If You Give Iran a Nuke

America's role in the world. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz. This episode of Verdict is brought to you by American Hartford Gold. New inflation numbers are out and they are the worst this country has seen in nearly forty years. The price of gas up, price of housing up, the US national debt way up, and with our current administration printing and spending trillions of dollars, experts don't see it getting better anytime soon. So how do you protect your money,

your retirement, and your savings when times are turbulence? Americans like you turn to real assets like physical gold and silver. American Hardford Gold can show you how to head your hard earned savings against inflation by helping you diversify a portion of your portfolio into physical gold and silver. All it takes to get started is a short phone call and they'll have physical gold and silver delivered right to your door or inside your IRAA or four oh one K.

And they make it easy. If you call them right now, they will give you up to fifteen hundred dollars of free silver on your first order. So don't wait, call them now. Call eight five five seven, six eight one eight eight three. That's eight five five seven six eight one eight eight three. Or text Cactus to six five five three two. Again that's eight five five seven six eight one eight eight three. Or text Cactus to six five five three two. This episode, a Verdict with Head

Cruise is also brought to you by Thompson's Cigar. Now, I don't have to tell you that the gentleman on this show like cigars. Well, that's why you have to check out Tom and Cigar. Whether you're working from home or just kicking back after a week of being essential, there is no better way to relax than with a premium cigar. Thompson's Cigar has got the best prices on the biggest brands in the business, from Macanudo to Monte Cristo. And perhaps you are looking to try new, rare, top

rated blends, but you don't want to splurge on boxes. Well, then check out Thompson's Cigar Tour, a smattering of five different blends delivered to your doorstep each month. Michael and my husband, by the way, have been fans of Thompson even before they became a partner on this show. Why Well, because no one has more selection than Thompson does. Their customer service is also the best. So sit back and take a break from all the craziness with a cigar

from Thompson Cigar Company. Now, these guys rarely do offers, but right now Thompson is offering our listeners fifteen percent off orders over seventy five dollars or twenty percent off orders over ninety nine dollars. To take advantage of these incredible savings, simply go to Thompson Cigar dot com and use promo code cactus when you're ready to check out. That website is Thompson spelled thompsom Cigar dot com and use promo code cactus. Today's episode of Verdict with Ted

Cruz is brought to you by ip Vanish. Did you know that browsing online using incognito mode doesn't actually protect your privacy? Without added security, you might as well give all your private data way to hackers, advertisers, your Internet service provider, and who knows who else. Ip Vanish helps you securely and privately browse the Internet by encrypting one

hundred percent of your data. This means that your private messages, passwords, emails, browsing history, and other information will be completely protected from falling into the wrong hands. Ip Vanish makes you virtually invisible online. It's that simple. Just for Verdict listeners, ip vanish is offering an insane seventy percent off their annual plan. That's like getting nine months for free. You have to go directly to ip vanish dot com slash cactus to

get this seventy percent off discount. Ip Vanish is super easy to use. Just tap one button and you're instantly protected. You won't even know it's on. You can use ip vanish on your computers, tablets, and phones, whether you're at home or in public. Don't go online without using ip vanish. Don't forget Verdict listeners get seventy percent off the ip Vanish annual plan. Just go to ip vanished dot com slash cactus to claim your discount and secure your online life.

That's ip v anish dot com slash cactus. Welcome back to Verdicts with Ted Cruz. I'm Michael Knowles, Senator. Have you been watching the Olympics? To be honest, I have not turned it on even once. I have seen the snippets, frankly on Twitter of the opening ceremonies where they had a wager athlete light the torch and it was so obnoxious. The Chinese Communist Party literally has one million weekers, more

than one million weekers in concentration camps right now. They are being tortured, murdered, they are working in slave labor. And for the propaganda of the Chinese Communist Party to use this wager athlete to say everything is great. And I got to say, NBC Savannah Guthrie, you know said, well, critics accuse China doing this, Well, okay, it is a genocide. Those are the facts. They are literally trying to exterminate

the leaguers. But NBC wants to apologize for the Chinese communist atrocities and get given that, you know, I can't bring myself to watch it. It just is these games never should have happened in China. It's wrong that that that that the International Olympic Committee allowed China to host these games. Now, what do you think is at play here?

