← The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson
The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson
Red Terror In China As Biden Is Silent, GOP Caves On Marriage Bill In Senate, & Biden Lied Over Rail Strike
00:50:03
Loading summary
Transcript57 lines
- [00:01]
Ted Cruz
China, a major vote on marriage and a rail strike. That's the stories today on Verdict with Ted Cruz. Senator, nice to have you with us. You're back in Washington D.C. after Thanksgiving and I want to get people up to speed on what's going on right now, specifically with China. It was shocking because the Prime Minister actually came out in the UK in and is now leading on this issue of China after watching what's happening to the people. He came out earlier saying something that the President of the United States of America should have said that they're still silent. Take a listen.
- [00:37]
Ben Shapiro
Now, let's be clear. The so called golden era is over. Along with the naive idea that trade would automatically lead to social and political reform. But nor should we rely on simplistic Cold War rhetoric. We recognize China poses a systemic challenge to our values and interests, a challenge that grows more acute as it moves towards even greater authoritarianism. Instead of listening to their people's protests, the Chinese government has chosen to crack down further, including by assaulting a BBC journalist.
- [01:20]
Ted Cruz
Sinner. He came out and when you desperately need leaders, leaders stand up and lead. When they see that America's not leading on China. I felt like he probably had no choice but to stand up and to say this. I'm glad he did. But where's America right now?
- [01:35]
Unnamed Guest
Well, unfortunately, Joe Biden and the White House are completely AWOL now. You know, I will say for the British Prime Minister that was a degree of clarity missing in the United States of America. But that being said, you know, one of the things he said is we should not rely on simplistic Cold War rhetoric. I actually think it's a conceit of the so called intelligentsia that simple terms like good and evil can't be used. You know, I was 10 when Reagan became president and I remember well that at the time, all of the Democrats, many of the Republicans, all of the media, all of the academy, they all recognize that the smart, nuanced thing to say on the Soviet Union was that we needed to, that they, they couldn't be beaten, that the best we could hope for was detente, which I've joked is, is French for surrender and that there was nothing we could do about it. And, and Reagan came in as this California cowboy and he said a series of things that shocked Washington. He said, for example, he described the Soviet Union as an evil empire. He said Marxism, Leninism will end up on the ash heap of history. When they asked, what's your objective in the Cold War? He said, very simple, we win, they lose. All of the self proclaimed intellectuals were shocked. They tittered at him. What an ignorant philistine. Didn't he understand subtlety and nuance? And if you come to my office in dc, you've been there, Ben. The most dominant feature in my office is a gigantic painting, it's about 20ft wide, of Ronald Reagan standing before the Brandenburg Gate and saying what I think are the most consequential words of any leader in modern times. Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall with that leadership, with that clarity. Ronald Reagan won the Cold War. We defeated the Soviet Union. We need that same clarity with regards to communist China. Communist China is the new evil empire. And the Marxism, Leninism, the Maoism that dominates China, I believe it will also end up on the ash heap of history. But we need absolute clarity. And it's not simplistic to say that Communist China murdering its citizens, torturing its citizens, locking down its citizens, engaging in draconian violations of human rights, maintaining concentration camps, with over a million people in those concentration camps, employing slave labor, covering up Covid. All of that is evil. It's not gray, it's not subtle. It is evil. And contrast that with the complete gobbledygook from the Joe Biden White House. I want to read the entirety of the Biden White House statement on the massive protests that are unfolding in China based on the draconian, horrific COVID lockdown policies in China.
- [04:46]
Ted Cruz
Senator, before you read that, I want to remind people about our sponsor, our good friends, Patriot Mobile. Patriot Mobile is America's only Christian conservative wireless company who shares your values. Now more than ever, it's important to band together and support companies that share our conservative values. And Patriot Mobile is the company that can save you money on your cell phone bill while also making an impact with every call you make. Patriot Mobile donates a portion of every dollar earned to organizations that fight for causes you care about. They also stand up for our first second amendment rights and the right to life. They help with adoptions, especially after the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Patriot Mobile also saves you money. They have plans that fit any budget and they use the same exact towers that you're using right now with your cell phone. So if you're worried about coverage, don't be. Make the switch and actually stand up for what you believe in with every phone call you make while also saving money. 972 patriot is their number. Use the promo code verdict for free activation and other special offers. You'll get to keep your same cell phone if you want to or get a new one. You'll get to keep your same cell phone number. And switching is easy. 972-patriot. That's 972 Patriot. Use the promo code. Verdict or online@patriotmobile.com Verdict all right, Senator, I want to get back to you reading that statement you just mentioned a moment ago.
