Loading summary
Transcript88 lines
- [00:00]
Michael Knowles
House Democrats wrap up their case against the President. The president's arguments will begin tomorrow. And we all march for life on the 47th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. And that sounds like it's two very different stories. Actually, there's a key connection between the two. We will get into all of that. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz. Welcome back. I'm Michael Knowles and I actually should have been more specific. What I meant to say was this is Verdict with Ted Cruz, the third biggest podcast on the charts right now. Congratulations, Senator.
- [00:40]
Ted Cruz
Well, back at you.
- [00:42]
Michael Knowles
We are number three on the charts of all podcasts and number one in news. We are beating the New York Times.
- [00:50]
Ted Cruz
I'm sorry, could you say that again?
- [00:51]
Michael Knowles
Oh, did you maybe perhaps you couldn't hear me. I just wanted to say we're beating the New York Times.
- [00:56]
Ted Cruz
Well, that is a wonderful thing and a testament to all the good people who are listening.
- [01:01]
Michael Knowles
And it sounds like birds chirping sort of in the studio, but we have a lot to get to today. Indeed. We have the Democrats wrapping up their arguments. We've got the Trump team is going to begin tomorrow. And in the 15 minutes that you got free today, you ended up marching for life out on the National Mall.
- [01:19]
Ted Cruz
All true. And it's 1045. So we're getting started tonight earlier than we have any day this week.
- [01:25]
Michael Knowles
This is a very early night, so not squander the time. How do you think the Democrats did in their closing arguments?
- [01:33]
Ted Cruz
Well, I think all hundred senators are grateful that the 24 hour marathon is over. I think it was an interesting decision of the House managers to consume practically every minute of those 24 hours. Listen, Adam Schiff gave the close and there were moments of it that were powerful. I mean, he is an effective trial lawyer. He's a talented trial lawyer. He can be an effective orator. I think we saw throughout the opening arguments the House managers used multimedia quite effectively. And so there were moments that they drove in with different video clips that.
- [02:09]
Michael Knowles
Worked and it broke up the kind of long arguments and it did manage to pull people's attention.
- [02:15]
Ted Cruz
Well, and that's something you're seeing, by the way, in trial courts much more often now, videos. I mean, it's effective. Trial lawyers know how to do that. And we saw that on display. I also think Schiff did a good job. He had a big chunk of his closing that was trying to preempt the president's arguments. And it's because of the structure of it. House managers have 24 hours and the president has 24 hours and there's not a rebuttal.
- [02:39]
Michael Knowles
Right.
- [02:39]
Ted Cruz
So he knew they're getting ready to start. And so he went through dozens of potential arguments that they will almost surely make and he tried to give responses to it.
- [02:48]
Michael Knowles
What was he preempting? I mean, what were the big arguments that he expects from Trump?
- [02:51]
Ted Cruz
I mean, he went through whether they're process arguments, whether they're, I mean, he went through a whole host. But you actually put your finger on a major failing I think he had, which is he didn't shine a lantern on his biggest problem. So he briefly noted, well, the House managers might suggest Joe Biden's corrupt, but there's no evidence of that. And that's all he said, he's setting himself up. It's the biggest weakness of their entire case is that they have built their case on the proposition there is zero evidence, none whatsoever, of any corruption concerning Joe Biden, concerning his son Hunter Biden, concerning Burisma, the Ukrainian natural gas company that was paying Hunter Biden a million bucks a year.
- [03:40]
Michael Knowles
That's a strawman because yesterday the House Democrats in making their case, they kept saying there's nothing wrong with Burisma, there's nothing wrong with the Bidens, there's nothing to see here, folks. And because they kept talking about actually brings that to the forefront, right? And then today in their closing arguments.
- [03:58]
Ted Cruz
They failed to address it, they just dismissed it. And it's like leading with your jaw. They're setting up to just get it knocked crazy. Look, I'll say Schiff had some very good moments, but he also tends to get self righteous and punch the biggest.
- [04:20]
Michael Knowles
Statement of the year.
