Kamala is a MASSIVE Threat to Free Speech, plus Kamala's Border Hypocrisy is too much even for CNN

Summary

Summary of "Kamala is a MASSIVE Threat to Free Speech, plus Kamala's Border Hypocrisy is too much even for CNN"

Introduction

In this episode of The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson, host Ben Ferguson and guest Senator Ted Cruz delve into the critical examination of Senator Kamala Harris’s stance on free speech and her contradictory positions on border security. Released on September 6, 2024, the episode scrutinizes Harris's actions and rhetoric, positioning her as a significant threat to First Amendment rights and highlighting inconsistencies in her political narrative, particularly regarding the U.S. border wall. The discussion also critiques mainstream media outlets, especially CNN, for their handling of Harris's policies.

Kamala Harris: A Threat to Free Speech

Ben Ferguson opens the conversation by asserting that Kamala Harris and her running mate, Tim Waltz, represent the most anti-free speech candidates in American history. He emphasizes Harris’s history of advocating for censorship and silencing dissenting voices.

• Ferguson (00:18): "Kamala Harris and Tim Waltz are the most anti free speech presidential and vice presidential candidate in American history."

The dialogue highlights Harris’s 2019 interview with Jake Tapper on CNN, where she advocated for revoking President Donald Trump's Twitter privileges. Ferguson criticizes her stance, arguing that it sets a dangerous precedent for governmental overreach into free speech.

• Ferguson (04:36): "Freedom of speech is a privilege, she says, is granted to you by us, the dictators."

Border Wall Hypocrisy

A significant portion of the episode focuses on Harris's contradictory positions regarding the U.S. border wall. Despite her long-standing opposition to the wall, Ferguson points out that her current campaign ads prominently feature it, labeling her stance as hypocritical.

• Ferguson (00:18): "Number two. Kamala Harris on the border wall, over and over and over and over again has been opposed to the border wall."

Cruz elaborates on this hypocrisy by referencing a CNN report that uncovered over 50 instances of Harris criticizing Trump’s border wall. Despite this, her campaign now showcases the very wall she once condemned.

• CNN Reporter (28:52): "And on top of critical tweets, Harris also wrote in her 2019 book... a monument designed to send the cold, hard message, keep out."

Critique of Media Outlets: CNN Under Scrutiny

The episode critically examines CNN's handling of Harris's policies, particularly their reporting on her stance on the border wall. Ferguson portrays CNN as inconsistent, lauding their investigative efforts while simultaneously airing campaign ads that contradict their findings.

• Ferguson (28:30): "This is a story that illustrates that her campaign is built on deception. It's built on lying."

Cruz adds that CNN’s attempts to expose Harris's inconsistencies may backfire, potentially harming their credibility and highlighting the deceptive strategies employed by political campaigns.

Implications for Free Speech and Democracy

Ferguson and Cruz discuss the broader implications of Harris’s policies on free speech and democratic principles. They argue that her approach not only threatens individual liberties but also undermines the foundational values of democracy by enabling government-backed censorship.

• Ferguson (09:48): "She was saying, silence the President of the United States... she is at the top of the list of those wanting to suppress the rights of free speech of every American."

Cruz echoes these concerns, emphasizing that the Democratic Party’s stance equates dissent with being an "enemy of democracy," thereby justifying authoritarian measures against opponents.

• Cruz (17:11): "You should just silence someone... they do believe that every American that disagrees with them, there should be a consequence for their views."

Expert Insights and Historical Context

The episode references Jonathan Turley, a law professor, who draws parallels between Harris’s potential administration and historical threats to free speech, notably the Alien and Sedition Acts under President John Adams.

• Ferguson (24:18): "Jonathan Turley... 'For free speech advocates, the 2024 election is looking strikingly similar to the election of 1800.'"

Turley underscores the gravity of Harris's positions, suggesting that her policies could lead to unprecedented governmental control over speech, reminiscent of early American history's darkest times.

Conclusion

Ben Ferguson concludes the episode by reiterating the significant threats posed by Kamala Harris to free speech and national security. He criticizes her administration’s record on various issues, including the economy, crime, and foreign policy, attributing these failures to her leadership. The discussion anticipates the forthcoming presidential debate, urging listeners to remain informed and vigilant against policies that undermine constitutional rights.

• Ferguson (42:33): "Her record is a failure. The Biden Harris record of the last four years is terrible... that's why she's desperately trying to run against, run away from it."

Ferguson calls for proactive opposition to Harris’s agenda, advocating for truth and factual discourse as remedies to counteract her perceived authoritarian tendencies.

Notable Quotes

• Ben Ferguson (00:18): "Kamala Harris and Tim Waltz are the most anti free speech presidential and vice presidential candidate in American history."

• Jake Tapper (05:03): "How is that not a violation of free speech? I mean, the president has the same rights that you have that I have."

• Jonathan Turley (24:18): "For free speech advocates, the 2024 election is looking strikingly similar to the election of 1800."

