Latest / The Ben Ferguson Podcast / Trump Endorses in Indiana, Louisiana, Kentucky & Texas, Castro about to be Indicted, and Dems’ Disgraceful History on Race

Transcript

Trump Endorses in Indiana, Louisiana, Kentucky & Texas, Castro about to be Indicted, and Dems’ Disgraceful History on Race · The Ben Ferguson Podcast

0:00
Speaker 1: Well, come in is verdict with Center, Ted Cruz, Ben
0:02
Speaker 1: Ferguson with You and Center. We've got a lot of
0:06
Speaker 1: news that's happening, including a big runoff election day in America,
0:10
Speaker 1: and there are a lot of results that have come
0:12
Speaker 1: in and it did not look good for people that
0:14
Speaker 1: didn't get the endorsement of Donald Trump.
0:16
Speaker 2: Well, elections in America. Turns out that Donald Trump's endorsement
0:20
Speaker 2: has enormous potency in a Republican primary that was not
0:23
Speaker 2: really much in doubt two weeks ago, but it's an
0:27
Speaker 2: even less doubt today. We're going to talk about the
0:30
Speaker 2: results there. We're also going to talk about the pending
0:33
Speaker 2: news coming out today that the Trump Department of Justice
0:38
Speaker 2: is expected to indict Raoul Castro in Cuba. We're going
0:41
Speaker 2: to break that down as well. And we're also going
0:44
Speaker 2: to talk about fireworks on the Senate Judiciary Committee, in
0:46
Speaker 2: particular a battle over racial jerrymandering. The Democrats trying to
0:52
Speaker 2: claim they have clean hands, that racial gerrymandering is a
0:55
Speaker 2: wonderful thing, and you know, I did my very best
0:59
Speaker 2: this week to hold them to account.
1:01
Speaker 1: Yeah, it's going to be very very fun audio. I've
1:04
Speaker 1: heard it earlier and you're going to not want to
1:06
Speaker 1: miss that. Want to also talk to you about an
1:08
Speaker 1: organization if you want to stand up for unborn babies
1:12
Speaker 1: in this country. And things have changed now that's gone
1:15
Speaker 1: back to the states in the Supreme Court with the
1:17
Speaker 1: overruling of Roe v. Wade. Well, now your help is
1:20
Speaker 1: needed more than ever before, and Americans United for Life
1:24
Speaker 1: they are on the front lines writing incredible legislation state
1:27
Speaker 1: by state protecting women and unborn babies. Now, over the
1:32
Speaker 1: past fifty years, Americans United for Life has filed more
1:36
Speaker 1: than two hundred legal briefs and also helped create at
1:39
Speaker 1: least four hundred pro life bills in over forty states.
1:44
Speaker 1: By writing model legislation, they are consulting with state legislators
1:49
Speaker 1: and defending their own laws and other pro life statues
1:52
Speaker 1: in court. Now. Aul's dual front approach of writing and
1:56
Speaker 1: defending legislation has proved an effective one that could become
2:01
Speaker 1: even more impactful as pro life state legislators move to
2:05
Speaker 1: enact protections for preborn babies and their mothers. Now that
2:09
Speaker 1: the legality of abortion has returned to the states, that
2:14
Speaker 1: is where you come in. You and I have the
2:16
Speaker 1: opportunity to overturn pro abortion laws and advance pro life
2:21
Speaker 1: legislation that attacks the most vulnerable in our society, from
2:26
Speaker 1: the womb to the tomb. Together, we can shape the
2:29
Speaker 1: future of our nation through life affirming legislation in every state. Now,
2:35
Speaker 1: a gift of just twenty five dollars helps hold abortion
2:39
Speaker 1: providers accountable and helps protect women and unborn children across
2:44
Speaker 1: this country. And now through a match, your gift is doubled.
2:50
Speaker 1: Donate securely at AUL dot org slash verdict. That's a
2:57
Speaker 1: UL dot org slash vertic sponsored by Americans United for Life,
3:03
Speaker 1: so centator. There's leave no doubt in this country. Donald
3:07
Speaker 1: Trump's endorsement extremely important, and if you didn't get his endorsement,
3:12
Speaker 1: it is not good news for you if you're a
3:14
Speaker 1: Republican running for office. Now, there's two ways to interpret this.
3:18
Speaker 1: I interpreted this way simply. Donald Trump's agenda is what's
3:22
Speaker 1: on the ballot in this midterm election coming up. Redistricting
3:25
Speaker 1: is a part of that. If you are not standing
3:28
Speaker 1: and fighting with Donald Trump, then there's a lot of
3:30
Speaker 1: American voters that say we want someone different. And clearly
3:33
Speaker 1: that was the thought process for many people that went
3:35
Speaker 1: to the voting booth.
3:36
Speaker 3: Yeah.
3:37
Speaker 2: Look, in the last two weeks, we've had four illustration
3:39
Speaker 2: of the potency of President Trump's endorsement. We had, first
3:42
Speaker 2: of all, Indiana, So Indiana, President Trump and the White
3:47
Speaker 2: House asked Indiana to redistrict, to redraw their congressional map
3:50
Speaker 2: to gain additional Republican seats. The Indiana legislature refused. They
3:56
Speaker 2: rebuke the president. They said no, we're not going to
3:58
Speaker 2: do that, and the President got pissed off. And so
4:01
Speaker 2: there were seven Indiana state senators that Trump endorsed against,
4:08
Speaker 2: and five of them were defeated in their primaries. That
4:11
Speaker 2: was two weeks ago. It was really a striking result
4:15
Speaker 2: that if you stand up and defy the president, if
4:19
Speaker 2: you declare I'm opposed to the president. At least in
4:22
Speaker 2: the Republican Party, there is no never Trump lane in
4:25
Speaker 2: the Republican Party. That does not exist, or it does
4:28
Speaker 2: not exist with any staying power. The never Trump lane
4:34
Speaker 2: is largely non existent. Then we saw the state Louisiana,
4:39
Speaker 2: State Louisiana. My colleague Bill Cassidy, the incumbent Republican Senator
4:43
Speaker 2: from Louisiana, was in a primary President Trump endorsed against
4:48
Speaker 2: him and Louisiana has a multi person primary. They require
4:55
Speaker 2: that in order to win, you got to win a majority.
