← The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson
The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson
Trump Indictment Is Garbage - Understand The Facts & Law To Know Why This Is a Brazen Political Persecution
00:46:26
Loading summary
Transcript30 lines
- [00:02]
Ben Ferguson
Welcome. It is verdict with Senator Ted Cruz. Ben Ferguson with you. And on March 18, former President Donald Trump announced via True Social that he, quote, will be arrested on Tuesday of this coming week. Now protests take our nation back. A spokesman for President Trump stated that the former president has not received a notification from the Manhattan District Attorney's office regarding any potential indictment and his post was highlighting his innocence. Senator, President Trump saying, hey, this is coming. Be ready for it. Be ready to protest. Let's talk about what he could be indicted for and how we got to this point with an activist DA in New York.
- [00:48]
Senator Ted Cruz
Well, let me say several things. Number one, obviously this is a big damn deal if the former President of the United States is arrested tomorrow. That is historic. It has never happened in the history of our nation that a former President of the United States has been arrested. Number two, the case from the Manhattan District Attorney, if they bring an indictment and charge him, is utter and complete crap. Actually, as Groundskeeper Willie would put it on the, on the Simpsons, it's crap. I tell you, it's crap. It is flimsy, it is weak. It has been rejected by prosecutor after prosecutor after prosecutor and, and it is obviously political retribution and a political persecution. Number three, if this case is brought to the jury and the prosecutor loses, the richest irony of everything is it may be left wing Soros funded Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg more than anyone else who will have reelected Donald Trump as President of the United States. Because this is if you want to talk about how to unify Republicans behind Donald Trump in the primary, having an unhinged left wing prosecution, complete with perhaps a perp walk for the cameras that ends up being thrown out and ends in failure, could, could be the single biggest in kind gift to the Donald Trump campaign of this entire cycle.
- [02:27]
Ben Ferguson
Let's, before we get into the politics of this, I want to get to people so they understand who this district Attorney is. This is a George Soros backed district Attorney. This is an activist da and as you mentioned, no one else was willing to do this. But I guess this is how he gets campaign contributions.
- [02:44]
Senator Ted Cruz
Well, unfortunately, that's right. Alvin Bragg is the District Attorney in Manhattan. He is newly elected. He was supported by more than a million dollars from George Soros. That's how he got elected. And one of the very first things he's done is dramatically reduce the prosecution of violent crime in New York. According to the Daily Mail, In November of 2022, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg downgraded 52% of felony cases to misdemeanors compared to 39% in all of 2019, according to New data. By the way, Bragg's conviction rate, even, even after downgrading the cases, his conviction rate is 51%. Barely half the cases his lawyers bring to trial get convicted. That's down from 68% in 2019. That is shockingly bad for a DA's office to have a conviction rate of 51%. And if you compare it, his predecessor was Cyrus Vance Jr. Another left wing Democrat DA. Between 2013 and 2020, former DA Cyrus Vance Jr. Never exceeded 40% in the percentage of cases downgraded from felony to misdemeanor. Alvin Bragg has already gone up to 52%. And, and he campaigned on the promise of criminal justice reform, which in George Soros world means letting violent criminals go. Now here's the irony. This DA comes into office and he sets his hallmark of if you're a violent criminal, if you assault someone, we're going to downgrade your, your, your crime from a felony to a misdemeanor. We're going to release you, we're going to let you commit yet more violent crimes in Manhattan. The irony is the legal theory that he is pursuing against Donald Trump in all likelihood will be an incredibly aggressive legal theory based on going the other way, on taking a misdemeanor and elevating it to a felony. And nobody is confused as to why he is doing this. He is doing this because he's a partisan Democrat and he hates Donald Trump. Now, he has a right to hate Donald Trump, but he doesn't have a right to abuse and corrupt the justice system, to persecute his political opponents. And that sadly is exactly what he's doing here.