- [04:22]
Ted Cruz
And so he'll be making an argument that's effective, that's real. And then he suddenly starts lecturing you. And I think the moment where that was most acute is when he cited this CBS story and said Trump was threatening if any Republican voted against him to have their head on a pike. And I gotta tell you, that pissed Republican senators off. I heard probably a half dozen senators surround me like openly, like gasp and express anger. And that's a great argument if you're talking to a bunch of left wing activists at a California rally and shifts base. But it ain't a good argument if you're trying to get some Republican votes, right?
- [05:03]
Michael Knowles
If you're actually trying to persuade the few Republicans who maybe you could persuade. Not a good way to do it. You bring up the reaction among the Republican senators today. Have you wandering around the halls of the Senate heard any gossip from the Democratic side? I mean, Is what is the reaction, if anything at all, to how they're doing?
- [05:23]
Ted Cruz
Well, it was interesting. One of the Democratic senators was talking to a reporter walking out, and the reporter asked, what'd you think of the closing? And the head on the pike line? And the comment from the Democratic senator is, look, every argument has a discordant note or two. I mean, it may not have come across on tv, but he was almost booed for saying that. I mean, Republican senators were offended by it. But in many ways, his audience for that was not the hundred people in the room, it was TV that have to render a verdict. It was tv. And I'll tell you a very interesting observation. So why did they fill 24 hours? Why did they repeat the same arguments over and over and over again? Because for most of the argument, they weren't talking to the hundred senators that will vote on impeachment. They were talking to 330 million Americans. And you know, one of the fascinating things that several senators noticed, if you look at their order of speaking, it followed prime time, depending on where the House manager was from. In other words, they started off with the East Coast House managers, they then moved to the central. So you looked at, you know, the congressman from Colorado, they'd put them on in primetime in Colorado, and it would always close with, with the West Coast. And they were, they were very deliberately, more than a couple of people observed that this, this was at least more than a little bit about Adam Schiff launching either his governor candidacy or his Senate candidacy. And look, this stuff I'm sure plays very well in a California Democratic primary.
- [06:56]
Michael Knowles
So that to me raises the question, have the House Democrats given up on actually persuading the senators? I mean, are they now tuning out the senators and just playing this to TV to launch their own political careers?
- [07:08]
Ted Cruz
So yes and no. 90%+ was launching their political careers, was energizing their base, was speaking to the angry mob. There was a 10% in the closing where Schiff was trying to throw a Hail Mary. Look, he knows that they don't have the votes. He knows that they haven't proven their case. But their hope now is they want more witnesses because they want to go on a fishing expedition.
- [07:33]
Michael Knowles
Right?
- [07:33]
Ted Cruz
And so, for example, he had some, some actually pretty moving oratory about moral courage and standing up and how it's harder to stand against your party. And he said, you risk being called. You risk people saying, he's a Democrat in name only or she's a Republican in name only. I don't think the choice of pronoun was accidental.
- [07:58]
Michael Knowles
No, he might be referring specifically to some senators.
- [08:02]
Ted Cruz
Well, and it was. Now, I will confess, as I was walking out, there was a group of reporters, and I'd said to him, I said, wow, Schiff's call to for moral courage to stand up against your party was powerful. And I really wonder how many Democrats are gonna do that and vote to acquit the president. And of course, the reporters look at you like, no, no, no, no. Moral courage is always Republicans abandoning their party, of course, never Democrats doing that.
- [08:31]
Michael Knowles
Now, before we move on from their arguments, I do want to be clear. They spend most of the time talking impeachment, which was abuse of power, and we've talked about that now in the last couple of episodes, the argument that Trump engaged in a quid pro quo and he withheld the military aid from Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine investigating his political rival Joe Biden, even though he didn't end up withholding the aid and they didn't end up investigating Joe Biden. We talked about that on previous episodes. The second article of impeachment is called obstruction of Congress. Half the reason I voted for the president is so that he would obstruct Congress. What does that even mean? How do you obstruct Congress?
