Latest / The Ben Ferguson Podcast / Will Schumer REFUSE to Try Mayorkas, plus the Media Turns on Biden

Transcript

Will Schumer REFUSE to Try Mayorkas, plus the Media Turns on Biden · The Ben Ferguson Podcast

0:01
Speaker 1: Welcome.
0:01
Speaker 2: It is his verdict with Senator Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson
0:04
Speaker 2: with you and Senator we have got a lot to
0:06
Speaker 2: talk about it, especially with the border. As you're hearing
0:09
Speaker 2: from many Texans that are frustrated with what's going on.
0:12
Speaker 3: Well, that's exactly right. I'm in South Texas right now.
0:15
Speaker 3: Next week, the Senate will receive articles of impeachment for
0:19
Speaker 3: Alejandro Majorcas and the Senate will have to act on it.
0:22
Speaker 3: We're going to do a deep dive tonight on what
0:24
Speaker 3: to expect in the impeachment trial of Alejandro Mayorcis, how
0:27
Speaker 3: the Democrats are going to try to avoid this, cover
0:30
Speaker 3: it up, hide it, how Chuck Schumer plans to ignore
0:35
Speaker 3: the constitutional responsibility of the Senate, and everything to know
0:39
Speaker 3: about what to expect next week. We're also going to
0:43
Speaker 3: examine how the media is turning on Joe Biden. It's
0:46
Speaker 3: truly quite remarkable. The New York Times, the Washington Post,
0:49
Speaker 3: they've all suddenly discovered the guys old. Apparently he wasn't
0:52
Speaker 3: old a few weeks ago, but it just struck him
0:56
Speaker 3: out of nowhere. And it sure seems like rats are
1:00
Speaker 3: are fleeing a sinking ship in a way that makes
1:04
Speaker 3: you wonder what's next.
1:05
Speaker 2: Yeah, wait till you hear these headlines that they're actually printing.
1:08
Speaker 2: They've never done this before. The bidens. Before we get
1:10
Speaker 2: into the border issue in my orchis, let me tell
1:12
Speaker 2: you about our friends at Patriot Mobile. If you have
1:15
Speaker 2: a cell phone, listen up. It is time for you
1:18
Speaker 2: to vote and switch with your dollars to a company
1:22
Speaker 2: that stands for what you believe in. Get away from
1:25
Speaker 2: woke Big Mobile. You may not realize this, but Big
1:28
Speaker 2: Mobile gives massive donations to Planned Parenthood, to democratic causes
1:34
Speaker 2: and candidates. That's why Patriot Mobile has started more than
1:37
Speaker 2: a decade ago. And when I say you're going to
1:39
Speaker 2: get incredible service, trust me you are. I'm using Patriot
1:43
Speaker 2: Mobile right now because I get the same dependable, nationwide
1:46
Speaker 2: coverage I was used to before.
1:48
Speaker 1: But the difference is this.
1:51
Speaker 2: When I pay my bill, a portion of that bill
1:54
Speaker 2: every month goes back to support free speech, religious freedom organizations,
1:59
Speaker 2: the same to the of life, the Second Amendment causes,
2:02
Speaker 2: as well as supporting our military, our veterans, our first responders,
2:06
Speaker 2: and wounded warriors. Yes, that's why Patriot Mobile is so special.
2:11
Speaker 2: They've got one hundred percent US based customer service team
2:13
Speaker 2: that makes switching easy. You keep your same number you
2:17
Speaker 2: have now, keep your same phone in your hand, or
2:19
Speaker 2: upgrade to a new one, and their team will help
2:22
Speaker 2: you save money and get the best planned for you.
2:24
Speaker 2: Just go to Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict. Patriot Mobile
2:29
Speaker 2: dot com slash verdict are called nine to seven to
2:31
Speaker 2: two Patriot. That's nine to seven to two Patriot get
2:35
Speaker 2: free activation when you use the offer code Verdict as well.
2:38
Speaker 2: Make that switch today and get rid of Big Mobile center.
2:42
Speaker 2: You and several other senators signed a letter asking for
2:48
Speaker 2: the Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to move forward quickly
2:53
Speaker 2: with impeachment hearings for majorcis and there are a lot
2:57
Speaker 2: of Republican establishment people that don't want this to move
3:00
Speaker 2: forward to a trial. Explain why this letter was so
3:03
Speaker 2: important and not a lot of Republicans sign this letter.
3:07
Speaker 1: You guys are truly leading the way on this.
3:09
Speaker 3: Well. Next week the Senate will receive the articles of
3:15
Speaker 3: impeachment and the Senate will return from recess on February
3:21
Speaker 3: twenty sixth, and under the Senate rules, when the Senate
3:25
Speaker 3: receives articles of impeachment. The next thing that happens is
3:28
Speaker 3: that senators are sworn in as jurors the next day,
3:33
Speaker 3: and a trial is supposed to proceed. However, Chuck Schumer
3:37
Speaker 3: has made clear he doesn't want to have a trial.
3:40
Speaker 3: He doesn't want anyone in America to know about the
3:43
Speaker 3: absolute disaster that is unfolding on our southern border. And
3:46
Speaker 3: so what Schumer is indicated he intends to do is
3:50
Speaker 3: use a procedural mechanism called tabling the articles of impeachment.
3:55
Speaker 3: What does it mean to table the articles of impeachment?
3:57
Speaker 3: It means he wants the Senate to vote no, we're
4:00
Speaker 3: not going to take these up. In other words, he
4:02
Speaker 3: wants the Senate not to adjudicate the articles of impeachment
4:06
Speaker 3: at all, not to conclude guilty or not guilty, simply
4:10
Speaker 3: to table it on a party line vote and move on.
4:13
Speaker 3: And the purpose of this, look, we've talked a lot
4:16
Speaker 3: on this podcast about how the disaster on the southern border.
4:20
Speaker 3: You cannot defend it on the merits, you cannot defend
4:23
Speaker 3: it on the substance. The Democrats have one strategy, and
4:26
Speaker 3: one strategy only, and that is hide it from the
4:28
Speaker 3: American people. In order to hide it from the American people.
4:32
Speaker 3: They need to make sure that the average person doesn't
4:35
Speaker 3: know the human suffering that the Democrats open borders are causing.
4:41
Speaker 3: That's why Schumer wants to table the articles of impeachment
4:45
Speaker 3: at the outset, never have a trial, never hear the evidence,
4:48
Speaker 3: never consider anything, and never put any Senator on record
4:52
Speaker 3: adjudicating the claims. And so, in response to that, Mike
4:57
Speaker 3: Lee and I together led a letter to Mitch McConnell,
5:01
Speaker 3: and it's a letter that was signed by thirteen senators
5:04
Speaker 3: and it calls on Mitch McConnell to stand up and
5:08
Speaker 3: fight for the Senate to fulfill our constitutional obligation under
5:14
Speaker 3: the terms of the Constitution, when the House impeaches, we
5:17
Speaker 3: have an obligation to conduct a trial and to adjudicate
5:22
Speaker 3: the guilt or innocence of the individual who's impeached. And
5:26
Speaker 3: Chuck Schumer is trying to, for the first time in
5:29
Speaker 3: our country's history in over two hundred years, refuse to
5:33
Speaker 3: adjudicate an article of impeachment. Simply table it, make it
5:36
Speaker 3: go away, say never mind, nothing to see here, and
5:40
Speaker 3: give every Democrat senator a get out of jail free
5:43
Speaker 3: pass by avoiding the need for them to give an
5:46
Speaker 3: answer on guilt or innocence.
