Ted Cruz (4:14)

Cast doubt on all stories of atrocities you may have heard over the last week.

Ben Ferguson (4:18)

Allegedly, right? Allegedly. By the way, that word, allegedly, sometimes they use it, sometimes they don't. When Israel strikes at Gaza and their Palestinian civilians killed, 20 bucks says right now CBS will not use the word allegedly. Allegedly will disappear. Let's give an example from NBC.

Ted Cruz (4:37)

Yeah.

Ben Ferguson (4:38)

NBC News, NBC News. Here's the headline. Conservatives stoke fears of a Hamas attack in US no credible threat. FBI says the posts show how quickly the latest bloody conflict between Israel and Hamas has upended online political debate thousands of miles away.

Ted Cruz (4:58)

Now, I've been part of this political debate online because I told the story you and I did this on the podcast of the day. There have been more terrorists on the terrorist watch list this year that have been caught coming across the board in the last five years combined. So I guess I'm a part of the online, you know, the online political debate by telling the facts that there have been more people on the terrorist watch list have come across the border and been caught this year. Doesn't count any of the gotaways, any of the people that got across we don't know about in the last five years combined. And if you say that now, now you're part of some weird conspiracy theories group.

Ben Ferguson (5:34)

NBC went all in trying to cover that there's no reason to think terrorism will happen in the United States. By the way, among the conservatives stoking fears are apparently you and me because Friday's podcast, we went into great Length on this, how this is particularly dangerous when you have Hamas calling for a global day of jihad. And we've had two and a half years of open borders with hundreds if not thousands of criminals and terrorists crossing into this country illegally. And look, the numbers that we have of people on the terror watch list, the numbers that we have of people from special interest countries, those are disturbing, but it's the tip of the iceberg. What is really worrying are the gotaways. We don't know how many terrorists came on the gotaways. We know that the fact that they got away shows they're deliberately evading arrest. It suggests that they're not blameless. They're not. Because if you're blameless, if you don't have a criminal record, if you're not a gang member, if you're not a terrorist, you turn yourself into the Biden administration and they let you go. So there's no reason to be a got away. Unless you're a drug dealer, unless you're a criminal, unless you're a terrorist. That's the only reason.

Ted Cruz (6:45)

Gang member, yes.

Ben Ferguson (6:46)

That's why people are gotaways. And the number, you're looking at upwards of a million and a half gotaways. We don't know how many terrorists are among that group, but NBC is reporting as news. There's no reason to be afraid of terrorism in America. Never mind the million and a half people who came in who could be terrorists. Never mind the fact that if you were a terrorist, if you wanted to commit jihad, there's an obvious way to do that. You and I are not giving away some state secret saying if you're a terrorist who wants to murder Americans, the way to do it is cross over our southern border because these idiots in the White House will let you go. And they're not enforcing the border. And it's not hard to be a gotaway. You can get away. Because the Border Patrol agents are so swamped with processing paperwork and changing diapers and dealing with the 7.6 million illegal immigrants that they're not able to be actually protecting this nation. And mind you, the Biden administration has also pulled federal air marshals off of planes, so our planes are less secure because they're down there doing paperwork as well. These two crises are intertwined, and NBC News does not want anyone to connect that our open borders makes us subject to a greater risk of terrorism. I believe it is indisputable. The risk of a major terror attack today is greater than any time it has been since 9, 11, now, if.

Ted Cruz (8:09)

You want to hear the rest of this conversation, you can go back and listen to the full podcast from earlier this week. Now, on to story number two. This gag order that was just put on former President Donald Trump, plain and simple, is this election interference at its worst, but also at its finest. For Democrats who say, hey, we can shut up a candidate running the leader in the lead by, I don't know, 40 plus points, depending on what poll you look at, we're going to make sure this guy can't defend himself and what we're trying to do to him.

Unnamed Guest 1 (8:40)

This gag order is blatantly unconstitutional. Really, it is an absolute abuse of power. Here's what the gag order reads. Quote, all interested parties in this matter, including the parties in their counsel, are prohibited from making any public statements or directing others to make any public statements that target one, the special counsel prosecuting this case or his staff, Two, defense counsel or their staff. Three, any of this court staff or other supporting personnel, and for any reasonable foreseeable witness or the substance of their testimony. Now, I want to focus in particular.