• Ben Ferguson (09:48): "She is at the top of the list of those wanting to suppress the rights of free speech of every American."

Final Thoughts

This episode serves as a critical examination of Kamala Harris's political strategies and their implications for American democracy and free speech. Through incisive analysis and pointed critique, Ben Ferguson and Ted Cruz present a narrative that challenges Harris's integrity and underscores the importance of safeguarding constitutional liberties against perceived governmental overreach.

Transcript

[Ted Cruz]

Welcome. It is verdict with Senator Ted Cruz. Ben Ferguson with you. Senator Kamala Harris has got quite a history when it comes to wanting to limit free speech. And it seems to all be boiling up at this moment, just days before this big presidential debate.

[Ben Ferguson]

Kamala Harris and Tim Waltz are the most anti free speech presidential and vice presidential candidate in American history. Kamala has a long, long history of calling for censorship, call for silencing anyone who disagrees with her, of wanting to use government power to silence her critics. If Kamala Harris becomes president, I predict now she will try to muzzle X. She will try to ban X. She wants to follow Brazil's path and ban X. She wants to use government power to go after big tech and force them to be her sensors. We're going to break that down. We're going to lay out her record. Her record is stunning and it is consistent over the years. A profound threat to the government silencing you. Number two. Kamala Harris on the border wall, over and over and over and over again has been opposed to the border wall. She's denounced the border wall. Now she's running millions of dollars of TV ads featuring, hold for it, the border wall. Utterly and completely hypocritical. And astonishingly, CNN has called her out for it. All of that in today's pod.

[Ted Cruz]

Yeah. Telegraphing that move in court. It was a wild day. And that is going to be very interesting to chat about. A moment. We are quickly approaching the one year anniversary of the horrific Hamas attacks on Israel. And still the Holy Land continues to be attacked on multiple fronts on a daily basis. Deadly threats are increasing in northern Israel. Constant rocket attacks from Hezbollah have been fired at Israel, causing widespread damage. Since the war started, the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews has been on the forefront in Israel addressing the needs of the most vulnerable. And that's why I'm proud to stand and partner and tell you about ifcj because with your life saving donation, you are literally helping provide for emergency food as well as critical security needs. We're talking about flak jackets, firefighting equipment, armored vehicles, including armored ambulances that have saved countless lives over the last year already. They're also helping put in bomb shelters and much more. We're asking for 500 of you to join the fellowship and me by donating $150 because right away a generous IFC supporter has said that they will match your $150 donation, doubling your impact in helping the people in the Holy Land to make your gift right now and to stand with the people in Israel. You can call them 888-488-IFCJ. That's 888-488- IFCJ or 4325. You can also give securely online at supportifcj.org that's one word, support. Ifcj.org as Israel needs our support and the people need our get into freedom of speech. I believe that this should be a center point of this debate that we are just days away for from. And that is what you said a moment ago. Not only is Kamala Harris and her VP running mate Walsh extremists, but they are at the top of the list of those wanting to suppress the rights of free speech of every American, including Donald Trump.

[Ben Ferguson]

Look, Kamala Harris displays more antipathy to free speech and the First Amendment than any presidential candidate in 224 years. The last time we had a presidential candidate with this antipathy was John Adams, our second president, who had enforced the Alien and Sedition acts and used them to persecute his political opponents. It's been two centuries since that has happened, since then. And Kamala Harris displays an unprecedented willingness to use government power to silence you. And I want to go back, I want you to listen to an interview that Kamala Harris did with Jake Tapper on CNN in 2019 and listen to this back and forth between Tapper and Kamala Harris.

[Jake Tapper]

I guess the question about you, I know you wrote to Twitter and the CEO Jack Dorsey and asked him to take away the president's Twitter handle his account. How is that not a violation of free speech? I mean, the president has the same rights that you have that I have. And how would that not just be a slippery slope where they have to ban, you know, half of the people on Twitter?

[Kamala Harris]

I've heard that argument. But here's the thing, Jake. First of all, a corporation, which is what Twitter is, does not have the has obligations. And in this case, Twitter has terms of use policy. And their terms of use dictate who receives the privilege of speaking on that platform and who does not. And Donald Trump has clearly violated the terms of use and there should be a consequence for that. Not to mention the fact that he has used his platform being the president of the United States in a way that has been about inciting fear and potentially inciting harm against a witness to what might be a crime against our country and our democracy. And for that reason, I do believe that he is that it's clear that he has violated the terms of use. And I'm asking that Twitter does what it has done in previous occasions, which is to revoke someone's privilege because they have not. They've not lived up to the. To the advantages of the privilege.

[Ted Cruz]

Freedom of speech is a privilege, she says, is granted to you by us, the dictators. And she was advocating for the President of the United States of America to be silenced by Big Tech and demanding it.

[Ben Ferguson]

She was. And mind you, this is 2019, so this is before January 6th. It had nothing to do with that. He was the sitting president that she was calling on to be silenced. And I'll tell you what, I want to do something. Play that clip again, and I want to just start it. I'm going to tell you to stop it a couple of times midway through, but play it one more time.