5:48
Speaker 2: Let's talk about what this try would look like and explain,
5:51
Speaker 2: because this is not saying it's happened in my lifetime.
5:55
Speaker 2: It's something it's very rare when it's a cabinet member
5:58
Speaker 2: obviously throughout history. But let's talk about what a trial
6:02
Speaker 2: would actually look like. Does it look very much like
6:04
Speaker 2: what we've seen before when it comes to an impeachment
6:07
Speaker 2: trial for a president.
6:09
Speaker 3: Well, it potentially does, but there are differences. So, for example,
6:12
Speaker 3: the Constitution specifies that when the president of the United
6:16
Speaker 3: States is impeached, the Chief Justice of the United States
6:20
Speaker 3: will preside. By the way, interesting trivia, do you know
6:23
Speaker 3: what the title of John Roberts is?
6:26
Speaker 1: What is it?
6:27
Speaker 3: John Roberts is the Chief Justice of the United States.
6:30
Speaker 3: He is not the Chief Justice of the United States
6:33
Speaker 3: Supreme Court. Just like Joe Biden is the President of
6:37
Speaker 3: the United States, John Roberts is the Chief Justice of
6:39
Speaker 3: the United States. That that is the formal and technical title.
6:44
Speaker 3: The Constitution provides the Chief Justice will preside over the
6:49
Speaker 3: impeachment trial of a president. Because obviously may orcus is
6:52
Speaker 3: not a president. The Chief Justice will not preside. Instead,
6:57
Speaker 3: the trial is typically presided over over by the President
7:01
Speaker 3: pro tem, which right now is Patty Murray, Democrat, senator
7:05
Speaker 3: from Washington State. Now, when it comes to cabinet members,
7:09
Speaker 3: impeaching cabinet members is exceptionally rare. In fact, this is
7:15
Speaker 3: only the second time in history the House is impeached
7:18
Speaker 3: a cabinet member, and even that is overstating it because
7:24
Speaker 3: the last Cabinet secretary to be impeached was Secretary of
7:28
Speaker 3: War William Belknap, and that was in eighteen seventy six.
7:33
Speaker 3: Now what's interesting about Belknap is right before the House
7:37
Speaker 3: voted to impeach him, Belknap resigned. So may Orcas is
7:41
Speaker 3: actually the first sitting cabinet member ever to be impeached.
7:47
Speaker 3: And in terms of how the trial will proceed, the
7:52
Speaker 3: Senate is not obligated to hold a full trial on
7:56
Speaker 3: the floor of the Senate, as the Senate does for
7:59
Speaker 3: them each man of a president. And so, for example,
8:02
Speaker 3: in past impeachments, a number of judges have impeached, and
8:06
Speaker 3: what the Senate has done in the past is appointed
8:11
Speaker 3: an impeachment committee to conduct the trial, and typically that
8:15
Speaker 3: committee consists of an equal number of Republicans and Democrats,
8:19
Speaker 3: members of both parties, and so it can be a
8:22
Speaker 3: smaller group of the Senate that conducts the trial. But
8:26
Speaker 3: what has always happened is that the House managers get
8:29
Speaker 3: to present their evidence, they get to prosecute the case,
8:32
Speaker 3: they get to put on the trial.
8:34
Speaker 1: And what has.
8:35
Speaker 3: Also always happened is the Senators adjudicate. All one hundred
8:40
Speaker 3: senators ultimately adjudicate guilt or innocence. So if the Senate
8:45
Speaker 3: appoints an impeachment committee, that committee makes a recommendation to
8:50
Speaker 3: the Senate, but then every Senator goes on record voting.
8:52
Speaker 3: What Schumer is trying to do. He knows that if
8:55
Speaker 3: there's a trial, even of a smaller committee than the
8:58
Speaker 3: full Senate, that that will force press coverage of the
9:04
Speaker 3: absolute disaster Mayorcus has been, the disaster Biden has been,
9:09
Speaker 3: the open border chaos they have produced. And Schumer doesn't
9:12
Speaker 3: want anyone to know that. And so, as I said,
9:15
Speaker 3: what he wants to do is instead just right at
9:18
Speaker 3: the outset before anything starts, say we're not going to
9:21
Speaker 3: hear any evidence, We're not going to have a trial.
9:24
Speaker 3: The House managers are not going to present the evidence
9:26
Speaker 3: they don't get to prosecute the case. No senator is
9:29
Speaker 3: going to vote guilty or not guilty. We're simply going
9:31
Speaker 3: to vote to table and make it go away.
9:33
Speaker 2: Now, there's been a lot of media Republican establishment rhinotypes
9:38
Speaker 2: had been out there saying this is a terrible decision
9:41
Speaker 2: by conservatives to do this, that this is we already
9:44
Speaker 2: know what the outcome of the vote's gonna be. This
9:47
Speaker 2: is going to be an embarrassing moment slash failure, and
9:52
Speaker 2: so why the hell are they doing this. If that
9:54
Speaker 2: was the case, then Democrats wouldn't be fighting this. I
9:57
Speaker 2: don't think this is a mistake, do you all? I mean,
10:00
Speaker 2: this is about national security as well, and that's something
10:04
Speaker 2: that the media and these Republican talking heads I think
10:08
Speaker 2: they're forgetting that. This is about someone that is not
10:12
Speaker 2: enforcing the laws of land, not protecting a country, having
10:16
Speaker 2: an open border policy, deliberately not getting rid of people
10:20
Speaker 2: that come in this country and break our.
10:22
Speaker 1: Laws who are here illegally.
10:24
Speaker 2: And on top of all that, it's a national security
10:26
Speaker 2: issue from the domestic from the terrorists on the terrorists
10:29
Speaker 2: watch lists that are coming across the border at staggering numbers.
10:33
Speaker 3: Yeah, So I don't know who's been going on TV
10:35
Speaker 3: saying that. So I can say this with complete free
10:39
Speaker 3: conscience because I don't know who I'm talking about. But
10:42
Speaker 3: anyone who says that is a blithering idiot with an
10:45
Speaker 3: IQ below room temperature. To say it is a mistake
10:51
Speaker 3: to impeach Alejandro Majorcas for aiding and embedding a criminal
10:54
Speaker 3: invasion of the United States of America by global cartels
10:59
Speaker 3: that have sent ten million people illegally into this country,
11:02
Speaker 3: that are bringing murderers and rapists and gang members into
11:05
Speaker 3: this country, that are abusing children, that are raping women,
11:09
Speaker 3: that are potentially smuggling in Hamas and hezbel a terrorist.
