1. Support for Law Enforcement during Police Week
- Highlights bipartisan legislation to improve benefits for officers and their families.
- A specific bill aims to:
- Speed up death/disability benefit decisions (within 270 days).
- Expand eligibility to partially disabled officers.
- Core message: Police deserve greater respect, faster support, and fulfilled government commitments.
2. Fixing Bureaucratic Delays
- The current system for officer benefits is described as slow and inefficient, with cases delayed for years.
- The proposed reforms are framed as a common-sense fix to government inefficiency.
- Key theme: Government failure vs. responsibility to public servants.
3. “Trey’s Law” (Child Sexual Abuse Reform)
- Inspired by a victim who was silenced by a legal non-disclosure agreement (NDA).
- The law would:
- Ban NDAs that silence child sexual abuse victims.
- Ensure victims can speak freely about their abuse.
- Already passed in multiple states; advancing federally.
- Central idea: Protect victims and prevent legal systems from enabling abuse.
4. Human Rights Pressure on China
- A bipartisan Senate resolution calls on the U.S. President to:
- Advocate for release of political prisoners in China.
- Focus especially on:
- Religious leaders (Christian pastors)
- Pro-democracy activist Jimmy Lai
- Passed unanimously (100–0), signaling strong political unity.
- Strategy: Use unified U.S. political pressure as leverage in foreign diplomacy.
5. Foreign Policy Goals with China
- Broader objectives mentioned:
- Encourage China to influence Iran.
- Expand U.S. trade (e.g., agriculture, Boeing deals).
- Promote American economic interests.
6. Criticism of The New York Times & Israel Lawsuit
- Israel is suing The New York Times for defamation.
- Allegations center on a controversial column accusing Israel of abuses.
- The reporting is false, biased, and politically motivated.
- Media outlets are misrepresenting facts about Israel and Hamas.
Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz/
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome. It is Verdic with Center. Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson
with you. It's so nice to have you with us.
If you're listening on the radio around the Country Center.
We've got a lot to chat about on today's show,
including some we haven't seen a long time. We are
celebrating at the White House. It in Washington, d C.
Law enforcement not trying to defund them.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
Well, that's exactly right. This past week was Police Week.
We had police officers from all across the country come
to Washington, d C.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
Come to the.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
Capitol and we celebrated, celebrated the heroism. We celebrated and
remembered the officers who gave their lives, gave their lives
in duty defending us. And it really after all of
the vilification, after all of the attacks that are directed
at police officers, it was nice to have a time
(00:47):
just to say thank you. And it was also a
time that was recognized the Senate Judiciary Committee. This week
we passed a series of bills out of the Judiciary Committee,
including two different bills that I authored, one directed specifically
to police officers and a second protecting child victims of
sexual assault, and both of those victories are significant. Both
(01:10):
of them are now going to the floor of the Senate,
and I think we'll get both pasted into law.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
It's going to be really awesome. We're going to break
that down for you in a moment. I also want
to tell you about a organization that you may not
even know exists, and it's one that is so important,
Americans United for Life and the amazing work that they're
doing right now. If you are proud to be pro life,
just like I am, then you need to know about
(01:35):
the Americans United for Life. Over the past fifty years,
they have filed more than two hundred legal briefs and
helped create at least four hundred pro life bills in
over forty states by writing model legislation, consulting with state legislators,
and defending their own laws and other pro life statutes
(01:56):
in court. AUL is a nonprofit law firm an advocacy
group that was founded in nineteen seventy one, two years
before Roe established the constitucial right to an abortion before
fetal viability. Aul's dual front approach of writing and defending
legislation has proved an effective one that could become even
(02:18):
more impactful as pro life state legislatures move to enact
protections for preborn babies and their mothers. Now that the
legality of abortion has returned to the states, you have
the opportunity to overturn pro abortion laws and advance pro
life legislation that attacks the most vulnerable in our society,
(02:40):
from the womb to the tomb. And together we can
shape the future of our nation through life affirming legislation
in every state. A gift of just twenty five dollars
helps hold abortion providers accountable and helps protect women and
unborn children across this country. And now through a match,
(03:02):
your gift is doubled. So donate securely at aul dot
org slash verdict a UL dot org slash verdict sponsored
by Americans United for Life. All right, Senator, so let's
talk about saying that's just exciting for me. My dad
still is involved in law enforcement. I am so glad
(03:25):
to see the Republican Party moving to put a law
enforcement where they deserve to be, which is in a
great light instead of a dehumanizing, attacking defund And every
time something happens, we immediately go after law enforcement that
has changed and something else that's really significant, A bipartisan
piece of legislation that your name is on that is
(03:47):
going to do something incredible for people that protect.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
And serve well.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
This week, the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously passed my legislation.
It's entitled the Officer John Barnes and Chi Michael ansbro
Public Safety Officers Benefit Program Expansion Act of twenty twenty six.
Now it is named for two tremendous heroes. First of all,
Officer John Barnes. Officer John Barnes was the police officer
(04:15):
at Santa Fe High School where you'll recall Ben the
horrific school shooting that happened. Santa Fe is just outside
of Houston, and it's the morning of that shooting. I
was actually at home when that shooting happened, and so
I jumped in a truck and headed down to the school.
I was on campus about an hour after the shooting happened,
(04:36):
and I will tell you the horror of what transpired
there as that deranged gunman shot and murdered multiple students
and Officer John Barnes was on duty, and when the
shooter began his rampage, Officer Barnes rushed the shooter. He
(04:57):
put himself between the shooter and the students. He saved
multiple students' lives. And the shooter had one of the
weapons he was armed with was a shotgun, and he
fired the shotgun and it hit Officer Barnes in the
arm and did permanent damage to his elbow, to his arm.
Speaker 1 (05:16):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (05:16):
He had massive blood loss. Uh.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
And he ended up actually flatlining twice and being resuscitated twice.
And I've got to know Officer Barnes, and he's he's
the man is a hero. He risked his life and
almost gave his life to protect the students that he
had been charged with protecting. And so this bill honors
him and and and it also honors Chief Michael ansbro
(05:43):
who was a hero on nine to eleven, And he
was one of the first responders in nine to eleven
who rushed into the building, rescued people, risked his life.
Speaker 3 (05:54):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
He survived nine to eleven in the collapse of the towers,
but in the course of that he inhalesiled so much
toxic material that ultimately Chief Annsbrod died from cancer from
all of the poison he inhaled on nine to eleven.
With both of them, they submitted applications to the Public
(06:18):
Safety Officer's Benefit Program. Now, the Public Safety Officer's Benefit
Program is created within the Department of Justice and in
particular the Bureau of Justice Assistance, and it does several things.
Number one, it provides death benefits to survivors of officers
who died.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
In the line of duty.
Speaker 2 (06:38):
And that's something I think we owe owe their families
to say thank you for that. And then secondly, it
provides assistance to people who are permanently disabled as a
result of in the light of the duty injury. And
the problem is that the program has historically been very
(06:59):
very slow and very very delayed. You look at the
Santa Fe shooting. The Santa Fe shooting happened in twenty eighteen.
Officer Barnes application is still pending. It's eight years later
and it hasn't been adjudicated. The same is true for
the application for benefits for Chief Ansbrose family, is that
(07:23):
it's delayed and it's still pending long after he passed away.
And so what this bill that I did along with
Kirsten gilibrand Kirsten Jilibran is a Democrat from New York.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
She's a friend.
