Michael Knowles (4:50)

Welcome back to Verdict with Ted Cruz. I am a threat to democracy. Senator, congratulations. I'm so glad that our event next week is already creating a little bit of buzz on campus.

Ted Cruz (5:01)

I am really happy and you know, I'm really impressed that there's an 18 year old Yale freshman who believes he's Spider Man. Like he literally closes his op ed with. With great power comes great responsibility. That's impressive.

Michael Knowles (5:20)

It is very impressive. This is of course because when you matriculate at Yale, you immediately get six months of being told that you are the most important, special, wonderful person in the history of the world. You're all going to be president someday, you are told. My only problem with this piece from the Yale Daily News is the evidence they use that I'm a terrible threat to democracy is they quote me on January 6th of this year saying that we should all remember the wise men who traveled a great distance for their leader, the true leader of us all. In defiance of an unjust government. These yalies don't get a good feast of the epiphany joke. What are they teaching them in New Haven?

Ted Cruz (5:58)

Well, there is apparently neither God nor man at Yale, but we will be there.

Michael Knowles (6:03)

We will be there on April 11th. I think the event is sold out as I understand it.

Ted Cruz (6:09)

Well, I mean this op ed author I think bought all the tickets, by the way, the tickets are free. So he's such an insightful soul that somebody's selling the tickets to him. And I'll tell you what, this young man, this freshman, he has a special invitation. We'll sell him a ticket, 100 bucks just for him. It's a special deal. Everyone else, it's free. But if he comes, I'm going to promise him he gets the first question. And let's see if this brave Peter Parker is willing to actually have a conversation using your words and logic and reason. But I gotta say, I'm also kind of happy because if he's Spider man, that means we're Spider man villains. And really what I want to know is which one of us is the Green Goblin and which one of us is Doc Ock?

Michael Knowles (7:01)

I simply don't have high enough cheekbones to look like Willem Dafoe. So unfortunately, I don't think I get the green Gob Goblin. But you're right, Senator. This is a great responsibility that you can exercise, that you can use, that you can show up, ask a question of a sitting United States senator, come air your views, we can engage in a respectful debate or don't. Or just take potshots from the sidelines and buy scalper tickets to a free event. So I hope that we get a wonderful engagement here. Free speech does seem to be a huge issue now. And all the news on free speech that we get is so negative. There is a story right now. It might be the most positive development for free speech in the last five or six years. Elon Musk is now the largest single shareholder in Twitter.

Ted Cruz (7:52)

I think it is absolutely awesome. There are not words to describe how happy I am about this. He bought, I think, 9.2% of the company. They named him a board member, which is very nice given that he has four times as much stock as Jack Dorsey does. And so he magically has a board seat. And it's funny, I was reading online that there are a bunch of Twitter employees who are freaking out. Oh my God. Someone who believes in free speech is like, suddenly owns 10% of the company. It is more spectacular than words can allow. And it's a great example of, look, I hope Elon says, open it up. If you disagree with someone, we're not going to silence you. We're going to let you disagree with them. And let's actually have. You know, John Stuart Mill said the best cure for bad speech is more speech. I hope Elon embodies that libertarian free speech ethos. It's fantastic.

Michael Knowles (8:59)

It's also important because it's shifted the conversation on free speech. I remember five or ten years ago you would hear conservatives tell you with a straight face, well, if you don't like what Facebook is censoring, build your own Facebook. You don't like how Google is suppressing the conservative news? Well, go build your own Google. Go build a new public square that currently controls 90% of the information that flows around our republic. And what we're seeing here is something a little different than that. Elon Musk is going in and taking over these companies that have entrenched themselves either through chicanery, some sort of fraudulent practices by exploiting legal loopholes that give them liability protections. He's just going in as a non woke person and saying, no, that's mine.

Ted Cruz (9:47)

Now look, I am so happy about it, I may go out and buy a damn Tesla. And by the way, my girls want me to get a Tesla anyway. You know why the girls love love the Tesla?

Michael Knowles (9:59)

Why?

Ted Cruz (9:59)

Because the central computer makes fart noises in each of the seats. And for an 11 year old and 13 year old, that is the coolest feature. And I got to admit, as a 51 year old. That's a pretty cool feature. Although I probably shouldn't admit that publicly as I say it and do a TV camera, but it is compelling to an 11 year old and 13 year old.