[Jake Tapper]

I guess the question about you, I know you wrote to Twitter and the CEO Jack Dorsey and asked him to take away the president's Twitter, handle his account. How is that not a violation of free speech? I mean, the president has the same rights that you have that I have. And how would that not just be a slippery slope where they have to ban, you know, half of the people on Twitter?

[Ben Ferguson]

Stop. Okay, let me start by saying that is an excellent question from Jake Tapper. And I don't often praise cnn, but that. That was cnn. That was Jake Tapper being a real journalist. His question is exactly right. She is saying, silence the President of the United States. He says, well, how's that not a violation of free speech? He has the same rights you do. I do. And isn't the consequence of what you're saying that Twitter would have to ban half the country? Anyone who disagrees with you, Kamala Harris, if you're not a leftist, if you dare say something conservative, if you say something like, we need to secure the border, Twitter has to ban you. How is that not a violation of free speech? That's a great question. Now, notice she doesn't answer it. Instead, play what she says, and I'm going to stop you again pretty soon, but play what she says.

[Kamala Harris]

I've heard that argument. But. But here's the thing, Jake. First of all, a corporation, which is what Twitter is.

[Ben Ferguson]

So this is one of the classic arguments of leftists, which is corporations don't have free speech rights. And that's what she's referring to. Now, that is, as a matter of constitutional law, objectively false. That is wrong. And let me tell you why it is wrong. The New York Times is a corporation. Ben, do you think the New York Times has free speech rights?

[Ted Cruz]

I think they absolutely do.

[Ben Ferguson]

CNN is a Corporation. You think CNN has free speech rights?

[Ted Cruz]

Yes.

[Ben Ferguson]

Simon and Schuster, which publishes books. They're a corporation. You think they have free speech rights?

[Ted Cruz]

If they didn't, they would be in a lot of trouble. A lot of days of the year.

[Ben Ferguson]

Paramount Pictures, which makes movies, They're a corporation. You think they have free speech rights?

[Ted Cruz]

100%.

[Ben Ferguson]

Planned Parenthood is a corporation. You think Planned Parenthood has free speech rights?

[Ted Cruz]

As much as I don't like it, yes.

[Ben Ferguson]

The NRA is a corporation. Does the NRA have free speech rights?

[Ted Cruz]

Absolutely.

[Ben Ferguson]

The NAACP is a corporation. Does the NAACP have free speech rights?

[Ted Cruz]

Yes. And they would argue all day and all night to that.

[Ben Ferguson]

And by the way, the Supreme Court has agreed with your answers on every one of those over and over and over and over again. So understand her standard. Leftist. Well, it's a corporation. So? So? So it doesn't matter. That is gibberish. It is nonsense. What is a corporation? A corporation is a legal structure for human beings to organize together in a collective endeavor. And in politics, corporations frequently engage in speech and political speech. It is a method through which people speak. And so she starts with the idea, okay, corporations, we can do it now. Keep playing. What else she says.

[Kamala Harris]

Has obligations. And in this case, Twitter has terms of use policy.

[Ben Ferguson]

Okay, to notice what she said. Twitter. Twitter's a corporation and a corporation has obligations. Now that. Those are the words of a collectivist. Those are the words of a totalitarian. If you do business in my government, you have obligations. You have obligations. She's going to tell you what those obligations are, and they are not to be a spoiler, but to silence anyone who dares disagree with me. The all powerful Oz. Keep playing.

[Kamala Harris]

Views dictate who receives the privilege of speaking on that platform and who does.

[Ben Ferguson]

Not stop the privilege. She's saying, by the way, and to be clear, it's not just Donald Trump that has the privilege of speaking on that platform. Twitter has become the public square. X today has become the public square. It is the most important forum on planet earth for free speech. And in Kamala's leftist, totalitarian view, and that's what this is. This is government unchecked power. It is merely a privilege and a privilege that she as the dictator, can revoke if you dare disagree with her. It is not a privilege. The First Amendment says Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. It's not a privilege. It is a right protected in the Bill of Rights. Keep playing.

[Kamala Harris]

Violated the terms of use and there should be a consequence for that not to Mention the fact that he has used his platform being the President of the United States in a way that has been about inciting fear and potentially inciting harm against.

[Ben Ferguson]

So, number one, she says there should be a consequence. Notice, she is threatening. We will punish you if you do not obey. We will punish you. And to be clear, she's not talking about silencing an ordinary citizen. She's talking about silencing, this is 2019, the sitting President of the United States. She wants him banned from speaking. Why? Because she says he is incited fear. So in other words, when he talks about the threats of murderers coming across our southern border, when he talks about the threats of terrorists coming across our southern border, well, in her world, that's inciting fear. That's a message she does not want people to hear. Why? Because she wants as many illegal immigrants, including murderers and terrorists, coming across our southern border. And if you incite fear, well, that's really inconvenient for her political agenda.

