Latest / The Ben Ferguson Podcast / Trump Indicted AGAIN, Facebook ADMITS Censorship & Now Kamala Supports the Wall?

Transcript

Trump Indicted AGAIN, Facebook ADMITS Censorship & Now Kamala Supports the Wall? · The Ben Ferguson Podcast

0:01
Speaker 1: Welcome.
0:01
Speaker 2: It is verdic with center, Teed Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you, Senator.
0:07
Speaker 2: It's a very big day because I'm just gonna go
0:10
Speaker 2: ahead and throw it out there. It's my birthday, and
0:12
Speaker 2: why not throw in a Donald Trump up getting reindicted.
0:15
Speaker 2: All at the same time, it's the best birthday president
0:17
Speaker 2: you can ask for.
0:18
Speaker 3: Well, happy birthday, big guy. I'm really proud to see
0:21
Speaker 3: you enter age sixty. You know, you don't look a
0:24
Speaker 3: day over fifty five, and so that's really great.
0:28
Speaker 1: Man.
0:29
Speaker 2: You know, forty three, I'm never gonna catch up to you, sir.
0:32
Speaker 2: You're just older than I am. I don't you know older.
0:34
Speaker 2: You can throw in the wiser thing, but I'm still
0:36
Speaker 2: coming for you.
0:37
Speaker 3: Look, you're forty three, so you're George W.
0:40
Speaker 1: Bush today. That's right. I like it, so you'll remember
0:42
Speaker 1: it this year. There you go. So let's talk about
0:45
Speaker 1: this indictment for a second. This is crazy, all right.
0:49
Speaker 3: So it's a big day number one, As Yogi Barra said,
0:54
Speaker 3: it's deja vu all over again. Donald Trump has been indicted.
1:00
Speaker 3: I gotta say, I wish that were new, I wish
1:02
Speaker 3: that were different, I wish that were unusual. At this point,
1:05
Speaker 3: it feels like any day that ends with a why
1:08
Speaker 3: the Democrats are indicted on Donald Trump again? Every time
1:11
Speaker 3: they're scared that he's going to win, they indict him again. So, yes,
1:14
Speaker 3: that has happened again. We're going to explain exactly what
1:16
Speaker 3: Jack Smith did and what it means beyond that. This
1:19
Speaker 3: is actually a big bombshell. Facebook admits it is actively
1:24
Speaker 3: censoring social media and that they was doing so at
1:27
Speaker 3: the behest of the Biden administration. The government asked it,
1:31
Speaker 3: and Facebook saluted and actively censored. We're going to talk
1:34
Speaker 3: about that. And then finally Kamala Harris wants to build
1:38
Speaker 3: the wall. Truly a stunning admission. This is a bizarre chapter.
1:44
Speaker 4: We live in. We're going to lay that out as well.
1:46
Speaker 1: Yeah, it certainly is.
1:47
Speaker 2: I want to tell you real quick about our friends
1:49
Speaker 2: of the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews. We are
1:52
Speaker 2: quickly approaching the one year anniversary of the horrific Commas
1:56
Speaker 2: attacks on Israel and the Holy Land is under a
2:00
Speaker 2: day after day, this time on multiple fronts, from deadly
2:04
Speaker 2: threats that are increasing in northern Israel, constant rocket attacks
2:08
Speaker 2: from Hesblah that have been fired at Israel and then
2:11
Speaker 2: the threats from Iran as well. It is a major
2:15
Speaker 2: problem to be safe in Israel right now now, since
2:20
Speaker 2: the war started, the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews
2:23
Speaker 2: has been on the forefront of Israel, addressing the needs
2:26
Speaker 2: of those that are most vulnerable. And that's why I
2:29
Speaker 2: am proud to partner with IFCJ and many of you.
2:33
Speaker 2: I say thank you because you've already given donations, and
2:36
Speaker 2: these life saving donations are helping provide emergency food as
2:40
Speaker 2: well as critical security needs such as flat jackets, firefighting equipment,
2:45
Speaker 2: armored vehicles including armored ambulances that have been used countless
2:51
Speaker 2: time since the attacks, temporary bomb shelters that are being
2:55
Speaker 2: installed as we speak, and much more. Right now, we're
2:58
Speaker 2: asking for five hundred of you to join the Fellowship
3:02
Speaker 2: and meet by donating one hundred and fifty dollars to
3:05
Speaker 2: meet these urgent security needs. And thanks to an incredible
3:10
Speaker 2: IFCJ supporter, your gift will be matched, doubling your impact
3:16
Speaker 2: in the Holy Land. So all you have to do
3:18
Speaker 2: is call to make your gift right now eight at
3:20
Speaker 2: eight four eight eight IFCJ. That's eight eight eight four
3:26
Speaker 2: eight eight IFCJ are four three, two five. You can
3:30
Speaker 2: go online as well to support them at support IFCJ
3:35
Speaker 2: dot org. That's one word, SUPPORTIFCJ dot org. Israel needs
3:41
Speaker 2: are support now more than ever. So go to support
3:44
Speaker 2: IFCJ dot org. And I'll say it in advanced thank
3:47
Speaker 2: you to all of you that are getting involved, in
3:49
Speaker 2: all of you that already have center. This was one
3:52
Speaker 2: of those headlines. And I'm I'm not shocked anymore. As
3:55
Speaker 2: you almost described in the intro there, that the left
3:59
Speaker 2: is afraid Trump's going to win. So okay, let's try
4:02
Speaker 2: to throw him in jail, let's indict him again. But
4:04
Speaker 2: there is some confusion. How is it that this guy
4:08
Speaker 2: who was told you did it wrong from the Supreme
4:11
Speaker 2: Court can then go back to the federal grand jury
4:14
Speaker 2: in DC and reindict Donald Trump on these four felony
4:18
Speaker 2: charges in essence going around with the Supreme Court. That's
4:23
Speaker 2: what it seems like, is that reality.
4:26
Speaker 3: Yeah, look, I understand that. Let me say, first of all,
4:29
Speaker 3: put this in a broader context. A year ago, no
4:33
Speaker 3: president of the United States has ever been indicted, No
4:36
Speaker 3: major party candidate for the president had ever been indicted.
4:39
Speaker 3: In the past year, Donald Trump has been indicted, not once,
4:42
Speaker 3: not twice, not three times, four separate times by rabid
4:47
Speaker 3: Democrat partisans who are very concerned that the voters are
4:53
Speaker 3: going to elect him. Every one of these indictments. They're
4:56
Speaker 3: not about the criminal law, they're not about the rule
4:58
Speaker 3: of law, they're not about actual conduct to Donald Trump.
5:01
Speaker 3: They are about trying to stop the voters from voting
5:05
Speaker 3: for him. In November, we are sixty nine days away
5:07
Speaker 3: from election day, and Democrats are terrified he's going to win.
5:11
Speaker 3: And so I got to say, after four different indictments,
5:16
Speaker 3: to wake up and see yesterday a fifth indictment. It
5:20
Speaker 3: almost feels like that classic Saturday Night Live skit with
5:23
Speaker 3: Christopher Walken where he's a record producer and his solution
5:27
Speaker 3: to everything is more cow bell, more cow bell. The
5:30
Speaker 3: Democrats answered, everything is more indictments, more indictments. They just
5:34
Speaker 3: want to indict Trump. So Jack Smith, Jack Smith is
5:37
Speaker 3: like to use another analogy.
5:38
Speaker 4: I don't know.
5:39
Speaker 3: I feel a little bit like Dennis Miller stopped me
5:41
Speaker 3: before I sub reference again. Jack Smith is like Javert
5:46
Speaker 3: from Le Miz. He is going after Jean Valjean, and
5:51
Speaker 3: Jean Valjean for him is Donald Trump. And he must
5:53
Speaker 3: get him, and so he filed a brand new indictment
5:58
Speaker 3: thirty six pages, and he indicted Trump again. Now it
6:03
Speaker 3: is you asked, is this permissible after the Supreme Court decision,
6:07
Speaker 3: And the answer is yes, it is.
