Latest / The Ben Ferguson Podcast / Nick Saban Addresses NIL in College Sports, Hunter Calls for Public Hearing then Bails, & NY Wants $500MILL from Trump Week In Review

Transcript

Nick Saban Addresses NIL in College Sports, Hunter Calls for Public Hearing then Bails, & NY Wants $500MILL from Trump Week In Review · The Ben Ferguson Podcast

• 0:01
  Speaker 1: Welcome to Verdict with Ted Cruz. Week in Review. Ben
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: Ferguson with you, and these are the stories that you
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: may have missed that we talked about this past week.
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: First up, Nick Saban testifies about the importance of NIL
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: the deals with athletes students, and how it could help
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: or even hurt and destroy college sports. We'll take a
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: look at what Congress may do to get involved. Also,
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: Hunter Biden runs away from the public hearing that he demanded,
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: so when is he going to be seen again in Washington.
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: We'll talk about those developments as well. And finally, New
• 0:39
  Speaker 1: York wants five hundred million a half a billion dollars
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: from Donald Trump by Tuesday, and if he doesn't come
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: up with the money, they want to seize his assets.
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: So what will Trump do next? We'll dive into that.
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: It's the weekend review and it starts right now. Sata,
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: you mentioned this roundtable, and I want to play some
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: of your opening remarks. You were sitting there next to
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: Nick Saban, which is, by the way, if you're a
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: sports fan, it's just cool. He's a legendary coach. I'm
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: so glad he retired so I don't have to deal
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: with him playing him every year because he's a brilliant
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: mind in football. But here's part of what you had
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: to say.
• 1:16
  Speaker 2: Fear and many others, fear threatens to jeopardize all that
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: is working so well with college athletics. More and more
• 1:24
  Speaker 2: there is agreement that Congress needs to act to ensure
• 1:27
  Speaker 2: that we have a level playing field, that we have
• 1:29
  Speaker 2: real competition, that college sports can continue to thrive in
• 1:35
  Speaker 2: the decades going forward. And this roundtable is designed to
• 1:39
  Speaker 2: be a discussion with numerous stakeholders who are engaged in
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: the process to get perspectives on what is needed and
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: what is not Right now, we have the brave new
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: world of nil and college athletes now, many of them
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: earning very significant sums of money. I for one, think
• 1:58
  Speaker 2: that's a good thing, and get as good that young
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: men and young women who worked incredibly hard to develop
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: fantastic skills that in turn can generate enormous economic activity
• 2:10
  Speaker 2: should be entitled to enjoy the fruits of their labor,
• 2:13
  Speaker 2: should be entitled to benefit. But we also need a
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: system where we have real competition and fair competition, and
• 2:21
  Speaker 2: not just one or two monster schools and everyone else
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: as a hanger on, but real competition throughout the league
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: to make for good games. We also need to make
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: sure the rules that are in place don't just focus
• 2:37
  Speaker 2: on Power five conferences, don't just focus on football and basketball,
• 2:41
  Speaker 2: which generate most of the revenue. But we need to
• 2:45
  Speaker 2: keep in mind and keep our focus on smaller schools,
• 2:49
  Speaker 2: Division two schools, Division three schools, and we need to
• 2:52
  Speaker 2: focus on the many other sports that are not going
• 2:54
  Speaker 2: to be playing on ESPN, but nonetheless provide an avviage
• 3:00
  Speaker 2: for young women and young men to go to school
• 3:02
  Speaker 2: and to get an education. We now have a patchwork
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: of nil laws state by state that makes it difficult
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: to navigate. We have multiple active litigation going on that
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: prevents the NCAA and conferences and universities from enforcing the
• 3:20
  Speaker 2: rules or even knowing what the rules are. And we
• 3:23
  Speaker 2: have a lot of uncertainty for student athletes and for
• 3:26
  Speaker 2: agents and collectives who are trying to navigate the evolving
• 3:29
  Speaker 2: and unpredictable rules but uncertain what they're going to be
• 3:32
  Speaker 2: today and even more so, what they're going to be tomorrow.
• 3:36
  Speaker 2: The purpose of this discussion is to listen if we
• 3:39
  Speaker 2: do it right, A number of senators are expected to
• 3:42
  Speaker 2: join us. We have with us today Senator Moran and
• 3:45
  Speaker 2: Senator Tillis, and I think others will be coming in
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: and out throughout the day. There are many members, both
• 3:50
  Speaker 2: Republicans and Democrats, very interested in this topic. And I
• 3:54
  Speaker 2: will say, if we're going to go forward, and I
• 3:57
  Speaker 2: very much want Congress to pass meaningful legens addressing a IL,
• 4:02
  Speaker 2: but if we're going to go forward, it is going
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: to take bipartisan cooperation. If this simply becomes a partisan
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: exercise of shirts and skins, we know how that ends.
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: That ends with a vote that doesn't pass through Congress.
• 4:16
  Speaker 2: So we have and I will say many of us
• 4:19
  Speaker 2: here at this table have had multiple good, productive conversations
• 4:23
  Speaker 2: with senators on the other side of the aisle, and
• 4:25
  Speaker 2: I think we are coming towards some outlines of consensus,
• 4:30
  Speaker 2: but we're not there yet, and I'm hopeful this conversation
• 4:33
  Speaker 2: will help move the process forward.