[Kamala Harris]

Keep going to what might be a crime against our country and our democracy. And for that reason, I do believe that he is. That it's clear that he has violated the terms of use. And I'm asking that Twitter does what it has done in previous occasions, which is to revoke someone's privilege because they have not. They've not lived up to the. To the advantages of the privilege.

[Ted Cruz]

Revoke someone's privileges. That is radical.

[Ben Ferguson]

Yep. And by the way, at the time, Jack Dorsey was the CEO. Jack Dorsey is someone who does not respect free speech, who had used Twitter repeatedly to censor aggressively. When Elon Musk bought Twitter, he released the Twitter files. So we now know just how eager Jack Dorsey was to censor people who dared disagree with the leftist orthodoxy. But even Jack Dorsey, this was too much for him. He did not ban Donald Trump in 2019 when Kamala Harris asked him to from Twitter. He didn't do it then, but she was saying she's demanding that they silence the existing. The sitting president because she doesn't like what he's saying. Now, I want to play another interview, actually, that Jake Tapper did with Kamala Harris the same month, October of 2019, and on the same topic. So this is a different night. But. But the. But. But the same rough time period. Play the second interview.

[Kamala Harris]

He has. He has lost his privileges, and it should be taken down. And the bottom line is that you can't say that you have one rule for Facebook and you have a different rule for Twitter. The same rule has to apply, which is that There has to be be a responsibility that is placed on these social media sites to understand their power. They are directly speaking to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation, and that has to stop.

[Ben Ferguson]

I want to take the end of her statement there. They are directly speaking to millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation, and that has to stop. That may be the single most anti free speech statement I have ever heard a political candidate give. She is saying that the government must provide oversight and regulation of any platform. That, in her words, speaks to millions of people. Because if you are effective in free speech, if you reach a lot of people, the government is going to decide whether you get this privilege or not. If you care about free speech, that ought to scare the hell out of you. And let me be clear. Listen, the difference between me and Kamala Harris could not be more stark. She wants to silence her opponent. She wants to silence Donald Trump. She wants to silence Elon Musk. She wants to ban X, all of it. I believe if she's president, she will try to do that. I'm sure she wants to silence you and me, Ben. Let's be clear about the difference. Yeah, you and I do not want. You and I do not want to silence her. I would vigorously oppose any effort to censor or silence her. I don't want to silence Bernie Sanders. I don't want to silence aoc. I think. I think their. Their policies are blithering idiocy. So I want people to hear what they're saying. Look, in this podcast, we are playing her words. We're not silencing them. We're doing the opposite. Which is, look, John Stuart Mill said the best cure for bad speech is more speech. If we were totalitarians, this is not. There's not a. Both sides does this. We're not saying silence the other side, use power. We're saying, no, no, no. She has a right to prattle on to her heart's content. And if you don't like what she's saying, the remedy for that is to lay out the truth, the facts, the argument, and prove why she's wrong.

[Ted Cruz]

It is also scary just how easy it rolls off their tongue and how quickly they're willing to just go automatically to, well, you should just silence someone. And, and this is, I think, part of what the Democratic Party has become. They do believe that every American that disagrees with them, there should be a consequence for. For their views. There should be a consequence for their statements, for their words. We also heard, and I'll Never forget this because I've said this before, Senator. Believe them when they say what they say. Believe them when they tell you what their plan is. Remember when they said that we need re education camps for Trump supporters and Trump voters And it wasn't just one person said. It was like the entire Democratic Party singing in verse on a Sunday morning in quiet. It was like weeks of we need to re educate these people well.

[Ben Ferguson]

And they have a new mantra that if you disagree with leftist orthodoxy, you are a, quote, enemy of democracy. And that's their new justification. In defense of democracy, they're going to silence half the country in defense of democracy, they're going to muzzle free speech. In defense of democracy, they're going to ensure that you can only say what they want you to say. Look, that, that reminds me of Iniga Montoya and the Princess Pride. You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. That is not in fact what democracy means. Democracy does not mean the government has the power to silence you if you dare disagree with your government overlords. In fact, that would be precisely the opposite of democracy. But with or will Orwellian irony, they use the word democracy to justify their silencing their opponents. I want you to play now Kamala Harris, when she went to speak at the NAACP again, and this is in 2019 during the presidential campaign, listen to what she promised to do if she.

[Kamala Harris]

Became president and will put the Department of Justice of the United States back in the business of justice. We will double the Civil Rights division and direct law enforcement to counter this extremism. We will hold social media platforms accountable for the hate infiltrating their platforms because they have a responsibility to help fight against this threat to our democracy. And if you profit off of hate, if you act as a megaphone for misunderstanding information or cyber warfare, if you don't police your platforms, we are going to hold you accountable as a community.

[Ted Cruz]

Wow.

