speaker 3: still considers himself a Republican to this day. Chris's problem,
Speaker 3: I believe, is that he is a company man. Now look,
Speaker 3: Donald Trump put him in that position, he appointed him
Speaker 3: to that position. Chris is a company man, and he
Speaker 3: is He and I have had screaming arguments on this
Speaker 3: where he believes it is his job as administrator of
Speaker 3: the FBI, director of the FBI to defend the career
Speaker 3: leaders at the FBI, and I've told him, Chris, you
Speaker 3: are not defending the institution of the FBI if you
Speaker 3: support people who are corrupting it and destroying its integrity.
Speaker 3: What does it tell you that half of America doesn't
Speaker 3: trust the institution anymore because you've been so politicized, and
Speaker 3: he has proven utterly incapable of seeing it and even
Speaker 3: less capable of taking it on and stopping 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: podcasts 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.
Speaker 2: You've been in a lot of debates, Senator, and you've
Speaker 2: been on the presidential debate stage.
Speaker 1: You debated Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: But I and I one of my things that I
Speaker 2: love is debate prep, and I was putting myself in
Speaker 2: the room tonight mentally. All Right, if I'm in the
Speaker 2: room before the debate with Joe Biden, I know Joe
Speaker 2: Biden at some point is going to look over at
Speaker 2: Donald Trump and say, well, you're a convicted felon. How
Speaker 2: does Trump respond to that? And that's I mean, that's
Speaker 2: a pretty hardcore line that they have been obsessed with,
Speaker 2: and they've got it. Now, how do you overcome that
Speaker 2: when there's people watching that I'm sure are going to
Speaker 2: watch this thing and maybe just engage the very first time.
Speaker 2: Weren't watching the trial. Don't understand how corrupt it was.
Speaker 2: Don't understand how these charges shouldn't have ever been used,
Speaker 2: how they change things to get rid of the Senchul limitations,
Speaker 2: how the federal government didn't bring these charges eight years
Speaker 2: ago for a reason. I mean, all of that they've missed,
Speaker 2: and they look at the president sitting president, Look at
Speaker 2: Don Drungle, You're a convicted felon.
Speaker 1: What do you do with that?
Speaker 6: Well, look, I think the Biden debate prep team is
Speaker 6: going to spend a lot of time trying to convince
Speaker 6: Bides and try to help Biden not to seem like
Speaker 6: a smug soop. His instinct is going to be smug
Speaker 6: and sanctimonias and to rub Trump's face Trump's face in it.
Speaker 6: I think that is a bad look for Biden if
Speaker 6: he does, and my prediction is they'll fail. By the
Speaker 6: way that Biden can't resist being smug and sanctimonious on this,
Speaker 6: I think he probably just will. But if his debating
Speaker 6: prep team is any good, they will try to get
Speaker 6: him to resist that. On Trump's side on this whole
Speaker 6: topic and more broadly, on everything in the debate, I
Speaker 6: think they're gonna try to stop Trump from just being
Speaker 6: volcanically angry. Look, Trump typically engages in very little debate prep.
Speaker 6: He is not. You're right, I have debated Trump many, many,
Speaker 6: many times. She doesn't engage in extensive debate prep to
Speaker 6: the extent they have debate prep. I think the team
Speaker 6: around him, if they're any good, likely will try to
Speaker 6: get him to be calm and matter of fact and
Speaker 6: not angry and cambative. If you go back and look
Speaker 6: at the twenty twenty debates, the first debate Trump was
Speaker 6: angry and combative, and that many observers believe that that
Speaker 6: hurt Trump because he was too angry and combative in
Speaker 6: the debate. I think that will be an instinct here.
Speaker 6: And Trump has reason to be pissed. Look, he was
Speaker 6: just railroad. He was railroaded by a kangaroo court. Any
Speaker 6: natural person and any person's natural reaction would be pissed.