4:57
Speaker 2: So if you don't win a majority, the top two
4:59
Speaker 2: go to irun off. What ended up happening in Louisiana
5:02
Speaker 2: is two other candidates, Julia Letlowe and John Fleming, ended
5:07
Speaker 2: up winning the primary, and Bill Cassidy, the incumbent Republican senator,
5:13
Speaker 2: did not make the top two, so he was defeated.
5:16
Speaker 2: He's not going to be in the runoff, so he
5:17
Speaker 2: will not be a senator next year. And that was
5:21
Speaker 2: a powerful illustration. Cassidy had millions of dollars behind him. Look,
5:25
Speaker 2: Cassidy's most significant step that he took is that he
5:29
Speaker 2: voted to convict President Trump during the impeachment I'll tell you,
5:33
Speaker 2: I was sitting next to Bill Cassidy. He and I
5:35
Speaker 2: are seats on the floor of the Senate, were next
5:38
Speaker 2: to each other during the impeachment trial. When he cast
5:42
Speaker 2: that vote to convict, it felt like he knew what
5:47
Speaker 2: he was doing. It felt like he knew that he
5:49
Speaker 2: was ending his political career. I was surprised. I think
5:54
Speaker 2: most Republicans were surprised. We did not anticipate that Bill
5:57
Speaker 2: Cassidy would vote to.
5:58
Speaker 1: Convict That was a shock in the moment when it happened.
6:02
Speaker 1: If you take pell back to that day, it wasn't
6:04
Speaker 1: like he was out on TV talking about how he
6:06
Speaker 1: was going to convict Don Trump. It wasn't like he
6:08
Speaker 1: was Democrats in the media were not floating. That is
6:11
Speaker 1: a real possibility. And then when it happened, I remember,
6:14
Speaker 1: it was a total shock on social media at that moment.
6:17
Speaker 2: Look and Louisiana is now a bright red state, and
6:21
Speaker 2: so it was that vote was costly. He did not
6:24
Speaker 2: make the top two. He will not be either Fleming
6:28
Speaker 2: or Letlow will be the next Senator from Louisiana, but
6:32
Speaker 2: it will not be Bill Cassidy. And so the Trump
6:35
Speaker 2: endorsement was demonstrated to be extremely potent. Then we saw
6:40
Speaker 2: tonight you and I are here. It is eleven nineteen
6:43
Speaker 2: pm and tonight in Kentucky, Thomas Massey, incumbent Republican congressman,
6:50
Speaker 2: has been defeated. Has been defeated, but it looks like
6:53
Speaker 2: maybe up to ten points. Then the numbers are still
6:56
Speaker 2: being counted. Massy look Massy to win by big margins.
7:01
Speaker 2: Massey is a libertarian. Massy is in some ways. He's massy,
7:07
Speaker 2: is similar to Rand Paul, but in the House.
7:09
Speaker 1: He's a Rand Paul of the House in essence.
7:12
Speaker 2: Yeah, but but and and listen, President Trump endorsed against him,
7:16
Speaker 2: leaned in against him. They had a Navy seal running
7:18
Speaker 2: against him. Who's who was a strong Donald Trump supporter.
7:22
Speaker 2: And listen, I know Thomas Thomas is a very smart guy.
7:25
Speaker 2: He's an MIT graduate, He's a principled libertarian. I don't
7:30
Speaker 2: doubt that he believes what he's doing. But but I
7:33
Speaker 2: will say Thomas's tenure in the House had become simply
7:38
Speaker 2: relentless votes against Trump. He voted no, no, no, no,
7:43
Speaker 2: no on everything. He voted no on the Big Reconciliation Bill,
7:47
Speaker 2: the one big beautiful bill, also called the Working Family's
7:49
Speaker 2: Tax Cut. And it got to the point that I
7:53
Speaker 2: think President Trump was really frustrated. Listen, if we had
7:58
Speaker 2: if we had a huge majority, if we had two
8:00
Speaker 2: hundred and fifty Republicans in the House, you only need
8:03
Speaker 2: two eighteen for a majority, it wouldn't hurt to have
8:06
Speaker 2: a constant no vote. But if you vote against President
8:09
Speaker 2: Trump all the time, and if you vote with the
8:12
Speaker 2: Democrats almost all the time, that's frustrating. When you have
8:16
Speaker 2: a one or two vote margin in the House, it
8:19
Speaker 2: really hurts. If you want to be an op ed
8:21
Speaker 2: columnist and say I am against everything. No no, no, no, no. Fine,
8:26
Speaker 2: write your columns, express your opinions. But when you're in
8:30
Speaker 2: an incredibly narrow congressional body, those votes have consequence. I
8:35
Speaker 2: will say also Thomas's votes and positions on Israel. This
8:41
Speaker 2: was a bitter, nasty primary. He had a he had
8:46
Speaker 2: a line when he was conceding his race where he
8:49
Speaker 2: said it took some time to call his opponent to
8:52
Speaker 2: concede because it took some time to track him down
8:54
Speaker 2: and Tel Aviv. That was gratuitous, that was unnecessary. I
8:59
Speaker 2: get that Thomas's unhappy that he lost, but that kind
9:03
Speaker 2: of nastiness I wish she hadn't done that. There's no
9:08
Speaker 2: doubt but for Donald Trump, Thomas Massey wins, and so
9:12
Speaker 2: Trump endorsed against him, leaned in hard. He wanted a
9:16
Speaker 2: House member who will vote with him, and the challenger
9:20
Speaker 2: who beat Massey will win the general election. He will
9:23
Speaker 2: vote with Trump consistently. And then today we got the
9:26
Speaker 2: bombshell news and in Ben, you're in my home state
9:29
Speaker 2: of Texas, which is that President Trump endorsed Ken Paxton
9:33
Speaker 2: against John Cornet. As we're sitting here right now, the
9:38
Speaker 2: primary for Senate is unfolding in Texas. We're in early votes.