Michael Knowles (10:23)

I'm totally with you. I think it's wonderful. I think he's a guy who, if not uniquely, can do it. He's really well positioned. He's putting his money where his mouth is. I hope he makes a lot of money doing it.

Ted Cruz (10:34)

Absolutely.

Michael Knowles (10:35)

I think he can improve Twitter. It'll improve the experience for everybody. And it's in the private enterprise sphere. It's not simply in politics, but turning to the realm of pure politics and government. The White House is not happy with how you've been using your free speech. You were called out yet again by the White House, this time by Ron Klain, Chief of Staff to the President, for your claim that Ketanji Jackson, who is a judge who's soon going to be on the Supreme Court, will be the farthest left jurist ever.

Ted Cruz (11:07)

Well, I think the facts back that up. If you look at her substantive record, if you look at her record as a judge, if you look at the speeches she's given, if you look at the legal, academic writing she's done, it is consistently far, far left. And I think on every issue, free speech, religious liberty, the Second Amendment, school choice, life. I think she will vote hard, hard left. I think she'll vote to overturn the Heller decision, protecting our Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. I think she'll vote to overturn Citizens United, protecting our right to free speech and to participate in the political process. I think she'll vote to strike down the death penalty. I think she'll vote to strike down every reasonable restriction on abortion, including bans on partial birth abortion, parental, consent, parental notification. I think she'll vote to strike down every school choice program in America. It is. Her record is radical. And look, one of the ways that that's illustrated, she's unable to answer the question, what is a woman? This didn't used to be a trick question. There have been 115 Supreme Court justices to date. Every one of them was able to answer that question. I gotta say, it was funny. I was walking down the hallway in the Capitol today and a left leaning reporter from Huffington Post came up to me breathlessly and said, okay, I'm asking every Senate Republican in the Judiciary Committee, what is a woman? And he looks at me with this gotcha. And I turned to him and said, an adult female human.

Michael Knowles (12:50)

You sly Dog.

Ted Cruz (12:52)

Well, but the response is better. He looks at me, completely befuddled, and says, wait, did you look it up? That's exactly the dictionary definition. And I said, no, I just happen to speak English.

Michael Knowles (13:05)

Yep, yep.

Ted Cruz (13:05)

And then I provided a secondary definition, which was a Homo sapien with two X chromosomes. And at that, he rushed off and had his story. But what I find amazing is he was befuddled at the actual definition of a woman. Like, it was apparently difficult for him to conceive. What is this woman word you keep using?

Michael Knowles (13:30)

That he thought that there were some kind of memo, perhaps that went out among the Senate Republicans. Listen, fellas, you're gonna get some tough questions today, like, what is a woman? And so here is the talking point.

Ted Cruz (13:41)

This.

Michael Knowles (13:41)

Not long ago, this is something that people would have known, and they would have actually laughed at the question because it's so absurd. So this is why I don't really understand Ron Klain's attack on you, where Ron Klain is saying, your claim that Ketanji Jackson will be the furthest left judge that we've ever had, it is totally baseless. It's without evidence. And you say, look, if you can't define what a woman is, if you're that radical, then obviously, just by the nature of where we are, it's the year 2022. The left has moved so far to the left that of course a judge is gonna be more radical than one would have been 10, 20, 30 years ago.

Ted Cruz (14:17)

You know, there's no area where her record is more egregious than crime. And this is something that the Democrats and their cheerleaders in the press really lost their minds over, is that if you look at her record on crime. And I actually had my team assemble because. So there was a lot of discussion about child pornography. And there's a reason her record on child pornography is really troubling. The response that the Democrats gave, the sort of first order response, was, well, she sentenced below the sentencing guidelines, but many judges sentenced below the sentencing guidelines, particularly on these cases. And that response is actually right insofar as it goes. But they said, well, that means that she's well within the mainstream. So I actually had my team do some empirical studies of just her overall sentencing. So if you look at criminal cases, so all criminal cases between 2015 and 2019, where she was a federal district judge, so the average sentence for all criminal cases by all federal judges in the country, all federal district judges, is 45.1 months. So a little under four years. Her average sentence for criminal cases is 29.9 months. So her average is 34% less than the national average.

