Latest / The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson / CBS Cans Journalist Following Biden Crime Family, Behind the Death of Alexei Navalny, & the Headlines Turn on Joe Biden Week In Review

Transcript

CBS Cans Journalist Following Biden Crime Family, Behind the Death of Alexei Navalny, & the Headlines Turn on Joe Biden Week In Review · The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson

0:01
Speaker 1: Welcome.
0:02
Speaker 2: It is a Verdict with Ted Cruz Week in Review
0:05
Speaker 2: live from Austin. Ben Ferguson with you, and these are
0:09
Speaker 2: the stories that you may have missed that we talked
0:11
Speaker 2: about this week. First up, Catherine Heritage was let go
0:16
Speaker 2: from NBC News and the most shocking part is apparently
0:20
Speaker 2: her notes were seized by the network.
0:22
Speaker 1: What was behind that shocking decision.
0:25
Speaker 2: Also, what's going on in Russia and will there be
0:29
Speaker 2: reaccountability for Vladimir Putin for killing his top political opponent.
0:33
Speaker 1: We're going to break that down for you. And finally,
0:36
Speaker 1: the media turning on.
0:38
Speaker 2: Joe Biden this week in the headlines that we never
0:41
Speaker 2: thought they would ever write. So will this continue or
0:45
Speaker 2: is just just gonna be a bad week for Biden?
0:47
Speaker 2: That will go back to the media praising him. It's
0:50
Speaker 2: the Week in Review and it starts right now. There's
0:53
Speaker 2: also another shocking story, and I want to make sure
0:56
Speaker 2: we spend some time on this. Many people may know
1:00
Speaker 2: the name Katherine Herrid. She is a phenomenal reporter. She
1:03
Speaker 2: was at Fox for a long time. She then moved
1:06
Speaker 2: to CBS News. She did incredible reporting on tough issues
1:11
Speaker 2: and stories, including what's been happening with the Biden crime family.
1:16
Speaker 2: She was let go, slash fired, whatever you want to
1:20
Speaker 2: call it, laid off with some other people as CBS
1:23
Speaker 2: is having financial issues and downsizing. But it was shocking
1:29
Speaker 2: that she was let go in that because she's basically
1:32
Speaker 2: that one of their best and only tough investigative reporters,
1:35
Speaker 2: certainly in Washington, d C. Now we have found out
1:38
Speaker 2: that CBS News went full communists after quote seizing her
1:45
Speaker 2: journalistic files. That is not what's supposed to happen in
1:51
Speaker 2: America in journalism. And yet now we're finding out and
1:54
Speaker 2: only they get rid of her. But the question is
1:56
Speaker 2: what was she what did she have? What was she
1:58
Speaker 2: about to report on? I would say this enter, I
2:01
Speaker 2: know you love her reporting. I think we should try
2:04
Speaker 2: to get her on Verdict because I would love to
2:06
Speaker 2: hear what she has to say about everything she uncovered
2:08
Speaker 2: that maybe she hasn't been able to tell us yet.
2:12
Speaker 3: So I agree with you that we should have Catherine
2:14
Speaker 3: Herridge as a guest on Verdict. We're going to try
2:16
Speaker 3: to make that happen. And I will say, look, in
2:20
Speaker 3: many ways, Catherine Herridge is a unicorn because the corporate
2:24
Speaker 3: media is so utterly corrupt, that they do not report
2:28
Speaker 3: on news that is inconvenient to the regime. And Catherine
2:32
Speaker 3: Harridge was a rebel in that she actually reported on
2:35
Speaker 3: things the Biden White House didn't like. And so CBS
2:39
Speaker 3: was engaged in layoffs. And I get, Look, the media
2:43
Speaker 3: are a bunch of dishonest, lying hacks. I understand that
2:48
Speaker 3: they're firing people because people don't want to purchase their
2:50
Speaker 3: goods anymore, because it is useless. They're no longer journalists,
2:54
Speaker 3: they're liars. That being said, if you're laying off people,
3:00
Speaker 3: and some corporate suit in a corner office made a decision,
3:05
Speaker 3: who do we want to lay off. Let's lay off
3:07
Speaker 3: the person who actually is criticizing the White House, and
3:11
Speaker 3: so Catherine herriage they laid off. That was shocking in
3:15
Speaker 3: and of itself because she is such a unicorn. But
3:18
Speaker 3: then the news broke this week that then not only
3:22
Speaker 3: do they layer off, but CBS officials took the unusual
3:27
Speaker 3: step of seizing her files, her computers, her records, including
3:34
Speaker 3: her information on privileged sources.
3:38
Speaker 2: And and that I've got to say, so explain people
3:41
Speaker 2: privileged sources, so people understand why that's such a shocking,
3:46
Speaker 2: in my opinion, abuse of power by CBS.
3:49
Speaker 3: Well, listen, reporters have sources that give information and under
3:53
Speaker 3: promises of confidentiality, and those promises are that their name
4:00
Speaker 3: be held secret, they will not be outed.
4:02
Speaker 1: And that's that.
4:04
Speaker 3: That is right at the heart the essence of journalism,
4:07
Speaker 3: of free press. Well, CBS, the corporate suits have said,
4:12
Speaker 3: we want to know who your sources are. And the
4:15
Speaker 3: problem is that nobody rational with their head not inserted
4:22
Speaker 3: in a bodily orifice, believes that the corporate suits want
4:26
Speaker 3: that for any reason other than bad purposes. Look, I'm
4:33
Speaker 3: going to read from an article in The Hill. So
4:37
Speaker 3: in the Hill, this is something written by Jonathan Turley,
4:41
Speaker 3: who has been really terrific on a lot of these issues.