- [06:22]
Unnamed Guest
Here's what the Biden White House said. Quote, we've said that zero Covid is not a policy we are pursuing here in the United States. And as we've said, we think it's going to be very difficult for the People's Republic of China to be able to contain this virus through their zero Covid strategy. For us, we are focused on what works, and that means using the public health tools, like continuing to enhance vaccination rates, including boosters, and making testing and treatment easily accessible. We've long said that everyone has the right to peacefully protest here in the United States and around the world. This includes in the prc. That's the total statement. What weak, sniveling, Neville Chamberlain problem. And one of the biggest reasons the enemies of America are on the rise today is the Biden Democrats are so weak, they're unwilling to call evil evil. They're unwilling to call murderers murderers, and they're unwilling to stand up to communist China and the enemies of America.
- [07:25]
Ted Cruz
I want to get your thoughts about something else that's also happened, and this is about the technology side of things. There has been a lot of people that were shocked by Apple actually taking away some of the devices, mechanisms where people were sharing information in China that were helping these protests to break out. One of them was a basic thing that you've probably used a thousand times, an airdrop. And they Apple, Apple literally is aiding China, while at the same time Apple, the same company is threatening to remove Twitter from their app store because they say it's, you know, too dangerous to society. When, when you see companies like Apple helping the red China the way they are saying, you know, okay, what do you want us to do to make sure we help you squash these protests that are happening? Is there a point where there needs to be some sort of oversight?
- [08:22]
Unnamed Guest
Corporate America's lost its way. I don't think it is accidental that Apples are red. Apple is in bed with communist China. Most of big tech is in bed with communist China. An awful lot of big business is in bed with communist China. Big universities are in bed with communist China. Big Hollywood is in bed with communist China. By the way, that's one of the reasons the Democrats are structurally pro China, because All of their major donors, big business, big tech, big universities and big Hollywood are in bed with China. Apple is more than happy to facilitate squashing the protesters, human rights be damned is Apple's view. Apparently as long as they can keep making money in communist China, it is utterly craven. And look, it's the same policy the NBA has as they grovel because they want to make money in China. And never mind the slave labor. It's the same policies the Biden White House has. You know, last year I forced a vote on the Senate floor that the United States should not expend any money purchasing electric vehicles or parts, batteries or other things made in electric vehicles made using slave labor in concentration camps. Now if you think about it, should we be buying things made with slave labor? That ought to be 100 to nothing vote. That ought to be easy. Yeah, we voted on the Senate floor and every single Democrat except one, except Joe Manchin, voted no. Why is that? Because the Biden White House, Joe Biden is communist China's customer of the year. They are buying the output of concentration camps. And I want you to think back of like the history of concentration camps. The people who facilitate, who fund human slavery. History is not kind to them. Well, you know what that is Joe Biden, that is Chuck Schumer, that is John Kerry, that is today's Democrat Party that cannot be bothered to care about slavery and misery and oppression.
- [10:29]
Ted Cruz
And by the way, and let's be clear, when you talk about the donations, I want everybody listening to verdict. This is the information you just share with your friends. 97.5% of Apple's donations are to the Democratic Party. If you look at their employee donations in the midterm elections to candidates by party, this is how much money was Apple's donations? 97.5% of Apple's donations went to Democrats.
- [11:04]
Unnamed Guest
Big Tech has become the financial muscle. Who was the biggest Democrat donor in the country in 2020? Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook. He went in, spent what are called Zuck bucks. He spent $400 million essentially taking over the election machinery, the operation of elections in big blue cities in key swing states. It is not an exaggeration to say Mark Zuckerberg is directly responsible for Joe Biden being President of the United States. By the way, Sam Bankman, fried from ftx, who made billions and it appears now was engaged in a massive Enron style, Madoff style Ponzi scheme defrauding investors of billions. We don't know that for sure, but it sure looks like it. From what has come out so far. He was the second largest donor in the country to Democrats behind George Soros, I got to say, and we talked about this on a pod last week. How many Democrats have given the money back? Or even better, how many Democrats have given the money back to the investors who were defrauded by Sam Bankman Fried? I believe the answer is none. Joe Biden certainly hasn't given the millions of dollars he got from Sam Bankman Fried back. And so listen, watching Big Tech's reaction, watching journalism reaction to Twitter, Elon Musk took over Twitter and he said one simple thing. He said, okay, we're going to allow free speech. We're going to allow people to speak. You can't threaten people. You can't make threats of violence. You can't carry out criminal conduct. But if you have a political view, if you're right wing, left wing, if you're, if you're arguing a political view, you can say it. And if people think what you're saying is wrong, they can say what you're saying is wrong. The corporate media world has lost their minds over it. They're freaking out. We talked in a previous pod about how CBS News had a 24 hour fake boycott where they're like, oh my goodness, if you're actually listening to people who disagree, we won't be part of it. And then they realize, no, we can't do that. A huge component of what is happening. Corporate America, the Fortune 100 has become the financial enforcement arm of the Democrats. And there have been public reports that Twitter's advertising has dropped in half. Why? Because major corporate companies are just saying, nope, we won't advertise anymore. And by the way, who is the biggest advertiser on Twitter? Apple. Yeah, Apple's cut off its advertising. Why? Because Tim Cook and Apple is saying, you bastards, you're allowing free speech. And we are the Big Tech oligarchs. No one is allowed to disagree with us. By the way, do you wonder why Big Tech is so friendly with China? She says we are the oligarchs. No one's allowed to disagree with us. Big Tech says we are the oligarchs. No one's allowed to disagree with us. Dictators of a feather tend to flock together.