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: You talked about this being bipartisan. Senator, rarely in Congress
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: do you get something. I think everybody kind of agrees, Hey,
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: we need to make sure this is done right. And
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: you mentioned every different state's got different things, and this
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: has become the and I kind of become the wild
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: wide west. But having this discussion, does there seem to
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: be a lot of consensus here on both sides of
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: the aisle, and pretty easy to get people of the
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: table here to say, hey, let's do this in a
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: responsible manner.
• 5:02
  Speaker 2: Well, yes and no. I would say there's bipartisan agreement
• 5:05
  Speaker 2: that Congress needs to act, and I think senators on
• 5:08
  Speaker 2: both sides are realizing, hey, we've got a real problem here.
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: What is not clear is if we can reach consensus
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: on what acting looks like. I think there's a need
• 5:17
  Speaker 2: for a federal legislation. We've got a bunch of states
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: stepping in passing their own nil legislation, but you end
• 5:23
  Speaker 2: up having this conflicting patchwork. So, for example, Texas has
• 5:27
  Speaker 2: passed nil legislation. It did something I've never seen the
• 5:29
  Speaker 2: state of Texas do before, or for that matter, any
• 5:32
  Speaker 2: state legislature. In the Texas State Bill, it explicitly calls
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: on Congress to act. It says, Look, it's not great
• 5:38
  Speaker 2: for each of the states to be doing this. This
• 5:40
  Speaker 2: ought to be a federal rule that applies to everyone.
• 5:43
  Speaker 2: And so I've drafted legislation, I've circulated it. I spent
• 5:47
  Speaker 2: the better part of a year listening to stakeholders, listening
• 5:49
  Speaker 2: to universities, listening to athletic conferences, listening to players, listening
• 5:53
  Speaker 2: to all sorts of players across across the world of
• 5:58
  Speaker 2: college athletics, and trying to capture their best practices. So
• 6:03
  Speaker 2: the legislation that I've put forward number one. Number one,
• 6:07
  Speaker 2: it protects the ability of student athletes to earn from
• 6:11
  Speaker 2: their name, image, and likeness. And I think it's only fair.
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: If you've worked incredibly hard, you've developed fantastic skills, you
• 6:17
  Speaker 2: should be able to reap the rewards the fruits of
• 6:19
  Speaker 2: your labor. But number two, it empowers the nc double
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: A to set rules and set standards. Now, there have
• 6:26
  Speaker 2: been some other senators that have introduced legislation that would
• 6:30
  Speaker 2: put the federal government in charge of setting the rules
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: and standards, either the government or a quasi governmental organization.
• 6:36
  Speaker 2: I think that's a mistake. I think if you have
• 6:38
  Speaker 2: politicians or bureaucrats, I mean, can you imagine what a
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: nightmare would be to have congressional hearings on what constitutes
• 6:43
  Speaker 2: pass interference?
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean be bad.
• 6:46
  Speaker 2: That's bad.
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: So it would never get it would never get agreed
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: upon ever, Right.
• 6:50
  Speaker 2: Are there problems with the NC double A, Yes, but
• 6:53
  Speaker 2: it's the least worst option out there, and so my
• 6:56
  Speaker 2: legislation protects the ability of the NC double A to
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: set rules. It also provides for things like the registration
• 7:03
  Speaker 2: of agents. Right now, you have seventeen, eighteen, nineteen year
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: old students who are being represented by agents. They don't
• 7:10
  Speaker 2: know if these guys are honest, they don't know their background.
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: There's no transparency, and it's really setting kids up to
• 7:16
  Speaker 2: be swindled by people taking advantage of them. So it
• 7:20
  Speaker 2: sets up for a system of registration of agents. It
• 7:23
  Speaker 2: also sets up a system of transparency where you can
• 7:26
  Speaker 2: see what the name, image and likeness market is. You
• 7:29
  Speaker 2: can see what other schools, what other positions are paying,
• 7:33
  Speaker 2: so that you're not operating in the dark. And I've
• 7:37
  Speaker 2: introduced this legislation. I put it out there, and I
• 7:41
  Speaker 2: have been in the process of negotiating with several Democrats
• 7:45
  Speaker 2: to see if we can get to common ground. One
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: of the important things my legislation also provides is that
• 7:51
  Speaker 2: student athletes are not employees. This is a big question.
• 7:56
  Speaker 2: It's being litigated right now. I think it'd be a
• 7:58
  Speaker 2: disaster of student athletes were treated as employees. I think
• 8:01
  Speaker 2: if that happened, if student athletes were treated as employees,
• 8:05
  Speaker 2: it would end up badly damaging particularly smaller schools Division
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: two schools, Division three schools, and it would badly damage
• 8:14
  Speaker 2: non revenue sports. So football and basketball would be fine.
• 8:19
  Speaker 2: But look, you played men's tennis, women's golf, volleyball, swimming,
• 8:24
  Speaker 2: track and field. You know universities are saying across the
• 8:28
  Speaker 2: board those sports would be obliterated by treating student athletes
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: as employees. I'll say the historically black colleges and universities
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: have come in and said, likewise, please do not make
• 8:39
  Speaker 2: student athletes employees. It will decimate our athletic programs. And
• 8:43
  Speaker 2: so I'm in the process of negotiating and trying to
• 8:47
  Speaker 2: find Democrats who are willing to find common ground on this.