- [05:17]
Ben Ferguson
You talk about this persecution of your political opponents and this goes back to what you warned about and spent a lot of time actually working on in your last book, Justice Corrupted how the Left Weaponized Our Legal System. Now, you started this book back in January of last year, it came out in October. This book, in your mindset more than a year ago was the, the worry that the left had gained control of our legal system and then was going to weaponize our legal system to take out political opponents. Now, George Soros has been funding this. He has done a, a damn good job. I give him credit of basically turning upside down district attorneys offices all over the country and using them for criminal, criminal justice reform, bail reform, jail reform, and defund the police or drive the police insane. The other thing that's done is it's then also allowed for them to weaponize and go after political opponents. Now, your entire book was basically warning America about this. You saw this coming and you realized that they were putting the pieces of this puzzle together. And here we are now with a President of the United States of America that may have a mug shot this week.
- [06:39]
Senator Ted Cruz
Well, unfortunately, I did see this coming. You write the book? I spent much of last year writing the book. It came out in October. And it goes into depth on how the left is weaponizing our legal system. There's an entire chapter on George Soros DA's, on the millions of dollars that Soros has spent on putting radicals in the position of District attorney. District attorney races used to be sleepy races, typically between people who are both prosecutors, who are both campaigning on, we're going to lock up the bad guys, we're going to put violent criminals in jail. And you'd have a back and forth on competence, often without a whole lot of partisanship. Soros has invested tens of millions of dollars in putting radicals, people like Alvin Bragg, in this position because he understands power. I will give Soros credit. He has found the weak points in our democracy and our rule of law, and he has devoted millions of dollars to attacking those weak points which have been having tremendous negative effect. And so there's an entire chapter, Injustice Corrupted, that explains what specifically the Soros DAs are doing. There's also an entire chapter that goes through Crossfire Hurricane, how the Department of Justice and the FBI were weaponized against Donald Trump, were used to attack the person who was then the Republican nominee to be president. And then once he became president, the hardcore partisans that had burrowed into DOJ and the FBI continued that witch hunt against him. And the book details that at great length. And so I would encourage you, if you want to understand what is going on right now with the Biden DOJ and these, this George Soros prosecutor targeting Trump. Go buy the book Justice Corrupted. It just came out a couple of months ago. And it walks you through the details of what happened.
- [08:29]
Ben Ferguson
I want to get into the play by play of if in fact the President is indicted, how does that go through the process? How will he be arraigned? Will there be mug shots? How all that happens for people so they understand how this could play out with him saying, I'm going to be arrested. That's the president's words, former President Donald Trump's words. Before I get to that, though, I want to talk to you about Augusta Precious Metals. You've seen what's been happening with banks. You've seen what's been happening on Wall street just over the last couple weeks. This is exactly why I've been telling you about Augusta Precious Metals. If you want to protect your hard earned dollars, especially if you're close to retirement or in retirement, you understand protecting your money is what you're focused on. That is what Augusta Precious Metals can help you do. I'm excited to tell you about a company not only that I trust, but also that I use. Augusta Precious Metals is different. They will even tell you if a gold IRA isn't your answer. Now Augusta Precious Metals all about protecting your IRAs, your 401ks in this crazy economic time that we're in right now. And if you are close to retirement or in retirement, you know there is no time to make up losses. So if you've saved a hundred thousand dollars or more, take a look at their free guide and most importantly, sign up for their live free web conference. Both are filled with economic Insights and Gold IRA Info. For your peace of mind, call Augusta Precious Metals 877-the-number4 Gold IRA 8774 Gold IRA or visit Augusta Precious Metals.com say that I sent you Ben and they'll pay your fees up to 10 years. That's Augusta precious metals.com or 8774-gold- IRA. So I want to go back to the former President Trump's tweet, Senator, and he says, look, I'm going to be arrested. This is going to happen. If this does happen, is there a very, I mean, is there going to be a mug shot of Donald Trump and is that going to be victory for the Democrats? And how does this go? How does this happen? How are his attorneys brought into this? Tell people how this will play out legally?
