1. Maine Senate Candidate Scandal
- Focuses on a Democratic Senate candidate (referred to as “Graham Plattner”).
- Presents allegations including:
- Infidelity and sexually explicit messages
- Use of a controversial messaging platform allegedly linked to criminal activity
- Past extreme ideological positions (described with strong labels like “Nazi” and “communist”)
- The candidate is morally unfit and scandal-ridden.
- There may be an internal Democratic effort to remove him for political reasons.
2. Democratic Party Strategy & Infighting
-
- Prioritize political power over principles
- Support candidates despite misconduct until politically inconvenient
- Party leaders may be leaking damaging information about the candidate
- A replacement strategy may be underway before election deadlines
3. UNRWA and Hamas Allegations
-
- Alleged ties between staff and Hamas
- Mentions a reported investigation involving over 1,500 individuals
- UNRWA is corrupt and dangerous
- Calls for:
- Defunding
- Legal action
- Possible designation as a terrorist-linked organization
4. Joe Biden & Jill Biden Criticism
-
- President Biden’s mental fitness
- Jill Biden’s public statements defending him
- Inconsistencies in Jill Biden’s account of a debate night where she said she feared he was having a stroke.
- A broader cover-up by Democrats and media
- Lack of transparency about Biden’s condition
5. Media & Political System Critique
- Media outlets knowingly suppressed negative information
- Political actors prioritize power over truth
- Both scandals and narratives are strategically released
6. Iran Political Development (Breaking News)
-
- Iranian president allegedly submitting a resignation letter
- Possible internal instability
- Potential geopolitical implications
- Iranian president allegedly submitting a resignation letter
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/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/verdictwithtedcruz
X:
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome in as Verdict with Center, Ted Kruz, Ben Ferguson
with you, Senator, We're gonna get to do political strategy
today on the show, which I actually love. So this
is like one of my favorites because of the insanity
and a race that actually matters for control of the Senate.
We're going to dive into that. Plus Joe Biden's on
like this rewrite history tour as well.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Well.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
We're gonna cover the continued fiery crash of the Nazi
communist in Maine. Graham Platter, it seems every day when
you think there cannot be anything worse about this guy,
there are no more skeletons in the closet. It turns
out that closet is in fact a cemetery. It is
a graveyard, and there are so many skeletons there there
(00:46):
are more to come. We're gonna break down why they're
coming right now, why they're coming right now so quickly,
and is something sinister afoot. We're gonna break that down
in detail. We're also going to talk to you about
a shocking story about UNRA, the un relief agency that
has employed hundreds and maybe even thousands of hamas terrorists.
(01:11):
New breaking news there that is going to make you
you didn't think well of the United Nations when you
started listening to this podcast. I promise you at the
end of it, you're gonna think even worse.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
You know what.
Speaker 3 (01:21):
It occurs to me now, Graham Platner would make a
fantastic employee at UNRA. He would fit right in amen
that they would understand his anti American leftist vitriol. It
would be a perfect mesh. And then there's Jill Biden.
Jill Biden is going on TV and just kind of
crashing and burning just you know, she's trying to defend
(01:43):
her husband. She is failing miserably in that. And at
the end of the day, what she's doing I don't
think she intends to, but she is indicting the entire
Democrat Party and all of the media for being willing,
enthusiastic partisan liars. We're gonna bring you all of that today.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Yeah, it really is an incredible story. We've got the
receipts for you with the audio. Let me also talk
to you for a moment about the incredible work that's
being done right now by Americans United for Life and
how you can get involved for over the past fifty years,
AUL has filed more than two hundred legal briefs and
(02:20):
helped create at least four hundred pro life bills in
over fifty states. They're writing model legislation and consulting with
the state legislators and defending their own laws and other
pro life statues in court. Now, Americans United for Life
has a dual front approach of not only writing but
(02:42):
then defending legislation, and it's proved an effective one that
could become even more impactful as pro life state legislatures
are moving to enact protections for preborn babies after the
downfall of Roe v.
Speaker 4 (02:56):
Wade.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
They're also protecting the mothers, and they are also doing
everything they can to fight on the legality of abortion
that is returned to the states, and.
Speaker 4 (03:08):
That's where you come in. You now have the.
Speaker 1 (03:10):
Opportunity to overturn pro abortion laws and advance pro life
legislation that attacks the most vulnerable in our society, from
the womb to the tomb. Together, we can shape the
future of our nation through life affirming legislation in every state.
A gift of just twenty five dollars helps Hohod abortion
(03:32):
providers accountable and helps protect women and unborn children across
the country. And now through a match your gift is doubled.
You can donate securely at aul dot org slash verdict.
That's a UL dot org slash verdict sponsored by Americans
(03:52):
United for Life. All right, Senator, So before we get
into politics of political theory and how to run campaigns,
he do have some even more breaking news on this
disaster of a candidate. As you said, the skeletons keep
coming out of the closet.
Speaker 3 (04:07):
Well, the latest that just broke. Here's how the Wall
Street Journal covered it. Graham Plattner's wife flagged sexually explicit
texts to his Senate campaign. The wife of the main
Senate Democrat candidate last year last year told the campaign
about texts she had found between Platner and other women
and noticed women is plural. Days after Graham Plattner announced
(04:31):
his main Senate bid, his wife informed the campaign about
a potential political problem she had previously discovered on the
quote oyster farmer's phone boy, He's doing some oyster farming
sexually explicit texts with several women, According to the people
familiar with the matter. Amy Gertner, who married Platner in
twenty twenty three, told the campaign about messages she had
(04:51):
found early in their marriage in the spring of twenty
twenty five. So this is a guy who can stick
with something. I mean, he lasted almost eighteen months before
he's caught sexual texting other women women not his wife.
In late August, as some aids were conducting opposition research
on their own candidate. And by the way, that's a
standard thing you do in politics, is when you are
(05:11):
preparing to launch a campaign, one of the first thing
you do is hire your own team to do oppo
research on you so that you know what they're going
to come and attack you with Gershner disclosed the text
to a campaign AID to make sure they didn't pose
a risk to her husband's naissance campaign. The campaign had
been preparing for a major rally over Labor Day weekend
last year with Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, who likes to
(05:34):
hang out with Nazi communists who are sexual harassers and
cheating on their wives. That's not actually in the journal story.
That's just kind of reading between the lines. But who
was And this is getting back to the story. Set
to officially endorse Platner at the event, Aids ultimately decided
that the text were a private matter.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
Let me read that again.
Speaker 3 (05:54):
Aids ultimately decided the text were a private matter. You
remember when that private matter of private matters drove Eric's
swallwell out of the California gubernatorial race. YEA, their private
matter until they're not. That was being handled by the
couple in marriage counseling. A campaign official said the rally
preceded as planned, with thousands in attendance. In a statement
(06:17):
provided by Platner's campaign, Gertner said she believed she was
confiding in an age she considered a friend. I know
who Graham is. I know the man I'm married and
the husband he has been to me in the best
and worst days of my life. This hasn't changed, and
it won't. The previously unreported deliberations last year over sexually
explicit text discovered on Platner's phone come as the veteran
(06:39):
has exploded onto the national political scenes, kindling Democratic hopes
that they can unseat Republican Susan Collins and gain control
of the Senate. All right, now, that's bat yeah, but
surely there couldn't be worse. Well, there is, and stop
calling me Shirley also breaking. Graham Platner has an active
(07:01):
profile on a messaging app called and I'm not making
this up predators Paradise, uh.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Active profile just so everybody understands, that means that means
like he currently being used.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
Yes, And if you read the Daily Wire, Graham Plattner,
who setate campaign has been marred with scandal from the outset,
maintains an active account on a platform notorious for enabling
sexual predators. The main Democrat who seeking done seed, incumbent
Senator Susan Collins, is a registered user on Kick, a
(07:35):
Daily Wire review found now Kick is already known as
a hotbed for child pornography, kidnapping, and sexual abuse.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
And by the way, to be queer, there was four
months before apparently he joined a major expose I think
it was The New York Times about what you just
said in this site being used by these things. So
if you googled, you would know that you're about to
join a site that is known for child pornography and
other things like that, and it's like, oh yeah, let's
(08:07):
sign up for that. Four months after that massive expos
came out.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
You know, bet, I will say this seriously, I'm beginning
to wonder whether we're about to have something enter popular
culture which is a new euphemism of oyster farming. You know,
what is my scoundrel husband doing. Oh he's oyster farming.