- [09:13]
Ted Cruz
Look, they're basing it on a refusal to allow witnesses to testify, defying subpoenas, and refusing to produce documents. And, you know, look, I will say where the Democrats were effective in making this case is the Trump administration didn't hand over documents from any of the cabinet agencies in response to subpoenas. I gotta say, most of the Republican senators think that was pretty dumb, that the administration would have been better off complying, producing some documents in response, and preserving the fights for the things that really matter.
- [09:52]
Michael Knowles
And part of the obstruction charge that the Democrats wage against the president is that he wouldn't allow certain people who worked for him, such as John Bolton, the national security adviser, to testify. Are you saying, should they have testified?
- [10:06]
Ted Cruz
Well, and that's where this argument collapses, and it's why the Democrats are not gonna prevail on it. Because, look, front and center, John Bolton is the most notable example. They're like, we need John Bolton's testimony. Well, we talked about earlier this week in one of these podcasts how John Bolton did something very clever. He went to a federal District Court in D.C. and he went before the court and he said, look, I've got two conflicting demands on me. The House is asking me to testify, and the president is instructing me not to, citing executive privilege. And he said, which one do I comply with? And John Bolton said, judge, I'll do whatever you tell me.
- [10:45]
Michael Knowles
Right.
- [10:46]
Ted Cruz
The House Democrats response was fascinating. They just said, never mind. They actually informed the court, we're not going to subpoena John Bolton and we don't need his testimony.
- [10:58]
Michael Knowles
So the fact that John Bolton does not end up testifying during the House impeachment investigation is on the House Democrats.
- [11:07]
Ted Cruz
And in fact, Bolton's lawyer said if they withdraw the subpoena, the choice for John Bolton not to testify is not John Bolton's, it's the House Democrats.
- [11:18]
Michael Knowles
Why is that? I mean, why would the House withdraw their poll to get him to testify?
- [11:24]
Ted Cruz
Because I think they were in a hurry. They did this whole thing, they just wanted to vote 40 some odd days. They were moving rocket fast. You know, part of it, I think there are a number of us, I mean, we were speculating the other night, why did they not drag this out and delay it more? I think part of it is that Nancy Pelosi at least thinks this is a political illusion. She knows that impeachment is hurting the Democrats chances in 2020. So I think she wanted to get this over with. Now House managers have different interests. I think they, they're enjoying the national.
- [12:01]
Michael Knowles
T schiff has his eyes on other offices.
- [12:05]
Ted Cruz
You know, I will confess, I did ask in the Republican cloakroom, I said, hey, what do y'all think of us having a motion to give him another 24 hours to keep talking?
- [12:12]
Michael Knowles
Just let everyone else's numbers go up. So, all right, the arguments are over. I do wanna move on to the march for life.
- [12:19]
Ted Cruz
Yeah.
- [12:20]
Michael Knowles
Before we do that though, if you had to give the Democrats a grade. They've made their arguments. You've argued many high profile cases. How did they do?
- [12:32]
Ted Cruz
On presentation and style, I'd say an A minus. They actually did. This was a talented group, presenting okay. On substance A D. Yeah, they sounded good and they have little snippets. But they also were very selective in terms of what they cited. I expect to see. I expect to see the President's lawyers come back hard. I expect to see the President's lawyers in particular to make a powerful case about the evidence of corruption that justified an investigation into Burisma and whether Vice President Joe Biden was part of that corruption. And the House managers have now built their whole case on the proposition. There's zero evidence that proposition is gonna be blown out of the water.
- [13:23]
Michael Knowles
So I guess we'll see tomorrow. Tomorrow's gonna be a really big day because finally the Trump team gets to make. I have to tell you, after going through all these hours and hours of the Democrat case, I'm glad you gave me this recommendation to have a nice, delicious glass of milk, because it's really fortified me.
- [13:39]
Ted Cruz
Well, there's nothing like a cool glass of milk.
- [13:42]
Michael Knowles
There is a strange rule in the Senate that goes around impeachment trials. You are not allowed, as a senator to bring in a cup of coffee or a bottle of whiskey or a soft drink. You are only allowed to drink two things in the Senate during the impeachment trial. Water and milk. You have availed yourself of this, I noticed.