- [10:41]
Senator Ted Cruz
So presumably there will be a mugshot if he is in fact arrested. There are a couple of ways they can do it. Typically when you have an attorney who's represented by counsel and an arrest warrant is issued, you typically will give give that client the opportunity to turn himself in, particularly when the client is not a flight risk. We saw recently, in fact, I think last week's podcast discussed how the Biden DOJ sent over 20 FBI agents to the house of Mark Hauck, who was a pro life activist. They showed up with body armor and helmets and machine guns and arrested him at the crack of dawn in front of his wife and seven children who were crying. That was utterly unnecessary in that instance. Mark Hauck, his attorney, had offered, okay, if you're going to prosecute him, he'll turn himself in. And and the Biden DOJ said, no, no we want to come raid you. Likewise, we saw the Biden FBI raided Mar? A Lago searching for documents. There was a sharp contrast, a double standard between how they rated Mar A Lago searching for documents. But they were perfectly happy to let Joe Biden's attorneys turn over one set of classified documents after another, after another, after another, because this is political and partisan justice in any sane world. If they issue an arrest warrant, they will allow Trump to turn himself in, and they won't actually try to forcibly arrest him. I think that's likely. But if there is an arrest, there presumably will be a mug shot. There is an entire canon of politician mugshots. Unfortunately, we've seen politicized prosecutions before. There is a question about does the politician smile or not. You know, you may remember Tom DeLay when, when he was indicted. You may remember Rick Perry when he was indicted. And, and smiling is one thing. It, it leads to kind of a strange mug shot when you have a picture of someone in front of the, the hash marks for the different height levels and, and holding a little, little placard with their name and, and, and number on it. And if they're smiling like a politician, it's often quite dissonant. I don't know how Trump will handle that. But will the media and the Democrats go crazy if there's a Trump mugshot? Of course they will. But at the end of the day, I think the image matters less than the facts in reality. And let me explain why this case is crap. So this all stems back to 2016, which was. 2016 was a long time ago. That was seven years ago. And in 2016, Trump allegedly paid $130,000 to Stormy Daniels. Remember Stormy Daniels, who was a stripper and porn star and allegedly had an affair with Trump? And the allegation is that Trump paid $130,000 of hush money, basically paid her $130,000 to keep quiet because in 2016, he was running for president and he didn't want a bunch of stories about his affair with Stormy Daniels. The person who allegedly delivered the money was Michael Cohen. Michael Cohen was, of course, Trump's personal lawyer. He was often involved in pretty shady conduct. Michael Cohen himself has now served prison time. He has turned hard on Trump. He hates Trump. Michael Cohen is the chief witness for the prosecution in this instance. And look, as an ordinary matter, paying someone hush money is not typically illegal. You know, if, if, you know, Ben, if you paid me a thousand bucks not to tweet out that I saw you mowing your lawn in A pink tutu last week.
- [14:33]
Ben Ferguson
If that was true, I would pay you more than $1,000. But keep going.
- [14:36]
Senator Ted Cruz
Look, that might be entirely understandable, and it might be 2000 to delete the photo I took on my iPhone of your doing so. But doing that is not illegal. Like paying someone to do something, not to do something that on the face of it, is not illegal. So what is it that the DA is trying to say is illegal? And by the way, look, unfortunately, people, people in both parties, men and women, have affairs they shouldn't. Affairs destroy marriages, destroy lives. But. But this is not the first time that has happened in the history of the world. Um, paying an adulterous lover to keep quiet is something an awful lot of Democrats, an awful lot of Republicans have done. It's not good or right or moral. It is typically not illegal to do so. So what is the Manhattan DA's theory here? Well, it's based on something called New York Penal Law 175.05. That is a statute that makes it a crime when an individual, number one, makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an enterprise. Or two, alters, erases, obliterates, deletes, removes or destroys a true entry in the business records of an enterprise. Or three, omits to make a true entry in the business records of an enterprise in violation of a duty to do so, which he knows to be imposed on him by law or the nature of his position. Or four, prevents the making of a true entry or causes the omission thereofs in the business records of an enterprise. Now, what the heck does that mean? It's a bookkeeping requirement. It's basically, don't keep bogus books. Don't. Don't keep fake books in a business. Um, now the. The allegation here is that the $130,000 was recorded as legal expenses because Trump paid Michael Cohen $130,000, when in fact, it was not legal expenses in the sense of paying the hourly rate of your lawyer, but it was money that was given to Stormy Daniels to keep quiet. So that's the allegation. Now, it actually gets more complicated than that because New York Penal Law 175.05 is a 2nd degree Class A misdemeanor, which has a maximum jail sentence of one year and has a two year statute of limitations, which means the DA can't charge Trump for something that happened seven years ago as a misdemeanor because the statute of limitations has run. So what. What would the DA do? Well, there's A second provision, which is New York Penal Law 175.10, that is a felony. And for it to be a felony, which has a longer statute of limitations, the prosecutor must prove that Trump committed the misdemeanor business record falsifications, and that his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid in concealing the commission of another crime. So he's got a