11:13
Speaker 3: To say that it is a mistake for Republicans to
11:16
Speaker 3: fight for the House to impeach may orchis They should
11:18
Speaker 3: have done this two years ago. You and I have
11:21
Speaker 3: both been calling for this for two years. And in
11:23
Speaker 3: the Senate, look is the Chuck Schumer Democrat Senate going
11:28
Speaker 3: to vote to convict No, obviously not why Because the
11:31
Speaker 3: Democrats are partisan hacks. They don't care about the facts,
11:34
Speaker 3: they don't care about the truth. They are going to
11:36
Speaker 3: vote with the Democrats because that's what Democrats do. When
11:39
Speaker 3: Schumer cracks the whip, every Democrat obeys that's what's going
11:43
Speaker 3: to happen. But why is it that Biden has been
11:48
Speaker 3: able to get away with this? So the biggest reason
11:50
Speaker 3: is the media is utterly corrupt and they don't cover this.
11:53
Speaker 3: If you watch Fox News, if you watch News Max
11:56
Speaker 3: roy In, if you listen to Verdict, you know about
11:59
Speaker 3: what's happen at the border. But if you watch CNN
12:03
Speaker 3: or MSNBC or ABCNBCCBS, if you read the Washington Post
12:07
Speaker 3: or the New York Times, there is no border crisis.
12:10
Speaker 3: Nothing is happening. The corrupt corporate media covers it up.
12:13
Speaker 3: The reason this impeachment is important is to put the
12:17
Speaker 3: evidence before the American people. And I got to say,
12:20
Speaker 3: and it's why. You know, the amazing thing is the
12:24
Speaker 3: Democrats get this. Why do you think Schumer wants to
12:27
Speaker 3: table this at the outset because he knows a trial
12:29
Speaker 3: would be terrible? Why because the facts are terrible. What
12:35
Speaker 3: they are doing, the Democrats are doing is grossly inhumane.
12:39
Speaker 3: It is cruel, It is evil. Schumer and Biden do
12:43
Speaker 3: not want the American people to know that, so they
12:46
Speaker 3: want the issue to go away. But I got to say,
12:48
Speaker 3: any Republican that, like a docile little sheep, rolls over
12:53
Speaker 3: and starts buying the hell is wrong with them. And
12:56
Speaker 3: there's a reason thirteen of us wrote a letter to
12:59
Speaker 3: our hip, because Republican leadership, when they see a fight,
13:04
Speaker 3: typically turn around and charge the opposite direction. And so
13:08
Speaker 3: we ought to stand united and say, listen, we have
13:12
Speaker 3: a constitutional obligation. Listen, I'm going to read you the
13:16
Speaker 3: letter we sent, because it's not a long letter. Dear
13:18
Speaker 3: Leader McConnell. Our Republican colleagues in the House have recently
13:21
Speaker 3: passed two articles of impeachment against Department of Homeland Security
13:25
Speaker 3: Secretary Alejandro Majorcas for willful and systemic refusal to comply
13:30
Speaker 3: with the law, as well as the breach of public trust.
13:34
Speaker 3: These articles will soon be transmitted to the Senate. It
13:37
Speaker 3: is imperative that the Senate Republican Conference prepared to fully
13:41
Speaker 3: engage our constitutional duty and hold a trial. According to
13:47
Speaker 3: multiple briefings by your staff, Majority Leader Schumer and Senate
13:51
Speaker 3: Democrats intend to dispose with the articles of impeachment simply
13:54
Speaker 3: by tabling both individually. This is an action rarely contemplated
14:00
Speaker 3: it and never taken by the US Senate in the
14:03
Speaker 3: history of our republic. It remains to be seen if
14:06
Speaker 3: the Senate rules will even allow us to brush aside
14:09
Speaker 3: our duty in this manner. But one thing is sure.
14:12
Speaker 3: If a similar strategy was contemplated by Senate Republicans when
14:17
Speaker 3: we were in the majority with a Republican occupying the
14:20
Speaker 3: White House, the opposition would be fierce and the volume
14:24
Speaker 3: from Democrats would be deafening. We call on you to
14:29
Speaker 3: join us in our efforts to jettison this approach by
14:31
Speaker 3: Democrats to shirk their constitutional duty, ensure that the Senate
14:37
Speaker 3: conducts a proper trial, and that every Senator, Republican and Democrat,
14:41
Speaker 3: adjudicates this matter. When the Senate returns and Mike Lee
14:45
Speaker 3: and I let it signed by a total of thirteen Senators.
14:49
Speaker 2: I want to ask you about strategy here of laying
14:51
Speaker 2: this out to the American people, because that's going to
14:54
Speaker 2: be obviously something we got to get right at the
14:56
Speaker 2: very beginning. As you know, Republicans sometime are accused of
15:00
Speaker 2: screwing up the basics. So I want to get your
15:03
Speaker 2: perspective on what the strategies to be laying the south
15:05
Speaker 2: of the American people that maybe haven't been listening to
15:08
Speaker 2: this podcast or watching as you mentioned Fox or News
15:10
Speaker 2: Max or on. Let me first say about Freedom Gold
15:13
Speaker 2: though real quick. If you have been looking at what's
15:16
Speaker 2: been happening with our economy, with inflation, with the ups
15:20
Speaker 2: and downs in the stock market, you may have seen
15:22
Speaker 2: that your purchasing power has been disappearing. Well, that's happening
15:27
Speaker 2: because of inflation. Maybe it's putting your savings, your retirement
15:30
Speaker 2: accounts at risk.
15:32
Speaker 1: And then you have the other problem.
15:34
Speaker 2: You have things going on like wars around the world,
15:37
Speaker 2: national debt exceeding thirty four trillion and counting. That is
15:42
Speaker 2: why so many are now actually protecting their hard earned
15:46
Speaker 2: dollars by investing in gold and silver. That's why I
15:50
Speaker 2: want you to know about Freedom Gold USA. They're a
15:52
Speaker 2: company that I use and a company that you can
15:56
Speaker 2: sit down with and talk to about protecting your hard
15:58
Speaker 2: earned money. You have fifty thousand or more in retirement savings,
16:02
Speaker 2: you may be at risk in times of economic uncertainty.
16:05
Speaker 2: Securing your family's financial future is essential. Call Freedom Gold
16:10
Speaker 2: and they are here to help you navigate all of this.
16:14
Speaker 2: One eight hundred sixty five y five eight eight four three.
16:18
Speaker 2: That's one eight hundred sixty five five eight eight four three.
16:21
Speaker 2: You can also visit them online at FREEDOMGOLDUSA dot com.