9:42
Speaker 2: I voted yesterday. I voted on Monday, the first day
9:45
Speaker 2: of early votes, and Texas early votes run from Monday
9:47
Speaker 2: to Friday, and then election day is next Tuesday. And
9:52
Speaker 2: this is already the most expensive primary in US history.
9:55
Speaker 2: Just the primary, the two candidates spent over one hundred
9:58
Speaker 2: million dollars in the off. We don't have the firm
10:02
Speaker 2: numbers yet, but my guess is well over fifty million
10:04
Speaker 2: dollars will have been spent in the runoff. So I
10:06
Speaker 2: think all told, this will be over one hundred and
10:09
Speaker 2: fifty million dollars in a primary. So it's by a
10:12
Speaker 2: massive margin, the most expensive Senate primary in the history
10:15
Speaker 2: of the country. And look, keyword, by the way, is primary,
10:20
Speaker 2: because now you've got money going in the general election
10:22
Speaker 2: as well after this, which is going to be a
10:24
Speaker 2: ton of money as well. Listen, we don't know for
10:27
Speaker 2: a fact what will happen on election Day, but any
10:30
Speaker 2: observer will acknowledge that President Trump's endorsement makes it significantly
10:36
Speaker 2: more likely that Ken Paxston wins. How much more likely,
10:38
Speaker 2: I don't know, but given what we've seen the last
10:41
Speaker 2: two weeks, nobody can dispute the Trump endorsement is a
10:44
Speaker 2: big deal. And so this has been a powerful demonstration
10:48
Speaker 2: of the President that he wants. He wants members of
10:50
Speaker 2: the House, he wants members of the Senate who stand
10:52
Speaker 2: with him, who support support him, and if they don't,
10:57
Speaker 2: they're real consequences.
11:00
Speaker 1: You mention that because there's even some that reached out
11:02
Speaker 1: to me, and I had media people that were calling saying, hey,
11:05
Speaker 1: we want to have you talk about this exact as
11:08
Speaker 1: you just described with this. You know, why did the
11:10
Speaker 1: president dorse when he did? Was it worth it? Should
11:13
Speaker 1: he just stay out of the primary with Cornyn? Because
11:15
Speaker 1: there are consequences. Cassie is another example of this with
11:19
Speaker 1: consequences because now there's real talk about about the War
11:23
Speaker 1: Powers Act now getting fast tracked because you have I
11:26
Speaker 1: think it's for if I'm not mistaken. As of before
11:28
Speaker 1: we start the show, the latest as I saw as
11:30
Speaker 1: four Senate Republicans are now willing to go and say yeah,
11:35
Speaker 1: we're gonna We're gonna now talk about the warst Power
11:37
Speaker 1: Act and maybe taking away some power from the president.
11:40
Speaker 2: Yeah, So we had a vote today. The Democrats have
11:43
Speaker 2: done repeated I think it's been about a dozen now
11:46
Speaker 2: War Powers Act resolutions trying to restrict the president's power
11:52
Speaker 2: to wage war in Iran, to defend this nation and
11:54
Speaker 2: to take out the Iranian regime. They have lost every
11:58
Speaker 2: one of those until today, and they've had voting in
12:02
Speaker 2: favor of them has been Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski
12:05
Speaker 2: and Rand Paul. But today, for the first time, they
12:09
Speaker 2: won because they got a fourth vote Bill Cassidy. And
12:11
Speaker 2: I assume I've not talked to Bill. I did not
12:13
Speaker 2: see Bill today, but I assume he's pissed. He's pissed
12:16
Speaker 2: the President endorsed against him. He's pissed he lost. And
12:19
Speaker 2: I don't think it's a crazy assumption that he's going
12:22
Speaker 2: to be pissed the rest of the year. It's going
12:23
Speaker 2: to be complicated on votes. If Cornyn Law loses, I
12:28
Speaker 2: can imagine he's going to be pissed as well. And
12:31
Speaker 2: so that dynamic when we have a fifty three to
12:33
Speaker 2: forty seven majority, if we have several members. Tom Tillis
12:38
Speaker 2: is not running again and he has been quite expressed
12:41
Speaker 2: a lot of animosity towards the president. Mitch McConnell's not
12:44
Speaker 2: running again, He's expressed a lot of animosity towards the president.
12:48
Speaker 2: That makes the Senate complicated. If you've got a three
12:50
Speaker 2: vote majority and you have four or five senators who
12:52
Speaker 2: are pissed at the president. That ain't easy. By the way,
12:56
Speaker 2: another result that happened today was the Kentucky Senate race.
13:00
Speaker 2: So the race to replace Mitch McConnell. Mitch is not
13:02
Speaker 2: running for reelection. You had multiple candidates running, and it
13:08
Speaker 2: was close. It was a bitterly, hotly contested race. Millions
13:12
Speaker 2: of dollars were spent. Trump a week or two ago
13:16
Speaker 2: endorsed Andy Barr, who's a congressman, and that basically ended
13:20
Speaker 2: the race. Barr won the primary to day, I think
13:23
Speaker 2: about about sixty five percent was the last number I saw.