Because there are a couple of dynamics going on. One, you have communist China doing all sorts of heinous, horrible things in their own country and around the world, so people just don't want to tune in for that too. You've got this strange dynamic where an American athlete born and raised in San Francisco. Though frankly, maybe that explains it. An American athlete choosing to compete not for America, her country, but for China, the country that her mother is from,

to compete for the Chinese Communist Party. It seems so shocking, so disgusting to me that an American would ever want to compete for any other country, to say nothing of China. What is it a revulsion at China? Is a revulsion at America? Or is it just that people are tuning out of the mainstream media? So look, I don't know, I mean, I don't know this athlete. I was certainly saddened by those headlines. You know, I want to be a little bit careful throwing rocks. I guess she has

renounced her citizenship. She's decided she wants to be a Chinese national. Okay, that that is an unusual choice. That's not a choice many people make. Most people don't go from freedom to tyranny. Most people don't choose to subject themselves to the oppression of a communist dictatorship. I don't know what a reasoning was. I don't know her thinking was. UM. I will say I am saddened whenever anyone gives up

on America. UM, that that is an unfortunate thing. You know, it reminds me if this is not exactly the same, but another guy from the San Francisco area, remember what was his name, John Walker Lynne, the American Taliban. It was in Marin County, and decided he wanted to go be a Taliban. I'm not suggesting she's a terrorist, so

I don't want that to be a false equivalency. M but it was someone born and raised in America deciding to pledge their allegiance to a foreign power and to an oppressive foreign power to a foreign power that that commits atrocities. M you know that it's we don't know the whole story there, but it but it's certainly a dismaying development, and it speaks, I think, to a deeper problem, not just this one girl or a handful of a

fleets who want to compete for other countries. But you're seeing on the left a disavowal of American power and influence, because they say America is immoral and unjust in a terrible place, and wherever it goes, it just oppresses people. But you're also seeing on the right a sort of disappointment with America looking around and and saying, what are we doing when we go overseas? Are we fighting to I don't know, raise the Pride flag over Kndahar, What

does it even mean? I think you're seeing a little bit, certainly in in certain aspects of the right, a demoralization there as well. What are we Are we just in a national malaise, Senator, the likes of which we might have seen in the seventies. Look, some people are and some are not. And unfortunately this really does follow a

political polarization the left. It is proudly and brazenly anti American. Yea, whether it is you know, Nike celebrating Colin Kaepernick and pulling the Betsy Ross flag off their shoes, which actually truth in advertising is what they followed. Nike would put the Chinese flag on their shoes because that's where their shoes are made, and in fact that they would put Chinese children on their shoes because it's Chinese children who sadly are are forced far too often into slave labor.

But the left generally, you know ESPN covering the Olympics, there was you know, one clown on ESPN who did this moral equivalence and says, well, yes, they're Chinese concentration camps, but you know, who are we to judge because America has faults also, and Michael he literally says, well, states like Georgia and Texas passed voter ID laws, So apparently requiring a driver's license to vote is equivalent to creating a concentration camp, putting a million people in them, torturing them,

raping them, murdering them. That's exactly like requiring an ID to vote. It makes sense. It's the most assinine moral equivalency. And I do wonder if you know, people that grow up surrounded by that leftism, they're incapable of making judgments. You know, it was America perfect, of course not but but the idea that we are literally, the Biden administration is the number one customer for slave labor coming out

of communist China. John Kerry, when he was asked about about the slave labor camps, he says, well, that's not my department. You know, I've joked, but it's not really a joke that John Kerry should be named the customer of the year for the Chinese communist slave labor. Several months ago, I introduced an amendment on the floor that said it should be illegal for the US government to purchase products and in particular or electric cars, electric batteries,

solar panels made with slave labor in China. Right, every single Democrat voted no except Joe Manchon. Joe Manchon was the one Democratic voted yes. Everyone else voted no. The

amendment failed, and you know, it is stunning. We are literally, you know, if you look through history at times when there have been concentration camps without exception, those are shameful, deplorable, disgusting, times that history is not kind to and we are funding concentration camps right now by purchasing the fruits of that slave labor. It's grossly immoral, and today's Democrats don't care. This raises my next question because a lot of people

are suggesting, well, it's ideological. You know, the radical left to hate America, and they do hate America, and they protest the flag, and so there's no question there's an ideological element here. Well, and they're taught America is evil and that the evil is at best equivalent and in many ways worse than really evil stuff globally. And no, they're not the same. No, George W. Bush was not Aidolf Hitler. No, Donald Trump was not Aidolf Hitler. And

the nuts who say that are nuts. Right, But then this raises this question, how does China keep getting away with it? Is it just because we're all brainwashed? Or is it because of cold hard cash? Is because China owns a ton of our debt. Our businesses in America are totally in bed with the Chinese. They make all of our goods. I mean, is it is it an economic problem? It is massively an economic problem. And by

the way, the political problem is an economic problem. So one of the things to understand about the Democratic Party today, they are structurally pro China. Now what does that mean. That means that they're leading supporters are all completely in bed with China. So who is today's Democratic Party funded by. It's funded by big tech, big tech, er monster supporters of the Democratic Party. It's funded by big business, giant corporations,

almost all of which are overwhelmingly Democrat right now. It's funded by big Hollywood, and it's funded by big universities. All four of those big tech, big business, big Hollywood, big universities are up to their eyeballs with the Chinese Communist. They have billions of dollars depending on the Chinese Communist.