Speaker 2 (07:34):
She and I have actually done quite a bit together,
and so she this was originally the Officer John Barnes
bill because he's a Texan and someone I know, and
we teamed up and she brought in Michael Landsboro to
honor a nine to eleven hero as well. And what
this bill does is speed up the determination of benefits.
And so it puts a shot clock of two hundred
(07:58):
and seventy days. It says the Department of Justice must
make it a termination within two hundred and seventy days.
You can't have it drag on for eight years. And
it also it expedites the processing. And it also expands
the coverage. So it extends partial eligibility to officers who
are permanently but not totally disabled. So if you have
(08:21):
a permanent disability, you qualify. It expands the number of officers,
the number of officers families who qualify, and it speeds it up.
We got this through the Senate Judiciary Committee. The next
step is to move it on the floor of the Senate.
Then we'll move it through the House, and I'm confident
President Trump will sign it to law.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
Before we get to trades with Law Center, I want
to ask you a couple of questions. Just I think
when Americans see this type of bipartisan leadership and you
see that this about benefits of those that have risked
their lives or given the ultimate sacrifice their life, and
to see how many loopholes there are to jump through
(08:59):
to clearly get the benefits of the family needs. If
you've ever set with an officer, and I have, and
it's a miserable moment, or let me rephrase that, a
family of a fallen officer. In that miserable moment, even
after all of all the people go back home and
life gets back to normal, that is when the real
(09:19):
thermal they say, sets in because you're waiting for so
many things that you've been promised to come through. And
then you compare that center to the waste, fraud, and
abuse that we're finding where there's just billions here, another
billion here, another million here, another twenty million here, another
thirty million here, these daycare centers, hospice centers. It would
make you go insane if you are a family that's
(09:42):
just waiting on the benefit because your loved one gave
their life to protect and serve. How frustrating is that
for you when you see that this is how we
treat our heroes and yet the villains, these con artists,
they can get their hands on billions and billions of dollars.
Speaker 2 (09:57):
Yeah, it's it's deeply frustrating. Listen, if an officer tragically
loses his or her life in the line of duty,
that there's nothing we can do to bring them back.
There's nothing we can do to bring that officer back
to their loved ones.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
Uh. But but we do owe honoring our commitments to them.
We do oh being there for their family. Uh.
Speaker 2 (10:18):
The men and women in blue who put themselves on
the line, like John Barnes, they literally stand in harm's way.
They stand between someone who would harm or kill us.
Speaker 1 (10:30):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
And and ourselves are our loved ones. And and unfortunately,
bureaucracy is one of the few constants in the world,
and and dealing with the federal government is frequently maddening
and infuriating. That being said, the pso B process, this
benefit process, is notoriously slow, It is notoriously backlogged. And
(10:53):
so this is a common sense bill just to speed
up the process, to ensure that that that that whether
it's an office who's lost his life like Chief Ansbro
or whether it's an officer who is permanently disabled, like
John Barnes, that we make the determinations quickly and we
provide them the benefits they've been promised.
Speaker 1 (11:16):
Yeah, absolutely right. I want to move on to Tred's
Law as well, and we've talked about this before on
this show, but for people that are listening many are
listening on the radio around the country this show, can
you give us a recap of Trade's Law, how it
became about, and now what's happening moving forward.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Well, Trey's Law is named for a Texan named for
Trey Carlock. Trey Carlock grew up in Dallas and as
a kid, he went to a Christian summer camp and
at the summer camp, tragically an adult man groomed him
and then for years sexually abused him. And ultimately that
(11:52):
sexual abuse resulted in a lawsuit. That lawsuit was settled
and one of the terms of the settlement was that
Trey Carrarlock signed a non disclosure agreement where he committed
to not disclose to anyone the details of his years
of sexual abuse. Well, the abuse continued taking a toll
on Trey, and tragically he took his own life and
(12:17):
he was silenced. He shared with his therapist how frustrated
he was about being silenced and not being able to
speak the truth of his experience of the abuse that
he suffered. Trey's law has risen up in the wake
of that. And Tray's law is very simple. What it
does is it prohibits enforcement of non disclosure agreements concerning
(12:40):
victims of child sexual assault, so that legally you cannot
enforce a gag order that if a child is sexually assaulted.
And I will say, sexual assault of kids is an
epidemic in this country. It happens far too often, and
litigation and non disclosure agreements are commonplace features that that
(13:00):
that the the people who are assaulting kids will put
in place to silence the victims.
Speaker 3 (13:06):
And nobody should have a right to do that. Uh.
Speaker 2 (13:08):
You know, Tray's Law was was championed by by Trey's sister, Elizabeth,
and we had Elizabeth on this show. She talked about
her brother, she talked about her her effort. She went
in Texas. The state legislature in Texas has already passed
Trade's Law.
Speaker 3 (13:22):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
The legislature at Alabama's passed trades law. Missouri has passed
trades law. A number of different states of passed Tray's
Law UH and I introduced it UH in the US
Congress uh to so that we could pass it nationally.
And again I joined with with Kirsten Gillibrand she and
I did both of these bills together, UH and and
it is it is designed to ensure that that that
(13:45):
any child victim has the right to speak out and
and the court system will not be used as a
tool of a second round of abuse, because when you're
silencing a child victim, that is once again abusive. And
in Trey's case in particular, he described that great length
(14:06):
to his therapist how he felt silenced and agonized that
he wasn't able to speak about it. His sister Elizabeth
told us on this podcast how much of what happened
to her brother she didn't even find out about until
after he was dead, until after he'd taken his own life,
because because of the gag order, he didn't share it
(14:27):
with his sister, he didn't share it with his family.
And so Trey's Law, we passed it unanimously through the
Senate Judiciary Committee. We'll get it on the floor, we'll
get it through the House and once again, the President's
going to sign.
Speaker 1 (14:38):
This all right. I got to tell you really something exciting.
We got a new puppy at Christmas. I've talked about
our new dog, Bertie on the show, and Bertie is
now taking rough creens. Why because it's a brand new puppy, right, Like,
why do you need to give him rough creens? After
we saw what happened with our older dog, Memphis, we
realized why wait until dogs older? Why not give rough
(15:02):
greens right now to little Birdie? And we know what
it does. It supports long term health by providing live,
bioavailable nutrients including essential vitamins, minerals, probiotics, digestive enzymes, and
omega oils. Now the ingredients they work together to improve
nutrition absorption, also help Birdie maintain joint and muscle health
(15:24):
as she grows, and enhance her overall vitality. Now we
care about Birdie's longevity. We've already lost two dogs unfortunately
when they got older, and this is a way we
can do everything we can to keep Birdie around as
long as possible. Now, there are deficiencies found in processed
dog food, but rough greens it supplements your dog or
(15:46):
your puppies diet with natural intioxidants and anti inflammatory compounds
that help reduce oxidative stress, support immune defense as well,
and slow age related to climb.
Speaker 3 (15:59):
That's what we love the most.
Speaker 1 (16:01):
Now it's easy. You're not buying new food. You just
sprinkle it on the current food that your dog eats
and bam they love it. So whether you've got a
puppy or an older dog, you need to check out
and try Roughcreens. You will see a difference. Now you
don't have change your dog's food. You just add Roughcreams
and I'm going to offer you a free Jumpstart trial bag.
Speaker 3 (16:25):
You just cover shipping.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
Use the discount code Verdict to claim your free Jumpstart
Trial bag at Roughgreens dot com. That's ruff greenswit ans
dot com promo code Verdict. So don't change your dog's food,
just add Roughcreens and watch the health benefits come alive.
All right, Sentata, I want to talk about the presence
(16:48):
big trip to China and specifically you add some notes,
some requests, some advocacy for some Americans that are being held.