- [14:03]
Ted Cruz
I have. And look, the Senate is a strange place. It is a place in many respects. It is governed by tradition. But the reason you can drink milk all stems back to January 24, 1966. So before you and I were born, Senator Everett Dirksen is on the Senate floor, and he raises a question with the presiding officer. He asks, he says, is it in violation of the Senate rules if the senator from Illinois asks one of the page boys to go to the restaurant and bring him a glass of milk? If it is in violation of the rules, I will forget it. And the presiding officer answered, there is nothing in the rules to prohibit the senator from requesting a glass of milk. When that exchange happened, that formed a precedent. This is actually a governing precedent. So when you're a newly elected senator, you get in your desk, in the drawer of your desk, you get something called Riddick's precedence, and it is printed that Riddick's precedents stating going back to January 24, 1966, Riddick's precedents.
- [15:08]
Michael Knowles
Just. Just to clarify, this is like the. The rules of the.
- [15:11]
Ted Cruz
It is, but it's just rulings from the chair that become binding precedent because Everett Dirksen wanted a glass of milk. And the presiding officer said, said, yes. Now, the two things you can drink are water and milk. And so the first night of the impeachment trial, we went till 2 in the morning. At midnight, I decided, you know what? I'm gonna try this out. So I went to the cloakroom. I said, hey, does anyone here actually have milk? And they're like, no. No one ever orders it. I'm like, can we track some down? And one of the guys in the cloakroom said, I'll find you some. And it ran out. So at midnight, I just sat there quietly sipping milk. And it was, you can't have coffee. You can't have diet Dr. Pepper. You can't have caffeine. But. But you can enjoy A glass of milk.
- [15:52]
Michael Knowles
Now, what I want to know, Senator, as a taxpayer myself, who paid for that glass of milk that you had in the Senate?
- [16:00]
Ted Cruz
Well, I'll tell you, the cloakroom actually called our office and said, we need to charge the Senator from the glass of milk. We ain't paying for it. And I laughed and said, look, I'm glad to hear some fiscally conservative policies being implemented. And now, now, I can't necessarily promise. So, look, if milk is allowed at the end of the day, all you see is it's a white liquid. So I can't promise you that there aren't senators having White Russians on the.
- [16:26]
Michael Knowles
Senate floor, especially the longer this drags on.
- [16:28]
Ted Cruz
And you know what? That would probably drive the conspiracy theorists crazy, particularly post Mueller.
- [16:34]
Michael Knowles
That's true. And you know, we've been coming here in the middle of the night now all week, so there's really nothing to say that we haven't had a couple White Russians on the very same drink. Now, speaking of your health and refreshing yourself today, when you had a little bit of a break, you decided to use that by going outside and actually marching in the March for Life. This was 47 years after Roe vs. Wade. The March for Life has gone on every single year since then, and it's the largest pro life gathering in the world. And you participated in it today.
- [17:08]
Ted Cruz
It's something I've done a number of years. Today. It was going on right during the impeachment trial. So when the march started, I couldn't participate. But around 3 o'clock, we had a break that ended up being about a half hour. And so I just went outside and joined the marchers. It's a wonderful chance. I spent a lot of the time there just thanking people and thanking them for coming out. It's usually a cold day when the march happens, and it's amazing to see people from all over the country coming together and standing up for life. I gotta say, is always wonderful to participate. But it was particularly affirming in the middle of all this craziness.
- [17:46]
Michael Knowles
It was moving. I was there myself today. It was very moving. And it actually got me thinking about the relation between Roe v. Wade and this impeachment trial, because Roe v. Wade is decided in 1973. And it was when the Supreme Court discovered this previously undiscovered constitutional right to abortion, as though the framers of our Constitution secretly, in invisible ink, wrote in a right to an abortion. You know a lot more about the Constitution than I do. It's a bogus argument, right?