Ben Ferguson (9:09)

On two of them.

Unnamed Guest 1 (9:10)

Number one, the special counsel prosecuting the case, the judge is saying, you're not allowed to make this case, that the special counsel is a rabid, partisan Democrat who's made a career out of prosecuting Republicans, out of abusing his power. And he's saying Trump can't make that point. But she rather the judge. But even more importantly, number four, Trump is prohibited from making any public comments about any reasonable foreseeable witness or the substance of their testimony. So one of the witnesses is Mike Pence. Mike Pence is currently running against Donald Trump for President of the United States.

Ted Cruz (9:50)

Yeah.

Unnamed Guest 1 (9:50)

So you now have a federal judge saying you, the leading candidate for President of the United States as a Republican, are prohibited by this court from making any comments, positive or negative, about Mike Pence, one of your opponents.

Ted Cruz (10:06)

That's impossible, by the way.

Unnamed Guest 1 (10:08)

You know, I can just envision if Trump participated in a debate, and I don't know if he will or not, but you could imagine him on a debate stage and Mike Pence stands up and attacks him. And Mike Pence has criticism of Trump and Trump turns to him. And if Trump were to follow this order, I guess Trump would say, I would like to respond to those comments, but I am prohibited by court order from saying anything regarding the individual who just said that. That's absurd. That is right in the face, laughing at the First Amendment, laughing at free speech, laughing at the democratic process. Now watch and listen to what Donald Trump said in response to this, they.

Donald Trump (10:49)

Think the only way they can catch me is to stop me from speaking. They want to take away my voice. And a judge gave a gag order today. Did you hear that? On speech, which I believe is totally unconstitutional, what she did. A judge gave a gag order. The judge doesn't like me too much. Her whole life is not liking me, but she gave a gag order. You know what a gag order is? You can't speak badly about your opponent, but this is weaponry. All being done because Joe Biden is losing the election and losing very, very badly to all of us in the polls. He's losing badly. But what they don't understand is that I am willing to go to jail if that's what it takes for our country to win and become a democracy again.

Ted Cruz (11:39)

By the way, that's why people love him. He's calling it out and saying, fine, you want to go there? You can put me in jail. I'm willing to go to defend my rights.

Unnamed Guest 1 (11:48)

To that end, there are very few statements Donald Trump has made that I agree with more emphatically than what he just said there. That is exactly right, by the way, on the face of it, he arguably violated the gag order right there because he's pointing out that the judge is a radical leftist and is, in fact, one of the most liberal judges, if not the most liberal judge on the entire D.C. court. I don't think the D.C. judge is.

Unnamed Guest 2 (12:13)

Going to dare to put him in.

Unnamed Guest 1 (12:15)

Jail like you could.

Ted Cruz (12:17)

She really could. That was my question based on that. Could she actually go and arrest him?

Unnamed Guest 1 (12:22)

She could issue an order, go arrest him, and put him in jail. Part of me wants her to do that because if she did, he would immediately appeal. And I am absolutely certain the appellate courts would reverse it. I put it at 100%. Even for a hardcore leftist judge, she knows that. She's not going to lie.

Ted Cruz (12:45)

Then why did she do the gag order? That's my question. Because if you know Donald Trump at all, you know he's gonna push that.

Unnamed Guest 1 (12:50)

Button, because there's an arrogance to it. And I think what she probably will do is fine him.

Ted Cruz (12:57)

Okay.

Unnamed Guest 1 (12:57)

I think you will see her at some point. I don't think she'll take that comment. I think she'll try to find something that is really explicitly blasting the prosecutor, explicitly blasting Mike Pence or some other potential witness. And I think what is likely to. That we're likely to see is that she enters an order fining him $1,000 or $5,000 or $50,000 or 100, whatever, some amount. And I expect that fine to be appealed. But it will not be appealed with the urgency of. If she issued an order for the leading Republican candidate to be incarcerated and.

Ted Cruz (13:35)

The former President of the United States.

