← The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson
The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson
Super Tuesday BLOWOUT! plus UNANIMOUS Supreme Court Victory for Trump & Unanimous Reversal of 100+ J6 Sentences
00:35:28
Loading summary
Transcript54 lines
- [00:01]
Ted Cruz
Welcome. It is Verdict with Senator Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you on the Super Tuesday Evening Center. It's a fun night for American democracy.
- [00:10]
Ben Ferguson
Well, that's exactly right. A lot is going on. We just had Super Tuesday. We had elections all over the country. Dominating night for Donald Trump, dominating night for Joe Biden. Pretty disappointing night for every other candidate out there. I think this, this race is cooked. But we will, we will analyze it in depth as we always do. Beyond that, we've got this week the blockbuster decision from the Supreme Court. 9, 0 unanimous ruling that Donald Trump will remain on the ballot, will remain on the ballot in Colorado. That also means he'll remain on the ballot in Maine. That also means he'll remain on the ballot in Illinois. That is precisely what you and I predicted on Verdict two months ago. We'll break that down and analyze that decision as well. And finally, a big decision out of the D.C. circuit federal court of Appeals. That court ruled unanimously that a number of federal district courts in D.C. were improperly enhancing the sentences of January 6th defendants that the Biden Department of Justice wrongly sought an enhancement of their sentence, a sentence that the law didn't require. And so they have effectively lowered the sentences of some 100 defendants. It's a big, big story about how the Biden Justice Department continues to abuse its power and how the courts, even, even judges appointed by Democrats are being forced to rein in their abuse of power.
- [01:31]
Ted Cruz
Big story there, obviously. I also want to tell you real quick about our friends over at Freedom Gold. If you are worried about what's going on in the economy, you're looking at inflation that's heavily eroding your purchasing power, putting your savings, your retirement accounts and your future legacy at risk. Well, you know that you want to be diversified with your financial portfolio, and that is why I want you to know about amazing company Freedom Gold USA. Look at our national debt right now. It's exceeding $34 trillion. There's also this insane push for a central bank digital currency. And that is why I make sure that I have physical gold and silver in my portfolio. So I know no matter what happens in this country, no matter what happens with inflation, the banks, I am prepared. In fact, I just got some new silver coins this week from Freedom Gold usa. Now, here's the other cool part. You may qualify for up to $10,000 in free silver when you work with Freedom Gold USA. They can help you learn how to add gold and silver to your IRA or have it shipped to your home, safeguarding your wealth with physical gold and Silver and take control of your financial future today. So see if you qualify for up to $10,000 in free silver. 1-800-655-8843. That's 1800-655883-31800-655-8853 or online at freedomgoldusa.com verdict that's Freedomgold USA.com verdict center. Let's start with Super Tuesday. I gotta say, I had a really fun day today because I got to take my son out of school. He's in first grade. He went to vote for with me today. Congratulations. Talk about a smackdown. He got over 89% of the vote, which is awesome. But if you look at the raw numbers, that's the part that was the most exciting. 1.28 million votes for you, Senator. And then if you look on the Democratic side over there, allred got only 357,000 as we're recording this right now. Number of votes. That's a huge difference. That's got to feel good.
- [03:53]
Ben Ferguson
Well, it was a great night. It was very gratifying. I'm glad, glad you brought him in and thank you.
- [03:58]
Ted Cruz
It was so much fun. Let's talk about the overall Super Tuesday results that happened. Nothing really that surprising except for the fact it was overwhelming victory for Donald Trump nationwide. This is, I think, clearly connected to the Supreme Court decision. There's a lot of really mad Republicans in this country right now.
- [04:18]
Ben Ferguson
Well, look, I think saying it's overwhelming is a bit of an overstatement. Yes, it's true that Trump won Iowa. Yes, it's true. He won New Hampshire. Yes, it's true that he won South Carolina. Yes, it's true that he won Nevada. Yes, it's true that he won on Super Tuesday. He won Idaho, he won Nevada, he won Colorado, he won Texas, he won Oklahoma, he won North Dakota, he won Minnesota. He won Iowa. He won Missouri. He won Arkansas, he won Alabama. He won Tennessee. He won Michigan. He won South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia. He won Vermont, he won Massachusetts and he won Maine. But it's not fair to say it's overwhelming then, because Nikki Haley won the District of Columbia.