4:43
Speaker 3: But here's what he But he wrote quote, I've spoken
4:47
Speaker 3: confidentially with current and former CBS employees who have stated
4:50
Speaker 3: that they could not recall the company ever taking such
4:56
Speaker 3: a step before. One former CBS journalist said that many
5:00
Speaker 3: employees quote are confused why Herridge was laid off. As
5:04
Speaker 3: one of the correspondents who broke news regularly and did
5:08
Speaker 3: a lot of original reporting. This has led to concerns
5:13
Speaker 3: about the source of the pressure. He added that he
5:17
Speaker 3: has never seen a seizure of records from a departing
5:21
Speaker 3: journalist and that the move has sent a chilling signal
5:27
Speaker 3: to the ranks of CBS and that is deeply, deeply disturbing.
5:35
Speaker 3: By the way, there have been reports that when Catherine
5:42
Speaker 3: Herridge published stories that were critical of the Biden White House,
5:47
Speaker 3: that CBS executives pushed back, including someone CBS News president
5:53
Speaker 3: Ingrid Cyprianne Matthews, who I don't know, but good god,
5:58
Speaker 3: her name sounds like something out of a science fiction
6:01
Speaker 3: movie about some overlord in the star chamber who wants
6:05
Speaker 3: to silence all dissent Ingrid Cyprian Matthews, let's fire the
6:11
Speaker 3: reporter that dares report anything of substance because we are propagandists.
6:17
Speaker 3: And I got to say, there was a time when
6:21
Speaker 3: CBS actually had a reputation as being real journalists. How
6:28
Speaker 3: many Walter Cronkite is rolling over in his grave at
6:34
Speaker 3: what has happened to CBS today.
6:39
Speaker 2: There's I want to just talk about the quality of
6:41
Speaker 2: Catherine's reporting for a moment. There are reporters that you
6:45
Speaker 2: don't talk to. There's reporters that I don't talk to
6:48
Speaker 2: you see them, you roll their eyes. You deal with
6:50
Speaker 2: it a lot more than I do. There's certain reporters
6:52
Speaker 2: on Capitol Hill You're like, really, you again, give me
6:54
Speaker 2: a break because you know they're hacks. When you when
6:57
Speaker 2: you saw Katherine and now there's like there seemed to
7:01
Speaker 2: be mutual respect from both sides out because she wasn't partisan,
7:06
Speaker 2: she just was a truth teller and investigative journalism. It's
7:10
Speaker 2: something that we've lost in this country and that's what
7:14
Speaker 2: ultimately I think made her lose her job at CBS.
7:18
Speaker 3: Look sadly what Catherine Herridge does used to be the
7:25
Speaker 3: Norman journalism. Yeah, you would have journalists who would actually
7:29
Speaker 3: investigate stories, they would follow the facts, they would report
7:34
Speaker 3: on the substance. That used to be how the entire
7:38
Speaker 3: enterprise worked. Now and I really think this is post Trump.
7:44
Speaker 3: Trump broke the corporate media. They hate him so much
7:50
Speaker 3: that they've abandoned any effort at truth telling, any effort
7:53
Speaker 3: at reporting facts, any effort at being even handed, at
7:56
Speaker 3: the effort reporting both sides. Instead, Look, if you go
8:03
Speaker 3: back a decade ago, if you go back to twenty fourteen,
8:06
Speaker 3: twenty fifteen, you would have people at CBS you'd have
8:10
Speaker 3: people at c and NMSNBC, even MSNBC that would claim
8:15
Speaker 3: they're trying to be journalists and report both sides. What
8:20
Speaker 3: has changed is Trump convinced a lot of the so
8:27
Speaker 3: called journalists and all of the corporate brass that reporting
8:34
Speaker 3: fairly was no longer acceptable, that Trump was the devil,
8:39
Speaker 3: and because he was the devil, their mission was no
8:43
Speaker 3: longer present both sides. Their mission and this is the
8:46
Speaker 3: way they framed it was to save democracy. And what
8:51
Speaker 3: they mean by save democracy is elect left wing Democrats
8:55
Speaker 3: in every election, no matter what, which means never ever
8:59
Speaker 3: ever pored on anything harmful to left wing Democrats and
9:04
Speaker 3: only be propagandists for the left wing of the party.
9:08
Speaker 3: Now listen, I don't like the New York Times. I
9:11
Speaker 3: think they're a bunch of freaking communists. I don't particularly
9:15
Speaker 3: like the Washington Post. I don't like much.
9:18
Speaker 4: Of the media.
9:20
Speaker 3: But bizarrely, Ben, I think they're valuable. How many years
9:24
Speaker 3: were you an employee of CNN?
9:26
Speaker 1: Seven years? In hell is how long I was there
9:28
Speaker 1: fighting the good fight.
9:29
Speaker 3: Okay, but compare CNN all right, you're a former employee.
9:34
Speaker 3: You were an employee there from win.
9:35
Speaker 1: To win, gosh, it was.
9:37
Speaker 2: I mean, go back what two years ago and then
9:40
Speaker 2: and then add seven on to there. So in the
9:42
Speaker 2: middle of it, right before Trump was elected, when it
9:46
Speaker 2: wasn't that bad. I was there for I guess about
9:48
Speaker 2: two years before the sixteen election when Trump was elected,
9:51
Speaker 2: and then the will came off.
9:53
Speaker 3: So give your perspective, because you were a paid employee
9:56
Speaker 3: of CNN. Give your perspective of CNN before twenty sixteen,
10:02
Speaker 3: in the Trump election and after, because look, what I'm
10:06
Speaker 3: describing is real, but you experienced it from the inside.
10:09
Speaker 1: Yeah, when I first got hired, it was funny.
