A Day In The Life

Summary

Summary of "A Day In The Life" Episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz

Release Date: January 30, 2020

---

Introduction: Setting the Stage for the Impeachment Trial

In this episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz, host Michael Knowles engages Senator Ted Cruz in an in-depth discussion about the ongoing impeachment trial. The conversation delves into the strategic maneuvers within the Senate, the likelihood of various voting outcomes, and Cruz's personal experiences navigating the complexities of the trial.

---

Senate Strategy and Voting Outcomes

Understanding the Vote Dynamics

Ted Cruz provides a comprehensive analysis of the Senate's trajectory regarding the impeachment trial. He explains the delicate balance required to secure the necessary votes to either conclude the trial or call additional witnesses.

• Vote Thresholds: Cruz emphasizes that securing 51 votes is crucial to definitively end the trial without additional witnesses. He highlights that prominent Republicans like Mitt Romney and Susan Collins are likely to side with Democrats, leaving the Republican bloc at 49 votes. The positions of Lisa Murkowski and Lamar Alexander remain uncertain, potentially tipping the scales.

  "There are at least two Republicans who are pretty clearly going to vote with the Democrats, Mitt Romney and Susan Collins. That means they have 49 votes."
  — Ted Cruz [01:01]

Handling a Potential 50-50 Split

Should the Senate reach a 50-50 split, Cruz discusses the unprecedented scenario and the ambiguity surrounding tie-breaking procedures. He underscores the lack of clear Senate rules for such a situation, referencing historical precedents where the Chief Justice briefly assumed a role but later receded.

"We are in uncharted territory. If Chief Justice Roberts decided to vigorously assert himself and make a ruling, I don't know what would happen."
— Ted Cruz [02:37]

Cruz remains skeptical about the Chief Justice's likelihood to intervene, citing his inclination to remain an impartial umpire in the proceedings.

---

Strategic Questioning and Impeachment Arguments

Crafting Effective Questions

Cruz outlines his approach to formulating questions for the impeachment hearing, focusing on uncovering overlooked aspects and challenging the defense's case. He emphasizes the importance of simplifying complex legal issues to their core elements.

"What parts of the story haven't been told, what hasn't been told as effectively as it should, what additional facts need to be brought out."
— Ted Cruz [05:35]

Key Focus Areas

Cruz zeroes in on alleged corruption involving Burisma and the Biden family, aiming to highlight inconsistencies and potential conflicts of interest.

"The question is whether Joe Biden made decisions that made him part of that corruption. And I don't think so far the connection as to why this is Joe Biden's decision, I'll give you another example."
— Ted Cruz [09:17]

He plans to question discrepancies between Joe Biden's and Hunter Biden's statements regarding their business dealings, aiming to expose any contradictions that may undermine their credibility.

---

A Day in the Life: Balancing Responsibilities

Morning Engagements

Cruz provides a glimpse into his daily routine amidst the impeachment trial. His day begins with a meeting with Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, discussing international relations and nuclear non-proliferation.

"He also talked a lot about Iran. I think Bibi's leadership ... has been extraordinarily important."
— Ted Cruz [12:11]

Afternoon Duties

Post his morning engagement, Cruz dedicates time to strategizing with his team, refining questions for the impeachment hearing, and participates in White House events such as the signing of the USMCA trade agreement.

"We worked on questions for the impeachment hearing. We just went back and forth, okay, where do we want to press."
— Ted Cruz [12:41]

Evening Trial Sessions

The latter part of Cruz's day is consumed by the lengthy Senate trial sessions, which can extend late into the night. He candidly shares the exhaustion and challenges of navigating these grueling hours.

"The trial went from 1:00 till about 11:15 at night. Stayed in the cloakroom for about 45 minutes trying to see if we could find a deal to get us to 51."
— Ted Cruz [15:22]

Late-Night Reflections

After the trial, Cruz balances his responsibilities with personal downtime, humorously referencing his limited viewing of a Rockets vs. Jazz game.

"I turned on the DVR and watched about a quarter of the Rockets Jazz game. Don't tell me who won."
— Ted Cruz [15:46]

---

Potential Scenarios and Next Steps

Concluding the Trial

If the Senate votes no on calling additional witnesses, Cruz anticipates emotional reactions from Democrats but remains confident in concluding the trial swiftly.