I mean, this guy has a potential to like set
a term that is going to last well beyond the
main Senate race. And if Saturday Night Live actually did comedy,
(08:35):
they would have an entire skin on oyster farming like
it fries.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
Out for it.
Speaker 3 (08:40):
And here's the bizarre thing they just might you know
I mentioned before Eric Swalwell, And let's talk a little strategy.
Let's talk about why this information is coming out right now.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
By the way, it's not coming from Republicans. That's the
point that Number one we need to make this is
Democrats that we're in his campaign, who have now outed him, yes,
publicly on this. And this goes back to comparing contrast
Eric Swalwell. When Democrats thought Eric swall was no longer useful,
they're the ones that released all the info to destroy him,
(09:13):
not Republicans going after him. Let's be clear, we're seeing
this now play out his dejavou weeks later.
Speaker 3 (09:19):
Yeah, look, there's a real time parallel. And if you
look at it, this story that Plattner's wife came with
the sexually explicit texts to the campaign staff, you know
who knew about that, the campaign staff. That's the source
of this story in all likelihood. And so you've got
(09:39):
Democrats going after their own nominee, and it is reminiscent
of Look, Eric Swalwell. I didn't know the guy, but
from everything that has been said, it was widely known
among his colleagues that the guy was a complete predator,
that the guy was sexually harassing, sexually assaulting women, was
out partying. What was was like Bluto and animal House,
(10:02):
living his life.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
And Democrats didn't care.
Speaker 3 (10:08):
They didn't care at all because he was an attack
dog and so he could be a sexual predator if
he's attacking Donald Trump. They're happy with whatever he's doing.
They didn't care until they realized they had a problem
in the California gubernatorial race. And by the way, look Swallwell,
it appears that other House members knew. There may be
(10:29):
some Democrats senators right now who knew when they were
in the House with him. There were lots and lots
of staffers who knew. There presumably were reporters who knew.
Because these reporters and members and staffers are all very
tight with each other, and they all kept it silent
until the instant there was a political benefit to getting
rid of him, and boom, it was a matter of
(10:50):
hours and he was gone. I got to say, when
the story was just that Platner was a communist, Democrats
were fine. Mary Sanders campaign with him. Elizabeth Warren said,
he's my guy. When the story was just he was
a communist with a Nazi tattoo of a total comp
the symbol of the SS they used on the death camps. Amazingly,
(11:12):
Democrats were fine. They went out and campaigned with him,
said I'm proud to stand with him. That's who they were.
But as the stories got worse and worse and worse,
you do have to wonder who is it that's trying
to push Platner out. Is it Republicans trying to smack
him in the general election, or is it instead Democrats
(11:36):
who want to jettison him. And in particular, if you
look at the main law, under main law, a candidate
who wins the June ninth primary and subsequently withdraws by
five pm on July thirteenth, So there's a narrow window.
Speaker 2 (11:53):
We have just over a minute.
Speaker 4 (11:54):
By the way, make sure you mark your calendar for
that date. That date matters.
Speaker 3 (11:57):
July thirteenth may be replaced by a nominee selected by
party officials. Any replacement candidate must be chosen no later
than five pm on July twenty seventh. The timeline would
give Democrats just fourteen days to settle on a replacement
candidate and prepare for the general election campaign. So I
(12:21):
doubt Platner is on board with this. But by the way,
Swalwell wasn't on board with his defenestration. I mean he
was forcibly ejected and did not have a vote the matter.
I am quite sure Platner is not liking his oyster
farming being exposed to all of all of Maine and
all of this country. But you have at least some
(12:42):
Democrats who are saying, gosh, this guy is becoming a liability.
And listen, these guys are ruthless. I think we need
to be quite aware that this could well be a
Democrat on Democrat violence effort to remove Platner, and they're
objective is to get Platner to withdraw by July thirteenth.
Speaker 1 (13:04):
Yeah, you look at just how quick this came out,
and Democrats are really good at planning stories and building momentum.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
It's exactly the playbook they did with Swawell.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
By the way, it's also what Democrats said to Bernie
Sanders when they were making sure he didn't get the nomination.
If you go back, there's some parallels here when they're like,
we're not gonna support you, We're gonna pull the funding,
we're gonna pull our everybody from you, and they will
destroy you. I mean, this is a party that they
always decide who their guy is and if they don't
like you, and that included Bernie Sanders when he was
(13:35):
running for president, they were gonna make sure he didn't
get anywhere close to the nomination. Now you look at
it this way, and I wonder this question center. Did
Republicans maybe misplay this a little bit because there was
such shocking news that then we started pushing out there.
Speaker 4 (13:50):
Should we have looked.
Speaker 1 (13:51):
At that date earlier on and been like, maybe we
should just be quiet for a while, and then on
the thirteenth that's when we hammer his candidacy.
Speaker 3 (13:58):
Look, I will say this Chuck Schumer and Democrat leadership
wanted a different candidate. Schumer recruited to the race, Jadet Mills,
the Democrat governor from sort of traditional Washington playbook. She
was by far the most attractive Democrat candidate. The problem is,
the base of the Democrat Party today is batcrap crazy
(14:21):
that they've lost their ever loving mind, and so a
safe and somewhat boring choice of a city Democrat governor
that was far less interesting than a Nazi communist. That's
where their base is like. Understand, being a Nazi communist
is not a negative in the Democrat Party today. It
is a plus because the people who are fueling these
(14:43):
campaigns are themselves self described communists, and far too many
of them are Nazi communists. That dynamic, yes, very much
so well.
Speaker 1 (14:52):
And the Democratic Party now has become as a party
very much anti Semitic. I mean, nationwide, we're seeing activists
and candidate and leaders who truly hate Jewish people, whether
they're in Israel or in the United States of America
anywhere else in the world.
Speaker 4 (15:05):
That's become norm for them.
Speaker 3 (15:07):
So it would not surprise me at all if this
is Chuck Schumer and Chuck Schumer's minions planting these stories
because because he wanted a different candidate, and I think
they see blood in the water and they're going after Platnir.
I will say this entire episode has really revealed how
(15:28):
utterly and completely morally bankrupt the Democrat Party is, because
as every one of these stories broke, no Democrats senator
abandoned him. The only one who did was John Fetterman,
and Fetterman, to his credit, did the right thing. But
that makes the other forty six look all the more
hypocritical because they are.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
Got big main people coming to stand on stage with him,
Like that's what's incredible, Like he's not canceling campaign events,
but you actually have what I would refer to as
is your top one percent list of Democratic lawmakers that
you want to be seen on stage with if you're
running a Democratic campaign. It's the equivalent of having you
center go to a Republican campaign, like it's on the
(16:07):
short list of people you want to you want to
campaign with. They're not backing out as standing by him
so far.
Speaker 3 (16:14):
Just today I saw a tweet from Roe Conna, the
very very rich, very very liberal democrat from Silicon Valley
member of Congress. He said, how proud he is to
be going to Maine to campaign with Graham Platner. This
is where their base is. And and and by the way,
these people don't care that the guy's misogynists, that he's racist,
that he's anti Semitic. They don't care that he's he
(16:35):
he has said that he wished that federal uh felt
fellow veterans died. And and they don't care that that
that he's now a registered user on on a site
that is filled with sexual predators and child pornography. None
of that matters. He's on their team, so they stick
(16:55):
with him no matter what. And by the way, I'll
draw a contrast because you know some might say, oh,
come on, both sides do that. Well, no, that's not true.
If you remember back a few cycles ago when Roy
Moore was the nominee in Alabama, the Republican nominee, and
once he was the nominee, many of us were willing
to support him. And then the stories came out about serious,
(17:16):
credible allegations of his engaging in sexual assault of underage girls,
and I and a number of other people his answers
were thoroughly unsatisfactory. He could not conclusively respond to those allegations,
and I at a number of others said all right,
we're done now. It resulted in a Democrat winning that seat,
(17:36):
so that was from a partisan perspective, not a good thing.