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: If we can't get common ground, the bill's not going
• 8:52
  Speaker 2: to pass. I think we're close, but we're not there yet.
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: But I will say, you know, sitting at the roundtable
• 8:58
  Speaker 2: with Nick Saban, it was striking. I asked coach Saban.
• 9:01
  Speaker 2: I mean, he just stepped down from being one of
• 9:03
  Speaker 2: the most successful college football coaches in all time, and
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: I asked him, I said, coach was the current chaos
• 9:11
  Speaker 2: of NIL and the transfer portal and everything. Was that
• 9:15
  Speaker 2: a factor in your stepping down? And listen to what
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: Nick Saban said in response to my question.
• 9:20
  Speaker 3: All the things that I believed in for all these
• 9:23
  Speaker 3: years fifty years of coaching no longer exist in college athletics.
• 9:28
  Speaker 3: So it's always about developing players. It was always about
• 9:32
  Speaker 3: helping people may more successful in life. My wife even
• 9:36
  Speaker 3: said to me, we'd have all the recruits over on
• 9:38
  Speaker 3: Sunday with their parents for breakfast, and she would always
• 9:43
  Speaker 3: meet with the mothers and talk about how she was
• 9:46
  Speaker 3: going to help and impact their sons and how they
• 9:50
  Speaker 3: would be well taken care of. And she came to me,
• 9:53
  Speaker 3: you know, like right before I retired, and said, why
• 9:56
  Speaker 3: are we doing this? And I said, what do you mean?
• 9:58
  Speaker 3: She said, they care about is how much you're gonna
• 10:01
  Speaker 3: pay them. They don't care about how you're gonna develop them,
• 10:03
  Speaker 3: which is all what we've always done. So why are
• 10:05
  Speaker 3: we doing this?
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: I mean it drove him, I think from the game.
• 10:09
  Speaker 2: Yeah, no, it's striking. And listen, if Nick Saban can't
• 10:15
  Speaker 2: stand it anymore, how the heck is anyone else supposed
• 10:17
  Speaker 2: to it? And I got to say the genuine concern
• 10:20
  Speaker 2: I've heard from coach after coach after coach, rom athletic
• 10:24
  Speaker 2: director after an athletic director, from the heads of conferences.
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: They are genuinely afraid that we've got a short window
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: of maybe a year or two to act to preserve
• 10:35
  Speaker 2: college sports or else we are risking major and permanent damage.
• 10:39
  Speaker 2: So I hope we see Congress act. I'll tell you
• 10:42
  Speaker 2: I put the odds at about fifty to fifty. I
• 10:44
  Speaker 2: think we're close to getting bipartisan agreement. I'm spending a
• 10:48
  Speaker 2: lot of time talking with several Democrats and we're close.
• 10:51
  Speaker 2: And it was good. A number of Republicans and Democrats
• 10:55
  Speaker 2: came to this roundtable participated. It was a good conversation,
• 10:58
  Speaker 2: and what was nice about it is it wasn't a
• 11:01
  Speaker 2: hearing where there was show voting and grandstanding. It was
• 11:03
  Speaker 2: a real conversation, and I do think there's a desire
• 11:07
  Speaker 2: to act to make sure we preserve something amazing, because
• 11:11
  Speaker 2: I got to say, when you're cheering for your school,
• 11:14
  Speaker 2: it brings people together across party lines, across races, across ethnicities,
• 11:18
  Speaker 2: across everything when you're cheering together, and that's something amazing
• 11:23
  Speaker 2: and special and it's also such a powerful pipeline. There's
• 11:27
  Speaker 2: so many young men and women who are getting college
• 11:29
  Speaker 2: educations who wouldn't get it without college athletics that if
• 11:33
  Speaker 2: we screw this up, it would be enormously damaging.
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: Now, if you want to hear the rest of this conversation,
• 11:40
  Speaker 1: you can go back and listen to the full podcast
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: from earlier this week. Now onto story number two, Joe Biden.
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: They had no problem talking about his son, Hunter Biden
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: when he went to Washington, d C. When he had
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: that press conference when he said, I will not testify
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: behind closed doors because the Republicans are going to lie
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: about what I say, and I will only do it
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: in a public hearing. I demand a public hearing. And
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: there was a big charaine and it was in front
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: of the Capitol where you serve senator. And now we've
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: found out that there is a public hearing that's coming,
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: and Hunter Biden has rejected the GOP invitation for the
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: public hearing after demanding that the same GOP give him
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: a damn public hearing and demanded it in Washington in
• 12:27
  Speaker 1: front of the Capitol.
• 12:28
  Speaker 2: Well, this was all theatrics, that it was all dishonest,
• 12:31
  Speaker 2: that theatrics by Hunter Biden and his legal team and
• 12:33
  Speaker 2: by Joe Biden and the White House. But as you noted,
• 12:37
  Speaker 2: Hunter Biden said from the beginning that he only wanted
• 12:39
  Speaker 2: to testify in public. He didn't trust a closed door event.