[Ben Ferguson]

You accountable. And who is it that's going to hold you accountable? The United States Department of Justice. That is a threat to X, to Facebook, to every social media site, to every Internet site, to every media site, if you dare. What she says is if you act as a platform for misinformation. Understand what she means by misinformation? Is anything she disagrees with, if it.

[Ted Cruz]

Is not 50% of America, you must silence.

[Ben Ferguson]

Yes. And the Department of Justice is going to do it. We will hold you accountable. She's threatening government power to force censorship. And if Big Tech doesn't go along with it, the Department of justice will come after it. You know, Jonathan Turley, does that mean.

[Ted Cruz]

Let me ask you this real quick. Does that mean when you say come after? I think people need to understand what that means. Like, we hear that, we think, okay, it's gonna be like a parking ticket. I, I don't think that's what she means, but there's a lot of people like, well, that just means you're gonna get, like, a little fine. I, I think what she means is what they've done so far with people they don't like, they want to put you in jail. They would be locking up people that work at these companies as the threat and massive fines that could bankrupt companies.

[Ben Ferguson]

Well, to understand that they want to put you in jail, look at what they're doing on January 6th, the prosecution from January 6th, the Department of Justice, Jack Smith, is trying to prosecute Donald Trump. And you know what they're using as a basis for the prosecution? Tweets. He sent. He sent tweets, and they're trying to put him in jail for it. By the way, we covered in this podcast a couple of weeks ago in the United Kingdom that they sentenced a man to 20 months in jail for a Facebook post.

[Ted Cruz]

20 months a couple weeks ago.

[Ben Ferguson]

That is happening right now. And so listen, we've seen under Joe Biden, the Department of justice weaponized the difference between Biden and Kamala. Biden is a puppet. He is unaware of what's going on around himself, and so he is manipulated by the hard left, the radicals in his party. Kamala is a true believer. She believes in this. She is eager to use government power. And I was mentioning a second ago, Jonathan Turley, who's a terrific law professor at gw, he is a friend, and he's a really good thinker. He wrote an op ed on September 4th that is entitled, quote, that has to stop. Harris denounces unfettered free speech in 2019. CNN interview, and it's the one we played just a minute ago. But I want to read a couple of paragraphs from his op ed because it's really, really strong. Here's how he opens, quote, I previously wrote how a Harris waltz administration would be a nightmare for free speech. Both candidates, that would be Harrison Waltz have shown a. Pronounced and have shown pronounced anti free speech values. Now, ex owner Elon Musk and former independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Have posted a Harris interview to show the depths of the hostility of Harris to unfettered free speech. I have long argued that Trump and the Third party candidates should make free speech a central issue in this campaign. That has not happened. Kennedy was the only candidate who was substantially and regularly talking about free speech in this election. Yet Musk and Kennedy are still trying to raise the chilling potential of a. Potential of a Harris Waltz administration. And then I want to focus on the end of Turley's article because it's, it's, it's. It's really good. Um, he's talking about the. The end of it. He says, quote. For free speech advocates, the 2024 election is looking strikingly similar to the election of 1800. One of the greatest villains in our history discussed in my book was President John Adams, who used the Alien and Sedition Acts to arrest his political opponents, including journalists, members of Congress, and others. Many of those prosecuted by the Adams administration were Jeffersonians. In the election of 1800, Thomas Jefferson ran on the issue and defeated Adams. It was the only presidential election in our history where free speech was a central issue for voters. It should be. Again, while democracy is really not on the ballot this election, free speech is Turley. Professor Turley is exactly right. That is powerful. It is profound. It is true. And I. Look, I've spent my entire adult life fighting to defend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and free speech in particular. I am passionate about free speech, and you and I are ringing the alarm bells. The threat that Kamala Harris and Tim Waltz pose to free speech, it is greater than any candidate in our lifetime and greater than any candidate in two centuries.

[Ted Cruz]