- [14:04]
Ted Cruz
Yeah, they do. And if you look at the money and you can see it, as you were mentioning a moment ago about Apple being one of the top advertisers, but you look at where the money goes from Big Tech and many of those have connections to China, Netflix of their donations 99.6% went to Democrats. Twitter 98.7 before Zuckerberg took over. Airbnb 97.8 Apple 97.5 Lyft 96.1 these are the and Facebook and so on. All in the 90 plus percentile. That is part of the reason why you're seeing them all look the other way on this issue of China when it comes to the issue of things.
- [14:41]
Unnamed Guest
Like by the way, you know who the single biggest donors to Hillary Clinton were?
- [14:46]
Ted Cruz
If you say China, I'm going to laugh.
- [14:48]
Unnamed Guest
Well, Google, which is another way of saying China.
- [14:50]
Ted Cruz
Yeah, there you go. Google. It's all big tech. They love them all, each and every time they go all in because they know they will not rein them in and they will not ask any questions about them. Look at the NBA totally silent. You're a basketball guy. It is beyond to me, I think absurd to watch the NBA spend years giving their Florida Black Lives Matter, literally painting it on the floor, putting it in the corners and doing all that they did about the national anthem and then they're immediately silent on what's happening in China. Right now is another example of the hypocrisy of the people on the left.
- [15:25]
Unnamed Guest
Well, listen, you look at the Fortune 100 that is complicit with what's happening in China and that also wants desperately for Elon Musk's effort to make Twitter a place where free speech is allowed. They want that to fail. Let me read a list of some of the companies that, based on Media Matters analysis of Pathmatics data, have stopped for a significant period of time. Advertising on Twitter Abbott Laboratories, Allstate Corporation, AMC Networks, American Express Company AT&T, BigHART Pet Care, BlackRock Incorporated, Blue Triton Brands Incorporated, Boston Beer Company California State Lottery, Century Linked, Chanel, Chevrolet, Chipotle, Mexican Grill, Citigroup, CNN, Dell, Diego, DirecTV, Discover Financial Services, Fidelity First National Retail Realty Partners, Ford, Heineken, Hewlett Packard, Hilton Worldwide, Inspire Brands, Jeep, Kellogg Co. Kohl's Department Scores, Kyndryl, LinkedIn Corporation, Mailchimp, Marriott International, Mars Pet Care, Mars Incorporated, Merck & Co. Meta Platform. In other words, Facebook, Moneywise, Nestle, Novartis, AG, Pernade Ricard, Play Pass, the Coca Cola Company, the Kraft Heinz Company, Tire Rack, Verizon, Wells Fargo, Whole Foods Market and Yum Brands.
- [16:58]
Ted Cruz
Yeah, I mean if that's not proof that they're all trying to bankrupt the people that don't do and say and silence the people they want them to silence, AKA conservatives, they're just going to Say, we'll try to bury you and ruin your company. That's what they're all about.
- [17:15]
Unnamed Guest
And let's be clear. If Elon Musk says, tomorrow I will behave like communist China, I will silence anyone who disagrees with the left wing orthodoxy. Those brands will all come running back. What they want is for him to be the chief censor of the public square. Facebook's perfectly willing to do that. Google is quite willing to do that. YouTube is quite willing to do that. And suddenly Twitter is this outlier. By the way, if, if the reports from Elon are to believed, more people are using Twitter. But this is a question of power. This is a question of using power to try to force censorship and muzzle free speech. And it is incredibly dangerous. And my view is of corporate America, if they want to come out and say, we hate free speech and we will use our financial power to silence and censor you, they ought to tell us that. They ought to admit that. They ought to let you know when you're buying their products, hey, your money is going to silence you. But they're trying to do it surreptitiously. They're trying to hide. And it is. And by the way, the big enchilada that they're trying to set the stage for is the two biggest gatekeepers in all of tech are Apple and Google. And if Apple and Google pull Twitter down from their app stores, that is like setting off the atom bomb. Now, by the way, they did that to Parler. They did that in concert to Parlor. Parlor grew up as a conservative alternative to Twitter. It was gaining real success. And then simultaneously Google and Apple together said, you're deep platformed by which is such an obvious antitrust violation as a very simple matter, when horizontal competitors cooperate together to block a new entrant to the market that is on its face, an antitrust violation. They didn't care. They're so rich, they have so much power, they said, screw it, we'll bury you in lawsuits. There's nothing you can do about it. If they try to do it to Twitter, which a bunch of leftists and Democrats are pressuring them to do, it will be a massive escalation. Now what's interesting, they could do it to Parler because Parler was a little company with not that much financial resources behind it. Elon Musk is the richest man in the world. He's already tweeted, all right, if you do that, I'm going to go create a new phone. I don't know if he'll do that. Or not. But the guy does make Teslas. He knows how to make cars. It's not like he doesn't know how to make stuff. And so they got to be a little more cautious. And I think they are a little more cautious about straight out bullying him because he's, at a minimum, not a 98 pound weakling. They can just kick Santa to his face and ignore. And I for one, if they do.