"If we vote no additional witnesses, if we get 51 who say no additional witnesses, that we've heard enough, I expect that the Democrats will have kind of paroxysms of rage."
— Ted Cruz [18:08]

He praises Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's strategy of prolonging the trial to encourage a desire among senators to end the ordeal.

"Mitch has told us a hundred times this is not going to be pleasant."
— Ted Cruz [20:01]

Introducing Additional Witnesses

Should the Senate opt to call more witnesses, Cruz anticipates prolonged litigation and a temporary shift back to regular Senate business. He speculates on potential high-profile witnesses like John Bolton and Hunter Biden, asserting that Democrats are unlikely to achieve the necessary votes without significant Republican support.

"Chuck Schumer is telling reporters there will never be 51 to call Hunter Biden. He is full of it, really."
— Ted Cruz [21:35]

Cruz predicts that introducing these witnesses would open avenues for further questioning and potentially expose deeper layers of alleged corruption.

---

Notable Exchanges and Memorable Moments

A Light-Hearted Anecdote

In an unexpected and humorous turn, Cruz shares an incident involving Senator Richard Burr and his chocolate milk, highlighting the human and often unpredictable aspects of the Senate environment.

"I wrote out a question ... 'Is it the case that Senator Burr is the first senator in the history of the U.S. Senate to have chocolate milk at his desk?'"
— Ted Cruz [28:35]

This anecdote underscores the occasional levity amidst the serious proceedings of an impeachment trial.

Critique of Partisan Standards

Cruz criticizes the partisan motivations he perceives in the impeachment process, particularly targeting Minority Leader Adam Schiff's criteria for impeachment.

"If any part of Adam Schiff's motivation is partisan... he should be impeached and removed from office for high crimes and misdemeanors."
— Ted Cruz [27:16]

He argues that the standards set are unattainable, making it a political game rather than a substantive legal process.

---

Conclusion: Navigating Uncharted Waters

As the impeachment trial teeters on uncertain outcomes, Senator Ted Cruz remains steadfast in his strategic approach, balancing legislative duties with the demands of the trial. His candid reflections provide listeners with a nuanced understanding of the political maneuvering and personal toll involved in such high-stakes proceedings.

---

Notable Quotes with Timestamps:

• "If we vote no additional witnesses, if we get 51 who say no additional witnesses, that we've heard enough, I expect that the Democrats will have kind of paroxysms of rage."
  — Ted Cruz [18:08]

• "Mitch has told us a hundred times this is not going to be pleasant."
  — Ted Cruz [20:01]

• "Is it the case that Senator Burr is the first senator in the history of the U.S. Senate to have chocolate milk at his desk?"
  — Ted Cruz [28:35]

---

This episode offers a candid and strategic insight into Senator Cruz's approach to the impeachment trial, highlighting the intricate balance between political strategy and legislative responsibilities.

Transcript

[Michael Knowles]

The Senate is heading for a nail biter vote on whether to call additional witnesses or to end this impeachment trial once and for all. The senator and I sit down in daylight for a change to get his strategy before he heads to Capitol Hill. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz. Welcome back to Verdict with Ted Cruz. I'm Michael Knowles. Senator, I don't remember the last time I saw you in daylight.

[Ted Cruz]

Well, hopefully the sun shining indicates we're near the end of this journey.

[Michael Knowles]

I want to get your thoughts on the likelihood of that. I want to get your strategy on the last day of questions today. There are some reports coming out that John Barrasso, the number three Republican in the Senate, says that the momentum is heading in the direction of not calling additional witnesses. There are other reports that we might get a 50, 50, 50 vote, perfectly split, in which case I want to know who breaks the tie.

[Ted Cruz]

You know, it's an open question. It is close. Right now we need 51 votes to definitively say the trial is done. We don't need additional witnesses. Let's move on to final judgment. If we have 51 votes, we can wrap this up in the next couple of days. If we don't, and I hope the momentum's going that way. As we talked about in the last podcast, I think there are at least two Republicans who are pretty clearly going to vote with the Democrats, Mitt Romney and Susan Collins. That means they have 49 votes. There are the two next most likely are Lisa Murkowski and Lamar Alexander. I don't know where they're going to be. They're holding their cards very close to the vest. They could end up on either side of that and I think they're considering it carefully. They seem to be genuinely struggling with this decision. If it ends up 50, 50, we're in a little bit of uncharted territory. Under the scheduling order we adopted, I think Republican leadership's argument would be 5050 means witnesses are not in order. In other words, let's move on. We can't have additional witnesses.