• 12:42
  Speaker 2: He said he was happy to testify in public. So
• 12:45
  Speaker 2: the House has taken him up on it and invited him, said,
• 12:47
  Speaker 2: come testify on March twentieth. We've got a hearing. Devin Archer,
• 12:51
  Speaker 2: Tony Bubbolinski, and Jason Galanis are testifying. By the way,
• 12:55
  Speaker 2: these are individuals Hunter knows very well that he's done
• 12:57
  Speaker 2: business with. Come testify publicly and immediately. The lie was
• 13:03
  Speaker 2: apparent because Hunter Biden said no. Hunter Biden's lawyer refused
• 13:09
  Speaker 2: to go calling the public hearing a quote blatant planned
• 13:13
  Speaker 2: for media event, and in fact, let me read what
• 13:17
  Speaker 2: Abby Lowell, who's Hunter Biden's lawyer, wrote, quote Your blatant
• 13:20
  Speaker 2: planned for media event is not a proper proceeding but
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: an obvious attempt to throw a hail Mary pass after
• 13:26
  Speaker 2: the game has ended. Let me remind you of a
• 13:29
  Speaker 2: statement you made about how witnesses and specifically mister Biden,
• 13:32
  Speaker 2: could satisfy your prior requests. At your press conference after
• 13:37
  Speaker 2: the January tenth, twenty twenty four committee hearing to hold
• 13:41
  Speaker 2: mister Biden in contempt, you stated, quote, all we need
• 13:44
  Speaker 2: are people to come in for the depositions and then
• 13:47
  Speaker 2: will be finished. We just need people to show up
• 13:49
  Speaker 2: to the depositions and will wrap this up. Nobody wants
• 13:52
  Speaker 2: to wrap this up more than I do. Mister Biden
• 13:56
  Speaker 2: did just as you asked, and as you did when
• 14:00
  Speaker 2: you announced that witnesses could choose depositions. You want to
• 14:03
  Speaker 2: ignore what you said. Now, let me note you and
• 14:08
  Speaker 2: I had this conversation with James Comer at the time,
• 14:11
  Speaker 2: and James Comer is a good man, he's a friend.
• 14:13
  Speaker 2: He's doing a very good job. I told him then
• 14:16
  Speaker 2: on this podcast, forget about the closed door deposition. Hunter
• 14:21
  Speaker 2: is saying he will testify publicly. Do it tomorrow, get
• 14:25
  Speaker 2: him on record publicly tomorrow. I wish I could say
• 14:29
  Speaker 2: I'm surprised. I'm not surprised Hunter Biden is playing games.
• 14:33
  Speaker 2: He is trying to delay this until after the election.
• 14:36
  Speaker 2: And as I reminded James Comer, Hunter Biden's not the
• 14:41
  Speaker 2: target here, He's not the reason. This is a matter
• 14:43
  Speaker 2: of public concern Joe Biden. The corruption of the President
• 14:46
  Speaker 2: of the United States is the target. And so listen,
• 14:50
  Speaker 2: nothing of me, no part of me. Is surprise that
• 14:53
  Speaker 2: Hunter's now saying, oh, no, I did the deposition. Now
• 14:55
  Speaker 2: I'm not gonna do it. I think the next step
• 14:58
  Speaker 2: is obvious. The House needs issue a subpoena for Hunter
• 15:01
  Speaker 2: Biden to testify publicly. Hunter will have a choice comply
• 15:06
  Speaker 2: with a subpoena or defy the subpoena. And if he
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: defies the subpoena, the House needs to hold him in contempt.
• 15:12
  Speaker 2: That needs to happen fast. Time is running out. But
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: I got to say, you know all of the bravado.
• 15:19
  Speaker 2: Remember we talked about on verdict. Also, how when the
• 15:22
  Speaker 2: House was having a hearing, Hunter Biden showed up in
• 15:25
  Speaker 2: the hearing room just just gloating. In my view, I
• 15:29
  Speaker 2: wish they had right then said mister Biden, come down
• 15:32
  Speaker 2: to the table, we'll swear you in. Let's go. That's
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: what they should have done. I still think and hope
• 15:38
  Speaker 2: they will get him to testify publicly, but if he
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: avoids public testimony through these games, it will be tragic
• 15:47
  Speaker 2: because this is an effort at off uscation This is
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: an effort at cover up, This is an effort at
• 15:52
  Speaker 2: hiding the criminal behavior of Joe Biden, the president of
• 15:57
  Speaker 2: the United States Center.
• 15:59
  Speaker 1: How important is it that we get Hunter Biden on
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: the record publicly. It's one thing to read the transcripts.
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: You've read them, what's been released. I've read what's been released,
• 16:11
  Speaker 1: We've had reporting on it. But look, there's an aspect
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: of Hunter Biden that could offer, in my opinion, a
• 16:19
  Speaker 1: huge opportunity for conservatives to capitalize on just how corrupt
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: Joe Biden is because you never know what he's going
• 16:27
  Speaker 1: to say, or how angry he's going to get, or
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: how self righteous he's going to be. And part of
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: having a public hearing is getting to ask him those
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: uncomfortable questions that need to be answered. But you don't
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: know what he's going to do, and that is a,
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: I think, something the American people deserve to see.
• 16:44
  Speaker 2: It's incredibly important. Look, Hunter Biden, I believe is lying.