Amen to that. Americans are tired and frustrated by a stalling economy, inflation, endless wars, and the relentless assault on our values and our freedom of speech. Thankfully, there are companies like Patriot Mobile that still believe in America and our values and our Constitution. Now, I'm proud to be a, well, customer of Patriot Mobile, and I'm proud to tell you about them because they are on the front lines fighting right now for our first and our Second amendment rights, the sanctity of life, as well as our military, our first responders, and our wounded warrior heroes. Now, you may say that seems interesting, Ben. Why would a mobile phone company be involved in all of these things? Well, it's because they're taking a stand after they found out what Big Mobile was doing. Every time you pay your bill, every month, they're giving a portion of that bill to major donations to places that support abortions, candidates, and radical causes at the local, state, and the national level. We're talking about big Democratic candidates running for office right now. If you don't want your money going there. Then now is the time for you to switch to Patriot Mobile. You're going to get the same nationwide coverage that you're used to right now because they operate on all three major networks. Meaning the same towers you're using now are the same towers you're going to be using when you make the switch. Plus they back their service with a coverage guarantee. Switching in 2024 is so easy, you literally can do it over the phone. Their 100% US based customer service team will find the best plan for you and you can keep your same number, keep your same phone or upgrade to a new one. So how do you switch and make a difference? With every phone call and every text you send, go to patriotmobile.com verdict that's patriotmobile.com verdict or call them 972 Patriot right now to get a free month when you use the offer code Verdict Again, join me and switch to America's only Christian conservative mobile provider, patriot mobile@patriot mobile.com verdict or 972-patriot and get that free month of service today with a promo code Verdict Center. There was also something else that happened and it was just weird. When I say weird like a next level weird. CNN and I've got two theories I want your take on this came out and did a three and a half minute segment attacking Kamala Harrison prime time, attacking her for using Trump's wall in her new border ads. They actually went back years, all the way back to 2017 and they were proud of themselves, patting themselves on their back for finding more than 50 instances of Harris slamming Trump's border wall. And they put this story together. Now I want to play it but, but there's two things here that I think could be a possibility. A CNN has become so irrelevant with no one watching and the ratings back up that point. If they're desperate to get their ratings back, having Trump in office delivers that to them. The Highest ratings that CNN's had in years was when Donald Trump was in office and they were attacking him 247 and that brought the crazies in to watch them. That's option number one. Option number two is are they doing this center because they're realizing that Harris and this big bump she was supposed to have from the convention, it didn't actually happen. Are they hedging their bets that they think she might lose and so they want to look like they're actual journalists or could both of those be true at the same time?

[Ben Ferguson]

Well, let's, let's play this first because it really is A stunning piece. And it simply takes the fact that she's spending millions of dollars advertising and featuring the border wall as something she now supports. And it contrasts that with her record for years and years and years viciously, passionately, emphatically opposing the border wall. And I'll tell you, the contrast is striking. Give a listen and remember. This is CNN.

[CNN Reporter]

Tonight, K File investigates. In a new report you'll see first out front, the K File team scoured Kamala Harris tweets and statements going all the way back to 2017. And what they found was more than 50 instances of Harris slamming Trump's border wall. But now New Paris campaign ads actually showcase that very wall.

[Ben Ferguson]

As a border state prosecutor, she took on drug cartels and jailed gang members for smuggling weapons and drugs across the border.

[CNN Reporter]

And on top of critical tweets, Harris also wrote in her 2019 book, quote, There was a bigger reason to oppose the border wall. A useless wall on the southern border would be nothing more than a symbol, a monument standing in opposition to not just everything I value, but to the fundamental values upon which this country was built. How could I vote to build what would be little more than a monument designed to send the cold, hard message, keep out? Well, K Files, Andrew Kaczynski joins me now. So, Andrew, I mean, you, you and you all have gone through, I mean, scoured an incredible amount of material. Tell me more about what you found.

[Andrew Kaczynski]

Yeah, that's right. We found more than 50 of those. Those tweets criticizing the border wall before she used that in her ad. And I want people to take a look at just a few of what she said here. She called it wasteful, useless, a waste of taxpayer money, a vanity wall project, a wasteful border wall, a stupid wall, a medieval vanity project, and an unnecessary wall. And those are really just, I mean, there were more. There's just like 10 or 50. But there was really, there was really a lot of. This was the common refrain during the campaign. You read that quote where she said it was against everything, that not only she stood for, everything America stood aboard, but. And she brought this up a lot. Take a listen to just one instance of that in 2019.

[Kamala Harris]

It's the president's vanity project. His multibillion dollar vanity project called a wall is nothing more than a distraction from the fact that he actually hasn't focused on working people in America. He contrived a national crisis around his big distraction.

[CNN Reporter]

All right, so you go through all of that, you've got all the tweets, and yet all of a sudden, in the ads, there's pictures of the wall. And then you went through to look at that wall, like what is that specific wall that's in her, her campaign ads now? And you found something very interesting about this specific portion of the wall.

[Ben Ferguson]

Yeah.

[Andrew Kaczynski]

And what's, I think what's also really remarkable, this is like, I mean, you heard her talking about it there. Trump's wall in his campaign, during his presidency. There was really no greater symbol of Trump's presidency than the wall in the way that Democrats were attacking him over the wall and his restrictive immigration policies. So we looked in that ad and if you look at it, that exact area of wall is in Sabi or Sosabi, Arizona. And that is a portion of wall that was actually built by Donald Trump. It was built in an area where there was not previous wall is actually pretty controversial when they were building it at the time. So just to see that, I mean, there are other.

[CNN Reporter]

She's using his wall that he built to say, look at what I did.

[Andrew Kaczynski]

And the other images of the wall we weren't able to pinpoint, but there's, there's telltale signs that that was a Trump wall because there's an anti climbing plate on top that became popularized during the Trump years.

[CNN Reporter]

It's really incredible reporting and important. All right, Andrew Kaczynski and K File, thank you very much.

[Ted Cruz]

Now there's also another theory, Senator, and that could be. They were just so embarrassed.