And so the people who write the checks that keep Joe Biden in power, that keep Kamala Harris in power, that keep Chuck Schumer in power, that keep Nancy Pelosi in power, they have billions of dollars at stake with keeping us intertwined with communist China. So the Democratic Party does not want to decouple, does not want to delink. They may occasionally have a little bit of tough rhetoric because they realize that the Chinese commun poll badly, right,

but they are opposed to actually doing anything about China. Well, he who pays the piper calls the tune. But then the next question would be, how do we fix that? If this is not merely the ideological whims of some koukie leftist politicians, but this is really a structural issue, as you say, I think quite persuasively, then what's the answer to that? How do we fight back? Well, I do think the debate has changed, and it's changed a lot.

You know, when I got to the State a decade ago, I was arguing then in twenty thirteen, that China poses the single greatest geopolitical threat to the United States over the next century. That I believe this. I think it is a massive The goal of the Chinese communist dictators is global domination, and they are playing the game not on the short term, but over decades and over the next century. And I got to say, when I got to DC and started saying that that was a lonely view,

almost all of Washington thought that view was nuts. Every Democrat did, Every Democrat remember Joe Biden used to say, come on, man, come on man, there are friends, Come

on man. But back then most of the Republicans believe that also, most of the Republicans, you know, you go back to twenty thirteen, twenty fourteen, the Republican Party was in a very significant way the Chamber of Commerce party, and the Chamber of Commerce looked at China and saw big bucks, and the Republican enlightened view was, well, we can make a whole lot of money in China and eventually that human rights and democracy stuff, well, we'll worry

about it another time. You know, there's a clip that makes the rounds now of Joe Biden way back when this was ten years ago now saying that arising China is good for America, it's good for the whole world, and we should encourage arising China. And one of the reasons why it's little tough to use that clip against him is because many, if not most Republicans at the same time, we're saying the exact same thing. No, that's

that's exactly right. It was there were a handful of us that we're calling out the threat of China, and we were we were lonely voices in Washington. I will say two things have really changed that and they both you know, you asked, how do we deal with this in the long term. Two things have changed that for the better. Number one is Donald Trump and and Trump changed the discussion on China fundamentally. Trump came in, talked about China, China. He changed the pronunciation, really he did.

He did. I don't know a very good Trump impersonation, but but he but by force of will change the focus to China considerably. And I will say in the

Republican Party that that made a real difference. But then secondly, what really changed it was COVID and and COVID, Chinese Communist government's complicity in covering up COVID, and now the overwhelming evidence suggests complicity in COVID likely being released from a Chinese government lab in Wuhan, and the very real possibility that it was the Chinese Communist government that developed COVID through gain a function research, and that culpability in

something that has taken so many lives in America across the world, that has destroyed trillions of dollars in jobs and productivity and savings, that has changed the fundamental view of the Chinese Communist here at home and abroad. And I think that is potent. Now, as long as the government in the US is controlled by Biden, Schumer and Pelosi, they're not going to do a damn thing about China.

But I'm hopeful when the election happens in November and we see new Republican leadership in the House and Senate will see I hope, leaders willing to stand up and take on China directly. And then in twenty four we need a strong Republican president who's willing to take on China because it's not going to happen from today's Democratic Party. So you've got the China issue seems clear enough at least today, Republicans against China, Democrats very pro China, really

bought and paid for by China. Then there's another issue, which is Iran. And for a much longer time, Republicans have opposed Iran and Iran's attempts to get a nuclear weapon and Iran's attempts to grow, and the Democrats just keep coming back to Iran. Barack Obama signed to the Iran nuclear Deal. Donald Trump comes into office, rips up that deal now again. Joe Biden seems to be trying to revive it. As far as I can tell, without

any input from the US Senate. Yeah. No, it really is incredibly dangerous and it is a story the Democrats history in Iran is horrific. You go back to Jimmy Carter, where you know, the Shava Ran was a US ally supported America and then they had an Islamist revolution led by the Ayatola Komine which, among other things took Americans hostage and held our Americans hostage for four hundred and