Speaker 6: And Trump is not someone who generally his emotions. You know,
Speaker 6: I'm reminded of back back in two thousand. So we
Speaker 6: were talking about First versus four earlier in the pods
Speaker 6: after Bushman, after the Supreme Court resolved the case, and
Speaker 6: after he came in, he appointed his Attorney General, John Ashcroft,
Speaker 6: and I was part of the team that prepared John
Speaker 6: Ashcroft for his confirmation hearings, and so we looted John
Speaker 6: Ashcroft multiple times first confirmation hearings his attorney general. And
Speaker 6: you know, I'm young at this point, thirty year old lawyer,
Speaker 6: and there were several of us in the room, but
Speaker 6: we would try to get it noxious with Ashcroft and
Speaker 6: the preparation for confirmation. We tried to piss him off.
Speaker 6: We try to insult it. And in the prop sessions.
Speaker 6: He would blow his top, he'd yell at us, he'd
Speaker 6: get mad, and we were asking if noxious questions and
Speaker 6: he would scream at us. And then we'd say, okay, senator,
Speaker 6: because he a senator at the time. With the enator,
Speaker 6: I get what you're saying. You're right, that was a
Speaker 6: totally unfair question, is completely wrong. You're perfectly justified yelling
Speaker 6: with us. Here's the problem. They don't have the votes
Speaker 6: to defeat you right now. The only way they'd beat
Speaker 6: your confirmation is if they provoked you to say something
Speaker 6: stupid at the hearing, and what you say, thanks your nomination.
Speaker 6: And so we worked with him. We said, Okay, yell
Speaker 6: at us, get all of your anger out of us.
Speaker 6: But when you get into hearing, don't yell at the senators.
Speaker 6: Give them nothing because they have nothing to defeat you,
Speaker 6: and they can only win as if should give it
Speaker 6: to them. So you fast forward to the hearing, and
Speaker 6: you had Democrat senators that just made fool to themselves.
Speaker 6: I remember Ted Kennedy at one point, leaning forward, he
Speaker 6: was reading something Ashcroft has read about the Second Amendment,
Speaker 6: and he talked about the Second Amendment be as the
Speaker 6: framers as James Mattison, another Framers, wrote about it a
Speaker 6: check on tyranny and Ted Kennedy and his Boston Brahmin
Speaker 6: boys goes taranny in the United States. What you know
Speaker 6: what that is? That is treason, I tell you treason.
Speaker 6: And John Ashcroft, to his credit, he had Ted Kennedy
Speaker 6: screaming at him and calling him a trainer. And John
Speaker 6: Ashcroft said, Senator, it's confirmed as Attorney General, I will
Speaker 6: follow the law. And I don't know that. His heartbeat
Speaker 6: got about sixty five and he got confirmed. You know
Speaker 6: John Ashcroft, Well, you and here are good friends.
Speaker 1: Yeah, he's one of my mentors.
Speaker 6: Yes, his confirmation hearing, he didn't take debate, I promise you.
Speaker 6: In the prep sessions he did it got it out
Speaker 6: of his system. I think the Trump debate prep sessions
Speaker 6: will be similar. They will try to get that out
Speaker 6: of his system. I don't know if it will succeed.
Speaker 2: Final question for you on this, and it deals with
Speaker 2: the presidency and Joe Biden. I don't know how you
Speaker 2: can separate what this judge did from the corruption of
Speaker 2: the Biden White House. We know the attorneys that left
Speaker 2: the DOJ to go work on this case. We know
Speaker 2: that Alvin Bragg ran on this, We know he raised
Speaker 2: money off of it. We know that this judge has
Speaker 2: as a as a daughter that's heavily involved in fundraising
Speaker 2: the Democratic Party.
Speaker 5: Uh.
Speaker 2: And this all was orchestrated from from the Biden administration down.
Speaker 2: Now they're trying to act like now they're sprit from
Speaker 2: it like this is we stood back. We were just
Speaker 2: watching the wills of justice and and and and and
Speaker 2: a man be found accountable by a jury of his peers.
Speaker 2: That is clearly going to be their line. But make
Speaker 2: no mistake, none of this would have happened. And without
Speaker 2: the direction, uh of Biden. I said, today America has
Speaker 2: its own Vladimir Putin. Now his name is is Biden.
Speaker 2: Joe Biden is America's Putin right now going after his
Speaker 2: political opponent and trying to lock them up.
Speaker 6: You know, in law, if you look at something like
Speaker 6: anti trust law, there's a concept in law called conscious parallelism,
Speaker 6: which is people that all have similar incentives behaving similarly.