6:09
Speaker 5: So.
6:09
Speaker 3: The Supreme Court did not conclude that jack Smith had
6:13
Speaker 3: no authority in charges. The Supreme Court did not rule
6:18
Speaker 3: on whether jack Smith was properly appointed. That was a
6:21
Speaker 3: basis for ruling from the judge down in Florida concerning
6:25
Speaker 3: the document's case, but that was not in front of
6:26
Speaker 3: the Supreme Court. What the Supreme Court ruled is that
6:30
Speaker 3: presidents of the United States enjoy significant immunity from prosecution.
6:36
Speaker 3: And the line the Supreme Court laid out is that
6:38
Speaker 3: the immunity presidents enjoy is an immunity for actions carried
6:43
Speaker 3: out that are official actions that are carrying out that
6:46
Speaker 3: are exercising their power as president, and significant parts of
6:51
Speaker 3: the first indictment were in the direct exercise of Trump's
6:55
Speaker 3: authority as president. The Supreme Court said, you can indict
6:58
Speaker 3: a president for that. Lookresident, and let's do all sorts
7:00
Speaker 3: of things that frankly you and I can't do. Presidents
7:04
Speaker 3: send the military into combat and kill people if you
7:07
Speaker 3: and I sent someone out to kill someone, we would
7:11
Speaker 3: in all likelihood be charged with potentially murder attempted murder.
7:15
Speaker 3: Presidents have authority under the Constitution that ordinary citizens do not.
7:20
Speaker 3: What Jack Smith did here is he refiled the indictment,
7:23
Speaker 3: and you can do that. So one question, and you
7:26
Speaker 3: and I were talking beforehand, and a question was, well,
7:30
Speaker 3: does this violate double jeopardy?
7:32
Speaker 4: And it does not.
7:33
Speaker 3: So double jeopardy is the protection of the constitution against
7:36
Speaker 3: trying someone multiple times for the same crime. And the
7:40
Speaker 3: general rule is that jeopardy attaches when a jury is impaneled.
7:46
Speaker 3: In other words, when the trial, you get a jury together,
7:49
Speaker 3: you bring the jury, you start the trial. That's the
7:51
Speaker 3: point at which, okay, if the guy gets off, if
7:56
Speaker 3: the guy is acquitted, you can't prosecute him again because
8:00
Speaker 3: pretty is attached. At this point, jeopardy has not attached legally,
8:04
Speaker 3: because an indictment has come down, but a jury has
8:06
Speaker 3: not been impaneled. So the prosecutor can indict Trump as
8:10
Speaker 3: many times as he wants to. That that is part
8:13
Speaker 3: of being a prosecutor. Now, indicting is simply bringing a
8:16
Speaker 3: charge against him. And so what Jack Smith tried to
8:18
Speaker 3: do here was narrow the indictmenty as many of the
8:22
Speaker 3: same claims he had before, but he tried to carve
8:26
Speaker 3: out to excise the bases that were most connected to
8:31
Speaker 3: Trump's official exercise of presidential authority. Now, I think this
8:36
Speaker 3: is going to fail. I think this is not going
8:38
Speaker 3: to go anywhere. But as I said, Jack Smith is
8:42
Speaker 3: like Javert, he is on a crusade, and so he
8:45
Speaker 3: did it yet again.
8:47
Speaker 2: When I look at the timing of this, and this
8:49
Speaker 2: is the next question, is you mentioned the Facebook story?
8:54
Speaker 4: Right?
8:54
Speaker 2: Mark Zuckerberg has now admitted that he played a major
8:58
Speaker 2: part in election interference, along with by the way, the
9:01
Speaker 2: FBI and the Biyden regime. So this story comes out
9:05
Speaker 2: and actually like, all right, let's indict Donald Trump again today.
9:08
Speaker 2: Is there any threat that this could also be straight
9:11
Speaker 2: up election interference from the standpoint that Donald Trump's gonna
9:15
Speaker 2: actually have to go back to court, be in court,
9:17
Speaker 2: be in a trial between now in November.
9:20
Speaker 3: Now, I don't think there's any risk of that. Look, look,
9:23
Speaker 3: we're sixty nine days out from the election. This new indictment,
9:26
Speaker 3: a new indictment takes time. You're not going to see
9:29
Speaker 3: a criminal trial between now an election day. We're just
9:31
Speaker 3: too close that there's no prospect of that happening that quickly.
9:35
Speaker 3: In DC. There might be some pre trial hearing or something.
9:39
Speaker 3: It could conceivably take one day, but it's not going
9:42
Speaker 3: to consume significant time between now an election day and
9:47
Speaker 3: what this means. Listen, if Trump wins and he gets
9:51
Speaker 3: inaugurated as the president on January twentieth the next year,
9:54
Speaker 3: this case will be dismissed on January twentieth because as
9:57
Speaker 3: president he has the authority to order the case to
10:00
Speaker 3: be dismissed, and he will. So this is number one.
10:05
Speaker 3: It's another political shot at Trump for them to say, oh,
10:08
Speaker 3: he's been indicted again. He's a felon. He's a felon,
10:10
Speaker 3: He's a felaon. At this point, they already say he's
10:13
Speaker 3: a fellain NonStop. When we have a debate between Kamala
10:16
Speaker 3: Harris and Donald Trump, and by the way, when we
10:19
Speaker 3: do have the debate, this podcast is going to analyze
10:21
Speaker 3: before the debate and great detail what to expect, and
10:24
Speaker 3: then after the debate we're going to break it down
10:25
Speaker 3: in great detail. I'll point out on this pod you
10:28
Speaker 3: and I did a special pod the night of the
10:31
Speaker 3: debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden, and I think
10:34
Speaker 3: it was a really consequential pod because that night real time,
10:38
Speaker 3: we predicted and we said in my judgment the odds
10:43
Speaker 3: were one hundred percent that Joe Biden would not be
10:46
Speaker 3: the nominee of the Democrat Party, that this would prove
10:49
Speaker 3: to be the most consequential presidential debate in US history.
10:53
Speaker 3: That prediction proved right because just after a month later,
10:57
Speaker 3: they remove Biden from the ballot. So we'll do the
10:59
Speaker 3: same thing on this debate. But I gotta say, I
11:03
Speaker 3: actually am not terribly excited about this Jack Smith indictment one.
11:07
Speaker 4: Way or the other.
11:08
Speaker 3: Yeah, he hates Trump, Yes, he's willing to abuse power.
11:11
Speaker 3: We know that this is nothing new. I don't think
11:15
Speaker 3: there are a whole lot of political consequences to another
11:17
Speaker 3: indictment after there have been four. I don't really see
11:21
Speaker 3: how a fifth indictment has any more political bite to it.
11:24
Speaker 3: And I don't think there are real legal consequences. Now,
11:27
Speaker 3: if God forbid, Kamala wins, then this legal case will
11:31
Speaker 3: proceed and Trump may be dragged into ongoing proceedings for
11:35
Speaker 3: years as a consequence of this. But in terms of
11:38
Speaker 3: the election, I don't see any significant consequences.
11:42
Speaker 2: So let's talk about this other massive story and that
11:45
Speaker 2: broke and this is dealing with Meta, which owns Facebook, Instagram.
11:51
Speaker 2: And the House Judiciary Committee came out and said, hey,
11:54
Speaker 2: Mark Zuckerberg, who's the founder owner of Facebook, has in
12:00
Speaker 2: a letter to Congress admitting some pretty major things. One
12:04
Speaker 2: that the Biden Herricks administration pressured Facebook to censor Americans.