But are there no Democrats that they're fond of a
phrase of country over party? Does any Democrat actually believe
country over party? Or are they just willing to do
anything in pursuit of power.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
Yeah, it's a great question, final one on this. If
you are Susan Collins right now looking at this, I
think it's pretty clear that you want to you'd want
to run against this guy. Partner you that much better
person for you to run against. And let's say they
do a replacement. Is she looking at the thirteenth date
and saying, please, let us get there as fast as
we can with this guy.
Speaker 2 (18:16):
Look, I don't know.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
I haven't talked to Susan about that, but but the
speed with which it's coming out and the source of
it that it is Democrats who are going after this
guy raises very real suspicions that they're at least some
in the party. And I suspect Schumer's front and center
who have decided let let's let let's cut our losses
(18:38):
with this guy and throw them overboard.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
And you know his.
Speaker 4 (18:41):
Torture prediction for the thirteenth. You think they will.
Speaker 2 (18:44):
I think there's a very good chance.
Speaker 4 (18:47):
I want to move to Andra right now.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
And we've talked about under on the show before, but
we have new news on this, and I want to
get the headline for people say, understand, uh, just how
big of anitious is, even if it's not being covered
by the media.
Speaker 4 (19:01):
That's why we did a show.
Speaker 1 (19:02):
The Washington Free Beacon came out with an article it's
his exclusive US probe of embattled You and Gaza Relief
Agency now expands to one thousand, five hundred plus staffers
suspected with direct ties to Hamas. Now that would be
direct ties to a terrorist organization. Senat, We've been warning
about this for a long time. There's the presence that
(19:24):
talked about how worthless in many ways the United Nations
can be, certainly in the Middle East. This is another
example of this. We know that Hamas had worked with
the United Nations people on the ground. Food had been stolen,
Countless dollars of eight have been stolen and given to terrorists.
And now you see the compromising of UN staff of
up to one thousand, five hundred plus people. I wish
(19:46):
I could say I'm surprised by this.
Speaker 4 (19:48):
I am not.
Speaker 1 (19:49):
But what does this story say about what America's role
should be moving forward?
Speaker 2 (19:53):
Look?
Speaker 3 (19:54):
For a long time, I've called for UNRA to be
completely defunded, to be shut down. UNRA is so so
bad it makes the UN itself seem like a pro America,
fantastic organization with integrity, part of the UN.
Speaker 2 (20:08):
But it is.
Speaker 3 (20:09):
It is the most corrupt part. Here's what was reported
the story by Adam Credo, the Federal investigation and his
staff of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency. The
UN Gaza relief organization that has been closely linked to
Hamas will soon encompass at least one thy five hundred
unrelinked individuals suspected of terror ties. This unprecedented dragonet, reported
(20:34):
here for the first time by the Washington Free Beacon,
exposes an AID group brimming with Hamas operatives and is
generating momentum in Congress and the Trump administration for harsher
sanctions on the embattled AID group. According to congressional staffers
briefed on the matter. The punitive matters up for consideration
include stripping UNRA of its diplomatic immunity under US law,
(20:56):
which would open it up to legal action from terror victims,
and fully designating the AID organization as a foreign terrorist organization.
According to three Trump administration officials and other sources tracking
the matter in Congress, these discussions have accelerated since The
Free Beacon first reported in April that UNRUN other un
agencies are stonewalling a federal probe into their ties to HAMAS.
(21:20):
The US Agency for International Development Inspector General's Office, a
law enforcement agency separate from the largely defunct USAID, has
spent months independently unearthing evidence that multiple UNRE employees participated
in hamas's October seventh terror attack. Let me repeat that again,
participating multiple UNRA employees participated in hamas's October seventh terror attack.
(21:49):
The probe will soon expand to at least one thousand,
five hundred suspected militants with UNRA ties, the article continues.
Senators Ted Cruz and Bill Haggerty, influential members of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, nice of them to say that
both told the Free Beacon, I mean they could have said,
you know, lousy members.
Speaker 4 (22:07):
I think those two random guys in the Senate.
Speaker 3 (22:10):
Yeah, yeah, you were two guys we ran into on
the street. So that's nice of them to say. Both
told the Free Beacon that it's time to move beyond
merely freezing unrestfunding, particularly as the USAID Inspector General continues
to unearth evidence of Hamas complicity. Quote, either they come
clean or I expect growing momentum for designating them for
the support they give to terrorists crew said Haggarty called
(22:33):
it quote appalling that the other UN agencies today are
still stonewalling the Trump administration's ongoing investigations, adding that quote,
if UN agencies refuse to show basic transparency and accountability,
then the Executive Branch and Congress must respond appropriately. That's
a big deal. And it's a big deal that both
(22:53):
the UN and and and UNRE in particular are still
stonewalling and refusing to accept any accountability.
Speaker 4 (22:59):
What's so Yeah, it is.
Speaker 1 (23:02):
One other thing on this is the fact that it's
so widespread. There is no way that the United Nations
didn't know about this. There was no way that UNDRA
and the leadership didn't know about this. And we're not
talking about fifteen talking about more than one thousand, five
hundred would direct tie a terrorist organization. What does that
say about the President's standpoint on not just under but
also on the UN in general. Because I don't believe
(23:25):
for a moment that the UN doesn't know this.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
Well, let's talk about how pervasive it is.
Speaker 3 (23:30):
So so, Ben, how many employees do you think there
are an UNRA.
Speaker 4 (23:35):
That's a great question. I have no clue.
Speaker 1 (23:36):
I mean, i'd say ten thousand, just because it's a
bloated agency.
Speaker 2 (23:40):
Yeah, I had no idea.
Speaker 3 (23:42):
And so as we were preparing for the POD, I
pulled out my Google and I typed in how many
staff are there at UNRA? And Google came back and said,
there are approximately thirty thousand staff in Iran. We now
have an investigation into more than fifteen hundred of them
for direct ties to Hamas. That's five percent of the agency.
(24:05):
That's not one isolated person, fifteen hundred out of thirty
thousand suspected of being HAMAS terrorist or directly linked to
AMAS terrorists. That is a big damn deal. That is
an agency that needs to shut down, needs to be padlocked,
needs to be ended. The idea that the United Nations,
(24:26):
much less the United States, would be providing funding that's
going directly to Hamas terrorists. That is insanity. It needs
to stop.
Speaker 4 (24:34):
Yeah, I agree with you there.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
I want to move finally on to Joe Biden and
you want to talk about a dumpster fire of interviews.
Joe Biden's out there. I was like, is she i
Witley was searching. I'm like, is she promoting a book?
And does she write about autobiography? She's out there doing
all these interviews, trying to rewrite history, but also wants
you to feel sorry for her and her husband, saying
that his bad night, she was terrified he was having
(24:56):
a stroke. The only problem is after she thought he
maybe having a stroke in that debate with Donald Trump,
she had no problem taking him to campaign event and
then to a waffle house and said on TV with
him standing there, I'm so proud of you did such
a great job tonight. It's either I'm like, all right,
well it's a senior abuse or your pathological liar, or both.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
Well.
Speaker 3 (25:14):
You and I did an emergency podcast the night of
that debate. We did it immediately as the debate concluded,
and we told verdict. Listeners, at the time, you've just
watched the single most consequential presidential debate in American history.
And the reason is and you and I predicted that
night as the debate ended, this debate will change the
names on the ballot in November. This debate was such
(25:35):
a disaster, such a train wreck. The Democrats will do
what we're worried they're going to do with Graham Plattner,
which is pull them off and put someone else on.
The Democrats are really Republicans are lousy at this. By
the way, Republicans almost never managed to do this. The
Democrats are ruthlessly efficient. And we saw that debate, we
saw it went badly. But it turns out apparently Jill
(25:58):
Biden thought it went't even worse worse than we did.
Give a listen to what she said. She thought when
she was watching the debate.
Speaker 5 (26:05):
You horrified as you saw it on Hold, I wasn't horrified.
I was frightened because I had never ever seen Joe
like that before or since, never since, yes.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
Or he's never seen never.