• 16:50
  Speaker 2: I think he lied in his closed door deposition. I
• 16:52
  Speaker 2: think if he has a public hearing, he will lie.
• 16:54
  Speaker 2: But I also think he's not a very good liar.
• 16:57
  Speaker 2: His lies are facially inconsistent their contradictory and competent cross
• 17:04
  Speaker 2: examination can demonstrate how he is lying to cover up
• 17:08
  Speaker 2: for his father. Now we have a closed door deposition,
• 17:12
  Speaker 2: we have a transcript. A transcript is dry, A transcript
• 17:15
  Speaker 2: is lifeless. A transcript is not going to dominate the
• 17:18
  Speaker 2: evening news. A transcript people are not going to watch
• 17:21
  Speaker 2: and see for themselves and understand the context of it.
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: The context of this is very much like going into
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: the twenty twenty election. The twenty twenty election. In October
• 17:30
  Speaker 2: of twenty twenty, the news broke of the Hunter Biden laptop.
• 17:34
  Speaker 2: The New York Post broke the story, and we saw
• 17:38
  Speaker 2: big tech silence and censor it. We saw Facebook and
• 17:41
  Speaker 2: Twitter block anyone sharing it. We saw big tech threaten
• 17:45
  Speaker 2: to deep platform any media outlets that reported on it,
• 17:48
  Speaker 2: and media outlets like Politico happily obeyed big tech and
• 17:52
  Speaker 2: simply kept its secret. What was in the Hunter Biden laptop?
• 17:56
  Speaker 2: Mind you, the Hunter Biden laptop was real, it was accurate,
• 17:59
  Speaker 2: it had evidence of multiple felonies. And mind you, also
• 18:02
  Speaker 2: the Department of Justice and the FBI knew that it
• 18:05
  Speaker 2: was real and accurate because they had the laptop in
• 18:08
  Speaker 2: their possessions and they had had it for over a year,
• 18:11
  Speaker 2: but particularly as you get closer to an election, their
• 18:14
  Speaker 2: objective is do not let the American people see things
• 18:18
  Speaker 2: that demonstrate Joe Biden's criminal culpability. The same thing is
• 18:23
  Speaker 2: true here. The reason to have Hunter Biden testify is
• 18:26
  Speaker 2: so the American people can look him in the eye.
• 18:29
  Speaker 2: You know, the American people are very good at judging credibility.
• 18:33
  Speaker 2: They can tell when somebody is spouting bs, they can
• 18:37
  Speaker 2: tell when they're not telling the truth, and it's harder
• 18:41
  Speaker 2: to tell that when you're reading a transcript. And so
• 18:44
  Speaker 2: in my view, it is critically important to get Hunter
• 18:48
  Speaker 2: Biden in sworn testimony alone. I actually don't think it
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: was a great idea to have him testifying alongside a bunch.
• 18:55
  Speaker 3: Of other people.
• 18:56
  Speaker 2: I get there's some value in saying, well, so and
• 18:59
  Speaker 2: so said this, how you, But I think Hunter Biden
• 19:01
  Speaker 2: ought to be alone at that table. I think every
• 19:03
  Speaker 2: question ought to be directed to him, and you can
• 19:05
  Speaker 2: use the answers from the other witnesses to cross examine him.
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: I also hope if and when Hunter testifies that there's
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: a degree of coordination. One of the problems when you
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: have a hearing is if you've got lots of individual members,
• 19:19
  Speaker 2: lots of House members, each of whom has five minutes,
• 19:23
  Speaker 2: you will often have people go on marches in one
• 19:26
  Speaker 2: direction or another, and they don't follow up on anything,
• 19:29
  Speaker 2: and it's kind of whatever any individual member wants to do,
• 19:31
  Speaker 2: they just ask that, and some of them are not
• 19:34
  Speaker 2: very good cross examiners, so they can't follow up, and
• 19:36
  Speaker 2: it doesn't present a coherent storyline, it doesn't systematically dismantle
• 19:43
  Speaker 2: the lies. What I hope is that James Comer and
• 19:47
  Speaker 2: or Jim Jordan the chairman, sit down with their Republican members,
• 19:51
  Speaker 2: that they plan out a strategy for the hearing, a
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: strategy for the cross examination that they assign each member
• 19:58
  Speaker 2: of the committee. Okay, you've got this point, this point,
• 20:02
  Speaker 2: Here are the questions that will be helpful to ask,
• 20:05
  Speaker 2: and you drive a systematic message. That's something in the
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: Commerce Committee. I'm the ranking member on the Senate Committee
• 20:11
  Speaker 2: of Commerce, Science, and Transportation. On major hearings, that's exactly
• 20:15
  Speaker 2: what I try to do. In the Senate Judiciary Committee,
• 20:18
  Speaker 2: we have done that on multiple hearings. For example, the
• 20:20
  Speaker 2: Brett Kavanaugh hearing that was a major fight. We sat
• 20:24
  Speaker 2: and we strategized exactly how we were going to handle
• 20:28
  Speaker 2: the cross examination, the messaging. I hope the House does that,
• 20:31
  Speaker 2: but none of that matters unless you get Hunter at
• 20:37
  Speaker 2: the witness stand, sworn in and on national television. Because listen,
• 20:42
  Speaker 2: if Hunter's testifying. As much as the media wants to
• 20:45
  Speaker 2: hide it from the American people, they cannot completely do so.