Unnamed Guest 1 (13:37)

Of America, yes, that appeal would be resolved within hours. Like, that would be done on an emergency, expedited basis. And even the DC Circuit leans left. I don't believe the DC Circuit. Look, the Supreme Court, in a case called Seattle Times v. Reinhart, said that litigants, First Amendment rights, quote, may be subordinated to other interests that arise in the courthouse. For instance, on several occasions, this court has approved restrictions on the communication of trial participants where necessary to ensure a fair trial for a criminal defendant. But this isn't designed to ensure a fair trial for a criminal defendant. In fact, just the opposite, this is designed to hurt the criminal defendant. And I will point out in New York Times versus Sullivan, which is a landmark, maybe the landmark free speech, freedom of the press case, the Supreme Court said that the First Amendment reflects, quote, a profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attack on government and public officials. What this judge has just said is you're not allowed to criticize the prosecutor. You're not allowed to criticize Merrick Garland, the most political Attorney General in America's history, for weaponizing the Department of Justice, to go after you because he's afraid you'll win the election, and he wants to abuse the justice system to lock you up because he doesn't want the voters to be able to vote for you. You're not allowed to say that because while you're running for president, I don't want the voters to hear that. That's not about the jury pool. That's not about protecting the integrity of the trial. That's about, I don't like anyone knowing what's going on. Now, everyone knows what's going on. That's why every time Trump gets indicted, his numbers in the primary go up. Yeah, because it's obvious whether you like Trump or don't like Trump, even people that don't like Trump, they look at this and say, this is garbage. And this gag order, I gotta say, this judge may overreach. And I think this gag order is overreaching. Now, the gag order, on the face of it, is not likely to be immediately appealable on an expedited basis when the appeal will speed up. In all likelihood is when the judge orders a consequence. If the judge ordered incarceration, if the judge says lockdown, she's crazy enough to do that. I don't think she is. I actually don't. I think. I don't know this judge at all. I've never practiced in front of her. I don't know her. But from everything I know, I'm assuming, and her record indicates she's a hardcore leftist, but I don't think she's stupid.

Ted Cruz (16:17)

Yeah.

Unnamed Guest 1 (16:18)

If you issue an order, go incarcerate the President of the United States. Lock him up. By the way, you want to talk about unprecedented? Put it in handcuffs, put it in prison. Secret Service is coming with him. So in the cell, you're going to have Secret Service agents protecting Donald Trump in prison. If she issued that order, you would have an emergency expedited appeal. And my prediction is in less than a day, it would be reversed. I actually think in hours. I don't even think it would take. It wouldn't take 24 hours. It would take a couple of hours. And Trump is exactly right. Send me to jail, you crazy lunatic partisan who is rubber stamping this abuse of power from the most partisan attorney General we've ever seen.

Ted Cruz (16:59)

It's incredible.

Unnamed Guest 1 (17:00)

This gag order is a sad moment in American democracy. It's a sad moment for American free speech. And let me close the podcast with this question. Can you name a single Democrat who's criticized the gag order?

Ted Cruz (17:14)

Not a one.

Unnamed Guest 1 (17:15)

So I can't name an elected Democrat, but I can actually. I'm going to close with this. I can name Erwin Chemerinsky. So Erwin Chemerinsky, I know him well. He's a very liberal left wing law professor. When I litigated the case defending the Texas Ten Commandments Monument in Texas, went to the supreme court, we won 5, 4. The lawyer on the other side was Erwin Chemerinsky. He and I have done multiple debates, one on one. He's. He's a very smart, very affable, very liberal constitutional law professor. So erwin wrote on October 17, 2023, an op ed in the LA Times entitled, A federal judge's gag order against Trump may be satisfying, but it isn't constitutional. And here's what Erwin wrote. Basic First Amendment principles cast serious doubt on the judge's order. Quote, the Supreme Court has long held that court orders prohibiting speech constitute prior restraint and allowed are allowed only in extraordinary and compelling circumstances. Quote. What is particularly troubling about Chutkan's order is that it seems primarily concerned with protecting prosecutors. And court personnel. From Trump's vitriol, the law is clear that speech can't be restricted to prevent government officials from from being criticized or even vilified. Quote, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment protects a right to criticize government officials, even harshly. Quote. There is no reason to believe, however, that Trump's criticism of Smith, his staff or court personnel will prevent a fair trial. It is impossible to imagine that Trump's attacks will change how the prosecutors behave. Erwin Chemerinsky is demonstrating principle here. He's absolutely right. Name one Democrat senator who's shown this principle. Name one Democrat House member who's shown this principle. If they exist, I don't know about it because today's Democrat members of Congress hate Donald Trump so much that the rule of law, the First Amendment, the Constitution, free speech, none of it matters. Trump hatred defines today's Democrat Party as before.