12:09
Speaker 2: Two they did it. Facebook said sure, we're all in,
12:13
Speaker 2: we will censor Americans. And three Facebook then throttled the
12:17
Speaker 2: Hunter Biden laptop story as well. And we have to
12:21
Speaker 2: I think connect the dots here center. Zuckerberg was all
12:25
Speaker 2: in for the Democrats in Biden. There was a thing
12:28
Speaker 2: called zuck Bucks. We're talking about tens of millions of
12:32
Speaker 2: hundreds of millions of dollars that were going to leftist candidates.
12:37
Speaker 2: Mark Zuckerberg is a hardcore lefty. It's very clear follow
12:41
Speaker 2: the money. But in this letter, it was like he
12:43
Speaker 2: tried to wash his hands of any of that. It's like, oh,
12:46
Speaker 2: I was just trusting the government, and I probably shouldn't
12:49
Speaker 2: have my bad.
12:51
Speaker 3: So there's a lot to say here. Let me say
12:53
Speaker 3: first of all that Mark Zuckerberg sent a letter to
12:55
Speaker 3: Jim Jordan sent it on to August twenty sixth, So
12:58
Speaker 3: this week and this letter is a big deal, and
13:03
Speaker 3: I want to read what's in this letter. It's not
13:05
Speaker 3: very long, it's just over a page, but our listeners
13:08
Speaker 3: need to know exactly what Zuckerbrok said because there's a
13:10
Speaker 3: lot of substance. Then I want to break down what
13:12
Speaker 3: it means. So here's what Zuckerberg said. Chairman Jordan, I
13:16
Speaker 3: appreciate the committee's interest and content moderation online platforms. As
13:19
Speaker 3: you are aware, Metas produced thousands of documents part of
13:22
Speaker 3: investigation and made a dozen employees available for transcribed interviews
13:26
Speaker 3: further to our cooperation with your investigation. I welcome the
13:29
Speaker 3: opportunity to share what I've taken away from this process.
13:32
Speaker 3: There's a lot of talk right now about how the
13:34
Speaker 3: US government interacts with companies like Meta, and I want
13:37
Speaker 3: to be clear about our position. Our platforms are for everyone.
13:41
Speaker 3: We're about promoting speech and helping people connect in a
13:43
Speaker 3: safe and secure way. As part of this, we regularly
13:46
Speaker 3: hear from governments around the world and others with various
13:49
Speaker 3: concerns about public discourse and public safety. In twenty twenty one,
13:54
Speaker 3: and I will note that's when Biden was in office.
13:57
Speaker 3: Senior officials from the Biden administration, including the White House,
14:00
Speaker 3: repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID
14:06
Speaker 3: nineteen content, including humor and satire, and expressed a lot
14:12
Speaker 3: of frustration with our teams when we didn't agree. Ultimately,
14:16
Speaker 3: was our decision whether or not to take content down,
14:19
Speaker 3: and we own our decisions, including COVID nineteen related changes
14:23
Speaker 3: we made to our enforcement in the wake of this pressure.
14:28
Speaker 3: I believe the government pressure was wrong, and I regret
14:32
Speaker 3: that we were not more outspoken about it. I also
14:35
Speaker 3: think we made some choices that, with the benefit of
14:38
Speaker 3: hindsight and new information, we wouldn't make today. Like I
14:43
Speaker 3: said to our teams at the time, I feel strongly
14:46
Speaker 3: that we should not compromise our content standards due to
14:49
Speaker 3: the pressure from any administration in either direction, and we're
14:54
Speaker 3: ready to push back if something like this happens again.
14:57
Speaker 3: In a separate situation, the FBI warned us about a
15:01
Speaker 3: potential Russian disinformation operation about the Biden family and Barisma
15:06
Speaker 3: in the lead up to the twenty twenty election that fall.
15:09
Speaker 3: When we saw a New York Post story reporting on
15:12
Speaker 3: corruption allegations involving then Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden's family.
15:18
Speaker 3: We sent the story to fact checkers for review and
15:20
Speaker 3: temporarily demoted it while waiting for a reply. It's since
15:25
Speaker 3: been made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation,
15:30
Speaker 3: and in retrospect, we shouldn't have demoted the story. We've
15:34
Speaker 3: changed our policies and processes to make sure this doesn't
15:38
Speaker 3: happen again. For example, we no longer temporarily demote things
15:43
Speaker 3: in the US while waiting for fact checkers. Apart from
15:48
Speaker 3: content moderation, I want to assess the contributions I made
15:52
Speaker 3: during the last presidential cycle to support electoral infrastructure. The
15:58
Speaker 3: idea here was to make sure local election jurisdictions across
16:01
Speaker 3: the country had the resources they needed to help people
16:05
Speaker 3: vote safely during the global pandemic. I made these contributions
16:09
Speaker 3: through the chan Zuckerberg Initiative. They were designed to be nonpartisan,
16:14
Speaker 3: spread across urban, rural, and suburban communities. Still, despite despite
16:19
Speaker 3: the analyzes I've seen showing otherwise, I know that some
16:23
Speaker 3: people believe this work benefited one party over the other.
16:27
Speaker 3: My goal is to be neutral and not play a
16:29
Speaker 3: role one way or the other, or even appear to
16:32
Speaker 3: be playing a role. So I don't plan on making
16:35
Speaker 3: a similar contribution this cycle, respectfully, Mark Zuckerberg.
16:40
Speaker 2: Now, I'm sorry this last because I just don't believe
16:44
Speaker 2: any of this crap from him, and I just maybe
16:46
Speaker 2: I'm cynical center, but like this, to me, seems like
16:49
Speaker 2: he's hedging his bets. Maybe Donald Trump wins, maybe Republicans
16:52
Speaker 2: are in control of stuff, and so now I'm hedging
16:55
Speaker 2: my bets. That don't come down hard on me.
16:57
Speaker 4: You know, yes, and no, I actually have a little
16:59
Speaker 4: bit take on it than you do. Ben.
17:02
Speaker 3: So let me say, first of all, the admission he
17:05
Speaker 3: made publicly that the Biden White House repeatedly pressure him
17:08
Speaker 3: to censor speech. That's a big deal. That is enormously consequential.
17:14
Speaker 3: The predicate of legislation that different states have passed, including Texas,
17:18
Speaker 3: including Florida, is that government cannot use private industry to
17:22
Speaker 3: censor for them. His admission there has real legal consequences
17:26
Speaker 3: because there's a whole doctrine where when government uses private
17:30
Speaker 3: industry to violate the constitution, that that is, the courts
17:36
Speaker 3: can step in and stop that Now, the Supreme Court
17:40
Speaker 3: this past term basically concluded, gosh, we don't know that
17:44
Speaker 3: government was pressuring big tech to censor people. Well, you
17:47
Speaker 3: know what, the Supreme Court's entire assumption was just disproven
17:51
Speaker 3: by Mark Zuckerberg's admission. That has real consequences and consequences
17:55
Speaker 3: that will appear in litigation going forward. So his saying
18:00
Speaker 3: that and even his saying we should have stood up
18:03
Speaker 3: to that pressure more, that's meaningful. Now the second point
18:09
Speaker 3: he made, which was that the Biden that the FBI
18:15
Speaker 3: pressured Facebook to censor information about the Hunter Biden laptop. Look,
18:20
Speaker 3: you and I have talked about this at length on
18:22
Speaker 3: this podcast. That was blatant election interference. It may well
18:27
Speaker 3: have changed the outcome of the twenty twenty election. I
18:31
Speaker 3: am angry as you are. That's saying sorry four years
18:35
Speaker 3: later is too little, too late. But I'm glad for
18:40
Speaker 3: the I'm sorry as compared to denying it ever happened.
18:42
Speaker 3: That there is at least some tiny kernel of accountability
18:46
Speaker 3: in that. And finally, the point about the Zuckbucks. Look,
18:51
Speaker 3: the single largest Democrat donor in twenty twenty was named
18:54
Speaker 3: Mark Zuckerberg. He invested four hundred million dollars in election
18:59
Speaker 3: in for structure in big blue cities, and that easily
19:02
Speaker 3: could have changed the outcome of the election. By the way,
19:05
Speaker 3: by contrast, the biggest Republican donor in twenty twenty was
19:08
Speaker 3: seld Natilson. He put about one hundred million, so it
19:10
Speaker 3: was a four to one differential. Wow, Zuckerberg is saying, well, gosh,
19:16
Speaker 3: I didn't mean to influence the outcome of the election.
