September 26, 2025 • 38 mins
-
-
The episode centers on the claim that former FBI Director James Comey was indicted on two counts of lying under oath to Congress.
-
Cruz and Ferguson argue that Comey falsely denied authorizing leaks to the press, while Andrew McCabe’s testimony and evidence suggest otherwise.
-
They frame this as proof that Comey politicized and weaponized the FBI against Donald Trump.
-
Comey’s public response is portrayed as political and deflective rather than factual.
-
The discussion also touches on the statute of limitations, prosecutorial strategy, and the likelihood of conviction.
- Comey indictment sparks fierce political reactions nationwide
-
-
Sniper Attack on Dallas ICE Facility (WATCH)
-
The podcast also covers a violent shooting at an ICE facility in Dallas, described as politically motivated.
-
Cruz personally recounts being on the scene shortly after the attack.
-
The shooter is linked rhetorically to left-wing ideology and anti-ICE sentiment, with parallels drawn to other recent politically motivated shootings.
-
The hosts criticize Democratic leaders for “demonizing” ICE and argue that their rhetoric fuels such violence.
-
-
Political Framing
-
The episode repeatedly frames these events within a broader narrative of political weaponization, left-wing hypocrisy, and anti-Trump bias.
-
Cruz portrays Comey as a partisan actor, contrasting his own questioning of Comey with McCabe’s admissions.
-
Violence against law enforcement is positioned as a consequence of inflammatory rhetoric by Democrats.
-
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
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Welcome. It is Verdict with Senator Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson
with you. Nice to have you with us wherever you
are around the country, especially if you're listening on radio
right now as well. We've got a pack show and
Senator I don't even know if you thought that it
was going to be all about you with the James
Comy indictment. He has been indicted for alleged false statement,
(00:20):
substruction of congressional proceedings. This is obviously, as you would say,
a big damn deal, and the clip of you talking
to James Comy is what everyone's playing on TV right now.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Well, Bennett's a momentous day. The former director of the FBI,
James Comy, has been indicted on two counts of lying
to Congress under oath and lying to Congress under oath
to be clear in response to questioning from me in
front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The grand jury has
indicted him. He's facing prosecution, and we are seeing the
media losing their minds. The media is letting out a
(00:56):
primal scream of horror. The Democrats are horror. We're going
to break down exactly why James Comy has been indicted.
We're going to give you the factual predicate. We're going
to give you the legal predicate, and I will tell
you James Comy is defending himself, and he's defending himself
as a partisan, as someone who hates Donald Trump. He
is defending himself as if he were Chuck Schumer or
(01:18):
Nancy Pelosi, rather than actually addressing the facts that I
believe demonstrated he committed deliberately committed felonies when he testified
and falsely testified under oath to the United States Senate.
We're going to give you all those details. We're also
going to talk about the tragic shooting that happened when
a deranged sniper targeted an ICE facility in Dallas, Texas.
(01:40):
I was on the ground there moments after the shooting occurred.
This is yet the latest incidence of politically motivated violence
and violence directed against ICE agents and CBP and law enforcement.
This is getting worse and worse, and this must stop.
We're going to tell you exactly what happened and give
you all the facts.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Yeah, it's certainly a very very very big story. All
of you know that I am a pro Second Amendment guy.
I've shared on numerous occasions how caring my firearms saved
my life from a gang related attack. But for those
of you out there with family members who may not
be comfortable having a gun by their side, you still
want them to be able to protect themselves and others
(02:21):
in times of danger, and that's where the Burno launcher
comes in. Berna is a handheld pistol that fires both
kinetic rounds and chemical irritants to separate you from an attacker.
Berna is a handheld pistol that fires both kinetic rounds
and chemical irritants to separate you from the attacker. I'm
here today with Josh Cherard from Berna to share the
(02:43):
true story of how a California homeowner used a Berna
launcher to stop a home intruder. Josh tell us what happened.
Speaker 3 (02:51):
You know, Bob Braid was one of the earliest adopters
of Burna back when we first started. He lived in
California in a residential suburb of LA that was pretty
pro into a lot of vagrancy, a lot of homeless
walking up and down the street. He kept the burnet's
living room and one of these vagrants wandered in his
home just confused, probably chunk and intoxicated in the wrong house.
Bob was able to pull his burne out, point it
(03:13):
at the intruder, who promptly backed out of the home
back into the yard. And of course it was all
taught on surveillance. He didn't even have to use the
berna and he was able to ward off this intruder
in a situation that could have ended incredibly badly had
more force than used. This is a great demonstration of
how the lowest level of force can be used to
(03:33):
rectify a situation. And of course it was all thought
on video, which it makes for a great illustration of
how that burnet can be used on a day day basis.
Speaker 1 (03:42):
There's a lot of people are going to say, well,
why wouldn't the homeowner just use a gun in this case?
Speaker 3 (03:46):
Yeah, Well, one, it comes down to the legality you
know in this part of California and made very difficult
to use the gun. And then two, we saw that
this intruder literally just stumbled into the wrong home in
an altered state of mind. Nobody wants to kill anybody
that doesn't need killing that they absolutely don't have to.
So this is a great instance where the Berno was
(04:07):
able to be used the lowest level of les legal
forces able to use direct by the situation without bringing
a gun into that situation.
Speaker 1 (04:15):
Yeah, I tell you I have one of these. My
family members do as well a lot of my friends.
If you want more information how you or a family
member can protect themselves with a Berno auncher, go to
Berna by RNA dot com. That's burna dot com by
RNA dot com again, protect yourself and your family burna
(04:35):
b why RNA dot com? All right, so, Senator, I
want to start with this clip, and I think this
is a great starting point for this indictment of the
former REPBI director James Comy. This is you questioning Comy
back in September of twenty twenty. Uh. This is the
back and forth between the two of you. Everyone listening.
(04:58):
This is really an important and part of history now
and could probably be an important part of this case.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
To another topic. On May third, twenty seventeen, in this committee,
Chairman Grassley asked you point blank, quote have you ever
been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating
to the Trump investigation of the Clinton investigation? You responded,
under oath quote never, he then asked you, quote, have
(05:25):
you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be
an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation
or the Clinton administration? You responded again under oath No. Now,
as you know, mister McCabe, who works for you, has
publicly and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to the
Wall Street Journal and that you were a directly aware
(05:47):
of it and that you directly authorized it. Now, what
mister McCabe is saying and what you testify to this
committee cannot both be true. One or the other is false.
Who's telling the truth.
Speaker 4 (06:02):
I just can only speak to my testimony. I stand
by what the testimony you summarized that I gave in
May of twenty seventeen.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
So your testimony as you've never authorized anyone to leak,
And mister McCabe, if he says contrary, is not telling
the truth. Is that correct?
Speaker 4 (06:16):
Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony, but mine
is the same.
Speaker 2 (06:19):
Today, all right, I'm going to make a final point
because my time has expired. This investigation of the president
was corrupt. The FBI and the Department of Justice were
politicized and weaponized, and in my opinion, there are only
two possibilities that you were deliberately corrupt or wilfully incompetent,
and I don't believe you were incompetent. This has done
(06:41):
severe damage to the professionals and the honorable men and
women at the FBI, because law enforcement should not be
used as a political weapon.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
All right, So you listen to that, and then you'll
look at the indictment. Count one false statement to the
US Senate that he had not quote authorized someone else
of the FBI to be an anonymous news source. Count
two call me obstructed the Judiciary Committee's investigation through his
quote false and misleading statements. That is a big smoking gun.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Well it is. It's the basis of the indictment and
this will be the central focus of the trial. Now.
James Comy put out a statement tonight on Instagram, and
his statement is striking in that it is a political statement.
It is not a statement about the facts of the law.
So give a listen to what James Comby said this
evening in response to the indictment.