Speaker 6: But it's not a conspiracy. They just all are acting
Speaker 6: according to the same incentives. I don't know that Alvin
Speaker 6: Bragg is taking orders from the Biden White House. I
Speaker 6: agree that the Biden Joe Biden has been dictatorially's abused
Speaker 6: his power. But I think Alvin Bragg is a petty
Speaker 6: dictator of his own. He's George sorows Da. He ran
Speaker 6: on getting Joe Biden. You know, when his was the
Speaker 6: first indictment. I think a lot of Democrats are kind
Speaker 6: of sheepish. They said, Okay, this one is really sketchy.
Speaker 6: They didn't want this to be the lead case. And look, ultimately,
Speaker 6: the Biden do OJ. They sent the number three lawyer
Speaker 6: at d OJ, who had been a Democrat donor before
Speaker 6: in a Democrat themselves, and they sent him to be
Speaker 6: part of the trial team. So the bidend Oj got
Speaker 6: in bed with this partisan prosecution. But but I'm not
Speaker 6: convinced that Alvin Bragg did so at the direction of
Speaker 6: the White House. I just think he hates Trump scuts.
Speaker 6: So does everyone in the bidend Oj Biden White House.
Speaker 6: So does Fanny Willis down in Georgia, so does just
Speaker 6: about every wild eyed partisan Democrat. And so I wouldn't
Speaker 6: say it as as much a direction from the White
Speaker 6: House as that they're all suffering from the same Trump
Speaker 6: derangement syndrome, where they're willing to burn it all down,
Speaker 6: to destroy the rule of law, to abuse the justice
Speaker 6: system because they hate Trump so much, and they've convinced
Speaker 6: themselves if he is re elected, if he's president, it's
Speaker 6: the end of democracy. I mean, we played on Wednesday's
Speaker 6: Pot Robert de Niro going on and on that'll be
Speaker 6: the last election ever if Trump is elected, which is
Speaker 6: just it's arranged. It's unhim. But I don't think de
Speaker 6: Niro is lying in that. I think he believes every
Speaker 6: word he says. I suspect Alvin Brad does too, and
Speaker 6: I suspect the Biden White House that DOJ does as well.
Speaker 2: Final question. You're a poll guy. I love polls. I
Speaker 2: want your prediction. The first major polls that come out
Speaker 2: after this verdict has obviously come down, will they show
Speaker 2: that Donald Trump starts to lose momentum. Do you think
Speaker 2: he'll go backwards in the polls nationally or in swing states?
Speaker 2: Do you think this could even backfire more because you
Speaker 2: did say, and I agreed with you, that if they
Speaker 2: indict make him more powerful, his poll numbers would go up.
Speaker 2: That happened when the court case started. You said it's
Speaker 2: gonna make people solidify their support behind Donald Trump. But
Speaker 2: now that he has the he's a convicted felon around
Speaker 2: his neck, and that will be what happens in the polls.
Speaker 6: So when the indictment first came down, the first indictment,
Speaker 6: I said on this podcast, this indictment will be worth
Speaker 6: ten points for Donald Trump in the polls. Now that's
Speaker 6: in the progress. A week later, Trump was up ten.
Speaker 6: That prediction proved exactly accurate. Now, to be fair, that's
Speaker 6: a primary poll. Primary polls are different than general election polls,
Speaker 6: and so it caused Republicans to rally around Trump, even
Speaker 6: some Republicans who were not supporting Trump at that time.
Speaker 6: The general election, it's a little harder. I think most
Speaker 6: of the views on both sides are baked in.
Speaker 8: But if you.
Speaker 6: Forced me to make a prediction, my prediction right now
Speaker 6: is Trump. I think it is mildly beneficial for Trump
Speaker 6: and the polls. I don't think it is major league
Speaker 6: because I think most of the people on both sides
Speaker 6: are baked in and it almost doesn't matter at this point.
Speaker 6: They're not moving. But if you, if you press me,
Speaker 6: I would say, I don't think it's gonna cause for
Speaker 6: showing the polls, and I would say I think it's
Speaker 6: likely to be a mile positive benefit for Trump of
Speaker 6: the Poles.
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 the Ben Ferguson
Speaker 2: podcasts and we will see you back here on Monday morning.