- [04:56]
Ted Cruz
That's true. The swamp. She won the swamp. That's a valid point. I apologize for insulting Nikki Haley's tough campaign work in the District of Columbia with all the swampsters there.
- [05:07]
Ben Ferguson
So to quote the classic movie Dumb and Dumber, you're saying I got a chance.
- [05:12]
Ted Cruz
That's right. That's right. So I gotta ask at this point, if you're Nikki Haley and you're on her campaign. And you're the never. And you're the Never Trumpers and you've been feeding her cash. What's going through your head tonight? And at this point, does it even matter what she does anymore?
- [05:29]
Ben Ferguson
Well, listen, understand the dynamic of presidential campaigns. Virtually every candidate who drops out of a presidential campaign does so for the identical reason. They go broke, they run out of money. When candidates run out of money, they drop out. Now, in Nikki's case, she has up until now had donors willing to write her checks. And as long as they keep writing her checks, she's likely to continue in the race. At some point, the donors say, why are we writing checks for a candidate who can't win? And when that happens, she'll drop out. Now, listen, I don't feel the particular need to jump on the bandwagon and say, you must get out, you must get out. I will say this. I think it is not productive to have Nikki or other Republican candidates just amplifying the attacks on Donald Trump that Democrats are using. And the reason is, at this point, Donald Trump is going to be our nominee. That is clear. I think that is indisputable. Given that I don't think it is helpful to have Republicans being the point of the spear on attacking our nominee. Look, I've endorsed Donald Trump. I want Donald Trump to win in November. I am absolutely convinced that the Biden agenda has been a disaster for this country. And so Nikki Haley will decide to do what she wants to do, and she'll do it on her own timeframe. But I think just being a battering ram, making the case that Donald Trump is the devil is only playing into the hands of Democrats whose only argument in November is going to be Donald Trump is the devil. And they'd love to use Republican mouthpieces to say that if they can.
- [07:03]
Ted Cruz
Let's talk about the Supreme Court, and I want to talk about the politics of it just for a second. The 9, 0 ruling that came down this week predicted on this show literally months ago. You look at that, how much of an impact do you think that had on voters today wanting to show up and send a clear message that we're standing behind Donald Trump and other candidates like him?
- [07:25]
Ben Ferguson
Well, I don't think the Supreme Court decision keeping Trump on the ballot impacted the results tonight. Look, I think Trump was going to win. As you'll recall, I endorsed Trump right after Iowa, right after he had a dominating night in which he won 98 of the 99 counties. He won by 20 points. It was clear then that he was gonna be the nominee. Now, I do think the Supreme Court decision, we ought to pause and talk about it, because as soon as the Colorado Supreme Court made its decision, a divided 4, 3 decision where four partisan Democrat justices ordered Trump thrown off the ballot, you and I went on this podcast immediately thereafter, and we said that day, we said, this is not gonna stand. This decision will be reversed. And indeed, I said, the chances of it being reversed, I believe, are 100%. Now, look, that's always dangerous to make a prediction where you're predicting 100%. Sure. But we went further because I said, not only is it 100% that it'll be reversed, I said at the time, literally the day after the decision, I said, I think there's a very good chance the decision is unanimous. Now, at the time, there were not many people saying that. There were lots of commentators on TV saying, well, they may reverse it, but it'd be partisan. It'll be divided among party lines. Well, that was not the case. What is most significant about Monday's decision is that it was 9 0. It was 9 to 0. And it was interesting. It was not a signed opinion. It was a per curium curcurium. Opinions are done. It does not have any particular justice who has authorship of the opinion. My strong suspicion is the opinion was authored by Chief Justice Roberts, but he didn't put his name on it. He made it. A per curium and per curiam can be a tool to emphasize that this is the opinion of the entire court, and it is critically important. Look, we have some very liberal justices. We have Elena Kagan, we have Sonia Sotomayor, we have Ketanji, Brown, Jackson. And all of them agreed with the outcome that the Colorado Supreme Court decision was wrong and that Donald Trump should stay on the ballot. That is a big, big deal. And I am so grateful as I sit here tonight, I am grateful. It was 9 0. If we had woken up, if we had turned on the TV or picked up our phones and looked and saw that it was a 6, 3 decision. It was just straight party lines. And the three Democrat appointees were like, no, no, no, you must throw Trump off the ballot. He's an insurrectionist. The