Speaker 4 (07:36):
My family and I have known for years that there
are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we
couldn't imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not
live on our knees, and you shouldn't either. Somebody that
I love dearly recently said that fear is the tool
of a tyrant, and she's right. But I'm not afraid,
(08:00):
and I hope you're not either. I hope instead you
are engaged, You are paying attention, and you will vote
like your beloved country depends upon it, which it does.
My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but
I have great confidence in the federal judicial system, and
(08:20):
I'm innocent, So let's have a trial.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
I love how he is a victim there and acting
like he's above all of this. But center, let's just
go back to three point thirty of twenty three. James
Comey tweeted out, quote, it's been a good day. That
is how I reacted to Trump being in died in
the Alvin Bragg hush money case. So to act like
(08:45):
he's some sort of guy that's above all this. Look
at his own.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
Words, well, his statement he put out in response to
this that could have been given by Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi,
or King Jeffries or any other political Democrat. And in
fact he makes a call Mountain vote, it's a get
out the vote message. This is a former director of
the FBI. But to give you a sense of just
how much he loathes Donald Trump, this is a former
(09:10):
director of the FBI who tweeted out to the world
a picture of shells spelling out eighty six forty seven,
in other words, slang for kill the current President of
the United States, Donald V.
Speaker 4 (09:21):
Trump.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
To say, calling for the murder of the sitting president
is not appropriate for the former FBI director In an
ordinary time, that would be such an obvious statement that
nobody would even think to say it. But that's just
how much James Comy loathes Donald Trump. And understand. When
(09:42):
Trump became president the first time in January of twenty seventeen,
President Trump unfortunately made a serious mistake, which is he
left James Comey in office. In hindsight, on January twentieth,
twenty seventeen, President Trump should have called James Comy and
said thank you for your service to the nation. Your
services are no longer required. I am certain President Trump
(10:06):
wishes he had done that. I think the White House
team believed that Komy could focus on law enforcement, could
not be politicized, and that assumption proved to be in error.
James Comy presided over weaponizing and politicizing the FBI. He
was part of weaponizing and politicizing the Department of Justice.
(10:28):
And it was because they hated Donald Trump, and frankly,
they were angry at the American people for electing him
in twenty sixteen, and so the FBI set out to
try to attack and to try to ultimately remove from
office the President of the United States. Now, again this
should not bear saying, but it is not the job
(10:52):
of law enforcement to determine the will of the voters.
Is wrong, and the elected president should no longer be president.
That's what Comy presided over. And so when I listened
to him say I weep for the Department of Justice,
it really is. You know, there's a Yiddish word, hootspot.
And I got to say, James Comy really ought to
have a T shirt with that printed on it, because
(11:15):
he is grieving for the Department of Justice. Why because
he has been indicted for what I think is clearly
a felony. And we're going to break down in just minutes,
why exactly this is a felony, what the crime is,
And I want to point out Nowhere in his statement
does Comy get into the actual facts. Nowhere in the
statement does he get into what he did. Nowhere in
(11:37):
the statement does he get into law. He just gives
a political statement. He will not be on his knees.
He calls Trump a tyrant who is ruling by fear. Look,
this is an indictment that was returned by a grand
jury in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and it was returned
because of I believe clear evidence demonstrating Comy committed felonies.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Senator, I want to bring up a point that no
one in the media has brought up so far about
this indictment. And I brought it up on CNN and
they were like all deer in headlights, there is something
about this case. And they were saying, Oh, this is
just political retribution by Donald Trump that clearly they weren't
(12:21):
going to bring this case. He had to fire the
person in charge of this office in Virginia, had to
put in somebody that would weaponize the DOJ. Here's the
fact that most people don't know, James Comy's own son
in law was literally inside the prosecutor's office that was tasked.
(12:42):
Just think about this with indicting his father in law.
And so when you sit there and I look at this,
I'm like, man, the deep State got together to protect
James Comy at all costs. And as soon as the
indictment came out later in the day, James Comy's son
in law then gave his resign letter because I guess
he just couldn't stop what was inevitable.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
Well, and look, I think what should govern this case
is the facts and the law. And I believe James
Commey should have been indicted five years ago. And indeed
I called upon him to be indicted five years ago.
So let me lay out the facts and in December
of twenty twenty. So the questioning that we played in
the first segment was for September thirtieth of twenty twenty.
(13:24):
And by the way, the reason the indictment was brought
right now is the statute limitations was going to run
next week, and so they had to bring it before
the end of the statute limitations or they would not
be able to charge him. But on December tenth of
twenty twenty, here's the letter that I sent to Bill Barr,
then the Attorney General of the United States, and Christopher Ray,
(13:45):
who was then the director of the FBI. Days before
the presidential election in twenty sixteen, a Wall Street Journal
article quoted an anonymous source confirming the existence of a
probe into Hillary Clinton's use of a private eas mail
server while serving as Secretary of State, an investigation that
up to that point mister Komy and the FBI declined
(14:07):
to confirm. We now know that this leak was authorized
by then Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe. Mister
McCabe initially told FBI agents under oath that he did
not authorize the leak and he did not know who did,
but when confronted later with contrary evidence, he confessed both
(14:28):
to knowing about and authorizing the leak. We do not know, however,
whether and to what extent then FBI Director Comy was
aware of and authorized this leak. After the fact, mister
McCabe has repeatedly stated that mister Komy knew of and
effectively authorized the leak by approving it. He told the
(14:51):
Office of Inspector General that quote. He and Komy discussed
the October thirtieth Wall Street Journal article in person on
October thirty five, Verse twenty sixteen, and that at that meeting,
quote he told Comy that he had authorized ad slash
OPA and Special Council to disclose the account of the
(15:12):
August twelfth call and did not say anything in any
way to suggest that it was unauthorized. According to mister McCabe,
mister Comby quote did not react negatively, just kind of
accepted it and quote thought it was a good idea
that they presented this information to the media. He again
(15:35):
reiterated mister Comy's involvement at a hearing last month at
the Senate Judiciary Committee. I asked mister McCabe. According to
The Washington Times April eighteenth, twenty eighteen, mister McCabe insisted
that he told his boss that he had authorized disclosure
about the Clinton investigation. But mister Comy has denied this claim,
(15:56):
and mister McCabe told investigators that mister Comby knew he
had authorized disclosure and agreed it was a good idea.
Is that accurate? Is that your testimony to this committee?
Mister McCabe replied, that is my recollection. Mister Komy, however,
has sworn under oath that he has neither authorized the
(16:18):
leak nor knew of mister McCabe's involvement. At a May
twenty seventeenth hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Grassley asked,
mister Comy, have you ever been an anonymous source in
news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or
the Clinton investigation. Mister Komy replied never. Senator Grassley then asked,
(16:41):
have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to
be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump
investigation or the Clinton administration? He testified no. And this
October that a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, mister Komy testified
in response to my question, quote, I stand by the
(17:02):
testimony that you summarized that I gave in May of
twenty seventeen. Mister Komy's denial in front of the Senate
is consistent with his statement to the OIG. He told
the OIG that quote, he recalled seeing this article, but
he did not know how the disclosure about the paidag
call in the October thirtieth article happened. He said that
(17:24):
he was quote very concerned about that part of the article.