And this was a really big moment that people should
be talking about.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
Yeah, so this was a meaningful legislative week. We've already
talked about the two victories we had in the Senate
Judiciary Committee passing two bills I authored. We had a
third victory on the Senate floor, which is the entire
Senate passed a resolution that I authored along with Dick Durbin,
Democrat from Illinois, concerning the President's China trip and in
(17:23):
particular urging the President to prioritize the release of political prisoners,
the release of people who are wrongfully imprisoned in China,
including Jimmy Lai, who's the great democracy activist in Hong Kong.
I met Jimmy Lai when I traveled to Hong Kong.
I met with him. His health is failing. He is
being imprisoned because the Chinese Communist government views him as
(17:46):
a threat to their communist depression. And then also focusing
on the Christian pastors and including Pastor ezra Zin who
have been targeted, who have been arrested. China has been
cracking down on Christian pastors and so Dick Durbin and
I together introduced this resolution. We took it to the
Senate floor and this week it passed one hundred to nothing.
(18:08):
So the entire Senate with a bipartisan voice urge the
President prioritize the releasing of these political prisoners.
Speaker 1 (18:16):
It matters how much political I think pressure in a
positive way does that create for the conversation that happened,
Because when you meet with an adversary like China, and
if you've ever been around these meetings, I was around
a couple of them, and the Bush is second term,
a lot of it is very much scripted. You have
(18:37):
State Department that gets with their equivalent, the State Department.
They decide what will and will not be talked about
the table and these meetings. But when you have one
hundred and nothing vote, you have Dick Durbin, you have
you And is that giving the AMMO extra to the
President saying hey, you've got all of the United States
Congress behind you. It gives you a reason even if
you need to in essence to break protocol on what's
(18:58):
been agreed to in the meetings, to say, hey, this
just happened and we got to talk about it.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
Yeah, that's exactly right. And this is something when I
put this resolution on the floor, I'm working in coordination
with the White House, with the administration and the President
had already indicated an openness to raising these political prisoners.
And what this does is give him additional ammunition. It
lets him say to Ji, look, the Senate one hundred
(19:27):
and nothing. We may have political disagreements in our country
and other topics, but.
Speaker 3 (19:30):
Not on this.
Speaker 2 (19:31):
Every every single Senator, from the most conservative to the
most liberal, they're all on the same page. And I
use an example that's actually a very similar circumstance, which
is Mark Swedan. So, Mark Swedan is a Texan who
was wrongfully imprisoned in China for over ten years.
Speaker 3 (19:49):
He was thrown in.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
Prison, his health failed badly, and I led the fight
in the Senate for years to free Mark Swedan, including
sitting down with a ambassador in one on one, leaning
in very hard, trying urging China to release him, that
that that civilized countries don't keep political prisoners. Joe Biden
(20:11):
was President UH during much of this time, and so
I repeatedly pressured President Biden and and and the State
Department to raise Mark Swedan. Mark Sweden's mom is it
lives in Texas. I talked to her multiple times, and
I did the same thing. I introduced a resolution calling
for the release of Mark Swedan, and it passed the
(20:33):
Senate just like this one did one hundred and nothing
that gives real force, and it ended up Joe Biden
followed through and pressed it. The State Department followed through,
and finally the pressure was enough that China released Mark Swedan.
So he is no longer in a Chinese prison. He
has been released. He came back. In fact, he came
to my office. I had the opportunity to meet him
(20:56):
and embrace him. And this is someone who for years
I was speaking his name and demanding his release. And
it's you know, often when you're dealing with with with
a government like the Chinese Communist government, it's a question
of ratcheting up pressure and any one step typically is
not enough. But the more pressure you put on, the
(21:18):
more leverage you put on, the more likely they are
to comply. So, you know, here's what the resolution said,
expressing the sense of the Senate that the President should
prioritize securing the release of Pastor Jin Mengri, Pastor Guau
Guangfu and his wife, Pangju Jimmy Lai, doctor Gulshan Abbas
(21:40):
and Ek Perasat detained by the People's Republic of China
during future engagements with Chinese President Shijingping, Whereas the government
of the People's Republic of China has arrested Chinese, American
and British citizens for the peaceful expression of free speech
or religion, or such acts by family members, Whereas such
(22:01):
arrests have been widely condemned by the international community and
human rights organizations, with repeated calls for the release of
the detainees. Whereas, on May seventeenth, twenty twenty five, Pastor
Gao Guang Kwangfu of the Light of Zion Church in
Xian City was detained and is being held on charges
(22:22):
of quote using superstitious activities to undermine the implementation of
law in other words, being a Christian is what they're
holding him for, and also quote fraud. Whereas Pastor GAO's wife,
Pang Yu, who was subsequently detained on June seventh, twenty
twenty five, remains held despite holding no official position in
(22:43):
the church and has been denied access to critical prescription medication.
Whereas Honor about October tenth, twenty twenty five, authorities of
the People's Republic of China detained Pastor Jenmingri, founder of
Zion Church, along with other church leaders, on equally dubious
charges of quote illegal uses of information networks, Whereas Pastor
(23:09):
Jin continues to be detained without access to critical medications
to treat diabetes or contact with family members in the
People's Republic of China and the United States. Whereas on
November seventh, twenty twenty five, the Senate unanimously passed Senate
Resolution four to sixty three calling for the immediate unconditional
(23:29):
release of all detained members of Zion Church, including Pastor
Gin and by the way, that was my resolution as
well that I introduced in pass last year, and for
the government of the People's Republic of China to end
harassment and intimidations of the relatives of Zion Church members
and their relatives. Whereas in nineteen ninety five, Jimmy Lai
(23:52):
founded the Apple Daily newspaper in Hong Kong and subsequently
faced repeated harassment and arrest, including a sixty nine months
cent twenty twenty two on dubious fraud charges that were
later overturned, and a subsequent twenty year sentence in February
twenty twenty six on dubious national security charges, Whereas in
(24:13):
December twenty twenty five, President Donald Trump said he had
asked Chinese President Shi Jingping to consider releasing Jimmy Lai.
Whereas on December fourth, twenty twenty five, House Resolution nine
thirty was introduced commemorating Jimmy Lai and calling on authorities
the People's Republic of China to immediately and unconditionally release
Jimmy Lai and all other Hong Kong pro democracy advocates imprisons.
(24:36):
It goes on there a whole series more of whereas provisions,
but then it says resolved that the Senate calls upon
the President to prioritize securing the humanitarian release of Pastor
Jin mingre Pastor Guao Gao Kwanfu and his wife Pangyu,
Jimmy Lai, doctor Gulsham abbas and Ek Perasat, and other
(24:59):
wrongf detained individuals on the agenda for engagements with President
Chi Jinping, including the anticipated May twenty twenty sixth summit,
and urges the President to seek verifiable proof of life
and access to independent legal counsel, family communication, and medical
care for such detainees, and reaffirms the commitment of the
(25:22):
United States to defend political and religious freedoms worldwide.
Speaker 1 (25:27):
Incredible, it really is. And look, this is an administration,
as you know, that has really been about getting back
Americans all over the world. They've made it a prayer order.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
Its great success. President Trump is very effective at this and.
Speaker 1 (25:41):
That's the reason why I think it's gonna be very
interesting to see what comes out of this quickly, what
is your definition of success of overall this big meeting
with China.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
Look, it depends. There are a number of things that
President Trump is trying to accomplish. One of the things
he's trying to do is to get China to assist
with Iran is the main purchaser of Iranian oil, and
so China could exert a lot of leverage over Iran,
and the President is urging she to lean on Iran
(26:12):
in particular to hand over there enriched geranium, to stop enriching,
to stop funding terrorism, and to open the Strait of Hormuz. Secondly,
I think the President is also working to open the
Chinese market. So, for example, it's been reported now that
China agreed to buy two hundred Boeing planes.