19:19
Speaker 3: Now I call bs on that. I don't believe that
19:21
Speaker 3: at all. He's a very bright man. He knew damn
19:25
Speaker 3: well what he was doing. But I do think it's meaningful.
19:29
Speaker 3: The closing line of the letter, I will not be
19:32
Speaker 3: making a similar contribution going forward. I'll tell you something
19:35
Speaker 3: I've heard from multiple people in the tech world, which
19:40
Speaker 3: is that Zuckerberg is souring on the leftists and the Democrats.
19:46
Speaker 3: That he's souring on that he had been look in
19:50
Speaker 3: the last cycle, he was the single biggest Democrat donor
19:53
Speaker 3: in the country. The fact that he's saying, I'm not
19:56
Speaker 3: doing that again, I'm really glad not to have four
19:58
Speaker 3: hundred million dollars coming in on behalf of Kamala Harris
20:01
Speaker 3: in the last two months. If he doesn't do that.
20:04
Speaker 3: That's a big deal. That dramatically enhances the chance of
20:08
Speaker 3: Trump's victory. That's good for democracy, that's good for America.
20:12
Speaker 3: And I do think it's a broader sense where Look,
20:15
Speaker 3: I know Zuckerberg a little bit. I don't know him well,
20:17
Speaker 3: but I spent He and I had about a three
20:20
Speaker 3: and a half hour dinner together. It was a very
20:21
Speaker 3: interesting dinner. Look, he's a crazy smart guy. We did
20:27
Speaker 3: it by the way off the grid. We did it
20:29
Speaker 3: in DC. We didn't do it at a restaurant because, frankly,
20:32
Speaker 3: Ben people would lose their crap if they saw me
20:35
Speaker 3: and Mark Zuckerberg sitting at a restaurant having dinner together.
20:37
Speaker 4: So we didn't do that.
20:40
Speaker 3: Yeah, but it was an interesting He reached out and said, Hey,
20:42
Speaker 3: I'd like to have dinner with you. I said sure,
20:44
Speaker 3: and we had. I would characterize a vigorous intellectual debate
20:48
Speaker 3: where I was very aggressively saying to him, stop censoring people.
20:54
Speaker 3: Who the hell are you to decide what is and
20:57
Speaker 3: what isn't permissible to say? Just to allow free speech. Basically,
21:01
Speaker 3: I was urging Zuckerberg to do to Facebook what Elon
21:05
Speaker 3: Musk has done to Twitter.
21:06
Speaker 4: Now X.
21:07
Speaker 1: What was his reaction to that.
21:08
Speaker 2: I mean, because I've been I've had the privilege of
21:11
Speaker 2: having quite a few meals with you, and having those
21:14
Speaker 2: types of spirited conversations are very fun because you're honest,
21:20
Speaker 2: you're blunt, but it's also a genuine conversation.
21:24
Speaker 1: Was what was the demeanor towards that?
21:27
Speaker 3: Listen, he's very smart, and he's he's he's a geek.
21:32
Speaker 3: And I don't mean that pejoratively. I mean, heck, I'm
21:34
Speaker 3: a geek like that. I actually can talk to geeks
21:37
Speaker 3: quite well. I mean, I'm my parents are both mathematicians
21:40
Speaker 3: and computer programmers.
21:41
Speaker 4: So if you.
21:42
Speaker 3: Really want to walk out, But by the way, when
21:44
Speaker 3: I hang out with you, Ben, you like enhance my
21:47
Speaker 3: cool factor dramatically.
21:48
Speaker 4: Like you were like a.
21:50
Speaker 3: College jock at Old miss playing Division one tennis. I
21:54
Speaker 3: was a debater at Princeton. I mean, there's got to.
21:56
Speaker 2: Bring some of the table you know, I bring that,
21:58
Speaker 2: You bring the smarts.
21:59
Speaker 1: Everybody went.
22:00
Speaker 3: Look, I just appreciate in the entire course of our friendship,
22:03
Speaker 3: you've never once given me a wedgie. You haven't given
22:05
Speaker 3: me a noggie, and you haven't stuffed me in the Locker.
22:07
Speaker 3: So I'm glad of that. But look, I promise Zuckerberg
22:11
Speaker 3: has gotten all three of those and so I can
22:15
Speaker 3: talk to people who are geeks, because that's the world.
22:18
Speaker 4: I come from.
22:21
Speaker 5: You know.
22:21
Speaker 3: I will say this, when we had this dinner, and
22:23
Speaker 3: this was years ago, I do think he was intellectually
22:28
Speaker 3: trying to struggle through and think through this issues. I
22:32
Speaker 3: don't think Zuckerberg is a hard lefty someone like Jack Dorsey.
22:36
Speaker 3: I've never met Jack Dorsey, but the old CEO of Twitter, Yeah,
22:39
Speaker 3: you knew he was. I've had him testify and I've
22:42
Speaker 3: questioned him in hearings. Everything about Jack Dorsey screamed hard lefty.
22:47
Speaker 3: I don't think that's what Zuckerberg is. Does he lean
22:50
Speaker 3: left of center?
22:51
Speaker 4: Yes, but.
22:55
Speaker 3: It was interesting on the free speech issues. So he's
22:58
Speaker 3: actually in the world to free speech. He's given some
23:01
Speaker 3: speeches saying, gosh, tech should protect free speech.
23:05
Speaker 4: Now. Facebook has been terrible on this.
23:07
Speaker 3: They suppressed the Hunter laptop, the Hunter Biden laptop. They
23:12
Speaker 3: suppressed speech about COVID. They aggressively suppressed any discussion about
23:19
Speaker 3: the COVID virus origin coming from the Wuhan Institute of Rology,
23:24
Speaker 3: which I will note this podcast covered before just about
23:28
Speaker 3: any other place in the world. Multiple times we laid
23:31
Speaker 3: out the facts for it on Verdict. But it was
23:35
Speaker 3: interesting in talking with Zuckerbrand. I don't know him well,
23:38
Speaker 3: but you know, three three and a half hour dinner,
23:41
Speaker 3: he was someone intellectually trying to figure out what the
23:44
Speaker 3: right answer is. And in his general approach, he would
23:48
Speaker 3: point to number one Twitter and he'd be like, oh,
23:50
Speaker 3: they're worse than we are. And by the way, when
23:53
Speaker 3: Dorsey was CEO, he was right, and he would point
23:55
Speaker 3: to number two Google and they're bigger and more powerful
23:58
Speaker 3: and more dangerous than they are. He was number two,
24:01
Speaker 3: write on that, and then number three point to TikTok
24:04
Speaker 3: and they're Chinese commies and he was right in that,
24:07
Speaker 3: And so it was the sort of thing Facebook kind.
24:10
Speaker 2: Of benefit its me, look at everybody else. But so
24:13
Speaker 2: then that brings up this question. How much of do
24:16
Speaker 2: you think this letter could have been connected to the
24:18
Speaker 2: fact that we've seen the pendulum swing so much with
24:23
Speaker 2: a cell of Twitter and Dorsey losing that to Elon Musk,
24:27
Speaker 2: who is all about free speech.
24:30
Speaker 3: I think significantly, And you and I have talked about.