result would have been the same. Trump would have stayed on the ballot. But I think that would have been a terrible outcome for the country, and I think it would have been a terrible outcome for the court. Look, just about every major institution in our country, its credibility has been undermined in recent years. People have less faith in the institutions of our country. I understand why we've seen a lot of our institutions really corrupted, and you and I talk about that a lot on this podcast. But for the court, I think it's important for the long term rule of law in our nation. I think it's important for the protection of our constitutional liberties for the court to have some modicum of credibility. And so I am grateful for the Democrat appointees for doing the right thing, the right thing under the law. But it was important for the court, and I think it is important for the country. I think the statement that the unanimity makes. Look, there have been big decisions. If you look back to 1954, 1954 was when the Supreme Court decided Brown versus Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas. That is the decision that desegregated our public schools. Prior to Brown, the rule of law had been the rule that was articulated. A case called Plessy vs Ferguson. Plessy vs Ferguson laid out a doctrine that was called separate but equal. And Plessy upheld the notion that it was okay for public schools to be segregated by law, to explicitly have classrooms that were white only and have classrooms that were black only. And they claimed the law allowed that, that they were. And the phrase they used was separate but equal. And they claimed that was consistent with the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. In Brown vs. Board of Education, the Supreme Court reversed Plessy and ordered that our schools be desegregated. The law could not treat the races differently based on race. That was unequivocally the right decision. Brown vs. Board of Education is one of the most important, if not the most important, decision the Supreme Court has ever issued. And Brown critically was unanimous as well. The justices understood that ordering schools to desegregate schools that had been segregated for a long, long time, schools that had a long history of racial animus, that that was going to be a controversial decision. And the court wanted to speak with one unanimous voice. I am grateful that here the court likewise spoke with one unanimous voice. And this decision, in my view, says democracy is paramount, that it is the voters who decide that. It is not partisans, whether that be partisan judges as we had in Colorado, or partisan officials, as we had in Maine or Illinois. It is not partisans of either party that should be in the business of saying, I don't want the voters to vote for their choice. I want to throw my opponent off the ballot. Why not? Because they did something wrong. And by the way, there are lots of ballot litigation where, say, you've got to have 50,000 signatures, and someone fails to get 50,000 signatures, and then they get thrown off the ballot because that's pursuant to the requirements of law that you've got to do whatever it takes to qualify for the ballot. But that's not what was going on in these decisions and these decisions. It was not any objective requirement of the law. It was simply. These partisans hated Donald Trump. And fundamentally, I think they were afraid the voters, if given the chance, would vote for him. I think that's right. And I'm glad the Supreme Court said, you know what the voters are gonna decide. It's not gonna be partisans.
- [13:25]
Ted Cruz
You know, one of the most, I think, encouraging moments, and it was a moment I wanna be clear about, that was how the media covered the decision instantly when it came down. Abc, NBC, cbs, they actually covered it in a way that was, I think, genuine and authentic for that moment, before the partisan hackery that, of course, they got into pretty quickly after this decision. But take a listen to ABC News. This is just one example of how they cover this right in front of the Supreme Court.
- [13:56]
C
A rare moment of unanimity on a usually divided court. All nine justices of the Supreme Court agree that states cannot kick candidates off the ballot under the 14th Amendment. That clause which you mentioned, which passed after the Civil War, held that people who had sworn an oath to uphold the Constitution and then engaged in insurrection are banned from holding federal office. Further, and what the Supreme Court said is that states can't enforce that, that it requires Congress to pass a law to outline how that clause should be enforced, concluding very simply that responsibility for enforcing that part of the Constitution rests with Congress and not with the states. The Supreme Court expressing real concern that states could go different ways. Some states would perhaps ban one candidate. Some states perhaps ban another candidate. Other states keep them both on the ballot, and they express concern about the disruption that that would.