Speaker 3 (26:30):
That's a big deal.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
The President is fighting for farmers and ranchers to get
our crops and our livestock into China, and he's fighting
for US manufacturers, and so he's fighting for American jobs
in China. He's fighting for American national security in China.
And he's also fighting for China to do the right
thing and release these these wrongfully detained political prisoners.
Speaker 1 (26:52):
All right, Senator, this is a very interesting story. It
deals with the New York Times not saying you say
every day, being sued by a foreign country and a
lawsuit that I think many are going to be very
excited when they hear exactly who's suing the New York
Times and what it's all about.
Speaker 2 (27:09):
Well, let's start with the proposition that The New York
Times is a garbage newspaper, that they are not in fact.
Speaker 1 (27:15):
You need a second for that. I second that, amen.
Speaker 3 (27:17):
Look, they are not journalists.
Speaker 2 (27:19):
They are not objectively reporting on facts, they are not
trying to tell the truth. They are dishonest. They are
propagandas they are hard left, they are frequently pushing anti
American propaganda, left wing propaganda, and in particular, The New
York Times hates the state of Israel. So they are
routinely any way they can slander Israel, they're eager to
(27:40):
do so, and that has been the case for many decades.
That being said, that they reached a new low with
a column by Nicholas Christoff that was truly repulsive and
let me read let me read to you how National
Review reported on this issue. The Israeli government is suing
The New York Times over columnists Nicholas christofs thinly sourced
(28:03):
report accusing Israeli soldiers and prison guards of using rape
and other forms of sexual violence against Palestinian prisoners as
part of an organized state policy. Christof's column, which goes
so far as to accuse Israeli soldiers of using trained
(28:23):
dogs to rape Palestinian prisoners, cites a number of obviously
conflicted organizations and individuals whose accounts are not backed by
documentation or supporting eyewitnesses accounts. Now understand this for a minute.
Christof wrote that the Israeli government uses dogs to rape
Palestinian prisoners men that they let's just start with a
(28:47):
fairly obvious proposition. Dogs don't rape people like. That's not
something dogs do. That's not like even in the world
of anti Semitic Israel. He eight making up stories that
they've trained dogs to rape human beings. There is zero
evidence of that. That is not something. And by the way,
(29:10):
Christoph had no evidence of it. He just cites well, here,
I'll read a little more quote following the publication by
Nicholas Christoff of The New York Times of one of
the most hideous and distorted lies ever published against the
state of Israel and the modern press, which also received
the backing of the newspaper, Prime Minister Benjamin Etna who
and Foreign Minister Gideon Syer have instructed the initiation of
(29:32):
a defamation lawsuit against The New York Times. So Israel
is suing the New York Times for defamation. The column
cites fourteen individuals who claim to have been raped or
otherwise sexually assaulted by Israeli settlers or members of the
security forces, only a few of whom agree to be named.
Of the name sources, several have changed their accounts over time,
(29:54):
and at least one has a history of promoting hamas terror.
The column also relies heavily on claims made by human
rights watchdogs such as Euromed Human Rights Monitor, a group
with close ties to Hamas and a history of gross
and unsubstantiated claims against Israel. The Times is standing by Christoff,
(30:15):
saying in a Wednesday Evening statement that the column is
based on quote on the record accounts and cite several analyzes.
This is look the the slander and just the bias
of the New York Times that they don't report facts.
And I'll tell you Christoff's column came out right before
a detailed report came out of the sexual abuse by
(30:39):
Hamas on October seventh, and afterwards of the hostages they took.
And I guarantee you Christoff of the New York Times,
they knew this report was coming. And so this is
exactly out of the Sololensky playbook. This is exactly how
leftists operate. What it is what they are doing, they
(31:00):
accuse others of doing. In this instance, Hamas used rape
at a massive level. Now mind you, no accused.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
Plan and well organized. To be clear, it was part
of the attack. And so people understand that's the reporting
that was coming out, which is why, of course the
New York Times would publish what they just published. The
report was very clear that they had pre planned and
orchestrated to use rape and sexual assault during and after
the attacks of October seventh on the people that we're
(31:30):
gonna be taken hostage like this wasn't organic, it was
purposely planned to take place. And that's part of the reporting.
And so, like you mentioned a moment ago, we will
accuse the other side of doing literally what we did
and what they did the terrorists did that went in
there and took people is they said, we're gonna rape them,
We're gonna kill some of them, we're gonna rape others,
(31:51):
and we're gonna keep raping them and we're gonna hold
them hostage and keep sexually assaulting them. That was all
part of their terrorist plan.
Speaker 3 (31:57):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (31:57):
And to give you a sense, you may say, well, look, Christoph,
he's a columnist in the New York Times. Surely he's objective.
Surely he's not biased, and that would of course be wrong.
And stop calling me, Shirley. Let me give you an
amazing fact about Nicholas Christoph. Okay, this is from a
story in the Free Beacon Headline.
Speaker 3 (32:18):
Times.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
Columnist Christoph's father fought on Nazi side in World War II,
hamas prison rape dog propagandist. Dad also defended Vshi War
criminal then committed suicide after decades of nightmares. Now New
York Times columnist Nicholas Christoph, whose article accusing Israel abusing
(32:39):
dogs and carrots to rape Palestinian prisoners, is being denounced
by the Israeli Foreign Minister as a hamas propagant ganda
fabricated in a baseless blood Libel had a father who
served on the Nazi side during World War II. In
Christof's twenty twenty four memoir Chasing Hope, he writes, when
I was growing up and other kids talked about their
(32:59):
dad heroically battling the Nazis, I kept quiet. I didn't
want to admit that my father had actually fought for
a year on the same side of the Nazis. Christo's
father also wrote a letter to the editor of The
Times in nineteen eighty nine defending Paul Tuvier, the intelligence
chief of a pro Nazi militia in Vishi, France, who
(33:21):
was convicted of killing seven Jewish hostages. Now look, I
got to say, I guess the apple doesn't fall far
from the tree. But it is still a little amazing
to have someone who fought alongside the Nazis have his
son now spreading Hamas propaganda attacking Israel. And I guess
(33:43):
the question you would ask is is there anyone responsible
at the New York Times?
Speaker 3 (33:47):
Is there any.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
Editor the fact that you have the State of Israel
suing them for defamation? So one of the things Israel's
going to get in this litigation is there going to
get the emails and discussion of hey, is there any
fact checking? Is there any basis for these extraordinary and
ridiculous and absurd claims? And I'm I think it is
(34:11):
likely that you're going to see that the editors didn't
care if there was any basis. This is the political
story they wanted to tell because they knew that the
damning report of Hamas's use of rape was coming out,
and so they decided, let's put it all on Israel
and blame Israel. It is It's disgraceful, but sadly it
(34:33):
is not very uncommon for The New York Times.
Speaker 1 (34:35):
No it's not. And by the way, go grab that
free breaking article. You can read all about it. It's
a mos propagana. New York Times writer Christoph's sexual violence
Colin CAP's a career of corrections, retractions and apologies going
back twenty five years. It's a great read. Don't forget.
We do this show Monday, Wednesday, Friday. Hit that subscriber
auto download button, Download Verdict with Ted Cruse wherever you
(34:56):
get your podcasts and the Senate and I will see
you back here next week on this radio station and
on the podcast all week long.
