November 30, 2022 • 50 mins
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
China, a major vote on marriage, and a rail strike.
That's the stories today on Verdict with Ted Cruz, Senator,
nice to have you with us. You're back and watching
in DC after Thanksgiving, and I want to get people
up to speed on what's going on right now, specifically
with China. It was shocking because the Prime Minister actually
(00:23):
came out in the UK and is now leading on
this issue of China after watching What's having the people.
He came out earlier saying something that the President of
the United States of America just says that they're still silent.
Take a listen. Now, Let's be clear, the so called
Golden Era is over, along with a naive idea that
trade would automatically lead to social and political reform. That,
(00:49):
nor should we rely on simplistic Cold war rhetoric. We
recognize China poses a systemic challenge to our values and interests,
a challenge that grows more acute as it moves towards
even greater authoritarianism. Instead of listening to their people's protests,
(01:12):
the Chinese government has chosen to crack down further, including
by assaulting a BBC journalist center. He came out and
when you desperately need leaders. Leaders stand up and lead
when they see that America is not leading on China.
I felt like he probably had no choice but to
stand up and to say this. I'm glad he did.
(01:32):
But where's America right now? Well, unfortunately, Joe Biden and
the White House are completely a wall now. You know,
I will say for the British Prime Minister that was
a degree of clarity missing in the United States of America.
But that being said, you know, one of the things
he said is we should not rely on simplistic cold
(01:54):
war rhetoric. I actually think it's a conceit of the
so called intelligentsia that simple terms like good and evil
can't be used. You know, I was ten when Reagan
became president, and I remember well that at the time,
the all of the Democrats, many of the Republicans, all
(02:16):
of the media, all of the academy, they all recognize
that the smart and nuanced thing to say on the
Soviet Union was that we needed to that they they
couldn't be beaten, that the best we could hope for
was detante, which I've joked is French for surrender, and
that there was nothing we could do about it. And
(02:37):
Reagan came in as this California cowboy, and he said
a series of things that shocked Washington. He said, for example,
he described the Soviet Union as an evil empire. He said, Marxism,
Leninism will end up on the ash heap of history.
When they asked what's your objective in the Cold War,
he said, very simple, we win, they lose. All of
(02:58):
the self proclaimed in a lectuals were shocked. They tittered
at him, what an ignorant philistine. Didn't he understand subtlety
and nuance. And if you come to my office in DC,
you've been there, Ben. The most dominant feature in my
office is a gigantic painting. It's about twenty feet wide
of Ronald Reagan's standing before the Brandenburg Gate and saying
(03:22):
what I think are the most consequential words of any
leader in modern times. Mister Gorbachov, tear down this wall
with that leadership, With that clarity, Ronald Reagan won the
Cold War. We defeated the Soviet Union. We need that
same clarity with regards to Communist China. Communist China is
(03:42):
the new evil empire, and the Marxism, Leninism, the Maoism
that dominates China. I believe it will also end up
on the ash heap of history. But we need absolute clarity.
And it's not simplistic to say that communist China murder
its citizens, torturing its citizens, locking down its citizens, engaging
(04:05):
in draconian violations of human rights, maintaining concentration camps with
over a million people in those concentration camps, employing slave labor,
covering up COVID. All of that is evil. It's not gray,
it's not subtle. It is evil. And contrast that with
(04:28):
the complete gobbledegook from the Joe Biden White House. I
want to read the entirety of the Biden White House
statement on the massive protests that are unfolding in China
based on the draconian, horrific COVID lockdown policies in China, Senator,
before you read that, I want to remind people about
(04:48):
our response, our good friends, Patriot Mobile. Patriot Mobile is
America's only Christian conservative wireless company who shares your values.
Now more than ever, it's important to band together and
support companies that share our conservative values. And Patriot Mobile
is the company that can save you money on your
cell phone bill. While also making an impact with every
(05:12):
call you make. Patriot Mobile donates a portion of every
dollar earned to organizations that fight for causes you care about.
They also stand up for our first Second Amendment rights
and the right to life. They help with adoptions, especially
after the overturning of Rovuwade. Patriot Mobile also saves you money.
(05:34):
They have plans that fit any budget, and they use
the same exact towers that you're using right now with
your cell phone. So if you're worried about coverage, don't
be Make the switch and actually stand up for what
you believe in with every phone call you make, while
also saving money. Nine seven two Patriot is their number.
(05:55):
Use the promo code Verdict for free activation and other
special offers. You'll get to keep your same cell phone
if you want to or get a new one, You'll
get to keep your same cell phone number, and switching
is easy. Nine to seven to Patriot. That's nine seven
to Patriot. Use the promo code Verdict or online at
patriotmobile dot com slash Verdict right center. I want to
(06:18):
get back to you reading that statement you just mentioned.
A moment ago. Here's what the Biden White House said.
Quote We've said that zero COVID is not a policy
we are pursuing here in the United States, and as
we've said, we think it's going to be very difficult
for the People's Who Republic of China to be able
to contain this virus through their zero COVID strategy. For US,
(06:40):
we are focused on what works, and that means using
the public health tools like continuing to enhanced vaccination rates,
including boosters, and making testing and treatment easily accessible. We've
long said that everyone has the right to peacefully protest
here in the United States and around the world. This
includes in the PRC. That's the total statement. What weak,
(07:04):
sniveling Neville Chamberlain problem and one of the biggest reasons
the enemies of America are on the rise today is
the Biden Democrats are so weak. They're unwilling to call
evil evil, They're unwilling to call murderers murderers, and they're
unwilling to stand up to communist China and the enemies
of America. I want to get your thoughts about something
(07:26):
else that's also happened, and this is about the technology
side of things. There has been a lot of people
that were shocked by Apple actually taking away some of
the devices mechanisms where people were sharing information in China
that we're helping these protests to break out. One of
them was a basic thing that you've probably used a
(07:47):
thousand times, an air drop. And the Apple literally is
aiding China, while at the same time Apple, the same
company is threatening to remove Twitter from their apps or
because they say it's, you know, too dangerous to society.
When when you see companies like Apple helping the red
(08:08):
China the way they are saying, you know, okay, what
do you want us to do to make sure we
help you squash these protests that are happening, is there
a point where there needs to be some sort of oversight.
Corporate America has lost its way. I don't think it
is accidental that apples are red. Apple is in bed
(08:31):
with communist China. Most of big tech is in bed
with communist China. An awful lot of big business is
in bed with communist China. Big universities are in bed
with communist China. Big Hollywood is in bed with communist China.
By the way, that's one of the reasons the Democrats
are structurally pro China because all of their major donors,
(08:54):
big business, big tech, big universities in big Hollywood are
in bed with China. Apple is more than happy to
facilitate squashing the protesters. Human rights be damned, is Apple's view. Apparently,
as long as they can keep making money in communist China,
it is utterly craven. Look, it's the same policy the
(09:17):
NBA has as they grovel because they want to make
money in China and never mind the slave labor. It's
the same policies the Biden White House has. You know,
last year I forced to vote on the Senate floor
that the United States should not expend any money purchasing
electric vehicles or parts, batteries or other things in electric
(09:37):
vehicles made using slave labor in concentration camps. Now, if
you think about it, should we be buying things made
with slave labor? That ought to be one hundred to
nothing both that ought to be easy. Yeah. We voted
on the Senate floor, and every single Democratic sept one
except Joe Manchion voted no. Why is that because the
(09:59):
Biden White House, Joe Biden is Communist China's customer of
the year. They are buying the output of concentration camps
and I want you to think back of like the
history of concentration camps, the people who facilitate, who fund
human slavery. History is not kind to them. Well, you
know what that is Joe Biden, that is Chuck Schumer,
(10:21):
that is John Kerry, that is today's Democrat Party that
cannot be bothered to care about slavery and misery and depression.
And by the way, let's be clear when you talk
about the donations, I want everybody listening to verdict. This
is the information you need to share with your friends.
Ninety seven point five percent of Apple's donations are to
(10:42):
the Democratic Party. If you look at their employee donations
in the midterm elections to candidates by party, this is
how much money was Apples donations. Ninety seven point five
percent of appless wit to Democrats. Big tech has become
(11:06):
the financial muscle. Who was the biggest Democrat donor in
the country In twenty twenty Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook,
He went in spent what are called zuckbucks. He spent
four hundred million dollars, essentially taking over the election machinery,
the operation of elections in big blue cities and key
(11:26):
swing states. It is not an exaggeration to say Mark
Zuckerberg is directly responsible for Joe Biden being President of
the United States. By the way, Sam Bankman freed from FTX,
who made billions, and it appears now was engaged in
a massive Enron style made off style Ponzi scheme, defrauding
(11:48):
investors of billions. We don't know that for sure, but
a sure looks like it from what has come out
so far. He was the second largest donor in the
country to Democrats, behind George Soros. I gotta say, and
we talked about this on a pod last week, how
many Democrats have given the money back? Or even better,
how many Democrats have given the money back to the
(12:10):
investors who were defrauded by Sam Bankman freed. I believe
the answer is none. Joe Biden certainly hasn't given the
millions of dollars he got from Sam Bankman freedback. And
so listen watching big text reaction, watching journalism reaction to Twitter.
Elon must took over Twitter, and he said one simple thing.
He said, Okay, we're gonna allow free speech. We're gonna
(12:31):
allow people to speak. You can't threaten people, you can't
make threats of violence. You can't carry out criminal conduct.
But if you have a political view, if you're right wing,
left wing, if you're arguing a political view, you can
say it. And if people think what you're saying's wrong,
they can say what you're saying's wrong. The corporate media
world has lost their minds over it. They're freaking out.
(12:53):
We talked in a previous pod about how CBS News
had a twenty four hour fake boycott where they're like, oh,
my goodness, if you're actually listening to people who disagree,
we won't be part of it. And then they realize, no,
we can't do that. A huge component of what is
happening corporate America, the Fortune one hundred has become the
(13:15):
financial enforcement arm of the Democrats. And there have been
public reports that Twitter's advertising has dropped in half. Why
because major corporate companies are just saying, no, we won't
advertise anymore. And by the way, who is the biggest
advertiser on Twitter, Apple, Yeah, Apple's cut off its advertising.