[Michael Knowles]

Okay.

[Ted Cruz]

I am certain that the Democrats will argue. If it's 50, 50 it means witnesses are in order.

[Michael Knowles]

So who decides then?

[Ted Cruz]

Who knows? Look, look this, there's not a whole lot of precedent here. There's not under the Senate rules. It's not, I can make the argum sides of that. I understand the arguments on both sides of that. It is possible the Chief justice will have a view. It is not clear. So the Chief justice doesn't play the role of the Vice President. You Know, normally in the Senate, the Vice President breaks ties.

[Michael Knowles]

Right?

[Ted Cruz]

That's not the Chief Justice's role. The Chief Justice's role is to preside. Now, there's some historical precedent for the Chief justice breaking a 50, 50 tie. That happened in the impeachment of Andrew Johnson twice. But then the Senators got unhappy with that and the Chief justice receded and said, okay, I'm not gonna do that anymore.

[Michael Knowles]

So as with so many aspects of this trial, we really don't have a lot of precedent to go on.

[Ted Cruz]

We are in uncharted territory. If Chief Justice Roberts decided to vigorously assert himself and make a ruling, I don't know what would happen. I don't think that's all that likely. I think, you know, you may recall at his confirmation hearing, he used the analogy of wanting to be an umpire in baseball. I think that's what he wants to do. And so one of the nice things he did, which he didn't have to do, but yesterday he enforced a five minute time limit on answers to questions. That was the same thing Rehnquist had done. There's nothing in the rules that makes him do five minutes. Yeah, but I think every Senator was grateful because if it hadn't been a five minute time limit, you would have just seen the lawyers on both sides filibuster forever and you would have only.

[Michael Knowles]

Gotten to a handful of questions instead of all.

[Ted Cruz]

Okay, but that's an example where that was within his discretion. Although, that being said, if enough senators disagreed, 51 of us could have overruled it. Right. So that sort of ruling is a perfect example of, I think everyone agreed with it, so it was fine. But where it runs into problems if the Chief justice is disagreeing with the majority. By the way, you saw the House managers suggest something last night. They said, we're perfectly fine with the Chief justice deciding everything, deciding evidentiary motions, deciding everything. Now look, you gotta understand that argument makes perfect sense when you're in the minority.

[Michael Knowles]

Why is that?

[Ted Cruz]

There are 47 Democrats on any party line vote. They're gonna lose. They know that. Remember, we had 11 motions on day one. They lost all 11. They understand that. So if you're going to lose on any party line vote, it's in your interest to find any other decision maker.

[Michael Knowles]

Give the power away, let somebody else make the decision.

[Ted Cruz]

Even if they think they're not going to win with the Chief, they got a better chance if they know that they're outvoted. It's sort of like, all right, an election recounts. Have you noticed that when an election is close, the prevailing party never calls for a recount. Right. Like whoever's been declared the winner, even if by one vote, you don't see that person saying, we need a recount. It's always the guy who's lost. Yes. Because if you've lost, it's your only chance. A recount is the only thing that can benefit you. That's a little bit the same as what's going on here.

[Michael Knowles]

So obviously then to is going to matter a lot before we get to this vote. The reason I wanted to sit down today before we get to the impeachment trial is I want to hear a little bit about your strategy, how you prepare when you're going in, when you're writing these questions, what are you trying to accomplish? What are you going to ask today when you get to the Hill?

[Ted Cruz]

Well, you're looking at what parts of the story haven't been told, what hasn't been told as effectively as it should, what additional facts need to be brought out, what weaknesses in the defenses or the House manager's case. Should you shine a light on some of what I'm looking at some of the areas that there are still aspects of the evidence of corruption, the evidence of corruption of Burisma, the Ukrainian natural gas company, of Joe Biden and Hunter Biden that still haven't been fleshed out. And then I think need to. So for example, there is an email exchange that happened when Chris Hines. So Chris Hines is the stepson of John Kerry. John Kerry was Obama's secretary of State. Chris Hines was business partners with Hunter Biden and with this guy, Devin Archer, who was Chris Hines college roommate. Three of them were business partners. First Devon Archer and then Hunter Biden both join the board of Barista. They both are getting paid a million bucks a year.