piggyback. Not just was this a bogus business record, but it was done to hide the commission of another crime. And presumably the theory for the other crime would be some sort of election federal election violation, that this money was somehow a campaign expenditure that you were hiding. Um, it would be something like that. Now, number one, the Mueller report already examined this exact issue. Did Donald Trump commit a federal campaign violation through the alleged $130,000 hush payment to Stormy Daniels? And Mueller decided not to prosecute. Decided there was not enough here to prosecute the Southern District of New York, the US Prosecutor in New York. And I think it's fair to say there is no love lost between the Southern District of New York and Donald Trump. They decided not to prosecute because the evidence, A, because Michael Cohen is an exceptionally unreliable witness. Someone would have, I think, serious credibility problems. But B, because this is really, really attenuated. Look, they actually tried to prosecute John Edwards. Remember John Edwards, the former Democrat senator who did the same thing, paid off his mistress to keep her quiet, and they went after him, alleging that that was really a campaign expenditure. And they lost. The jury said, get the hell out of here. They lost. So in this instance, the Manhattan DA has to piggy bank one alleged state violation on another alleged federal violation, both of which are exceptionally weak. Legally. This is about as flimsy a case as you can imagine.
- [19:24]
Ben Ferguson
If this case is tried, how does that play out? He's indicted, you get a mug shot. Is there a trial date that would then be set? Because the question is going to be, how does that affect the President's run for the presidency? He's already announced he's going to run again, Senator. So how does that play out? And can do you go to trial quickly so it's not in the middle of an election? Or does this just. Could it be held up in court for a year or two? And how does that play out politically?
- [19:56]
Senator Ted Cruz
So usually you would go to court relatively quickly on this sort of thing. Now, I will readily admit I have not practiced law in New York State courts. I've certainly not practiced criminal law in New York State. Courts. So I don't have personal familiarity with trying a case like this in New York State courts. That being said, typically for a criminal provision, there's a speedy trial obligation, and this would ordinarily proceed relatively quickly. The first step would be the district attorney going and getting an indictment from a grand jury. Now, given the politics in New York, I suspect it would be very easy to get an indictment. When you get an indictment from a grand jury, the criminal defendant isn't in there. Your lawyer doesn't get to make an argument to the grand jury as to why you shouldn't be indicted. And so that leads to the old aphorism that a prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich. And so I think if the DA decides to go seek an indictment, he'll get an indictment in all likelihood. But bringing this case to the jury is going to be exceptionally difficult. Even a biased jury of partisan Democrats. The evidence here is really flimsy. Look, number one, listen, I think cases where people are engaged in sexual infidelities and trying to cover it up, there's been a long history of politicians doing that. Donald Trump is not the first politician alleged to have done that. Obviously. Bill Clinton famously had a career involved in doing this. John Edwards had these issues. I think juries are often skeptical of holding people accountable for what they view as essentially private and personal failings rather than official corruption. I think a lot of juries are not going to be eager to convict, particularly the first criminal conviction of a former president, the United States, in the history of our nation. I think there is an understanding that if that is going to happen, the threshold needs to be significant. It shouldn't be some little ticky tack Bookkeeping claim that if Trump's name were Donald Smith, the chances that Alvin Bragg would be bringing this case are zero. It is 100% because he hates Donald Trump. Why this case will be brought, I'll point out. Also, look, we've talked a lot in the podcast about how I believe the Biden Department of Justice wants to indict Trump. And I think Merrick Garland personally wants to indict Trump on federal charges, federal charges that if brought, I think would be more serious than. Than these charges that apparently are going to be brought this week. But Merrick Garland's effort has gotten much, much more complicated because I think DOJ was on the verge of indicting Trump for the classified documents at Mar a Lago when suddenly Joe Biden appeared to have classified documents just about everywhere, almost stuck in the glove compartment of his Corvette. I mean it. And as we talked about in this podcast, look, legally that's not technically a problem, but it creates an obvious political problem because the double standard is evidence. If the Biden DOJ says if Trump has classified documents, we want to put him in jail. But if Biden has classified documents at his home, no biggie, all good with us. Even people not paying attention say, wait a second, that's a double standard. Well, here's a huge double standard with the Alvin Bragg potential prosecution of Trump, which is the theory that he's basing it on, that that Trump gave $130,000, recorded it as legal fees, when in fact it was hush money to Stormy Daniels. Well, that is precisely the charge that, that, that was raised against Hillary Clinton. Hillary Clinton funded the so called Steele dossier. This is something again that I discuss at great length in the book Justice Corrupted the Steele Dossier. The Hillary Clinton campaign paid over a million dollars to, to make the Steele dossier, which is, it's a work of fiction, it is a political hit job. But she covered up the payments for making the Steele dossier by calling those payments legal fees. So she did the exact same thing Donald Trump is accused of doing.