- [14:54]
Ted Cruz
I mean, sir, that was a moment of real journalism. It was impressive.
- [14:58]
Ben Ferguson
Well, it accurately covered what happened. And I'll point out, when you and I analyzed this decision, we laid out the basis. And in fact, as you know, I filed an amicus brief on behalf of 179 members of Congress in which I argued for the exact ground upon which the Court decided, which is that I argued and said it is not for the states to determine who violates the 14th Amendment, Section 3 and who does not. Rather, it is for Congress that the 14th Amendment explicitly gives that power to Congress. And Congress can determine whether or not to seat a candidate. But it is not, and Congress has not created a mechanism to adjudicate this. That has been followed here. And that was the ground that earned a unanimous approval from the Supreme Court.
- [15:44]
Ted Cruz
For the past 10 years, Patriot Mobile has been America's only Christian conservative wireless provider. And when I say only, I mean it. Patriot Mobile is a company that I use. I look down at my phone and in the top left it says Patriot. Now I love that because it means I'm giving my money to a company that actually is fighting for the values that I believe in. You may not know this, but big mobile that you're with right now is probably giving massive donations to liberal causes, candidates, organizations that include Plan Parenthood. If you are sick and tired of giving your money to companies that literally hate your values, well then switch your cell provider to Patriot Mobile. The other thing about Patriot Mobile is you get the same exact service that you're used to right now because they use all the three major networks that you're on one of them right now. That means you get the same coverage that you're used to without funding the left. And when you switch to Patriot Mobile this is where it gets great. They actually take about 5% of your bill every month and they give it back to conservative causes and organizations that you help choose to support. I'm talking about supporting free speech, religious freedom, the sanctity of life, the second amendment as well as our military, our veterans and our first responder and wounded warriors. They have 100% US based customer service team that makes switching easy. And you can keep your same cell phone number you have right now. So don't wait. Make a difference with every phone call and get away from woke big companies. Go to patriot mobile.com verdict that's patriotmobile.com verdict or call them 972 Patriot. That's 972 Patriot and get free activation when you use the promo code. Verdict patriotmobile.com verdict or 972 Patriot Now Senator, I said a moment ago that, you know, this is a great moment of journalism and it happened. And then they decided, all right, we're done with that. Let's go back to the partisan hackery. Take a listen to this montage of the media losing their minds over a 90 decision from the Supreme Court.
- [17:57]
D
We've learned that it was a nine to nothing decision ruling that Donald Trump can be on the ballot in Colorado and other states.
- [18:04]
C
I'm not confident that that will produce.
- [18:07]
Ted Cruz
A result that's good for American democracy.
- [18:10]
C
This is actually what I had been concerned about. I had been concern that should it go to the Supreme Court, they would rule this way.
- [18:16]
Ben Ferguson
I'd laugh if it weren't so sad.
- [18:19]
C
My next guest says Donald Trump is still an oath breaking insurrectionist. Do you have confidence in the Supreme Court? Do you think this court is partisan? The court itself may have overstepped.
- [18:28]
Ted Cruz
The court went way further than it needed to go. Our colleague Melissa Murray has called this.
- [18:33]
C
Supreme Court the YOLO Court. The criticism of the court is that they're playing interference. Not since Bush.
- [18:39]
Ben Ferguson
Regarding we've seen a court that's had this many opportunities to interfere in the election.
- [18:44]
C
The headline here is that this is a unanimous ruling. But if you scratch the surface just a little, this is a 5 to 4 ruling on part of it.
- [18:53]
Ted Cruz
This is actually a 5 to 4 decision.
- [18:56]
C
It's 5 to 4. Trump will take this, spin it, spread the misinformation, disinformation on it. So it's a win for them.
- [19:03]
D
He's on the ballot and voters will.
- [19:05]
C
Vote and he looks like he's headed.
- [19:07]
D
To become the Republican nominee for president.
- [19:10]
Ben Ferguson
You can't save a people from themselves.
- [19:12]
Ted Cruz
If they're determined to reelect him after he organized that insurrection, then there's nothing.
- [19:18]
Ben Ferguson
To stop the people from doing that.
