Loading summary
Transcript86 lines
- [00:00]
Michael Knowles
Taxes was taxing.
- [00:02]
Ted Cruz
Now taxes is relaxing. When you file for free I can.
- [00:05]
Michael Knowles
File for free TurboTax Free Edition. Roughly 37% of filers qualify.
- [00:11]
Ted Cruz
Simple Form 1040 returns only. See if you qualify@turbotax.com free. Hmm, I can file for free now.
- [00:20]
Michael Knowles
This is Taxes.
- [00:21]
Ted Cruz
File for free with TurboTax Free Edition and get your maximum refund.
- [00:25]
Michael Knowles
No schedules except for earned income tax credit, child tax credit and student loan interest.
- [00:28]
Ted Cruz
See if you qualify@turbotax.com free on Monday, President Trump's legal team will finally get to present the President's affirmative defense. Here's what I would argue. For 24 hours, house managers devoted hour upon hour to proving two factual propositions. Number one, that the president temporarily delayed military aid to Ukraine, and number two, that President Trump sought an investigation into Burisma, the Ukrainian natural gas company, and to corruption potentially involving Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden. On those two points, they devoted more than half of their argument arguing ad nauseam with site after site and clip after clip. Both of those points are undisputed. Both of those points everyone admits there is no dispute that the military aid was delayed, and there is no dispute that the president sought an investigation into Barisma. Indeed, he has said so on national television multiple times. Neither of those factual propositions are impeachable offenses. In fact, neither of those propositions are remotely contrary to law. Presidents have the authority and regularly have temporarily delayed foreign aid in circumstances where they had concerns. And when it comes to investigating corruption, a president has the authority and the responsibility to investigate serious claims of corruption. During their 24 hour opening argument, the Democrats built their case on the proposition that it was utterly fraudulent, that it was completely baseless, that there was no evidence to seek an investigation into Burisma and and corruption. That proposition is laughable because not only was there sufficient evidence to seek an investigation into Barisma and corruption, there was so much evidence that there was a need, a legitimate need to investigate. And that need remains today, that corruption or potential corruption still needs to be investigated today. And from there, the Trump lawyer should calmly, coolly, systematically walk through the mountains of evidence that raise major red flags, that raise major concerns about corruption, about the sitting vice president bragging about blocking a billion dollars in aid to Ukraine. Until they fire the prosecutor who is investigating the company Burisma, that is paying his own son a million bucks a year, the White House team should calmly, systematically prosecute that case.
- [03:22]
Michael Knowles
That's a pretty good argument. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz. Welcome back to the Show, I'm Michael Knowles. And before we get into those arguments, because this is a very pivotal day, the Democrats have finally stopped talking. Hallelujah. And. And the Trump team gets to make its defense. Before we get into that, I have got to thank the listeners for engaging with this show subscribing, leaving five star reviews and actually bringing this show all the way up to number one on the charts, the number one podcast in the country. It is incredible. Congratulations, Senator.
- [04:01]
Ted Cruz
Well, congratulations to you and I gotta say to all the listeners, it is a testament. Look, I think there are a lot of folks in this country who care about substance and issues. And so much of what you get on tv, so much of what you get of talking heads is just people yelling at each other and doing sound bites. And I think people are interested in really trying to understand an issue, knowing facts, knowing con law. As you know, Michael, we've talked with our team putting this together and occasionally there's some discussion of, well, maybe we ought to dumb things down and then not actually get into complicated things. But look, I think people are interested in understanding. They don't have a million hours to dive in and drown in it, but they're interested in understanding issues. And I hope that this show now and going forward helps people really understand an issue and what's behind it and what you need to know to know what's going on.
- [04:50]
Michael Knowles
Of course, people are so much smarter than they get credit for. I think people are interested. And no one's going to watch 20 hours a day of these extremely tedious impeachment trials. But you've broken it down. Well, and the argument you just made is pretty interesting because basically what you're saying is, yes, on the basic facts that the Democrats laid out, we all agree it's not impeachable whatsoever. At the heart of this impeachment investigation is this potential corruption in Ukraine with the Bidens. And then the Trump team should just talk about that. The big Trump argument is gonna really begin on Monday in primetime when maybe some people are paying attention. But today you had a little, what, two hour session.
- [05:30]
Ted Cruz
Today we had about two hours.
- [05:32]
Michael Knowles
The Trump team tease up their arguments. You've come straight from the Capitol, straight from the impeachment trial. What's your reaction?