- [20:08]
Ted Cruz
Kick him off, though, if they do kick Twitter off, and I've had so many people ask me this over the last 24 hours, is Twitter really gonna go away from the app Store if they do that to try to destroy Twitter instantly by pulling that off? Is there anything that Congress will do in response, really, with antitrust?
- [20:27]
Unnamed Guest
No, there's nothing Congress will do in response because Congress, the Senate is controlled by the Democrats, and the Democrats want Apple to kick Twitter off. There's nothing the Biden Department of Justice will do in response. Why? Because the Biden Department of Justice is profoundly partisan and they want Apple to kick Twitter off. You know, just today, Karine Jean Pierre was asked, or I guess yesterday was asked, about what Elon Musk and the question from a reporter, I mean, it was, if Saturday Night Live were funny anymore, this would make a great Saturday Night Live skit. Because you had a lefty reporter who says, are you concerned that so many new people are signing up for Twitter and enjoying free speech? And the White House says, yes, we are very concerned. We are keeping an eye on what Elon Musk is doing. Like, holy crap. They're mad, number one, that free speech is allowed, but number two, they're mad that people like it. I mean, this is so that it's.
- [21:24]
Ted Cruz
Successful and that they can't control it. But that's what they're so concerned about.
- [21:29]
Unnamed Guest
I don't believe Apple and Google will do it. I think it is too big a risk. They're big on beating up people they can beat up. They're big on picking on the puny, wimpy kid. I think they're scared of someone who can punch back.
- [21:45]
Ted Cruz
You know, there was an interesting. There was an interesting moment you mentioned that press briefing, and I want to play it for you real quick. There was a reporter, the White House, that asked one of the weirdest questions I've ever heard. And the question was, what tools do you have to stop Elon Musk from restoring free speech at Twitter? Listen, a question about Twitter.
- [22:05]
Karine Jean-Pierre
You know, there's a researcher at Stanford who says that this is a critical moment, really, in terms of ensuring that Twitter does not become a vector for misinformation. I mean, are you concerned about, you know, Elon Musk says there's more and more subscribers coming online. Are you concerned about that? And what tools do you have? Who is it at the White House.
- [22:32]
Ben Shapiro
That is really keeping track of this?
- [22:34]
Ted Cruz
I mean, there it is. That's what you just mentioned, basically.
- [22:36]
Unnamed Guest
But play her answer. Play Karine Jean Pierre's answer.
- [22:40]
Karine Jean-Pierre
So look, this is something that we're certainly keeping an eye on. And look, we, you know, we have always been very clear and that when it comes to social media platforms, it is their responsibility to make sure that when it comes to misinformation, when we, when it comes to the hate that we're seeing, that they, they take action, that they continue to take action. Again, we're all keeping a close eye on this. We're all monitoring what's, what's currently occurring and we see, you know, we see it with our own eyes of what you all are reporting and just for, for ourselves, what's happening on Twitter. But again, social media companies have a responsibility to prevent their platform from being used by any user to incite violence, especially violence directed at individual communities, as we have been seeing. And the president has been very clear on calling that out. He'll continue to do that. And we're going to continue to monitor the situation.
- [23:43]
Ted Cruz
I love, we're going to monitor it. I mean, Senator, if you want to talk about a dog whistle to basically, yes, everybody pull your money from Twitter. Yes, advertisers that love us, the big tech oligarchs, others, make sure you destroy them. Yes, Apple, you have the backing of the White House. If you want to take down Twitter, we've got your back. It's all in that response from her.
- [24:08]
Unnamed Guest
It is. Big Brother is watching you. We are watching you. We are going to use all the power we can to crush you. And the amazing thing is. All right, so there are buzzwords, misinformation, which she means anything that contradicts the left wing narrative. So for example, one thing they defined as misinformation was saying that the COVID 19 virus had originated in Wuhan, China. It originated in a Chinese government lab, the Wuhan Institute for Virology. I now believe the overwhelming majority of evidence indicates that's exactly where the virus escaped from. And I think a significant preponderance of the evidence indicates that the virus was created at that lab through gain of function research. For over a year, Big Tech would censor anyone saying that at the explicit request of Dr. Foushee. Dr. Foushee and emails asked Mark Zuckerberg, censor anyone saying the Wuhan virus came from the Wuhan Institute for Virology. By the way, without admitting, and I, Dr. Foushee, funded that research that created the pandemic. I will note one amazing exception. One of the very few outlets that actually got into that was this podcast. This podcast. Early on in the pandemic, we did two extensive podcasts laying out the evidence that this virus had escaped from the Wuhan Institute for Virology. At the time, you were treated like a tinfoil hat wearing lunatic for saying that. I don't know why Big Tech didn't censor us, frankly. They censored other people for saying the same thing, but miraculous, they let us out. Now it's clear what we were saying is right. By the way, this is the same Big Tech that censored the Hunter Biden laptop. Again, it was true, it was accurate, but it was politically inconvenient. What they mean by misinformation is anything that hurts Democrats or their preferred narrative. If it's misinformation, I got a crazy idea. If what someone is saying is false, counter it with the truth. Yeah, well, I mean, why it's false.