[Michael Knowles]

Right.

[Ted Cruz]

And Chris Hines does a couple of things. Number one, he sends an email to the to his stepfather's chief of staff, to John Kerry's chief of staff. And he says apparently Devin and Hunter both joined the board of Burisma and made a press and a press release went out today. I can't speak to why they decided to do so, but there was no investment by our firm in that company.

[Michael Knowles]

Trying to clear his name, trying to dissociate himself.

[Ted Cruz]

It's fascinating that he sends this email. It's also fascinating John Kerry's chief of staff notice. He doesn't say Devin Archer and Hunter Biden. He says Devin and Hunter. So the chief of staff knows exactly who these guys are. He knows what Burisma is. He doesn't explain. Burisma is this Ukrainian company. You may not know it. Chief of staff knew exactly what Burisma was, knew exactly who Devin and Archer was. And what did Chris Hines do? He went on to say he terminated his business relationships with Hunter and Biden, and he said it was unacceptable to work for Burisma. Now, the White House defense team briefly got into this, but the House managers have never had to ask a question, answer a question on this they've never had to address. Now, wait a second. If Chris Hines thought it was unacceptable to work for Burisma, did John Kerry think that? Did his stepfather think that? And did Joe Biden that? And look, one of the things to keep in mind also, what really matters legally, we've talked about in any litigation, you want to simplify, your enemy is getting so complicated, and you get bogged down in the weeds. You want to simplify the question that matters. You know, I did Sean Hannity a couple days ago, and he had five points that are critical. Remember? Look, that's fine. I said, sean, there's one you want to simplify to what matters. What matters legally is does a president have the authority to investigate corruption? Incredible evidence of corruption. If the answer is yes, that's game over. This case is done now. And on the fact side, it's worth remembering that, listen, the question is not really whether Hunter Biden is corrupt. Hunter Biden by all appearances, has led a troubled life. This is someone with. Who's made some unfortunate decisions in his life. The question is whether Joe Biden made decisions that made him part of that corruption. And I don't think so far the connection as to why this is Joe Biden's decision, I'll give you another example. So there was a question, and I joined it. It was a question that Josh Hawley asked that I joined, and the two of us asked together. And it was about, did Joe Biden ever seek an opinion from the White House counsel's office if he could keep being the point man on Ukraine while his son was getting paid a million bucks a year from Burisma? And the White House team said, not that we know of. We have no. You know. You know, one of the things one does in government if one has a potential conflict is you go to the lawyers and say, hey, do I got a conflict here?

[Michael Knowles]

Right?

[Ted Cruz]

And you get an opinion and they tell you what to do. And sometimes they tell you, recuse yourself, don't be involved. So Joe Biden could have said, you.

[Michael Knowles]

Know what this doesn't look good.

[Ted Cruz]

There are a ton of countries on planet Earth. I'm just gonna stay out of Ukraine stuff. I'll worry about all the other countries. I'm not gonna get involved in Ukraine cuz my son's getting rich off of Ukraine and maybe it's not right for me to do this.

[Michael Knowles]

So the House managers, the Democrats did not have to answer this question yesterday and you are going to ask it today.

[Ted Cruz]

That's exactly right.

[Michael Knowles]

Are you worried that Adam Schiff listens to this podcast and he's gonna get a heads up?

[Ted Cruz]

You know? No. And look, I will say this though. Schiff is talented, he's good on his feet. But it's interesting. The questions that rattle him, the questions that rattle him are when you're getting close to the target.

[Michael Knowles]

So you're going to ask this question. Are you going, are there going to be questions on the same topic you're hitting or are you going to change it up and go after another angle in question time today as well?