- [05:39]
Ted Cruz
Look, I think for the two hours, they did a good job of refuting some of the points that the House managers made and pointing out in particular all the things they left out. So they did an effective job of saying they showed you this clip from witness 1, 2 or 3. But what they didn't show you is what they said next. And there were lots of good examples where they'd go to the video and you could see senators kind of nodding. I think that's what the Trump lawyers did most effectively today is say, well, gosh, why didn't the House managers tell you that? And they pointed that out quite a bit. I think that was helpful for undermining confidence in the whole body of what the House managers presented over the last three days.
- [06:21]
Michael Knowles
So I couldn't see senators nodding because I was not there. But you saw that, I guess, because it's so pivotal today, because now the Democrat case is over, the Trump case begins. If the Trump lawyers are saying, here's what the Democrats told you, but here's what they left out, what you're saying is that the Democrat arguments were deceptive.
- [06:44]
Ted Cruz
Yes, they were. And they were deceptive using lots of different tools. All right, here's a particular logical construct that the House managers used to be deceptive. They used this several times. And it's a logical construct of X, not Y. So, for example, let me explain what that means. They say, for example, that, that, that. That President Trump and Republicans bought the narrative that Ukraine and not Russia interfered in the 2016 election. Now, in that model, X is right. Ukraine did interfere in 2016. The lie, the deception is, is the not why? So when they say Ukraine, not Russia, look, it is obvious. Russia tried to interfere in 2016, did interfere in 2016, invested real money, had a team of people pushing out fraudulent material online. That happened. That was real. And anyone who looks at the evidence recognizes that. But the fact that Russia did doesn't mean no other country did. So the way they frame it, and you'll see, they do this all the time. They say they push the fraudulent theory that Ukraine and not Russia interfered. Here's another way they do it.
- [08:08]
Michael Knowles
So, so because it's. It's true that the Republicans are saying Ukraine interfered, but it's not true that Republicans are also saying, therefore Russia did not interfere.
- [08:20]
Ted Cruz
And it would be false if we said Russia did not interfere. Interfere. That's a false statement. Russia did interfere, but they're using that construct to deceive you. I'll give you another example they've used about President Trump wanting an investigation into Biden and into Burisma. What the House manager said over and over and over again is the president wanted the announcement of an investigation and not an actual investigation, X and not Y. So there's lots of evidence Trump wanted an investigation announced.
- [08:56]
Michael Knowles
Right?
- [08:56]
Ted Cruz
There is zero evidence that Trump didn't want an actual investigation. And the House managers asserted over and over and over again an announcement and not an actual investigation. They've never cited any evidence whatsoever. And by the way, think about it. In what universe would Trump not want an investigation? I mean, he's calling for investigate. This, this is corrupt. It stinks. Investigate it. And, and the, the hook that they use is, is they have one witness's testimony that Trump wanted to put the president of Ukraine in a, quote, public box, and they say, aha. That proves all he cared about was the announcement. It was just political for domestic consumption. Public box. Ha ha. We prove he wanted an announcement and not an actual investigation. Well, what utter nonsense. Why else might you want to put Zelensky in a public box, the President of Ukraine? Maybe because Ukraine has had a long history of corruption. They've been unwilling to go after Burisma. They've been afraid to do it. I'll tell you, you do it all the time. If someone is reluctant to do something, one of the best ways to get him to do it is, I don't want you just to secretly commit to me, wink, wink, nudge, nudge.
- [10:09]
Michael Knowles
You've got to be on the record.
- [10:10]
Ted Cruz
Stand up and say you'll do it publicly because the chances of your following through are much higher.
- [10:15]
Michael Knowles
So the Democrats trick here is, is that they're making a true statement and they're using the true statement to cover up for the false statement that they say immediately afterward.
- [10:25]
Ted Cruz
So if you. Yes, and if you hear the Democrats, if you're. The media does this all the time. The media loves doing the, The. You're saying Ukraine and not Russia interfered. No, no, that's not what we're saying.
- [10:38]
Michael Knowles
Right.
- [10:39]
Ted Cruz
That logical construct X and not Y is a real giveaway that they're engaging in lawyerly sleight of hand.
- [10:47]
Michael Knowles
That is. You know, I would not have picked up on that. Obviously, I've, I've been hearing it like, you used the example that President Trump wanted the announcement of an investigation into the Bidens and. But he didn't want an actual investigation.
- [11:01]
Ted Cruz
Does that make any sense?
- [11:02]
Michael Knowles
If you think about it for five seconds, it makes no sense.
- [11:04]
Ted Cruz
Picture that from the other side. So imagine someone saying Democrats wanted the announcement of the Mueller investigation, but they didn't actually want the Mueller investigation to happen. Are you friggin nuts? Like.
- [11:18]
Michael Knowles
They want the announcement and the investigation.