13:27
Speaker 2: But once Trump endorsed, the race was over. And so
13:32
Speaker 2: his endorsement clearly has a lot of potency, and I
13:36
Speaker 2: think he wants senators and House members that are going
13:39
Speaker 2: to stand with him and fight for the agenda that
13:41
Speaker 2: he was elected to fight for. And there's a reason
13:44
Speaker 2: that I had been Donald Trump's single strongest ally in
13:47
Speaker 2: the Senate for ten years because I believe in the
13:50
Speaker 2: agenda he's fighting for. And listen, Trump, by far, his
13:56
Speaker 2: greatest attribute is he has a cast iron backbone. He
14:01
Speaker 2: is a courageous fighter, and he's willing to stand up
14:04
Speaker 2: and fight, and that I and so many other Republicans
14:07
Speaker 2: have been frustrated by Republicans who were jellyfish, who are
14:11
Speaker 2: afraid of a fight, and so I'm glad to see
14:13
Speaker 2: the President standing up and standing up for what he
14:15
Speaker 2: believes in.
14:16
Speaker 1: Is it a fair assessment to say that for Donald
14:19
Speaker 1: Trump it may be really tough for him on the
14:22
Speaker 1: Senate side, as you mentioned, through the end of the year,
14:26
Speaker 1: but there's a real now possibility that Donald Trump could
14:29
Speaker 1: have even more power in the Senate moving forward because
14:33
Speaker 1: of some of these changes that are coming. And yeah,
14:35
Speaker 1: there's going to be retribution until they're out of office
14:38
Speaker 1: and you know, at the end of the year January technically,
14:40
Speaker 1: but like, this could be very interesting to see that
14:44
Speaker 1: he went in knowing, Hey, I'm going to have a
14:46
Speaker 1: hard you know, five six months here, seven months here,
14:49
Speaker 1: but by golly, it's going to get a lot better
14:51
Speaker 1: for two more years after that.
14:53
Speaker 2: Yeah, and look, if you look at how President Trump
14:56
Speaker 2: has done this, I don't think he has abused his
15:01
Speaker 2: decisions on this. It has not been the case that
15:05
Speaker 2: if somebody disagrees with the President on one particular issue,
15:08
Speaker 2: that that that is discreet and not that consequential, that
15:11
Speaker 2: that that he responds with with with you know, massive retribution.
15:17
Speaker 2: It has been. Look, Cassidy voted to convict him and
15:19
Speaker 2: to peach him and remove him from office. That's a
15:22
Speaker 2: big damn deal. That's not a small vote. The Indiana
15:26
Speaker 2: State legislators look, the Democrats that Jerrymander the heck out
15:30
Speaker 2: of much of the country. President Trump wanted Republicans to
15:33
Speaker 2: counterbalance that, and the Indiana State Legislators told the president
15:36
Speaker 2: go jump in a lake. That that was significant. You
15:40
Speaker 2: look at Thomas Massey. It's not like Thomas Massey just
15:43
Speaker 2: voted against the president on one vote. He voted against
15:46
Speaker 2: the President on almost every single vote, over and over
15:49
Speaker 2: and over again.
15:50
Speaker 1: I think it's fair to say Massey was fighting harder
15:52
Speaker 1: against Donald Trump than he was even the Democrats out there.
15:55
Speaker 2: And I will say, at least the political retribution for Massey,
15:59
Speaker 2: I don't know how he could vote against Trump more
16:01
Speaker 2: like at this point, when the Speaker of the House
16:04
Speaker 2: is counting votes in the House, he counts all the
16:07
Speaker 2: Democrats as to know, and he counts Massi as a no.
16:10
Speaker 2: So it's not like MASSI can vote no twice. He's
16:12
Speaker 2: going to vote no. He was voting no before. He'll
16:14
Speaker 2: keep voting no. And so I think the President acted
16:18
Speaker 2: to say, look, I need people in the House who
16:20
Speaker 2: actually support me.
16:22
Speaker 1: I'll tell you what, it's pretty awesome. America is entering
16:24
Speaker 1: its two hundred and fiftieth year and the direction of
16:27
Speaker 1: this country is being decided right now in our culture
16:30
Speaker 1: and our economy, and who we choose to support matters
16:33
Speaker 1: more than ever now. Most wireless companies don't care who
16:37
Speaker 1: you are or what you believe. They just want your money.
16:41
Speaker 1: Patriot Mobile they're different. For more than twelve years, they've
16:44
Speaker 1: stood with Americans who believe freedom is worth defending, funding
16:49
Speaker 1: the Christian Conservative movement when others have stayed silent. And
16:53
Speaker 1: here's the deal. You don't have to give up quality
16:57
Speaker 1: or service when you switch to Patriot Mobile. They deliver
17:00
Speaker 1: premium priority access and all three major US networks, so
17:05
Speaker 1: you'll get the same or better coverage than you have today.
17:09
Speaker 1: Think switching as a hassle. It isn't. You can keep
17:12
Speaker 1: your same number, keep your phone, or upgrade. They're one
17:16
Speaker 1: hundred percent US based customer service team can activate you
17:20
Speaker 1: literally in minutes still paying off a device. Patriot Mobile
17:24
Speaker 1: even offers a contract buyout. This is a defining year
17:29
Speaker 1: and we must work together to save our country. So
17:32
Speaker 1: go to Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict, or you can
17:37
Speaker 1: call them nine to seven to two Patriot and if
17:40
Speaker 1: you use the promo code vertict, you'll get a free
17:42
Speaker 1: month of service. That's Patriot Mobile dot com slash verdict
17:47
Speaker 1: or nine seven to two Patriot and switch today. All right, Senator,
17:52
Speaker 1: I want to move to the other big breaking news story,
17:54
Speaker 1: and this is happening as you and I were getting
17:56
Speaker 1: ready to do the show. There is word now that
18:00
Speaker 1: if there could be indictments coming from the DOJ against
18:03
Speaker 1: the Castro regime family members. This is significant break it down.
18:08
Speaker 1: And what does this actually mean if it does happen
18:10
Speaker 1: in the next twenty four hours.