(13:37):
Why because Tim Cook and Apple will say, you bastards,
you're allowing free speech, and we are the big tech oligarchs.
No one is allowed to disagree with us. By the way,
do you wonder why big tech is so friendly with China?
She says, we are the oligarchs. No one's allowed to
disagree with us. Big Tech says, we are the oligarchs.
(13:58):
No one's allowed to disagree with us. Dictators of a
feather tend to flock together. Yeah, they do. And if
you look at the money, and you can see it,
as you were mentioning a moment ago about Apple being
one of the top advertisers, but you look at where
the money goes from big tech, and many of those
have connections of China. Netflix of their donations nine nine
point six percent went to Democrats, Twitter ninety eight point
(14:20):
seven before Zuckerberg took over, Airbnb ninety seven point eight,
Apple ninety seven point five, Left ninety six point one.
These are the Facebook and so on all and the
ninety plus percentile. That is part of the reason why
you're seeing them all look the other way on this
issue of China when it comes to the issue of
things like by the way, you know who the single
(14:42):
biggest donors to Hillary Clinton were. If you say China,
I'm gonna laugh, well, Google, which is another way of
saying China. Yeah, there you go. Google, it's all big tech.
They love them all each and every time. They go
all in because they know they will not rain them
in and they will not ask any questions about them.
Look at the NBA totally silent. You're a basketball guy.
(15:03):
It is beyond to me. I think absurd to watch
the NBA spend years giving their floor to Black Lives Matter,
literally painting it on the floor, putting it in the
corners and doing all that they did. We're you know,
we're about the national anthem, and then they're immediately silent
on what's happening in China right now. Is another example
of the hypocrisy of the people on the left. Well, listen,
(15:28):
you look at the Fortune one hundred that is complicit
with what's happening in China, and that also wants desperately
for Elon Musk's effort to make Twitter a place where
free speech is allowed. They want that to fail. Let
me read a list of some of the companies that,
based on media Matters analysis of pathematics data, have stopped
(15:53):
for a significant period of time advertising on Twitter. Abbott
Laboratory is all state corporate ration, AMC Networks, American Express Company,
AT and T Bigheart pet Care, Black Rock Incorporated, Blue,
Triton Brands Incorporated, Boston Beer Company, California State Lottery, Century
Link Channel, Chevrolet, Chipotle, Mexican Grill, Citygroup, CNN, Dell, uh Diago,
(16:20):
Direct TV, Discover Financial Services, Fidelity First National, Retail Realty Partners, Ford, Heineken,
Hewlett Packard, Hilton Worldwide, Inspire Brands, Jeep, Kellogg Company, Cole's Department, Scores, Ken, Drill,
LinkedIn Corporation, Mail Chimp, Marriott International, Mars pet Care, Mars Incorporated,
Mercan Company, Meta Platform, and other words, Facebook, Moneywise, Neslee, Novarda,
(16:44):
sag pernod Ricard, play Pass, the Coca Cola Company, the
Kraft Heinz Company, tire Rack, Verizon, Wells Fargo, Whole Foods Market,
and Yum Brands. Yeah. I mean, if that's not proof
that they're all trying to bankrupt the people that don't
do and say and silence the people they want them
(17:07):
to silence, aka conservatives, They're just going to say, we'll
try to bury you and ruin your company. That's what
they're all about. And let's be clear. If Elon must
says tomorrow, I will behave like communist China. I will
silence anyone who disagrees with the left wing orthodoxy. Those
brands will all come running back. What they want is
(17:28):
for him to be the chief censor of the public square.
Facebook's perfectly willing to do that. Google is quite willing
to do that. YouTube is quite willing to do that.
And suddenly Twitter is this outlier. By the way, if
the reports from Elan are to believed, more people are
(17:48):
using Twitter. But this is a question of power. This
is a question of using power to try to force
censorship and muzzle free speech, and it is incredibly dangerous.
And my view is of corporate America. If they want
to come out and say we hate free speech and
(18:08):
we will use our financial power to silence and censor you,
they ought to tell us that, they ought to admit that,
they ought to let you know when you're buying their products. Hey,
your money is going to silence you. But they're trying
to do it surreptitiously. They're trying to hide and it
is And by the way, the big enchilada that they're
(18:29):
trying to set the stage for is the two biggest
gatekeepers at all of tech, or Apple and Google. And
if Apple and Google pull Twitter down from their app stores.
That is like setting off the atom bomb. Now, by
the way, they did that to Parlor, they did that
in concert to Parlor. Parlor grew up as a conservative
(18:51):
alternative to Twitter, it was gaining real success. And then
simultaneously Google and Apple together said your deep platform by
which is such an obvious anti trust violation as a
very simple matter, when horizontal competitors cooperate together to block
a new entrant to the market, that is on its
(19:13):
face and antitrust violation. They didn't care. They're so rich,
they have so much power. They said, screw it, will
bury you in lawsuits. That's nothing can do about it.
If they try to do it to Twitter, which a
bunch of leftists and Democrats are pressuring them to do,
it will be a massive escalation. Now, what's interesting They
could do it to Parlor because Parlor was a little
(19:34):
company with not that much financial resources behind it. Elon
Musk is the richest man in the world. He's already tweeted,
all right, if you do that, I'm going to go
create a new phone. No. I don't know if he'll
do that or not. But the guy does make teslas.
He knows how to make cars. It's not like he
doesn't know how to make stuff, and so they got
to be a little more cautious. And I think they
(19:56):
are a little more cautious about straight out bullying him
because he's, at a minimum not a ninety eight pound weakling.
They can just kick sand at his face and ignore.
And I for one, if they do kick him off, though,
if they do kick Twitter off, and I've had so
many people ask me this over the last twenty four hours,
is Twitter really going to go away from the app
store if they do that to try to destroy Twitter
(20:18):
instantly by pulling that off? Is there anything that Congress
will do in response really with antitrust? No, there's nothing
Congress will do in response because Congress the Senate is
controlled by the Democrats, and the Democrats want Apple to
kick Twitter off. There's nothing the Biden Department of Justice
will do in response. Why because the Biden Department of
(20:40):
Justice is profoundly partisan and they want Apple to kick
Twitter off. You know, just today Karen John Pierre was asked,
I guess yesterday was asked about what Elon Musk and
the question from a reporter, I mean it was if
Saturday Night Live were funny anymore. This would make a
great Saturday Night Live skit because you had a lefty
report who says, are you concerned that so many new
(21:03):
people are signing up for Twitter and enjoying free speech?
And the White House says, yes, we are very concerned.
We are keeping an eye on what Elon Musk is doing. Like,
holy crap, they're mad number one that free speech is allowed,
but number two, they're mad that people like it. I mean,
this is so that it's successful and that they can't
(21:25):
control it. But that's what they're so concerned about. I
don't believe Apple and Google will do it. I think
it is too big a risk. They're big on beating
up people they can beat up. They're big on picking
on the puny, wimpy kid. I think they're scared of
someone who can punch back. You know, there was an
(21:46):
interesting There was an interesting moment you mentioned that press briefing,
and I want to play it for you real quick.
There was a reporter the White House that asked one
of the weirdest questions I've ever heard, and the question was,
what tools do you have to stop Elon Musk from
restoring free speech at Twitter. Listen the question about Twitter.
You know, there's a researcher at Stanford who says that
(22:09):
this is a critical moment really in terms of ensuring
that Twitter does not become a vector for misinformation. I mean,
are you concerned about the Elon Musk says there's more
and more subscribers coming online. Are you concerned about that?
And what tools do you have? Who is it at
(22:31):
the White House that is really keeping track of the
I mean, there it is, that's what you just mentioned, basically,
Play her answer, Play Karen John Pearre's answer. So this
is something that we're certainly keeping an eye on. And look,
we you know, we have always been very clear and
that when it comes to social media platforms, it is
(22:54):
their responsibility to make sure that when it comes to misinformation,
when we when we comes to the hate that we're seeing,
that they take action, that they continue to take action. Again,
we're all keeping a close eye on this. We're all
u monitoring what's what's currently occurring, and we see, you know,
(23:15):
we see it with our own eyes of what you
all are reporting and just for ourselves what's happening on Twitter.
But again, social media companies have a responsibility to prevent
their platforms from being used by any user to incite violence,
especially violence directed at individual communities as we have been seeing,
and the present has been very clear on calling that out.
(23:38):
He'll continue to do that, and we're going to continue
a monitor situation. I love, We're going to monitor it.
I mean, Senator, if you want to talk about a
dog whistle to basically, yes, everybody pull your money from Twitter. Yes,
advertisers that love us, the big tech oigarchs and others,
make sure you destroy them. Yes. Apple, you have the
(23:58):
backing of the White House. If you want to take
down Twitter, We've got your back. It's all in that
response from her, It is big brother is watching you.