Komy told OIG he considered the disclosure about the paidag's
call problematic because it related the sensitive FBI information. The
OIG report continues, quote according to Komy, he discussed the
issue with McCabe after the article was published, and at
(17:46):
the time mccab quote definitely did not tell me that
he authorized the disclosure of the paidag call. Komy said
that McCabe gave him the exact opposite impression. Mister Comy
asserted that he took from whatever communication they had that
mister mccab wasn't involved in the leak. And here's what's critical,
(18:09):
mister Comy and mister mccab's statements are irreconcilably contradictory. Mister
McCabe says that he told mister Comy of the leak
and that mister Comy approved effectively authorizing the leak after
the fact. Mister Comy, on the other hand, has said
that he neither authorized the leak nor knew of mister
McCabe's involvement. One of them is lying under oath a
(18:33):
Federal crime eighteen USC. Section sixteen twenty one. The American
people deserve to know who those are the facts and
it is a simple binary choice. Either James Comy lied
under oath and committed to felony or Andrew McCabe lied
under oath or committed to felony, because what they said
(18:56):
is precisely opposite. There is not a world in which
neither of them committed a felon And the only choice
is which one broke the law by bringing this indictment. Obviously,
the Department of Justice has determined it was James Comey
who lied under oath and broke the law, and that's
what the trial will be all about.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
You've got a lot of choices for cell phone service,
with new ones popping up all the time. But here's
the truth. There's only one that stands boldly in the
gap for every American that believes that freedom is worth
fighting for, and that's Patriot Mobile. And every time if
you're a member of Patriot Mobile, you make a phone call,
you send a text, you pay your bill, you're making
(19:36):
a difference setting up for what you and I believe in,
because Patriot Mobile takes about five percent of your bill
each and every month, and they give it back to
organizations and causes that support our First Amendment rights, our
Second Amendment rights. Stand with our military, our veterans are
wounded warriors. That is why I love being with Patriot Mobile.
(19:57):
And if you're worried about coverage, don't bet. We'll use
all three major US networks. So if you've got service
right now, well you're gonna have as good or better
service coverage with Patriot Mobile. And if you think switching
is a hassle, not anymore. When you switch, it's easy.
You keep your same number, keep your phone you've got,
or upgrade to a new one. And Patriot Mobile has
(20:17):
a one hundred percent US based team that gets you
activated over the phone in minutes from the comfort of
your home or your office. And if you're stuck on
a contract, your own money on your phones, no worries.
Patriot Mobile has a contract buyout program. This is how
we win, folks by aligning our spending with our values,
and every dollar we spend matters. So make the switch
(20:38):
and send it for what you believe in. Go to
Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict, Patriot Mobile dot com slash
vertict or nine to seven to two Patriot and use
the promo code vertict. You're gonna get a free month
of service. Switch today Patriot Mobile dot com slash vertict
promo code verdict or nine to seven to Patriot to
get a free month of service. All right, So here's
(21:00):
what I've been hearing on online from the media. They're like, hey,
Donald Trump, weighed in on this too much. They're gonna
get this thing kicked out before it even goes to
a judge. This is a waste of the American taxpayer's dollars.
And then if that's not enough, they say, well, no
one ever gets indicted and they actually go forward and
get a conviction on someone lining to Congress because well,
(21:22):
a lot of people lie to Congress, and even if
you did lie, it may have been a mistake. It's
gonna be very hard to get a conviction. Break down
how this could roll out in court, what could happen.
Speaker 2 (21:32):
Well, at the end of the day, the factual predicate
behind this crime is not terribly complicated. As I mentioned,
there's a direct contradiction between James Comey's testimony under oath
before the Senate and Andrew McCabe's testimony under oath before
the Senate. They cannot both be true. One or the
other is deliberately lying, And how do we know which
(21:54):
one is likely to be lying? Well, the FBI, in
all likelihood possesses the information that confirms who's telling the
truth and who's lying. Indeed, if you look at the
account of what occurred, mccab initially told the same lie
that Comy did. Mcab initially said he didn't leak the information,
(22:16):
he didn't authorize it, and he didn't know who did.
But then the FBI Office of Inspector General confronted him
with contrary evidence. I don't know what the contrary evidence is,
but they put in front of him, mister McCabe, you
said you didn't leak this information. Well, boom, here's the
evidence to the contrary And what did McCabe do. Oh crap,
you got me?
Speaker 3 (22:36):
Okay, you're right.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
I leaked it. I'm the one who did it, and
I talked to Comy about it. I told him about it.
So he admitted that when he was caught in a lie.
I don't know specifically what confirming evidence the FBI in
the Department of Justice has, but they have enough that
they caused McCabe to reverse his first lie and instead
(23:01):
to say, yes, he did it, and Comy knew about it,
and so between the two, you know, it was interesting.
When I was questioning Comy, he said a couple of times. Well,
I'm not going to characterize, as he put it, Andy's testimony. Well,
I get politically that's a smart move not to characterize
Andy's testimony. But you know what, his entire legal defense
(23:22):
is going to be, McCabe is lying because he doesn't
have an alternative. That's his only argument is when McCabe
said under oath, good point that I knew about it.
Comy's defense team is going to have to say McCabe
was lying. And by the way, mccab is going to
be the star witness at the prosecution. The prosecution is
going to put Andy McCabe on the stand and he's
(23:44):
going to ask them, did you leak it? Now, I'm
going to predict Andy McCabe is going to say, yes,
did you talk to James Comy about it? Yes? Did
he authorize it? Yes? And the reason I'm going to
predict he's gonna do all of that that is because
Andy McCabe testified to that in front of Congress, and
if he gives any other answer, he'll be indicted for
(24:07):
lying to Congress. So he can't have it both ways.
And I expect that Comy's lawyer will try to cross
examine him and we'll try to argue McCabe is lying,
but it's very difficult to see why McCabe would have
any incentive to lie. He and Comy were Thicke as thieves.
He was only forced to admit the truth when confronted
(24:32):
with contrary evidence. Again, we don't know what that evidence is,
but presumably the FBI and the Department of Justice do so.
I don't know if it is contemporaneous phone calls, perhaps
with the reporters. I don't know if it is notes.
I don't know if it's emails. I don't know if
it's testimony from someone else at the FBI who said, hey,
Andrew McCabe told me to do this. But it is something,
(24:54):
and it was something that was compelling enough that it
caused Andrew McCabe to aban then lie number one, and
and so at the end of the day, this is
not a complicated factual case. This is not some grand tapestry.
It's a he said, he said, she said. But you
(25:15):
have both testimonies under oath, and it's going to be
a question of what additional evidence is there to confirm
who's telling the truth and who's not. I also think
I will be surprised if James Comy's lawyer puts him
on the stand. Now, under our justice system, the prosecution
cannot force a defendant to testify. But I'm going to
(25:38):
predict James Comy is not going to take the stand
because if he takes the stand, he can be cross examined,
and he does not want to be cross examined, because
this is someone who presided over weaponizing the Department of
Justice with the objective of taking out Donald J. Trump
and getting under oath, getting cross examined by a skilled
(26:01):
trial attorney, and again under oath. By the way, if
he lies in his trial testimony, he can be indicted
and prosecuted again for lying under oath. Again, I don't
think his lawyer will do that. And so at the
end of the day, look, the press is going to
go on and on and say, well, Trump hates James Comy.
That is certainly true, But being hated by the President
(26:22):
is not enough to exonerate you from criminal conduct. And
in this instance, I believe Comy should have been indicted
five years ago because it was clear he had deliberately
lied to Congress. And look, we started by playing my
cross examination. This wasn't an absent minded lie. This wasn't oh,
I'm not paying attention. This was careful, This was deliberate,
(26:47):
This was strategic, this was planned. I believe this was
James Comy saying, I face no accountability whatsoever. I can
lie under oath and no one's going to hold me
to account. And I think he feels he feels it's clever,
but he also feels vindicated. Listen, James Comy was someone
who I think fancied himself as j Edgar Hoover. He
(27:09):
fancied himself as as an incredibly powerful director of the FBI,
empowered to remove the tyrant. That's what he said in
his statement tonight that he thinks Trump is a tyrant.
And I think when the American people elected him in
twenty sixteen, I think Comy was angry and he decided
(27:30):
he would use the power of the FBI to remove
the president elected by the people. And so I think
it is quite fitting that he is facing accountability for
committing criminal conduct. Let me repeat, this indictment is not
for being an opponent of Donald Trump. It is not
for being a political a political figure on the other
(27:52):
side of Donald Trump. This indictment is for deliberately and
knowingly lying under oath to the United States Senate, which
is a clear an unmistakable felony. And and I think
I think Comy, I think the odds are good that
Comy will be convicted. And I think if he's convicted,
I think he's going to serve jail time.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
How much of very quickly, of his past will come
back to haunt him. He is a prolific guy when
it comes to leaking. He's a pro at it. He's
on amateur because he knows how to leak. Hell, he
leaked information that was apparently classified to make sure that
there was a special counsel that went after Donald Trump.