[Ted Cruz]

Well, look, I'll give you another example. So Joe Biden told reporters that he's never discussed his son's business dealings with him. And that, that, that was discussed yesterday. But what wasn't discussed is there's somebody who disagrees with that. And, and that somebody who disagrees with that is Hunter Biden. And, and, and, and Hunter Biden said that he talked to his dad about his serving on the Burisma board. And Hunter said, quote, dad said, I hope you know what you're doing. So one of his guys, dad said, I do. So why is it that Joe Biden and Hunter Biden are telling different stories that Joe says he's never talked to him about it? And Hunter's like, oh yeah, I talked to him about it.

[Michael Knowles]

One of these guys is lying. Joe Biden or Hunter Biden, they're not telling the truth. Another way to put it. So. Well, this sounds very interesting. I mean, I assume that the Democratic House managers are gonna just try to evade the question and filibuster, but it sounds like you've got a couple different angles to come at today. I wanna know beyond the impeachment trial. You have more work to do than just sit on this impeachment trial. What is a day in the life? Waking up, doing whatever you do in the morning, then going to the impeachment trial. I know what you do from 10pm until about 2 in the morning. But what does a day in the life look like?

[Ted Cruz]

All right, so let's take yesterday. Yeah, yesterday I got up first meeting I had was at nine was a meeting with, with Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel. And so he's staying at Blair House, which is the residence right next to the White House. So I went over to Blair House and met with him from 9 to 9:30. And I know Bibi quite well. I've met with him many times in Israel and in the US we're friends. When he and I meet, it's nice because they're one on ones. We don't have staff in there, just the two of us. We sat and had a cup of coffee. We talked some politics. Look, he's in a crazy situation in Israel. They keep having elections that he hasn't been able to form a government. And so I was getting his thoughts on what's going on, on that and what the dynamics are. We also talked a lot about Iran. I think Bibi's leadership when it comes to stopping Iran from getting nuclear weapons has been extraordinarily important, particularly when Obama was president and when Netanyahu, we invited him to speak on a joint session of Congress and he called out the danger of the Ayatollah Khamenei with nuclear weapons. And the adjective I've used a bunch of times for Netanyahu is Churchillian, because it was like Winston Churchill when the Nazis were a gathering storm, that he spoke out. He spoke out with a clarity, spoke out with a gravity and a weight. And it helped stiffen the spine, frankly, of a lot of members of Congress. One of the reasons Trump pulled out of the Obama nuclear deal is because Bibi was so strong that he had that you didn't have Republicans in Congress just give up on it, say, oh, well, this is done, let's move on. And so I think that was very important. So I started the day meeting with Bibi, met with him from 9 to 9:30, then went and met with my staff, my team, and we talked strategy for the impeachment hearing. We worked on questions for the impeachment hearing. We just went back and forth, okay, where do we want to press? And spent about an hour doing that. Then I went back to the White House and was there. We talked yesterday about the signing of the usmca, the US Mexico, Canada Trade Agreement that was out on the South Lawn of the White House. President was there. Greg Abbott, governor of Texas was there. A bunch of senators, a bunch of House members were there. You know, look, it was fun. We heard, heard speeches. The president gave, gave a pretty good speech. He was pretty funny, actually. He was almost Like a standup comedian, he was spending a lot of time, sort of almost tongue in cheek, kissing up to the senators and saying, hey, I need your votes, guys.

[Michael Knowles]

My fate is in your hands.

[Ted Cruz]

And what was amusing is said, house members, I don't need you guys. You already voted. So you're like, I can ignore you. But hey, the senators, you know, I mean, it was. And so he signed it. He was giving out signing pens. I've got a signing pen from usmca. So that was fun. And then from there went back to the, back to the Capitol and we went into the trial. Trial started at 1:00 and the trial went from 1:00 till about 11:15 at night.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah.

[Ted Cruz]

Stayed in the cloakroom for about 45 minutes trying to see if we could find a deal to get us to 51. And in this trial, so it was negotiating with other senators, got in the truck, headed over here, we recorded the podcast. I got home, oh, probably about two in the morning last night, turned on the DVR and watched about a quarter of the Rockets Jazz game. Don't tell me who won. I only watched a quarter. And then, although if I will be amazed if the Rockets won because we're so shorthanded, we're missing Harden and Westbrook and Capella. So if we want, it's a miracle, but I have to believe in miracles.