We are watching you. We are going to use all
the power we can to crush you. And the amazing
thing is all right. So they're buzzwords misinformation, which she
means anything that contradicts the left wing narrative. So, for example,
(24:22):
one thing they defined as misinformation was saying that the
COVID nineteen virus had originated in Wuhunt, China, had originated
a Chinese government lab, the Wuhunt Institute for Virology. I
now believe the overwhelming majority of evidence indicates that's exactly
where the virus escape from. And I think a significant
preponderance of the evidence indicates that the virus was created
(24:44):
at that lab through gain a function research. For over
a year, Big Tech would censor anyone saying that at
the explicit request of doctor Fauci. Doctor Fauci and emails
asked Mark Zuckerberg censor anyone saying the Wuhan virus came
(25:07):
from the Wuhan Institute for Virology, by the way, without
admitting and I, doctor Fauci, funded that research that created
the pandemic. I will note one amazing exception. One of
the very few outlets that actually got into that was
this podcast. This podcast. Early on in the pandemic, we
did two extensive podcasts laying out the evidence that this
(25:30):
virus had escaped from the Wuhun Institute for Virology. At
the time, you were treated like a tinfoil hat wearing
lunatic for saying that. I don't know why Big Tech
didn't censor us. Frankly, they censored other people for saying
the same thing. But miraculously they let us out. Now
it's clear what we were saying is right. By the way,
this is the same big tech the censor the hunter
(25:52):
Biden laptop. Again, it was true, it was accurate, but
it was politically inconvenient. What they mean by misinformation and
is anything that hurts democrats are their preferred narrative. If
it's misinformation. I got a crazy idea. If what someone
is saying is false, counter it with the truth. Yeah,
eximain why it's false. And you notice that Fauci's coming
(26:15):
out on his last days. Just yesterday he did his
CNN quote exit interview and what I'm about to play
for you, he basically is saying that you're a liar
center for doing those two shows and for what you
just said. Listen, I can't tell you what's going on
in all of China and in other things. I can
tell you for sure that if you look at the
(26:37):
viruses that the NIH grant funded to study in a
surveillance way, anybody who even has a peripheral understanding of
evolutionary virology will tell you these viruses could not possibly
turn into Sauce Kobe too. So when you talk about
a leak, maybe there's a lab leak, but it's not
(26:58):
with the viruses that the h was funding. That's almost
certain that that's the case. Okay, so that's affective interview.
Literally now he's saying it still, So it's amazing a
couple of things. Number One, he's saying, you talk about
a leak from the lab, So he's now implicitly admitting
yet leak from the Chinese lab, which, by the way,
(27:19):
writing asked Mark Zuckerberg, don't allow anyone to say it
leak from the Chinese lab. So what he just said
there a couple of years ago, he claimed was misinformation
and Big Tech was more more than happy to censor.
But then secondly, he also admitted we were funding the
creation of viruses, which he's denied before, so he just
admitted that, but he argued the viruses we created were
(27:43):
not this virus. You know what, maybe that's possible. I
don't know. I'm not a virologist. You know how we're
going to figure out by having congressional oversight hearings and
examining evidence. And let me say what an indictment of Democrats.
They've had a control of both houses for two years.
They don't give a damn about knowing where COVID nineteen
came from. They don't give a damn about knowing China's culpability.
(28:05):
They don't give a damn about knowing the degree to
which doctor Fauci and the federal government funded it. They
don't care about any of that. They want to cover
it up. They want to blame it all in the
Democrat slash corrupt corporate media narrative. Donald Trump created COVID
in the Oval Office and released it on America to
cause people to suffer. That's what they want to say.
(28:26):
Facts be damned, well, we need to figure it out. Now.
Fauci's admitted he was funding the creation of viruses, and
there's a very good chance the virus leaked from the
Chinese lab. That's a big admission. All right, Let's hear
some witness testimony and some expert examination about whether the
viruses Fauci funded were in fact COVID nineteen. I agree
(28:49):
that that has not yet been proven, but I think
there's considerable evidence to suggest it could be the case.
We need more examination. I hope with a Republican majority
in the House, we'll finally get that, and hopefully they'll
get to actually ask some real questions off out too
that he's going to have to defend himself on I
want to move Senator to this big vote on marriage
(29:09):
in the Senate. We've been talking about this extensively with
your good friend and Senator Mike Lee's amendment. With this
bill you were talking about, there need to be pressure
put on Senators to have that bill be vote on
with the amendment not separated out. Otherwise we were going
to have a major problem with religious liberty in this country,
(29:32):
quite possibly the government. This was a vote they organized
and plan I'm referring to the Democrats right after Thanksgiving.
They wanted to ram this through, and you flew back
to Washington just like everybody else. What happened. The twelve
Republicans who caved continued cavy and the Democrats passed their
(29:55):
bill in bracing gay marriage number one number two. This bill,
my words, is going to set the stage for the
Biden I RS to target people of faith, and in
particular to deny tax exempt status to religious churches, charities, universities,
(30:16):
and k through twelve schools. I stood up today at
the Senate lunch and I address the twelve Republicans who
are voting with the Democrats, and I said listen, and
in fact I made an offer to my colleagues, I said,
I'll tell you what. I will bet any one of
you one hundred dollars that in the next two years,
the Biden Irs is going to come after a religious
(30:40):
institution because of their beliefs on marriage, that they're going
to come after and deny tax exempt status to Catholic charities,
or to bring them Young University, or to Notre Dame,
or to Liberty University. By the way, I think Liberty
University is going to be who they target for because
(31:00):
they hate the evangelicals. And I will say one of
my colleagues took that bet. So we'll see two years
from now whether I'm paying one hundred dollars or collecting
one hundred dollars, I will tell you. Subsequently, I also
pointed out part of this bill they create a federal
cause of action to sue institutions that believe in marriage
(31:22):
as the union of one man and one woman. There
are going to be hundreds of lawsuits filed all across
this country. And I got to tell you most of
those lawsuits, the defendants aren't going to have the money
to defend them, so they're going to settle, They're going
to cave, and they're going to abandon their religious beliefs
to embrace same sex marriage. That's what the Democrats want,
(31:45):
and the Republicans, they're twelve Republicans who went along with it.
I literally at lunch begged my colleagues if you don't
want this to happen. So the Democrats disingenuously claim that
it'd be clear. I want to people to understand when
you say you beg your colleagues, is it generic to
the room or is it you get to sit down
(32:06):
with the twelve people that you were talking about that
caved and try to appeal to them personally. How does
this work? So every Tuesday and Wednesday, when the Senates
in session, the Republicans have lunched together. We meet on
Tuesdays and Thursdays in the LBJ room. We meet on
Wednesdays in the Mansfield Room. So the LBJ room is
(32:29):
where we met today, and virtually every Republican was there.
I think of the fifty of us, they're probably forty
seven of us in the room. Of the twelve Republicans
who voted with the Democrats, all but one or two
were there. And so I'm standing up in the room
making a fervent pitch to my colleagues, and a number
(32:54):
of the Republicans voted with the Democrats. They're like, well, look,
we got to vote on Mike Lee's amendment, Michaelee. Mike
Lee's amendment would have prohibited the IRS from targeting institutions
based on their support for traditional marriage. Mike Lee's amendment
was voted on. It was voted down. I stood up
and said, no, kidding, why do you think the Democrats
allowed to vote. They have the votes to beat it,
(33:14):
they know they're going to win. So just having a
vote and losing it is not actually defending religious liberty.
It's a show vote. And by the way, a lot
of the senators think, oh, if we have a show
vote and we vote for it, we can say we
supported religious liberty, except we were perfectly happy and content
to lose on it. And this is where the voters
(33:37):
are getting smarter and more savvy. I said, it's very
very simple. If you don't want to see the IRS
going after institutions, faith based institutions in your states. Of
the twelve Republicans, three of you need to stand up
and say we're going to vote no today on culture.
Culture is the sixty vote threshold. That we voted on today.
(33:59):
Unless the Democrats accept Mike Lee's amendment that prohibits the
IRS from targeting those faith based institutions, I believe the
Democrats would have caved now. They might not have caved today,
but they want this bill to pass, and they would
have caved tomorrow or the next day. And this is
not a bill that is in the nomenclature of Washington
(34:20):
a must pass bill. This is not like the death
sealing or government funding where people like it has to
has to pass. You know what, if forty one Republicans
stood together and we said no, it would have been
killed unless and until the Democrats gave those three Republicans
who broke off what they wanted and the revealing thing.
(34:40):
And I made this point to my colleagues. I said, look,
all of the Democrats are telling you no, no, no, no, no,
this is not about the IRS targeting religious groups. We
don't need Mike Lee's amendment because it's superfluous. It's already
in there. This is already what the bill does. I said, well,
if that's the case, what an easy give at What
they're saying is wrong as a legal matter, it's wrong.
(35:02):
But I said, if they're right that it's superfluous. If
it does nothing, then holy cow. I mean, you guys
are the worst negotiators on earth. If you can't stand
up and say, well, give us this protection. If you say,
it's already in there, it ought to be easy to
give it to us. But the problem was twelve Republicans
started with I surrender. And I'll tell you if you
(35:24):
watch c SPAN, you can see me. I was standing
on the Senate floor arguing with a number of my colleagues. Look,
we were arguing respectfully. We weren't yelling at cursing at
each other. But I was arguing with a number of
my Republican colleagues and they were like, well, well, the
Democrats would never take that. I said, of course they
wouldn't take that, because you started by giving them all
the votes they needed to pass it without it. What
(35:45):
moron concede something additional when they've already gotten to yes.
And so I'm sorry to say the Senate is done.
It has past this bill. And as I said, I
offered wager to my colleagues of one hundred bucks that
in the next two years we're going to see the
Biden irs target people of faith based on their views
(36:09):
on marriage because Republicans were unwilling to stand and fight
for religious liberty. And I gotta tell you, Ben, I'm
pissed off. Trying not to be pissed off, but I'm failing.
Why Why are we so weak? I mean, this was
not something If you looked at what Mike Lee was
doing and this amendment, it was it was not controversial.
(36:30):
It just protected religious liberty. How is it so hard?
And and maybe you can, you know, give a different
word than that that will connect with people to understand
why you wouldn't This wouldn't be a no brainer for
these twelve Republicans or at least three of them out
of the twelve to stand up. Look, there are a
lot of politicians that liked a virtue signal, and there's
(36:55):
no doubt public opinion has changed on gay marriage. D
stand their Republicans who want to say I'm for gay marriage.
I told my colleagues, if you want to say you're
for gay marriage, put out a press release saying I'm
for gay marriage. I love gay marriage. If you want
dress up in a pink bow and dance it again,
damn gay pride parade. I don't care. But don't pass
(37:16):
into law legislation that is going to empower the politicized
bureaucrats and the Biden administration to target people of faith.
That's what these Republicans did. The Democrats know what they're doing.
And I was telling a couple of my Republican colleagues.
They're like, no, no, no, this is not true. That's
not true. I said, listen, I don't believe you actually
(37:37):
want this outcome. I don't believe you want people of
faith persecuted. I just think you're naive and that you
don't understand how Democrats think. You don't understand the reason
they are pushing this is because they want to target
people of faith. And by the way, this is not hypothetical.