Speaker 5 (26:22):
No, what happened, I don't know what happened. I mean
when I as I watched it, I thought, oh my God,
he's having a stroke and it scared me to death.
Speaker 1 (26:32):
Senator, if you think that your spouse is having a stroke, A,
why would you leave him on stage? B? Why would
you then take to a campaign event afterwards? And C
why would you then go to waffle house instead of
to a doctor?
Speaker 4 (26:48):
And d uh?
Speaker 1 (26:49):
If this is the worst it ever was, and the
whole world saw that exact moment, It's never been anywhere
close before. After you're either a pathological liar A or B.
You're either a pathology a coiar who's crazy? You pick
which one you want to be.
Speaker 3 (27:04):
Look, Ben, this is an area where where I think
the American people have a great sense of intuition of
judging whether someone's speaking the truth or lying. You asked
the right question, what would you do if you believed
your spouse, your spouse of many decades, was having a stroke?
And the answer every one of us would give the
(27:25):
answer you would give the answer I would give. The
answer everyone would give is you take your doctor your
spouse to the hospital.
Speaker 4 (27:31):
Immediately, regardless of what they're doing, regardless.
Speaker 3 (27:34):
Of what think they're having a stroke. And look, maybe
you don't rush out and pull them off National TV.
I don't know about that, but at a minimum, So
suppose you just just just you're scared, but you don't
as soon as it was over, how do you not say,
we're going to the emergency room. We're gonna go okay,
you don't want a big public public bru haha, all right,
get a doctor when you're watching it, he's having a stroke.
(27:56):
Get a doctor here right now. The instant he steps
off stage.
Speaker 2 (27:59):
I want to being.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Examined like that. Anyone who is watching their spouse and
thinks they're having a stroke would do that. She didn't
do that. She went to the campaign party. She cheered
and celebrated. I'm actually not critical like you're giving. You're
giving harsh criticism because she said he did great. Look,
(28:20):
she's a campaign spouse. Every campaign spouse is gonna say that.
I'm understanding of that. If I do a terrible job
at a debate, I don't really want Heidi to go, wow,
he really crapped the bed like that.
Speaker 4 (28:35):
I understand that.
Speaker 1 (28:36):
But my point is that the pathological laying aspect of this,
I don't believe for a second that she's telling the truth.
And she says it's the worst it's ever been it
only happened that one time. It happened to be the
one and a half hours it was on national television
during a presidential debate. I don't believe her. Number one
and number two. If you are I mean center, let's
(28:56):
let's go to a debate night with you. If I thought,
as one of your friends, that you're having a stroke
and you could make it till the end, I would
immediately do what you just said. And I'm not your spouse,
and I think your team would. But second of all,
I think you'd also if you thought there was a
medical issue there, you probably would actually let people know,
because they did. Remember, they may have excuse they lied
and said he had a cold, like if you thought
(29:18):
something was bad, that's your alibi to get out of
a terrible debate. Which is why I think they didn't
actually say it is because this was the cognitive normal
for him. And so I think it's another part of
the pathological lyeing of the Democratic Party in the cover
up is that they're like, no, no, no, this is
she says. One time, I think, no, it wasn't. This
is the guy that wasn't running the country. Somebody else
was in the White House. And then they glied and
(29:39):
covered it up. And now she's saying it only happened
one time. I don't believe her for a moment.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
Well.
Speaker 3 (29:44):
And in fact, listen to a reporter ask asking her
about whether this had been going on for a long time.
Speaker 2 (29:51):
Give a listen.
Speaker 5 (29:52):
Did you ever see signs that he was falling into
cognitive declimb?
Speaker 4 (29:58):
No? No, no, true, no. I mean that's just totally insane.
Everyone saw it.
Speaker 1 (30:07):
There was examples that you could actually give that were
caught on tape. And then I go back to what
she said, It was the worst I ever saw. I
thought he was having a stroke, but I didn't do
anything when he was having a stroke, and I never
saw anything like this ever. Again, this is why I
think so many Americans have distrust for politicians, and why
you should even be asking more questions now about who
the hell was running the country.
Speaker 4 (30:26):
Was it Joe Biden? I don't know.
Speaker 3 (30:29):
And by the way, I'll say again, I am I
am more forgiving of of Jill Biden of the spouse.
Speaker 2 (30:36):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (30:36):
But every Democrat aide knew that he was in massive
mental decline, that that that he was not capable of
doing the job. Every reporter knew that ABC new, that
CBS knew, that NBC new that CNN knew that MSNBC
new that.
Speaker 2 (30:51):
They all knew that.
Speaker 4 (30:53):
And where were these it was going on?
Speaker 3 (30:56):
But every Democrat senator, every Democrat House member, they all
knew that. The four years Joe Biden was president. Do
you know how many times I spoke with him in
person in those four years?
Speaker 4 (31:06):
I'm going to guess one or zero.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
Zero, not a single time.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
That is weird. It is a regular part of the
job of being a senator to talk to the president.
When Obama was president, I talked to him regularly. When
Trump is president, I talk to him sometimes every week
or sometimes even every day. You know, last time I
talked to Trump was three days ago.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
It is weird.
Speaker 3 (31:27):
And by the way, it was not just me. Almost
every single Republican senator did not speak to him at
all during his presidency. We would sit around at lunch
and talk about how weird it was that the White
House would not let us talk to the president. And understand,
we all knew him. Joe was a man of the
Senate for forty plus years, so every one of us
(31:49):
had a personal relationship with Joe Biden and the fact
that they wouldn't let him speak to us was a
screaming alarm bell that his medal could pass. City has
diminished so much that they couldn't let us see it.
And it's why the debate was so high risk, because
there you had the TV cameras going and you couldn't
have an aid step in and save him. But well,
(32:12):
by the way, what did the Biden staffs say about
Jill Biden's comments about thinking he was having a stroke? Well,
an axious reporter said, quote ex Biden aids simply don't
believe Jill Biden.
Speaker 4 (32:27):
And there's your sign. Well, there's your sign.
Speaker 3 (32:30):
No kidding, but I'll tell you And this story links
back to the story we started with number one. Democrats
in the party and the media do not care about
anything other than power. That sounds too harsh, but they
were willing to have for four years and potentially for
eight years, someone who was senile, who was unable to
(32:53):
put together coherent thoughts as the commander in chief. Understand
Joe Biden could have pushed a launched our nukes, an
annihilated mankind from the face of the planet. And yet
Democrats say, you know what if he's there, we get
to run things. So you know, what does it matter
if our enemies look at the commander in chief and
(33:14):
think he's an adult old man who can't operate the
TV remote control that level of cynicism. Frankly, it's the
same thought process that says, what does it matter if
someone is a commi nazi, misogynist, racist, What does it matter?
My party gets to stay in power, So that's good
by me.
Speaker 2 (33:36):
There is.
Speaker 3 (33:38):
Look, I think it is number one we keep. And
by the way, swallwell, they were fine, someone's a repeat
sexual predator. They were great with him until there was
a political problem, and then with all three they immediately
jettisoned them and throw them out the back. I'm going
(34:00):
to try to be restrained and say that is not
the behavior of a party that gives a damn about principle.
Speaker 4 (34:08):
Yeah, yeah, great point.
Speaker 1 (34:10):
Finally, Senator, we have some breaking news as we are recording,
and they're saying it's a regime rift. I'm going to
read this headline for you. Iran's president reportedly submits resignation
letter amid claims of deepening internal divisions. What does this mean?
And that's all we have at this moment. I wish
we had more, we don't. That's what we have at
(34:31):
this moment. Some of this by the time you listen
to it may have changed, but right now, that's what
we've got, so.
Speaker 3 (34:37):
We don't know. We're recording this on Sunday. The news
is breaking. I expected the next pod we'll discuss more
about it. But Iran's president resigning strikes me as a
good thing. I have always said that a critical objective
here should be regime collapse. The president resigning is a
step in the right direction. Now, sitting here today, I
don't know that whether that means the hardliners are prevailing,
(35:00):
or whether that means voices of sanity are prevailing. We'll
learn more, we'll talk more. But as you know, I
spoke with the President this week, spent about twenty minutes
on the phone with him, talking predominantly about Iran, and
what I urged the President was hold the line, hold
the line, stand strong, no nukes, no nukes, no nukes,
and the President adamantly agreed with me. We were on
(35:21):
exactly the same page. So I'm hopeful this is a
good development. But it's too early to tell. We will
tell you more when we know more about it.