16:26
Speaker 2: That's FREEDOMGOLDUSA dot com slash verting. Now here's the other
16:30
Speaker 2: great thing. When you switch over investments or buy gold
16:33
Speaker 2: and silver, you may qualify for up to ten thousand
16:37
Speaker 2: dollars in free silver. Learn how to add gold and
16:40
Speaker 2: silver to your IRA or have it shipped to your home.
16:44
Speaker 2: Safeguard your wealth of physical gold and silver, and take
16:46
Speaker 2: control of your financial future today one eight hundred sixty
16:50
Speaker 2: five five eight eight four three or Freedom Goold USA
16:54
Speaker 2: dot com slash vertic center laying all this out and
17:01
Speaker 2: the threat from MAJORCIS and not doing his job, which
17:04
Speaker 2: is what this is basically about. How do the Republicans
17:07
Speaker 2: do this the right way? Do you break it up into, Hey,
17:12
Speaker 2: the fetanyl coming across the southern border because it's open
17:15
Speaker 2: is the number one killer of people under the age
17:17
Speaker 2: of forty nine, And you go through that. Do you
17:19
Speaker 2: then go through the sex trafficking and the human smuggling.
17:22
Speaker 2: Do you then go to the domestic the terrorists on
17:26
Speaker 2: the terrorists watch list? Do you then go to the
17:28
Speaker 2: financial aspects? I mean, is that how we need to
17:31
Speaker 2: break this down to the American people understand just how
17:33
Speaker 2: catastrophic this is.
17:35
Speaker 3: Well, listen, what you say makes a lot of sense.
17:37
Speaker 3: And what you're doing there is telling a story. And
17:39
Speaker 3: I will say that's one thing Republicans are typically horrible
17:42
Speaker 3: at doing, is telling a story. And that's what we
17:45
Speaker 3: desperately need to do. At the end of the day,
17:48
Speaker 3: the choice of how to present the evidence is not
17:51
Speaker 3: going to be one for the Senate to make. The
17:53
Speaker 3: way an impeachment trial works, the House managers or the prosecutors,
17:57
Speaker 3: so they will present their case and will be ultimately
18:01
Speaker 3: the managers selected by the Speaker of the House, who
18:04
Speaker 3: will present the evidence and lay it out, and they
18:07
Speaker 3: could very well follow the pattern you laid out. It
18:10
Speaker 3: should be a systematic presentation of the evidence. I think
18:13
Speaker 3: it should focus on the harms. It should focus on
18:16
Speaker 3: who has heard. It should focus on the dead bodies,
18:18
Speaker 3: the biden body bags that have piled up, one after
18:21
Speaker 3: the other after the other. It should focus on the
18:23
Speaker 3: children who've been physically and sexually abused over and over
18:28
Speaker 3: and over again. It should focus on the women who've
18:30
Speaker 3: been violently raped. It should focus on the disease that
18:34
Speaker 3: has come in over an open border. It should focus
18:36
Speaker 3: on the more than one hundred thousand drug overdoses last year,
18:41
Speaker 3: the highest and recorded history, seventy percent of which came
18:44
Speaker 3: from Chinese fentanyl coming across our southern border. It should
18:47
Speaker 3: focus on the terror threat hamas Hezbela, the open borders
18:52
Speaker 3: we have, and the exposure we have to a major
18:55
Speaker 3: terrorist attack higher, I believe right now than any time
18:58
Speaker 3: since September eleventh. All of that they should do. But
19:03
Speaker 3: what Chuck Schumer's trying to do is prevent all of that.
19:06
Speaker 3: He wants to table the articles before any evidence is presented,
19:11
Speaker 3: before the Senate considers anything, and he wants to spare
19:14
Speaker 3: Democrat senators. Understand, there are a bunch of Democrat senators
19:17
Speaker 3: running in red and purple states that Schumer doesn't want
19:21
Speaker 3: to have them vote not guilty because may Orkis is
19:24
Speaker 3: obviously guilty, and so he doesn't want to get them
19:28
Speaker 3: on record and tabling it is a much simpler and
19:31
Speaker 3: less painful way to do it. Now. I can tell
19:33
Speaker 3: you a week ago, Mike Lee and I together went
19:37
Speaker 3: to the Senate Parliamentarian's office and we presented an argument,
19:40
Speaker 3: the two of us. It's quite rare for Senators to
19:43
Speaker 3: go directly to the parliamentarian. Typically, staff lawyers on our
19:47
Speaker 3: staff make those arguments. Mike and I made these arguments ourselves,
19:51
Speaker 3: and he and I have both done this a couple
19:53
Speaker 3: of different times over the last decade. But the argument
19:56
Speaker 3: we presented is we wanted to walk through the parliamentarian
20:00
Speaker 3: the history and the precedent in this case, and in
20:03
Speaker 3: particular because Schumer wants to table the articles, we wanted
20:07
Speaker 3: to underscore that in over two centuries, the Senate has
20:12
Speaker 3: never once tabled articles of impeachment. There was a previous
20:17
Speaker 3: impeachment in which the Senate tabled the procedural rules, but
20:21
Speaker 3: that's different than tabling the actual articles of impeachment refusing
20:24
Speaker 3: to adjudicate. And the point we made, which the Parliamentarian
20:29
Speaker 3: agreed with, is every single time when an impeachment came over,
20:34
Speaker 3: the Senate adjudicated the merits, it reached the merits. The
20:37
Speaker 3: one exception was a case where the individual resigned and
20:41
Speaker 3: in that case the House basically withdrew the articles of impeachment.
20:45
Speaker 3: So every time there was an impeachment and the House
20:49
Speaker 3: was pressing the impeachment, the end of it was every
20:52
Speaker 3: senator saying guilty or not guilty. And what Chuck Schumer
20:55
Speaker 3: is trying to do is throw away two hundred years
20:59
Speaker 3: of our nation's history, all in an effort to give
21:02
Speaker 3: political protection to vulnerable Democrats and to avoid any media
21:07
Speaker 3: coverage of the disaster at our southern border.
21:10
Speaker 2: One other question on this, and that is who is
21:13
Speaker 2: going to run this? I mean, will this be you
21:16
Speaker 2: and Sinerle and others heavily involved, or is this going
21:21
Speaker 2: to be lawyers representing the Republicans that would be asking
21:24
Speaker 2: the questions. How does that play out?
21:27
Speaker 3: Well, actually, when it comes to questions, unfortunately, the Senate
21:30
Speaker 3: doesn't get to ask questions. And so if you remember back,
21:33
Speaker 3: look when Verdict launched, the very first episode of this
21:37
Speaker 3: podcast was the first night of the first Trump impeachment.
21:42
Speaker 3: And if you remember what happened in impeachment number one
21:44
Speaker 3: and impeachment number two, when we sat there as jurors,
21:48
Speaker 3: we couldn't speak. Yeah, I'll admit that was frustrating. You know,
21:52
Speaker 3: among things I like to do, I do kind of
21:55
Speaker 3: enjoy talking.