The City of Philadelphia went after Catholic charity and Catholic
(38:01):
Charities performed adoption services, and the City of Philadelphia said, well,
you will not perform adoption services for gay couples, so
you're out of the adoption businesses. We refuse to do
business with you unless you will perform adoptions for gay couples,
even though there were lots of other adoption agencies out
there that did perform adoptions for gay couples. So it's
(38:23):
not like gay couples in Philadelphia couldn't adopt. They just
couldn't go to Catholic charities and say, hey, violate your
faith and help us adopt. City of Philadelphia tried to
ban them. Now thankfully that went to the Supreme Court
and was overturned. This legislation today, I think there's a
very real possibility will reverse that outcome. And a number
(38:47):
of the Republicans who voted with it. I got in
an argument at the lunch with one of the Republican authors.
I won't identify who it was, but I said, one
of the outcomes of this is you're going to unleash
the trial lords, who are going to be funded by
left wing groups suing all of these small charities, small
Christian school small Jewish schools, universities, churches, and a bunch
(39:11):
of them are not going to be able to defend themselves,
not going to have the funds. They're just going to settle.
They're just going to give in. It's it's litigation to
accomplish a public policy goal from the left. They do
it all the time. And one of my colleagues, who's
one of the most vocal sponsors of this bill, said well,
they can sue. Now, this doesn't change this at all.
I said, well, yes it does. This spill explicitly creates
(39:34):
a federal cause of action. What is the federal cause
of action? A federal cause of action is it creates
a right to file a lawsuit that did not exist.
And my colleagues said, well, a burgh Felt, the Supreme
Court case did that. I said no, No, A burgh
Felt did not create a federal cause of action. Nothing
in a burgh Fell created a federal cause of action.
Now a Burgh Fell is the law of the land.
(39:55):
A Burgha Fell ruled that gay marriage is required by
the constitution. Disagree with that ruling, but that is the law.
And the Supreme Court was absolutely unequivocal that it's not
going to revisit that decision. But there is no federal
cause of action. Thanks to twelve of my Republican colleagues
and all of the Democrats, there is now going to
(40:17):
be a federal cause of action, and every lawsuit that
is filed you can look to the folks who voted
today as why those lawsuits are filed. And it's really
sad and shocking that this has actually happened, and it's
been the Republican's fault. I want to move lastly, Senator
to the rail strike possibility. This is a very complex issue.
(40:42):
You've seen Nancy Pelosi. She came out saying that the
White House today the same meeting that Kevin mccartthey apparently
was asked to come over for as well. It was
a meeting they said was important. Here is what Pelosi
had to say in front of the White House after
this meeting, trying to avert this rail strike. Take a listen.
We must avoid a strike. Jobs will be lost, even
(41:07):
union jobs, will be lost, water will not be safe,
product will not be going to market. It is we
could lose seven hundred and fifty thousand jobs, some of
them union jobs, that must be avoided. So tomorrow morning
in the House, we will bring up the legislation. We'll
bring it up tomorrow morning, she says in the House.
(41:28):
This is a very interesting thing because she mentions multiple
times their union jobs, union jobs, union jobs. That's the
obsession of many in the Democratic Party on this. What
is your take on this rail strike and how do
we get to this point right before the holidays. Well,
Joe Biden and the administration screw this up. And screw
this up badly. And you know, before the election, Joe
(41:50):
Biden announced, oh, we've averted a rail strike. We solved
the problem. Turned out that was a lie. It was
exactly like what he said to Saudi Arabia, Hey, will
you delay restrict oil production until after the election. It
was all about getting past the election. Now that we're
past the election, we discovered that Biden has screwed this up.
So there have been ongoing negotiations that go back to
(42:12):
twenty nineteen between the six Class one freight rail carriers
and twelve different rail labor unions, and they've been ongoing
and ultimately it went to something that's called the Presidential
Emergency Board, which is something that has created pursuant to
a law called the Railway Labor Act. Now, the Presidential
(42:33):
Emergency Board made a number of recommendations, including increasing wages
for railway workers by twenty four percent over five years. Now,
twenty four percent sounds like a lot until you reflect
on the fact that under Biden, inflation is over eight
percent a year. So just adding up eight percent over
(42:54):
five years, that's forty percent, and if you compound it,
you get closer to fifty percent. So essentially this agreement
raises rail workers salaries about half of what inflation has
increased under Joe Biden the unions. Of the twelve unions,
eight of the unions voted to approve the deal, so
(43:15):
they wanted the additional money. But four of the rail
labor unions voted to reject the deal, and those are
the members who voted to reject the deal. And in particularly,
what they're pressing for is sick leave. They want a
few more days of sick leave, and they want clear schedules.
As I understand it, the way rail workers work is
the company has enormous ability to say you will work
(43:38):
this day, and we're not going to tell you, and
we can change it, and so the workers don't have
clarity on when they're working. So this is all headed
to a strike. Now, let me start by saying a
strike would be a disaster. It would be catastrophic, It
would be really bad. It would impose The projections are
about two billion dollars a day of cost on the economy.
(43:59):
So I don't want to see a rail strike. No
one in the right mind wants to see a rail strike.
It shouldn't have happened if Biden and the administration, we're
actually doing their job and engaging and not lying to
just before the election. Let's be clear about that. But
at this point, what Joe Biden the Democrats are trying
to do is they want Congress to step in and
force a deal on the railroads and the unions, and
(44:24):
they want to force the deal that the railroad companies want.
I gotta tell you, I've served in the Senate ten years.
We've never done this in the past. There's never been
any labor dispute where Congress has stepped in and said,
we're picking the winners, we're picking the losers. And by
the way, we've decided the management's the winners and the
workers of the losers. That's what Biden is doing. Biden
(44:47):
is screwing the union workers right now. Biden is saying
while claiming that they're helping them, Like you just heard
the Nancy Pelosi quote. Yes, and so my view is
this aught be negotiated between the labor unions and the railroads,
and they ought to work it out. And you know,
I was talking with with with one of the CEOs
(45:08):
of one of the big railroads recently and I asked him,
you know. I talked to him at home Sunday night
while I was at home over Thanksgiving, and I said, Okay,
if Congress does this, what happens next month when there's
a strike of airline pilots? Do we step in also
and resolve the dispute between management and the unions in
(45:31):
airline pilots? And how about the month after that when
there's a strike of auto workers, do we step in there?
And is Congress's job now to step in and crush
the unions and resolve these issues or should they be
worked out in negotiations between management and the workers? And
I think Biden is scared of what is going to come,
and so what is likely to happen. Biden and Schumer
(45:55):
and Pelosi are going to force through a deal that
rams a result down on the union workers despite the
fact that they don't want it. And I stood up
at lunch today. We actually had a pretty vigorous discussion.
This was the other big topic at lunch, and I
got up at a couple of other my colleagues got
up and I said, look, I get Historically, Republicans have
(46:16):
been viewed as reflexively pro management and Democrats as reflexively
pro union. I think one of the most consequential political
shifts of the last decade is that Republicans have become
a blue collar party. We are the party of working
men and women, We are the party of truck drivers
(46:38):
and steel workers, and we are the party of the
railroad union workers. And not just that. There are a
lot of Republicans that are old National Chamber of Commerce,
Republicans that just automatically, if the unions want it, we're
against it. And here's what Biden's counting on is that
some Republicans will come save as Bacon like. My view is,
(47:00):
I'm not going to step in and force a deal
that the railroad workers don't want. They ought to negotiate
that with management and resolve it. And if the Biden
White House hadn't screwed this up, we wouldn't been this
mess to begin with. How quickly are we going to
see movement you think from Congress? I mean, Pelosi says, hey,
we're gonna take this up in the morning, right We're
(47:20):
gonna get on this right away. Is there anything left
that the union can do to stop Congress from screwing
them or is it pretty much the fix is already
in so I don't know. It sounds like Pelosi and
Schumer are willing to ram through Biden's deal, screwing the
working men. Now, I will say Bernie Sanders also doesn't
(47:43):
like this deal. But Bernie Sanders wants to introduce legislation
forcibly granting the union members I think in additional five
days of sick leave. I don't support what Bernie's doing either.
I don't think Congress ought to get in the middle
of this fight and say you win, you lose. Look
in abor arrangement, you have the ability, the workers have
the ability to negotiate with management. They can fight back
(48:05):
and forth, and they can resolve at their selves. And
I don't think it should come down to who has
more political strokes. So I don't support Bernie Sanders saying, Okay,
we agree with we're just going to mandate the results.
But I also don't think management ought to be able
to run to the White House and say we want
your help to squash what four of these twelve unions
(48:26):
unions their members vot voted that they wanted. It'll be
interesting to see how this ends up. And again, it's
weird when you hear concertives as you just mentioned it.
It was not exactly what I thought you were going
to stay, Senator, but it makes sense. What you're saying
is let them negotiate this and don't give them a
bad deal. By the way, can I give you an
(48:47):
interesting bit of historical trivia? Sure, So, the last time
there was a rail strike, Congress stepped in and resolved it.
Now what Congress did is it it adopted the recommendation
of the Presidential Board. Here, it's not actually the recommendation
of the Presidential Board that Biden wants to do. It's
(49:08):
what's called a tentative agreement, which is modified from what
the board recommended. But ninety two Congress did that. There
were six senators who voted against the settlement that ended
the nineteen ninety two rail strike. You know who one
of the six senators was? Who is that? Joe Biden? Wow?
(49:28):
Wow history there. Yeah, you weren't joking. Ah, this is
gonna be a mess right before the holiday, Senator. I
appreciate it. It's always nice to talk to you again
when you're back in DC to hear what's going on
behind the scenes. Don't forget subscribe. Hit that subscribe button.
It's free and you'll get the show three days a week.
We do the show obviously one day week using on
(49:49):
video and audio as well, and the other two are
just audio only. Make sure you write it's a five
star review wherever you listen to this show, tell your
family and friends about it, share it on social media,
and you will see you back here in just a
couple of days.