Michael Knowles (15:37)

So it's not just that it's 31% less than the guidelines, it's 31% less than what people are actually seeing in practice.

Ted Cruz (15:44)

Yep. And that's judges. That includes all the judges. That includes Obama judges, Trump judges, Bush judges, Jimmy Carter judges, Bill Clinton judges. That's all across the board. Every federal district judge in the country, she sentences, on average, 34% lower than they do. But when you look at child pornography, it gets even more disturbing. So for possession of child pornography, the average sentence nationally is 68 months, so a little over five years. For possession of child pornography, her average sentence is 29.2 months. That is 57% less than the average. There's another category of child pornography cases which are distribution. And just like a drug dealer, where selling drugs is punished more severely than just possession. The same is true with child pornography, that if you're distributing child porn to other people, it's punished more severely. The national average, this is every federal district judge in the country. The average for distribution of child pornography is 135 months. So 11 years. It's a serious crime. As a serious punishment. Judge Jackson's average is 71.9 months. That's 47% less than the average. But that actually understates it, because for distribution of child pornography, there is a mandatory minimum sentence. So Congress has set. The lowest any defendant can receive is 60 months. So that's. By law. No judge has the authority to deviate below that. That means, on average, federal judges across the country sentence those who distribute child porn to 75 months more than the mandatory minimum, and Judge Jackson sentences them to 11.9 months more. It's a massive differential, this pattern. 100% of the cases where she had discretion, she sentenced way, way below what the prosecutors asked for. And the response of Ron Klain, who's the White House chief of staff, the response of Democrats on the committee, the response of the media is to scream and yell, this is horrible, horrible, horrible. This attack is terrible. Why are you being so mean to her? And you must be a racist for saying this, right? This is her actual record.

Michael Knowles (18:17)

Well, this point is really important, Senator, because Dick Durbin, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, he came out and he said, I'm so sorry. I'm embarrassed by some Republicans who have said vile things about you, Judge Jackson, vile things before your family and your parents and your kids. Now, of course, we remember genuinely vile things being said about Brett Kavanaugh, which were smears manufactured completely out of whole cloth without any evidence whatsoever in most cases, no evidence that Brett Kavanaugh had ever even been in the same state as some of the people who were making claims.

Ted Cruz (18:54)

Yeah.

Michael Knowles (18:54)

In this case, the vile things that were being said about Judge Jackson were just quotes from her own record, were quotes from her own court decisions.

Ted Cruz (19:04)

I was visiting with a reporter last week, and I made the point that there's a big difference between this confirmation hearing and the political circuses that Democrats have put on over and over and over again. With Robert Bork, with Clarence Thomas, with Brett Kavanaugh. By the way, do you know who the chairman of the Judiciary Committee was with Clarence Thomas during that horrible smear?

Michael Knowles (19:25)

I actually do happen to remember, although he may not. That would be our President, Joe Biden. Okay.

Ted Cruz (19:31)

And do you know who the chief counsel for the Judiciary Committee was when Joe Biden was chairman of the committee and they were smearing Clarence Thomas?

Michael Knowles (19:38)

I don't.

Ted Cruz (19:40)

That would be Ron Klain. He's now the White House Chief of staff. He's horrified that I and others brought up Judge Jackson's actual record. And, you know, I was talking to this one reporter last week and I said, look, the Democrats, they go nasty. They go into the gutter. Republicans don't do that. We've never done that to a nominee. We're not going to do that to a nominee. And he responded, he said, well, the child porn stuff's pretty hard hitting. That stuff is tough. And I said, yes, but it's her actual record, like as a judge. These are real criminal cases. This is the reading from the transcripts while she's sentencing people to slaps on the wrists. And I said, look, we're not asking for her high school yearbook. We're not going into the gutter the way the Democrats did with Brad. And it was interesting, this left leaning reporter, he nodded, he said, yeah, that's right. And it's what the Democrats think is hard hitting, is that her actual record is very hard to defend on the substance.