- [24:37]
Ben Ferguson
Well, and to be clear, she was not indicted. I want to make that very clear. Remind people of the double standard here.
- [24:43]
Senator Ted Cruz
She was not indicted. By the way, she's a resident of New York, so she could have been indicted under this statute by this da. And, and by the way, she did it at the same time Trump was doing this. This is the 2016 election. So she literally did exactly the same thing at exactly the same place at exactly the same time. But Alvin Bragg is a Democrat, so he doesn't want to indict Hillary Clinton even though their conduct was identical. Although let me put in a caveat. I have no evidence to suggest that Hillary Clinton had a sexual relationship with Stormy Daniels. So that conduct I'm not suggesting was identical. But the payments that are called legal fees, they both did the exact same thing. How the hell do you just go after the opposing party and not your own party's nominee?
- [25:34]
Ben Ferguson
I got to ask you also about the timing of this. There was big breaking news that the Biden crime family had expanded this past week with, with payments coming from the Chinese communist governments. You know, these, these sectors and jobs that were sending cash back to the Biden crime family now has expanded to more family members. And exactly the same week that happens, this story breaks. Now, before I get your reaction that I want to tell you about Patriot Mobile, if you're a conservative and you care about working and standing with with companies that actually protect and defend your values. One way you can stand up for what you believe in is by switching your cell phone to Patriot Mobile. Patriot Mobile is growing and they are the largest and only conservative Christian cell phone provider in the country. Now here's the part that you're going to love. They take a portion of your bill every month at no extra cost to you and give it back to conservative causes and organizations that you stand for. We're talking about protecting, defending our first and our second amendment rights, standing up for unborn children and even helping with adoptions. With Patriot Mobile you get great cell phone service. The same coverage you have right now. You get to keep your same cell phone number and many times you keep your same cell phone if you want to or upgrade to a new one while paying that bill every month. You stand up for what you believe in. So call them. 878 Patriot is the number 878-PATRIOT. Use the promo code verdict and you'll get the best deals of the day. 878patriot or online@patriot mobile.com that's patriot mobile.com Verdict Senator, I want to go back to the point I was making a moment ago and that is this week was a a really big week in in the news area to the point where even Biden's team had to respond, Hunter Biden's team had to respond about these new alle that there was millions coming in from shady Chinese companies are directly tied to the communist government and expanded the list of people with the last name Biden who were receiving these funds from these shady business deals that were all being run through Hunter and James Biden. Then in the middle of the same week when this happens and they're forced to respond, bam, we're hearing about an indictment of Donald Trump. Is there any connection in your mind between these timing of these two stories?