We know that for a fact. And it went to
(28:32):
one of his former law friends at a university that
then went to a newspaper. That is a fact. Will
that come up? And then the other question I have
for you quickly is this, will the testimony that he
gay before Congress be used in court or literally will
senators that interviewed him, would you guys go to court
or would they just use the testimony video?
Speaker 2 (28:51):
Yeah, I think they would use the testimony. They would
read or play the testimony. I don't think you're going
to see senators testifying, and the record is clear in
the objective and so everyone knows exactly what his testimony was.
In terms of his past pattern, I think it could
certainly come in. The prosecution might try to bring it
in to establish a pattern. That would be difficult. But
(29:13):
I think if Comy's lawyer argues, well, he couldn't possibly
have approved this, he never would have approved a leak,
then I think the prosecution would be able to get
all of that in as rebuttal to the defendant's argument.
So I think it's more likely to come in as
rebuttal evidence than directly proving a pattern. But my guess
is one way or another that evidence is going to
(29:35):
come in, And you're right, there's a clear pattern. Comy
has a long pattern of relying on media leaks to
advance his own personal agenda.
Speaker 1 (29:43):
Do you have a dog, if you've got one like
I do, My dog is twelve and a half. His
name is Memphis, and there's nothing worse than watching your
dog age. We're having to coach him off the couch,
We're having to help pick him up to get him
on the couch. And then I was told about rough Greens.
It literally has added the spunk back to Memphis life.
And it supports long term health by providing live, bioavailable
(30:07):
nutrients including essential vitamins, minerals, probiotics, digestive enzymes, and omega oils.
Now it is ingredients that work together to improve your
dog's life nutrition absorption, it maintains joint and muscle health,
and it enhances his overall or her overall vitality. It
also promotes longevity by addressing common nutritional deficiencies found in
(30:31):
processed dog food. And it's so easy. It's not a diet.
It is literally you sprinkle it on your dog's food,
and after you give it to them, not only they
want to eat it, they love it, but then the
effects happen where your dog gets back to the way
they used to be. So don't change your dog's food.
Just add rough Greens on top, and I am offering
(30:52):
a free jump Start bag right now. All you got
to do is cover the shipping. Use the discount code
Ben to claim your free Jumpstart Trial bag at Roughgreens
dot com. That's r uff greens dot Com promo code Ben.
So you don't change your dog's food. Just add Roughgreens
and watch the health benefits come live, get the freebag
(31:14):
Roughgreens dot com promo code ben Centater. You were in
Dallas when this shooting happened. It was eight hours after
we watched Gavin Newsom go on on late night TV
demonizing ICE agents, saying that they are authoritarian. And then
the liberals are like, wait, wait, we're not attacking ICE agents.
(31:35):
Yes they are. They've undermined them, they've demonized them, and
we were watching attack after attack happen against ICE agents.
It's horrific.
Speaker 2 (31:43):
Yeah, I was in Dallas this week for a series
of unrelated meetings and the news broke that this strange
gunman had opened fire on an ICE facility in Dallas.
That he had gone onto a rooftop emulating Charlie Kirk's
assassin and with a bolt action rifle, fired multiple rounds,
(32:03):
ended up killing two people severely injuring a third, and
then then he took the gun to himself and took
his own life. And it was horrific. When the news broke,
I canceled my morning meeting and just drove over to
the ICE facility that morning. Was there, was there shortly
after the shooting had occurred. And this has happened far
too often. Here's what I had to say at the
(32:27):
press conference that was ongoing when I arrived at the facility.
Speaker 3 (32:31):
If this needs to stop.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
Violence is wrong, Politically motivated violence is wrong. It was
two weeks ago today that we saw political assassination in
Utah that tore the heart out of much of this country.
This is the third shooting in Texas directed at ICE
(32:54):
or CBP. This must stop. To every politician who is
using rhetoric demonizing ICE and demonizing CBP, stop to every
politician demanding that ICE agents be dosed and calling for
(33:15):
people to go after their families.
Speaker 3 (33:17):
Stop.
Speaker 2 (33:19):
This has very real consequences. Look in America, we disagree.
That's fine, that's the democratic process. But your political opponents
are not Nazis. We need to learn to work together
without demonizing each other, without attacking each other. And I
want to say thank you. I want to say thank
(33:40):
you to the brave men and women of law enforcement.
I want to say thank you to the brave men
and women of ICE and CVP and everyone who puts
their lives on the lines to keep us safe. The
divisive rhetoric tragically has real consequences. I hope that every
(34:00):
one of us will I hope that every one of
us will pray Number one for the safety of law
enforcement that are risking their lives to keep us safe.
Number two, for the health of those who were shot
and injured. Today we still don't know the full details
of who was injured, but for the families also of
(34:21):
the victims of this shooting. Violence has no place. It
is wrong, and we should come together. If we want
to have a debate of an immigration policies, we can
do so in the halls of Congress without demonizing each other,
and especially without demonizing the men and women who every
day put on a badge and go risk their lives
(34:43):
to keep us safe. And we should not be putting
language out there that inspires mad men to commit evil crimes.
Our prayers are with the men and women of law enforcement,
and we ought to come together and have some decency
across the political aisle to say this violence is wrong and.
Speaker 3 (35:06):
It needs to stop.
Speaker 1 (35:08):
We know Senator a lot about this gunman. We know
that he was googling the shooting of our friend whose
funeral we just went to, Charlie Kirk. We know that
he was looking at the app that they put out
there and these websites where you can track ICE agents
which is accent where they are.
Speaker 2 (35:30):
That is an app designed to encourage violence against ICE
agents and law enforcement. And whether it's Gavin Newsom or
a Keen Jeffries or any any other Democrat who is
encouraging this targeting of ICE agents, it is fundamentally wrong
and that they need to stand up and stop it.
You know, I will say this shooter, it's the news
(35:52):
has since come out. This shooter. His mother was a
hard leftist who actually had been vocally critical of me
and other Texas Republicans for not embracing gun control, and
in fact, in May of twenty twenty two, she posted
the following Governor Abbot, Senator Cornyn, and Senator Cruz, how
does it feel that your action to open up gun
laws is responsible for the killing of twenty one more people?
(36:15):
Do you secretly sit in front of a TV and
smile with a demented smile. You must be proud of
all the money that sits in your bank accounts from
the gun lobby support. Was it worth it? Governor Abbot?
How about you senators? When you prioritize money over people,
this is what you get And I will say the
irony is rich that this leftist mom who was championing
(36:38):
gun control now her son has committed a mass murder
as a sniper. It is tragic, and it is a
consequence of extreme rhetoric, extreme ideology that is poisoning the
minds of those who are driven to violence. And I
will say this assassin wrote on his shell casings anti Ice,
(37:03):
very much, emulating what Charlie Kirk's murderer did, writing pro
Antifa and pro transgender propaganda on his shell casings. And
we need to stop this violence, regardless of where your
politics are, but we need to stop the rhetoric that
is fueling this violence. And there's a lot of Democrat
politicians engaging in this rhetoric, no matter how many lives
(37:26):
are lost. And I want to be clear, I am
not calling them Nazis. I am absolutely opposing any violence
or calls to violence. I'm calling on them to tone
down their rhetoric and stop demonizing their opponent, stop demonizing Ice,
stop demonizing law enforcement, because it's dangerous and tragically. Lunatics
(37:48):
are acting on the rhetoric they're hearing from these politicians.