- [18:21]
Ted Cruz
It Was the court created it in Roe vs. Wade. But the effect it had in our country is it took one of the most deeply personal, emotional public policy issues. And the Supreme Court said, you idiot, voters don't get to decide this. We're deciding it for you. And you have no say. Look, prior to that, abortion had been a question for the states to consider, and people could debate it at state. State issues. You could get up and make arguments as to why. Look, you and I both believe that life should be protected, right? But as voters, we ought to be able to make those decisions. And the Supreme Court said, no, we're seizing this. And I think that decision has produced a lot of the bitterness, the rancor, the division. People are frustrated on both sides of that aisle that they don't have a natural outlet to debate the issues. Because it all becomes the battle for the courts. Because it's now nine elected judges that decide everything.
- [19:24]
Michael Knowles
Because this was, in 2016, probably the top issue, especially.
- [19:29]
Ted Cruz
And by the way, I think I said nine elected judges. Let me be very clear. Nine unelected. Unelected, because unelected is the whole problem.
- [19:37]
Michael Knowles
No accountability whatsoever. In 2016, the Big Issue was the judges. Who's gonna replace Justice Scalia? Who. And you saw it on the left and the right, and especially for the left. So much of that comes down to Roe v. Wade. I mean, you see it in their campaign materials.
- [19:51]
Ted Cruz
Let me make two observations from today. One, when I went out to march in the protest, I encountered one anti Trump protester, a woman who was angry. And part of what she was screaming is, why aren't you in the trial? It's like, well, we're on a break.
- [20:07]
Michael Knowles
I just had my glass of milk, and I've got a lot of energy.
- [20:10]
Ted Cruz
But it was a striking contrast. One anti Trump protesters, and then tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of protesters, or not protesters, but marchers standing for life. And the contrast was interesting. And it actually made me think, so a lot of us getting ready for the impeachment trial were anticipating bitter, nasty confrontations, like we had during Brett Kavanaugh. And Brett Kavanaugh, the left had paid protesters who yelled, who stalked who. You know, one of them went to Susan Collins home, and I mean, it was.
- [20:45]
Michael Knowles
And nobody to be reminded because it was such a national story. But Brett Kavanaugh was the second Trump pick for the Supreme Court. So it wasn't even the first one. It was the second one.
- [20:53]
Ted Cruz
But it underscores just how bitter and divisive it is. I gotta tell you, the Capitol Police were anticipating that we may see some of the same, you know, vigorously threatening, almost violent, some of those confrontations with Kavanaugh. I mean, you had people getting in your face and screaming and bitter and angry. And it's interesting that even though Trump inspires strong emotions, the impeachment trial has seemed to be a snoozer from that perspective.
- [21:22]
Michael Knowles
Totally. Totally. I mean, frankly, that's why I really think that's why this podcast is doing so well, is people are not going to watch 10 hours a day of impeachment. They want, I think they want to come here. You've done an excellent job giving us a behind the scenes view.
- [21:35]
Ted Cruz
Look, there were times when it felt like listening to a reading of Vogon poetry, which for the handful of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy geeks who are listening to this, you'll get what I'm saying. And everyone else, it's just right over the head. Don't worry about it.
- [21:52]
Michael Knowles
Fly over. Yeah, I think you're right. And I just wonder if a decision like Roe vs Wade had not stolen this very important question from the legislature, from the citizens to decide for themselves, and taken it into the arms of nine unelected lawyers wearing robes, if maybe we wouldn't even see an impeachment like this if the presidential elections were not so incredibly tense and important.
- [22:21]
Ted Cruz
Well, and it's much the same. You look at impeachment and the House Democrats argument. Their central argument is we can't trust the voters to make this decision. Yes, that they believe the voters got it wrong in 2016. And a lot of the Democrats, when they're being candid, they're worried if Trump is on the ballot in 2020, he'll win again. And so they're trying to undo a Democratic election. Right. And that is a persistent problem of politicians wanting to force an agenda against the wishes of look of non constituents. Let the people decide.