24:32
Speaker 3: I think the fact that Elon Musk bought Twitter was
24:35
Speaker 3: the single most important development for free speech in decades,
24:39
Speaker 3: change the terrain of media. So Facebook is feeling pressure
24:43
Speaker 3: to be a greater free speech forum because Twitter is
24:48
Speaker 3: I think, the most important free speech forum in the
24:50
Speaker 3: world right now. But I also think, and I can't
24:56
Speaker 3: overstate this, look I talked to a lot of people
24:58
Speaker 3: in the tech world. I think Zuckerberg is pissed at
25:04
Speaker 3: the totalitarian lefties who he's sort of tried to cozy
25:07
Speaker 3: up to, and they've taken his money and kind of
25:13
Speaker 3: crapped all over him. That's an interesting moment. It's just
25:18
Speaker 3: an interesting inflection moment. So I am angry about what
25:23
Speaker 3: Facebook did in twenty twenty, and I'm going to continue
25:26
Speaker 3: to lay that out at length. That being said, I'm
25:30
Speaker 3: a big believer in redemption, so I will welcome Zuckerberg, Mark,
25:35
Speaker 3: if you want to defend free speech, if you want
25:38
Speaker 3: to be a champion of free speech, I want to
25:40
Speaker 3: give an invitation to Mark Zuckerberg be an even bigger
25:44
Speaker 3: defender of free speech than Elon Musk, because, by the way,
25:47
Speaker 3: competition would be awesome. If Facebook steps forward and says
25:50
Speaker 3: we will be a forum for free.
25:52
Speaker 4: Speech x can you match.
25:55
Speaker 3: That's even better because competition will make both better, and
25:59
Speaker 3: so I don't want some conservatives are responding to this
26:02
Speaker 3: letter by just beating Zuckerberg over the head with a stick.
26:05
Speaker 4: I think that's a mistake.
26:06
Speaker 3: If you want to come into the light, come into
26:08
Speaker 3: the light, we welcome you. If you will embrace free speech,
26:12
Speaker 3: that's good for America and good for the world.
26:15
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's an interesting perspective, certainly because mine was more cynical, like, Okay,
26:19
Speaker 2: he's just hedging his bets, as I mentioned, with the
26:21
Speaker 2: election coming up, and if it is different than that,
26:25
Speaker 2: you're right. Welcome him in and say welcome to the
26:28
Speaker 2: club where we may disagree on issues, but let everyone
26:31
Speaker 2: have a voice and don't pick winners and losers when
26:34
Speaker 2: it comes to free speech. I want to talk to
26:36
Speaker 2: you real quick about Patriot Mobile. Americans are tired and
26:39
Speaker 2: frustrated by installing economy, inflation, endless wars than relentless assault
26:45
Speaker 2: on our values. Thankfully, there are companies like Patriot Mobile
26:49
Speaker 2: that still believe in America and our constitution. I'm proud
26:53
Speaker 2: to tell you that I use Patriot Mobile because they're
26:56
Speaker 2: on the front lines fighting for our first and Second
26:58
Speaker 2: Amendment rights for the sanctity of life, as well as
27:02
Speaker 2: our military, our veterans, our first responders, and our wounded warriors.
27:07
Speaker 1: How do they do that? This is the best part.
27:09
Speaker 2: When I switched to Patriot Mobile from Big Mobile, I
27:13
Speaker 2: got the same exact service I was accustomed to, but
27:16
Speaker 2: without the woll agenda of the left. In fact, Patriot
27:20
Speaker 2: Mobile takes about five percent of my bill every month
27:23
Speaker 2: at no extra cost to me, and they give it
27:27
Speaker 2: back to conservative causes and organizations.
27:30
Speaker 1: It's that list that I just gave you.
27:33
Speaker 2: I love that because I know I'm partnered with a
27:36
Speaker 2: company that stands up for what I believe in. Now,
27:38
Speaker 2: Big Mobile they're fighting against your values. They're giving massive
27:42
Speaker 2: donations democratic causes, candidates and organizations, including organizations that are
27:48
Speaker 2: paying for abortions right now. If you don't want your
27:52
Speaker 2: money going there, take a stand for conservative causes and
27:56
Speaker 2: put your values first. By switching to Patriot Mobile, you'll
28:00
Speaker 2: get the same nationwide coverage is the Big providers, because
28:03
Speaker 2: Patriot Mobile use the same exact towers that you're using
28:06
Speaker 2: right now, and they back their service with a coverage guarantee,
28:10
Speaker 2: and you can keep your same number you have now
28:12
Speaker 2: keep your phone you have now or upgrade to a
28:14
Speaker 2: new one.
28:15
Speaker 1: So how do you switch? It's so easy.
28:17
Speaker 2: Now go to Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict. Patriotmobile dot
28:21
Speaker 2: com slash verdict. Are called them nine to seven to
28:24
Speaker 2: two Patriot. That's nine to seven to two Patriot and
28:29
Speaker 2: if you use the promo code vertict, you're gonna get
28:31
Speaker 2: a free month of service today nine seven to two
28:34
Speaker 2: Patriot for your free month of service today or Patriot
28:37
Speaker 2: Mobile dot com slash verdict. There is also another story
28:43
Speaker 2: you mentioned earlier, and this one I'm sorry, Senner, I
28:46
Speaker 2: just laughed when I saw this happen in real time.
28:50
Speaker 2: Kamala Harris has come out and now flip flopped on.
28:53
Speaker 1: The border wall issue.
28:56
Speaker 2: She is one that said she would never, okay never
29:01
Speaker 2: ever support building a wall, and I'm going to play
29:06
Speaker 2: it because I think people should hear. This is her
29:08
Speaker 2: in her own words in Des Moines, Iowa.
29:11
Speaker 5: Let me be very clear, I'm not going to vote
29:12
Speaker 5: for a wall under any circumstances. And I do support
29:15
Speaker 5: border security, and if we want to talk about that,
29:17
Speaker 5: let's do that.
29:18
Speaker 2: But I will never support a wall under any circumstances. Now,
29:23
Speaker 2: the polling data is not looking good for her on
29:26
Speaker 2: security at the border, and she's like, Okay, I guess
29:29
Speaker 2: I might be in favor of wall, even putting out
29:31
Speaker 2: an ad that shows Donald Trump's wall in her ad.
29:34
Speaker 3: Well, the single greatest vulnerability to Kamala Harrison Democrats nationally
29:39
Speaker 3: is the open borders they've had for four years. It
29:41
Speaker 3: is the number one issue voters are concerned about. We're
29:44
Speaker 3: seeing an invasion at our southern border, eleven point five
29:46
Speaker 3: million illegal immigrants. People are seeing the death, the suffering,
29:51
Speaker 3: the children being brutalized, the women being sexually assaulted. People
29:54
Speaker 3: are seeing the criminals being released who are murdering Americans,
29:57
Speaker 3: who are raping women, who are assaulting kids. People are
30:00
Speaker 3: seeing the risk of terrorism coming across the southern border,
30:03
Speaker 3: and they're very unhappy. So the Democrats are looking at
30:06
Speaker 3: the same poll numbers we are. They realize, gosh, this
30:09
Speaker 3: is a vulnerability. Now, mind you, They're not willing to
30:11
Speaker 3: change their policies. They still want another eleven million, another
30:15
Speaker 3: twenty million, another thirty million league immigrants to come into
30:18
Speaker 3: this country because they view them all as future Democrat voters.
30:20
Speaker 3: They want to stay in power. But we've got sixty
30:23
Speaker 3: nine days to election day, and so in the sixty
30:25
Speaker 3: nine days to election day, they will say whatever whatever
30:28
Speaker 3: they feel they can to convince the voters to elect
30:31
Speaker 3: Kamala Harris, and after which she will go hard left
30:34
Speaker 3: and continue to destroy this country. Now we saw at
30:38
Speaker 3: the outset of her campaign. By the way, she's been
30:41
Speaker 3: the presumptive Democrat nominee for over a month, she's done
30:45
Speaker 3: zero interviews, no press conferences, no questions. They put her
30:49
Speaker 3: in front of a teleprompter, she reads the teleprompter, They
30:53
Speaker 3: tackle her, they throw her back in Joe Biden's basement.