- [28:01]
Senator Ted Cruz
Look, I don't know that that was the driving factor for Alvin Bragg. My suspicion is Bragg is not a big fan of Biden either. So I doubt that that was his driving motivation to cover up for the growing evidence of Biden family corruption. Now I will say, you know, you pointed out, you said last week was a big week. My reaction listening to that was to chuckle. I'm like, well wait a second, how could that possibly be? I didn't see it on cnn. I didn't see it on ABC or CBS or NBC. Like the corporate media just ignores the evidence. So if you listen to this podcast, you Know the facts. Uh, if you listen to a handful of conservative media outlets, you can find at least some of the facts, but the corporate media utterly ignores it. So my suspicion about the timing is it was less. That brag is driven by wanting to change the media story. But the instant this began happening, I think the media was more than eager to jump all over it and change the topic because they certainly didn't want to be forced to discuss the evidence that came out last week that, that up to four Biden family members now collectively received over $1 million from the Chinese Communists. That's a big, big deal. The media doesn't want anyone to know about it. And so the best way to do that is to talk instead about who Trump was sleeping with a decade ago. And if we can talk about porn stars and distract people from the sitting president and his family receiving over a million bucks from the Chinese Communist, well, that's, that's convenient for the political narrative from the corporate media.
- [29:44]
Ben Ferguson
One of the things that the media is covering is Donald Trump and they're now saying that he is threatening violence again. He put out a message about the possible, his possible arrest. And I want people to be able to hear what Trump had to say quickly. And then I want you to hear CNN clearly take him out of context, treating him like he's a domestic terrorist. Here's Trump in his own words.
- [30:06]
Donald Trump
These four horrible radical left Democrat investigations of your all time favorite president, me, is just a continuation of the most disgusting witch hunt in the history of our country. It's gone on forever with Russia, Russia, Russia and Ukraine, Ukraine, Ukraine and the Mueller hoax. It's an absolute disgrace. What's going on. They even spied on my campaign. And remember this, with all of the work that they did on Mueller, no collusion. That's what the answer was, was all no collusion. Whether it's the Mar A Lago raid or the Unselect committee hoax, the perfect Georgia phone call who is absolutely perfect, or the stormy horse face Daniels extortion plot. They're all sick and it's fake news. Our enemies are desperate to stop us because they know that we are the only ones who can stop them. And they know it very strongly and they're looking at the polls where not me, but we are are up by so much they can't even believe it.
- [31:15]
Ben Ferguson
Now you hear him say that and how does CNN spin it? They say that the President, the United States of America is threatening violence again and he should be treated basically like a domestic terrorist. Here CNN in their own words.
- [31:27]
Senator Ted Cruz
Your reaction to Trump's claim that he.
- [31:29]
CNN Reporter
Will be arrested Tuesday, his calls for.
- [31:32]
Ben Ferguson
Protests, and by the way, the Manhattan.
- [31:34]
CNN Reporter
DA's office still not confirming that there is any imminent arrest or indictment that.
- [31:39]
Senator Ted Cruz
Is scheduled for Tuesday.
- [31:41]
CNN Reporter
Right. That's part of the story that he's, he's putting a specific date on it that the DA's office is not. But obviously, the larger point is the one, Fred, that you mentioned. You know, if you are the most sympathetic observer possible to Donald Trump and you do double backflips, you can find some credence in his argument that on January 6th he did not know that his language would lead to, to violence. But January 6th has now happened. He knows the effect of the language that he used that day and how it led to violence. And here he is coming very close to that language. Again, it makes it very hard to avoid the conclusion that he is willing to use the threat of violence as part of his political strategy. And that is just a reminder of the very different era we are in, that we have been at any point in American history where you have Trump, the leader of a political movement who is routinely willing to raise the specter of violence as a way of advancing his goals, and so many conservative commentators and members of Congress who have condemned preemptively the possibility of indictment remain silent on his raising this threat of violence. So, so that I think is just enormously significant and a marker of the very different era that we are in politically than we have ever been in before.
- [33:05]
Ben Ferguson
I mean, they're pretty much calling out what I do. They're calling out you, Senator, saying as a member of Congress and basically saying that you're aiding and abetting a domestic terrorist who's now calling for a massive uprising in the country. That's not what I heard from Donald Trump. I heard a former president saying this is an activist day who's gone rogue yet again with four different times. They're batting over three on the first ones. And now they're going at me again.