Michael Knowles (20:48)

So I totally agree. It's a completely fair hit. It's not even as though you're bringing up some personal issue. Let's say Judge Jackson had gotten a DUI or something 10 years ago. She didn't, but let's say she had. It's. It's not even that kind of an attack. You're actually talking about what is totally relevant for the job. I think it's a totally fair hit. I think it's extremely creepy. It's not a conspiracy theory. I suppose it could be a conspiracy, but whatever it is, it demonstrates very poor judgment. So then I have to ask. I don't wanna put you on the spot, but I guess I sort of do. Why are some of your Republican colleagues voting for this woman, the most radical left wing woman to ascend to the high court? I'm speaking about a certain senator from Utah, and I'm not talking about Mike Lee, a certain former governor of Massachusetts, a certain liberal Republican whose name rhymes with rit Momni, and he's gonna vote for this woman to make it to the Supreme Court.

Ted Cruz (21:45)

So look, I have no idea. Three Republicans have said they're gonna vote for her. I can tell you we had vigorous conversations in our lunches all last week and all the week before. And I and several other Republicans on the Judiciary Committee described in detail what occurred. That chart I gave you that actually came out of those lunches where a couple of the Republicans said, well, gosh, they're saying that others depart below the sentencing guidelines. How does she sentence compared to other judges? So that was a question that some of my colleagues asked me. So I went back and did that research. And the chart that I just read you, I did in response to questions from fellow Republican senators. And I'm not surprised at the outcomes because I read the transcripts of her sentencing. And by the way, I made copies of key portions of the transcripts and I sent them to the fellow Republican senators. I said, just take 20 minutes and read them. To be honest, two weeks ago, I think we easily could have seen five or ten Republicans vote for. And I think the work that a handful of us did on the Senate Judiciary Committee laying out her record caused several of the people who would have been wobbling, who would have wanted to vote for her because they would have wanted to get the praise for the press. I think her record was so extreme that we're holding 47 of the Republicans, but not all 50.

Michael Knowles (23:16)

She has underperformed in the sense that she hasn't had good answers to these questions. The stuff that's come out about her record is pretty troubling. It was funny. Whoopi Goldberg on the View, where we turn for our understanding of politics and philosophy. Whoopi Goldberg said this, of course, is because Republicans hate black women and don't think black women can do the job. And she had to phrase it in exactly that way because if she said Republicans don't think black people can be on the court, she would have to explain Clarence Thomas, probably our favorite judge on the court as far as the conservative base goes. And if she said, we don't think women can do it, you'd have to explain Amy Barrett, who was the last conservative judge who was put up there. So I agree. It's silly. It's just sad to me when I see a Republican U.S. senator refuses to endorse Mike Lee, a conservative senator from his own state, and voting for Ketanji Jackson, this radical leftist jurist. I'm just disappointed, I guess, is all I would say on that. I know a lot of conservatives are.

Ted Cruz (24:17)

I do have a question for you, Michael. How does the show the View figure out who can be their hosts? The View is structured to be a show with only women as hosts.

Michael Knowles (24:29)

How do they know they're not biologists? Last I checked.

Ted Cruz (24:35)

I find it. Apparently this is a question that is beyond human comprehension.

Michael Knowles (24:43)

Well, you know, Senator, most shows have a director and a producer and some editors. And maybe it is the case that the View does have a biologist on staff. That's the only thing that I could possibly make sense of it.

Ted Cruz (24:55)

But by the way, I do need to tell you one other thing on Judge Jackson.

Michael Knowles (25:00)

Yeah.

Ted Cruz (25:01)

So I submitted to or after the hearing, 239 written questions. By the way, the reason that was 239 is it was one fewer than the 240 written questions that Senator Dianne Feinstein gave to Brett Kavanaugh. And so I thought that was an appropriate level for the questions. But one of the questions was I asked her about natural rights and do you believe in the position that people have natural rights? Her response to that is, I have no view on that topic. I have no view on whether or not people possess natural rights. Now, as you know, in the Declaration, Jefferson wonderfully penned one of the greatest proclamations of humanity and human liberty ever written. We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It literally is the central portion of the document declaring our independence from Great Britain and forming our nation, setting up the Constitution. And she has no view on whether you or I are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. That is a stunning and radical position. And that was her answer in writing.