21:56
Speaker 1: I do it a lot.
21:59
Speaker 3: And we were not allowed to say a word. We
22:03
Speaker 3: were to sit there and listen, and we listen to
22:06
Speaker 3: the presentation of the House impeachment managers. We listened to
22:10
Speaker 3: the presentation of the President's defense team. Now, as I
22:16
Speaker 3: discussed at great length in those Opening Verdict episodes, I
22:21
Speaker 3: spoke frequently with President Trump's defense team. And by the way,
22:26
Speaker 3: some observers said at the time, Oh, that's terrible. You're
22:29
Speaker 3: supposed to be jurors. You're supposed to be impartial, And
22:32
Speaker 3: that's not actually right. It is true that we are
22:35
Speaker 3: jurors in one sense, and that we adjudicate guilt or innocence,
22:39
Speaker 3: but senators are not designed to be impartial. Frequently in
22:44
Speaker 3: impeachment you have senators who are very close to the
22:49
Speaker 3: individual being impeached or very antagonistic to the individual being impeached.
22:54
Speaker 3: The impeachments occur in a partisan context, and senators are
22:57
Speaker 3: elected in partisan elections. The framers knew that that was
23:01
Speaker 3: the world in which impeachments would occur, and they placed
23:05
Speaker 3: it in a political body to have an exercise of judgment.
23:09
Speaker 3: Uh And and importantly, actually, during the Bill Clinton impeachment,
23:15
Speaker 3: Tom Harkin, the Senator from Iowa at the time, stood
23:19
Speaker 3: up and raised a point of order and asked for
23:20
Speaker 3: clarification from the presiding Chief Justice that was William Rehnquist,
23:25
Speaker 3: my former boss, the previous Chief Justice uh and And
23:30
Speaker 3: Harkin raised a point of order and said, to clarify,
23:33
Speaker 3: we are not jurors in the sense of a jury
23:38
Speaker 3: in a in a criminal case, where we simply have
23:40
Speaker 3: to review the evidence and making determination. And the Chief
23:44
Speaker 3: Justice rule that is correct. The Constitution empowers you to
23:47
Speaker 3: adjudicate this matter, uh and and and to consider issues
23:52
Speaker 3: of fact and law and policy and politics and everything else.
23:57
Speaker 3: But during that trial, I spoke frequently with President Trump's lawyers.
24:01
Speaker 3: More than once I told them I thought a strategy
24:03
Speaker 3: they were pursuing was boneheaded. A number of times I
24:08
Speaker 3: told them there were strategies they were pursuing that were
24:10
Speaker 3: quite good and they should do more of it. And
24:12
Speaker 3: I was trying to give my judgment in terms I
24:14
Speaker 3: thought both Trump impeachments were completely bogus. They were not
24:18
Speaker 3: supported by either the facts or the law, and I
24:21
Speaker 3: wanted that to be the outcome, and so I was
24:23
Speaker 3: actively involved in giving my thoughts and counsel to the
24:29
Speaker 3: Trump impeachment defense. Now you'll recall the questions we asked
24:34
Speaker 3: in the full trial were asked. We wrote them on
24:37
Speaker 3: note cards and then submitted them to the bench, and
24:41
Speaker 3: actually the Chief Justice read the questions, and so that's
24:46
Speaker 3: how it proceeded on the floor of the Senate in
24:49
Speaker 3: this instance, if we have a trial, if the Senate
24:52
Speaker 3: follows the procedure, I think it is more likely than
24:55
Speaker 3: not that a trial would be conducted by a smaller committee,
24:58
Speaker 3: not the full Senate. Don't think we're likely to spend
25:01
Speaker 3: weeks on the Senate floor. If we had a Republican majority,
25:05
Speaker 3: I would be arguing vociferously for us to spend weeks
25:07
Speaker 3: on the Senate floor trying this, But with Schumer as
25:11
Speaker 3: majority leader, that argument is going to fail. So I
25:15
Speaker 3: think it is likely instead to go to a smaller
25:17
Speaker 3: committee appointed to hear the trial. But then the trial
25:23
Speaker 3: will be driven by the presentation of evidence by the
25:26
Speaker 3: House managers. If the Senate actually does its job and
25:30
Speaker 3: Republicans don't roll over quietly while Schumer tables the whole
25:34
Speaker 3: matter to make.
25:34
Speaker 1: It go away.
25:35
Speaker 2: One last question, because this is incredibly complicated but also
25:40
Speaker 2: unbelievably interesting, there are going to be a ton of
25:43
Speaker 2: people that say this is a frivolous waste of taxpayers
25:49
Speaker 2: money in time, because you can count the votes, and
25:52
Speaker 2: you know the Democrats are going to be able to
25:54
Speaker 2: defeat this. Therefore, Republicans shouldn't do this. What is your
25:59
Speaker 2: counter to that.
26:00
Speaker 3: That it's obviously false, and by the way, that was
26:04
Speaker 3: true of the Trump impeachment, the Trump impeachment, the Clinton
26:06
Speaker 3: impeachment before that. That's been true of a lot of impeachments.
26:10
Speaker 3: But there is a value, you know. Look, Schumer gets
26:15
Speaker 3: the value of it. It's why he's scared of this.
26:17
Speaker 3: The problem is Republican leadership doesn't get the value of it.
26:22
Speaker 3: Our leadership is from a prior generation where they do
26:26
Speaker 3: not understand that what we do in the Senate actually
26:28
Speaker 3: influences public opinion. A lot of our leadership comes from
26:33
Speaker 3: an era where they say, look, we make decisions in
26:37
Speaker 3: smoke filled rooms in Washington, and then we go back
26:41
Speaker 3: to our home states and we tell the silly constituents
26:43
Speaker 3: there whatever it is they want to hear. And there's
26:45
Speaker 3: no connection between the two. That they think public opinion
26:50
Speaker 3: is exogenous. Is it is separate and not impacted by
26:55
Speaker 3: what we're doing. I think that is a fundamental mistake.
26:59
Speaker 3: That a major part of our job is to present
27:02
Speaker 3: facts and argument in a way that move public opinion.
27:07
Speaker 3: Our leadership fundamentally doesn't think that way. Ironically, the Democrats
27:11
Speaker 3: do everything they do is designed to move public opinion.
27:15
Speaker 3: Virtually nothing Republican leadership does is designed to move public
27:19
Speaker 3: opinion because they don't view that as our job. I
27:22
Speaker 3: think it is critical to our job. And all right,
27:27
Speaker 3: let's just go through some facts. So, since seventeen eighty nine,
27:32
Speaker 3: the Senate has completed seventeen impeachment trials. Of those seventeen
27:38
Speaker 3: trials completed the Senate, seven of them were conducted in
27:44
Speaker 3: the last eighty years, and four of them were federal judges.