Ted Cruz (19:21)

If you want to hear the rest of this conversation on this topic, you can go back and download the podcast from early this week to hear the entire thing. I want to get back to the big story number three of the week you may have missed. Lastly, for, for everyone in, in the US that's going to be hearing this, is there anything that they can do? I've had so many people reach out saying they want to get involved, they want to help. What is it they can do? Obviously, pray for the people of Israel and those the, the loved ones are still have their loved ones who are missing that are being held hostage. But is there anything else that Americans can do if they want to be involved?

Unnamed Guest 3 (19:59)

Thank you for asking. And having had the privilege of representing America here in Israel for four years, I know that Americans love Israel and I know that Americans love being on the side of good. And Israel is a great example of that. Here are the three things that somebody can do. And I just want to highlight for one moment, important for all the listeners to know that there were 30Americans killed in this tragedy and there are 11Americans at least still missing. I remember a time where there was a submarine, a tourist submarine to go see the Titanic. And I think there were five, six, seven people on board and the nation was gripped by how many hours of oxygen that they had left. And it was porn of watching these people die. But the world was gripped and prayed and whatever else happened, and I'm not belittling that by any stretch of imagination, but I do not see the same captivation of America of eleven American young men and women being held hostage. The Red Cross has not been able to See them, we don't know where they are. The leaders of their organization fit in a major non NATO allied country, Qatar. They sit there in the four season village and are living it up while they know where our young men and how young women are. And I don't know why there's not a counter of how many seconds have gone by since their parents, if their parents are still alive, have seen them last since America knows where they are. This is, yes, in Israel, but there are Americans amongst the hostages and America is amongst the killed in action. And we have people protesting the streets, rooting these people on that. They are rooting on the killing and the kidnapping of Americans. I just want to be crystal clear on that. Three different things we can do as human beings, certainly as Americans, because we're highly influential and connected. The first is prayer. God neither sleeps nor he slumbers. Let's make sure that he's busy 24 7. If you pray, pray more. If you don't pray yet, start now. That's critical. Number two is Israel will defend itself by itself. It does not want an American troop. It never has wanted an American troop. It needs arms, needs weapons. It needs to be able to be resupplied and it needs diplomatic cover to be able to continue to do this. The senators pointed out so clearly how fast the world turns against Israel. The United States needs to have the moral clarity to allow Israel to excise its tumor along its side. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Iran. It needs that diplomatic space and needs the weaponry to be able to do it by itself. The third thing is, look, all of my neighbors, as I said, have somebody who's at the front. I don't know how they sleep at night, which is by more than honored to be up in the middle of the night to be able to be on this podcast. There's a very little bit that I can do. If you post, post, if you give charity, give charity. But whatever it is that you do, do it until it hurts. There are mothers who cannot sleep tonight because their kids are missing. There are fathers who cannot sleep tonight because their kids are on the front and they don't know if they will come home. If we want to be with them, we need to be with them. And that means do something differently than you would normally do. If you Normally pray for 5 minutes, pray until you're missing the football game this Saturday. Pray until. If you give charity, if you can afford $1,000, figure out how to give $2,000. There are ways that we can be with the people of Israel at this point in time, the Americans who are still missing at this point in time, in a way that God will know that I am willing to sacrifice in order to help share the pain. Pain can be diffused. Pain can be shared. And so will victory. Israel will win. The free world will win. America will win. We just need to do those three things.

Unnamed Guest 2 (24:06)

So, Aria, that was profound and powerful, and I agree with all three. Let me make a couple of observations. One, the fact, my friend, that you are a rabbi came through loud and clear when you gave the wonderful advice, if you pray, pray more. If you don't pray, start praying now. I love that advice, and that's good advice to every listener. A verdict. I enthusiastically second that council. And you're right in terms of all of the steps of adding the voice, adding the voices of truth that are really needed powerfully right now. You know, I want to ask you.