Welcome. It is Verdic with Center. Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson
with you. It's so nice to have you with us.
If you're listening on the radio around the Country Center.
We've got a lot to chat about on today's show,
including some we haven't seen a long time. We are
celebrating at the White House. It in Washington, d C.
Law enforcement not trying to defund them.
Speaker 2 (00:19):
Well, that's exactly right. This past week was Police Week.
We had police officers from all across the country come
to Washington, d C.
Speaker 3 (00:26):
Come to the.
Speaker 2 (00:27):
Capitol and we celebrated, celebrated the heroism. We celebrated and
remembered the officers who gave their lives, gave their lives
in duty defending us. And it really after all of
the vilification, after all of the attacks that are directed
at police officers, it was nice to have a time
(00:47):
just to say thank you. And it was also a
time that was recognized the Senate Judiciary Committee. This week
we passed a series of bills out of the Judiciary Committee,
including two different bills that I authored, one directed specifically
to police officers and a second protecting child victims of
sexual assault, and both of those victories are significant. Both
(01:10):
of them are now going to the floor of the Senate,
and I think we'll get both pasted into law.
Speaker 1 (01:14):
It's going to be really awesome. We're going to break
that down for you in a moment. I also want
to tell you about a organization that you may not
even know exists, and it's one that is so important,
Americans United for Life and the amazing work that they're
doing right now. If you are proud to be pro life,
just like I am, then you need to know about
(01:35):
the Americans United for Life. Over the past fifty years,
they have filed more than two hundred legal briefs and
helped create at least four hundred pro life bills in
over forty states by writing model legislation, consulting with state legislators,
and defending their own laws and other pro life statutes
(01:56):
in court. AUL is a nonprofit law firm an advocacy
group that was founded in nineteen seventy one, two years
before Roe established the constitucial right to an abortion before
fetal viability. Aul's dual front approach of writing and defending
legislation has proved an effective one that could become even
(02:18):
more impactful as pro life state legislatures move to enact
protections for preborn babies and their mothers. Now that the
legality of abortion has returned to the states, you have
the opportunity to overturn pro abortion laws and advance pro
life legislation that attacks the most vulnerable in our society,
(02:40):
from the womb to the tomb. And together we can
shape the future of our nation through life affirming legislation
in every state. A gift of just twenty five dollars
helps hold abortion providers accountable and helps protect women and
unborn children across this country. And now through a match,
(03:02):
your gift is doubled. So donate securely at aul dot
org slash verdict a UL dot org slash verdict sponsored
by Americans United for Life. All right, Senator, so let's
talk about saying that's just exciting for me. My dad
still is involved in law enforcement. I am so glad
(03:25):
to see the Republican Party moving to put a law
enforcement where they deserve to be, which is in a
great light instead of a dehumanizing, attacking defund And every
time something happens, we immediately go after law enforcement that
has changed and something else that's really significant, A bipartisan
piece of legislation that your name is on that is
(03:47):
going to do something incredible for people that protect.
Speaker 3 (03:51):
And serve well.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
This week, the Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously passed my legislation.
It's entitled the Officer John Barnes and Chi Michael ansbro
Public Safety Officers Benefit Program Expansion Act of twenty twenty six.
Now it is named for two tremendous heroes. First of all,
Officer John Barnes. Officer John Barnes was the police officer
(04:15):
at Santa Fe High School where you'll recall Ben the
horrific school shooting that happened. Santa Fe is just outside
of Houston, and it's the morning of that shooting. I
was actually at home when that shooting happened, and so
I jumped in a truck and headed down to the school.
I was on campus about an hour after the shooting happened,
(04:36):
and I will tell you the horror of what transpired
there as that deranged gunman shot and murdered multiple students
and Officer John Barnes was on duty, and when the
shooter began his rampage, Officer Barnes rushed the shooter. He
(04:57):
put himself between the shooter and the students. He saved
multiple students' lives. And the shooter had one of the
weapons he was armed with was a shotgun, and he
fired the shotgun and it hit Officer Barnes in the
arm and did permanent damage to his elbow, to his arm.
Speaker 1 (05:16):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (05:16):
He had massive blood loss. Uh.
Speaker 2 (05:19):
And he ended up actually flatlining twice and being resuscitated twice.
And I've got to know Officer Barnes, and he's he's
the man is a hero. He risked his life and
almost gave his life to protect the students that he
had been charged with protecting. And so this bill honors
him and and and it also honors Chief Michael ansbro
(05:43):
who was a hero on nine to eleven, And he
was one of the first responders in nine to eleven
who rushed into the building, rescued people, risked his life.
Speaker 3 (05:54):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
He survived nine to eleven in the collapse of the towers,
but in the course of that he inhalesiled so much
toxic material that ultimately Chief Annsbrod died from cancer from
all of the poison he inhaled on nine to eleven.
With both of them, they submitted applications to the Public
(06:18):
Safety Officer's Benefit Program. Now, the Public Safety Officer's Benefit
Program is created within the Department of Justice and in
particular the Bureau of Justice Assistance, and it does several things.
Number one, it provides death benefits to survivors of officers
who died.
Speaker 3 (06:37):
In the line of duty.
Speaker 2 (06:38):
And that's something I think we owe owe their families
to say thank you for that. And then secondly, it
provides assistance to people who are permanently disabled as a
result of in the light of the duty injury. And
the problem is that the program has historically been very
(06:59):
very slow and very very delayed. You look at the
Santa Fe shooting. The Santa Fe shooting happened in twenty eighteen.
Officer Barnes application is still pending. It's eight years later
and it hasn't been adjudicated. The same is true for
the application for benefits for Chief Ansbrose family, is that
(07:23):
it's delayed and it's still pending long after he passed away.
And so what this bill that I did along with
Kirsten gilibrand Kirsten Jilibran is a Democrat from New York.
Speaker 3 (07:33):
She's a friend.
Speaker 2 (07:34):
She and I have actually done quite a bit together,
and so she this was originally the Officer John Barnes
bill because he's a Texan and someone I know, and
we teamed up and she brought in Michael Landsboro to
honor a nine to eleven hero as well. And what
this bill does is speed up the determination of benefits.
And so it puts a shot clock of two hundred
(07:58):
and seventy days. It says the Department of Justice must
make it a termination within two hundred and seventy days.
You can't have it drag on for eight years. And
it also it expedites the processing. And it also expands
the coverage. So it extends partial eligibility to officers who
are permanently but not totally disabled. So if you have
(08:21):
a permanent disability, you qualify. It expands the number of officers,
the number of officers families who qualify, and it speeds it up.
We got this through the Senate Judiciary Committee. The next
step is to move it on the floor of the Senate.
Then we'll move it through the House, and I'm confident
President Trump will sign it to law.
Speaker 1 (08:38):
Before we get to trades with Law Center, I want
to ask you a couple of questions. Just I think
when Americans see this type of bipartisan leadership and you
see that this about benefits of those that have risked
their lives or given the ultimate sacrifice their life, and
to see how many loopholes there are to jump through
(08:59):
to clearly get the benefits of the family needs. If
you've ever set with an officer, and I have, and
it's a miserable moment, or let me rephrase that, a
family of a fallen officer. In that miserable moment, even
after all of all the people go back home and
life gets back to normal, that is when the real
(09:19):
thermal they say, sets in because you're waiting for so
many things that you've been promised to come through. And
then you compare that center to the waste, fraud, and
abuse that we're finding where there's just billions here, another
billion here, another million here, another twenty million here, another
thirty million here, these daycare centers, hospice centers. It would
make you go insane if you are a family that's
(09:42):
just waiting on the benefit because your loved one gave
their life to protect and serve. How frustrating is that
for you when you see that this is how we
treat our heroes and yet the villains, these con artists,
they can get their hands on billions and billions of dollars.