China, a major vote on marriage, and a rail strike.
That's the stories today on Verdict with Ted Cruz, Senator,
nice to have you with us. You're back and watching
in DC after Thanksgiving, and I want to get people
up to speed on what's going on right now, specifically
with China. It was shocking because the Prime Minister actually
(00:23):
came out in the UK and is now leading on
this issue of China after watching What's having the people.
He came out earlier saying something that the President of
the United States of America just says that they're still silent.
Take a listen. Now, Let's be clear, the so called
Golden Era is over, along with a naive idea that
trade would automatically lead to social and political reform. That,
(00:49):
nor should we rely on simplistic Cold war rhetoric. We
recognize China poses a systemic challenge to our values and interests,
a challenge that grows more acute as it moves towards
even greater authoritarianism. Instead of listening to their people's protests,
(01:12):
the Chinese government has chosen to crack down further, including
by assaulting a BBC journalist center. He came out and
when you desperately need leaders. Leaders stand up and lead
when they see that America is not leading on China.
I felt like he probably had no choice but to
stand up and to say this. I'm glad he did.
(01:32):
But where's America right now? Well, unfortunately, Joe Biden and
the White House are completely a wall now. You know,
I will say for the British Prime Minister that was
a degree of clarity missing in the United States of America.
But that being said, you know, one of the things
he said is we should not rely on simplistic cold
(01:54):
war rhetoric. I actually think it's a conceit of the
so called intelligentsia that simple terms like good and evil
can't be used. You know, I was ten when Reagan
became president, and I remember well that at the time,
the all of the Democrats, many of the Republicans, all
(02:16):
of the media, all of the academy, they all recognize
that the smart and nuanced thing to say on the
Soviet Union was that we needed to that they they
couldn't be beaten, that the best we could hope for
was detante, which I've joked is French for surrender, and
that there was nothing we could do about it. And
(02:37):
Reagan came in as this California cowboy, and he said
a series of things that shocked Washington. He said, for example,
he described the Soviet Union as an evil empire. He said, Marxism,
Leninism will end up on the ash heap of history.
When they asked what's your objective in the Cold War,
he said, very simple, we win, they lose. All of
(02:58):
the self proclaimed in a lectuals were shocked. They tittered
at him, what an ignorant philistine. Didn't he understand subtlety
and nuance. And if you come to my office in DC,
you've been there, Ben. The most dominant feature in my
office is a gigantic painting. It's about twenty feet wide
of Ronald Reagan's standing before the Brandenburg Gate and saying
(03:22):
what I think are the most consequential words of any
leader in modern times. Mister Gorbachov, tear down this wall
with that leadership, With that clarity, Ronald Reagan won the
Cold War. We defeated the Soviet Union. We need that
same clarity with regards to Communist China. Communist China is
(03:42):
the new evil empire, and the Marxism, Leninism, the Maoism
that dominates China. I believe it will also end up
on the ash heap of history. But we need absolute clarity.
And it's not simplistic to say that communist China murder
its citizens, torturing its citizens, locking down its citizens, engaging
(04:05):
in draconian violations of human rights, maintaining concentration camps with
over a million people in those concentration camps, employing slave labor,
covering up COVID. All of that is evil. It's not gray,
it's not subtle. It is evil. And contrast that with
(04:28):
the complete gobbledegook from the Joe Biden White House. I
want to read the entirety of the Biden White House
statement on the massive protests that are unfolding in China
based on the draconian, horrific COVID lockdown policies in China, Senator,
before you read that, I want to remind people about
(04:48):
our response, our good friends, Patriot Mobile. Patriot Mobile is
America's only Christian conservative wireless company who shares your values.
Now more than ever, it's important to band together and
support companies that share our conservative values. And Patriot Mobile
is the company that can save you money on your
cell phone bill. While also making an impact with every
(05:12):
call you make. Patriot Mobile donates a portion of every
dollar earned to organizations that fight for causes you care about.
They also stand up for our first Second Amendment rights
and the right to life. They help with adoptions, especially
after the overturning of Rovuwade. Patriot Mobile also saves you money.
(05:34):
They have plans that fit any budget, and they use
the same exact towers that you're using right now with
your cell phone. So if you're worried about coverage, don't
be Make the switch and actually stand up for what
you believe in with every phone call you make, while
also saving money. Nine seven two Patriot is their number.
(05:55):
Use the promo code Verdict for free activation and other
special offers. You'll get to keep your same cell phone
if you want to or get a new one, You'll
get to keep your same cell phone number, and switching
is easy. Nine to seven to Patriot. That's nine seven
to Patriot. Use the promo code Verdict or online at
patriotmobile dot com slash Verdict right center. I want to
(06:18):
get back to you reading that statement you just mentioned.
A moment ago. Here's what the Biden White House said.
Quote We've said that zero COVID is not a policy
we are pursuing here in the United States, and as
we've said, we think it's going to be very difficult
for the People's Who Republic of China to be able
to contain this virus through their zero COVID strategy. For US,
(06:40):
we are focused on what works, and that means using
the public health tools like continuing to enhanced vaccination rates,
including boosters, and making testing and treatment easily accessible. We've
long said that everyone has the right to peacefully protest
here in the United States and around the world. This
includes in the PRC. That's the total statement. What weak,
(07:04):
sniveling Neville Chamberlain problem and one of the biggest reasons
the enemies of America are on the rise today is
the Biden Democrats are so weak. They're unwilling to call
evil evil, They're unwilling to call murderers murderers, and they're
unwilling to stand up to communist China and the enemies
of America. I want to get your thoughts about something
(07:26):
else that's also happened, and this is about the technology
side of things. There has been a lot of people
that were shocked by Apple actually taking away some of
the devices mechanisms where people were sharing information in China
that we're helping these protests to break out. One of
them was a basic thing that you've probably used a
(07:47):
thousand times, an air drop. And the Apple literally is
aiding China, while at the same time Apple, the same
company is threatening to remove Twitter from their apps or
because they say it's, you know, too dangerous to society.
When when you see companies like Apple helping the red
(08:08):
China the way they are saying, you know, okay, what
do you want us to do to make sure we
help you squash these protests that are happening, is there
a point where there needs to be some sort of oversight.
Corporate America has lost its way. I don't think it
is accidental that apples are red. Apple is in bed
(08:31):
with communist China. Most of big tech is in bed
with communist China. An awful lot of big business is
in bed with communist China. Big universities are in bed
with communist China. Big Hollywood is in bed with communist China.
By the way, that's one of the reasons the Democrats
are structurally pro China because all of their major donors,
(08:54):
big business, big tech, big universities in big Hollywood are
in bed with China. Apple is more than happy to
facilitate squashing the protesters. Human rights be damned, is Apple's view. Apparently,
as long as they can keep making money in communist China,
it is utterly craven. Look, it's the same policy the
(09:17):
NBA has as they grovel because they want to make
money in China and never mind the slave labor. It's
the same policies the Biden White House has. You know,
last year I forced to vote on the Senate floor
that the United States should not expend any money purchasing
electric vehicles or parts, batteries or other things in electric
(09:37):
vehicles made using slave labor in concentration camps. Now, if
you think about it, should we be buying things made
with slave labor? That ought to be one hundred to
nothing both that ought to be easy. Yeah. We voted
on the Senate floor, and every single Democratic sept one
except Joe Manchion voted no. Why is that because the
(09:59):
Biden White House, Joe Biden is Communist China's customer of
the year. They are buying the output of concentration camps
and I want you to think back of like the
history of concentration camps, the people who facilitate, who fund
human slavery. History is not kind to them. Well, you
know what that is Joe Biden, that is Chuck Schumer,
(10:21):
that is John Kerry, that is today's Democrat Party that
cannot be bothered to care about slavery and misery and depression.
And by the way, let's be clear when you talk
about the donations, I want everybody listening to verdict. This
is the information you need to share with your friends.
Ninety seven point five percent of Apple's donations are to
(10:42):
the Democratic Party. If you look at their employee donations
in the midterm elections to candidates by party, this is
how much money was Apples donations. Ninety seven point five
percent of appless wit to Democrats. Big tech has become
(11:06):
the financial muscle. Who was the biggest Democrat donor in
the country In twenty twenty Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook,
He went in spent what are called zuckbucks. He spent
four hundred million dollars, essentially taking over the election machinery,
the operation of elections in big blue cities and key
(11:26):
swing states. It is not an exaggeration to say Mark
Zuckerberg is directly responsible for Joe Biden being President of
the United States. By the way, Sam Bankman freed from FTX,
who made billions, and it appears now was engaged in
a massive Enron style made off style Ponzi scheme, defrauding
(11:48):
investors of billions. We don't know that for sure, but
a sure looks like it from what has come out
so far. He was the second largest donor in the
country to Democrats, behind George Soros. I gotta say, and
we talked about this on a pod last week, how
many Democrats have given the money back? Or even better,
how many Democrats have given the money back to the
(12:10):
investors who were defrauded by Sam Bankman freed. I believe
the answer is none. Joe Biden certainly hasn't given the
millions of dollars he got from Sam Bankman freedback. And
so listen watching big text reaction, watching journalism reaction to Twitter.
Elon must took over Twitter, and he said one simple thing.
He said, Okay, we're gonna allow free speech. We're gonna
(12:31):
allow people to speak. You can't threaten people, you can't
make threats of violence. You can't carry out criminal conduct.
But if you have a political view, if you're right wing,
left wing, if you're arguing a political view, you can
say it. And if people think what you're saying's wrong,
they can say what you're saying's wrong. The corporate media
world has lost their minds over it. They're freaking out.
(12:53):
We talked in a previous pod about how CBS News
had a twenty four hour fake boycott where they're like, oh,
my goodness, if you're actually listening to people who disagree,
we won't be part of it. And then they realize, no,
we can't do that. A huge component of what is
happening corporate America, the Fortune one hundred has become the
(13:15):
financial enforcement arm of the Democrats. And there have been
public reports that Twitter's advertising has dropped in half. Why
because major corporate companies are just saying, no, we won't
advertise anymore. And by the way, who is the biggest
advertiser on Twitter, Apple, Yeah, Apple's cut off its advertising.