• 20:49
  Speaker 2: And it gives the American people the chance to decide
• 20:52
  Speaker 2: is the President of the United States corrupt? Has he
• 20:55
  Speaker 2: taken bribes from Chinese Communists, from Russians, from Ukrainians, from
• 21:00
  Speaker 2: from foreign oligarchs. It lets the American people decide. When
• 21:06
  Speaker 2: Hunter sent a WhatsApp text to a Chinese communist threatening
• 21:11
  Speaker 2: his father's punishment if the Chinese Communists didn't send them
• 21:15
  Speaker 2: millions of dollars, was Dad complicit in that shakedown? I
• 21:20
  Speaker 2: think the answer is obviously yes. But seeing Hunter being
• 21:24
  Speaker 2: forced to answer those questions goes a long way to
• 21:27
  Speaker 2: letting the American people decide based on the facts.
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: As before, if you want to hear the rest of
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: this conversation on this topic, you can go back and
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: dow the podcast from earlier this week to hear the
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: entire thing. I want to get back to the big story,
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: number three of the week. You may have missed, Senator.
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: While they're trying to destroy our country and not going
• 21:48
  Speaker 1: after the people that are breaking in, there's one thing
• 21:50
  Speaker 1: that is very clear, and that is public enemy number
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: one of this administration the Democrats, is Donald Trump. We
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: now are seeing them trying to break trump financial I
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: would assume that you would agree this is certainly a
• 22:04
  Speaker 1: level of election interference at shocking. But let's talk about
• 22:08
  Speaker 1: the money now. The ag James who said vote for
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: me and I'll go after Trump, is now asked the
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: court to deny Donald Trump's four hundred and fifty four
• 22:17
  Speaker 1: million dollar bond appeal. This is unprecedented in American society.
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: This is what would happen in communist countries, yet it's
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: happening right now in America.
• 22:29
  Speaker 2: Well, we are seeing across the country Democrat prosecutors abusing
• 22:34
  Speaker 2: the justice system to try to number one, destroy Donald Trump,
• 22:38
  Speaker 2: but to try to number two subvert democracy. They are
• 22:42
  Speaker 2: terrified that the voters in November will vote to re
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: elect Donald Trump, and so they want to abuse their
• 22:47
  Speaker 2: power to stop the voters from doing that. What Letitia
• 22:52
  Speaker 2: James has done, she ran for Attorney General promising I'm
• 22:56
  Speaker 2: going to get Trump, and I'll say, at least so far,
• 22:59
  Speaker 2: she's delivered on that. She went after him with everything
• 23:01
  Speaker 2: she had in a fraud case that is under a
• 23:04
  Speaker 2: New York statute that is really a ridiculous statute because
• 23:09
  Speaker 2: she alleged fraud with no victims. She alleged that he
• 23:14
  Speaker 2: had borrowed hundreds of millions of dollars from sophisticated banks
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: like Deutschebank, and Deutschebank didn't lose money. In fact, they
• 23:22
  Speaker 2: made money on the loans. Trump repaid the loans, and
• 23:25
  Speaker 2: Deutschbach said they were thrilled to make the loans and
• 23:27
  Speaker 2: would happily make them again. And the argument was that
• 23:31
  Speaker 2: he valued his real estate more than it was worth.
• 23:34
  Speaker 2: Deutschbach Bank is not some like poor little old lady
• 23:39
  Speaker 2: who's a vulnerable consumer. They're a multi billion dollar global bank.
• 23:43
  Speaker 2: They valued the real estate on their own damn thing.
• 23:45
  Speaker 2: You know, if I come in and tell tell my
• 23:48
  Speaker 2: mortgage company, hey, my home is worth ten million dollars,
• 23:52
  Speaker 2: they're gonna send their own appraiser to go figure out
• 23:54
  Speaker 2: what my home is worth, They're going to laugh at me.
• 23:56
  Speaker 2: So an alleged offense with no victim, no injury, and
• 24:02
  Speaker 2: no harm. The judgment with interest is four hundred and
• 24:08
  Speaker 2: fifty four million dollars half a billion dollars. And then
• 24:12
  Speaker 2: New York has a provision that you see in a
• 24:14
  Speaker 2: number of states that to appeal that you've got to
• 24:18
  Speaker 2: put the four hundred and fifty four million dollars in
• 24:20
  Speaker 2: cash either liquid, so either cash or securities liquid, or
• 24:26
  Speaker 2: you have to have a bond that covers that amount.
• 24:30
  Speaker 2: And so Trump went and tried to get a bond,
• 24:32
  Speaker 2: and he went to thirty different surety companies and all
• 24:36
  Speaker 2: of them turned him down, and and he filed an affidavit.
• 24:41
  Speaker 2: So he's raised an issue on appeal to say, look,
• 24:44
  Speaker 2: you can't require me to put up a half billion
• 24:47
  Speaker 2: dollars just to be able to appeal. And Leticia James
• 24:51
  Speaker 2: just opposed that and said, oh, yeah, he doesn't put
• 24:53
  Speaker 2: that money up, We're coming to take his property. So
• 24:56
  Speaker 2: I understand what she wants to do, and she wants
• 24:57
  Speaker 2: to do this as soon as potentially next next week.