- [23:01]
Michael Knowles
Well, fortunately, the Trump team is going to get the chance tomorrow to make their arguments. I very much look forward to that. We're going to be covering it again. Please. Thank you to everybody who has made this podcast the number three biggest podcast in the world. It's really terrific. Please, if you can subscribe, leave us a five star review before we go. Lightning round on the mailbag. All right, from Tom. Will the whistleblower testify in the impeachment trial?
- [23:25]
Ted Cruz
Probably not. I think it's more likely than not that next week we'll vote not to have additional witnesses.
- [23:31]
Michael Knowles
So not only will we not get the so called whistleblower the guy who started this whole Ukraine business, really started the whole impeachment. But then we wouldn't get Hunter Biden. We wouldn't get anything.
- [23:41]
Ted Cruz
So if I were to order likely outcomes next week, we'll vote on whether or not additional witnesses are needed beyond those who've already testified in the House. 51 senators will decide. I think it is more likely than not. 51 senators will say, we've heard enough, we're ready to decide. Let's move to judgment. And the president gets acquitted. That may not happen. All 47 Democrats will vote for more witnesses. Maybe four Republicans join them if that happens. The second most likely outcome, I think, is 51 senators say, yes, we want more witnesses. The Democrats call John Bolton, the President calls Hunter Biden. And I think.
- [24:22]
Michael Knowles
And then it's a bloodbath.
- [24:23]
Ted Cruz
But, but, but I think the second most likely outcome is those two additional witnesses come in right, Bolton and Biden.
- [24:29]
Michael Knowles
And only those two.
- [24:31]
Ted Cruz
I would say that's the second most likely outcome. The third. Third most likely outcome is you end up having several witnesses. And I do think, and this is something I've been pitching to other Republicans, is the principle of reciprocity, that we need to be fair, we need to give both sides. We can't be like the House and have it only on one side. And so I think, I feel quite confident that's where the Republican conference is, that there's consensus. Right. And I got to say, by the way, yesterday in the press, there were a bunch of stories that said Chuck Schumer has rejected the deal of Bolton for Biden. And I actually had today spent a while, like, laughing with reporters, going, well, that's all fine and good. Of course, Chuck Schumer doesn't want Hunter Biden to testify because the Democrats are trying to cover that up.
- [25:17]
Michael Knowles
Right.
- [25:18]
Ted Cruz
But he doesn't have the votes. If they go down the road to John Bolton, I guarantee you the other side, right. We're gonna have the votes among Republicans to ensure that both sides are treated fair.
- [25:29]
Michael Knowles
And so that will come down to. For Republicans. Last question before we head out of here from Marty with very specific punctuation. When is it our turn? Can't watch these clowns.
- [25:43]
Ted Cruz
Tomorrow morning, 10am Tomorrow morning, 10am and.
- [25:45]
Michael Knowles
You will be right back here in the studio to break it down for us.
- [25:48]
Ted Cruz
I will. Now, tomorrow is likely to be relatively short. I think it will probably go from about 10 to 1. So we'll get about three hours of opening arguments from the president's team. So we'll record this tomorrow afternoon and then we'll come back on Monday at 1pm and we'll get another probably extended stretch of argument from the president's team. I'm looking forward to the first chance the president's legal team has had to present his defense and to present. Look, what I've urged them to do is present the substantive evidence of innocence. Don't just talk about process the whole time, but lay out the facts. Because on the facts, I think the president will.
- [26:25]
Michael Knowles
Well, I hope they take some messaging from this podcast because I think when you lay out the facts, the case is pretty clear. And tomorrow we will see the president strike back. And it should be a lot of fun.
- [26:34]
Ted Cruz
Well, you know the Burisma timeline that we tweeted out yesterday and talked about yesterday on the show? I xeroxed that and put it in the box of every single Republican senator. So every one of them has that right now.
- [26:45]
Michael Knowles
I sure hope they read it and I hope they listen to the show and I hope you all will listen to the show. We will be back here tomorrow. I'm Michael Knowles. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz.
- [27:00]
Ted Cruz
This episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz is being brought to you by Jobs, Freedom and Security pac, 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.