Speaker 1 (37:51):
No doubt about it. Don't forget. We do this show Monday,
Wednesday and Friday, so make sure that subscriber auto download
button whereever you get your podcasts. We do it again Monday,
Wednesday Friday. You can also say to Alexa or Siri
play Verdict with Ted Cruz and it will do it
for you, So download the podcast. We will keep you updated,
obviously on all the breaking news around James Comy. He
(38:15):
is and it's gonna be a very very big case,
so we'll have that for you and we'll see you
on the podcast all week long. Be safe, everyone,
Welcome. It is Verdict with Senator Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson
with you. Nice to have you with us wherever you
are around the country, especially if you're listening on radio
right now as well. We've got a pack show and
Senator I don't even know if you thought that it
was going to be all about you with the James
Comy indictment. He has been indicted for alleged false statement,
(00:20):
substruction of congressional proceedings. This is obviously, as you would say,
a big damn deal, and the clip of you talking
to James Comy is what everyone's playing on TV right now.
Speaker 2 (00:32):
Well, Bennett's a momentous day. The former director of the FBI,
James Comy, has been indicted on two counts of lying
to Congress under oath and lying to Congress under oath
to be clear in response to questioning from me in
front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. The grand jury has
indicted him. He's facing prosecution, and we are seeing the
media losing their minds. The media is letting out a
(00:56):
primal scream of horror. The Democrats are horror. We're going
to break down exactly why James Comy has been indicted.
We're going to give you the factual predicate. We're going
to give you the legal predicate, and I will tell
you James Comy is defending himself, and he's defending himself
as a partisan, as someone who hates Donald Trump. He
is defending himself as if he were Chuck Schumer or
(01:18):
Nancy Pelosi, rather than actually addressing the facts that I
believe demonstrated he committed deliberately committed felonies when he testified
and falsely testified under oath to the United States Senate.
We're going to give you all those details. We're also
going to talk about the tragic shooting that happened when
a deranged sniper targeted an ICE facility in Dallas, Texas.
(01:40):
I was on the ground there moments after the shooting occurred.
This is yet the latest incidence of politically motivated violence
and violence directed against ICE agents and CBP and law enforcement.
This is getting worse and worse, and this must stop.
We're going to tell you exactly what happened and give
you all the facts.
Speaker 1 (02:01):
Yeah, it's certainly a very very very big story. All
of you know that I am a pro Second Amendment guy.
I've shared on numerous occasions how caring my firearms saved
my life from a gang related attack. But for those
of you out there with family members who may not
be comfortable having a gun by their side, you still
want them to be able to protect themselves and others
(02:21):
in times of danger, and that's where the Burno launcher
comes in. Berna is a handheld pistol that fires both
kinetic rounds and chemical irritants to separate you from an attacker.
Berna is a handheld pistol that fires both kinetic rounds
and chemical irritants to separate you from the attacker. I'm
here today with Josh Cherard from Berna to share the
(02:43):
true story of how a California homeowner used a Berna
launcher to stop a home intruder. Josh tell us what happened.
Speaker 3 (02:51):
You know, Bob Braid was one of the earliest adopters
of Burna back when we first started. He lived in
California in a residential suburb of LA that was pretty
pro into a lot of vagrancy, a lot of homeless
walking up and down the street. He kept the burnet's
living room and one of these vagrants wandered in his
home just confused, probably chunk and intoxicated in the wrong house.
Bob was able to pull his burne out, point it
(03:13):
at the intruder, who promptly backed out of the home
back into the yard. And of course it was all
taught on surveillance. He didn't even have to use the
berna and he was able to ward off this intruder
in a situation that could have ended incredibly badly had
more force than used. This is a great demonstration of
how the lowest level of force can be used to
(03:33):
rectify a situation. And of course it was all thought
on video, which it makes for a great illustration of
how that burnet can be used on a day day basis.
Speaker 1 (03:42):
There's a lot of people are going to say, well,
why wouldn't the homeowner just use a gun in this case?
Speaker 3 (03:46):
Yeah, Well, one, it comes down to the legality you
know in this part of California and made very difficult
to use the gun. And then two, we saw that
this intruder literally just stumbled into the wrong home in
an altered state of mind. Nobody wants to kill anybody
that doesn't need killing that they absolutely don't have to.
So this is a great instance where the Berno was
(04:07):
able to be used the lowest level of les legal
forces able to use direct by the situation without bringing
a gun into that situation.
Speaker 1 (04:15):
Yeah, I tell you I have one of these. My
family members do as well a lot of my friends.
If you want more information how you or a family
member can protect themselves with a Berno auncher, go to
Berna by RNA dot com. That's burna dot com by
RNA dot com again, protect yourself and your family burna
(04:35):
b why RNA dot com? All right, so, Senator, I
want to start with this clip, and I think this
is a great starting point for this indictment of the
former REPBI director James Comy. This is you questioning Comy
back in September of twenty twenty. Uh. This is the
back and forth between the two of you. Everyone listening.
(04:58):
This is really an important and part of history now
and could probably be an important part of this case.
Speaker 2 (05:03):
To another topic. On May third, twenty seventeen, in this committee,
Chairman Grassley asked you point blank, quote have you ever
been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating
to the Trump investigation of the Clinton investigation? You responded,
under oath quote never, he then asked you, quote, have
(05:25):
you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be
an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation
or the Clinton administration? You responded again under oath No. Now,
as you know, mister McCabe, who works for you, has
publicly and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to the
Wall Street Journal and that you were a directly aware
(05:47):
of it and that you directly authorized it. Now, what
mister McCabe is saying and what you testify to this
committee cannot both be true. One or the other is false.
Who's telling the truth.
Speaker 4 (06:02):
I just can only speak to my testimony. I stand
by what the testimony you summarized that I gave in
May of twenty seventeen.
Speaker 2 (06:08):
So your testimony as you've never authorized anyone to leak,
And mister McCabe, if he says contrary, is not telling
the truth. Is that correct?
Speaker 4 (06:16):
Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony, but mine
is the same.
Speaker 2 (06:19):
Today, all right, I'm going to make a final point
because my time has expired. This investigation of the president
was corrupt. The FBI and the Department of Justice were
politicized and weaponized, and in my opinion, there are only
two possibilities that you were deliberately corrupt or wilfully incompetent,
and I don't believe you were incompetent. This has done
(06:41):
severe damage to the professionals and the honorable men and
women at the FBI, because law enforcement should not be
used as a political weapon.
Speaker 1 (06:52):
All right, So you listen to that, and then you'll
look at the indictment. Count one false statement to the
US Senate that he had not quote authorized someone else
of the FBI to be an anonymous news source. Count
two call me obstructed the Judiciary Committee's investigation through his
quote false and misleading statements. That is a big smoking gun.
Speaker 2 (07:15):
Well it is. It's the basis of the indictment and
this will be the central focus of the trial. Now.
James Comy put out a statement tonight on Instagram, and
his statement is striking in that it is a political statement.
It is not a statement about the facts of the law.
So give a listen to what James Comby said this
evening in response to the indictment.
Speaker 4 (07:36):
My family and I have known for years that there
are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we
couldn't imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not
live on our knees, and you shouldn't either. Somebody that
I love dearly recently said that fear is the tool
of a tyrant, and she's right. But I'm not afraid,
(08:00):
and I hope you're not either. I hope instead you
are engaged, You are paying attention, and you will vote
like your beloved country depends upon it, which it does.
My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but
I have great confidence in the federal judicial system, and
(08:20):
I'm innocent, So let's have a trial.
Speaker 1 (08:24):
I love how he is a victim there and acting
like he's above all of this. But center, let's just
go back to three point thirty of twenty three. James
Comey tweeted out, quote, it's been a good day. That
is how I reacted to Trump being in died in
the Alvin Bragg hush money case. So to act like
(08:45):
he's some sort of guy that's above all this. Look
at his own.