- [26:13]
Ted Cruz
And you notice that Fauci's coming out on his last days. Just yesterday he did his CNN quote, exit interview. And what he I'm about to play for you. He basically is saying that you're a liar, Senator, for doing those two shows and for what you just said.
- [26:29]
Ben Shapiro
Listen, I can't tell you what's going on in all of China. And in other things, I can tell you for sure that if you look at the viruses that the NIH grant funded to study in a surveillance way, anybody who even has a peripheral understanding of evolutionary virology will tell you these viruses could not possibly turn into SARS COV. 2, so when you talk about a leak, maybe there's a lab leak, but it's not with the viruses that the NIH was funding. That's almost certain that that's the case.
- [27:04]
Ted Cruz
Okay, so that's his exit interview. Literally. Now he's saying it still.
- [27:09]
Unnamed Guest
So it's amazing. A couple of things. Number one, he's saying you talk about a leak from, from the lab. So he's now implicitly admitting, yet leaked from the Chinese lab, which by the way, writing asked Mark Zuckerberg don't allow anyone to say it leaked from the Chinese lab. So what he just said there a couple of years ago, he claimed was Misinformation. And Big Tech was more. More than happy to censor. But then secondly, he also admitted we were funding the creation of viruses, which he's denied before. So he just admitted that. But he argued the viruses we created were not this virus. You know what? Maybe that's. That's possible. I don't know. I'm not a virologist. You know how we're going to figure out? By having congressional oversight hearings and examining evidence. And let me say what an indictment of Democrats. They've had control of both houses for two years. They don't give a damn about knowing where COVID 19 came from. They don't give a damn about knowing China's culpability. They don't give a damn about knowing the degree to which Dr. Fauci and the federal government funded it. They don't care about any of that. They want to cover it up. They want to blame it all. In the Democrat slash corrupt corporate media narrative, Donald Trump created Covid in the Oval Office and released it on America to cause people to suffer. That's what they want to say, facts be damned. Well, we need to figure it out. Now. Foushee is admitted. He was funding the creation of viruses, and there's a very good chance the virus leaked from. From the Chinese lab. That's a big admission. All right, let's hear some witness testimony and some expert examination about whether the viruses Foushee funded were in fact COVID 19. I agree that that has not yet been proven, but I think there's considerable evidence to suggest it could be the case. We need more examination. I hope with a Republican majority in the House, we'll finally get that, and.
- [29:00]
Ted Cruz
Hopefully they'll get to actually ask some real questions about you that he's going to have to defend himself on. I want to move, Senator, to. To this big vote on marriage in the Senate. We've been talking about this extensively with your good friend and Senator Mike Lee's amendment with this bill you were talking about. There need to be pressure put on senators to have that bill be voted on with the amendment not separated out. Otherwise we were going to have a major problem with religious liberty in this country, quite possibly the government. This was a vote they organized and planned. I'm referring to the Democrats right after Thanksgiving. They wanted to ram this through. And you flew back to Washington just like everybody else. What happened?
- [29:50]
Unnamed Guest
The 12 Republicans who caved continued caving, and the Democrats passed their bill embracing gay marriage, number one. Number two, this bill, mark my words, is going to set the Stage for the Biden IRS to target people of faith and in particular to deny tax exempt status to religious churches, charities, universities, and K through 12 schools. I stood up today at the Senate lunch and I addressed the 12 Republicans who were voting with the Democrats and I said, listen. And in fact, I made an offer to my colleagues. I said, I'll tell you what, I will bet any one of you $100 that in the next two years the Biden IRS is going to come after a religious institution because of their beliefs on marriage that they're going to come after and deny tax exempt status to Catholic Charities or to Brigham Young University or to Notre Dame or to Liberty University. By the way, I think Liberty University is going to be who they target first because they hate evangelicals. And I will say one of my colleagues took that bet. So we'll see two years from now, whether I'm paying $100 or collecting $100, I will tell you subsequently. I also pointed out part of this bill, they create a federal cause of action to sue institutions that believe in marriage as the union of one man and one woman. There are going to be hundreds of lawsuits filed all across this country. And I got to tell you, most of those lawsuits, the defendants aren't going to have the money to defend them. So they're going to settle, they're going to cave and they're going to abandon their religious beliefs to embrace same sex marriage. That's what the Democrats want. And the Republicans, there are 12 Republicans who went along with it. I literally at lunch begged my colleagues, if you don't want this to happen. So the Democrats disingenuously claim, and to.