30:55
Speaker 3: They say shut up and please don't say anything. The
30:58
Speaker 3: first major policy provision she came out for was no
31:03
Speaker 3: taxes on tips. That was literally a proposal Donald Trump
31:06
Speaker 3: rolled out in Nevada. It's a proposal, by the way,
31:08
Speaker 3: that I introduced in the Senate. I introduced it, the
31:10
Speaker 3: no Taxes on Tips legislation. When I introduced it, both
31:14
Speaker 3: Democrat senators from Nevada co sponsored my legislation. And there's
31:18
Speaker 3: a reason for that, which is twenty five percent of
31:20
Speaker 3: the workers in Nevada are tipped workers. And so both
31:22
Speaker 3: Democrats immediately sponsored my legislation. Kamala came out and suddenly
31:27
Speaker 3: had this crazy idea. Hey, no taxes on tips. So
31:29
Speaker 3: that was where she started. She is now gone. So
31:33
Speaker 3: she also said this week she is not for an
31:36
Speaker 3: EV mandate. Suddenly she loves her some internal combustion engine.
31:40
Speaker 3: No electric vehicle mandate, just keep your car. Never mind.
31:45
Speaker 3: For the last four years of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris,
31:47
Speaker 3: they have been pushing an EV mandate date on every front.
31:50
Speaker 3: They've been trying to ban the internal combustion engine. They've
31:52
Speaker 3: been using regulatory assaults in every front. None of that exists.
31:56
Speaker 3: As Obi Wan Kenobi said, these are not the drones
31:58
Speaker 3: you're looking for. Do not pay attention to anything Kamala
32:02
Speaker 3: Harris and Joe Biden have done. Listen instead to the
32:05
Speaker 3: nonsense they're spewing sixty nine days before the election. But
32:09
Speaker 3: this truly is the one that is is the cherry
32:12
Speaker 3: on the top of the banana. Sunday, let me read
32:15
Speaker 3: the headline from Axios quote Harris flip flops on building
32:20
Speaker 3: the border wall. If she's elected president. Kamala Harris pledges
32:24
Speaker 3: to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a wall
32:27
Speaker 3: along the Southern border, a project she once opposed it
32:31
Speaker 3: and called un American during the Trump administration. By the way,
32:36
Speaker 3: I'm going to break news right now, and this may
32:38
Speaker 3: not be news, you know, but next week I am
32:41
Speaker 3: reliably told from leaks within the White House that Kamala
32:44
Speaker 3: Harris plans to dye her hair blonde, dye her skin orange,
32:49
Speaker 3: and buy enormously long red ties and wear only those
32:53
Speaker 3: in public appearances.
32:54
Speaker 2: And you got to add, Beyonce's going to be in
32:56
Speaker 2: there with her doing the same thing, right, because if
32:58
Speaker 2: we're going to start rumors, whom as we go back
33:00
Speaker 2: to that one to get people excited.
33:02
Speaker 3: But by the way, Beyonce is going to be blonde
33:04
Speaker 3: and also with orange skin.
33:08
Speaker 1: I love it.
33:10
Speaker 3: Listen, I want to go back. I want you to
33:13
Speaker 3: listen to a montage that Martha McCallum put together on
33:16
Speaker 3: Fox of Kamala's prior positions on the wall, because this
33:20
Speaker 3: is Look, there's a Yiddish word, juspa, that doesn't even
33:24
Speaker 3: begin to capture what Kamala Harris has claimed that she's
33:27
Speaker 3: going to build.
33:27
Speaker 4: The wall is. Now listen to this axious.
33:31
Speaker 6: News calling out Vice President Harris's quote flip flop on
33:34
Speaker 6: the border wall. Here is some of what she has
33:37
Speaker 6: said in the past.
33:38
Speaker 1: Watch.
33:39
Speaker 5: I'm all for increased border security where we need it.
33:42
Speaker 1: I am not for a wall.
33:44
Speaker 5: I specialize on transnational criminal orgnisations.
33:47
Speaker 1: That wall, I'm going to stop them.
33:49
Speaker 7: No, no, okay.
34:01
Speaker 6: But last week Harris said that she supports the bipartisan
34:05
Speaker 6: border bill, which includes requiring the Trump border wall. According
34:11
Speaker 6: to its negotiators, Oxyo is reporting that Tim Harris says
34:14
Speaker 6: that the bill doesn't include new wall funding, it just
34:18
Speaker 6: extends the timeline to spend funds appropriated during the Trump administration.
34:24
Speaker 6: So we hope we'll hear directly from the candidate to
34:27
Speaker 6: clear that up in an interview, which we would love
34:30
Speaker 6: to see over the next several days.
34:32
Speaker 2: By the way, the interview is now going to be
34:34
Speaker 2: a joint interview, apparently on CNN, where she doesn't have
34:37
Speaker 2: to worry about babbling so much because the VP will
34:40
Speaker 2: be there with their candidate, which still makes me laugh.
34:44
Speaker 2: That's her first interview, But we have no policies, decisions.
34:47
Speaker 1: It's just sold.
34:48
Speaker 4: Ben.
34:48
Speaker 3: Let me ask you something, so, Ben, you have been
34:52
Speaker 3: following politics closely since you were like in the womb. Yeah,
34:57
Speaker 3: and it's your birthday. So like in the womb was
34:59
Speaker 3: for three.
35:00
Speaker 1: Years, you're going numbers.
35:04
Speaker 3: I'm digging this in forty three years. Do you know
35:09
Speaker 3: of a single instance ever, And I'm asking this comprehensively in.
35:13
Speaker 4: Forty three years where.
35:15
Speaker 3: A presidential candidate was so terrified to do an interview
35:20
Speaker 3: on their own that they demanded their VP candidate be
35:23
Speaker 3: with there with them.
35:24
Speaker 2: Yeah, bring a buddy with you, right, No, I've never
35:27
Speaker 2: seen that. But what's even more weird. It's weird, but
35:30
Speaker 2: it's even more shocking then, is we had a convention.
35:34
Speaker 2: And if you go to her website right now, because
35:36
Speaker 2: I check it every day when I'm doing my show,
35:38
Speaker 2: no policy. There is still no policy tabs on her
35:41
Speaker 2: damn website.
35:42
Speaker 3: There's no taxes on tips and building a wall and
35:46
Speaker 3: protect the internal combustion engine. Yeah, and the same wall
35:50
Speaker 3: that it's not actually on the website for the fact
35:52
Speaker 3: checkers there. That's just the policy she's rolling out. But
35:55
Speaker 3: she has no policies on her website.
35:57
Speaker 2: Well, and that's the port I think that Axis was
35:59
Speaker 2: trying to get at, is like, give me a break.
36:01
Speaker 2: I mean, Kamala Harris, if you go back.
36:04
Speaker 4: And by the way, Axios is not a right wing website.
36:07
Speaker 3: It is a center left media organizations. It's not one
36:11
Speaker 3: of the most left wing organizations, but it's not conservative. No,
36:16
Speaker 3: and they're pointing out, are you friggin kidding me? Like
36:19
Speaker 3: this is what she's saying.
36:21
Speaker 2: Yeah, and let's go back to what she called the wall,
36:24
Speaker 2: which she's now using parts of the wall visually in
36:27
Speaker 2: her ads.
36:27
Speaker 5: Listen, we don't need to build a wall. This is
36:30
Speaker 5: a crisis of his own making. And by definition does
36:34
Speaker 5: planes speak basic English language definition, it is not an emergency.
36:39
Speaker 5: What's going to end up happening is that he will
36:43
Speaker 5: end up without any question if he proceeds. We're going
36:47
Speaker 5: to be looking at a situation where, in particular, homeowners
36:49
Speaker 5: and landowners in places like New Mexico and Texas are
36:53
Speaker 5: probably going to look at government taking their land. We're
36:57
Speaker 5: looking at military resources being focused again on the president's
37:02
Speaker 5: vanity project instead of focused on real national security issues.