Speaker 2 (08:47):
Words, well, his statement he put out in response to
this that could have been given by Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi,
or King Jeffries or any other political Democrat. And in
fact he makes a call Mountain vote, it's a get
out the vote message. This is a former director of
the FBI. But to give you a sense of just
how much he loathes Donald Trump, this is a former
(09:10):
director of the FBI who tweeted out to the world
a picture of shells spelling out eighty six forty seven,
in other words, slang for kill the current President of
the United States, Donald V.
Speaker 4 (09:21):
Trump.
Speaker 2 (09:22):
To say, calling for the murder of the sitting president
is not appropriate for the former FBI director In an
ordinary time, that would be such an obvious statement that
nobody would even think to say it. But that's just
how much James Comy loathes Donald Trump. And understand. When
(09:42):
Trump became president the first time in January of twenty seventeen,
President Trump unfortunately made a serious mistake, which is he
left James Comey in office. In hindsight, on January twentieth,
twenty seventeen, President Trump should have called James Comy and
said thank you for your service to the nation. Your
services are no longer required. I am certain President Trump
(10:06):
wishes he had done that. I think the White House
team believed that Komy could focus on law enforcement, could
not be politicized, and that assumption proved to be in error.
James Comy presided over weaponizing and politicizing the FBI. He
was part of weaponizing and politicizing the Department of Justice.
(10:28):
And it was because they hated Donald Trump, and frankly,
they were angry at the American people for electing him
in twenty sixteen, and so the FBI set out to
try to attack and to try to ultimately remove from
office the President of the United States. Now, again this
should not bear saying, but it is not the job
(10:52):
of law enforcement to determine the will of the voters.
Is wrong, and the elected president should no longer be president.
That's what Comy presided over. And so when I listened
to him say I weep for the Department of Justice,
it really is. You know, there's a Yiddish word, hootspot.
And I got to say, James Comy really ought to
have a T shirt with that printed on it, because
(11:15):
he is grieving for the Department of Justice. Why because
he has been indicted for what I think is clearly
a felony. And we're going to break down in just minutes,
why exactly this is a felony, what the crime is,
And I want to point out Nowhere in his statement
does Comy get into the actual facts. Nowhere in the
statement does he get into what he did. Nowhere in
(11:37):
the statement does he get into law. He just gives
a political statement. He will not be on his knees.
He calls Trump a tyrant who is ruling by fear. Look,
this is an indictment that was returned by a grand
jury in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and it was returned
because of I believe clear evidence demonstrating Comy committed felonies.
Speaker 1 (12:00):
Senator, I want to bring up a point that no
one in the media has brought up so far about
this indictment. And I brought it up on CNN and
they were like all deer in headlights, there is something
about this case. And they were saying, Oh, this is
just political retribution by Donald Trump that clearly they weren't
(12:21):
going to bring this case. He had to fire the
person in charge of this office in Virginia, had to
put in somebody that would weaponize the DOJ. Here's the
fact that most people don't know, James Comy's own son
in law was literally inside the prosecutor's office that was tasked.
(12:42):
Just think about this with indicting his father in law.
And so when you sit there and I look at this,
I'm like, man, the deep State got together to protect
James Comy at all costs. And as soon as the
indictment came out later in the day, James Comy's son
in law then gave his resign letter because I guess
he just couldn't stop what was inevitable.
Speaker 2 (13:03):
Well, and look, I think what should govern this case
is the facts and the law. And I believe James
Commey should have been indicted five years ago. And indeed
I called upon him to be indicted five years ago.
So let me lay out the facts and in December
of twenty twenty. So the questioning that we played in
the first segment was for September thirtieth of twenty twenty.
(13:24):
And by the way, the reason the indictment was brought
right now is the statute limitations was going to run
next week, and so they had to bring it before
the end of the statute limitations or they would not
be able to charge him. But on December tenth of
twenty twenty, here's the letter that I sent to Bill Barr,
then the Attorney General of the United States, and Christopher Ray,
(13:45):
who was then the director of the FBI. Days before
the presidential election in twenty sixteen, a Wall Street Journal
article quoted an anonymous source confirming the existence of a
probe into Hillary Clinton's use of a private eas mail
server while serving as Secretary of State, an investigation that
up to that point mister Komy and the FBI declined
(14:07):
to confirm. We now know that this leak was authorized
by then Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe. Mister
McCabe initially told FBI agents under oath that he did
not authorize the leak and he did not know who did,
but when confronted later with contrary evidence, he confessed both
(14:28):
to knowing about and authorizing the leak. We do not know, however,
whether and to what extent then FBI Director Comy was
aware of and authorized this leak. After the fact, mister
McCabe has repeatedly stated that mister Komy knew of and
effectively authorized the leak by approving it. He told the
(14:51):
Office of Inspector General that quote. He and Komy discussed
the October thirtieth Wall Street Journal article in person on
October thirty five, Verse twenty sixteen, and that at that meeting,
quote he told Comy that he had authorized ad slash
OPA and Special Council to disclose the account of the
(15:12):
August twelfth call and did not say anything in any
way to suggest that it was unauthorized. According to mister McCabe,
mister Comby quote did not react negatively, just kind of
accepted it and quote thought it was a good idea
that they presented this information to the media. He again
(15:35):
reiterated mister Comy's involvement at a hearing last month at
the Senate Judiciary Committee. I asked mister McCabe. According to
The Washington Times April eighteenth, twenty eighteen, mister McCabe insisted
that he told his boss that he had authorized disclosure
about the Clinton investigation. But mister Comy has denied this claim,
(15:56):
and mister McCabe told investigators that mister Comby knew he
had authorized disclosure and agreed it was a good idea.
Is that accurate? Is that your testimony to this committee?
Mister McCabe replied, that is my recollection. Mister Komy, however,
has sworn under oath that he has neither authorized the
(16:18):
leak nor knew of mister McCabe's involvement. At a May
twenty seventeenth hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Grassley asked,
mister Comy, have you ever been an anonymous source in
news reports about matters relating to the Trump investigation or
the Clinton investigation. Mister Komy replied never. Senator Grassley then asked,
(16:41):
have you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to
be an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump
investigation or the Clinton administration? He testified no. And this
October that a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, mister Komy testified
in response to my question, quote, I stand by the
(17:02):
testimony that you summarized that I gave in May of
twenty seventeen. Mister Komy's denial in front of the Senate
is consistent with his statement to the OIG. He told
the OIG that quote, he recalled seeing this article, but
he did not know how the disclosure about the paidag
call in the October thirtieth article happened. He said that
(17:24):
he was quote very concerned about that part of the article.
Komy told OIG he considered the disclosure about the paidag's
call problematic because it related the sensitive FBI information. The
OIG report continues, quote according to Komy, he discussed the
issue with McCabe after the article was published, and at
(17:46):
the time mccab quote definitely did not tell me that
he authorized the disclosure of the paidag call. Komy said
that McCabe gave him the exact opposite impression. Mister Comy
asserted that he took from whatever communication they had that
mister mccab wasn't involved in the leak. And here's what's critical,
(18:09):
mister Comy and mister mccab's statements are irreconcilably contradictory. Mister
McCabe says that he told mister Comy of the leak
and that mister Comy approved effectively authorizing the leak after
the fact. Mister Comy, on the other hand, has said
that he neither authorized the leak nor knew of mister
McCabe's involvement. One of them is lying under oath a
(18:33):
Federal crime eighteen USC. Section sixteen twenty one. The American
people deserve to know who those are the facts and
it is a simple binary choice. Either James Comy lied
under oath and committed to felony or Andrew McCabe lied
under oath or committed to felony, because what they said
(18:56):
is precisely opposite. There is not a world in which
neither of them committed a felon And the only choice
is which one broke the law by bringing this indictment. Obviously,
the Department of Justice has determined it was James Comey
who lied under oath and broke the law, and that's
what the trial will be all about.