10:12
Speaker 2: When I got hired by CNN, the call came in
10:15
Speaker 2: and they said, look, we want real and genuine conservatives
10:18
Speaker 2: on the air. I got hired, I think it was
10:20
Speaker 2: on the same day with New Gingrich and they said,
10:23
Speaker 2: we want to have a robust debate and it was
10:25
Speaker 2: and that's exactly what it started out as. And even
10:29
Speaker 2: when they were covering Donald Trump in sixteen, remember CNN
10:33
Speaker 2: would go wall to wall with him campaign event after
10:35
Speaker 2: campaign event, and I remember, well, yeah, it was huge
10:39
Speaker 2: for their ratings. You remember, you were running against him.
10:41
Speaker 2: It's like CNN was giving It was almost like the
10:43
Speaker 2: Trump News Network during the primary, and then once he
10:48
Speaker 2: got the nomination, and then once he actually looked like
10:52
Speaker 2: he might have a chance of winning, they started to
10:55
Speaker 2: turn a little bit. It wasn't until the night and
10:58
Speaker 2: I was I was at CNA that night all night
11:01
Speaker 2: long on election night, and you could see the shock
11:04
Speaker 2: and the anger because everyone there from the highest up
11:09
Speaker 2: people they assumed till they assumed Hillary was going to win.
11:12
Speaker 2: So this was basically just great TV drama until he won.
11:17
Speaker 2: And then when he won, they basically and once he
11:20
Speaker 2: started saying they were fake news, and he was in
11:23
Speaker 2: there going after them as the president and going after
11:26
Speaker 2: them in the in the White House Press briefing room
11:28
Speaker 2: and allowing Sara Huckabee, Sanders and others to fight back,
11:32
Speaker 2: they couldn't take it out on Trump enough, so they
11:34
Speaker 2: started taking it out on the commentators that were left.
11:37
Speaker 2: I was one of the last, I think, real concertives
11:40
Speaker 2: left at CNN. I actually begged them to not re
11:43
Speaker 2: sign me at the end. They had a right to
11:45
Speaker 2: sign and right to match, and they did it anyway,
11:48
Speaker 2: And in my last year they signed me to silence me.
11:52
Speaker 1: I don't think I've ever talked about this publicly.
11:54
Speaker 2: Actually, in my last year, I asked them not to
11:57
Speaker 2: and they said, no, we're going to resign. I had
12:00
Speaker 2: other offer and they were gonna matchine and that was it.
12:03
Speaker 2: I can say this and you'll laugh. I will go
12:07
Speaker 2: down in history as being the highest paid CNN contributor
12:11
Speaker 2: in history if you count it per appearance, because in
12:14
Speaker 2: the last year of my contract, when they extended it,
12:17
Speaker 2: they signed me to bench me just to say they
12:21
Speaker 2: had a pro Trump commentator on the payroll. And I
12:24
Speaker 2: did a total of two appearances in twelve months under contract.
12:30
Speaker 1: Yes, one of appearances.
12:32
Speaker 2: Yes, that's I've never really talked about this publicly. So
12:35
Speaker 2: they resigned me and I said, please don't and they
12:39
Speaker 2: did it anyway, and they didn't have me on for
12:43
Speaker 2: like three and a half four months.
12:44
Speaker 3: All right, Ben, I don't want to out your personal finances,
12:47
Speaker 3: but I kind of do. How much to see Ann
12:50
Speaker 3: pay someone? I mean, look, if you don't want to
12:52
Speaker 3: answer that, don't answer that. But I'm kind of curious.
12:55
Speaker 2: Yeah, it all depends on if you're hosting. What you're
13:00
Speaker 2: resume was, how long you been there? And so I
13:03
Speaker 2: made I mean low six figures when I was there.
13:07
Speaker 2: My first yeah, clus I think it's what it was.
13:11
Speaker 3: And you did two appearances in a year, in a year,
13:15
Speaker 3: in a year, they paid you fifty freaking thousand dollars.
13:18
Speaker 1: Per appearance, a little more than that.
13:20
Speaker 2: That's why I said, I go down in history is
13:22
Speaker 2: the highest paid CNN contributor in history per appearance. But
13:27
Speaker 2: they benched me, and the Hollywood Reporter noticed that there
13:31
Speaker 2: was like two or three of us that were pro Trump,
13:34
Speaker 2: and we vanished from the screen. Because a normal week
13:37
Speaker 2: when I was there in the first, you know, six years,
13:40
Speaker 2: I would probably average four to six appearances a week
13:43
Speaker 2: some weeks to be eleven, twelve, thirteen. During the political campaigns,
13:47
Speaker 2: I did so many appearances in my first contract.
13:50
Speaker 3: That I'm doing some quick math. Let's say five appearances
13:54
Speaker 3: a week fifty two weeks. That's over two hundred and
13:56
Speaker 3: fifty appearances a year. That's that's what you used to be.
13:59
Speaker 3: And you went from two hundred and fifty appearances a
14:01
Speaker 3: year to.
14:02
Speaker 2: Two to two in my last year two and it
14:06
Speaker 2: was only I did one appearance where they tried to
14:10
Speaker 2: I think it was actually to try to get rid
14:11
Speaker 2: of me. They had me come on to defend Rush
14:13
Speaker 2: Limball and they try to turn me into a racist
14:16
Speaker 2: bigot that was defending Rush Limball, that was anti gay,
14:20
Speaker 2: and I didn't take the bait. And you could see
14:22
Speaker 2: I was very angry when I was on TV because
14:25
Speaker 2: I knew what they were trying to do and it
14:27
Speaker 2: didn't work, and I didn't take the bait, and I
14:29
Speaker 2: fought back. And then there was a bunch of articles
14:31
Speaker 2: from you know, scumbags and media were trying to imply
14:34
Speaker 2: that I said something I didn't say. And then Hollywood
14:38
Speaker 2: Reporter noticed that the pro Trump surrogates, in essence, these
14:44
Speaker 2: conservatives at CNN had vanished from the air, and they
14:48
Speaker 2: wrote an article.