- [11:20]
Ted Cruz
It's a ludicrous proposition. And yet they say it. And by the way, Adam Schiff says it very smoothly. He says it's smiling. And to date, I haven't seen anyone actually contradicting it. And pointing out that half of that sentence is crazy. Total deception.
- [11:38]
Michael Knowles
Right. That's an incredibly deceptive trick. It's so deceptive that even I. Look, I've been paying close attention.
- [11:46]
Ted Cruz
There's a reason lawyers are so beloved.
- [11:49]
Michael Knowles
The most popular people in the country. Well, speaking of the most popular people in the country, I want to pivot a little bit here because you've now had this impeachment trial go on and on and on in the 2020 election. We're now nine days out from the Iowa caucuses. Right. This is the first big event of the presidential primary campaign. But you've got three Democratic senators who are stuck in Washington, D.C. in the impeachment trial running for president.
- [12:16]
Ted Cruz
Well. And it's driving them bat crap crazy. Although, actually, technically, I have to correct you, technically, we have four Democratic senators.
- [12:23]
Michael Knowles
Well, there's Bernie, there's Warren, and there's.
- [12:27]
Ted Cruz
Amy Klobuchar, and nobody remembers. Michael Bennett from Colorado is also still theoretically running.
- [12:33]
Michael Knowles
Is he?
- [12:35]
Ted Cruz
As far as I know, he's in the race. The only reason I pointed out is he launched his campaign. Literally the whole basis for his campaign is a few months ago, he stood on the Senate floor and screamed at me and his launch campaign email. Like, what he talked about in the email launching his presidential campaign is I yelled at Ted Cruz on the Senate floor. And I gotta say, I'm actually kind of a little offended that apparently yelling at me is not even worth a percent point in the Democratic primary for president.
- [13:06]
Michael Knowles
I have to say, this is a little embarrassing for me that I did not know that he was still running. It is more embarrassing for him. But I digress.
- [13:14]
Ted Cruz
Look, all of them are losing their minds not to be there. I mean, it was. You can see them. Like, during the trial, there'd be periods where each of them would be up in the back and they'd be kind of pacing back and forth on the Senate floor. And it.
- [13:28]
Michael Knowles
Well, you have a. Interesting perspective here because you know a thing or two about winning the Iowa caucuses. You. You won in 2016 there. This is the first big real event when people are going to the voting booth. So it's gonna set the tone for the rest of the primary.
- [13:44]
Ted Cruz
They're dying not to be there. Yeah. After the trial ended last night, actually, Amy Klobuchar and I were visiting. She and I are friends and she was. I don't want to pull an Elizabeth Warren and repeat things that were said to me. In confidence or not said to me in confidence, I won't get into what Bernie and Elizabeth said to each other, but I think I can fairly say that Amy was chomping at the bit to run out and get on a plane and head back to Iowa. And she did tell me we were talking about surrogates. And she did say she has a surrogate in Iowa who is, I think, a collegiate curling champion.
- [14:24]
Michael Knowles
Curling. That's the one where it looks like people are mopping the floor.
- [14:27]
Ted Cruz
Yeah, like broom in front of the rock. I'm from Houston, so we don't have snow or ice. But it strikes me as a very Midwest thing to have the collegiate curling champion as apparently a surrogate.
- [14:39]
Michael Knowles
That's a big deal, you know, a really big deal that just came out of Iowa. There's a poll now that puts your colleague Bernie Sanders at the top of the pack there. Now, outside the margin of error, he is a clear. He's clearly in the lead right now.
- [14:55]
Ted Cruz
I think that's right. And there's also a poll out of New Hampshire that has him in the lead there. And I think that has a lot of Democrats scared out of their mind. It there are an awful lot of Democrats who I think think if Bernie gets the nomination, it reelects Donald Trump, which is obviously not what Democrats are looking to do. You know, it's interesting, two nights ago at dinner, when we were on the dinner break, several of several of us Republican senators were sitting there having dinner, and one of the senators observed, laid out a theory that the reason the House managers had thrown Joe Biden under the bus had put so much of an argument on Barisma and Hunter Biden that it ensures that a big part of the Trump legal team's argument on Monday will be, here's all the evidence of corruption of Joe Biden and Hunter Biden and Barisma.
- [15:53]
Michael Knowles
Well, you mentioned this the other night, that one of the big takeaways from the Democratic impeachment argument is they were just throwing their nominal presidential frontrunner, Joe Biden, right under the bus.
- [16:02]
Ted Cruz
Well, one of my Republican colleagues laid out a theory at dinner that, that the Democratic superdelegates had soured on Joe Biden.