27:48
Speaker 3: In those four cases, the Senate appointed a trial committee
27:51
Speaker 3: composed of an equal number of senators from each party
27:54
Speaker 3: here and consider evidence and report to the Senate. The
27:57
Speaker 3: trial committees were not used for presidential impeachments, and the
28:01
Speaker 3: three trials since eighteen thirty six conducted without a committee,
28:05
Speaker 3: where Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, and Donald Trump. Every single
28:10
Speaker 3: instance in over two hundred years of our nation's history,
28:14
Speaker 3: the Senate has never, once, not even a single time,
28:18
Speaker 3: tabled articles of impeachment. Every single time the Senate has
28:21
Speaker 3: voted on either guilt or innocence or the House has
28:25
Speaker 3: withdrawn the impeachment, and so this is an opportunity for
28:32
Speaker 3: Senate Republican leadership just to stand and fight, and I
28:35
Speaker 3: hope that they do. I don't know if they will,
28:38
Speaker 3: but I hope that they do.
28:39
Speaker 1: Senator you said something there was very interesting.
28:41
Speaker 2: You got to really pay attention to the words, and
28:43
Speaker 2: you said there was seventeen completed impeachment. So the question
28:47
Speaker 2: I have to ask is, well, then, how many others
28:50
Speaker 2: weren't completed?
28:51
Speaker 1: And what it's the difference between the two.
28:53
Speaker 2: Is it meaning that the Senate decides guilt or innocence
28:57
Speaker 2: and that is completed.
28:59
Speaker 3: That's a very good question. In total, there been twenty
29:03
Speaker 3: one impeachments sent to the Senate, and look, we're well
29:07
Speaker 3: over two hundred years old, so it averages a little
29:10
Speaker 3: less frequently than once every ten years. Of the twenty
29:14
Speaker 3: one impeachments, twenty one individuals who were impeached by the
29:17
Speaker 3: House of Representatives and transmitted to the Senate. Seventeen of
29:20
Speaker 3: them were completed, had a trial, and they ended in
29:23
Speaker 3: an adjudication of guilty or not guilty. One of the
29:27
Speaker 3: twenty one never got started and the Senate didn't take
29:31
Speaker 3: action because the person resigned, and so it became mooted,
29:35
Speaker 3: and then three of them were dismissed. One of them
29:38
Speaker 3: was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds, and two of them were
29:42
Speaker 3: dismissed because the people resigned, and the House asked for
29:45
Speaker 3: the proceedings to be halted. The one that was dismissed
29:49
Speaker 3: on jurisdictional grounds was the first ever impeachment, and it
29:53
Speaker 3: was the impeachment of a senator, and the Senate concluded
29:56
Speaker 3: they had no jurisdiction over the impeachment of a sen
30:00
Speaker 3: that that impeachment applies to executive officers or judicial officers,
30:05
Speaker 3: but not to members the legislature, and so it was
30:07
Speaker 3: dismissed on the.
30:08
Speaker 1: Basis of jurisdiction.
30:10
Speaker 4: Uh.
30:10
Speaker 3: The other two that were dismissed were judges who resigned,
30:14
Speaker 3: and so the House asked the Senate to end the proceedings.
30:17
Speaker 3: And the ones that were dismissed, the most recent one
30:20
Speaker 3: was Samuel Kent, who was a district judge in Texas
30:25
Speaker 3: who who was impeached and then he resigned right and
30:29
Speaker 3: so the House asked the Senate to dismiss the matter.
30:33
Speaker 3: Before that was George W. English, who was a district
30:37
Speaker 3: judge from Illinois who was impeached by the House in
30:39
Speaker 3: nineteen twenty six, and likewise, the judge resigned, and so
30:47
Speaker 3: the House asked the Senate not to proceed. And then
30:51
Speaker 3: the very first one that I mentioned was Senator William Blount,
30:55
Speaker 3: and and Blount was a Senator from Tennessee, and he
30:59
Speaker 3: was charged with conspiring with British forces and Indian tribes
31:04
Speaker 3: to seize Spanish held lands in the Lower Mississippi Valley
31:09
Speaker 3: in order to open the area to more settlers than
31:11
Speaker 3: to increase his personal landholdings. So I mean, you want
31:15
Speaker 3: to talk about salacious charges, it was literally treason with
31:18
Speaker 3: our enemies to enrich themselves. And what happened there was
31:25
Speaker 3: that the House impeached him and the Senate and this
31:30
Speaker 3: was in seventeen ninety seven, so it was very early
31:32
Speaker 3: in our country's history. And over the next several months
31:35
Speaker 3: the Senate spent a lot of time preparing for the trial.
31:39
Speaker 3: And the Senate trial began on December seventeenth, seventeen ninety eight,
31:44
Speaker 3: and the House managers and Blounts defense council presented arguments,
31:47
Speaker 3: but ultimately the question came down to whether Congress could
31:52
Speaker 3: impeach a former member, and on January fourteenth, seventeen ninety nine,
31:57
Speaker 3: the Senate dismissed the case, doing so unjust dictional grounds,
32:01
Speaker 3: holding that that impeachment did not lie again against a
32:05
Speaker 3: member of the legislature. What that means is unless there's
32:10
Speaker 3: a jurisdictional claim, and there's not uh, and unless Majorcus
32:15
Speaker 3: resigns and he hasn't that In every single instance for
32:21
Speaker 3: more than two hundred years, when the House has impeached someone,
32:25
Speaker 3: the Senate has adjudicated the matter and has come to
32:28
Speaker 3: a conclusion guilty or not guilty. That's the argument I
32:31
Speaker 3: presented to Mike Lee, presented to the parliamentarian. I think
32:34
Speaker 3: that's consistent with the Constitution, in our rules, and I
32:38
Speaker 3: very much hope that we see Republicans united in holding
32:41
Speaker 3: Democrats to follow the Constitution and follow the rules of
32:45
Speaker 3: the Senate.
32:46
Speaker 2: Last question for you, and that is there are people
32:49
Speaker 2: that are going to be listening and they're going to
32:50
Speaker 2: be saying to themselves, how do I get involved to
32:54
Speaker 2: make sure Republican leadership does the right thing? Is this
32:57
Speaker 2: that that moment of call to arms or you say, hey,
33:00
Speaker 2: call your senator, regardless of their Republican or Democrat call
33:05
Speaker 2: the Senate Minority leader's office as well.
33:08
Speaker 1: What should people do now.
33:11
Speaker 3: Well, that is always effective, picking up the phone and
33:13
Speaker 3: calling your senator and saying, follow the law, convict majorcas
33:19
Speaker 3: remove him from office. The invasion at our southern border
33:24
Speaker 3: is threatening the safety and security of my family. It
33:28
Speaker 3: is threatening this country. It is inhumane, it is cruel,
33:31
Speaker 3: it is it is a grotesque violation of the obligations
33:36
Speaker 3: of a cabinet member. And look, every senator, it makes
33:40
Speaker 3: a difference when their constituent calls that that that can
33:44
Speaker 3: be very effective, and speak out and make the case
33:47
Speaker 3: to your friends and family and on social media and
33:49
Speaker 3: to anyone else who will listen. That the right thing
33:53
Speaker 3: to do here was to impeach him, and now it's
33:55
Speaker 3: to convict him.