Michael Knowles (26:32)

Well, because the left has tried to say, these questions, they're a circus. They're a sideshow, they're irrelevant. These are directly relevant questions. Even when Senator Blackburn asks, what is a woman that's directly relevant? There are going to be a Lot of cases. Increasingly cases before the court that hinge on the question of what is a woman, what is the protection for sex? Title IX itself. We've been talking about women's sports a lot. That's come before the judges. You do need to have an answer to that. And if you don't have an understanding of natural rights, if you don't have a view on natural rights, how can you view our jurisprudence? How can you view our country, which is predicated on that idea?

Ted Cruz (27:09)

By the way, one of the most disturbing cases was a case called make the road versus McAleenan. That was a case concerning the Trump administration, the Department of Homeland Security, the rules they set up for removing illegal immigrants from the United States, people here illegally, the rules they set up for deporting them. She struck it down. Now, the statute explicitly says that this question is given to the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security and it is unreviewable by federal courts. It is not subject to review by federal courts. She ignored that and said, I'm gonna review it. It's not clear that he has this authority or not. Even though there's no way to write the statute that is more clear than the way Congress wrote it. She struck it down. She issued a nationwide injunction against the removal of illegal aliens. That case went on appeal to the D.C. circuit. The D.C. circuit is a left leaning liberal. Court unanimously reversed her as her decision was contrary to the plain language of the statute, but it was consistent with a political outcome. That's one of the reasons I say that I am convinced she will prove to be the most liberal justice ever to serve as a decision like that is a results oriented political decision. Just like a refusal to say what a woman is is a results oriented indicium of a focus on your preferred politically correct outcome rather than the ordinary use of language.

Michael Knowles (28:53)

This is a really great point. It's not that anyone is actually confused about what a woman is. It's just that some people, because of their ideology and their agenda, are unwilling to admit it. They're being too clever by half and they're putting aside common sense. I think that's a great observation. Before we go talking about the wisdom of the people, we must get to the mailbag. At least a couple of rapid fire questions. First one up. This ties back in with Elon and Big Tech from Jimmy. Can data collection be outlawed? All of these social media companies who generate nothing of value will stop all of this nonsense if we don't let them take our data. What say you?

Ted Cruz (29:31)

So it's A good question. It's a complicated question. So there are a couple of bills pending before the Senate right now that limit what big tech companies can do with data. And one of the options that's under consideration is giving you, the consumer, the ability to opt out, to make the decision whether or not you want them to collect your data and for what purposes. And I think the more we can empower consumers on that, the better. I'm not aware of anyone that has had just a blanket prohibition on anyone ever collecting data, and I'm not sure you'd want that. I mean, look, when, you know, you log onto a website and you're, you know, ordering your argyle socks for your Yale reunion, you'd like them to remember that you wear a size extra small, I mean, that you want built into the website.

Michael Knowles (30:23)

Thank you for remembering my size, Senator. I appreciate that. You make a good point. No, it's true. There are some reasons why you would want a tech company to be able to collect some of that data. We just don't want them taking our political views and targeting us and silencing us.

Ted Cruz (30:39)

And so the more you can empower consumers, the better, I'll tell you. I actually met today with some of the senior company leadership at Facebook and had about an hour long conversation in my office that was lively. And we had significant disagreements on censorship. We had significant disagreements on the policies of Facebook. But at the end, something I suggested to them, I said, look, because they were saying, well, consumers want us to do this. It actually, our consumers on Facebook show they don't like political information. They don't like things that are divisive. They want us to suppress them. I said, well, why do you only suppress them when they hurt Democrats? Why do you only suppress one side of the aisle? But I suggested the following to them. I said, all right, let's say you're right, that there are some consumers that want you to censor what they see. How about this? Give consumers the right to opt out. Yeah, I'm on Facebook. I said, look, it's real simple. Ask me, do I want you, Facebook, to censor my feed for political views that you think will be troubling to me because I am a very fragile flower, naturally, or even for things that you determine to be false, Do I want you making that decision, or am I willing to put on my big boy pants and actually read views from both sides or multiple sides and make my own determination what is true or not? And I said, by the way, that includes, do I want to choose to be able to see Donald Trump's social media. And if I opt in, I say, you know, dammit, yes, I would. I may not agree with everything he says, but I've decided after a good stiff whiskey that I'm strong enough to read a Trump post and not have heart palpitations. And at least the Facebook guys, they're like, well, you know, maybe that's an intriguing idea. I'm skeptical they'll do it, but if they did, if they gave you and I the ability to opt out of their political censorship and moderation, that would be a big, big, big step in the right direction.