- [33:28]
Senator Ted Cruz
CNN is not a news organization. They are a left wing propaganda outlet and they lie for a living. Every word of that diatribe, including and, but, and the were lies. Nothing Trump said was a call for violence. If you look at his truth Social post, he said, quote, he will be arrested on Tuesday of next week. Protest. Take our nation back. Now, the last I checked, the word protest is not the same thing as riot. It is not commit violence. The last I checked, the first Amendment to the Constitution, the very first protection in the Bill of Rights protects our right to protest, our right to stand up and speak out. And what the left does, and in fact what the left has done since January 6th is they've tried to smear the thousands of people who engaged in peaceful protests. They tried to smear those protesters with the violent action of a much smaller cohort. My view is simple and is consistent. If you commit violence, you should go to jail. The irony is that whole screed from cnn, the right does not excuse violence. If you commit violence, if you assault a police officer, you ought to be in a jail cell a long time. But you know who does excuse violence? The left. The Democrat party, the media. CNN happily sat there cooing about the antifa and Black Lives Matter riots across the country, listening while Democrats called it a summer of love as great American cities burned, as police cars were firebombed, as stores were looted, as police officers were murdered. Now let's be clear. The Black Lives Matter riots, there were some people engaged in peaceful protests. They had a right to do that. But there were hundreds if not thousands of people engaged in organized acts of violence and the Democrats turned a blind eye to it. The media not only ignored it, they celebrated it. And Kamala Harris went so far as to raise bail money to bail out of jail the violent criminals committing acts of violence. And, and you don't have to go back three years ago. You can go to right now. Right now you have aggressive threatening rioters outside of the homes of Supreme Court justices, threatening the justices and their families, threatening their children. Their conduct is a federal crime. And we have an attorney general under Joe Biden who just ignores the law, refuses to enforce that law. Why? Because he and the Biden White House agree with the people who are committing criminal offenses. They are quite content to use threats of violence to advance their political ends. By the way, they're also not investing resources in prosecuting the people who are firebombing crisis pregnancy centers across the country. Why? Because they are perfectly happy to use violence for their ends. So look Marxists, what they accuse you of doing, typically they are doing. And CNN illustrated that right there and then. That was not a call for violence. And let's be clear. My hope, my prayer, my urging to everyone is is no one should engage in violence this week or any other week. But peaceful protesting, speaking out, that is protected by the Constitution and that is good for America.
- [37:15]
Ben Ferguson
I want to ask you one final question about an eligibility issue. There's so much misinformation out there, Senator, about if the president is a indicted does he? Is he ineligible to be president? And B, if he is convicted before election day in E1, would he be ineligible? Before I get you to answer that, I want to tell everybody about our friends over at Chalk. If you're a guy and you're getting a little bit older and you feel like you've lost some of that strength and vitality, you're feeling a bit weak and just that complacency, then you need to hear what chalk can do for you. The problem is pretty simple. Men's testosterone levels are off a cliff, historically at an all time low. The patriots at Chalk are here to help real American men take back their right to proudly maximize your masculinity by boosting testosterone levels up to 20% over 90 days. Now you're going to ask the question, does it work? I've been doing this now for about 60 days. I can tell you it does. I've been taking chalk, Choq, and the male vitality stack is what I've been using. It works. It's manufactured right here in the US Of A. Chalk's natural herbal supplements are clinically proven to have game changing effects on your energy, your focus. Check out chalk. Choq.com use the promo code BEN for 35 off any Chalk subscription for life. You can cancel anytime as well. Choq.com use the promo code BEN. That's choq.com. finally, Senator, there's so much misinformation out there and I've seen a lot of fodder about this. People saying, well, the Democrats win if they indict Donald Trump. That means he's ineligible to be president. I've seen others have said, well, if he's indicted, they'll rush to a jury trial because if he is convicted, then he'll be ineligible to be present. What does the law actually say?