- [31:59]
Ted Cruz
Be clear, I want people to understand, when you say you beg your colleagues, is it generic to the room or is it you get to sit down with the 12 people that you were talking about that caved and try to appeal to them personally? How does this work?
- [32:13]
Unnamed Guest
So every Tuesday and Wednesday when the Senate's in session, the Republicans have lunch together. We meet on Tuesdays and Thursdays in the LBJ room. We meet on Wednesdays in the Mansfield room. So the LBJ room is where we met today. And virtually every Republican was there. I think of the 50 of us, there are probably 47 of us in the room. Of the 12 Republicans who voted with the Democrats, all but one or two were there. And so I'm standing up in the room making a fervent pitch to my colleagues. And a number of the Republicans voted with the Democrats. They're like, well, look, we got a vote On Mike Lee's amendment. Mike Lee's amendment would have prohibited the IRS from targeting institutions based on their support for traditional marriage. Mike Lee's amendment was voted on. It was voted down. I stood up and said, no kidding. Why do you think the Democrats allowed a vote? They have the votes to beat it. They know they're going to win. So just having a vote and losing it is not actually defending religious liberty. It's a show vote. And by the way, a lot of the senators think, oh, if we have a show vote and we vote for it, we can say we supported religious liberty, except we were perfectly happy and content to lose on it. And this is where the voters are getting smarter and more savvy. I said, it's very, very simple. If you don't want to see the IRS going after institutions, faith based institutions in your states. Of the 12 Republicans, three of you need to stand up and say, we're going to vote no today on cloture. Cloture is the 60 vote threshold that we voted on today unless the Democrats accept Mike Lee's amendment that prohibits the IRS from targeting those faith based institutions. I believe the Democrats would have caved. Now, they may not have caved today, but they want this bill to pass and they would have caved tomorrow or the next day. And this is not a bill that is in the nomenclature of Washington, a must pass bill. This is not like the debt ceiling or government funding where people like it has to, has to pass. You know what? If 41 Republicans stood together and we said no, it would have been killed. Unless and until the Democrats gave those three Republicans who broke off what they wanted. And the revealing thing, and I made this point to my colleagues, I said, look, all of the Democrats are telling you, no, no, no, no, no. This is not about the IRS targeting religious groups. We don't need Mike Lee's amendment because it's superfluous. It's already in there. This is already what the bill does. I said, well, if that's the case, what an easy give. What they're saying is wrong. As a legal matter, it's wrong. But I said, if they're right, that it's superfluous, if it does nothing, then holy cow. I mean, you guys are the worst negotiators on earth. If you can't stand up and say, well, give us this protection. If you say it's already in there, it ought to be easy to give it to us. But the problem was 12 Republicans started with I surrender. And I'll tell you, if you Watch C Span. You can see me. I was standing on the Senate floor arguing with a number of my colleagues. Look, we were arguing respectfully, we weren't yelling and cursing at each other, but I was arguing with a number of my Republican colleagues and they were like, well, the Democrats would never take that. I said, of course they wouldn't take that because you started by giving them all the votes they had. They needed to pass it. Without it. What moron concedes something additional when they've already gotten to yes. And so I'm sorry to say the Senate is done. It has passed this bill. And as I said, I offered a wager to my colleagues of 100 bucks that in the next two years we're going to see the Biden IRS target people of faith based on their views on marriage because Republicans were unwilling to stand and fight for religious liberty. And I got to tell you, Ben, I'm pissed off. I'm trying not to be pissed off, but I'm failing.
- [36:20]
Ted Cruz
Why are we so weak? I mean, this was not something. If you looked at what Mike Lee was doing and this amendment, it was, it was not controversial. It just protected religious liberty. How is it so hard? And maybe you can, you know, give a different word that will connect with people to understand why you wouldn't. This wouldn't be a no brainer for these 12 Republicans or at least three of them out of the 12 to stand up.