Speaker 2 (09:57):
Yeah, it's it's deeply frustrating. Listen, if an officer tragically
loses his or her life in the line of duty,
that there's nothing we can do to bring them back.
There's nothing we can do to bring that officer back
to their loved ones.
Speaker 3 (10:11):
Uh. But but we do owe honoring our commitments to them.
We do oh being there for their family. Uh.
Speaker 2 (10:18):
The men and women in blue who put themselves on
the line, like John Barnes, they literally stand in harm's way.
They stand between someone who would harm or kill us.
Speaker 1 (10:30):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (10:30):
And and ourselves are our loved ones. And and unfortunately,
bureaucracy is one of the few constants in the world,
and and dealing with the federal government is frequently maddening
and infuriating. That being said, the pso B process, this
benefit process, is notoriously slow, It is notoriously backlogged. And
(10:53):
so this is a common sense bill just to speed
up the process, to ensure that that that that whether
it's an office who's lost his life like Chief Ansbro
or whether it's an officer who is permanently disabled, like
John Barnes, that we make the determinations quickly and we
provide them the benefits they've been promised.
Speaker 1 (11:16):
Yeah, absolutely right. I want to move on to Tred's
Law as well, and we've talked about this before on
this show, but for people that are listening many are
listening on the radio around the country this show, can
you give us a recap of Trade's Law, how it
became about, and now what's happening moving forward.
Speaker 2 (11:31):
Well, Trey's Law is named for a Texan named for
Trey Carlock. Trey Carlock grew up in Dallas and as
a kid, he went to a Christian summer camp and
at the summer camp, tragically an adult man groomed him
and then for years sexually abused him. And ultimately that
(11:52):
sexual abuse resulted in a lawsuit. That lawsuit was settled
and one of the terms of the settlement was that
Trey Carrarlock signed a non disclosure agreement where he committed
to not disclose to anyone the details of his years
of sexual abuse. Well, the abuse continued taking a toll
on Trey, and tragically he took his own life and
(12:17):
he was silenced. He shared with his therapist how frustrated
he was about being silenced and not being able to
speak the truth of his experience of the abuse that
he suffered. Trey's law has risen up in the wake
of that. And Tray's law is very simple. What it
does is it prohibits enforcement of non disclosure agreements concerning
(12:40):
victims of child sexual assault, so that legally you cannot
enforce a gag order that if a child is sexually assaulted.
And I will say, sexual assault of kids is an
epidemic in this country. It happens far too often, and
litigation and non disclosure agreements are commonplace features that that
(13:00):
that the the people who are assaulting kids will put
in place to silence the victims.
Speaker 3 (13:06):
And nobody should have a right to do that. Uh.
Speaker 2 (13:08):
You know, Tray's Law was was championed by by Trey's sister, Elizabeth,
and we had Elizabeth on this show. She talked about
her brother, she talked about her her effort. She went
in Texas. The state legislature in Texas has already passed
Trade's Law.
Speaker 3 (13:22):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
The legislature at Alabama's passed trades law. Missouri has passed
trades law. A number of different states of passed Tray's
Law UH and I introduced it UH in the US
Congress uh to so that we could pass it nationally.
And again I joined with with Kirsten Gillibrand she and
I did both of these bills together, UH and and
it is it is designed to ensure that that that
(13:45):
any child victim has the right to speak out and
and the court system will not be used as a
tool of a second round of abuse, because when you're
silencing a child victim, that is once again abusive. And
in Trey's case in particular, he described that great length
(14:06):
to his therapist how he felt silenced and agonized that
he wasn't able to speak about it. His sister Elizabeth
told us on this podcast how much of what happened
to her brother she didn't even find out about until
after he was dead, until after he'd taken his own life,
because because of the gag order, he didn't share it
(14:27):
with his sister, he didn't share it with his family.
And so Trey's Law, we passed it unanimously through the
Senate Judiciary Committee. We'll get it on the floor, we'll
get it through the House and once again, the President's
going to sign.
Speaker 1 (14:38):
This all right. I got to tell you really something exciting.
We got a new puppy at Christmas. I've talked about
our new dog, Bertie on the show, and Bertie is
now taking rough creens. Why because it's a brand new puppy, right, Like,
why do you need to give him rough creens? After
we saw what happened with our older dog, Memphis, we
realized why wait until dogs older? Why not give rough
(15:02):
greens right now to little Birdie? And we know what
it does. It supports long term health by providing live,
bioavailable nutrients including essential vitamins, minerals, probiotics, digestive enzymes, and
omega oils. Now the ingredients they work together to improve
nutrition absorption, also help Birdie maintain joint and muscle health
(15:24):
as she grows, and enhance her overall vitality. Now we
care about Birdie's longevity. We've already lost two dogs unfortunately
when they got older, and this is a way we
can do everything we can to keep Birdie around as
long as possible. Now, there are deficiencies found in processed
dog food, but rough greens it supplements your dog or
(15:46):
your puppies diet with natural intioxidants and anti inflammatory compounds
that help reduce oxidative stress, support immune defense as well,
and slow age related to climb.
Speaker 3 (15:59):
That's what we love the most.
Speaker 1 (16:01):
Now it's easy. You're not buying new food. You just
sprinkle it on the current food that your dog eats
and bam they love it. So whether you've got a
puppy or an older dog, you need to check out
and try Roughcreens. You will see a difference. Now you
don't have change your dog's food. You just add Roughcreams
and I'm going to offer you a free Jumpstart trial bag.
Speaker 3 (16:25):
You just cover shipping.
Speaker 1 (16:27):
Use the discount code Verdict to claim your free Jumpstart
Trial bag at Roughgreens dot com. That's ruff greenswit ans
dot com promo code Verdict. So don't change your dog's food,
just add Roughcreens and watch the health benefits come alive.
All right, Sentata, I want to talk about the presence
(16:48):
big trip to China and specifically you add some notes,
some requests, some advocacy for some Americans that are being held.
And this was a really big moment that people should
be talking about.
Speaker 2 (17:02):
Yeah, so this was a meaningful legislative week. We've already
talked about the two victories we had in the Senate
Judiciary Committee passing two bills I authored. We had a
third victory on the Senate floor, which is the entire
Senate passed a resolution that I authored along with Dick Durbin,
Democrat from Illinois, concerning the President's China trip and in
(17:23):
particular urging the President to prioritize the release of political prisoners,
the release of people who are wrongfully imprisoned in China,
including Jimmy Lai, who's the great democracy activist in Hong Kong.
I met Jimmy Lai when I traveled to Hong Kong.
I met with him. His health is failing. He is
being imprisoned because the Chinese Communist government views him as
(17:46):
a threat to their communist depression. And then also focusing
on the Christian pastors and including Pastor ezra Zin who
have been targeted, who have been arrested. China has been
cracking down on Christian pastors and so Dick Durbin and
I together introduced this resolution. We took it to the
Senate floor and this week it passed one hundred to nothing.
(18:08):
So the entire Senate with a bipartisan voice urge the
President prioritize the releasing of these political prisoners.
Speaker 1 (18:16):
It matters how much political I think pressure in a
positive way does that create for the conversation that happened,
Because when you meet with an adversary like China, and
if you've ever been around these meetings, I was around
a couple of them, and the Bush is second term,
a lot of it is very much scripted. You have
(18:37):
State Department that gets with their equivalent, the State Department.