33:56
Speaker 2: I want to tell you about saying that it is
33:58
Speaker 2: really cool. Many of you may know this. I was
34:01
Speaker 2: an under of a gun store for four years and
34:04
Speaker 2: during COVID there was a massive shortage that happened with AMO.
34:08
Speaker 2: We saw AMMO prices skyrocket and people coming in that
34:12
Speaker 2: just want to make sure they can protect and defend
34:14
Speaker 2: themselves in their family and they couldn't find what they needed.
34:18
Speaker 2: I back then thought, man, I wish there was a
34:21
Speaker 2: way that you could just get Ammo and store it. Well,
34:24
Speaker 2: there is a way now, and it's called Ammo Squared.
34:27
Speaker 2: It's helping people just like you and I stay stocked
34:31
Speaker 2: up on Ammunition automatically. Ammo is delivered on demand or
34:36
Speaker 2: automatically when you need it, and stored for free when
34:39
Speaker 2: you don't. It's customizable to your budget. You can buy
34:42
Speaker 2: as little as a few dollars a month and let
34:45
Speaker 2: it grow over time, or buy a bunch all at once,
34:48
Speaker 2: and you have it when you need it. It's truly automatic,
34:52
Speaker 2: Set it and forget it. Ammo purchasing, you pick your calibers,
34:56
Speaker 2: you set your budget, you select a shipping trigger, and
34:58
Speaker 2: that's it builds up over time, and it delivered automatically
35:03
Speaker 2: when you want it, no matter what's going on in
35:05
Speaker 2: the market, because you already own it. In twenty twenty,
35:09
Speaker 2: when the store shows were empty and everyone had trouble
35:11
Speaker 2: finding Ammo locally or online, Ammo squared customers just need
35:15
Speaker 2: to ship their Amo stored at AMO squared and get
35:18
Speaker 2: it all immediately delivered with just the click of a
35:21
Speaker 2: single button. So forget about dealing with a moving, heavy
35:24
Speaker 2: case of ammunition in your garage, are having to figure
35:27
Speaker 2: out how to store it, or worried about prices skyrocketing
35:30
Speaker 2: when you need it the most. Check out amosquared dot
35:34
Speaker 2: com slash ben that's amosquared dot com slash bend to
35:39
Speaker 2: sign up and get free AMO in your account. It's
35:43
Speaker 2: effortless ammunition management. Amosquared dot com slash bend to sign
35:48
Speaker 2: up and get free AMMO in your account today, Senator,
35:51
Speaker 2: I want to move lastly to this other issue, and
35:53
Speaker 2: that is it is weird. The media seems to be
35:57
Speaker 2: turning on Joe Biden. Headlines now coming from major news organizations.
36:03
Speaker 2: The Washington Post, for example, had this headline, what happens
36:07
Speaker 2: if Trump or Biden can no longer run for president?
36:11
Speaker 2: Obviously they're trying to act like Donald Trump is in
36:14
Speaker 2: cognitive decline. It's not happening, and we know it's different
36:17
Speaker 2: with Joe Biden. The New York Times even said this,
36:21
Speaker 2: how old is too old to be president? An uncomfortable
36:24
Speaker 2: question arises again, and now the New York Times taking
36:28
Speaker 2: heat for that headline. I want to get your reaction
36:31
Speaker 2: to this moment on Fox News Channel as They describe
36:35
Speaker 2: this turning on the president on the story.
36:38
Speaker 4: Thanks for being here this afternoon with us, everybody. Interesting
36:43
Speaker 4: when you take a look at a them that seems
36:46
Speaker 4: to be emerging in the coverage of this campaign, this
36:51
Speaker 4: presidential race. Right, check out some of these recent headlines,
36:54
Speaker 4: quote what we know about cognitive decline? Quote what happens
37:00
Speaker 4: if Trump or Biden can no longer run for president?
37:04
Speaker 4: How old is too old to be president? These are
37:07
Speaker 4: not your typical electioneer headlines. But this is clearly not
37:10
Speaker 4: a typical election year matchup if it turns out to
37:14
Speaker 4: be these two presumed nominees. So the publisher of The
37:17
Speaker 4: New York Times is standing by his papers reporting on
37:22
Speaker 4: the president's quote on popularity and his age, but says
37:26
Speaker 4: that the White House is not happy. In fact, he
37:28
Speaker 4: says they're extremely upset about the coverage that they're getting
37:31
Speaker 4: at the New York Times. And take a listen to
37:33
Speaker 4: this exchange just a short time ago, as President Biden
37:36
Speaker 4: left for a fundraising trip to California, watching.
37:46
Speaker 1: Biden, are you ready, yes, Blod, look at Blod'm looking
37:50
Speaker 1: at you.
37:50
Speaker 4: We're looking to you, Okay that we bring in our paper.
37:54
Speaker 2: I mean, he didn't even know what they were talking about,
37:56
Speaker 2: Senator and you can see the media flipping on him.
38:00
Speaker 2: Is this the beginning of the end of his presidency
38:03
Speaker 2: with the Democratic Party figuring out how to offload him?
38:06
Speaker 1: Yeah?
38:07
Speaker 3: Look, that was weird that exchange at the end, being asked,
38:10
Speaker 3: are you're going to California for a plan B to
38:13
Speaker 3: talk to Gavin Newsom? Look, that was a nasty little question,
38:16
Speaker 3: but his answer was bizarre. It was a non sequit
38:20
Speaker 3: or it made no sense. And you know those three
38:22
Speaker 3: headlines that the Fox story just read. The first one
38:27
Speaker 3: was from the Wall Street Journal, the second one was
38:29
Speaker 3: from the Washington Post, the third one was from the
38:31
Speaker 3: New York Times. And I do think we are seeing
38:34
Speaker 3: the corporate media starting to turn on Joe Biden. And
38:38
Speaker 3: we've talked at length. Listen, it was this podcast that
38:42
Speaker 3: drove news and drove news across the country when we
38:45
Speaker 3: said months ago that I believe there was a very
38:48
Speaker 3: significant chance the Democrat Party would pull the court on
38:52
Speaker 3: Joe Biden, yank him out and replace him with Michelle Obama.
38:56
Speaker 3: And I think if they do that, they're likely to
38:58
Speaker 3: do it either at the Democrat convention this summer or
39:01
Speaker 3: shortly thereafter, and we're seeing the corporate media, which is
39:08
Speaker 3: one and the same with the Democrat Party, but in
39:10
Speaker 3: many ways they're the left wing of the Democrat Party.