18:11
Speaker 2: Yeah, we don't know a whole lot of details right
18:14
Speaker 2: now because it is Tuesday night. The Department of Justice
18:18
Speaker 2: sent out an advisory there's an event tomorrow at Miami's
18:22
Speaker 2: Freedom Tower to honor the victims of the Brothers to
18:26
Speaker 2: the Rescue murderers, and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche is
18:30
Speaker 2: expected to attend, and a Castro indictment is expected to
18:36
Speaker 2: be announced. So what we are anticipating is that the
18:39
Speaker 2: Department of Justice will indict Raoul Castro. Raoul Castro is
18:43
Speaker 2: Fidel Castro's brother. Fidel is dead, Raoul is still alive,
18:48
Speaker 2: and it is anticipated that the Department of Justice will
18:50
Speaker 2: indict Raul Castro. Presumably we don't have the details, so
18:55
Speaker 2: this may not be exact, but the Brothers to the Rescue,
18:58
Speaker 2: the Cubans shot down a plane and it resulted in
19:02
Speaker 2: a loss of life, and I'm assuming that is the
19:05
Speaker 2: basis for the indictment. We don't know for sure. We'll
19:09
Speaker 2: find out tomorrow, but that indicting Raul Castro, assuming DJ
19:15
Speaker 2: does that tomorrow, is a big deal. And part of
19:17
Speaker 2: the reason it's a big deal is remember the predicate
19:20
Speaker 2: for going in and seizing Maduro.
19:22
Speaker 1: That's exactly what I was going to ask you, is
19:24
Speaker 1: this is this Maduro two point zero?
19:26
Speaker 2: I don't know, but Maduro had been indicted. Maduro had
19:30
Speaker 2: been indicted by a grand jury for trafficking, for narco trafficking,
19:34
Speaker 2: for sending thousands of tons of cocaine to the United States,
19:38
Speaker 2: and that indictment served as the predicate for the Delta
19:42
Speaker 2: Force going and arresting him and so indicting Raoul Castro.
19:47
Speaker 2: I don't know if we'll see a military conflict with
19:49
Speaker 2: with Cuba. I'm still I'm still a little skeptical that
19:53
Speaker 2: the president will engage in a shooting war with Cuba.
19:56
Speaker 2: Right now, the President is imposing massive e economic costs
20:00
Speaker 2: on Cuba. So if you look at Cuba for the
20:03
Speaker 2: history since the Communist Revolution in nineteen fifty nine, Cuba
20:08
Speaker 2: spent forty years as essentially a vassal state of the
20:11
Speaker 2: Soviet Union, and the Soviet Union supported Cuba with money
20:14
Speaker 2: and with oil. And then when the Soviet Union collapsed,
20:18
Speaker 2: when America won the Cold War, Cuba entered into a
20:23
Speaker 2: faustian bargain with Venezuela. And Venezuela Cuba provided them soldiers,
20:29
Speaker 2: they provided them thugs. You know, the soldiers that were
20:32
Speaker 2: guarding Maduro were all Cuban soldiers. And they did this
20:36
Speaker 2: throughout Latin America where they would provide thugs and forcers
20:39
Speaker 2: to abuse and suppress the populace, and Venezuela reciprocated with
20:44
Speaker 2: money and with oil, and then that's what kept Cuba's
20:47
Speaker 2: communist regime alive. When President Trump arrested Maduro, the Venezuelan
20:53
Speaker 2: oil and money dried up immediately for a brief period
20:56
Speaker 2: of time. Mexico stepped in the gap and began providing
20:59
Speaker 2: oil to Cuba, and the Trump administration quite rightly, and
21:03
Speaker 2: this is something I publicly encouraged, leaned on Mexico and said,
21:07
Speaker 2: cut off the oil, stop sending oil to Cuba.
21:11
Speaker 3: And they did.
21:11
Speaker 2: Mexico did, and as a result, Cuba is in a
21:15
Speaker 2: massive economic crisis. Their public transportation is all but halted.
21:19
Speaker 2: They're almost entirely out of jet fuel. We saw just
21:23
Speaker 2: a week ago John Ratcliffe, the head of the CIA
21:25
Speaker 2: in Cuba, meeting with the heads of multiple Cuban agencies.
21:29
Speaker 2: I don't know what they were discussing, uh, but the
21:32
Speaker 2: economic crisis and the pressure on Cuba is massive. And
21:34
Speaker 2: I'll say this, Ben, Look, by.
21:36
Speaker 1: The way, we're out of oil. People need to understand,
21:38
Speaker 1: like their lights are off, they're.
21:40
Speaker 2: Having blackouts there. Yeah, No, I mean it's it's an
21:43
Speaker 2: absolute Their economy is shut down. And I also want
21:46
Speaker 2: to say, look, look, it is a testament to what
21:48
Speaker 2: an extraordinary moment we are in. There is a very
21:52
Speaker 2: real possibility that in the next year we will see
21:55
Speaker 2: new governments in Venezuela, Cuba, and Iran. Now, I want
22:01
Speaker 2: to be clear, I'm not naive, I'm not pollyannish about this.
22:04
Speaker 2: There are a thousand ways those could go wrong, so
22:06
Speaker 2: those are not guaranteed outcomes. Yeah, but if we wake
22:10
Speaker 2: up a year from now and we have governments in Cuba, Iran,
22:14
Speaker 2: and Venezuela who are not enemies of America, who want
22:17
Speaker 2: to be friends with America, that will be the single
22:20
Speaker 2: greatest geopolitical shift since the fall of the Berlin Wall,
22:23
Speaker 2: since America won the Cold War. And if you look
22:26
Speaker 2: at Cuba my vision. I've never been to Cuba, obviously,
22:28
Speaker 2: my father was born, grew up there, fought in the revolution,
22:31
Speaker 2: was imprisoned, was tortured in Cuba my aunt.
22:35
Speaker 1: But only at the regime faults.
22:37
Speaker 3: Correct.
22:38
Speaker 2: I do not want to go to a communist Cuba.