• 25:00
  Speaker 2: She wants to show up and physically seize his properties,
• 25:04
  Speaker 2: literally go and seize properties that he has in New
• 25:08
  Speaker 2: York or elsewhere. It could literally come down to her
• 25:13
  Speaker 2: trying to essentially put a padlock on Trump Tower. And
• 25:17
  Speaker 2: I say that not really with hyperbole, because this is
• 25:21
  Speaker 2: a political jahad for her, So I think she will
• 25:24
  Speaker 2: look for the most visible political way to attack her opponent.
• 25:29
  Speaker 2: And here's here's what Trump's lawyers told the New York
• 25:34
  Speaker 2: Appellate Court. The attorneys wrote that, quote, it is not
• 25:38
  Speaker 2: possible under the circumstances presented. They said, the underwriters insisted
• 25:42
  Speaker 2: on cash or liquid assets instead of real estate is collateral.
• 25:47
  Speaker 2: So Trump has lots of real estate, but apparently the
• 25:50
  Speaker 2: other writers said no, it's got to be cash or
• 25:52
  Speaker 2: liquid and he didn't have a half billion dollars sitting around,
• 25:55
  Speaker 2: and they insisted on cash to cover one hundred and
• 25:59
  Speaker 2: twenty percent of the judgment, which is five hundred and
• 26:02
  Speaker 2: fifty seven million dollars. An insurance broker, Gary Giuletti wrote
• 26:09
  Speaker 2: in a sworn statement that quote a bond of this
• 26:12
  Speaker 2: size is rarely, if ever.
• 26:15
  Speaker 3: Seen, And.
• 26:18
  Speaker 2: Letitia James responded, well, no, no, that's not true. There
• 26:21
  Speaker 2: have been billion dollar bonds before, yes, for massive public corporations,
• 26:26
  Speaker 2: but Trump's business is not a public corporation. It is
• 26:30
  Speaker 2: a private company. And to get a half billion dollar
• 26:33
  Speaker 2: bond is incredibly difficult, and so understand the impact. If
• 26:39
  Speaker 2: Trump is not able to post this bond, the effect
• 26:44
  Speaker 2: would be to deny him the right to even appeal
• 26:48
  Speaker 2: the absurd partisan decision from the district Court. I got
• 26:52
  Speaker 2: to say, this is such a profound abuse. Now, that
• 26:56
  Speaker 2: doesn't mean Trump would be out of options, because if
• 26:58
  Speaker 2: the New York courts insists you got to put up
• 27:01
  Speaker 2: a half billion dollars in order to appeal this decision,
• 27:04
  Speaker 2: I am confident that Trump will appeal that and potentially
• 27:08
  Speaker 2: appeal that all the way to the U. S. Supreme
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: Court and the U. S. Supreme Court. He would have
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: multiple arguments constitutional arguments, including the constitution prohibits denying an individual,
• 27:21
  Speaker 2: depriving an individual of property without due process of law.
• 27:25
  Speaker 2: And there would be an argument that this is such
• 27:27
  Speaker 2: an excessive bond that it constitutes a violation of due process.
• 27:33
  Speaker 2: He would also have an argument under the Eighth Amendment.
• 27:35
  Speaker 2: The Eighth Amendment specifies excessive bail shall not be required,
• 27:40
  Speaker 2: nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Now,
• 27:46
  Speaker 2: the Eighth Amendment typically applies in a criminal context, but
• 27:51
  Speaker 2: given the magnitude here, I would expect him to make
• 27:54
  Speaker 2: both an Eighth Amendment argument and a due process argument,
• 27:58
  Speaker 2: and it is entirely possible that would prevail ultimately. But
• 28:02
  Speaker 2: what New York is doing, what the New York Attorney
• 28:06
  Speaker 2: General is doing, is the conduct of a banana Republic.
• 28:12
  Speaker 1: Kevin O'Cleary, who many b will know from Shark Tank,
• 28:15
  Speaker 1: not the most political guy. He talked about the business
• 28:18
  Speaker 1: fallout of this and asking where are the adults in
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: the room, because we can't let this stand in the
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: United States of America. Here's part of what he said,
• 28:27
  Speaker 1: which I thought was really interesting.
• 28:29
  Speaker 4: But more importantly, the message about the American brand. You
• 28:33
  Speaker 4: think about America, the reason this is the number one
• 28:35
  Speaker 4: economy on Earth is that we have laws, and we
• 28:38
  Speaker 4: have due process, and we have property rights. It attracts
• 28:41
  Speaker 4: foreign capital from all around the world. All of that
• 28:45
  Speaker 4: is being shaken to the core here. The concept of
• 28:49
  Speaker 4: seizing assets in thirty days on a bond number that's
• 28:52
  Speaker 4: never been issued, No insurance bond companies ever issued anything
• 28:56
  Speaker 4: near this, so there was no chance that was going
• 28:58
  Speaker 4: to happen, and only giving thirty days notice in time,
• 29:03
  Speaker 4: that's a really bad message, and I think New Yorker
• 29:07
  Speaker 4: should think well past Trump, whether he's president or not,
• 29:11
  Speaker 4: or whether this Attorney's General is gone in four years
• 29:14
  Speaker 4: or not, it's irrelevant. This is case setting against the
• 29:17
  Speaker 4: American brand. The most stable country on earth anywhere to
• 29:23
  Speaker 4: put capital work over a long period of time, particularly
• 29:25
  Speaker 4: in real estate, is the United States of America. This
• 29:29
  Speaker 4: is an assault on what we believe to be core
• 29:34
  Speaker 4: and I find it extraordinary. I think it's very troubling.