- [19:21]
Ted Cruz
Wow. That is your media right after this saying it's somehow five to four decision. And this is just laying the groundwork for what they want to do. If the Supreme Court doesn't do what the left wants, they just want to pack the quarter, say it's an illegitimate court, or get rid of it altogether.
- [19:36]
Ben Ferguson
Well, look, those are partisan hacks in the media who are losing their minds. And you know, my favorite comment in that montage was, are the Supreme Court just partisans and understand what they're saying. They're saying Elena Kagan, appointed to the Supreme Court by a Democrat president, is a partisan Republican. They're saying Sonia Sotomayor, appointed to the Supreme Court by a Democrat president, is a Republican partisan. And my favorite is they're saying Ketanji Brown Jackson, appointed to the Supreme Court by Joe Biden, is a partisan in the tank for Donald Trump. That's what they just said and it's truly absurd. Look, was there a disagreement over some of the grounds of the decision? Yes, but I actually want to read from a portion of Amy Coney Barrett wrote a very short concurrence. And I want to read from her final paragraph. The majority's choice of a different path leaves the remaining justices with a choice of how to respond. In my judgment, this is not the time to amplify disagreements with stridency. The court has settled a politically charged issue in the volatile season of a presidential election, particularly in this circumstance, writings on the Court should turn the national temperature down, not up. For present purposes, our differences are far less important than our unanimity. All nine justices agree on the outcome of this case. That is the message Americans should take home. I think Amy Coney Barrett was exactly right. The fact that it was unanimous is an important victory for the Supreme Court. It's an important victory for the rule of law. It's an important victory for the country, and it's an important victory for democracy.
- [21:21]
Ted Cruz
You know, I've said this for a while and I keep saying I think the Democratic Party, for all intents and purposes, is dead. I think they're masquerading as Democrats and they're really communists. And Democratic Representative Jamie Raskin immediately went on CNN center and said this, and I want to get your reaction to it.
- [21:37]
C
I am working with a number of my colleagues, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Eric Swalwell, to revive legislation that we had to set up a process by which we could determine that someone who committed insurrection is disqualified by Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. And the House of Representatives already impeached Donald Trump for participating in insurrection by inciting it. So the House has already pronounced upon that.
- [22:03]
Ted Cruz
And I mean, you hear him there. These people are psycho. They're obsessed with taking away the rights of the American people to decide who they want to be President of the United States of America. And even after the liberals smack them down in a nine to nothing decision protecting democracy, they immediately like, nope, we're gonna go right back to the House. We're gonna do what we can to make sure you can't vote for Donald Trump.
- [22:26]
Ben Ferguson
Well, and I'll give you a couple of additional facts. Number one, Jamie Raskin was a constitutional law professor. So he's actually a very smart, very well respected law professor and lawyer. But yet his partisan extremism is overwhelming. Number two, here's an amazing thing. So Jamie Raskin was elected and you know, one of the very first things he did when he was elected to the House.
- [22:46]
Ted Cruz
What was that?
- [22:47]
Ben Ferguson
He showed up on the floor of the house on January 6, 2017, and he stood up and objected to the election and certification of the election of Donald J. Trump. There you go. What he calls an insurrection is actually one of the very first acts Jamie Raskin ever did in Congress. And yet, look, today's Democrat Party, they're so consumed by hate that they really have convinced themselves that Trump, Trump is the devil. That Trump is Hitler that Trump is so horrible that anything, anything, anything is justifiable. And the irony is, every one of those Democrats still puffs out their chest and says, we must defend democracy. And in their telling, we must defend democracy by stopping the damn voters from voting for someone we don't want them to vote for.
- [23:41]
Ted Cruz
Yeah, there's no There, there. There's no accepting that they may be wrong or that they can. That they lose, whether it be an election or a ruling. I mean, you look at Keith Olberman. He called for the court to be dissolved in response to ruling. And it's not like, I know he's crazy, but the number of people that retweeted him and advocated for this in the democratic world after he said it, they're like, all right, we didn't get our way. All right, well, then just get rid of the Supreme Court altogether. That's not normal.