[Michael Knowles]

I have to admit I missed the Rockets Jazz game last night. I'll try to catch it tonight.

[Ted Cruz]

And then went to sleep about 2:30. Woke up this morning. First thing I had this morning was a text from my scheduler saying, hey, Lindsey Groot, Graham needs to talk to you on impeachment. So I called Lindsey. Lindsey had just gotten off the phone with the President and so we talked about. He and I are both working to see is there a way to get the senators, who are not sure where they are, on additional witnesses to get them, get them to. Yes, to get them to ending this trial now. And so we're continuing to negotiate and discuss that. And then I headed back to see you.

[Michael Knowles]

Then you came here, we had a cup of coffee and did the show. This brings up a fascinating point because in the way that I was imagining how impeachment goes and I think for a lot of Americans it's all kind of pre planned. It's all scripted. Nothing is happening in the moment. Nobody needs to wake up and call the White House and then call your other senator friend. And this. And yet from what you're describing to me, running into the cloakroom, hearing something, writing Down a new question. Calling Lindsey Graham. He's on the phone with the President. A lot of this is happening in real time. It's not inevitable.

[Ted Cruz]

We.

[Michael Knowles]

We don't really know how this story ends.

[Ted Cruz]

But look, I think that's very much right, and that's not true of every senator. There are a lot of senators who are just kind of sitting there listening. They're going to cast their vote, and that's it. Listen, I like to be active. I like to be engaged. As, as I, as I told Lindsay this morning, I have to admit, I'm. I'm having a hell of a lot of fun now. It's not good for the country. I don't want to see it dragged on. I'd like to see it ended. But it is. These are complicated, tough, strategic, legal, political, factual questions that are. They're nuanced, they're difficult. And I think we're going to end up in the right place, which is the President being acquitted.

[Michael Knowles]

But how long that takes, how long.

[Ted Cruz]

That takes and how we get there is a different story.

[Michael Knowles]

Could you just take us really quickly through? You're gonna get this vote tomorrow, I guess, on whether to call additional witnesses. If they vote no, no additional witnesses, what do the next two weeks look like?

[Ted Cruz]

So if we vote no additional witnesses, if we get 51 who say no additional witnesses, that we've heard enough, I expect that the Democrats will have kind of paroxysms of rage. So we'll see several motions. Then the motions will kind of be, screw you. There'll be something like, I can't believe you did this to me. So I have another motion, I have another motion. And some of it is the Democrats will just need to get that out of their system. And one of the strategies Mitch McConnell has employed, which I actually think has been wise and the right thing is to make this long and brutal and painful to all 100 senators. Mitch has told us a hundred times this is not going to be pleasant.

[Michael Knowles]

Because he wants the senators to want to end this.

[Ted Cruz]

That's exactly right. And there are few things more motivating. This is a strange place. So typically we fly out Thursday afternoons to get back home, and we're in our home states Fridays through the weekends. Often, how things get done in the Senate is, as you're getting to Thursday, everything's at an impasse. People are, There's a roadblock, and then people want to get out. They've got a plane flight. And so the phrase is, jet fumes are in the air. And when jet fumes are in the air. You got a bunch of senators and some of them are in their 70s and 80s. They're looking to get out of here and they'll agree to damn near anything to get out of here. Some of the angriest I've ever made my colleagues is on fights trying to limit out of control spending when I've ended up saying, no, I'm gonna object, and it's ruined their weekend plans. And I mean, you cannot overstate how. I mean, how. Screaming and enraged.

[Michael Knowles]

You're joking.

[Ted Cruz]

I am not at all. I mean, literally screaming at the top of their lungs. Mitch knows that that's being used right now by having these be long, grueling days. What he is counting on is senators, both wobbly Republicans and Democrats, will say, I gotta get out of here enough already that they won't want to extend things forever. Tomorrow if we have a vote, no additional witnesses. I think you'll see several Democratic motions, by the way. Each motion you've got an hour on each side to argue it. So it will be. I expect tomorrow is likely to be a long night, but then I think we will move to the final judgment.

[Michael Knowles]

So that would be Saturday, you would.

[Ted Cruz]

Say, yeah, there's a period of deliberation and that deliberation is in closed session. So the TV cameras are off, the reporters are thrown out, and it's just senators giving speeches and talking to each other. And then we vote. I'm not sure the exact timing of a vote, but if we conclude that additional witnesses are not needed, I am confident that by Monday this will be done.