- [16:11]
Michael Knowles
So in the, in the, for people who have not paid close attention to this very corrupt system that the Democrats have to pick their presidential nominee, there are delegates. So you win a state and you get delegates if, you know, if you win the state. But there are also superdelegates who are these kind of party elites that get to pick whoever they want.
- [16:29]
Ted Cruz
And Let me explain it more simply. Look, the Democrats are statists. They're the party of elitists. They're the party of concentrated power dictating and controlling your life.
- [16:39]
Michael Knowles
Right.
- [16:39]
Ted Cruz
It's reflected in a lot of things about the Democrats. One of the things that's reflected are these superdelegates, these people that have the power in many ways to decide their nominee. There are no Republican superdelegates. And Republicans, we believe in this crazy thing called democracy where actually the voters should decide.
- [16:54]
Michael Knowles
You go to the polls and pick your candidates.
- [16:56]
Ted Cruz
But the Democrats have something like 900 superdelegates that are the party elite. And you gotta remember, look, these are people that are very comfortable with saying every decision in your life government should make for you. And so having the party elite control nominations, I mean, look, those superdelegates played a big part in taking Bernie out last time and making Hillary the nominee.
- [17:18]
Michael Knowles
So your Senate colleague, who shall remain nameless unless you want to make some.
- [17:23]
Ted Cruz
News right now, I will honor that confidentiality. But I don't know that the theory is right, but it was a significant topic of discussion around the dinner table that if the Democratic superdelegates have soured on Biden.
- [17:38]
Michael Knowles
Right.
- [17:38]
Ted Cruz
That manifesting this by putting him in a maelstrom where he goes down. And presumably you see the self described Democratic moderates going to, I don't know, a Bloomberg or a Klobuchar or a Buttigieg. I don't know where they go, but they presumably go somewhere that would be.
- [17:59]
Michael Knowles
I mean, it didn't make any sense to me. And when you said it to me earlier and said they threw Biden under the bus, it didn't make sense to me why the House Democrats would have done that unless it is the case.
- [18:11]
Ted Cruz
Unless they don't think he can beat Bernie.
- [18:12]
Michael Knowles
Exactly.
- [18:13]
Ted Cruz
And that he may be too weak. And so I don't know if that's going on or not, but it was a surprising tactical decision of the House Democrats. And hopefully, look, when the Trump legal team puts their case on, a lot of lawyers, when they argue a case, particularly when you're responding, they spend their whole time sort of going point by point and refuting. So the other side has 10 points. Let me answer point one with point one A, zero point two with point two A. I actually think that's a terrible way to argue, whether in a court of law or in a court of public opinion.
- [18:48]
Michael Knowles
Kind of like a tit for tat argument.
- [18:51]
Ted Cruz
I think the right way to do it. And what I hope that the President's lawyers do on Monday is tell a story. Tell a story, lay out an affirmative narrative. I'll give Adam Schiff credit. He told a story, he told a narrative. We need to do the same. And I hope we're not just sitting there going tit for tat and refuting.
- [19:11]
Michael Knowles
All the points of the Democrats.
- [19:13]
Ted Cruz
It's why a few minutes ago, where I gave an example of an argument to use on Monday, it's the affirmative case that a president has the authority and the responsibility to investigate serious allegations of corruption. That is fundamentally an explanation. You know, when I was arguing Supreme Court cases, I used to obsess with what's the narrative? And actually the test I tried to think about is when, when the judge or justice went home that night and his or her five year old grandson said, what'd you do at work today, Papa? I wanted to own that next sentence. If I could own the sentence that that judge or justice describes to his or her grandchild. You've won the case that framing the narrative. Sun Tzu says every battle is won before it's fought. It's won by choosing the terrain on which it will be fought. The Democrats are trying to frame the narrative. The Trump team needs to come in and frame the narrative. And I think the strongest ground is, is can a president investigate corruption when there is real evidence of corruption? Because if that's the question, then we win. The answer is hell yes.
- [20:26]
Michael Knowles
Right. That will be very interesting to watch on Monday because that is when this is all going to kick off. And I hope people take that advice. Before we go, obviously we only have a couple minutes and we got to get you on an airplane. I want to get to a couple of mailbag questions. First one from June, June wants gossip. Senator Cruz, what are the other senators saying behind the scenes? Any juicy gossip? Or are you gonna be, you're gonna be cautious to your Democratic or to your other colleagues?
- [20:53]
Ted Cruz
So yesterday when Adam Schiff did his closing and he rolled out the line that he'd read in CBS that President Trump had said, any Republican who votes against him will have their head on a pike, that pissed a lot of Republicans off. I mean, I mean, really, Schiff was booed. I don't know how much of that came across on tv.