Speaker 1 (19:15):
You've got a lot of choices for cell phone service,
with new ones popping up all the time. But here's
the truth. There's only one that stands boldly in the
gap for every American that believes that freedom is worth
fighting for, and that's Patriot Mobile. And every time if
you're a member of Patriot Mobile, you make a phone call,
you send a text, you pay your bill, you're making
(19:36):
a difference setting up for what you and I believe in,
because Patriot Mobile takes about five percent of your bill
each and every month, and they give it back to
organizations and causes that support our First Amendment rights, our
Second Amendment rights. Stand with our military, our veterans are
wounded warriors. That is why I love being with Patriot Mobile.
(19:57):
And if you're worried about coverage, don't bet. We'll use
all three major US networks. So if you've got service
right now, well you're gonna have as good or better
service coverage with Patriot Mobile. And if you think switching
is a hassle, not anymore. When you switch, it's easy.
You keep your same number, keep your phone you've got,
or upgrade to a new one. And Patriot Mobile has
(20:17):
a one hundred percent US based team that gets you
activated over the phone in minutes from the comfort of
your home or your office. And if you're stuck on
a contract, your own money on your phones, no worries.
Patriot Mobile has a contract buyout program. This is how
we win, folks by aligning our spending with our values,
and every dollar we spend matters. So make the switch
(20:38):
and send it for what you believe in. Go to
Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict, Patriot Mobile dot com slash
vertict or nine to seven to two Patriot and use
the promo code vertict. You're gonna get a free month
of service. Switch today Patriot Mobile dot com slash vertict
promo code verdict or nine to seven to Patriot to
get a free month of service. All right, So here's
(21:00):
what I've been hearing on online from the media. They're like, hey,
Donald Trump, weighed in on this too much. They're gonna
get this thing kicked out before it even goes to
a judge. This is a waste of the American taxpayer's dollars.
And then if that's not enough, they say, well, no
one ever gets indicted and they actually go forward and
get a conviction on someone lining to Congress because well,
(21:22):
a lot of people lie to Congress, and even if
you did lie, it may have been a mistake. It's
gonna be very hard to get a conviction. Break down
how this could roll out in court, what could happen.
Speaker 2 (21:32):
Well, at the end of the day, the factual predicate
behind this crime is not terribly complicated. As I mentioned,
there's a direct contradiction between James Comey's testimony under oath
before the Senate and Andrew McCabe's testimony under oath before
the Senate. They cannot both be true. One or the
other is deliberately lying, And how do we know which
(21:54):
one is likely to be lying? Well, the FBI, in
all likelihood possesses the information that confirms who's telling the
truth and who's lying. Indeed, if you look at the
account of what occurred, mccab initially told the same lie
that Comy did. Mcab initially said he didn't leak the information,
(22:16):
he didn't authorize it, and he didn't know who did.
But then the FBI Office of Inspector General confronted him
with contrary evidence. I don't know what the contrary evidence is,
but they put in front of him, mister McCabe, you
said you didn't leak this information. Well, boom, here's the
evidence to the contrary And what did McCabe do. Oh crap,
you got me?
Speaker 3 (22:36):
Okay, you're right.
Speaker 2 (22:38):
I leaked it. I'm the one who did it, and
I talked to Comy about it. I told him about it.
So he admitted that when he was caught in a lie.
I don't know specifically what confirming evidence the FBI in
the Department of Justice has, but they have enough that
they caused McCabe to reverse his first lie and instead
(23:01):
to say, yes, he did it, and Comy knew about it,
and so between the two, you know, it was interesting.
When I was questioning Comy, he said a couple of times. Well,
I'm not going to characterize, as he put it, Andy's testimony. Well,
I get politically that's a smart move not to characterize
Andy's testimony. But you know what, his entire legal defense
(23:22):
is going to be, McCabe is lying because he doesn't
have an alternative. That's his only argument is when McCabe
said under oath, good point that I knew about it.
Comy's defense team is going to have to say McCabe
was lying. And by the way, mccab is going to
be the star witness at the prosecution. The prosecution is
going to put Andy McCabe on the stand and he's
(23:44):
going to ask them, did you leak it? Now, I'm
going to predict Andy McCabe is going to say, yes,
did you talk to James Comy about it? Yes? Did
he authorize it? Yes? And the reason I'm going to
predict he's gonna do all of that that is because
Andy McCabe testified to that in front of Congress, and
if he gives any other answer, he'll be indicted for
(24:07):
lying to Congress. So he can't have it both ways.
And I expect that Comy's lawyer will try to cross
examine him and we'll try to argue McCabe is lying,
but it's very difficult to see why McCabe would have
any incentive to lie. He and Comy were Thicke as thieves.
He was only forced to admit the truth when confronted
(24:32):
with contrary evidence. Again, we don't know what that evidence is,
but presumably the FBI and the Department of Justice do so.
I don't know if it is contemporaneous phone calls, perhaps
with the reporters. I don't know if it is notes.
I don't know if it's emails. I don't know if
it's testimony from someone else at the FBI who said, hey,
Andrew McCabe told me to do this. But it is something,
(24:54):
and it was something that was compelling enough that it
caused Andrew McCabe to aban then lie number one, and
and so at the end of the day, this is
not a complicated factual case. This is not some grand tapestry.
It's a he said, he said, she said. But you
(25:15):
have both testimonies under oath, and it's going to be
a question of what additional evidence is there to confirm
who's telling the truth and who's not. I also think
I will be surprised if James Comy's lawyer puts him
on the stand. Now, under our justice system, the prosecution
cannot force a defendant to testify. But I'm going to
(25:38):
predict James Comy is not going to take the stand
because if he takes the stand, he can be cross examined,
and he does not want to be cross examined, because
this is someone who presided over weaponizing the Department of
Justice with the objective of taking out Donald J. Trump
and getting under oath, getting cross examined by a skilled
(26:01):
trial attorney, and again under oath. By the way, if
he lies in his trial testimony, he can be indicted
and prosecuted again for lying under oath. Again, I don't
think his lawyer will do that. And so at the
end of the day, look, the press is going to
go on and on and say, well, Trump hates James Comy.
That is certainly true, But being hated by the President
(26:22):
is not enough to exonerate you from criminal conduct. And
in this instance, I believe Comy should have been indicted
five years ago because it was clear he had deliberately
lied to Congress. And look, we started by playing my
cross examination. This wasn't an absent minded lie. This wasn't oh,
I'm not paying attention. This was careful, This was deliberate,
(26:47):
This was strategic, this was planned. I believe this was
James Comy saying, I face no accountability whatsoever. I can
lie under oath and no one's going to hold me
to account. And I think he feels he feels it's clever,
but he also feels vindicated. Listen, James Comy was someone
who I think fancied himself as j Edgar Hoover. He
(27:09):
fancied himself as as an incredibly powerful director of the FBI,
empowered to remove the tyrant. That's what he said in
his statement tonight that he thinks Trump is a tyrant.
And I think when the American people elected him in
twenty sixteen, I think Comy was angry and he decided
(27:30):
he would use the power of the FBI to remove
the president elected by the people. And so I think
it is quite fitting that he is facing accountability for
committing criminal conduct. Let me repeat, this indictment is not
for being an opponent of Donald Trump. It is not
for being a political a political figure on the other
(27:52):
side of Donald Trump. This indictment is for deliberately and
knowingly lying under oath to the United States Senate, which
is a clear an unmistakable felony. And and I think
I think Comy, I think the odds are good that
Comy will be convicted. And I think if he's convicted,
I think he's going to serve jail time.
Speaker 1 (28:12):
How much of very quickly, of his past will come
back to haunt him. He is a prolific guy when
it comes to leaking. He's a pro at it. He's
on amateur because he knows how to leak. Hell, he
leaked information that was apparently classified to make sure that
there was a special counsel that went after Donald Trump.