(13:37):
Why because Tim Cook and Apple will say, you bastards,
you're allowing free speech, and we are the big tech oligarchs.
No one is allowed to disagree with us. By the way,
do you wonder why big tech is so friendly with China?
She says, we are the oligarchs. No one's allowed to
disagree with us. Big Tech says, we are the oligarchs.
(13:58):
No one's allowed to disagree with us. Dictators of a
feather tend to flock together. Yeah, they do. And if
you look at the money, and you can see it,
as you were mentioning a moment ago about Apple being
one of the top advertisers, but you look at where
the money goes from big tech, and many of those
have connections of China. Netflix of their donations nine nine
point six percent went to Democrats, Twitter ninety eight point
(14:20):
seven before Zuckerberg took over, Airbnb ninety seven point eight,
Apple ninety seven point five, Left ninety six point one.
These are the Facebook and so on all and the
ninety plus percentile. That is part of the reason why
you're seeing them all look the other way on this
issue of China when it comes to the issue of
things like by the way, you know who the single
(14:42):
biggest donors to Hillary Clinton were. If you say China,
I'm gonna laugh, well, Google, which is another way of
saying China. Yeah, there you go. Google, it's all big tech.
They love them all each and every time. They go
all in because they know they will not rain them
in and they will not ask any questions about them.
Look at the NBA totally silent. You're a basketball guy.
(15:03):
It is beyond to me. I think absurd to watch
the NBA spend years giving their floor to Black Lives Matter,
literally painting it on the floor, putting it in the
corners and doing all that they did. We're you know,
we're about the national anthem, and then they're immediately silent
on what's happening in China right now. Is another example
of the hypocrisy of the people on the left. Well, listen,
(15:28):
you look at the Fortune one hundred that is complicit
with what's happening in China, and that also wants desperately
for Elon Musk's effort to make Twitter a place where
free speech is allowed. They want that to fail. Let
me read a list of some of the companies that,
based on media Matters analysis of pathematics data, have stopped
(15:53):
for a significant period of time advertising on Twitter. Abbott
Laboratory is all state corporate ration, AMC Networks, American Express Company,
AT and T Bigheart pet Care, Black Rock Incorporated, Blue,
Triton Brands Incorporated, Boston Beer Company, California State Lottery, Century
Link Channel, Chevrolet, Chipotle, Mexican Grill, Citygroup, CNN, Dell, uh Diago,
(16:20):
Direct TV, Discover Financial Services, Fidelity First National, Retail Realty Partners, Ford, Heineken,
Hewlett Packard, Hilton Worldwide, Inspire Brands, Jeep, Kellogg Company, Cole's Department, Scores, Ken, Drill,
LinkedIn Corporation, Mail Chimp, Marriott International, Mars pet Care, Mars Incorporated,
Mercan Company, Meta Platform, and other words, Facebook, Moneywise, Neslee, Novarda,
(16:44):
sag pernod Ricard, play Pass, the Coca Cola Company, the
Kraft Heinz Company, tire Rack, Verizon, Wells Fargo, Whole Foods Market,
and Yum Brands. Yeah. I mean, if that's not proof
that they're all trying to bankrupt the people that don't
do and say and silence the people they want them
(17:07):
to silence, aka conservatives, They're just going to say, we'll
try to bury you and ruin your company. That's what
they're all about. And let's be clear. If Elon must
says tomorrow, I will behave like communist China. I will
silence anyone who disagrees with the left wing orthodoxy. Those
brands will all come running back. What they want is
(17:28):
for him to be the chief censor of the public square.
Facebook's perfectly willing to do that. Google is quite willing
to do that. YouTube is quite willing to do that.
And suddenly Twitter is this outlier. By the way, if
the reports from Elan are to believed, more people are
(17:48):
using Twitter. But this is a question of power. This
is a question of using power to try to force
censorship and muzzle free speech, and it is incredibly dangerous.
And my view is of corporate America. If they want
to come out and say we hate free speech and
(18:08):
we will use our financial power to silence and censor you,
they ought to tell us that, they ought to admit that,
they ought to let you know when you're buying their products. Hey,
your money is going to silence you. But they're trying
to do it surreptitiously. They're trying to hide and it
is And by the way, the big enchilada that they're
(18:29):
trying to set the stage for is the two biggest
gatekeepers at all of tech, or Apple and Google. And
if Apple and Google pull Twitter down from their app stores.
That is like setting off the atom bomb. Now, by
the way, they did that to Parlor, they did that
in concert to Parlor. Parlor grew up as a conservative
(18:51):
alternative to Twitter, it was gaining real success. And then
simultaneously Google and Apple together said your deep platform by
which is such an obvious anti trust violation as a
very simple matter, when horizontal competitors cooperate together to block
a new entrant to the market, that is on its
(19:13):
face and antitrust violation. They didn't care. They're so rich,
they have so much power. They said, screw it, will
bury you in lawsuits. That's nothing can do about it.
If they try to do it to Twitter, which a
bunch of leftists and Democrats are pressuring them to do,
it will be a massive escalation. Now, what's interesting They
could do it to Parlor because Parlor was a little
(19:34):
company with not that much financial resources behind it. Elon
Musk is the richest man in the world. He's already tweeted,
all right, if you do that, I'm going to go
create a new phone. No. I don't know if he'll
do that or not. But the guy does make teslas.
He knows how to make cars. It's not like he
doesn't know how to make stuff, and so they got
to be a little more cautious. And I think they
(19:56):
are a little more cautious about straight out bullying him
because he's, at a minimum not a ninety eight pound weakling.
They can just kick sand at his face and ignore.
And I for one, if they do kick him off, though,
if they do kick Twitter off, and I've had so
many people ask me this over the last twenty four hours,
is Twitter really going to go away from the app
store if they do that to try to destroy Twitter
(20:18):
instantly by pulling that off? Is there anything that Congress
will do in response really with antitrust? No, there's nothing
Congress will do in response because Congress the Senate is
controlled by the Democrats, and the Democrats want Apple to
kick Twitter off. There's nothing the Biden Department of Justice
will do in response. Why because the Biden Department of
(20:40):
Justice is profoundly partisan and they want Apple to kick
Twitter off. You know, just today Karen John Pierre was asked,
I guess yesterday was asked about what Elon Musk and
the question from a reporter, I mean it was if
Saturday Night Live were funny anymore. This would make a
great Saturday Night Live skit because you had a lefty
report who says, are you concerned that so many new
(21:03):
people are signing up for Twitter and enjoying free speech?
And the White House says, yes, we are very concerned.
We are keeping an eye on what Elon Musk is doing. Like,
holy crap, they're mad number one that free speech is allowed,
but number two, they're mad that people like it. I mean,
this is so that it's successful and that they can't
(21:25):
control it. But that's what they're so concerned about. I
don't believe Apple and Google will do it. I think
it is too big a risk. They're big on beating
up people they can beat up. They're big on picking
on the puny, wimpy kid. I think they're scared of
someone who can punch back. You know, there was an
(21:46):
interesting There was an interesting moment you mentioned that press briefing,
and I want to play it for you real quick.
There was a reporter the White House that asked one
of the weirdest questions I've ever heard, and the question was,
what tools do you have to stop Elon Musk from
restoring free speech at Twitter. Listen the question about Twitter.
You know, there's a researcher at Stanford who says that
(22:09):
this is a critical moment really in terms of ensuring
that Twitter does not become a vector for misinformation. I mean,
are you concerned about the Elon Musk says there's more
and more subscribers coming online. Are you concerned about that?
And what tools do you have? Who is it at
(22:31):
the White House that is really keeping track of the
I mean, there it is, that's what you just mentioned, basically,
Play her answer, Play Karen John Pearre's answer. So this
is something that we're certainly keeping an eye on. And look,
we you know, we have always been very clear and
that when it comes to social media platforms, it is
(22:54):
their responsibility to make sure that when it comes to misinformation,
when we when we comes to the hate that we're seeing,
that they take action, that they continue to take action. Again,
we're all keeping a close eye on this. We're all
u monitoring what's what's currently occurring, and we see, you know,
(23:15):
we see it with our own eyes of what you
all are reporting and just for ourselves what's happening on Twitter.
But again, social media companies have a responsibility to prevent
their platforms from being used by any user to incite violence,
especially violence directed at individual communities as we have been seeing,
and the present has been very clear on calling that out.
(23:38):
He'll continue to do that, and we're going to continue
a monitor situation. I love, We're going to monitor it.
I mean, Senator, if you want to talk about a
dog whistle to basically, yes, everybody pull your money from Twitter. Yes,
advertisers that love us, the big tech oigarchs and others,
make sure you destroy them. Yes. Apple, you have the
(23:58):
backing of the White House. If you want to take
down Twitter, We've got your back. It's all in that
response from her, It is big brother is watching you.