22:40
Speaker 2: I will happily go and visit a free Cuba. And
22:44
Speaker 2: that could happen in the next year and my vision
22:48
Speaker 2: what I'd like to see happen in Cuba. I would
22:51
Speaker 2: like to see Cuba free. I would like to see
22:54
Speaker 2: Cuba with free speech. I'd like to see Cuba with
22:56
Speaker 2: free elections. I would love to see Cuba as a
23:00
Speaker 2: haven for free enterprise, think a Singapore or Hong Kong
23:05
Speaker 2: before China took it over. And I think they could
23:07
Speaker 2: have extraordinary prosperity. And one of the amazing things is
23:12
Speaker 2: there are billions of dollars from Cuban Americans who would
23:15
Speaker 2: be eager to invest back in Cuba if you had
23:19
Speaker 2: a government that would respect the rule of law and
23:21
Speaker 2: property rights and contract rights, and would welcome American investment
23:25
Speaker 2: in the Cuban beaches past.
23:28
Speaker 1: By the way, tourism would explode.
23:30
Speaker 2: At the Cuban beaches. By all reports. I've never seen
23:32
Speaker 2: them myself, but everyone who has says they're among, if
23:36
Speaker 2: not the most beautiful in the world. And it's only
23:38
Speaker 2: ninety miles away from America, so it's a very quick flight.
23:43
Speaker 2: Cuba could boom, could enjoy enormous prosperity if the communist
23:48
Speaker 2: regime falls, and I know President Trump wants that to happen,
23:52
Speaker 2: and so I hope and pray. That's what occurs.
23:54
Speaker 1: Final question on this If something does happen in Cuba
23:58
Speaker 1: the same way that we saw with Maduro, where we
24:01
Speaker 1: actually take a someone with the last named Castro, how
24:06
Speaker 1: significant is that in the moment in history and for
24:08
Speaker 1: all the victims of the Castro regime.
24:11
Speaker 2: Look, the Castros are among the most evil people who
24:13
Speaker 2: have ever lived. They have ruled a regime of tyranny,
24:18
Speaker 2: of murder, of torture, of oppression that they took an economy.
24:22
Speaker 2: You look at Cuba, when the Cuban Revolution happened, was
24:26
Speaker 2: the number one sugar producer at all of Latin America.
24:28
Speaker 2: Cuba is like the land that time forgot. They strangled
24:32
Speaker 2: the economy. There's misery, there's poverty. You look at Cuba,
24:37
Speaker 2: the cars that most of the people drive are cars
24:41
Speaker 2: from the nineteen fifties. It was like just time froze
24:44
Speaker 2: because communism is a failed economic model, it's a failed
24:49
Speaker 2: governmental model. And so you have cars from the nineteen
24:52
Speaker 2: fifties that they're stitching together the mechanics that they're almost
24:55
Speaker 2: holding them together with rubber bands and bubblegum. But look
25:00
Speaker 2: and poverty that the communists have inflicted on that nation.
25:04
Speaker 2: Enough is enough, and we have a moment right now
25:06
Speaker 2: where we could see finally, finally, finally, a Kuba libre
25:10
Speaker 2: free Cuba.
25:12
Speaker 1: I want to move to some fireworks that took place
25:14
Speaker 1: today in the Senate Judiciary where they were talking. You
25:18
Speaker 1: guys were talking about the issue of jerrymandering, and it
25:22
Speaker 1: got very heated between you and another senator. Walk us
25:26
Speaker 1: through that.
25:27
Speaker 2: Well, we had a hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee
25:29
Speaker 2: on racial gerrymandering and the Supreme Court's recent decision making
25:33
Speaker 2: clear that you cannot draw congressional lines discriminating based on race.
25:37
Speaker 2: And the Democrats have been losing their minds about this.
25:39
Speaker 2: They've been screaming that it's Jim Crow. And Mazie Herono,
25:44
Speaker 2: the very very liberal Democrat from Hawaii, she spoke right
25:47
Speaker 2: before me, and she gave a whole speech about how
25:51
Speaker 2: Democrats or how Republicans are racist, how they that they
25:55
Speaker 2: want to hurt minorities, and it was just it was
25:58
Speaker 2: a typic, vicious, false slandering speech. I'll tell you, I
26:04
Speaker 2: had a whole set of remarks prepared for me. I
26:08
Speaker 2: had a whole set of questions prepared for me. I
26:09
Speaker 2: did not ask a single one of the questions my
26:12
Speaker 2: team had prepared. What I did instead was just off
26:15
Speaker 2: the cuff. It was reacting to to Mazie Herono's comments.
26:19
Speaker 2: Give a listen and hear what I had to say, Chairman,
26:23
Speaker 2: just a moment ago, our colleague, Senator Herono said, there's
26:26
Speaker 2: a lot more to say, and indeed she's right, and
26:30
Speaker 2: in fact, I want to go back to her comments.
26:32
Speaker 2: She began by saying, we have a long history of
26:34
Speaker 2: racial discrimination in this country. That's undoubtedly correct, and then
26:38
Speaker 2: she said, quote, we had poll taxes, we had literacy tests,
26:43
Speaker 2: We even had tests of how many jelly beans are
26:46
Speaker 2: in a jar. Mister Chamberlain, when when Senator Herono says
26:50
Speaker 2: we had poll taxes, I want to ask you who
26:54
Speaker 2: we is and in particular, what party was it that
26:57
Speaker 2: implemented poll taxes in the South.
27:00
Speaker 3: And I don't want to necessarily speak in every single case,
27:02
Speaker 3: but I'm pretty confident it was mostly the Democrats.
27:05
Speaker 2: And what party was it that put literacy tests in
27:07
Speaker 2: place in the South?
27:08
Speaker 3: The same answer, mostly the Democrats.
27:10
Speaker 2: And what party was it that had tests like how
27:12
Speaker 2: many jellybeans are in a bottle? The Democrats tell me,
27:17
Speaker 2: what party were the founders of the Ku Klux Klan from.
27:21
Speaker 3: I'm pretty sure that was the Democrats.