Speaker 1 (35:29):
We'll do that Wednesday morning. Don't forget hit that subscriber
auto download button. Please write us a five star review.
If you want to watch the show, you can on
YouTube as well. And the Senator and I will see
you back here on Wednesday morning.
Welcome in as Verdict with Center, Ted Kruz, Ben Ferguson
with you, Senator, We're gonna get to do political strategy
today on the show, which I actually love. So this
is like one of my favorites because of the insanity
and a race that actually matters for control of the Senate.
We're going to dive into that. Plus Joe Biden's on
like this rewrite history tour as well.
Speaker 2 (00:21):
Well.
Speaker 3 (00:22):
We're gonna cover the continued fiery crash of the Nazi
communist in Maine. Graham Platter, it seems every day when
you think there cannot be anything worse about this guy,
there are no more skeletons in the closet. It turns
out that closet is in fact a cemetery. It is
a graveyard, and there are so many skeletons there there
(00:46):
are more to come. We're gonna break down why they're
coming right now, why they're coming right now so quickly,
and is something sinister afoot. We're gonna break that down
in detail. We're also going to talk to you about
a shocking story about UNRA, the un relief agency that
has employed hundreds and maybe even thousands of hamas terrorists.
(01:11):
New breaking news there that is going to make you
you didn't think well of the United Nations when you
started listening to this podcast. I promise you at the
end of it, you're gonna think even worse.
Speaker 2 (01:21):
You know what.
Speaker 3 (01:21):
It occurs to me now, Graham Platner would make a
fantastic employee at UNRA. He would fit right in amen
that they would understand his anti American leftist vitriol. It
would be a perfect mesh. And then there's Jill Biden.
Jill Biden is going on TV and just kind of
crashing and burning just you know, she's trying to defend
(01:43):
her husband. She is failing miserably in that. And at
the end of the day, what she's doing I don't
think she intends to, but she is indicting the entire
Democrat Party and all of the media for being willing,
enthusiastic partisan liars. We're gonna bring you all of that today.
Speaker 1 (02:00):
Yeah, it really is an incredible story. We've got the
receipts for you with the audio. Let me also talk
to you for a moment about the incredible work that's
being done right now by Americans United for Life and
how you can get involved for over the past fifty years,
AUL has filed more than two hundred legal briefs and
(02:20):
helped create at least four hundred pro life bills in
over fifty states. They're writing model legislation and consulting with
the state legislators and defending their own laws and other
pro life statues in court. Now, Americans United for Life
has a dual front approach of not only writing but
(02:42):
then defending legislation, and it's proved an effective one that
could become even more impactful as pro life state legislatures
are moving to enact protections for preborn babies after the
downfall of Roe v.
Speaker 4 (02:56):
Wade.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
They're also protecting the mothers, and they are also doing
everything they can to fight on the legality of abortion
that is returned to the states, and.
Speaker 4 (03:08):
That's where you come in. You now have the.
Speaker 1 (03:10):
Opportunity to overturn pro abortion laws and advance pro life
legislation that attacks the most vulnerable in our society, from
the womb to the tomb. Together, we can shape the
future of our nation through life affirming legislation in every state.
A gift of just twenty five dollars helps Hohod abortion
(03:32):
providers accountable and helps protect women and unborn children across
the country. And now through a match your gift is doubled.
You can donate securely at aul dot org slash verdict.
That's a UL dot org slash verdict sponsored by Americans
(03:52):
United for Life. All right, Senator, So before we get
into politics of political theory and how to run campaigns,
he do have some even more breaking news on this
disaster of a candidate. As you said, the skeletons keep
coming out of the closet.
Speaker 3 (04:07):
Well, the latest that just broke. Here's how the Wall
Street Journal covered it. Graham Plattner's wife flagged sexually explicit
texts to his Senate campaign. The wife of the main
Senate Democrat candidate last year last year told the campaign
about texts she had found between Platner and other women
and noticed women is plural. Days after Graham Plattner announced
(04:31):
his main Senate bid, his wife informed the campaign about
a potential political problem she had previously discovered on the
quote oyster farmer's phone boy, He's doing some oyster farming
sexually explicit texts with several women, According to the people
familiar with the matter. Amy Gertner, who married Platner in
twenty twenty three, told the campaign about messages she had
(04:51):
found early in their marriage in the spring of twenty
twenty five. So this is a guy who can stick
with something. I mean, he lasted almost eighteen months before
he's caught sexual texting other women women not his wife.
In late August, as some aids were conducting opposition research
on their own candidate. And by the way, that's a
standard thing you do in politics, is when you are
(05:11):
preparing to launch a campaign, one of the first thing
you do is hire your own team to do oppo
research on you so that you know what they're going
to come and attack you with Gershner disclosed the text
to a campaign AID to make sure they didn't pose
a risk to her husband's naissance campaign. The campaign had
been preparing for a major rally over Labor Day weekend
last year with Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, who likes to
(05:34):
hang out with Nazi communists who are sexual harassers and
cheating on their wives. That's not actually in the journal story.
That's just kind of reading between the lines. But who
was And this is getting back to the story. Set
to officially endorse Platner at the event, Aids ultimately decided
that the text were a private matter.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
Let me read that again.
Speaker 3 (05:54):
Aids ultimately decided the text were a private matter. You
remember when that private matter of private matters drove Eric's
swallwell out of the California gubernatorial race. YEA, their private
matter until they're not. That was being handled by the
couple in marriage counseling. A campaign official said the rally
preceded as planned, with thousands in attendance. In a statement
(06:17):
provided by Platner's campaign, Gertner said she believed she was
confiding in an age she considered a friend. I know
who Graham is. I know the man I'm married and
the husband he has been to me in the best
and worst days of my life. This hasn't changed, and
it won't. The previously unreported deliberations last year over sexually
explicit text discovered on Platner's phone come as the veteran
(06:39):
has exploded onto the national political scenes, kindling Democratic hopes
that they can unseat Republican Susan Collins and gain control
of the Senate. All right, now, that's bat yeah, but
surely there couldn't be worse. Well, there is, and stop
calling me Shirley also breaking. Graham Platner has an active
(07:01):
profile on a messaging app called and I'm not making
this up predators Paradise, uh.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
Active profile just so everybody understands, that means that means
like he currently being used.
Speaker 3 (07:14):
Yes, And if you read the Daily Wire, Graham Plattner,
who setate campaign has been marred with scandal from the outset,
maintains an active account on a platform notorious for enabling
sexual predators. The main Democrat who seeking done seed, incumbent
Senator Susan Collins, is a registered user on Kick, a
(07:35):
Daily Wire review found now Kick is already known as
a hotbed for child pornography, kidnapping, and sexual abuse.
Speaker 1 (07:46):
And by the way, to be queer, there was four
months before apparently he joined a major expose I think
it was The New York Times about what you just
said in this site being used by these things. So
if you googled, you would know that you're about to
join a site that is known for child pornography and
other things like that, and it's like, oh yeah, let's
(08:07):
sign up for that. Four months after that massive expos
came out.
Speaker 3 (08:10):
You know, bet, I will say this seriously, I'm beginning
to wonder whether we're about to have something enter popular
culture which is a new euphemism of oyster farming. You know,
what is my scoundrel husband doing. Oh he's oyster farming.
I mean, this guy has a potential to like set
a term that is going to last well beyond the
main Senate race. And if Saturday Night Live actually did comedy,
(08:35):
they would have an entire skin on oyster farming like
it fries.
Speaker 2 (08:39):
Out for it.
Speaker 3 (08:40):
And here's the bizarre thing they just might you know
I mentioned before Eric Swalwell, And let's talk a little strategy.
Let's talk about why this information is coming out right now.
Speaker 1 (08:53):
By the way, it's not coming from Republicans. That's the
point that Number one we need to make this is
Democrats that we're in his campaign, who have now outed him, yes,
publicly on this. And this goes back to comparing contrast
Eric Swalwell. When Democrats thought Eric swall was no longer useful,
they're the ones that released all the info to destroy him,
(09:13):
not Republicans going after him. Let's be clear, we're seeing
this now play out his dejavou weeks later.