[Ben Ferguson]

Hold on. Before the theories, before the third. I do want to take the very end the comment. It's really incredible reporting. So actually, no, it's not. It's not incredible reporting to say one nominee for president is spending millions of dollars running ads claiming to support something that she spent her entire professional career denouncing over and over and over and again. Like, that's not incredible reporting. That's called just actually doing your job. That is in fact what reporters are supposed to do. And this is a story that illustrates that her campaign is built on deception. It's built on lying. Understand this goes back to. Why is it in the six weeks since Kamala Harris became the presumptive Democrat nominee, she's done precisely one media interview actually with cnn. The fake interview she did with Dana Bash that we broke down. If you didn't listen to the podcast analyzing Dana Bash interview, you ought to. Because it was not an interview. It was a campaign commercial that protected her. But other than that, she's done no media interviews. She's done zero press conferences. And it's because her strategy is to Hide from everything she's ever said, everything she's ever done, every vote she's ever cast to hide from her record and instead to claim to, to claim that she supports things she does not support. Now listen, her left wing supporters are not upset that she is running ads picturing the border wall. Why? Because they know she's lying. Everyone knows she's lying. But CNN called her out and it, that is in fact the job of journalism, to call people out when their record is directly contrary to what they're saying on the campaign trail.

[Ted Cruz]

You look at the CNN interview that you mentioned, and that was my third, my, my third possibility is it really seemed to do some damage to cnn. They were embarrassed at how much they were called out for just propaganda that night, even from putting live. You and I talked about this, putting up live on the screen when the interview was taped.

[Ben Ferguson]

So let me ask you something, Ben. So Ben, you spent a lot of years as a paid CNN employee.

[Ted Cruz]

Yes. Seven years in hell is what I call it.

[Ben Ferguson]

Yeah. You said they were embarrassed. Do you think they actually were embarrassed? I'm not sure they can be embarrassed. So I'm actually curious about your thoughts on this.

[Ted Cruz]

So I actually think they were because they were just ridiculed. It was daylight outside, it was prime time at night when they aired it, it was obvious that it wasn't live. And when you do something that egregious, I, I think even people that are left of center are like, come on, like really? Like you think we're dumb enough to believe that it's daytime right now while we're watching it at nighttime? And we're dumb enough to believe it's live when we've already, we already know it's been taped and it's been well publicized. It was taped. But I also think the other part that hurt them and embarrass them was the interview was incredibly short compared to what normal interviews of this magnitude are. I mean, you look at the town hall last night, that happened with Trump and Hannity. I mean, it's solid hour plus on these things. And her interview, taped, edited in the daytime and then, you know, claiming it's live at night. I think that that is a point where they're like, okay, maybe we have to bring the pendulum back here a little bit because we look so much like we are a mouthpiece for a campaign. And if she loses, that puts us in a really bad situation.

[Ben Ferguson]

Look, that's possible. And you asked a minute ago if they're trying to cover their bases. You know, I Actually, you know, I'm. I'm a believer in Occam's Razor, that sometimes the simplest explanation is. Is the best. I actually think in this instance, the dissonance, the contrast between what Kamala Harris is campaigning on and what she has said for her entire career, it is so massive that I think they just ended up saying, all right, let's say it. I actually think even though they're propagandists, to see her embracing Trump's border wall is a level at which, you know, I asked a minute ago if they could get embarrassed. I think for a brief moment in time, they actually wanted to be journalists. And I have a. And by the way, let's be clear. This is a remarkable podcast. It may be the only podcast we've ever done where twice now, I praise cnn. I praised CNN at the beginning of the podcast for Jake Tapper's question of Kamala Harris. That was a real question. It was a good question, Jake. It was a question a journalist would and should ask. And listen, this story, this story is a question a journalist wouldn't should cover. By the way, has ABC run the story?

[Ted Cruz]

No.

[Ben Ferguson]

NBC? Cbs?

[Ted Cruz]

No.

[Ben Ferguson]

Msnbc?

[Ted Cruz]

Nope.

[Ben Ferguson]

Like, wait, they say they're journalists. I mean, CNN doesn't have it exclusive. Do you think MSNBC knows that she's lying when she runs an ad saying, look at this border wall?

[Ted Cruz]

Yeah, well, look, there's also another possibility that you and I have been having this discussion. It could be this is their way of slapping Kamal on the hand for not being radical enough. Like, oh, no, no, no, we don't go to border wall. And if you do it, we're going to embarrass you. You're supposed to. You're supposed to hate the border wall. That's who you are. We're going to remind you of who you are, and we're going to make you look bad when you. When you pander this way on an issue. We disagree with that. That also could be part of what the executive producers at CNN were so mad about.

[Ben Ferguson]

Yeah, look, maybe years ago, one of my very first bosses had a bit of advice for me that I think was really insightful. And it was about government, and it was never ascribed to malice. What can be explained with incompetence? In this instance, at least to me, I'm not reading a whole lot of Machiavellian, you know, positioning in CNN doing this. I think it was just there were like, holy crap, this is bs. I hope that is. I mean, that's actually a human instinct, and it Is an instinct a journalist is supposed to have. Now, maybe I'm being naive. I mean, Ben, maybe you are more cynical than I am on this, and maybe I'm not cynical enough, but 100%.