[Michael Knowles]

This is over.

[Ted Cruz]

State of the Union is Tuesday.

[Michael Knowles]

Right.

[Ted Cruz]

And so if we conclude there are no additional witnesses, I have full confidence we will push through whatever is necessary to get this resolved before the State of the Union.

[Michael Knowles]

And it will be a very funny State of the Union if this is resolved before then. What if it's not? What if they vote to call more witnesses? What are the next two, three, four weeks look like?

[Ted Cruz]

Nobody knows. I mean, it is. Presumably you'll have a motion from the Democrats to call John bolton. If they're 51 who just voted for more witnesses, you have to assume they're 51 for that. Presumably you'll have a motion on the other side to call Hunter Biden. I am very confident we'll get 51 for that. You know, Chuck Schumer is telling reporters there will never be 51 to call Hunter Biden. He is full of it, really. I mean, he's total bluff. It is total spin because he's saying, well, our Democrats will vote now. Well, look, even if four Republicans join with the Democrats in calling Bolton, those four are not going to say, we will only call prosecution witnesses and not defense witnesses. I'm confident if we're calling witnesses, if John Bolton is getting called, that we'll have at least 53 votes to call Hunter Biden. By the way, Joe Manchin also said he might vote Democrat from West Virginia. He might vote for Hunter Biden. The point is, if we go down this road, we'll have at least those two witnesses. An interesting bit of speculation. I've heard several senators say this in the cloakroom, that they think the Democrats are voting for more witnesses, but hoping, desperately hoping they lose that vote because a lot of these Democrats are terrified if we open the door to more witnesses and we bring in, say, Hunter Biden or we bring in Joe Biden or we bring in the whistleblower, that things get really bad. Because what they managed to do in the House proceedings is cover up all of the evidence of corruption. We start bringing in witnesses, and suddenly that corruption. You know, it's going to be real interesting seeing Hunter Biden on the floor of the Senate be asked, million bucks a year. What'd you do for that? What services did you provide for a million bucks a year? And what'd your dad do to help you out in that?

[Michael Knowles]

This almost has me hoping for more witnesses. But I just want to be clear, if more witnesses are called, this is not going to continue to be an every single day, 10 hours a day?

[Ted Cruz]

No, I think that's right. So if the Senate votes to subpoena, let's say we subpoena both John Bolton and Hunter Biden, that's going to take some time to shake out. Then those subpoenas will be served. I think it's likely you'll see litigation, at least on the John Bolton side, with the White House asserting executive privilege, trying to block his testimony. That could take weeks or even months. And so I think what is likely is the Senate would go back to regular business for a period of time until such time as those witnesses can come. And by the way, usually with witnesses, you have a deposition first and then you have trial testimony. So if we go down the road of more witnesses, I would anticipate that being sometime in the future, minimum of a couple weeks.

[Michael Knowles]

Okay, so we'll get a little bit of a break. And then the Senate has to go from this very intense trial back into the normal business of the Senate, back into possibly removing the President from Office.

[Ted Cruz]

Yep.

[Michael Knowles]

That seems like a lot of whiplash.

[Ted Cruz]

It is. And listen, I think there are a lot of Democrats really nervous about the direction these facts are going. I'll give an example. Yesterday, in questioning, Adam Schiff said early on, he said, if any part of the president's motivation is corrupt, then that's enough to convict him.

[Michael Knowles]

Now, does this mean there was a big angle on this yesterday, which was the difference between a private motive and a public motive? You know, private interest or the national good.

[Ted Cruz]

So. And I think actually Dershowitz did a really good job of sort of breaking out three scenarios.

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah.

[Ted Cruz]

There is one scenario, which is the sort of Mother Teresa, that you're making a decision because of love, of humanity and the greater good.

[Michael Knowles]

No selfishness.

[Ted Cruz]

No selfishness. And he said, look, there are not a lot of people in politics making a lot of decisions like that. And he is right in that.

[Michael Knowles]

Right.