37:06
Speaker 2: I mean, she says it's a vanity project and it's
37:09
Speaker 2: not a crisis and we don't need it, and everybody
37:12
Speaker 2: this Donald Trump is the idiot. I'm the brilliant one.
37:16
Speaker 2: She said this for years, and now she's using Trump's
37:19
Speaker 2: wall as like as a prop for her own campaign.
37:24
Speaker 3: Listen, I serve for years on the Senate Judiciary Committee
37:27
Speaker 3: with Kamala Harris one hundred percent of the time, without exception.
37:32
Speaker 4: She was hard left.
37:34
Speaker 3: As the non partisan bill tracking organization guv TRAC raided her,
37:38
Speaker 3: she was the single most liberal senator in the entire
37:41
Speaker 3: US Senate. She voted to the left of Bernie Sanders,
37:43
Speaker 3: to the left of Elizabeth Warren. She has never, once
37:47
Speaker 3: in any hearing I've been in, expressed any concern with
37:52
Speaker 3: securing the border. She is always, always, always sighted on
37:55
Speaker 3: side of illial aliens, of the cartels, of the human traffickers,
37:59
Speaker 3: of the drugs mugglers. In fact, in one hearing with
38:03
Speaker 3: the head of ICE, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement she
38:06
Speaker 3: analogized ICE agents to the ku Klux Klan, which is grotesque,
38:11
Speaker 3: it is offensive. And so now when she's pretending she
38:16
Speaker 3: will secure the border, she has been in charge of
38:19
Speaker 3: the border for the last four years. She has been
38:22
Speaker 3: the borders are as much as the media is trying
38:25
Speaker 3: to erase that those are the facts.
38:28
Speaker 4: She wanted.
38:28
Speaker 3: This outcome, this invasion, is her desired outcome, and if
38:33
Speaker 3: God forbid, she gets elected president eleven and a half
38:36
Speaker 3: million is going to become twenty million or even thirty
38:38
Speaker 3: million illegal immigrants.
38:40
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's it's truly astounding. And Kama Harris on the
38:44
Speaker 2: border over the years. It's twenty seventeen. I go back,
38:47
Speaker 2: she was asking taxpayers to pay for a border wall.
38:50
Speaker 2: She said it was quote a terrible idea. She said
38:54
Speaker 2: Trump's border wall was stupid in eighteen. In nineteen, she
38:58
Speaker 2: said funding Trump's unrealistic border wall would be a gross
39:02
Speaker 2: misuse of taxpayer dollars. And that is where she's always been.
39:07
Speaker 2: But now it's election season, let's rewrite history of the past.
39:10
Speaker 1: And I don't know. Now she's tough on the border.
39:14
Speaker 2: I hope this doesn't play out the way she thinks
39:16
Speaker 2: it is that the media is going to cover for.
39:18
Speaker 2: And I've got a question about that. I want to
39:20
Speaker 2: ask you in a second. But let me tell you
39:21
Speaker 2: about AMO squared. I love it when I get notes
39:24
Speaker 2: from you guys on social media telling us that you
39:28
Speaker 2: get to use companies that I tell you about.
39:31
Speaker 1: And that you love them. Ammo squared is just awesome.
39:34
Speaker 2: If you're a Second Amendment guy or gal, and you
39:36
Speaker 2: love to shoot, and you want to make sure you
39:38
Speaker 2: got AMO no matter what happens in the future. If
39:42
Speaker 2: there's a run on Ammo like we saw during COVID,
39:44
Speaker 2: you're covered if you're at Ammo Squared because AMO Squared
39:47
Speaker 2: helps you ensure that you have Ammo when you need it.
39:50
Speaker 1: It is an.
39:51
Speaker 2: Automated approach to purchsing Ammo on any budget. All you
39:54
Speaker 2: do is pick your calibers, you set your budget, then
39:58
Speaker 2: you select a shipping trigger and that it's your AMMO
40:00
Speaker 2: grows slowly over time, and this is the cool part.
40:04
Speaker 2: It is stored for free as it builds up, and
40:07
Speaker 2: its shipped with a click of three to one, and
40:10
Speaker 2: it shipped with a click of a button or automatically
40:14
Speaker 2: on your schedule. Unlike a traditional subscription service, you aren't
40:18
Speaker 2: forced into a set budget or a monthly shipment. You
40:21
Speaker 2: decide your budget, you schedule when you want your AMMO
40:24
Speaker 2: to arrive. AMO Squared also offers nearly seventy different caliber options.
40:30
Speaker 2: And if you buy one caliber for a long time
40:33
Speaker 2: and then maybe you decide you don't need it anymore,
40:36
Speaker 2: maybe you switch caliber firearms, not a problem. You can
40:39
Speaker 2: trade it for another caliber. Now, what happens if prices
40:42
Speaker 2: go through the roof like they did during COVID. Well,
40:45
Speaker 2: you can cash in on that investment like a four
40:47
Speaker 2: to oh one K and sell that Ammo back for
40:50
Speaker 2: big markups. So if you want to try Amo squared,
40:55
Speaker 2: I want to give you some free Amo right now
40:57
Speaker 2: in your account. All you got to do is go
40:59
Speaker 2: to Amo squared dot com, slash ben ammosquare dot com
41:04
Speaker 2: slash bend a day to get free Ammo in your account.
41:07
Speaker 2: There is no minimum to buy, no membership needed, and
41:10
Speaker 2: no extra fees. Customers can buy Ammo on a small
41:13
Speaker 2: budget and watch it grow. Amosquare dot com slash bend
41:17
Speaker 2: a day to get free Ammo in your account. Senator, finally,
41:21
Speaker 2: I want to ask you it finally came out that
41:25
Speaker 2: she's gonna do an interview. We mentioned a moment ago
41:28
Speaker 2: on CNN, but she's gonna do it with someone holding
41:31
Speaker 2: her hand. That is the VP that's gonna change the
41:35
Speaker 2: dynamic of the interview. It's gonna be more I think,
41:38
Speaker 2: like propaganda. That's why they're agreeing to this, because like,
41:42
Speaker 2: let's talk about how amazing you two are and your
41:46
Speaker 2: relationship and how excited you are. It's not gonna get
41:49
Speaker 2: into the policy stuff. That's what drives me nuts about
41:53
Speaker 2: the fact that they're even calling this an interview.
41:55
Speaker 1: It's not, it's propaganda.
41:58
Speaker 3: Well, let me say several points this. Number One, the
42:01
Speaker 3: Kamala Harris campaign spent weeks. I mean it's been I
42:05
Speaker 3: think thirty seven days since she was the presumptive dominee.
42:08
Speaker 3: They've done zero interviews, they've done zero press conferences. The
42:12
Speaker 3: last couple of weeks, they've been feeling out different media
42:14
Speaker 3: outlets saying, Hey, who wants to do the first interview?
42:17
Speaker 3: Because I guess we can't go all the way to
42:20
Speaker 3: election day without doing interviews, So we're going to do one.
42:23
Speaker 3: Who's willing to throw us the most softballs, who's willing
42:25
Speaker 3: to give us the most gentle format imaginable? And it
42:29
Speaker 3: turns out Ding Ding Ding Winter Chicken Dinner CNN step forward.
42:35
Speaker 3: So there are several questions. Number One, it is astonishing
42:40
Speaker 3: that the interview is not Kamala Harris, but it's Kamala
42:42
Speaker 3: Harris and Tim Waltz, and presumably Tim Waltz is sitting
42:44
Speaker 3: there so if that Kamala is screwing up, Tim Waltz
42:47
Speaker 3: can step in and try to bail her.
42:49
Speaker 1: Out.