39:13
Speaker 3: They're starting to get nervous. They're starting to realize, crap,
39:16
Speaker 3: if it's Biden against Trump, we think Trump's gonna win,
39:20
Speaker 3: and so they're they're they're hitting the panic button. And
39:22
Speaker 3: I think we're going to see more of these stories
39:25
Speaker 3: as the media turns on him. I do think you're
39:27
Speaker 3: seeing both Democrats in the media getting very, very worried
39:31
Speaker 3: about Joe Biden's ability to win in November.
39:34
Speaker 2: When you are running for president, you've done this before
39:37
Speaker 2: and you see something this significant of a change in
39:41
Speaker 2: the news cycle. Joe Biden has had three years of
39:44
Speaker 2: basically a media that's been covering for him. I think
39:47
Speaker 2: that's why he was so shocked when he had that
39:50
Speaker 2: the report that came out about his cognitive decline and
39:53
Speaker 2: couldn't answer basic questions, and then he came out with
39:56
Speaker 2: that very angry, uh really dysfunction press conference at night,
40:01
Speaker 2: and the media didn't get back in line since then.
40:04
Speaker 2: So when you see this, who is moving the needle?
40:07
Speaker 2: Is it donors who are saying we're not going to
40:09
Speaker 2: give money anymore. Or is it the leadership of the
40:13
Speaker 2: Democratic Party saying we got to figure something out, we
40:15
Speaker 2: got to figure it out fast, or could it even
40:17
Speaker 2: be both?
40:18
Speaker 3: So I don't think it's donors and I don't think
40:20
Speaker 3: it's anyone cutting off money. And understand, the Democrats and
40:24
Speaker 3: the media would be perfectly happy if they could wave
40:26
Speaker 3: a wand and put Joe Biden there four years more.
40:29
Speaker 3: They're not worried that he's incompetent to be president. They're
40:32
Speaker 3: not worried that the Department of Justice says he's not
40:34
Speaker 3: competent to stand trial. They're not worried that he's such
40:38
Speaker 3: a weak commander in chief that our enemies are attacking
40:41
Speaker 3: our allies and threatening America. They're not worried that he
40:44
Speaker 3: lacks the competence to do the job. That there's only
40:49
Speaker 3: one thing they're worried about that he would lose. If
40:53
Speaker 3: they believed he would win, they'd be perfectly fine to
40:56
Speaker 3: weekend it bernies him, to stand him up as a
40:59
Speaker 3: corpse and say Joe Biden's there, and let's keep pulling
41:03
Speaker 3: the puppet strings. Their concern is they're worried he's going
41:07
Speaker 3: to lose, and that is a very real and an
41:12
Speaker 3: acute concern on their part. It's also worth noting you
41:16
Speaker 3: were talking about the press turning on him. You know,
41:19
Speaker 3: there's a real difference between Republicans and Democrats. Look, on
41:22
Speaker 3: my end, the press has always turned on me. They're
41:25
Speaker 3: always hostile. Every question they're asking there, they're looking to
41:28
Speaker 3: screw me nine ways to Sunday. That's just when you're
41:32
Speaker 3: and by the way, and you've been in the Capitol
41:34
Speaker 3: with me, Ben, as you know, when I walk from
41:36
Speaker 3: my office to the Senate floor, and I do so repeatedly,
41:39
Speaker 3: whether it is to vote, or to go to meetings
41:41
Speaker 3: or to go to committee hearings, I'm walking back and
41:43
Speaker 3: forth through the Capitol and there's a cluster of reporters
41:47
Speaker 3: that surround you, and they ask you a hostile question
41:49
Speaker 3: after hostile question on every topic under the sun. And
41:53
Speaker 3: if you're a Republican, especially a conservative Republican, you're used
41:56
Speaker 3: to just getting constant barrages of attacks. The Democrats don't
42:01
Speaker 3: get that. They get the kind of questions. Remember Joe
42:04
Speaker 3: Biden in his first year in the White House, the
42:06
Speaker 3: reporters would ask him things like, mister President what's your
42:09
Speaker 3: favorite flavor of ice cream? I mean, that was right.
42:14
Speaker 1: I mean, it's it's embarrassing.
42:17
Speaker 3: It's it's there like groupies chasing the Beatles, throwing their
42:21
Speaker 3: panties at him. And that's just the guys. I mean,
42:23
Speaker 3: I mean it is it's pitiful and and and so
42:27
Speaker 3: he is really startled because he's not used to any scrutiny.
42:31
Speaker 3: He's not used to journalists actually being journalists. By the way,
42:35
Speaker 3: there is this phenomenon for Republicans as well. If you
42:38
Speaker 3: remember John McCain. John McCain used to get lots of
42:41
Speaker 3: adoring press coverage because when he was a Republican senator
42:46
Speaker 3: he would often attack other Republicans and the press, and
42:49
Speaker 3: he would attack him from the left. And the press
42:52
Speaker 3: loves it when a Republican attacks other Republicans from the left.
42:56
Speaker 3: It's the best way to get good press. You get
42:58
Speaker 3: called at bipartisans statesman when you agree with the Democrats
43:02
Speaker 3: and attack your fellow Republicans. Well, when John McCain got
43:06
Speaker 3: the Republican nomination, and you and I both supported John
43:10
Speaker 3: McCain once it is our nominee, Yeah, but the press
43:13
Speaker 3: turned on him and turned viciously on him. If you remember,
43:16
Speaker 3: McCain made a comment something like, I don't understand I
43:19
Speaker 3: thought you guys were my base, and he was completely startled.
43:24
Speaker 3: Because it's the same sentiment Biden's having. When you're used
43:28
Speaker 3: to just getting your your hindquarters kissed by the media,
43:34
Speaker 3: when they start biting, you don't know how to handle it.
43:37
Speaker 2: And one of two things is gonna happen when it
43:40
Speaker 2: comes to this center. They're either going to get back
43:42
Speaker 2: in line after trying to, you know, step out and see,
43:45
Speaker 2: well others follow us right and test the waters, or
43:49
Speaker 2: they're going to keep going what's your prediction.
43:52
Speaker 3: Well, if he stays the nominee, they'll get back in
43:54
Speaker 3: line and they'll immediately begin saying it's agist and racist
43:57
Speaker 3: and horrible to even ask these questions, and they have
44:00
Speaker 3: no shame. So this is the moment where they're trying
44:04
Speaker 3: to see if they can push him out and replace
44:06
Speaker 3: him with Michelle Obama. If they can't, if he doesn't go,
44:10
Speaker 3: if we get to September and Biden's the nominee, the
44:14
Speaker 3: media will suddenly be completely silent on this front and
44:18
Speaker 3: will attack anyone who dares raise the same questions they're raising,
44:22
Speaker 3: right now don't forget.
44:23
Speaker 2: We do the show Monday, Wednesday and Friday. We have
44:26
Speaker 2: a week in review on Saturdays. Make sure you grab
44:31
Speaker 2: that wherever you get your podcasts, hit that subscribe, auto
44:34
Speaker 2: download or follow button as well, and The Sinner and
44:38
Speaker 2: I will be back with you on Friday morning.