27:23
Speaker 2: Indeed, in fact, Nathan Bedford Forrest, the founder of the Klan,
27:26
Speaker 2: was a delegate to the eighteen sixty Democrat National Convention.
27:31
Speaker 2: What party wrote.
27:32
Speaker 3: The Jim Crow Laws in the South? The Democrats.
27:37
Speaker 2: And so on this side of the aisle were members
27:40
Speaker 2: of the Republican Party. Who was the first Republican President,
27:43
Speaker 2: Abraham Lincoln. The Republican Party was literally founded to oppose slavery.
27:49
Speaker 2: We came into existence because slavery was a grotesque evil.
27:54
Speaker 2: And it was President Lincoln, the first Republican President, who
27:57
Speaker 2: signed the Emancipation proclib who won the Civil War, and
28:03
Speaker 2: that resulted in the freeing of the slaves and the
28:06
Speaker 2: passage of the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth Amendments. By the way,
28:10
Speaker 2: fast forward to the civil rights era. Bull Connor one
28:14
Speaker 2: of the most noxiously racist politicians. What party was he from?
28:18
Speaker 3: He was a Democrat.
28:20
Speaker 2: The Democrats for the entire history of their party have
28:24
Speaker 2: been a party based on racial discrimination. They affirmatively embrace it,
28:30
Speaker 2: they support it. Let me ask you, mister grime, is
28:32
Speaker 2: discrimination is discriminating based on race consistent with the United
28:36
Speaker 2: States Constitution. No, what does the fourteenth Amendment say about discrimination.
28:42
Speaker 3: Based on race? It's prohibited.
28:45
Speaker 2: What does the fifteenth Amendments say about discriminating based on race,
28:48
Speaker 2: and in particular drawing congressional lines and explicitly discriminating based
28:53
Speaker 2: on race, It's prohibited. Now, the Democrats are fond of
28:58
Speaker 2: telling this story, that is, and I wish I could
29:01
Speaker 2: find a kinder way to say it a flat out
29:03
Speaker 2: lie that without discriminating based on race, that no African
29:09
Speaker 2: Americans will be elected and no Hispanics will be elected. Indeed,
29:12
Speaker 2: there was one fellow online who was a vocal left
29:17
Speaker 2: wing spokesperson who tweeted out, if I'm advising anybody to
29:20
Speaker 2: run for president, they sure as hell better have a
29:22
Speaker 2: solution to how you make sure that it's not another
29:26
Speaker 2: one hundred years before another black person can represent South Carolina.
29:31
Speaker 2: So that's a typical Democrat statement that we cannot elect
29:35
Speaker 2: a black person in South Carolina without discriminating based on race.
29:40
Speaker 2: I want to ask you, mister Chamberlain, who is the
29:44
Speaker 2: junior Senator from South Carolina right now? That would be
29:46
Speaker 2: Tim Scott, And all right, I'll tell you what I
29:50
Speaker 2: said online. I said, hey, groc who is Tim Scott
29:54
Speaker 2: and why did Democrats think he isn't black? And by
29:57
Speaker 2: the way, was Tim Scott elected because because of a
30:00
Speaker 2: Gerrymander district drawn only to elect an African American.
30:03
Speaker 3: No, he won statewide.
30:05
Speaker 2: He won statewide. By the way, the Democrat position is
30:10
Speaker 2: you can only elect African Americans with a Gerrymander district.
30:13
Speaker 2: I will point out Burgess Owens, an African American, is
30:15
Speaker 2: elected the majority white district in the state of Utah.
30:18
Speaker 2: He's a Republican. Byron Donald's another African American is elected
30:22
Speaker 2: the majority white district in Florida.
30:24
Speaker 3: He is a Republican.
30:25
Speaker 2: John James, another African American, has elected the majority white
30:29
Speaker 2: district in Michigan. He is a Republican. And my own Congressman,
30:33
Speaker 2: Wesley Hunt, who represents me in the House of Representatives,
30:36
Speaker 2: he is elected the majority white district. He is a Republican.
30:40
Speaker 2: And yet in the Democrats world, you're not black if
30:44
Speaker 2: you're not a liberal Democrat. There is an arrogance to
30:47
Speaker 2: African American voters. By the way, they also have that
30:51
Speaker 2: same arrogance to Hispanic voters. They say, you're not Hispanic,
30:56
Speaker 2: if you're not a liberal Democrat. Well, I'll tell you
30:58
Speaker 2: I am proud to be the first Hispanic ever elected
31:02
Speaker 2: to represent the state of Texas in the United States Senate.
31:05
Speaker 2: And mister Chamberlain, in my election in Texas, was I
31:10
Speaker 2: elected the gerrymandered district that could only elect in Hispanic?
31:13
Speaker 3: No, you were elected statewide.
31:16
Speaker 2: Discrimination based on race is wrong. Final question. The Democrats
31:23
Speaker 2: are now clutching their pearls that seats drawn to elect
31:27
Speaker 2: liberal Democrats in the South are going to go away.
31:30
Speaker 2: You may get black Republicans instead. Indeed, in Tennessee they're
31:33
Speaker 2: freaking out that a liberal white guy who's a Democrat
31:36
Speaker 2: is likely going to lose his seat to an African
31:39
Speaker 2: American woman who's a Republican. And they say that horrible
31:42
Speaker 2: racial oppression. My final question is this, if you look nationwide,
31:52
Speaker 2: which party has egregiously abused jerrymandering for decades? Both parties
31:57
Speaker 2: are guilty of it, But who has been the worst offender?
32:00
Speaker 2: And in particular take New England, Take Massachusetts, state Connecticut,
32:04
Speaker 2: Take Rhode Island, Take Maine, take Vermont, take New Hampshire.
32:08
Speaker 2: How many Republicans are elected from all of New England
32:11
Speaker 2: and the House representatives.
32:13
Speaker 3: I think the answer to that is zero zero.