We know that for a fact. And it went to
(28:32):
one of his former law friends at a university that
then went to a newspaper. That is a fact. Will
that come up? And then the other question I have
for you quickly is this, will the testimony that he
gay before Congress be used in court or literally will
senators that interviewed him, would you guys go to court
or would they just use the testimony video?
Speaker 2 (28:51):
Yeah, I think they would use the testimony. They would
read or play the testimony. I don't think you're going
to see senators testifying, and the record is clear in
the objective and so everyone knows exactly what his testimony was.
In terms of his past pattern, I think it could
certainly come in. The prosecution might try to bring it
in to establish a pattern. That would be difficult. But
(29:13):
I think if Comy's lawyer argues, well, he couldn't possibly
have approved this, he never would have approved a leak,
then I think the prosecution would be able to get
all of that in as rebuttal to the defendant's argument.
So I think it's more likely to come in as
rebuttal evidence than directly proving a pattern. But my guess
is one way or another that evidence is going to
(29:35):
come in, And you're right, there's a clear pattern. Comy
has a long pattern of relying on media leaks to
advance his own personal agenda.
Speaker 1 (29:43):
Do you have a dog, if you've got one like
I do, My dog is twelve and a half. His
name is Memphis, and there's nothing worse than watching your
dog age. We're having to coach him off the couch,
We're having to help pick him up to get him
on the couch. And then I was told about rough Greens.
It literally has added the spunk back to Memphis life.
And it supports long term health by providing live, bioavailable
(30:07):
nutrients including essential vitamins, minerals, probiotics, digestive enzymes, and omega oils.
Now it is ingredients that work together to improve your
dog's life nutrition absorption, it maintains joint and muscle health,
and it enhances his overall or her overall vitality. It
also promotes longevity by addressing common nutritional deficiencies found in
(30:31):
processed dog food. And it's so easy. It's not a diet.
It is literally you sprinkle it on your dog's food,
and after you give it to them, not only they
want to eat it, they love it, but then the
effects happen where your dog gets back to the way
they used to be. So don't change your dog's food.
Just add rough Greens on top, and I am offering
(30:52):
a free jump Start bag right now. All you got
to do is cover the shipping. Use the discount code
Ben to claim your free Jumpstart Trial bag at Roughgreens
dot com. That's r uff greens dot Com promo code Ben.
So you don't change your dog's food. Just add Roughgreens
and watch the health benefits come live, get the freebag
(31:14):
Roughgreens dot com promo code ben Centater. You were in
Dallas when this shooting happened. It was eight hours after
we watched Gavin Newsom go on on late night TV
demonizing ICE agents, saying that they are authoritarian. And then
the liberals are like, wait, wait, we're not attacking ICE agents.
(31:35):
Yes they are. They've undermined them, they've demonized them, and
we were watching attack after attack happen against ICE agents.
It's horrific.
Speaker 2 (31:43):
Yeah, I was in Dallas this week for a series
of unrelated meetings and the news broke that this strange
gunman had opened fire on an ICE facility in Dallas.
That he had gone onto a rooftop emulating Charlie Kirk's
assassin and with a bolt action rifle, fired multiple rounds,
(32:03):
ended up killing two people severely injuring a third, and
then then he took the gun to himself and took
his own life. And it was horrific. When the news broke,
I canceled my morning meeting and just drove over to
the ICE facility that morning. Was there, was there shortly
after the shooting had occurred. And this has happened far
too often. Here's what I had to say at the
(32:27):
press conference that was ongoing when I arrived at the facility.
Speaker 3 (32:31):
If this needs to stop.
Speaker 2 (32:34):
Violence is wrong, Politically motivated violence is wrong. It was
two weeks ago today that we saw political assassination in
Utah that tore the heart out of much of this country.
This is the third shooting in Texas directed at ICE
(32:54):
or CBP. This must stop. To every politician who is
using rhetoric demonizing ICE and demonizing CBP, stop to every
politician demanding that ICE agents be dosed and calling for
(33:15):
people to go after their families.
Speaker 3 (33:17):
Stop.
Speaker 2 (33:19):
This has very real consequences. Look in America, we disagree.
That's fine, that's the democratic process. But your political opponents
are not Nazis. We need to learn to work together
without demonizing each other, without attacking each other. And I
want to say thank you. I want to say thank
(33:40):
you to the brave men and women of law enforcement.
I want to say thank you to the brave men
and women of ICE and CVP and everyone who puts
their lives on the lines to keep us safe. The
divisive rhetoric tragically has real consequences. I hope that every
(34:00):
one of us will I hope that every one of
us will pray Number one for the safety of law
enforcement that are risking their lives to keep us safe.
Number two, for the health of those who were shot
and injured. Today we still don't know the full details
of who was injured, but for the families also of
(34:21):
the victims of this shooting. Violence has no place. It
is wrong, and we should come together. If we want
to have a debate of an immigration policies, we can
do so in the halls of Congress without demonizing each other,
and especially without demonizing the men and women who every
day put on a badge and go risk their lives
(34:43):
to keep us safe. And we should not be putting
language out there that inspires mad men to commit evil crimes.
Our prayers are with the men and women of law enforcement,
and we ought to come together and have some decency
across the political aisle to say this violence is wrong and.
Speaker 3 (35:06):
It needs to stop.
Speaker 1 (35:08):
We know Senator a lot about this gunman. We know
that he was googling the shooting of our friend whose
funeral we just went to, Charlie Kirk. We know that
he was looking at the app that they put out
there and these websites where you can track ICE agents
which is accent where they are.
Speaker 2 (35:30):
That is an app designed to encourage violence against ICE
agents and law enforcement. And whether it's Gavin Newsom or
a Keen Jeffries or any any other Democrat who is
encouraging this targeting of ICE agents, it is fundamentally wrong
and that they need to stand up and stop it.
You know, I will say this shooter, it's the news
(35:52):
has since come out. This shooter. His mother was a
hard leftist who actually had been vocally critical of me
and other Texas Republicans for not embracing gun control, and
in fact, in May of twenty twenty two, she posted
the following Governor Abbot, Senator Cornyn, and Senator Cruz, how
does it feel that your action to open up gun
laws is responsible for the killing of twenty one more people?
(36:15):
Do you secretly sit in front of a TV and
smile with a demented smile. You must be proud of
all the money that sits in your bank accounts from
the gun lobby support. Was it worth it? Governor Abbot?
How about you senators? When you prioritize money over people,
this is what you get And I will say the
irony is rich that this leftist mom who was championing
(36:38):
gun control now her son has committed a mass murder
as a sniper. It is tragic, and it is a
consequence of extreme rhetoric, extreme ideology that is poisoning the
minds of those who are driven to violence. And I
will say this assassin wrote on his shell casings anti Ice,
(37:03):
very much, emulating what Charlie Kirk's murderer did, writing pro
Antifa and pro transgender propaganda on his shell casings. And
we need to stop this violence, regardless of where your
politics are, but we need to stop the rhetoric that
is fueling this violence. And there's a lot of Democrat
politicians engaging in this rhetoric, no matter how many lives
(37:26):
are lost. And I want to be clear, I am
not calling them Nazis. I am absolutely opposing any violence
or calls to violence. I'm calling on them to tone
down their rhetoric and stop demonizing their opponent, stop demonizing Ice,
stop demonizing law enforcement, because it's dangerous and tragically. Lunatics
(37:48):
are acting on the rhetoric they're hearing from these politicians.
Speaker 1 (37:51):
No doubt about it. Don't forget. We do this show Monday,
Wednesday and Friday, so make sure that subscriber auto download
button whereever you get your podcasts. We do it again Monday,
Wednesday Friday. You can also say to Alexa or Siri
play Verdict with Ted Cruz and it will do it
for you, So download the podcast. We will keep you updated,
obviously on all the breaking news around James Comy. He
(38:15):
is and it's gonna be a very very big case,
so we'll have that for you and we'll see you
on the podcast all week long. Be safe, everyone,
Host
Ben Ferguson
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.