- [21:15]
Michael Knowles
I couldn't see it.
- [21:16]
Ted Cruz
And in particular, he was booed by senators like Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski who sit next to each other, Senators.
- [21:22]
Michael Knowles
Who are going to be very important if the Democrats want to advance their argument.
- [21:26]
Ted Cruz
And they recoiled. And in fact, several were murmuring under their breath. Not true. Not true. And you actually saw Schiff kind of shaken and said, well, I hope it's not true. I hope it's not true. That was an interesting moment that stuck with people.
- [21:41]
Michael Knowles
That is pretty juicy gossip. I think you gave June what she came for. From Melody. Senator Cruz, why are the four Democratic senators who are still running for president allowed to be part of the Senate jury? Because the senators are sort of the jury in the impeachment trial. Shouldn't they recuse themselves? It seems like a huge conflict of interest for them to be allowed to vote in the impeachment trial.
- [22:06]
Ted Cruz
Well, it's a good question, and it is a conflict of interest, but the answer is that we're not jurors in the sense of a typical jury. There are all sorts of things about impeachment that have nothing to do with being a typical jury. You wouldn't be allowed to sit on a jury if you knew the defendant. You wouldn't be allowed to sit on the jury if you knew the prosecutor. You wouldn't be allowed to sit on the jury if you were having conversations with the defendant or the prosecutor. We're discussing the issue. You wouldn't be allowed to sit on a jury if you were publicly discussing the issues, if you were taking positions. The Senate is not a jury. In fact, in the Bill Clinton impeachment trial, senators were referred to as jurors. And Tom Harkin stood up and objected, said, I object to senators being described as jurors. And Chief Justice Rehnquist upheld that objection. Because senators are jurors, but also judges. And the framers, when they wrote the Constitution, they knew that senators would be politicians. They understood that they were politicians. They got that they were reposing in the Senate. They hoped that the Senate, you would have leaders of sufficient weight and seriousness and gravitas to consider the issues to conduct a fair trial. But they also knew there would be senators running for president. That's not new. That has been true for a long time.
- [23:29]
Michael Knowles
Right.
- [23:30]
Ted Cruz
And so, yes, they have interests. There are people that have interests on all side. On all sides. But you're supposed to put that aside and follow the law. And so for me, I've said from the beginning, I believe the president will be acquitted. I think he should be acquitted. But the reason is my job is to follow the constitutional standard. And the constitutional standard for impeachment is high crimes or misdemeanors. And the House manager's case doesn't meet that standard.
- [23:58]
Michael Knowles
Right, it doesn't. Well, then this actually Leads into our last question from Tommy. Question from a Canadian. Are there any Democratic senators you believe will vote against impeachment? If so, why?
- [24:12]
Ted Cruz
I hope so. I think the most likely senator to vote against impeachment on the Democratic side would be Joe Manchin.
- [24:20]
Michael Knowles
Yeah, he's the senator from West Virginia.
- [24:21]
Ted Cruz
From West Virginia. Manchin voted for Brett Kavanaugh. He was the only Democrat to vote for Brett Kavanaugh. Manchin's vote probably got him reelected to the Senate. So he was on the ballot and that vote probably saved his seat. I don't know if Joe will or not. I think he's the most likely. You know, other people have looked to say Doug Jones from Alabama. Alabama is a bright red state. I'll tell you, my gut tells me that Jones will vote to convict, that he doesn't think he's going to win in November. And if he's gonna lose, he might as well go out in a blaze of glory and be celebrated by liberals. We'll see if that's right.
- [24:57]
Michael Knowles
Because Doug Jones, he's the guy who beat, he's the Democrat who beat the Republican Roy Moore. And there was that whole big scandal in the Moore campaign. So Doug Jones got in, but it doesn't, doesn't look very likely he's gonna be reelected anyway.
- [25:10]
Ted Cruz
In any ordinary cycle, Alabama should be electing a Republican. Those are certainly the values of the voters of Alabama.
- [25:17]
Michael Knowles
Right. Okay, well, maybe there's a chance we get one Democratic senator to vote for it. Obviously some of that is going to rest on the arguments that the Trump legal team makes. And that's all coming up on Monday, so be sure to tune in then. In the meantime, please continue to subscribe and leave those five star reviews. We just, I can't tell you how exciting it is that we are now the number one podcast in the country. And equally exciting is to have a senator walk down from the Capitol and give us a behind the scenes look into impeachment. So we'll see you back on Monday. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz.
- [25:58]
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 the Republican Party across the nation.