They decide what will and will not be talked about
the table and these meetings. But when you have one
hundred and nothing vote, you have Dick Durbin, you have
you And is that giving the AMMO extra to the
President saying hey, you've got all of the United States
Congress behind you. It gives you a reason even if
you need to in essence to break protocol on what's
(18:58):
been agreed to in the meetings, to say, hey, this
just happened and we got to talk about it.
Speaker 2 (19:02):
Yeah, that's exactly right. And this is something when I
put this resolution on the floor, I'm working in coordination
with the White House, with the administration and the President
had already indicated an openness to raising these political prisoners.
And what this does is give him additional ammunition. It
lets him say to Ji, look, the Senate one hundred
(19:27):
and nothing. We may have political disagreements in our country
and other topics, but.
Speaker 3 (19:30):
Not on this.
Speaker 2 (19:31):
Every every single Senator, from the most conservative to the
most liberal, they're all on the same page. And I
use an example that's actually a very similar circumstance, which
is Mark Swedan. So, Mark Swedan is a Texan who
was wrongfully imprisoned in China for over ten years.
Speaker 3 (19:49):
He was thrown in.
Speaker 2 (19:50):
Prison, his health failed badly, and I led the fight
in the Senate for years to free Mark Swedan, including
sitting down with a ambassador in one on one, leaning
in very hard, trying urging China to release him, that
that that civilized countries don't keep political prisoners. Joe Biden
(20:11):
was President UH during much of this time, and so
I repeatedly pressured President Biden and and and the State
Department to raise Mark Swedan. Mark Sweden's mom is it
lives in Texas. I talked to her multiple times, and
I did the same thing. I introduced a resolution calling
for the release of Mark Swedan, and it passed the
(20:33):
Senate just like this one did one hundred and nothing
that gives real force, and it ended up Joe Biden
followed through and pressed it. The State Department followed through,
and finally the pressure was enough that China released Mark Swedan.
So he is no longer in a Chinese prison. He
has been released. He came back. In fact, he came
to my office. I had the opportunity to meet him
(20:56):
and embrace him. And this is someone who for years
I was speaking his name and demanding his release. And
it's you know, often when you're dealing with with with
a government like the Chinese Communist government, it's a question
of ratcheting up pressure and any one step typically is
not enough. But the more pressure you put on, the
(21:18):
more leverage you put on, the more likely they are
to comply. So, you know, here's what the resolution said,
expressing the sense of the Senate that the President should
prioritize securing the release of Pastor Jin Mengri, Pastor Guau
Guangfu and his wife, Pangju Jimmy Lai, doctor Gulshan Abbas
(21:40):
and Ek Perasat detained by the People's Republic of China
during future engagements with Chinese President Shijingping, Whereas the government
of the People's Republic of China has arrested Chinese, American
and British citizens for the peaceful expression of free speech
or religion, or such acts by family members, Whereas such
(22:01):
arrests have been widely condemned by the international community and
human rights organizations, with repeated calls for the release of
the detainees. Whereas, on May seventeenth, twenty twenty five, Pastor
Gao Guang Kwangfu of the Light of Zion Church in
Xian City was detained and is being held on charges
(22:22):
of quote using superstitious activities to undermine the implementation of
law in other words, being a Christian is what they're
holding him for, and also quote fraud. Whereas Pastor GAO's wife,
Pang Yu, who was subsequently detained on June seventh, twenty
twenty five, remains held despite holding no official position in
(22:43):
the church and has been denied access to critical prescription medication.
Whereas Honor about October tenth, twenty twenty five, authorities of
the People's Republic of China detained Pastor Jenmingri, founder of
Zion Church, along with other church leaders, on equally dubious
charges of quote illegal uses of information networks, Whereas Pastor
(23:09):
Jin continues to be detained without access to critical medications
to treat diabetes or contact with family members in the
People's Republic of China and the United States. Whereas on
November seventh, twenty twenty five, the Senate unanimously passed Senate
Resolution four to sixty three calling for the immediate unconditional
(23:29):
release of all detained members of Zion Church, including Pastor
Gin and by the way, that was my resolution as
well that I introduced in pass last year, and for
the government of the People's Republic of China to end
harassment and intimidations of the relatives of Zion Church members
and their relatives. Whereas in nineteen ninety five, Jimmy Lai
(23:52):
founded the Apple Daily newspaper in Hong Kong and subsequently
faced repeated harassment and arrest, including a sixty nine months
cent twenty twenty two on dubious fraud charges that were
later overturned, and a subsequent twenty year sentence in February
twenty twenty six on dubious national security charges, Whereas in
(24:13):
December twenty twenty five, President Donald Trump said he had
asked Chinese President Shi Jingping to consider releasing Jimmy Lai.
Whereas on December fourth, twenty twenty five, House Resolution nine
thirty was introduced commemorating Jimmy Lai and calling on authorities
the People's Republic of China to immediately and unconditionally release
Jimmy Lai and all other Hong Kong pro democracy advocates imprisons.
(24:36):
It goes on there a whole series more of whereas provisions,
but then it says resolved that the Senate calls upon
the President to prioritize securing the humanitarian release of Pastor
Jin mingre Pastor Guao Gao Kwanfu and his wife Pangyu,
Jimmy Lai, doctor Gulsham abbas and Ek Perasat, and other
(24:59):
wrongf detained individuals on the agenda for engagements with President
Chi Jinping, including the anticipated May twenty twenty sixth summit,
and urges the President to seek verifiable proof of life
and access to independent legal counsel, family communication, and medical
care for such detainees, and reaffirms the commitment of the
(25:22):
United States to defend political and religious freedoms worldwide.
Speaker 1 (25:27):
Incredible, it really is. And look, this is an administration,
as you know, that has really been about getting back
Americans all over the world. They've made it a prayer order.
Speaker 2 (25:37):
Its great success. President Trump is very effective at this and.
Speaker 1 (25:41):
That's the reason why I think it's gonna be very
interesting to see what comes out of this quickly, what
is your definition of success of overall this big meeting
with China.
Speaker 2 (25:50):
Look, it depends. There are a number of things that
President Trump is trying to accomplish. One of the things
he's trying to do is to get China to assist
with Iran is the main purchaser of Iranian oil, and
so China could exert a lot of leverage over Iran,
and the President is urging she to lean on Iran
(26:12):
in particular to hand over there enriched geranium, to stop enriching,
to stop funding terrorism, and to open the Strait of Hormuz. Secondly,
I think the President is also working to open the
Chinese market. So, for example, it's been reported now that
China agreed to buy two hundred Boeing planes.
Speaker 3 (26:30):
That's a big deal.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
The President is fighting for farmers and ranchers to get
our crops and our livestock into China, and he's fighting
for US manufacturers, and so he's fighting for American jobs
in China. He's fighting for American national security in China.
And he's also fighting for China to do the right
thing and release these these wrongfully detained political prisoners.
Speaker 1 (26:52):
All right, Senator, this is a very interesting story. It
deals with the New York Times not saying you say
every day, being sued by a foreign country and a
lawsuit that I think many are going to be very
excited when they hear exactly who's suing the New York
Times and what it's all about.
Speaker 2 (27:09):
Well, let's start with the proposition that The New York
Times is a garbage newspaper, that they are not in fact.
Speaker 1 (27:15):
You need a second for that. I second that, amen.
Speaker 3 (27:17):
Look, they are not journalists.