14:49
Speaker 3: So I say this seriously, and look, I don't watch CNN.
14:52
Speaker 3: So but I can't recall a single pro Trump surrogate
14:58
Speaker 3: in years they've had. Yeah, I can tell you I
15:01
Speaker 3: used to do CNN. I didn't do it five times
15:04
Speaker 3: a week because they paid me zero and in my
15:06
Speaker 3: entire life have been paid zero by CNN, and you know,
15:10
Speaker 3: I feel it was a fair trade. But I used
15:13
Speaker 3: to do CNN once a week consistently. I haven't done
15:17
Speaker 3: them in years, years because they're not interested in a
15:23
Speaker 3: fair discussion. They are propagandas, yes, and they're not even
15:30
Speaker 3: Democrat propagandists. They are the left wing of the Democrat Party.
15:34
Speaker 3: And it's not just CNN. Why did CBS seese Catherine
15:41
Speaker 3: Herridge's confidential source notes that is extremely unusual, but it
15:49
Speaker 3: is a manifestation of the complete corruption of the corporate media.
15:54
Speaker 2: Now, if you want to hear the rest of this conversation,
15:57
Speaker 2: you can go back and listen to the full podcast
15:59
Speaker 2: from earlier this week. Now onto story number two. Let's
16:04
Speaker 2: talk about what's happening also with this adversary to Vladimir
16:08
Speaker 2: Putin and give a little context here so people understand
16:13
Speaker 2: the Russian regime has been trying to murder Alexi for
16:17
Speaker 2: now years. You go back to Joe Biden, and he
16:23
Speaker 2: even went on the record in Geneva, Switzerland, back on
16:27
Speaker 2: June the sixteenth of twenty twenty one, saying that there
16:30
Speaker 2: would be major consequences if he died in captivity by
16:36
Speaker 2: the Russians, by Putin. I want to play this from
16:38
Speaker 2: June sixteen, twenty twenty one, mister presidents, a quick following
16:42
Speaker 2: the same theme of consequences you said just now, you
16:44
Speaker 2: spoke to him a lot about human rights.
16:46
Speaker 4: What do you say would happen if opposition later Alexi
16:49
Speaker 4: Dvanni dies.
16:51
Speaker 5: I made it clear to him that I believe the
16:54
Speaker 5: consequences of that would be devastating for Russia. I'll go
16:58
Speaker 5: back to the same point. What do you think happens
17:01
Speaker 5: when he's saying it's not about hurting navalne, all the
17:06
Speaker 5: stuff he says to rationalize the treatment of navalney, and
17:10
Speaker 5: then he dies in prison. I pointed out to him
17:15
Speaker 5: that it matters a great deal.
17:19
Speaker 1: I mean, Senator, that was twenty twenty one.
17:23
Speaker 3: What changed, Well, actually nothing changed, And I'm going to
17:28
Speaker 3: explain in a minute that he didn't believe what he
17:30
Speaker 3: was saying then. But before I explain that, let's play
17:33
Speaker 3: what Biden is saying now, because even he is admitting
17:37
Speaker 3: today that what he said then was full of crap.
17:39
Speaker 3: Listen to what he's saying right now.
17:41
Speaker 5: Now's the time for even greater unity among our NATO
17:43
Speaker 5: allies to stand up to the threat that Putin's rush
17:46
Speaker 5: of poses. You know, I sent my deepest condolence as
17:50
Speaker 5: Alexi staff and supporters are going to continue his work
17:53
Speaker 5: despite this loss, despite all of Putin's desperate attempts to
17:57
Speaker 5: stamp out the opposition, and most of all to his family,
18:01
Speaker 5: especially to his wife, his daughter, and his son. We've
18:04
Speaker 5: already sacrificed so much for their family and a shared
18:08
Speaker 5: dream for a better future for Russia.
18:11
Speaker 2: Now, that was him making his first statement at the
18:15
Speaker 2: White House. But then the media asked him that question, Hey,
18:20
Speaker 2: what happened to what you said three years ago? First?
18:23
Speaker 1: Was this an assassination?
18:25
Speaker 5: The answer is that we don't know exactly what happened,
18:29
Speaker 5: but there is no doubt that the death of the
18:33
Speaker 5: Volny was the consequence of something that Putin and his
18:36
Speaker 5: thugs did.
18:38
Speaker 2: And to be clear, you warned Vladider Putin when you
18:41
Speaker 2: were in Geneva of devastating consequences if Navali died.
18:45
Speaker 1: In Russian custody.
18:47
Speaker 3: What consequences should he and Russia face?
18:50
Speaker 5: That was three years ago. In the meantime, they faced
18:52
Speaker 5: a hell of a lot of consequences. They've lost and
18:55
Speaker 5: or had wounded over three hundred and fifty thousand Russian soldiers.
18:59
Speaker 2: I mean, he doesn't answer the questions. He says, that
19:02
Speaker 2: was three years ago, and now, because of the war with Ukraine, Well,
19:05
Speaker 2: they've had some somehow, some consequences that have nothing to
19:09
Speaker 2: do with killing this individual.