We are watching you. We are going to use all
the power we can to crush you. And the amazing
thing is all right. So they're buzzwords misinformation, which she
means anything that contradicts the left wing narrative. So, for example,
(24:22):
one thing they defined as misinformation was saying that the
COVID nineteen virus had originated in Wuhunt, China, had originated
a Chinese government lab, the Wuhunt Institute for Virology. I
now believe the overwhelming majority of evidence indicates that's exactly
where the virus escape from. And I think a significant
preponderance of the evidence indicates that the virus was created
(24:44):
at that lab through gain a function research. For over
a year, Big Tech would censor anyone saying that at
the explicit request of doctor Fauci. Doctor Fauci and emails
asked Mark Zuckerberg censor anyone saying the Wuhan virus came
(25:07):
from the Wuhan Institute for Virology, by the way, without
admitting and I, doctor Fauci, funded that research that created
the pandemic. I will note one amazing exception. One of
the very few outlets that actually got into that was
this podcast. This podcast. Early on in the pandemic, we
did two extensive podcasts laying out the evidence that this
(25:30):
virus had escaped from the Wuhun Institute for Virology. At
the time, you were treated like a tinfoil hat wearing
lunatic for saying that. I don't know why Big Tech
didn't censor us. Frankly, they censored other people for saying
the same thing. But miraculously they let us out. Now
it's clear what we were saying is right. By the way,
this is the same big tech the censor the hunter
(25:52):
Biden laptop. Again, it was true, it was accurate, but
it was politically inconvenient. What they mean by misinformation and
is anything that hurts democrats are their preferred narrative. If
it's misinformation. I got a crazy idea. If what someone
is saying is false, counter it with the truth. Yeah,
eximain why it's false. And you notice that Fauci's coming
(26:15):
out on his last days. Just yesterday he did his
CNN quote exit interview and what I'm about to play
for you, he basically is saying that you're a liar
center for doing those two shows and for what you
just said. Listen, I can't tell you what's going on
in all of China and in other things. I can
tell you for sure that if you look at the
(26:37):
viruses that the NIH grant funded to study in a
surveillance way, anybody who even has a peripheral understanding of
evolutionary virology will tell you these viruses could not possibly
turn into Sauce Kobe too. So when you talk about
a leak, maybe there's a lab leak, but it's not
(26:58):
with the viruses that the h was funding. That's almost
certain that that's the case. Okay, so that's affective interview.
Literally now he's saying it still, So it's amazing a
couple of things. Number One, he's saying, you talk about
a leak from the lab, So he's now implicitly admitting
yet leak from the Chinese lab, which, by the way,
(27:19):
writing asked Mark Zuckerberg, don't allow anyone to say it
leak from the Chinese lab. So what he just said
there a couple of years ago, he claimed was misinformation
and Big Tech was more more than happy to censor.
But then secondly, he also admitted we were funding the
creation of viruses, which he's denied before, so he just
admitted that, but he argued the viruses we created were
(27:43):
not this virus. You know what, maybe that's possible. I
don't know. I'm not a virologist. You know how we're
going to figure out by having congressional oversight hearings and
examining evidence. And let me say what an indictment of Democrats.
They've had a control of both houses for two years.
They don't give a damn about knowing where COVID nineteen
came from. They don't give a damn about knowing China's culpability.
(28:05):
They don't give a damn about knowing the degree to
which doctor Fauci and the federal government funded it. They
don't care about any of that. They want to cover
it up. They want to blame it all in the
Democrat slash corrupt corporate media narrative. Donald Trump created COVID
in the Oval Office and released it on America to
cause people to suffer. That's what they want to say.
(28:26):
Facts be damned, well, we need to figure it out. Now.
Fauci's admitted he was funding the creation of viruses, and
there's a very good chance the virus leaked from the
Chinese lab. That's a big admission. All right, Let's hear
some witness testimony and some expert examination about whether the
viruses Fauci funded were in fact COVID nineteen. I agree
(28:49):
that that has not yet been proven, but I think
there's considerable evidence to suggest it could be the case.
We need more examination. I hope with a Republican majority
in the House, we'll finally get that, and hopefully they'll
get to actually ask some real questions off out too
that he's going to have to defend himself on I
want to move Senator to this big vote on marriage
(29:09):
in the Senate. We've been talking about this extensively with
your good friend and Senator Mike Lee's amendment. With this
bill you were talking about, there need to be pressure
put on Senators to have that bill be vote on
with the amendment not separated out. Otherwise we were going
to have a major problem with religious liberty in this country,
(29:32):
quite possibly the government. This was a vote they organized
and plan I'm referring to the Democrats right after Thanksgiving.
They wanted to ram this through, and you flew back
to Washington just like everybody else. What happened. The twelve
Republicans who caved continued cavy and the Democrats passed their
(29:55):
bill in bracing gay marriage number one number two. This bill,
my words, is going to set the stage for the
Biden I RS to target people of faith, and in
particular to deny tax exempt status to religious churches, charities, universities,
(30:16):
and k through twelve schools. I stood up today at
the Senate lunch and I address the twelve Republicans who
are voting with the Democrats, and I said listen, and
in fact I made an offer to my colleagues, I said,
I'll tell you what. I will bet any one of
you one hundred dollars that in the next two years,
the Biden Irs is going to come after a religious
(30:40):
institution because of their beliefs on marriage, that they're going
to come after and deny tax exempt status to Catholic charities,
or to bring them Young University, or to Notre Dame,
or to Liberty University. By the way, I think Liberty
University is going to be who they target for because
(31:00):
they hate the evangelicals. And I will say one of
my colleagues took that bet. So we'll see two years
from now whether I'm paying one hundred dollars or collecting
one hundred dollars, I will tell you. Subsequently, I also
pointed out part of this bill they create a federal
cause of action to sue institutions that believe in marriage
(31:22):
as the union of one man and one woman. There
are going to be hundreds of lawsuits filed all across
this country. And I got to tell you most of
those lawsuits, the defendants aren't going to have the money
to defend them, so they're going to settle, They're going
to cave, and they're going to abandon their religious beliefs
to embrace same sex marriage. That's what the Democrats want,
(31:45):
and the Republicans, they're twelve Republicans who went along with it.
I literally at lunch begged my colleagues if you don't
want this to happen. So the Democrats disingenuously claim that
it'd be clear. I want to people to understand when
you say you beg your colleagues, is it generic to
the room or is it you get to sit down
(32:06):
with the twelve people that you were talking about that
caved and try to appeal to them personally. How does
this work? So every Tuesday and Wednesday, when the Senates
in session, the Republicans have lunched together. We meet on
Tuesdays and Thursdays in the LBJ room. We meet on
Wednesdays in the Mansfield Room. So the LBJ room is
(32:29):
where we met today, and virtually every Republican was there.
I think of the fifty of us, they're probably forty
seven of us in the room. Of the twelve Republicans
who voted with the Democrats, all but one or two
were there. And so I'm standing up in the room
making a fervent pitch to my colleagues, and a number
(32:54):
of the Republicans voted with the Democrats. They're like, well, look,
we got to vote on Mike Lee's amendment, Michaelee. Mike
Lee's amendment would have prohibited the IRS from targeting institutions
based on their support for traditional marriage. Mike Lee's amendment
was voted on. It was voted down. I stood up
and said, no, kidding, why do you think the Democrats
allowed to vote. They have the votes to beat it,
(33:14):
they know they're going to win. So just having a
vote and losing it is not actually defending religious liberty.
It's a show vote. And by the way, a lot
of the senators think, oh, if we have a show
vote and we vote for it, we can say we
supported religious liberty, except we were perfectly happy and content
to lose on it. And this is where the voters
(33:37):
are getting smarter and more savvy. I said, it's very
very simple. If you don't want to see the IRS
going after institutions, faith based institutions in your states. Of
the twelve Republicans, three of you need to stand up
and say we're going to vote no today on culture.
Culture is the sixty vote threshold. That we voted on today.
(33:59):
Unless the Democrats accept Mike Lee's amendment that prohibits the
IRS from targeting those faith based institutions, I believe the
Democrats would have caved now. They might not have caved today,
but they want this bill to pass, and they would
have caved tomorrow or the next day. And this is
not a bill that is in the nomenclature of Washington
(34:20):
a must pass bill. This is not like the death
sealing or government funding where people like it has to
has to pass. You know what, if forty one Republicans
stood together and we said no, it would have been
killed unless and until the Democrats gave those three Republicans
who broke off what they wanted and the revealing thing.
(34:40):
And I made this point to my colleagues. I said, look,
all of the Democrats are telling you no, no, no, no, no,
this is not about the IRS targeting religious groups. We
don't need Mike Lee's amendment because it's superfluous. It's already
in there. This is already what the bill does. I said, well,
if that's the case, what an easy give at What
they're saying is wrong as a legal matter, it's wrong.
(35:02):
But I said, if they're right that it's superfluous. If
it does nothing, then holy cow. I mean, you guys
are the worst negotiators on earth. If you can't stand
up and say, well, give us this protection. If you say,
it's already in there, it ought to be easy to
give it to us. But the problem was twelve Republicans
started with I surrender. And I'll tell you if you
(35:24):
watch c SPAN, you can see me. I was standing
on the Senate floor arguing with a number of my colleagues. Look,
we were arguing respectfully. We weren't yelling at cursing at
each other. But I was arguing with a number of
my Republican colleagues and they were like, well, well, the
Democrats would never take that. I said, of course they
wouldn't take that, because you started by giving them all
the votes they needed to pass it without it. What
(35:45):
moron concede something additional when they've already gotten to yes.
And so I'm sorry to say the Senate is done.
It has past this bill. And as I said, I
offered wager to my colleagues of one hundred bucks that
in the next two years we're going to see the
Biden irs target people of faith based on their views
(36:09):
on marriage because Republicans were unwilling to stand and fight
for religious liberty. And I gotta tell you, Ben, I'm
pissed off. Trying not to be pissed off, but I'm failing.
Why Why are we so weak? I mean, this was
not something If you looked at what Mike Lee was
doing and this amendment, it was it was not controversial.
(36:30):
It just protected religious liberty. How is it so hard?
And and maybe you can, you know, give a different
word than that that will connect with people to understand
why you wouldn't This wouldn't be a no brainer for
these twelve Republicans or at least three of them out
of the twelve to stand up. Look, there are a
lot of politicians that liked a virtue signal, and there's
(36:55):
no doubt public opinion has changed on gay marriage. D
stand their Republicans who want to say I'm for gay marriage.
I told my colleagues, if you want to say you're
for gay marriage, put out a press release saying I'm
for gay marriage. I love gay marriage. If you want
dress up in a pink bow and dance it again,
damn gay pride parade. I don't care. But don't pass
(37:16):
into law legislation that is going to empower the politicized
bureaucrats and the Biden administration to target people of faith.
That's what these Republicans did. The Democrats know what they're doing.
And I was telling a couple of my Republican colleagues.
They're like, no, no, no, this is not true. That's
not true. I said, listen, I don't believe you actually
(37:37):
want this outcome. I don't believe you want people of
faith persecuted. I just think you're naive and that you
don't understand how Democrats think. You don't understand the reason
they are pushing this is because they want to target
people of faith. And by the way, this is not hypothetical.