[Ted Cruz]

He said, there's the other scenario. That is the corrupt and venal, that your motive is purely selfish. Look, it's give me a bag of cash. It's bribery. Or for that matter, look, that's what's alleged about Joe Biden, give my son a bag of cash. I mean, it is. You want to talk about the three scenarios? The Biden allegations, at a minimum, are in category three, and then category two is the big one. And it's mixed motive, where you have some public interest, you wanna do good, but you're also looking to political self interest. And one thing to keep in mind. Listen, with elected politicians, just about everything you do, one of the considerations you're thinking about is will the folks back home like it and will this help me get reelected? And that. Look, I think politicians think about that far too often. I'm a big believer in the proposition that good policy is good politics. If you do the right thing substantively.

[Michael Knowles]

It'Ll play well back home.

[Ted Cruz]

But you see, we just passed the usmca. Bunch of senators, bunch of House members voted for that. A big reason they voted for that is their constituents want them to. It's good politics, just about everything. All right, let me ask this. Let's apply the Adam Schiff test. If any part of the motive is corrupt, and by corrupt he means thinking it will advance his partisan interest, that it's impeachable and you should remove him from office. Let me ask you a question, Michael. Do you believe any part of Adam Schiff's motivation is partisan?

[Michael Knowles]

Oh, it couldn't possibly be. Not Adam. Well, maybe, yes. I think we would all have to say, of Course, part of Adam Schiff's motivation is partisan.

[Ted Cruz]

What a ludicrous standard.

[Michael Knowles]

Right.

[Ted Cruz]

He literally argued if the President had even the tiniest bit of political motivation, he should be impeached and removed for office for high crimes and misdemeanors.

[Michael Knowles]

So if the politician had a political motivation at all, in any degree, then he's gotta be thrown out of office.

[Ted Cruz]

Look, it shows. This is a game. They know it's a game. They know that standard.

[Michael Knowles]

You know, no politician could survive that standard.

[Ted Cruz]

Look, I'm shocked. Shocked. There's gambling in Casablanca. I mean, that. Do you remember the compliment that was made of Bill Clinton? That he's an exceptionally good liar?

[Michael Knowles]

Yeah.

[Ted Cruz]

Yes. I'm just gonna leave it at that. I'm not even gonna connect that.

[Michael Knowles]

We'll just leave it at that. And it seems as though you might be paying somebody a compliment. We have got to get you to Capitol Hill. We've run a little late anyway, and we need to make sure that you ask all of those questions of the House impeachment managers. And then we will be right back tomorrow to see how it all turns out.

[Ted Cruz]

I do have to make one point.

[Michael Knowles]

Okay.

[Ted Cruz]

We talked before about milk.

[Michael Knowles]

This is the most important point.

[Ted Cruz]

Two liquids are allowed on the Senate floor. I need to tell you a major landmark occurrence this week.

[Michael Knowles]

Please go on. Let's make some news.

[Ted Cruz]

Yesterday, I was looking over at Richard Burr from North Carolina, and I looked over at his. At his desk, and on his desk a page brought him chocolate milk.

[Michael Knowles]

Chocolate milk. What is the.

[Ted Cruz]

Well, so I took one of the witness cards, the question cards that you write to the Chief justice, and I wrote out a question from Senator Cruz. Mr. Chief justice, is it the case that Senator Burr is the first senator in the history of the U.S. senate to have chocolate milk at his desk? And I didn't send it to the Chief justice, but I did pass it over to Richard, who cracked up laughing. So we have apparently made a new precedent that I don't think has ever occurred. And the Nestle's precedent has been set.

[Michael Knowles]

When the historians look at this moment, they might say third time ever that a president was impeached. First time ever a president was impeached without being accused of a crime. That's gonna be a footnote because the big precedent is the first time ever chocolate milk was drunk on the Senate floor.

[Ted Cruz]

And next podcast, ask me about what John TH. And I are planning to do about this Kahlua.

[Michael Knowles]

We'll have to wait and see to find out. I'm Michael Knowles this is Verdict with Ted Cruz.

[C]

This episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz is being brought to you by Jobs, Freedom, and Security Pack, a political action committee dedicated to supporting conservative causes, organizations, and candidates across the country. In 2022, Jobs, Freedom and Security PAC plans to donate to conservative candidates running for Congress and help the Republican Party across the nation.