19:11
Speaker 3: Well, he did answer the question, actually, and his answer
19:15
Speaker 3: is nothing. That he's so weak, that he's so ineffective
19:18
Speaker 3: that he's not going to do anything. And Putin knows
19:20
Speaker 3: that everybody else knows that Navalney knew that. So last week,
19:24
Speaker 3: when the news of Navalney's death broke, here's the statement
19:28
Speaker 3: that I put out. Quote. The Russian regime has been
19:31
Speaker 3: trying to murder Alexi Navolney for years to stop his
19:34
Speaker 3: criticism of Vladimir Putin's corruption and ontocracy and to intimidate
19:40
Speaker 3: the Russian people from similar criticism. Tragically, they appear to
19:45
Speaker 3: have finally succeeded in murdering him. We must ensure that
19:49
Speaker 3: they will never succeed in silencing him. The regime interprets
19:55
Speaker 3: weakness from the United States as appeasement and has only
19:59
Speaker 3: escalated it suppression in recent years. The Russian people are
20:03
Speaker 3: entitled to express their views peacefully without fear of retribution,
20:08
Speaker 3: and I will work with my colleagues to hold accountable
20:11
Speaker 3: those in the Russian regime responsible for this atrocity. So
20:16
Speaker 3: that's what I put out. But I want to go
20:18
Speaker 3: back because I said that Biden didn't mean the tough
20:24
Speaker 3: consequences when he said that. How do I know that,
20:27
Speaker 3: Because if you go back to twenty twenty one, you
20:30
Speaker 3: go back to the beginning of the Biden administration where
20:33
Speaker 3: Vladimir Putin poisoned Alexi Nevaldi actually poisoned him in August
20:38
Speaker 3: of twenty twenty and he was poisoned with a Novachok
20:42
Speaker 3: class nerve agent, which is the same class that was
20:46
Speaker 3: used by Russia in the twenty eighteen assassin assassination attempt
20:52
Speaker 3: against a former British intelligence agency. It's a strategy of
20:58
Speaker 3: murder that the Russians are fond poisoning. And at the
21:02
Speaker 3: time Biden announced really mild sanctions on Russia, said okay,
21:09
Speaker 3: we're going to slap your hand. And what I called
21:11
Speaker 3: for at the time was sanctioning and shutting down the
21:17
Speaker 3: nord Stream two pipeline. Now remember nord Stream two pipeline
21:21
Speaker 3: was a pipeline that Putin was building that went straight
21:24
Speaker 3: from Russia to Germany. It circumvented Ukraine. The entire point
21:27
Speaker 3: of the nord Stream two pipeline was to enable Russia
21:30
Speaker 3: to get its natural gas to Europe without needing to
21:33
Speaker 3: go through the pipelines in Ukraine. Why did Putin want
21:37
Speaker 3: the nord Stream two pipeline so he could invade Ukraine.
21:42
Speaker 3: I authored the sanctions that shut nord Stream two down.
21:46
Speaker 3: I passed them into law in December of twenty nineteen,
21:51
Speaker 3: got overwhelming bipartisan support in the Senate, got overwhelming bipartisan
21:55
Speaker 3: support in the House. Donald Trump signed my sanctions legislation
21:59
Speaker 3: into law. Law and listen to this. Putin stopped building
22:05
Speaker 3: the nord Stream two pipeline literally the day, the very
22:09
Speaker 3: same day that Donald Trump signed my sanctions legislation, the
22:14
Speaker 3: pipeline was done. That was December of twenty nineteen. December
22:19
Speaker 3: of twenty twenty, I passed another set of sanctions legislation
22:22
Speaker 3: on nord Stream two, again with overwhelming bipartisan support. Again,
22:26
Speaker 3: Donald Trump signed it to law. The pipeline remained dead.
22:30
Speaker 3: Now fast forward to January twenty twenty one. On January twentieth,
22:35
Speaker 3: Joe Biden takes the oath of office. He becomes president.
22:39
Speaker 3: Four days later, four January twenty fourth, twenty twenty one,
22:45
Speaker 3: Putin resumes deep sea construction of the nord Stream two
22:48
Speaker 3: pipeline literally four days into the Biden presidency. Why because
22:53
Speaker 3: Biden was already showing weakness. Putin understood Biden was weak,
22:57
Speaker 3: and by the way, that foreshadowing of weakness was true,
23:01
Speaker 3: it was accurate. Why do we know that because several
23:03
Speaker 3: months later Biden formally waived the sanctions on nord Stream two.
23:09
Speaker 3: He gave Vladimir Putin a multi billion dollar gift. He
23:13
Speaker 3: let him complete that pipeline, and that pipeline waving those
23:17
Speaker 3: sanctions is why Putin invaded Ukraine. It is Biden's fault.
23:22
Speaker 3: But when Navalney, when Putin went after Navalney, I called
23:26
Speaker 3: on Biden. I said, all right, you gave Biden this
23:29
Speaker 3: gift of Nordstream too. How about now, when Navalney's in jail,
23:33
Speaker 3: how about now impose the sanctions on Nordstream two. How
23:36
Speaker 3: about now grow a backbone and stand up to Putin?
23:42
Speaker 3: And Biden refused to do so, instead put little slap
23:47
Speaker 3: of the wrist sanctions on it. And so when he
23:49
Speaker 3: said severe consequences, he didn't meet it in twenty twenty one,
23:53
Speaker 3: and he's admitted it now. The consequences he has in
23:56
Speaker 3: mind are nothing. And you know what, Putin will continue
24:00
Speaker 3: to behave worse, will continue to be more oppressive, will
24:02
Speaker 3: continue to be more of a threat. China, she will
24:06
Speaker 3: continue to behave worse, to be more oppressive, to be
24:08
Speaker 3: more of a threat North Korea, will, Venezuela will, Iran will,
24:13
Speaker 3: every enemy of America Hamas will has blow will all
24:16
Speaker 3: of them. When we have a weak commander in chief,
24:20
Speaker 3: America is at greater peril and every one of our
24:22
Speaker 3: allies is at greater peril.