Unnamed Guest 1 (24:46)

I want to shift, just as we're.

Unnamed Guest 2 (24:47)

Wrapping up, to a broader policy question, because you are living in Israel. You're experiencing firsthand what's happening there. But you also have been a very senior United States official, the chief of staff to the American ambassador to Israel during one of the most consequential times in the history of Israel. And that was the Trump presidency. David Friedman was ambassador. We moved the American Embassy to Jerusalem, something presidents of both parties had promised, both Republican and Democrat, and presidents of both parties had broken that promise. And yet we were able to deliver on it. And you also were integral in a process.

Unnamed Guest 1 (25:27)

Just two and a half years ago.

Unnamed Guest 2 (25:30)

We were at a moment where peace was breaking out in the Middle East. The Abraham Accords were being signed, and we were seeing Arabs and Israelis coming together in a moment that many of us were afraid we would never see. And it was extraordinary. And you played an important part in that process. And so what I want to ask you is a question. What changed three years ago? I remember standing on the South Lawn of the White House for the signing of the Abraham Accords, and people were marveling, how did this happen? And now we're facing the worst war in Israel in over 50 years. And in your judgment, as someone who was intimately involved in the policy that led to the good outcome, what has changed to have led to this horrific state of affairs where we find ourselves today?

Unnamed Guest 3 (26:27)

My goodness. Yeah. You know when your phone shows you, like, images that happen on that day. So three years ago this morning, I was in Abu Dhabi with our Secretary of the Treasury, Steven Mnuchin, leading the first ever Abraham, of course, business delegation to Abu Dhabi in The height of COVID we brought 100 Israeli business people, men and women, to meet with 100 Emirati business people, men and women, in the middle of COVID And had it not been Covid, they would have been hugging each other. Instead they were doing that stupid elbow thing, which was worse for people. And just there was an L HAL flight flying from Israel to Abu Dhabi to the United Arab Emirates and five peace treaties in 123 days. And there were more to come. Had the Biden administration capitalized on that? The answer, and I will agree with how you started the show, thank God for President Biden showing up to Israel. Thank God that President Biden brought the carriers into the Mediterranean close in order to do an act of deterrence. I praise him, I thank him and I think those are important. I think that's great. But the three years prior to that is why we're in this position. When you appease Iran, that is a Neville Chamberlain action. When you fight Iran, that is a Churchill reaction. We have given money to Iran. We've taken our foot off of their financial neck. That the billions, tens of billions, hundreds of billions of dollars that Iran has gotten over the last three years were not used to rebuild their economy, their universities, their high tech sector, they were used to fund terror. And when Biden decided that he wasn't going to use the words Abraham, of course that sent a message to every country that joined Israel in peace that we, the United States of America, do not stand with you. It left a vacuum in the region. And when the United States leaves a vacuum in the region, it is not filled by Costa Rica, it's filled by China, Iran and Russia. And the only deal that's been brokered in the last three years in the Middle east, after we did five in 123 days with 10 other countries ready to go, we gave the playbook to the Biden administration. China brokered a deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Now, why would Saudi Arabia, the chief relationship of the United States of America, agree to a deal with their number one adversary, Iran, brokered by China? Because they didn't trust that the United States of America would be there for them. And our inability to be able to tell our allies concretely we will be with you, create a vacuum. And when that vacuum exists, it's filled by terror. Under the Obama administration, it was called Haifa. Under the Biden administration, it's called Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran. It's the same thing, the same radical Islam. But it's because we are not decisive, we are not clear and we fund this. We fund this with our Iran deal that you fought against. We fund this with our hostage negotiations, which I would call ransom payments, which you fought against. But we nonetheless have enfranchised these monstrous barbarians who direct fund and lead these attacks. And you can call it Hamas, you can call it Hezbollah, but it's Iran.

Ted Cruz (29:49)

As always, thank you for listening to Verdict with Senator Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you. Don't forget to download my podcast. And you can listen to my podcast every other day. You're not listening to Verdict or each day when you listen to Verdict afterwards. I'd love to have you as a listener to again, the Ben Ferguson Podcast. And we will see you back here on Monday morning.