[Ted Cruz]

I wish I would say this way. I wish that I thought the way you thought on this. I just think this is too big of a 180 from them sucking up to Kamala Harris a week ago like it's like what happened.

[Ben Ferguson]

Yes, but to be clear, it is different. Okay? It is different. Listen, one of the reasons, and we didn't talk about this, I think in. In our podcast analyzing the Dana Bash fake interview, But I do think a component is CNN desperately wanted that interview. Like the Kamala Harris campaign. Put it out there. Hey, we're gonna do an interview with someone, and we wanna see who will kiss our ass the most. If you're just doing it a little. No, that's not enough. We want both lips full pucker. We want enthusiasm. And I do think there was a level of just corporate servility that we want this interview and we will abase ourselves. We will. We will abandon any pretense of journalistic ethics. We'll do anything we can to get this interview. And so I think it's easier in a story where you don't have Kamala Harris, and particularly the context where they won't give anyone an interview with Kamala Harris when you don't have her there. It is easier to actually run one real story for three minutes out of the 24 hours a day you're on TV.

[Ted Cruz]

Yeah, no, I. I mean, it's. Look, it's. It's. There is a possibility on all of these for you guys that listen to this podcast regularly. You know, we do this show pretty late at night, and six hours from now, I'm going to be back up on the radio talking about the latest breaking news. And I cannot start my show with an average cup of coffee. I've got to be awake. I've got to be alert. I've got to be read in on the biggest news that's happened over the next six hours. And that is why I love blackout coffee. Blackout Coffee is a 100 committed brand of conservative values. And in the coffee space, there are a lot of woke radical companies. When I said that, you probably thought of a couple big coffee brands instantly. Well, at blackout coffee, you don't get an average cup of coffee. You get a premium cup of coffee every time. And the values they stand by are what. And I believe in from the sourcing of the beans, the roasting process, customer support and shipping. They embody true American values and they accept no compromise on taste or on quality. Now I'm going to save you some money right now and I want you to try blackout coffee. Go to blackoutcoffee.com verdict that's blackout coffee.com verdict now if you use the coupon code verdict. You're gonna get 20% off your first order. Yeah, 20% off instantly. Blackoutcoffee.com verdict Be awake, not woke. That's Blackout Coffee.com verdict promo code verdict for 20% off your first order. Senator, we are just days away from the first presidential debate between the new candidate that no one voted for in Kamala Harris and Donald Trump. I got to ask you, as debate prep is happening maybe as we speak right now, what do you think the biggest vulnerability is now for Harris that were in this thing post convention? Is it the flip flop on the border? Is it freedom of speech? Is it national security issues? What do you think? Now the real issues are two months out from election day.

[Ben Ferguson]

Look, it's her record. Why is it that she's hiding in Joe Biden's basement? Because she's terrified of her record. Her record's a failure. The Biden Harris record of the last four years is terrible. Whether it's inflation in the economy, whether it's crime, whether it's the disaster at the southern border, whether it is the absolute wreck of foreign policy that has led to the war in Ukraine, the war in Israel, the anti Semitic protests on college campuses, the radicalization of the Democrat Party. Her record is a disaster. That's why she's desperately trying to run against, run away from it. That's why she's hiding from the media, because she doesn't want to talk about her record. We're going to on the next podcast, we're going to talk about what to expect in the debate. And after the debate, we'll do a podcast analyzing exactly what we heard. Listen, this debate matters. This debate matters a lot. Both candidates have risk here. And from her perspective, she wants to run away from her record as much as possible. My hope is that Donald Trump calmly prosecutes the case against her, that her record has been a mess, that all the things she's promising to do. She is in office right now. She is part of the current administration. And I hope that Trump more than anything keeps the focus not on him, but on the American people, on the people who have been hurt by the policy failures of Kamala Harris and Joe Biden. If Trump does that, he'll win the debate. Kamala, on the other hand, wants to do everything she can to provoke, to poke Trump into coming across as a jerk. That's what she wants. Uh, I don't know that that will happen. I hope it does not happen. But her strategy, she is right now prepping, saying, how can I poke the hornet's nest and get him to hurt himself? She's not looking to hurt him. She's looking to get him to hurt himself. If he can resist that, he'll have a very good debate night.

[Ted Cruz]

Don't forget, we do the show three days a week just for you guys and thank you for listening. Also, thank you for supporting the by sharing this podcast. Wherever you are on social media, we love doing this show, giving you guys the info and it's up to you guys to get it out to the masses. Without you, we wouldn't be doing it. So again, thank you. Make sure you share this Hit that subscribe or auto download button. Also, on those in between days, make sure you grab my podcast, the Ben Ferguson Podcast, and I'll give you the latest breaking news and analysis as well. And the Senate. I will see you back here in a couple of days.