• 29:38
  Speaker 4: It has absolutely nothing to do with Donald Trump at
• 29:41
  Speaker 4: this point, in my view, and it is completely bipartisan.
• 29:46
  Speaker 4: This is an attack on America, and I don't know
• 29:51
  Speaker 4: how you can look at it any other way. And
• 29:53
  Speaker 4: as an investor, and I know plenty of investors are
• 29:56
  Speaker 4: completely disturbed by this. I mean, no one is going
• 30:02
  Speaker 4: to put any money to work in New York in
• 30:04
  Speaker 4: these amounts until this thing settles down. The whole world
• 30:07
  Speaker 4: is watching, and everybody's waiting for one thing we haven't
• 30:11
  Speaker 4: got yet. Adult supervision.
• 30:13
  Speaker 3: Where is it?
• 30:14
  Speaker 4: Where are the adults in this crazy narrative. Certainly there's
• 30:18
  Speaker 4: got to be adult supervision at some point. And I understand,
• 30:22
  Speaker 4: you know, the war going on here and all the
• 30:25
  Speaker 4: political YadA YadA, Wolf wolf wolf, But we need an
• 30:28
  Speaker 4: adult in the room. Now, this is the United States
• 30:31
  Speaker 4: of America under.
• 30:33
  Speaker 1: Siege, under siege. I mean, he's not joking around. He says,
• 30:36
  Speaker 1: where are the adults center? I'm going to ask you this,
• 30:38
  Speaker 1: where are the adults? At what point do the adults
• 30:40
  Speaker 1: get a hold of this?
• 30:43
  Speaker 2: Well, at this point, it's not clear to me that
• 30:45
  Speaker 2: there are any adults left in New York. There certainly
• 30:48
  Speaker 2: are not among politicians. I don't know of a single
• 30:51
  Speaker 2: Democrat politician who has spoken out against this abuse. Certainly
• 30:56
  Speaker 2: Chuck Schumer hasn't. The governor hasn't. The Mayor of New
• 30:59
  Speaker 2: York City, he hasn't. Leticia James is auditioning to be governor.
• 31:03
  Speaker 2: She's clearly ambitious. She' views this as the path to
• 31:06
  Speaker 2: success in the Democrat Party in New York. And I
• 31:10
  Speaker 2: got to say, look, I think they rationalize in their
• 31:13
  Speaker 2: own mind, this is a special rule just for Donald Trump.
• 31:17
  Speaker 2: We hate Trump so much. They think Trump is the devil,
• 31:21
  Speaker 2: and so this applies just to Trump. But this precedent
• 31:26
  Speaker 2: can apply to anyone if if simply claiming that you
• 31:29
  Speaker 2: overstated the value of your real estate gives the Attorney
• 31:34
  Speaker 2: general the justification to seize hundreds of millions or billions
• 31:37
  Speaker 2: of dollars, what real estate developer in their right mind
• 31:41
  Speaker 2: would would continue to do business. Every real estate developer,
• 31:45
  Speaker 2: just as a starting point is subject to this kind
• 31:48
  Speaker 2: of shakedown. And if you don't think that Leticia James
• 31:51
  Speaker 2: or the next ambitious Attorney General will use that power,
• 31:56
  Speaker 2: then you're smoking something because look, it is arbitrary, it's unreviewable,
• 32:01
  Speaker 2: and by the way, if you can't get a bond
• 32:03
  Speaker 2: to appeal it, there is no appellate review. So it's
• 32:05
  Speaker 2: the ability to shake it down. And so if she
• 32:08
  Speaker 2: wants to negotiate a settlement, suppose she comes in. That
• 32:12
  Speaker 2: gives this politician the ability to terrorize businesses, to terrorize
• 32:17
  Speaker 2: foreign corporations, anyone that they decide we don't like.
• 32:23
  Speaker 4: It.
• 32:24
  Speaker 2: Essentially empowers the politicians to terrorize individuals and companies and
• 32:30
  Speaker 2: force them to comply with whatever their demand is or
• 32:35
  Speaker 2: else we will seize your assets and you can't even
• 32:38
  Speaker 2: appeal it. And yet why is not a single Democrat
• 32:43
  Speaker 2: in New York worried about this or speaking out about it.
• 32:48
  Speaker 2: You know, it's astonishing.
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: As always, thank you for listening to Verdict with Center
• 32:53
  Speaker 1: Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson with you don't forget to deal
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: with my podcast and you can listen to my podcast
• 32:58
  Speaker 1: every other day you're not listening to Verdict or today
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: when you listen to Verdict. Afterwards, I'd love to have
• 33:02
  Speaker 1: you as a listener to again the Ben Ferguson podcasts,
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: and we will see you back here on Monday morning.