Speaker 3 (09:19):
Yeah, look, there's a real time parallel. And if you
look at it, this story that Plattner's wife came with
the sexually explicit texts to the campaign staff, you know
who knew about that, the campaign staff. That's the source
of this story in all likelihood. And so you've got
(09:39):
Democrats going after their own nominee, and it is reminiscent
of Look, Eric Swalwell. I didn't know the guy, but
from everything that has been said, it was widely known
among his colleagues that the guy was a complete predator,
that the guy was sexually harassing, sexually assaulting women, was
out partying. What was was like Bluto and animal House,
(10:02):
living his life.
Speaker 2 (10:03):
And Democrats didn't care.
Speaker 3 (10:08):
They didn't care at all because he was an attack
dog and so he could be a sexual predator if
he's attacking Donald Trump. They're happy with whatever he's doing.
They didn't care until they realized they had a problem
in the California gubernatorial race. And by the way, look Swallwell,
it appears that other House members knew. There may be
(10:29):
some Democrats senators right now who knew when they were
in the House with him. There were lots and lots
of staffers who knew. There presumably were reporters who knew.
Because these reporters and members and staffers are all very
tight with each other, and they all kept it silent
until the instant there was a political benefit to getting
rid of him, and boom, it was a matter of
(10:50):
hours and he was gone. I got to say, when
the story was just that Platner was a communist, Democrats
were fine. Mary Sanders campaign with him. Elizabeth Warren said,
he's my guy. When the story was just he was
a communist with a Nazi tattoo of a total comp
the symbol of the SS they used on the death camps. Amazingly,
(11:12):
Democrats were fine. They went out and campaigned with him,
said I'm proud to stand with him. That's who they were.
But as the stories got worse and worse and worse,
you do have to wonder who is it that's trying
to push Platner out. Is it Republicans trying to smack
him in the general election, or is it instead Democrats
(11:36):
who want to jettison him. And in particular, if you
look at the main law, under main law, a candidate
who wins the June ninth primary and subsequently withdraws by
five pm on July thirteenth, So there's a narrow window.
Speaker 2 (11:53):
We have just over a minute.
Speaker 4 (11:54):
By the way, make sure you mark your calendar for
that date. That date matters.
Speaker 3 (11:57):
July thirteenth may be replaced by a nominee selected by
party officials. Any replacement candidate must be chosen no later
than five pm on July twenty seventh. The timeline would
give Democrats just fourteen days to settle on a replacement
candidate and prepare for the general election campaign. So I
(12:21):
doubt Platner is on board with this. But by the way,
Swalwell wasn't on board with his defenestration. I mean he
was forcibly ejected and did not have a vote the matter.
I am quite sure Platner is not liking his oyster
farming being exposed to all of all of Maine and
all of this country. But you have at least some
(12:42):
Democrats who are saying, gosh, this guy is becoming a liability.
And listen, these guys are ruthless. I think we need
to be quite aware that this could well be a
Democrat on Democrat violence effort to remove Platner, and they're
objective is to get Platner to withdraw by July thirteenth.
Speaker 1 (13:04):
Yeah, you look at just how quick this came out,
and Democrats are really good at planning stories and building momentum.
Speaker 4 (13:13):
It's exactly the playbook they did with Swawell.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
By the way, it's also what Democrats said to Bernie
Sanders when they were making sure he didn't get the nomination.
If you go back, there's some parallels here when they're like,
we're not gonna support you, We're gonna pull the funding,
we're gonna pull our everybody from you, and they will
destroy you. I mean, this is a party that they
always decide who their guy is and if they don't
like you, and that included Bernie Sanders when he was
(13:35):
running for president, they were gonna make sure he didn't
get anywhere close to the nomination. Now you look at
it this way, and I wonder this question center. Did
Republicans maybe misplay this a little bit because there was
such shocking news that then we started pushing out there.
Speaker 4 (13:50):
Should we have looked.
Speaker 1 (13:51):
At that date earlier on and been like, maybe we
should just be quiet for a while, and then on
the thirteenth that's when we hammer his candidacy.
Speaker 3 (13:58):
Look, I will say this Chuck Schumer and Democrat leadership
wanted a different candidate. Schumer recruited to the race, Jadet Mills,
the Democrat governor from sort of traditional Washington playbook. She
was by far the most attractive Democrat candidate. The problem is,
the base of the Democrat Party today is batcrap crazy
(14:21):
that they've lost their ever loving mind, and so a
safe and somewhat boring choice of a city Democrat governor
that was far less interesting than a Nazi communist. That's
where their base is like. Understand, being a Nazi communist
is not a negative in the Democrat Party today. It
is a plus because the people who are fueling these
(14:43):
campaigns are themselves self described communists, and far too many
of them are Nazi communists. That dynamic, yes, very much
so well.
Speaker 1 (14:52):
And the Democratic Party now has become as a party
very much anti Semitic. I mean, nationwide, we're seeing activists
and candidate and leaders who truly hate Jewish people, whether
they're in Israel or in the United States of America
anywhere else in the world.
Speaker 4 (15:05):
That's become norm for them.
Speaker 3 (15:07):
So it would not surprise me at all if this
is Chuck Schumer and Chuck Schumer's minions planting these stories
because because he wanted a different candidate, and I think
they see blood in the water and they're going after Platnir.
I will say this entire episode has really revealed how
(15:28):
utterly and completely morally bankrupt the Democrat Party is, because
as every one of these stories broke, no Democrats senator
abandoned him. The only one who did was John Fetterman,
and Fetterman, to his credit, did the right thing. But
that makes the other forty six look all the more
hypocritical because they are.
Speaker 1 (15:46):
Got big main people coming to stand on stage with him,
Like that's what's incredible, Like he's not canceling campaign events,
but you actually have what I would refer to as
is your top one percent list of Democratic lawmakers that
you want to be seen on stage with if you're
running a Democratic campaign. It's the equivalent of having you
center go to a Republican campaign, like it's on the
(16:07):
short list of people you want to you want to
campaign with. They're not backing out as standing by him
so far.
Speaker 3 (16:14):
Just today I saw a tweet from Roe Conna, the
very very rich, very very liberal democrat from Silicon Valley
member of Congress. He said, how proud he is to
be going to Maine to campaign with Graham Platner. This
is where their base is. And and and by the way,
these people don't care that the guy's misogynists, that he's racist,
that he's anti Semitic. They don't care that he's he
(16:35):
he has said that he wished that federal uh felt
fellow veterans died. And and they don't care that that
that he's now a registered user on on a site
that is filled with sexual predators and child pornography. None
of that matters. He's on their team, so they stick
(16:55):
with him no matter what. And by the way, I'll
draw a contrast because you know some might say, oh,
come on, both sides do that. Well, no, that's not true.
If you remember back a few cycles ago when Roy
Moore was the nominee in Alabama, the Republican nominee, and
once he was the nominee, many of us were willing
to support him. And then the stories came out about serious,
(17:16):
credible allegations of his engaging in sexual assault of underage girls,
and I and a number of other people his answers
were thoroughly unsatisfactory. He could not conclusively respond to those allegations,
and I at a number of others said all right,
we're done now. It resulted in a Democrat winning that seat,
(17:36):
so that was from a partisan perspective, not a good thing.
But are there no Democrats that they're fond of a
phrase of country over party? Does any Democrat actually believe
country over party? Or are they just willing to do
anything in pursuit of power.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
Yeah, it's a great question, final one on this. If
you are Susan Collins right now looking at this, I
think it's pretty clear that you want to you'd want
to run against this guy. Partner you that much better
person for you to run against. And let's say they
do a replacement. Is she looking at the thirteenth date
and saying, please, let us get there as fast as
we can with this guy.
Speaker 2 (18:16):
Look, I don't know.
Speaker 3 (18:17):
I haven't talked to Susan about that, but but the
speed with which it's coming out and the source of
it that it is Democrats who are going after this
guy raises very real suspicions that they're at least some
in the party. And I suspect Schumer's front and center
who have decided let let's let let's cut our losses
(18:38):
with this guy and throw them overboard.