- [24:10]
Ben Ferguson
No, it's extremism. And it is one of the saddest things. Listen, when I first arrived in the Senate 12 years ago, there were moderate Democrats. There are none left in the US Senate. There are only two even arguable moderate Democrats, and they are Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. And as of this week, we now know that the chances either of them being in the Senate next year are 0%. Joe Manchin has announced he's not running again. And then just today, Kyrsten Sinema announced she's not running again. So we know to an absolute certainty that come next year, there will be zero moderate Democrats left. They will all be extreme partisans. They have all become Bernie Sanders. They have all become Elizabeth Warren. They have all become aoc. And look, much of that is a reaction to Donald Trump. I've said many times, I think he broke the Democrat Party. He got in their head and he shattered their brains. But I gotta tell you, Ben, I think it's really bad for the country. I don't like seeing the Democrat Party this extreme. Listen, it is healthy for democracy to have two normal parties, to have two somewhat mainstream parties who have disagreements but are not deranged. And what Trump has done. And look, Trump bears some responsibility. He takes great joy in jabbing his thumb in the eyes of the Democrats, but the effect of it is their brains have exploded out their ears.
- [25:38]
Ted Cruz
Yeah, it's a great point. And you go back to. You move from just the Supreme Court ruling to what we also found out this week, and it goes back to corruption. You know, we have a judicial system that's trying to lock up Donald Trump everywhere. They can going after him, trying to bankrupt him, bankrupt his family, basically sending warning shots across about any other conservative that's thinking about running for office. But then we also have learned a lot more about what happened on January 6th to those that were there on January 6th that were sentenced to jail. There was major corruption within the Biden Department of Justice. And I think it's really, this has been under reported and I think it's an extremely important story that I would, I would challenge everyone listening right now take this part of the podcast and put it on social media, because what we're about to explain to you, it tells you just how corrupt the Biden Department of Justice when they come against conservatives.
- [26:36]
Ben Ferguson
Well, unfortunately, that's exactly right. In the past few days, there was a decision from the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. Now, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals is the federal court of appeals in D.C. it is considered the second highest court in the land, second only to the U.S. supreme Court. There are a total of 13 different courts of appeals, but the D.C. circuit is the most prestigious. Judges from the D.C. circuit regularly become Supreme Court justices afterwards. And this was a unanimous decision from a panel, and it's a panel that the full D.C. circuit is one of the most liberal circuits in the country. But this panel was three judges appointed by Democrats. The opinion was authored by Patty Millett, who was an appointee of Barack Obama. It was joined by Cornelia Pillard, who was an appointee of Barack Obama. And it was joined by Judith Rogers, who was an appointee of Bill Clinton. So you have three Democrat appointees. And they concluded that the Department of Justice was wrong when they enhanced the sentences of individuals convicted of rioting or storming the Capitol on January 6th. And they used an enhancement called the Administration of Justice enhancement. And here's what Judge Millet wrote for the unanimous opinion. Quote, the phrase administration of justice does not encompass Congress's role in the electoral certification process. Quote, text, context, and commentary show that the administration of justice refers to judicial, quasi judicial, and adjunct investigative proceedings, but does not extend to the unique congressional function of certifying Electoral college votes. Administration of justice enhancements are typically reserved for defendants who disrupt judicial proceedings, such as a courtroom trial or a grand jury investigation. More than 100 of the defendants have had administration of justice enhancements applied to their sentences.
- [28:43]
Ted Cruz
Wow.
- [28:45]
Ben Ferguson
And every one of them now is going to go and seek and presumably receive a lower sentence and potentially a significantly lower sentence. And what is striking is the Biden Justice Department sought this enhancement contrary to the law, over and over and over. Again, because they are engaged in a jihad. They are like Javert going after Jean Valjean. It is their quest. Look, Merrick Garland has absurdly said the Department of Justice has devoted more resources to going after the January 6th protest than any other event in our nation's history. And by the way, that includes September 11th. What an absurd statement. And to be clear, individuals who engaged in violence on January 6, and there were certainly individuals who engaged in violence, who assaulted police officers. If you engage in violence, you should be prosecuted and go to jail. But what the Biden Justice Department has done is use the excuse of the violence of a limited number of individuals to persecute hundreds and even thousands of individuals who engaged in peaceful protest, who spoke, who expressed their passionate First Amendment views, but did not engage in violence. And this enhancement was an effort that they wanted to go after you even if you engage in no violence. They wanted to lock you up. They wanted to lock you up a long time for the crime of being a Donald Trump supporter. And it is striking to have a unanimous decision from three judges, all three appointed by Democrat presidents, saying, no, this is not the law. And of course, sadly, the corporate media has not covered this virtually at all.