- [39:12]
Senator Ted Cruz
Well, it doesn't say any of that. So first of all, there is no prohibition on someone who is indicted running for president. There's no prohibition on someone who is indicted being elected president. Sadly, we have seen far too many political officials, both candidates and and office holders, indicted for political and partisan reasons in my book, Justice Corrupted. And look, this podcast wasn't supposed to entirely focus on the book, but the entire book is written on what's happening right now. I talked about DOJ's prosecution of Ted Stevens. Ted Stevens was a senator from Alaska. He was a Republican. He was an incredibly long serving Senator. The Department of Justice brought a corruption case against him, tried him, and he ended up being defeated on election day. A Democrat won the Alaska Senate seat. Subsequently, it turned out the prosecution had engaged in massive misconduct, and the entire thing was a political persecution. It was designed to do what it did, which is weaken him politically and let the Democrat win. Likewise, I talk about in the book, the prosecution of Bob Menendez. Bob Menendez was a Democrat senator, and DOJ announced they leaked an indictment against Bob Menendez for misuse of campaign funds. But they did it literally the day that Bob Menendez announced his opposition to the Biden Iran nuclear deal. The Biden White House was mad at him because he was a Democrat opposing the catastrophic Iran nuclear agreement. And so their doj, in a naked act of politics, they leaked then, they leaked then in order to punish Menendez for daring oppose the White House. By the way, we see the Biden DOJ doing political leaks constantly. At the end of the day, the Menendez case went to trial, and they lost at trial. So there are no consequences other than political for being indicted. And the question is, well, what if you're convicted? Well, if you're convicted, that doesn't mean you're ineligible to run for president or be president either. Um, it's happened in the past. For example, the socialist Eugene Debs ran for president four times in the early 1900s, and he was a candidate while he was in jail. So he was literally, as a socialist, in jail running for president. And the Constitution, Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution, provides the qualifications for president. And nothing in that clause precludes felons, precludes people who are incarcerated from running for president or serving as president. There is just one mechanism that could theoretically happen, which is if Trump were prosecuted, if he were convicted, and if the House of Representatives were subsequently to impeach him yet again, and if the Senate were to convict him in what would now be his third impeachment trial. One of the penalties that the Senate can impose in the impeachment of a president is to prohibit him from running for office in the future. So that is a penalty that is theoretically possible. But it would take the House of Representatives, which is controlled by a Republican majority, and it would take 2/3 of the Senate, to impeach and then convict Trump and make him ineligible for office. The chances of that happening, I can Quantify precisely, are 0.00%. This is a Democrat fever dream. This is a corporate media fever dream. The consequences of this are purely political. And I want to underscore Alvin Bragg. You know, you know, sometimes Donald Trump, in many respects, has enjoyed a great deal of luck in his life. And one of the areas where he's enjoyed a lot of luck is in having the right enemies. There were times where the Trump presidency was in difficult straits, and yet the Democrats and media hated him so much that they were so over the top attacking him that it had the reverse effect and it rallied voters behind him. And they said, you know, if those SOBs hate him that much, he's got to be the right guy. That dynamic is very much alive here. I'll tell you, if I were a partisan Democrat, if I wanted a Democrat to win in 2024 as president, I would be beside myself right now that this clown from Manhattan is going to bring a case that is ridiculous, that is legally weak. And in fact, here I'll, I'll read you what Jonathan Turley Jonathan Turley is a law professor. Very smart, well respected law professor, left of center, but willing to speak the truth even when it doesn't further Democrats interest. Here's what Turley wrote last week in the Hill. Quote, trump faces serious legal threats in the ongoing Mar? A Lago investigation, but the New York, New York case would be easily dismissed outside of a jurisdiction like New York, where Bragg can count on highly motivated judges and and jurors. Although it may be politically popular, the case is legally pathetic. Bragg is struggling to twist state laws to effectively prosecute a federal case long ago rejected by the Justice Department against Trump over his payment of hush money to former stripper Stormy Daniels. If Bragg brings this case and he tries it to a jury and he loses, which is what should happen if Trump wins at trial, that single action could be the single most decisive action that elects Trump as president. That helps him win the Republican nomination, number one, but that helps him win the general, number two. If I were a partisan Democrat, I would be crying in my beer right now that they are so extreme, so partisan, so abusive, that they are driving the American people the other direction.
- [45:43]
Ben Ferguson
Elon Musk, as he put it in a tweet. He said if they do this, he believes that Donald Trump will get reelected in a landslide just for the reason that you just mentioned there. If you're listening to Verdict and you have never hit that subscriber auto download button, this is the time to do it. Because this week, I promise you, is going to be a week you don't want to miss any of our episodes. And if this does happen, I can promise you we're going to get you a response right away. So make sure you subscribe to Verdict. Download it wherever you get your podcast. Share this podcast with your family and friends. And most importantly, please write us a five star review. It helps us reach a bigger audience. And we'll see you back here in a couple of days.