Speaker 2 (18:40):
And you know his.
Speaker 4 (18:41):
Torture prediction for the thirteenth. You think they will.
Speaker 2 (18:44):
I think there's a very good chance.
Speaker 4 (18:47):
I want to move to Andra right now.
Speaker 1 (18:49):
And we've talked about under on the show before, but
we have new news on this, and I want to
get the headline for people say, understand, uh, just how
big of anitious is, even if it's not being covered
by the media.
Speaker 4 (19:01):
That's why we did a show.
Speaker 1 (19:02):
The Washington Free Beacon came out with an article it's
his exclusive US probe of embattled You and Gaza Relief
Agency now expands to one thousand, five hundred plus staffers
suspected with direct ties to Hamas. Now that would be
direct ties to a terrorist organization. Senat, We've been warning
about this for a long time. There's the presence that
(19:24):
talked about how worthless in many ways the United Nations
can be, certainly in the Middle East. This is another
example of this. We know that Hamas had worked with
the United Nations people on the ground. Food had been stolen,
Countless dollars of eight have been stolen and given to terrorists.
And now you see the compromising of UN staff of
up to one thousand, five hundred plus people. I wish
(19:46):
I could say I'm surprised by this.
Speaker 4 (19:48):
I am not.
Speaker 1 (19:49):
But what does this story say about what America's role
should be moving forward?
Speaker 2 (19:53):
Look?
Speaker 3 (19:54):
For a long time, I've called for UNRA to be
completely defunded, to be shut down. UNRA is so so
bad it makes the UN itself seem like a pro America,
fantastic organization with integrity, part of the UN.
Speaker 2 (20:08):
But it is.
Speaker 3 (20:09):
It is the most corrupt part. Here's what was reported
the story by Adam Credo, the Federal investigation and his
staff of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency. The
UN Gaza relief organization that has been closely linked to
Hamas will soon encompass at least one thy five hundred
unrelinked individuals suspected of terror ties. This unprecedented dragonet, reported
(20:34):
here for the first time by the Washington Free Beacon,
exposes an AID group brimming with Hamas operatives and is
generating momentum in Congress and the Trump administration for harsher
sanctions on the embattled AID group. According to congressional staffers
briefed on the matter. The punitive matters up for consideration
include stripping UNRA of its diplomatic immunity under US law,
(20:56):
which would open it up to legal action from terror victims,
and fully designating the AID organization as a foreign terrorist organization.
According to three Trump administration officials and other sources tracking
the matter in Congress, these discussions have accelerated since The
Free Beacon first reported in April that UNRUN other un
agencies are stonewalling a federal probe into their ties to HAMAS.
(21:20):
The US Agency for International Development Inspector General's Office, a
law enforcement agency separate from the largely defunct USAID, has
spent months independently unearthing evidence that multiple UNRE employees participated
in hamas's October seventh terror attack. Let me repeat that again,
participating multiple UNRA employees participated in hamas's October seventh terror attack.
(21:49):
The probe will soon expand to at least one thousand,
five hundred suspected militants with UNRA ties, the article continues.
Senators Ted Cruz and Bill Haggerty, influential members of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, nice of them to say that
both told the Free Beacon, I mean they could have said,
you know, lousy members.
Speaker 4 (22:07):
I think those two random guys in the Senate.
Speaker 3 (22:10):
Yeah, yeah, you were two guys we ran into on
the street. So that's nice of them to say. Both
told the Free Beacon that it's time to move beyond
merely freezing unrestfunding, particularly as the USAID Inspector General continues
to unearth evidence of Hamas complicity. Quote, either they come
clean or I expect growing momentum for designating them for
the support they give to terrorists crew said Haggarty called
(22:33):
it quote appalling that the other UN agencies today are
still stonewalling the Trump administration's ongoing investigations, adding that quote,
if UN agencies refuse to show basic transparency and accountability,
then the Executive Branch and Congress must respond appropriately. That's
a big deal. And it's a big deal that both
(22:53):
the UN and and and UNRE in particular are still
stonewalling and refusing to accept any accountability.
Speaker 4 (22:59):
What's so Yeah, it is.
Speaker 1 (23:02):
One other thing on this is the fact that it's
so widespread. There is no way that the United Nations
didn't know about this. There was no way that UNDRA
and the leadership didn't know about this. And we're not
talking about fifteen talking about more than one thousand, five
hundred would direct tie a terrorist organization. What does that
say about the President's standpoint on not just under but
also on the UN in general. Because I don't believe
(23:25):
for a moment that the UN doesn't know this.
Speaker 2 (23:28):
Well, let's talk about how pervasive it is.
Speaker 3 (23:30):
So so, Ben, how many employees do you think there
are an UNRA.
Speaker 4 (23:35):
That's a great question. I have no clue.
Speaker 1 (23:36):
I mean, i'd say ten thousand, just because it's a
bloated agency.
Speaker 2 (23:40):
Yeah, I had no idea.
Speaker 3 (23:42):
And so as we were preparing for the POD, I
pulled out my Google and I typed in how many
staff are there at UNRA? And Google came back and said,
there are approximately thirty thousand staff in Iran. We now
have an investigation into more than fifteen hundred of them
for direct ties to Hamas. That's five percent of the agency.
(24:05):
That's not one isolated person, fifteen hundred out of thirty
thousand suspected of being HAMAS terrorist or directly linked to
AMAS terrorists. That is a big damn deal. That is
an agency that needs to shut down, needs to be padlocked,
needs to be ended. The idea that the United Nations,
(24:26):
much less the United States, would be providing funding that's
going directly to Hamas terrorists. That is insanity. It needs
to stop.
Speaker 4 (24:34):
Yeah, I agree with you there.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
I want to move finally on to Joe Biden and
you want to talk about a dumpster fire of interviews.
Joe Biden's out there. I was like, is she i
Witley was searching. I'm like, is she promoting a book?
And does she write about autobiography? She's out there doing
all these interviews, trying to rewrite history, but also wants
you to feel sorry for her and her husband, saying
that his bad night, she was terrified he was having
(24:56):
a stroke. The only problem is after she thought he
maybe having a stroke in that debate with Donald Trump,
she had no problem taking him to campaign event and
then to a waffle house and said on TV with
him standing there, I'm so proud of you did such
a great job tonight. It's either I'm like, all right,
well it's a senior abuse or your pathological liar, or both.
Speaker 2 (25:13):
Well.
Speaker 3 (25:14):
You and I did an emergency podcast the night of
that debate. We did it immediately as the debate concluded,
and we told verdict. Listeners, at the time, you've just
watched the single most consequential presidential debate in American history.
And the reason is and you and I predicted that
night as the debate ended, this debate will change the
names on the ballot in November. This debate was such
(25:35):
a disaster, such a train wreck. The Democrats will do
what we're worried they're going to do with Graham Plattner,
which is pull them off and put someone else on.
The Democrats are really Republicans are lousy at this. By
the way, Republicans almost never managed to do this. The
Democrats are ruthlessly efficient. And we saw that debate, we
saw it went badly. But it turns out apparently Jill
(25:58):
Biden thought it went't even worse worse than we did.
Give a listen to what she said. She thought when
she was watching the debate.
Speaker 5 (26:05):
You horrified as you saw it on Hold, I wasn't horrified.
I was frightened because I had never ever seen Joe
like that before or since, never since, yes.
Speaker 2 (26:20):
Or he's never seen never.
Speaker 5 (26:22):
No, what happened, I don't know what happened. I mean
when I as I watched it, I thought, oh my God,
he's having a stroke and it scared me to death.
Speaker 1 (26:32):
Senator, if you think that your spouse is having a stroke, A,
why would you leave him on stage? B? Why would
you then take to a campaign event afterwards? And C
why would you then go to waffle house instead of
to a doctor?
Speaker 4 (26:48):
And d uh?
Speaker 1 (26:49):
If this is the worst it ever was, and the
whole world saw that exact moment, It's never been anywhere
close before. After you're either a pathological liar A or B.
You're either a pathology a coiar who's crazy? You pick
which one you want to be.