24:25
Speaker 1: Cener.
24:25
Speaker 2: Our final question for you on sanctions, what is the
24:28
Speaker 2: point of having sanctions And you mentioned multiple countries there
24:32
Speaker 2: that we have sanctions on that we're not doing anything.
24:35
Speaker 2: We're not enforcing the sanctions. And if the president and
24:38
Speaker 2: his administration will not enforce the sanctions, is there any
24:42
Speaker 2: checks and balances that can come into play on the House,
24:46
Speaker 2: the Senate, congressional oversight, Because if you've got the sanctions
24:50
Speaker 2: and they're worthless because you don't enforce.
24:52
Speaker 1: Them, who does that fall on And can it change?
24:56
Speaker 3: Well, it certainly can change, and Congress can force the
24:58
Speaker 3: president to do it. And the best example of that,
25:02
Speaker 3: Let's go back to Nordstream two and I'll finish the story.
25:05
Speaker 3: When Biden waived the sanctions. My response, as I put
25:09
Speaker 3: a hold on every single nominee at the State Department.
25:11
Speaker 3: I blocked them in the Senate, and it caused the
25:13
Speaker 3: Biden administration to go nuts. It caused Senate Democrats to
25:16
Speaker 3: go nuts. And I said, listen, Joe Biden is handing
25:21
Speaker 3: a massive gift of Vladimir Putin. He is causing war
25:24
Speaker 3: in Europe. He is causing Russia to prepare to invade Ukraine.
25:29
Speaker 3: This makes no sense, and it is endangering Europe, our allies,
25:32
Speaker 3: and it's endangering America. For all of twenty twenty one,
25:36
Speaker 3: I had those holes in place. In December of twenty
25:39
Speaker 3: twenty one, I cut a deal with Chuck Schumer. I
25:42
Speaker 3: let I think it was thirty four of those holds
25:45
Speaker 3: go in exchange four scheduling a vote on new sanctions
25:50
Speaker 3: on Nordstream two in January of twenty twenty two. Schumer agreed,
25:55
Speaker 3: so I forced the vote on the Senate floor. Now.
25:58
Speaker 3: When the vote came up in January twenty twenty two,
26:00
Speaker 3: the week before the vote, President Zelensky and Ukraine publicly
26:06
Speaker 3: begged the United States Senate please please please pass Cruises
26:11
Speaker 3: sanctions legislation. This legislation is the last best hope to
26:17
Speaker 3: stop Russia from invading Ukraine to avoid war. That same week,
26:24
Speaker 3: the government of Poland put out a formal statement pleading
26:29
Speaker 3: with the United States Senate to pass my sanctions legislation.
26:33
Speaker 3: Poland said, if you do not do so, Russia will
26:36
Speaker 3: invade Ukraine. Now, Ben that is highly unusual. Foreign countries
26:40
Speaker 3: generally do not put out statements on particular votes in
26:44
Speaker 3: the Senate asking the Senate to do something. In this case,
26:48
Speaker 3: both Ukraine and Poland put out those statements. The day
26:51
Speaker 3: of the vote, Joe Biden came sixteen blocks from the
26:55
Speaker 3: White House down to Capitol Hill and he went to
26:59
Speaker 3: the Democratic CS Senate lunch and he personally lobbied the
27:03
Speaker 3: Democrat senators. This was the first time he had done
27:09
Speaker 3: so since he became president, and he came there to
27:14
Speaker 3: lobby them. His request was, please please please vote against
27:20
Speaker 3: Cruise's sanctions legislation. Please vote for Russia and putin so. Twice,
27:28
Speaker 3: when I had introduced my legislation and passed it to law,
27:31
Speaker 3: all the Democrats had come together and supported it, so
27:34
Speaker 3: they were on record twice supporting my sanctions. In January
27:40
Speaker 3: twenty twenty two, because of Biden's personal lobbying, forty four
27:44
Speaker 3: Democrat senators flipped their votes. They voted against sanctions, they
27:49
Speaker 3: voted in favor of Russia, they voted in favor of Putin,
27:54
Speaker 3: and as a result, a month later, Russia invaded Ukraine
27:59
Speaker 3: and we had have still today the biggest war in
28:03
Speaker 3: Europe since World War II. Look, I'm someone who hates war.
28:10
Speaker 3: I am very reluctant to go to war. But I
28:13
Speaker 3: agree with Ronald Reagan. I agree with Winston Churchill. I
28:17
Speaker 3: agree with Donald Trump in the philosophy of peace through strength,
28:20
Speaker 3: that the best way you avoid war is being strong
28:22
Speaker 3: enough your enemies don't want to mess with you, and
28:25
Speaker 3: sanctions can be a very powerful tool for avoiding war.
28:30
Speaker 3: What the Biden White House is all about when it
28:32
Speaker 3: comes to our enemies is weakness and appeasement, and waiving
28:36
Speaker 3: these sanctions directly cause the war. Once the pipeline was complete,
28:43
Speaker 3: Putin's view was he could invade because he could still
28:46
Speaker 3: get his gas to Europe even if the pipelines in
28:51
Speaker 3: Ukraine were.
28:52
Speaker 1: Destroyed as before.
28:53
Speaker 2: If you want to hear the rest of this conversation
28:56
Speaker 2: on this topic, you can go back and down the
28:58
Speaker 2: podcast from earlier this week to hear the entire thing.
29:02
Speaker 2: I want to get back to the big story, number
29:04
Speaker 2: three of the week you may have missed, Senator. I
29:07
Speaker 2: want to move lastly to this other issue, and that
29:09
Speaker 2: is it is weird. The media seems to be turning
29:14
Speaker 2: on Joe Biden. Headlines now coming from major news organizations.