32:15
Speaker 2: They've drawn every district in a naked jerrymander, and yet
32:18
Speaker 2: they're very upset that their illegal pursuit of power has
32:22
Speaker 2: now been stopped by the Supreme Court that is enforcing
32:25
Speaker 2: the Constitution and prohibiting the racial gerrymandering discrimination.
32:29
Speaker 3: Their party is built on.
32:33
Speaker 4: Personal privilege. Uh sure, I feel personally aggrieved to sit
32:39
Speaker 4: here and to be lectured by my colleague from Texas.
32:44
Speaker 4: And this reminds me of the time when he was
32:47
Speaker 4: first elected to the Senate and the Judiciary Committee had
32:50
Speaker 4: a hearing on gun safety, and he has felt a
32:54
Speaker 4: need to lecture Dianne Feinstein, who was a leader on
32:57
Speaker 4: gun safety legislation, and he took there's that opportunity to
33:01
Speaker 4: lecture Diane Feinstein about gun safety and her leadership on
33:05
Speaker 4: the issue. And she said to him something along the
33:08
Speaker 4: lines of I did not sit here on this committee
33:11
Speaker 4: for however many years she did, only to be lectured
33:14
Speaker 4: by you. And that is how I feel. So why
33:16
Speaker 4: don't you just stop lecturing the rest of us just
33:19
Speaker 4: because you think you are the smartest person in the world.
33:22
Speaker 4: Doesn't mean the rest of us agree to that. Okay,
33:24
Speaker 4: thanks you.
33:25
Speaker 2: Said, Senator Herono. I knew Diane Feinstein. I served with
33:29
Speaker 2: Dianne Feinstein, and you're not Diane Feinstein.
33:31
Speaker 1: Right, Senator, I just got one question for you. You're
33:34
Speaker 1: not a big morning person. So who made you mad
33:36
Speaker 1: this morning? And what did you eat? Because that was brilliant.
33:40
Speaker 2: Well, look, I couldn't stand seeing the Democrats being hypocritical
33:44
Speaker 2: and dishonest, and you know it was striking. Mazie Herono said,
33:48
Speaker 2: I'm offended. I'm offended that you said this. You know
33:51
Speaker 2: what she didn't do. She didn't dispute a single word
33:54
Speaker 2: I said, because every word I said was factual. She
33:57
Speaker 2: didn't dispute that her party has been vicious racist since
34:01
Speaker 2: the very beginning of that party, that it embraces racil, jerrymandering,
34:05
Speaker 2: like every word of substance. She just and this is
34:07
Speaker 2: a classic Democrat tactic. How dare you speak the truth?
34:11
Speaker 2: I'm offended by the truth. And obviously my reference at
34:13
Speaker 2: the end, I was quoting a Democrat. If you'll recall
34:17
Speaker 2: when George W. Bush or not George W. Bush, George H. W.
34:22
Speaker 2: Bush was running for president and he was running with
34:25
Speaker 2: dan Quayle and he was running against Michael Decaucus and
34:29
Speaker 2: his running mate was Lloyd Benson. And Lloyd Benson was
34:31
Speaker 2: a Senator from Texas and dan Quayle when he was
34:34
Speaker 2: nominated to be vice president was a very young senator,
34:37
Speaker 2: I think it was forty one or forty two, and
34:39
Speaker 2: he did not have a ton of experience. And in
34:42
Speaker 2: the vice presidential debate between dan Quayle and Lloyd Benson,
34:47
Speaker 2: dan Quayle had had a riff that I suspect was
34:50
Speaker 2: prepared by his team where he said, look, I'm the
34:52
Speaker 2: same age that John Kennedy was when he became president,
34:56
Speaker 2: and it was I think their line to say, gosh,
34:59
Speaker 2: I'm not in experience inst because because Kennedy and I
35:01
Speaker 2: are the same age. And Lloyd Benson looked at him
35:04
Speaker 2: and said, Senator, I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was
35:09
Speaker 2: a friend of mine. I served with Jack Kennedy. Senator,
35:15
Speaker 2: You're no Jack Kennedy. And that obviously was the riff
35:19
Speaker 2: I was I was using for for for Mazie Dianne
35:24
Speaker 2: Feinstein my first year, we did have a fiery blow
35:26
Speaker 2: up over gun control because she was a big advocate
35:30
Speaker 2: of gun control. I am a big defender of the
35:33
Speaker 2: Second Amendment, and when I asked her a specific question
35:37
Speaker 2: about the constitutional basis for what she was proposing, she
35:40
Speaker 2: got very upset and and and she much like Mazie Herono,
35:43
Speaker 2: she said, I am not a sixth grader, and she
35:46
Speaker 2: was horrified that I would actually ask her the constitutional
35:49
Speaker 2: basis for what she was trying to do. Uh, Mayzi
35:54
Speaker 2: does not have She could not refute a word I said,
35:58
Speaker 2: so instead she she resorted to insult and emotional offense.
36:05
Speaker 2: And look, I think that's a fairly typical example of
36:08
Speaker 2: where the Democrats are. Truth and facts are not their
36:11
Speaker 2: strong points, and they're not going going to engage in them. Instead,
36:15
Speaker 2: they're going to try to engage in deception. And sadly,
36:18
Speaker 2: that was the entire Democrat theme in the entire hearing.
36:22
Speaker 3: No, it really was.
36:23
Speaker 1: Don't forget. We do this show Monday, Wednesday, Friday. We'll
36:26
Speaker 1: have a lot for you on Friday's episode. I have
36:28
Speaker 1: a feeling, especially after that press conference in Cuba, So
36:30
Speaker 1: make sure you join us then hit that subscriber auto
36:33
Speaker 1: download button. You can also watch this show on YouTube,
36:36
Speaker 1: and please write us a five star review. It makes
36:38
Speaker 1: a huge difference on the charts and the center, and
36:40
Speaker 1: I will see you back here Friday morning.