Speaker 3 (27:04):
Look, Ben, this is an area where where I think
the American people have a great sense of intuition of
judging whether someone's speaking the truth or lying. You asked
the right question, what would you do if you believed
your spouse, your spouse of many decades, was having a stroke?
And the answer every one of us would give the
(27:25):
answer you would give the answer I would give. The
answer everyone would give is you take your doctor your
spouse to the hospital.
Speaker 4 (27:31):
Immediately, regardless of what they're doing, regardless.
Speaker 3 (27:34):
Of what think they're having a stroke. And look, maybe
you don't rush out and pull them off National TV.
I don't know about that, but at a minimum, So
suppose you just just just you're scared, but you don't
as soon as it was over, how do you not say,
we're going to the emergency room. We're gonna go okay,
you don't want a big public public bru haha, all right,
get a doctor when you're watching it, he's having a stroke.
(27:56):
Get a doctor here right now. The instant he steps
off stage.
Speaker 2 (27:59):
I want to being.
Speaker 3 (28:00):
Examined like that. Anyone who is watching their spouse and
thinks they're having a stroke would do that. She didn't
do that. She went to the campaign party. She cheered
and celebrated. I'm actually not critical like you're giving. You're
giving harsh criticism because she said he did great. Look,
(28:20):
she's a campaign spouse. Every campaign spouse is gonna say that.
I'm understanding of that. If I do a terrible job
at a debate, I don't really want Heidi to go, wow,
he really crapped the bed like that.
Speaker 4 (28:35):
I understand that.
Speaker 1 (28:36):
But my point is that the pathological laying aspect of this,
I don't believe for a second that she's telling the truth.
And she says it's the worst it's ever been it
only happened that one time. It happened to be the
one and a half hours it was on national television
during a presidential debate. I don't believe her. Number one
and number two. If you are I mean center, let's
(28:56):
let's go to a debate night with you. If I thought,
as one of your friends, that you're having a stroke
and you could make it till the end, I would
immediately do what you just said. And I'm not your spouse,
and I think your team would. But second of all,
I think you'd also if you thought there was a
medical issue there, you probably would actually let people know,
because they did. Remember, they may have excuse they lied
and said he had a cold, like if you thought
(29:18):
something was bad, that's your alibi to get out of
a terrible debate. Which is why I think they didn't
actually say it is because this was the cognitive normal
for him. And so I think it's another part of
the pathological lyeing of the Democratic Party in the cover
up is that they're like, no, no, no, this is
she says. One time, I think, no, it wasn't. This
is the guy that wasn't running the country. Somebody else
was in the White House. And then they glied and
(29:39):
covered it up. And now she's saying it only happened
one time. I don't believe her for a moment.
Speaker 2 (29:44):
Well.
Speaker 3 (29:44):
And in fact, listen to a reporter ask asking her
about whether this had been going on for a long time.
Speaker 2 (29:51):
Give a listen.
Speaker 5 (29:52):
Did you ever see signs that he was falling into
cognitive declimb?
Speaker 4 (29:58):
No? No, no, true, no. I mean that's just totally insane.
Everyone saw it.
Speaker 1 (30:07):
There was examples that you could actually give that were
caught on tape. And then I go back to what
she said, It was the worst I ever saw. I
thought he was having a stroke, but I didn't do
anything when he was having a stroke, and I never
saw anything like this ever. Again, this is why I
think so many Americans have distrust for politicians, and why
you should even be asking more questions now about who
the hell was running the country.
Speaker 4 (30:26):
Was it Joe Biden? I don't know.
Speaker 3 (30:29):
And by the way, I'll say again, I am I
am more forgiving of of Jill Biden of the spouse.
Speaker 2 (30:36):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (30:36):
But every Democrat aide knew that he was in massive
mental decline, that that that he was not capable of
doing the job. Every reporter knew that ABC new, that
CBS knew, that NBC new that CNN knew that MSNBC
new that.
Speaker 2 (30:51):
They all knew that.
Speaker 4 (30:53):
And where were these it was going on?
Speaker 3 (30:56):
But every Democrat senator, every Democrat House member, they all
knew that. The four years Joe Biden was president. Do
you know how many times I spoke with him in
person in those four years?
Speaker 4 (31:06):
I'm going to guess one or zero.
Speaker 2 (31:08):
Zero, not a single time.
Speaker 3 (31:10):
That is weird. It is a regular part of the
job of being a senator to talk to the president.
When Obama was president, I talked to him regularly. When
Trump is president, I talk to him sometimes every week
or sometimes even every day. You know, last time I
talked to Trump was three days ago.
Speaker 2 (31:26):
It is weird.
Speaker 3 (31:27):
And by the way, it was not just me. Almost
every single Republican senator did not speak to him at
all during his presidency. We would sit around at lunch
and talk about how weird it was that the White
House would not let us talk to the president. And understand,
we all knew him. Joe was a man of the
Senate for forty plus years, so every one of us
(31:49):
had a personal relationship with Joe Biden and the fact
that they wouldn't let him speak to us was a
screaming alarm bell that his medal could pass. City has
diminished so much that they couldn't let us see it.
And it's why the debate was so high risk, because
there you had the TV cameras going and you couldn't
have an aid step in and save him. But well,
(32:12):
by the way, what did the Biden staffs say about
Jill Biden's comments about thinking he was having a stroke? Well,
an axious reporter said, quote ex Biden aids simply don't
believe Jill Biden.
Speaker 4 (32:27):
And there's your sign. Well, there's your sign.
Speaker 3 (32:30):
No kidding, but I'll tell you And this story links
back to the story we started with number one. Democrats
in the party and the media do not care about
anything other than power. That sounds too harsh, but they
were willing to have for four years and potentially for
eight years, someone who was senile, who was unable to
(32:53):
put together coherent thoughts as the commander in chief. Understand
Joe Biden could have pushed a launched our nukes, an
annihilated mankind from the face of the planet. And yet
Democrats say, you know what if he's there, we get
to run things. So you know, what does it matter
if our enemies look at the commander in chief and
(33:14):
think he's an adult old man who can't operate the
TV remote control that level of cynicism. Frankly, it's the
same thought process that says, what does it matter if
someone is a commi nazi, misogynist, racist, What does it matter?
My party gets to stay in power, So that's good
by me.
Speaker 2 (33:36):
There is.
Speaker 3 (33:38):
Look, I think it is number one we keep. And
by the way, swallwell, they were fine, someone's a repeat
sexual predator. They were great with him until there was
a political problem, and then with all three they immediately
jettisoned them and throw them out the back. I'm going
(34:00):
to try to be restrained and say that is not
the behavior of a party that gives a damn about principle.
Speaker 4 (34:08):
Yeah, yeah, great point.
Speaker 1 (34:10):
Finally, Senator, we have some breaking news as we are recording,
and they're saying it's a regime rift. I'm going to
read this headline for you. Iran's president reportedly submits resignation
letter amid claims of deepening internal divisions. What does this mean?
And that's all we have at this moment. I wish
we had more, we don't. That's what we have at
(34:31):
this moment. Some of this by the time you listen
to it may have changed, but right now, that's what
we've got, so.
Speaker 3 (34:37):
We don't know. We're recording this on Sunday. The news
is breaking. I expected the next pod we'll discuss more
about it. But Iran's president resigning strikes me as a
good thing. I have always said that a critical objective
here should be regime collapse. The president resigning is a
step in the right direction. Now, sitting here today, I
don't know that whether that means the hardliners are prevailing,
(35:00):
or whether that means voices of sanity are prevailing. We'll
learn more, we'll talk more. But as you know, I
spoke with the President this week, spent about twenty minutes
on the phone with him, talking predominantly about Iran, and
what I urged the President was hold the line, hold
the line, stand strong, no nukes, no nukes, no nukes,
and the President adamantly agreed with me. We were on
(35:21):
exactly the same page. So I'm hopeful this is a
good development. But it's too early to tell. We will
tell you more when we know more about it.
Speaker 1 (35:29):
We'll do that Wednesday morning. Don't forget hit that subscriber
auto download button. Please write us a five star review.
If you want to watch the show, you can on
YouTube as well. And the Senator and I will see
you back here on Wednesday morning.
Host
Ben Ferguson
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
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.
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.