29:19
Speaker 2: The Washington Post, for example, had this headline, what happens
29:23
Speaker 2: if Trump or Biden can no longer run for president?
29:27
Speaker 2: Obviously to try to act like Donald Trump is in
29:30
Speaker 2: cognitive decline. It's not happening, and we know it's different
29:33
Speaker 2: with Joe Biden. The New York Times even said this
29:36
Speaker 2: how old is too old to be president? An uncomfortable
29:40
Speaker 2: question arises again, and now the New York Times taking
29:44
Speaker 2: heat for that headline. I want to get your reaction
29:47
Speaker 2: to this moment on Fox News Channel as they describe
29:51
Speaker 2: this turning on the president.
29:54
Speaker 4: On the story thanks for being here this afternoon with us, everybody.
29:57
Speaker 4: Interesting when you take a look at a theme that
30:01
Speaker 4: seems to be emerging in the coverage of this campaign,
30:06
Speaker 4: this presidential race. Right, check out some of these recent headlines,
30:10
Speaker 4: quote what we know about cognitive decline? Quote what happens
30:16
Speaker 4: if Trump or Biden can no longer run? For president?
30:19
Speaker 4: How old is too old to be president? These are
30:23
Speaker 4: not your typical electioneer headlines, But this is clearly not
30:26
Speaker 4: a typical election year matchup if it turns out to
30:29
Speaker 4: be these two presumed nominees. So the publisher of The
30:33
Speaker 4: New York Times is standing by his papers reporting on
30:37
Speaker 4: the president's quote on popularity and his age, but says
30:41
Speaker 4: that the White House is not happy. In fact, he
30:43
Speaker 4: says they're extremely upset about the coverage that they're getting
30:46
Speaker 4: at the New York Times. And take a listen to
30:48
Speaker 4: this exchange. It's a short time ago as President Biden
30:52
Speaker 4: left for a fundraising trip to California.
30:55
Speaker 1: Watch, Gavin, are you ready? Well, I'm looking for I'm
31:05
Speaker 1: looking to you. We're looking to you.
31:08
Speaker 2: Okay, with that we bring in our I mean, he
31:11
Speaker 2: didn't even know what they were talking about, Senator and
31:13
Speaker 2: you can see the media flipping on him. Is this
31:16
Speaker 2: the beginning of the end of his presidency with the
31:19
Speaker 2: Democratic Party figuring out how to offload him?
31:22
Speaker 1: Yeah?
31:23
Speaker 3: Look, that was weird that exchange at the end, being asked,
31:26
Speaker 3: are you're going to California for a plan B to
31:28
Speaker 3: talk to Gavin Newsom? Look, that was a nasty little question,
31:32
Speaker 3: but his answer was bizarre. It was a non sequitor.
31:36
Speaker 3: It made no sense. And you know those three headlines
31:39
Speaker 3: that that that the Fox story just read. The first
31:42
Speaker 3: one was from the Wall Street Journal, the second one
31:44
Speaker 3: was from the Washington Post, the third one was from
31:46
Speaker 3: the New York Times. And and I do think we
31:49
Speaker 3: are seeing the corporate media starting to turn on Joe Biden.
31:53
Speaker 3: And we've talked at length. Listen, it was this podcast
31:57
Speaker 3: that drove news and drove news across the country when
32:01
Speaker 3: we said months ago that that I believe there was
32:04
Speaker 3: a very significant chance the Democrat Party would pull the
32:07
Speaker 3: court on Joe Biden, yank him out, and replace him
32:11
Speaker 3: with Michelle Obama. And I think if they do that,
32:13
Speaker 3: they're likely to do it either at the Democrat convention
32:16
Speaker 3: this summer or shortly thereafter. And we're seeing the corporate media,
32:22
Speaker 3: which is one and the same with the Democrat Party,
32:25
Speaker 3: but in many ways they're the left wing of the
32:28
Speaker 3: Democrat Party. They're starting to get nervous. They're starting to realize, crap,
32:32
Speaker 3: if it's Biden against Trump, we think Trump's gonna win.
32:35
Speaker 3: And so they're they're they're hitting the panic button. And
32:38
Speaker 3: I think We're going to see more of these stories
32:41
Speaker 3: as the media turns on them. I do think you're
32:43
Speaker 3: seeing both Democrats in the media getting very, very worried
32:47
Speaker 3: about Joe Biden's ability to win in November.
32:50
Speaker 2: When you are running for president, you've done this before
32:53
Speaker 2: and you see something this significant of a change in
32:57
Speaker 2: the news cycle. Joe Biden has had three years of
33:00
Speaker 2: basically a media that's been covering for him. I think
33:03
Speaker 2: that's why he was so shocked when he had the
33:07
Speaker 2: report that came out about his cognitive decline and couldn't
33:09
Speaker 2: answer basic questions, and then he came out with that
33:12
Speaker 2: very angry, really dysfunctional press conference at night, and the
33:17
Speaker 2: media didn't get back in line since then.
33:20
Speaker 1: So when you see this, who is moving the needle.
33:23
Speaker 2: Is it donors who are saying we're not going to
33:25
Speaker 2: give money anymore, or is it the leadership of the
33:29
Speaker 2: Democratic Party saying we got to figure something out, we
33:31
Speaker 2: got to figure it out fast.
33:32
Speaker 1: Or could it even be both?
33:34
Speaker 3: So I don't think it's donors, and I don't think
33:36
Speaker 3: it's anyone cutting off money. And understand, the Democrats and
33:41
Speaker 3: the media would be perfectly happy if they could wave
33:43
Speaker 3: a wand and put Joe Biden there four years more.