Michael Knowles (32:52)

Yep, I agree. It would be something. Until Elon buys them, too. And then we can get some real free speech. Final question before we go. This is from Nate. A little bit of a prepper question here. A little pessimistic view about the future of the country. Do I invest in oil, gold, real estate, or food as inflation goes through the roof?

Ted Cruz (33:15)

All of the above. If you're hungry, I'd start with food. In the sort of Maslov's hierarchy of needs fill your stomach. Look, oil. I'm a Texan. I believe oil and gas. I'm personally invested in energy because I think energy produces jobs and America is the world's superpower of energy, despite the knuckleheaded policies of Biden. Real estate. Listen, historically, real estate has proven to be a great investment. It can be complicated. The tax treatment of it. This is not an investment show. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future performance. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Please don't sue me. Sue Michael.

Michael Knowles (33:58)

Wait a second.

Ted Cruz (34:01)

But real estate certainly historically has proven to be a pretty good investment. And then gold, look, gold is principally a hedge against inflation. There's certainly a lot of folks that choose to invest in gold or silver. I think that's one of the major things that's driving bitcoin and driving crypto is bitcoin is really digital gold. I'm invested in bitcoin for that reason. And I think as a hedge against inflation. There's no doubt that this administration is printing money like crazy, spending money like crazy, and deflating the currency. And so whether your inflation hedge is bitcoin or real estate or gold, I think you do want to think about how you protect yourself against inflation somehow.

Michael Knowles (34:52)

That's true. That's. The extra category is crypto, which at some point you're going to have to educate me on. We'll have to do an episode on crypto.

Ted Cruz (34:59)

Awesome.

Michael Knowles (34:59)

But that time is not right now because we've got to bring on our friend Liz Wheeler to talk about what will be coming up in the cloakroom.

Liz Wheeler (35:07)

You know, I almost didn't want to come on this episode tonight because I read somewhere from a very reputable source that you both Senator and Michael, are guilty of chipping away at democracy. And I, I wasn't sure I wanted to be associated with, with the likes of you. We do have some good topics on the cloak room. We have one funny topic and one very serious topic. We're going to talk a little bit about the Fox Hunt that happened outside of the Capitol this week. I don't know if I should be laughing at this. A fox actually bit a congressman. So we're going to talk about that. We're also going to talk about a really horrific story that happened at an abortion clinic in Washington D.C. 5 full term babies were found. Dead babies were found and the Washington D.C. police are not interested in investigating even though it appears that there could be lawbreaking activity that were involved in the death of these unborn, these beautiful unborn children. It's so horrendous. So we're gonna talk about that. It's a very heavy topic, but it's a very necessary topic and a lot of people wanna know about the legality of the thing. So we're gonna get into that. Of course, this happens over on Verdict plus. So if you'd like to join us, go to verdict with TedCruz.com plus if you use the promo code cloakroom, then you can get your first month free on an annual subscription. That is Verdict with TedCruz.com/plus.

Michael Knowles (36:21)

You know that story you bring up, Liz, about the question of, well, is this legal? What is the legality? I mean, frankly, it's almost more scandalous even if this sort of thing is legal. I mean that might even be the bigger topic. So I really look forward to tuning in to the Cloakroom. And as Liz mentioned, we are threats to democracy, but that is not deterring us. No matter what the Yale Daily News says. We are going, we're going to be Yale on April 11th. We are then going to be at the University of Alabama on April 18th. You can find out all about it at yaf.org verdictlive the tickets are free, but listen, if you want to buy one, I'll sell one to you. The senator and I, we're happy to scalp them for 100 bucks a piece beforehand. Make sure to subscribe to the Verdict with Ted Cruz channel and the Yaff TV YouTube channels. Hit that button. Ring that bell. We'll see you in person or virtually. In the meantime, I'm Michael Knowles. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz.

Ted Cruz (37:26)

This episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz is being brought to you by Jobs, Freedom, and Security pac, a political action committee dedicated to supporting conservative causes, organizations, and candidates across the country. In 2022, jobs, freedom and Security PAC plans to donate to conservative candidates running for Congress and help the Republican Party across the nation.