42:50
Speaker 3: I have never seen in my life. I'm ten years
42:53
Speaker 3: older than you are, I'm fifty three. I have never
42:56
Speaker 3: once seen a presidential candidate who was so week that
43:01
Speaker 3: he or she needed their vice presidential candidate as a
43:05
Speaker 3: safety blanket. That is bizarre. Can you imagine I'm just
43:08
Speaker 3: just just think back a little bit. Can you imagine
43:12
Speaker 3: Donald Trump saying I need Mike Pence there? Yeah, like
43:16
Speaker 3: it's it's unimaginable. Can you imagine Hillary Clinton saying I
43:20
Speaker 3: need Tim Caine there? Can you imagine Barack Obama saying
43:23
Speaker 3: I need Joe Biden there? Can Can you imagine Ronald
43:26
Speaker 3: Reagan saying I need George Bush there? Like it is?
43:30
Speaker 3: You can go back? Can you imagine George Washington saying
43:34
Speaker 3: I need John Adams there?
43:36
Speaker 7: Like?
43:37
Speaker 3: It is a bizarre thing for a presidential candidate to
43:41
Speaker 3: be so weak that they need someone to hold their hand.
43:44
Speaker 3: But secondly, this is a pre taped interview. They're gonna
43:50
Speaker 3: pretape it.
43:51
Speaker 2: Hold on to say that again, because I think people
43:53
Speaker 2: don't understand that.
43:54
Speaker 1: Say that again. That's a very important data point here.
43:58
Speaker 3: This is a pre taped interview. They're gonna pretape it.
44:03
Speaker 3: And then CNN is going to edit it. And I believe,
44:07
Speaker 3: and I think many Americans believe CNN is gonna edit it.
44:10
Speaker 3: So if and when Kamala says things that are dumb,
44:13
Speaker 3: if and when she says some word salad, if and
44:15
Speaker 3: when there's a moment that's bad, they'll cut it right
44:18
Speaker 3: out that Like, like I have to ask, does CNN
44:23
Speaker 3: and you worked what seven years is?
44:26
Speaker 1: In hell?
44:26
Speaker 3: Yes, do they have anywhere in that institution a tiny
44:32
Speaker 3: shred of journalistic integrity? If CNN did, here's what CNN
44:37
Speaker 3: should do.
44:38
Speaker 4: Say.
44:39
Speaker 3: We will release the entirety of the interview. We're gonna
44:41
Speaker 3: put out every word of it. We're not going to
44:44
Speaker 3: edit it. We're gonna put it all out. That's actually
44:47
Speaker 3: what a real journalistic outlet would do. We're not going
44:51
Speaker 3: to do a package that is a promo piece for
44:55
Speaker 3: the for the Harris campaign. We're going to release, We're
44:58
Speaker 3: gonna ask questions and release what she actually says, not
45:03
Speaker 3: editing out the bad stuff and only including the good stuff.
45:06
Speaker 2: Well, and this goes back to CNN's I think desperation
45:11
Speaker 2: to get the interview. They were willing to they were
45:14
Speaker 2: willing to basically do whatever it took. And so I
45:18
Speaker 2: think the deal was and again, knowing how this works
45:22
Speaker 2: behind the scenes, Hey, we want this thing to be
45:25
Speaker 2: not live, we want it to be Taylor.
45:27
Speaker 3: Were begging, they were gravely. They were conceding that will
45:30
Speaker 3: give you whatever, you will be.
45:31
Speaker 1: Whatever you want.
45:32
Speaker 2: Just give us the interview, give us the interview. Okay,
45:34
Speaker 2: well now we also want the VP to be with her. Okay, great,
45:36
Speaker 2: what else do you need from us? And because if
45:39
Speaker 2: you look at just data live interviews that you can
45:43
Speaker 2: promote as by the way, the last big interview Kamala did.
45:47
Speaker 3: The last big interview Kamala did was with Lester Holt. Yeah,
45:51
Speaker 3: and Lester Holt asked to actually asked her some real
45:55
Speaker 3: questions as she looked like an imbecile. He pointed out
45:58
Speaker 3: that she had not been to the southern border, she'd
46:01
Speaker 3: not been to the Rio Grande Valley, and she like
46:03
Speaker 3: it was a disaster. It's striking that even as biased
46:07
Speaker 3: as the big networks are, they wanted more. They wanted
46:11
Speaker 3: make sure you will protect her. But here's the question
46:14
Speaker 3: I want to close this podcast on. You know Dana Bash.
46:18
Speaker 3: I know Dana well, I've probably done a dozen interviews
46:21
Speaker 3: with Dana. She has now what is the biggest interview
46:26
Speaker 3: of her career? What does Dana Bash do to not
46:32
Speaker 3: be a laughingstock, to not be a patsy and simply
46:38
Speaker 3: a spokesperson for the.
46:41
Speaker 4: Kamala Harris campaign.
46:42
Speaker 3: Dana, recently she's been on air saying Kamala was never
46:46
Speaker 3: the borders are. She was never the borders are. So
46:47
Speaker 3: Dana has not been helping herself by giving those talking points.
46:52
Speaker 3: But I got to say, look, Dana, there's got to
46:55
Speaker 3: be a part of her somewhere that desires to be
46:58
Speaker 3: a real journalist. What does she do to not go
47:02
Speaker 3: down in history as a total stooge.
47:04
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's a great question. I don't know if it's
47:07
Speaker 2: just pure sellout. No matter what you got the interview,
47:10
Speaker 2: you play by the rules and you act like you
47:12
Speaker 2: accomplished something. When the interview's over and you're all glad
47:14
Speaker 2: and each other and go, that was so great. That
47:16
Speaker 2: was amazing, great interview. And how do you sleep at night?
47:20
Speaker 2: I guess you just cast that scene in check and
47:22
Speaker 2: you say, oh, it'll be fine. And look, I don't
47:25
Speaker 2: think any of her.
47:26
Speaker 3: Is that your prediction then that she totally rolls over
47:29
Speaker 3: because any difficult question, I mean I mean, you know her,
47:31
Speaker 3: I'm asking.
47:32
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, as a very I don't.
47:34
Speaker 3: Know the answer. I'm not trying to feed you the answer.
47:36
Speaker 3: I'm asking you legitimate no.
47:37
Speaker 1: I look, I've watched her.
47:39
Speaker 2: When i've watched her, we were on set together when
47:42
Speaker 2: Bernie Sanders was running, for example, when she was tough
47:44
Speaker 2: on Bernie, but that was because they wanted Bernie out.
47:47
Speaker 2: And so if she's all in for Harris, which I
47:51
Speaker 2: believe that she absolutely is, and I don't think there's
47:54
Speaker 2: anybody that judges her selling out in this interview because
47:59
Speaker 2: all the members of the media, the mainstream media, of
48:01
Speaker 2: the liberal media, they're all in this together.
48:04
Speaker 1: So you're not judged by your peers.
48:07
Speaker 2: I do think back in the day, whether it was
48:09
Speaker 2: Kronkite or broke Call, or or or Jinnings, like if
48:13
Speaker 2: you did a tie or tim Reser, if you did
48:16
Speaker 2: a crappy interview, there were people around you that judged you.
48:21
Speaker 2: And you were walking around and people are whispering about
48:24
Speaker 2: like what a sellout?
48:25
Speaker 1: Did you see? How pathetic that was?
48:27
Speaker 3: There's not a tiny and maybe naively hopeful statement, danna
48:33
Speaker 3: prove the naysayers wrong, do a real interview.
48:37
Speaker 4: And then don't edit the damn thing show the real answers.
48:40
Speaker 1: I hope that happens.
48:41
Speaker 2: I really do, and it's and the sad part is
48:44
Speaker 2: you shouldn't have to encourage a real journalist to do
48:47
Speaker 2: their damn job. But here we are. Don't forget. We
48:49
Speaker 2: do this show Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Make sure that
48:52
Speaker 2: subscribe or auto download button wherever you're listening, and on
48:56
Speaker 2: those in between days, I'll keep you update on my podcast,
48:59
Speaker 2: The ben ferg some podcasts, so make sure you download
49:01
Speaker 2: that one as well, and The Senator and I will
49:03
Speaker 2: see you back here on Friday morning