33:46
Speaker 3: They're not worried that he's incompetent to be president. They're
33:49
Speaker 3: not worried that the Department of Justice says he's not
33:52
Speaker 3: competent to stand trial. They're not worried that he's such
33:55
Speaker 3: a weak commander in chief that our enemies are attacking
33:58
Speaker 3: our allies and threat America. They're not worried that he
34:01
Speaker 3: lacks the competence to do the job. That there's only
34:06
Speaker 3: one thing they're worried about, that he would lose. If
34:10
Speaker 3: they believed he would win, they'd be perfectly fine to
34:13
Speaker 3: weekend it bernies him to stand him up as a
34:17
Speaker 3: corpse and say, Joe Biden's there, and let's keep pulling
34:21
Speaker 3: the puppet strings. Their concern is they're worried he's going
34:25
Speaker 3: to lose, and that is a very real and an
34:30
Speaker 3: acute concern on their part. It's also worth noting you
34:34
Speaker 3: were talking about the press turning on him. You know,
34:36
Speaker 3: there's a real difference between Republicans and Democrats. Look, on
34:40
Speaker 3: my end, the press has always turned on me. They're
34:43
Speaker 3: always hostile. Every question they're asking there, they're looking to
34:46
Speaker 3: screw me. Nine ways to Sunday. That's just when when
34:49
Speaker 3: you're and by the way, and you've been in the
34:51
Speaker 3: Capitol with me, Ben, as you know, when I walk
34:53
Speaker 3: from my office to the Senate floor, and I do
34:55
Speaker 3: so repeatedly, whether it is to vote, or to go
34:59
Speaker 3: to meetings or to go to committee hearings, I'm walking
35:01
Speaker 3: back and forth through the Capitol and there's a cluster
35:04
Speaker 3: of reporters that surround you, and they ask you a
35:06
Speaker 3: hostile question after hostile question on every topic under the sun.
35:09
Speaker 3: And if you're a Republican, especially a conservative Republican, you're
35:14
Speaker 3: used to just getting constant barrages of attacks. The Democrats
35:19
Speaker 3: don't get that. They get the kind of questions. Remember
35:21
Speaker 3: Joe Biden in his first year in the White House,
35:24
Speaker 3: the reporters would ask him things like, mister President, what's
35:27
Speaker 3: your favorite flavor of ice cream?
35:28
Speaker 1: I mean, that was right. I mean, it's it's embarrassing.
35:35
Speaker 3: It's it's they're like groupies chasing the Beatles, throwing their
35:39
Speaker 3: pennies at him. And that's just the guys. I mean,
35:41
Speaker 3: I mean, it is it's pitiful and and and so
35:45
Speaker 3: he is really startled because he's not used to any scrutiny.
35:49
Speaker 3: He's not used to journalists actually being journalists. By the way,
35:53
Speaker 3: there is this phenomenon for Republicans as well. If you
35:56
Speaker 3: remember John McCain, John McCain used to get lots of
35:59
Speaker 3: a boring press coverage because when he was a Republican
36:03
Speaker 3: senator he would often attack other Republicans and the press,
36:07
Speaker 3: and he would attack him from the left, and the
36:09
Speaker 3: press loves it when a Republican attacks other Republicans from
36:13
Speaker 3: the left. It's the best way to get good press.
36:16
Speaker 3: You get called a bipartisan statesman when you agree with
36:19
Speaker 3: the Democrats and attack your fellow Republicans. Well, when John
36:23
Speaker 3: McCain got the Republican nomination, and you and I both
36:27
Speaker 3: supported John McCain once we was our nominee, Yeah, but
36:31
Speaker 3: the press turned on him and turned viciously on him.
36:34
Speaker 3: If you remember, McCain made a comment something like, I
36:36
Speaker 3: don't understand. I thought you guys were my base. And
36:40
Speaker 3: he was completely startled. Because it's the same sentiment Biden's having.
36:46
Speaker 3: When you're used to just getting your your hindquarters kissed
36:51
Speaker 3: by the media, when they start biting, you don't know
36:55
Speaker 3: how to handle it.
36:56
Speaker 2: And one of two things is going to happen when
36:58
Speaker 2: it comes to this center. They're either going to get
37:00
Speaker 2: back in line after trying to you know, step out
37:02
Speaker 2: and see will others follow us right and test the waters,
37:07
Speaker 2: or they're gonna keep going, what's your prediction.
37:11
Speaker 3: Well, if he stays the nominee, they'll get back in
37:13
Speaker 3: line and they'll immediately begin saying it's agist and racist
37:16
Speaker 3: and horrible to even ask these questions, and they have
37:19
Speaker 3: no shame. So this is the moment where they're trying
37:23
Speaker 3: to see if they can push him out and replace
37:25
Speaker 3: them with Michelle Obama. If they can't, if he doesn't go,
37:28
Speaker 3: If if we get to September and Biden's the nominee,
37:33
Speaker 3: the media will suddenly be completely silent on this front
37:37
Speaker 3: and will attack anyone who dares raise the same questions
37:40
Speaker 3: they're raising right now.
37:41
Speaker 2: As always, thank you for listening to Verdict with Center,
37:45
Speaker 2: Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you don't forget to down
37:47
Speaker 2: with my podcast, and you can listen to my podcast
37:49
Speaker 2: every other day you're not listening to Verdict or each
37:52
Speaker 2: day when you listen to Verdict afterwards, I'd love to
37:54
Speaker 2: have you as a listener to again the Ben Ferguson podcasts,
37:57
Speaker 2: and we will see you back here on Monday morning.
38:00
Speaker 5: Yes,