The City of Philadelphia went after Catholic charity and Catholic
(38:01):
Charities performed adoption services, and the City of Philadelphia said, well,
you will not perform adoption services for gay couples, so
you're out of the adoption businesses. We refuse to do
business with you unless you will perform adoptions for gay couples,
even though there were lots of other adoption agencies out
there that did perform adoptions for gay couples. So it's
(38:23):
not like gay couples in Philadelphia couldn't adopt. They just
couldn't go to Catholic charities and say, hey, violate your
faith and help us adopt. City of Philadelphia tried to
ban them. Now thankfully that went to the Supreme Court
and was overturned. This legislation today, I think there's a
very real possibility will reverse that outcome. And a number
(38:47):
of the Republicans who voted with it. I got in
an argument at the lunch with one of the Republican authors.
I won't identify who it was, but I said, one
of the outcomes of this is you're going to unleash
the trial lords, who are going to be funded by
left wing groups suing all of these small charities, small
Christian school small Jewish schools, universities, churches, and a bunch
(39:11):
of them are not going to be able to defend themselves,
not going to have the funds. They're just going to settle.
They're just going to give in. It's it's litigation to
accomplish a public policy goal from the left. They do
it all the time. And one of my colleagues, who's
one of the most vocal sponsors of this bill, said well,
they can sue. Now, this doesn't change this at all.
I said, well, yes it does. This spill explicitly creates
(39:34):
a federal cause of action. What is the federal cause
of action? A federal cause of action is it creates
a right to file a lawsuit that did not exist.
And my colleagues said, well, a burgh Felt, the Supreme
Court case did that. I said no, No, A burgh
Felt did not create a federal cause of action. Nothing
in a burgh Fell created a federal cause of action.
Now a Burgh Fell is the law of the land.
(39:55):
A Burgha Fell ruled that gay marriage is required by
the constitution. Disagree with that ruling, but that is the law.
And the Supreme Court was absolutely unequivocal that it's not
going to revisit that decision. But there is no federal
cause of action. Thanks to twelve of my Republican colleagues
and all of the Democrats, there is now going to
(40:17):
be a federal cause of action, and every lawsuit that
is filed you can look to the folks who voted
today as why those lawsuits are filed. And it's really
sad and shocking that this has actually happened, and it's
been the Republican's fault. I want to move lastly, Senator
to the rail strike possibility. This is a very complex issue.
(40:42):
You've seen Nancy Pelosi. She came out saying that the
White House today the same meeting that Kevin mccartthey apparently
was asked to come over for as well. It was
a meeting they said was important. Here is what Pelosi
had to say in front of the White House after
this meeting, trying to avert this rail strike. Take a listen.
We must avoid a strike. Jobs will be lost, even
(41:07):
union jobs, will be lost, water will not be safe,
product will not be going to market. It is we
could lose seven hundred and fifty thousand jobs, some of
them union jobs, that must be avoided. So tomorrow morning
in the House, we will bring up the legislation. We'll
bring it up tomorrow morning, she says in the House.
(41:28):
This is a very interesting thing because she mentions multiple
times their union jobs, union jobs, union jobs. That's the
obsession of many in the Democratic Party on this. What
is your take on this rail strike and how do
we get to this point right before the holidays. Well,
Joe Biden and the administration screw this up. And screw
this up badly. And you know, before the election, Joe
(41:50):
Biden announced, oh, we've averted a rail strike. We solved
the problem. Turned out that was a lie. It was
exactly like what he said to Saudi Arabia, Hey, will
you delay restrict oil production until after the election. It
was all about getting past the election. Now that we're
past the election, we discovered that Biden has screwed this up.
So there have been ongoing negotiations that go back to
(42:12):
twenty nineteen between the six Class one freight rail carriers
and twelve different rail labor unions, and they've been ongoing
and ultimately it went to something that's called the Presidential
Emergency Board, which is something that has created pursuant to
a law called the Railway Labor Act. Now, the Presidential
(42:33):
Emergency Board made a number of recommendations, including increasing wages
for railway workers by twenty four percent over five years. Now,
twenty four percent sounds like a lot until you reflect
on the fact that under Biden, inflation is over eight
percent a year. So just adding up eight percent over
(42:54):
five years, that's forty percent, and if you compound it,
you get closer to fifty percent. So essentially this agreement
raises rail workers salaries about half of what inflation has
increased under Joe Biden the unions. Of the twelve unions,
eight of the unions voted to approve the deal, so
(43:15):
they wanted the additional money. But four of the rail
labor unions voted to reject the deal, and those are
the members who voted to reject the deal. And in particularly,
what they're pressing for is sick leave. They want a
few more days of sick leave, and they want clear schedules.
As I understand it, the way rail workers work is
the company has enormous ability to say you will work
(43:38):
this day, and we're not going to tell you, and
we can change it, and so the workers don't have
clarity on when they're working. So this is all headed
to a strike. Now, let me start by saying a
strike would be a disaster. It would be catastrophic, It
would be really bad. It would impose The projections are
about two billion dollars a day of cost on the economy.
(43:59):
So I don't want to see a rail strike. No
one in the right mind wants to see a rail strike.
It shouldn't have happened if Biden and the administration, we're
actually doing their job and engaging and not lying to
just before the election. Let's be clear about that. But
at this point, what Joe Biden the Democrats are trying
to do is they want Congress to step in and
force a deal on the railroads and the unions, and
(44:24):
they want to force the deal that the railroad companies want.
I gotta tell you, I've served in the Senate ten years.
We've never done this in the past. There's never been
any labor dispute where Congress has stepped in and said,
we're picking the winners, we're picking the losers. And by
the way, we've decided the management's the winners and the
workers of the losers. That's what Biden is doing. Biden
(44:47):
is screwing the union workers right now. Biden is saying
while claiming that they're helping them, Like you just heard
the Nancy Pelosi quote. Yes, and so my view is
this aught be negotiated between the labor unions and the railroads,
and they ought to work it out. And you know,
I was talking with with with one of the CEOs
(45:08):
of one of the big railroads recently and I asked him,
you know. I talked to him at home Sunday night
while I was at home over Thanksgiving, and I said, Okay,
if Congress does this, what happens next month when there's
a strike of airline pilots? Do we step in also
and resolve the dispute between management and the unions in
(45:31):
airline pilots? And how about the month after that when
there's a strike of auto workers, do we step in there?
And is Congress's job now to step in and crush
the unions and resolve these issues or should they be
worked out in negotiations between management and the workers? And
I think Biden is scared of what is going to come,
and so what is likely to happen. Biden and Schumer
(45:55):
and Pelosi are going to force through a deal that
rams a result down on the union workers despite the
fact that they don't want it. And I stood up
at lunch today. We actually had a pretty vigorous discussion.
This was the other big topic at lunch, and I
got up at a couple of other my colleagues got
up and I said, look, I get Historically, Republicans have
(46:16):
been viewed as reflexively pro management and Democrats as reflexively
pro union. I think one of the most consequential political
shifts of the last decade is that Republicans have become
a blue collar party. We are the party of working
men and women, We are the party of truck drivers
(46:38):
and steel workers, and we are the party of the
railroad union workers. And not just that. There are a
lot of Republicans that are old National Chamber of Commerce,
Republicans that just automatically, if the unions want it, we're
against it. And here's what Biden's counting on is that
some Republicans will come save as Bacon like. My view is,
(47:00):
I'm not going to step in and force a deal
that the railroad workers don't want. They ought to negotiate
that with management and resolve it. And if the Biden
White House hadn't screwed this up, we wouldn't been this
mess to begin with. How quickly are we going to
see movement you think from Congress? I mean, Pelosi says, hey,
we're gonna take this up in the morning, right We're
(47:20):
gonna get on this right away. Is there anything left
that the union can do to stop Congress from screwing
them or is it pretty much the fix is already
in so I don't know. It sounds like Pelosi and
Schumer are willing to ram through Biden's deal, screwing the
working men. Now, I will say Bernie Sanders also doesn't
(47:43):
like this deal. But Bernie Sanders wants to introduce legislation
forcibly granting the union members I think in additional five
days of sick leave. I don't support what Bernie's doing either.
I don't think Congress ought to get in the middle
of this fight and say you win, you lose. Look
in abor arrangement, you have the ability, the workers have
the ability to negotiate with management. They can fight back
(48:05):
and forth, and they can resolve at their selves. And
I don't think it should come down to who has
more political strokes. So I don't support Bernie Sanders saying, Okay,
we agree with we're just going to mandate the results.
But I also don't think management ought to be able
to run to the White House and say we want
your help to squash what four of these twelve unions
(48:26):
unions their members vot voted that they wanted. It'll be
interesting to see how this ends up. And again, it's
weird when you hear concertives as you just mentioned it.
It was not exactly what I thought you were going
to stay, Senator, but it makes sense. What you're saying
is let them negotiate this and don't give them a
bad deal. By the way, can I give you an
(48:47):
interesting bit of historical trivia? Sure, So, the last time
there was a rail strike, Congress stepped in and resolved it.
Now what Congress did is it it adopted the recommendation
of the Presidential Board. Here, it's not actually the recommendation
of the Presidential Board that Biden wants to do. It's
(49:08):
what's called a tentative agreement, which is modified from what
the board recommended. But ninety two Congress did that. There
were six senators who voted against the settlement that ended
the nineteen ninety two rail strike. You know who one
of the six senators was? Who is that? Joe Biden? Wow?
(49:28):
Wow history there. Yeah, you weren't joking. Ah, this is
gonna be a mess right before the holiday, Senator. I
appreciate it. It's always nice to talk to you again
when you're back in DC to hear what's going on
behind the scenes. Don't forget subscribe. Hit that subscribe button.
It's free and you'll get the show three days a week.
We do the show obviously one day week using on
(49:49):
video and audio as well, and the other two are
just audio only. Make sure you write it's a five
star review wherever you listen to this show, tell your
family and friends about it, share it on social media,
and you will see you back here in just a
couple of days.
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.
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