- [30:31]
Ted Cruz
They haven't. And it's not just that. It's also journalists that are involved and there's still harassment that's going on from January 6th, which, I mean, this was January 6th was, you know, several years ago now. Blaze News investigative writer Steve Baker, who had been reporting on January 6th, was charged, he was by the FBI, handcuffed by the FBI. And this is another example of the abuse of power here. I think this is a writer, a guy who's been reporting on January 6th. And it's like they went after him because they don't like what he was actually reporting on. And he said this after he was arrested by the FBI. This is what he said.
- [31:14]
D
I probably don't have a lot to say right now. I need to process for a little while. I'm actually still shaking a little bit. I don't like what I just went through. I don't like the deliberate humiliation that they put me through. There was no reason to do that. There was no reason to march me into a courtroom in the leg chains. Today. There was somebody there answering for a felony and they weren't in chains. My charges are misdemeanors. It's just, it's mind boggling. But that is unfortunately the type of selective persecution that January 6th defendants are facing. And ultimately what we are looking at here and probably the Only reason that many of the January 6th defendants have had to go through what they've had to go through is because of what I've talked about so many times and what I've written about so many times. It's called scary words. It doesn't matter if it's Stewart Rhodes. It doesn't matter if it's the grandmother who chanted usa, USA in the Capitol. It's the scary words that were said. If you don't say the right thing at the right time and comport to the right narrative, that's what they're going to do, is they're going to come after us. And that's exactly what's happened. These charges have nothing to do with my behavior at the Capitol. These charges are reflective of what I said before and after my speech, what I thought about things, what I joked about. That's what this was reflective of. And so that's what we're up against right now.
- [32:53]
Ted Cruz
I mean, you hear him, and it's not what he did on January 6, what he said before and after he talked about that grandmother that was charged when she chanted usa, usa, usa. I mean, they went after anyone that was in around January 6th. Even if you were not violent and if you reported on it and they don't like your narrative, they came after you and they put this guy in leg change just to prove a point. We are bigger than you.
- [33:15]
Ben Ferguson
Well, it is selective persecution. And it's not prosecution. It is persecution. It is targeting the enemies of the regime. And I have to say, it is sad. You know, Merrick Garland used to be a judge, actually a judge on the D.C. circuit. It was his old colleagues who slapped him down. Understand there's a personal element to this. They all served with Merrick Garland for years. He was very well respected when he was on the D.C. circuit. And yet three of his Democrat appointed colleagues just unanimously reversed what his department is doing because it was contrary to the law. And it's sad to see Merrick Garland turning the Department of Justice into just a partisan enforcement arm. It's doing enormous damage to the rule of law. And two unanimous decision within days of each other doesn't seem to have caused them even a moment of pause, a moment of hesitation to say, hey, maybe we should change our course. And I will say also more broadly, we're going to discuss in a later podcast the persecution of the media that the Biden Justice Department is engaged in. And you just gave a good example. But this is all about not the fair and even handed administration of Justice. This is about abusing power to go after the political enemies of the White House. And today, the D.C. circuit decision that just came down a few days ago is a big victory for the rule of law against the political abuse of power by the Biden Justice Department.
- [34:45]
Ted Cruz
No doubt about it. We will talk about the media. Like you said in future episodes, there was one headline, just to put an exclamation point on the absurdity of what's happening to journalists. It says, breaking January 6th. Journalist Steve Baker arrested for reporting on January 6th. There's a headline for you. Let that sink in. Don't forget we do this podcast Monday, Wednesday and Friday. We'll also have a lot to say after the State of the Union that's coming up this week as well. So make sure you stay with us all week long and on the in between days, download my podcast, the Ben Ferguson Podcast, and I'll keep you updated on the latest breaking news on those days. And the center and I will see you back here after the State of the Union on Friday morning.