- [36:50]
Unnamed Guest
Look, there are a lot of politicians that like to virtue signal and there is no doubt public opinion has changed on gay marriage. Yes, I understand there are Republicans who want to say I'm for gay marriage. I told my colleagues, if you want to say you're for gay marriage, put out a press release saying I'm for gay marriage. I love gay marriage. If you want dress up in a pink bow and dance at a G damn gay pride parade, I don't care. But don't pass into law legislation that is going to empower the politicized bureaucrats in the Biden administration to target people of faith. That's what these Republicans did. The Democrats know what they're doing. And I was telling a couple of my Republican colleagues, they're like, no, no, no, this is not true. That's not true. I said, listen, I don't believe you actually want this outcome. I don't believe you want people of faith persecuted. I just think you're naive and that you don't understand how Democrats think. You don't understand. The reason they are pushing this is because they want to target people of faith. And by the way, this is not hypothetical. The city of Philadelphia went after Catholic Charities and Catholic Charities performed adoption services. And the city of Philadelphia said, well, you will not perform adoption services for gay couples. So you're out of the adoption businesses. We refuse to do business with you unless you will perform adoptions for gay couples. Even though there were lots of other adoption agencies out there that did perform adoptions for gay couples. So it's not like gay couples in Philadelphia couldn't adopt. They just couldn't go to Catholic Charities and say, hey, violate your faith and help us adopt. City of Philadelphia tried to ban them. Now, thankfully, that went to the Supreme Court and was overturned. This legislation today, I think there's a very real possibility will reverse that outcome and a number of the Republicans who voted with it. I got in an argument at the lunch with one of the Republican authors. I won't identify who it was, but I said, one of the outcomes of this is you're going to unleash the trial lawyers. You're going to be funded by left wing groups suing all of these small charities, small Christian schools, small Jewish schools, universities, churches, and a bunch of them are not going to be able to defend themselves, not going to have the funds. They're just going to settle. They're just going to give in. It's, it's litigation to accomplish a public policy goal from the left. They do it all the time. And one of my colleagues who's one of the most vocal sponsors of this bill, said, well, they can sue now. This doesn't change this at all. I said, well, yes, it does. This bill explicitly creates a federal cause of action. What is the federal cause of action? A federal cause of action is it creates a right to file a lawsuit that did not exist. And my colleague said, well, Obergefell, the Supreme Court case did that. I said, no, no, Obergefell did not create a federal cause of action. Nothing in Obergefell created a federal cause of action. Now Obergefell is the law of the land. Obergefell ruled that gay marriage is required by the Constitution. I disagree with that ruling, but that is the law. And the Supreme Court was absolutely unequivocal that it's not going to revisit that decision. But there is no federal cause of action. Thanks to 12 of my Republican colleagues and all of the Democrats, there is now going to be a federal cause of action. And every lawsuit that is filed, you can look to the folks who voted today as why those lawsuits are filed.
- [40:27]
Ted Cruz
It's really sad and Shocking that this has actually happened and it's been the Republicans fault. I want to move lastly, Senator, to the rail strike possibility. This is a very complex issue. You've seen Nancy Pelosi. She came out saying at the White House today, the same meeting that Kevin McCarthy apparently was asked to come over for as well. It was a meeting they said was important. Here is what Pelosi had to say in front of the White House after this meeting trying to avert this rail strike. Take a listen.
- [41:02]
Ben Shapiro
We must avoid a strike. Jobs will be lost. Even union jobs will be lost. Water will not be safe. Product will not be going to market. It is. We could lose 750,000 jobs, some of them union jobs. That must be avoided. So tomorrow morning in the House, we will bring up the legislation.
- [41:25]
Ted Cruz
We'll bring it up tomorrow morning. She says in the House, this is a very interesting thing because she, she mentions multiple times there are union jobs, union jobs, union jobs. That's the obsession of many in the Democratic Party on this. What is your take on this rail strike and how do we get to this point right before the holidays?
- [41:44]
Unnamed Guest
Well, Joe Biden and the administration screwed this up and screwed this up badly. And, you know, before the election, Joe Biden announced, oh, we've averted a rail strike. We've solved the problem. Turned out that was a lie. It was exactly like what he said to Saudi Arabia, hey, will you delay restricting oil, oil production until after the election? It was all about getting past the election. Now that we're past the election, we discover that Biden has screwed this up. So there have been ongoing negotiations that go back to 2019 between the six Class 1 freight rail carriers and 12 different rail labor unions. And they've been ongoing. And ultimately it went to something that's called the Presidential Emergency Board, which is something that is created pursuant to a law called the Railway Labor Act. Now, the Presidential Emergency Board made a number of recommendations, including increasing wages for railway workers by 24% over five years. Now, 24% sounds like a lot until you reflect on the fact that under Biden, inflation is over 8% a year. So just adding up 8% over five years, that's 40%. And if you compound it, you get closer to 50%. So essentially, this agreement raises rail workers salaries about half of what inflation has increased under Joe Biden. The unions, of the 12 unions, eight of the unions voted to approve the deal. So they wanted the additional money. But 4 of the rail labor unions voted to reject the deal. And those are the members who voted to reject the deal. And in particular, what they're pressing for is sick leave. They want a few more days of sick leave, and they want clear schedules. As I understand it, the way rail workers work is the company has enormous ability to say, you will work this day and we're not going to tell you, and we can change it. And so the workers don't have clarity on when they're working. So this is all headed to a strike. Now, let me start by saying a strike would be a disaster. It would be catastrophic. It would be really bad. It would impose. The projections are about $2 billion a day of cost on the economy. So I don't want to see a rail strike. No one in their right mind wants to see a rail strike. It shouldn't have happened if Biden and the administration were actually doing their job.