Speaker 2 (27:19):
They are not objectively reporting on facts, they are not
trying to tell the truth. They are dishonest. They are
propagandas they are hard left, they are frequently pushing anti
American propaganda, left wing propaganda, and in particular, The New
York Times hates the state of Israel. So they are
routinely any way they can slander Israel, they're eager to
(27:40):
do so, and that has been the case for many decades.
That being said, that they reached a new low with
a column by Nicholas Christoff that was truly repulsive and
let me read let me read to you how National
Review reported on this issue. The Israeli government is suing
The New York Times over columnists Nicholas christofs thinly sourced
(28:03):
report accusing Israeli soldiers and prison guards of using rape
and other forms of sexual violence against Palestinian prisoners as
part of an organized state policy. Christof's column, which goes
so far as to accuse Israeli soldiers of using trained
(28:23):
dogs to rape Palestinian prisoners, cites a number of obviously
conflicted organizations and individuals whose accounts are not backed by
documentation or supporting eyewitnesses accounts. Now understand this for a minute.
Christof wrote that the Israeli government uses dogs to rape
Palestinian prisoners men that they let's just start with a
(28:47):
fairly obvious proposition. Dogs don't rape people like. That's not
something dogs do. That's not like even in the world
of anti Semitic Israel. He eight making up stories that
they've trained dogs to rape human beings. There is zero
evidence of that. That is not something. And by the way,
(29:10):
Christoph had no evidence of it. He just cites well, here,
I'll read a little more quote following the publication by
Nicholas Christoff of The New York Times of one of
the most hideous and distorted lies ever published against the
state of Israel and the modern press, which also received
the backing of the newspaper, Prime Minister Benjamin Etna who
and Foreign Minister Gideon Syer have instructed the initiation of
(29:32):
a defamation lawsuit against The New York Times. So Israel
is suing the New York Times for defamation. The column
cites fourteen individuals who claim to have been raped or
otherwise sexually assaulted by Israeli settlers or members of the
security forces, only a few of whom agree to be named.
Of the name sources, several have changed their accounts over time,
(29:54):
and at least one has a history of promoting hamas terror.
The column also relies heavily on claims made by human
rights watchdogs such as Euromed Human Rights Monitor, a group
with close ties to Hamas and a history of gross
and unsubstantiated claims against Israel. The Times is standing by Christoff,
(30:15):
saying in a Wednesday Evening statement that the column is
based on quote on the record accounts and cite several analyzes.
This is look the the slander and just the bias
of the New York Times that they don't report facts.
And I'll tell you Christoff's column came out right before
a detailed report came out of the sexual abuse by
(30:39):
Hamas on October seventh, and afterwards of the hostages they took.
And I guarantee you Christoff of the New York Times,
they knew this report was coming. And so this is
exactly out of the Sololensky playbook. This is exactly how
leftists operate. What it is what they are doing, they
(31:00):
accuse others of doing. In this instance, Hamas used rape
at a massive level. Now mind you, no accused.
Speaker 1 (31:08):
Plan and well organized. To be clear, it was part
of the attack. And so people understand that's the reporting
that was coming out, which is why, of course the
New York Times would publish what they just published. The
report was very clear that they had pre planned and
orchestrated to use rape and sexual assault during and after
the attacks of October seventh on the people that we're
(31:30):
gonna be taken hostage like this wasn't organic, it was
purposely planned to take place. And that's part of the reporting.
And so, like you mentioned a moment ago, we will
accuse the other side of doing literally what we did
and what they did the terrorists did that went in
there and took people is they said, we're gonna rape them,
We're gonna kill some of them, we're gonna rape others,
(31:51):
and we're gonna keep raping them and we're gonna hold
them hostage and keep sexually assaulting them. That was all
part of their terrorist plan.
Speaker 3 (31:57):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (31:57):
And to give you a sense, you may say, well, look, Christoph,
he's a columnist in the New York Times. Surely he's objective.
Surely he's not biased, and that would of course be wrong.
And stop calling me, Shirley. Let me give you an
amazing fact about Nicholas Christoph. Okay, this is from a
story in the Free Beacon Headline.
Speaker 3 (32:18):
Times.
Speaker 2 (32:18):
Columnist Christoph's father fought on Nazi side in World War II,
hamas prison rape dog propagandist. Dad also defended Vshi War
criminal then committed suicide after decades of nightmares. Now New
York Times columnist Nicholas Christoph, whose article accusing Israel abusing
(32:39):
dogs and carrots to rape Palestinian prisoners, is being denounced
by the Israeli Foreign Minister as a hamas propagant ganda
fabricated in a baseless blood Libel had a father who
served on the Nazi side during World War II. In
Christof's twenty twenty four memoir Chasing Hope, he writes, when
I was growing up and other kids talked about their
(32:59):
dad heroically battling the Nazis, I kept quiet. I didn't
want to admit that my father had actually fought for
a year on the same side of the Nazis. Christo's
father also wrote a letter to the editor of The
Times in nineteen eighty nine defending Paul Tuvier, the intelligence
chief of a pro Nazi militia in Vishi, France, who
(33:21):
was convicted of killing seven Jewish hostages. Now look, I
got to say, I guess the apple doesn't fall far
from the tree. But it is still a little amazing
to have someone who fought alongside the Nazis have his
son now spreading Hamas propaganda attacking Israel. And I guess
(33:43):
the question you would ask is is there anyone responsible
at the New York Times?
Speaker 3 (33:47):
Is there any.
Speaker 2 (33:48):
Editor the fact that you have the State of Israel
suing them for defamation? So one of the things Israel's
going to get in this litigation is there going to
get the emails and discussion of hey, is there any
fact checking? Is there any basis for these extraordinary and
ridiculous and absurd claims? And I'm I think it is
(34:11):
likely that you're going to see that the editors didn't
care if there was any basis. This is the political
story they wanted to tell because they knew that the
damning report of Hamas's use of rape was coming out,
and so they decided, let's put it all on Israel
and blame Israel. It is It's disgraceful, but sadly it
(34:33):
is not very uncommon for The New York Times.
Speaker 1 (34:35):
No it's not. And by the way, go grab that
free breaking article. You can read all about it. It's
a mos propagana. New York Times writer Christoph's sexual violence
Colin CAP's a career of corrections, retractions and apologies going
back twenty five years. It's a great read. Don't forget.
We do this show Monday, Wednesday, Friday. Hit that subscriber
auto download button, Download Verdict with Ted Cruse wherever you
(34:56):
get your podcasts and the Senate and I will see
you back here next week on this radio station and
on the podcast all week long.
Host
Ben Ferguson
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Bleep! with Ana Navarro
Fear thrives in silence and confusion. Ana Navarro rejects both. Her voice is an antidote to today’s chaos. Her new podcast, Bleep! with Ana Navarro, takes on today’s most pressing issues with the voices most connected to it: decision-makers, political leaders, cultural shapers, and people on the frontlines of the story. The conversations acknowledge the emotions we all feel—despair, sadness, fear— but emerge with knowledge, perspective, and hope. The belief is simple: fearless dialogue can transform fear into courage, and courage into change. When fear dominates the headlines, this show digs deeper. Because information, debate, and conversation don’t just ease fear, they give us power to shape the future.
Hey Jonas!
Hey Jonas! The official Jonas Brothers podcast. Hosted by Kevin, Joe, and Nick Jonas. It’s the Jonas Brothers you know... musicians, actors, and well, yes, brothers. Now, they’re sharing another side of themselves in the playful, intimate, and irreverent way only they can. Spend time with the Jonas Brothers here and stay a little bit longer for deep conversations like never before.