- [44:08]
Ted Cruz
And engaging and not lying to us before the election. Let's be clear about that.
- [44:12]
Unnamed Guest
But at this point, what Joe Biden and the Democrats are trying to do is they want Congress to step in and force a deal on the railroads and the unions, and they want to force the deal that the railroad companies want. I got to tell you, I've served in the Senate 10 years. We've never done this in the past. There's never been any labor dispute where Congress has stepped in and said, we're picking the winners, we're picking the losers. And by the way, we've decided the management's the winners and the workers are the losers. That's what Biden is doing. Biden is screwing the union workers right now.
- [44:50]
Ted Cruz
Biden is saying, while claiming that they're helping them. Like you just heard the Nancy Pelosi quote.
- [44:56]
Unnamed Guest
Yes. And so my view is this ought to be negotiated between the labor unions and the railroads and they ought to work it out. And you know, I was talking with, with, with one of the CEOs of one of the big railroads recently, and I asked him, you know, I talked to him at home Sunday night while I was at home over Thanksgiving, and I said, okay, if Congress does this, what happens next month when there's a strike of airline pilots? Do we step in also and resolve the dispute between management and the unions in airline pilots? And how about the month after that when there's a strike of auto workers? Do we step in there? And is Congress's job now to step in and crush the unions and resolve these issues, or should they be worked out in negotiations between management and the workers? And I think Biden is scared of what is going to come. And so what is likely to happen. Biden and Schumer and Pelosi are going to force through a deal that rams a result down on the union workers despite the fact that they don't want it. And I stood up at lunch today. We actually had a pretty vigorous discussion. This was the other big topic at lunch. And I got up and a couple of other my colleagues got up and I said, look, I get. Historically, Republicans have been viewed as reflexively pro management and Democrats as reflexively pro union. I think one of the most consequential political shifts of the last decade is that Republicans have become a blue collar party. We are the party of working men and women. We are the party of truck drivers and steel workers, and we are the party of the railroad union workers. And not just that, there are a lot of Republicans that are old national chamber of Commerce Republicans that just automatically, if the unions want it, we're against it. And here's what Biden's counting on is that some Republicans will come save his bacon. Like, my view is I'm not going to step in and force a deal that the railroad workers don't want. They ought to negotiate that with management and resolve it. And if the Biden White House hadn't screwed this up, we wouldn't be in this mess to begin with.
- [47:13]
Ted Cruz
How quickly are we going to see movement, you think, from Congress? I mean, Pelosi says, hey, we're going to take this up in the morning, right? We're going to get on this right away. Is there anything left that the union can do to stop Congress from screwing them? Or is it pretty much the fix is already in?
- [47:31]
Unnamed Guest
So I don't know. It sounds like Pelosi and Schumer are willing to ram through Biden's deal screwing the working men. Now, I will say Bernie Sanders also doesn't like this deal, but Bernie Sanders wants to introduce legislation for forcibly granting the union members, I think, an additional five days of sick leave. I don't support what Bernie's doing either. I don't think Congress ought to get in the middle of this fight and say, you win, you lose. Look, in a labor arrangement, you have the ability, the workers have the ability to negotiate with management. They can fight back and forth and they can resolve it themselves. And I don't think it should come down to who has more political strokes. So I don't support Bernie Sanders saying, okay, we agree with, we're just going to mandate the results. But I also don't think management ought to be able to run to the White House and say, we want your help to squash what, what four of these 12. Unions. Unions, their members voted. Voted that they wanted.
- [48:30]
Ted Cruz
It'll be interesting to see how this ends up. And again, it's weird when you hear conservatives, as you just mentioned it. It was not exactly what I thought you were going to say, Senator, but it makes sense. What you're saying is let them negotiate this and don't give them a bad deal.
- [48:46]
Unnamed Guest
By the way, can I give you an interesting bit of historical trivia?
- [48:51]
Ted Cruz
Sure.
- [48:51]
Unnamed Guest
So the last time there was a rail strike, Congress stepped in and resolved it. Now, what Congress did is it adopted the recommendation of the presidential board here. It's not actually the recommendation of the presidential board that Biden wants to do. It's what's called a tentative agreement which is modified from what the board recommended. But in 92, Congress did that. There were six senators who voted against the settlement that ended the 1992 rail strike. You know who one of the six senators was?
- [49:24]
Ted Cruz
Who is that?
- [49:25]
Unnamed Guest
Joe Biden.
- [49:26]
Ted Cruz
Wow. Wow. History there. Yeah, you weren't joking. This is going to be a mess right before the holiday. Senator, I appreciate it. It's always nice to talk to you again when you're back in D to hear what's going on behind the scenes. Don't forget, subscribe. Hit that subscribe button. It's free and you'll get the show three days a week. We do the show, obviously, one day a week, usually on video and audio as well. And the other two are just audio only. Make sure you write us a five star review wherever you listen to the show. Tell your family and friends about it, share it on social media, and we will see you back here in just a couple days.