forty four days. And Jimmy Carter, who had undermined our ally the Shaw and then sat there helplessly while the revolution that displaced the Shaw held Americans hostage. Now Jimmy Carter was even worse than sitting there helplessly. He sent a rescue team in to try to rescue the hostages. This is before you were alive, Michael, just a glint in my father's eye. Indeed, the rescue team crashed in the desert. The helicopters crashed with no opposing fire. They

weren't even confronting the enemy. I mean, it was the incompetence of the Carter administration had not been mad until

we got the bidens today. But before we do that, let's go in between let's go and by the way, the Ayatola Cominy release the hostages the day that Ronald Reagan was sworn in, literally as Reagan put his hand on the Bible raised his hand on the oath, January twentieth, nineteen eighty one, is when the Ayatola released the hostages because he understood there was a new sheriff in town and Reagan was going to blow the crap out of

them if they didn't let the Americans go it. You couldn't ask for a better demonstration of weakness and appeasement versus piece their strength. Right all right, fast forward to Obama. Obama first term big domestic agenda is Obamacare and Dodd

Frank Obama gets reelected in twenty twelve. Obama's second term major agenda was a nuclear deal with Iran, and in fact Ben Rhodes, who was the Deputy National Security Advisor in the Obama White House, he described an Iran nuclear deal as the Obamacare of the second term, which I think he meant his a compliment. You look at the Obama Iran deal, John Kerry negotiated it with Iran. It

is absolutely catastrophic. The Iran deal on its face was a total capitulation to Iran, and it is dangerous that the Obama Iran Deal put in Iran unavoidably on a path to having a nuclear weapon. I led the opposition to the Iran Deal in the Senate, and in fact, you know, it was interesting. As the presidential campaign started getting going in twenty fifteen, I helped organize a huge rally on the steps of the Capitol, thousands of people in opposition to the Iran Deal. I invited Donald Trump

to the rally and it was interesting. He was like, why would you invite me to your rally? You're running against me. He was like, well, and I just said, well, Donald, because when I invite you, every TV camera in the universe follows you. And I want to stop this deal because I don't want a theocratic lunatic. Now there's a different Ietola. The old one was the Aetola Komeni. The new Iotola is the Aetola Kamene. Just when you think the iranis you can't get more confusing. The two guys

have almost the same name. And look, there's an easy solution. Call him the Aetola. He's a bearded Jehadas who wants to murder us. And by the way, the Iatola Kamene, like the Ietola Komeni literally chance death to America and death to Israel. And he was doing this, This is not hyperbole. While John Kerry in the State Department were negotiating the Iran nuclear deal, the Ayatola was leading mobs

in Iran chanting death to America. They actually have every every year they celebrate Death to America Day and it's the anniversary of the revolutionaries taking Americans hostage. And yeah, there's a great political cartoon that came out about that time. I think it was twenty fifteen that had the Ayatola and had John Kerry and it had the Ayatola saying death to America, and it had John Kerry saying, can we meet you halfway? Yeah? Could we just be mortally

wounded in some way? Well, so this is what the left says, because if you look at the facts on the face, it seems absurd that the left would continue and Democrats specifically and Carrie and Biden specifically would try to get this deal. But what they have said is look forget about that. That's all just pr from the malas. They don't really believe it don't listen to the Republicans. This deal is not only not going to give Iran a bomb, but it is going to prevent Iran from

getting a bomb. And on an issue like Iran, as we've as we've just said, it's hard to keep track of the guy's names. It's difficult to know who to believe. So you're right, those are the talking points. And I will say a couple of things. So I actually met today with a Biden nominee to be an ambassador in the Middle East, and we were talking about Iran and the nuclear agreement, and he made a comment he said, I think everyone agrees with the foreign policy world that

Iran must never get a nuclear bomb. And I sort of stopped him, and I laughed and said, let me be clear, I don't think everyone agrees with that. I think the Biden White House is perfectly okay with Iran having a nuclear weapon. And I said, look, go back to the Obama white House. So when Obama was newly elected president, one of the very first speeches he ever gave was in the Middle East. He went to the University of Cairo and he at the University of Kiro.

He gave a speech and he said that Iran has a right and he used that word right to nuclear technology. Now that is absurd. I'm familiar with the right to life, to liberty, to property. There is no right to nukes. And if you're a crazy, theocratic lunatic who wants to murder millions of people, you especially don't have a right to nukes. Fast forward, there was an article that got a lot of attention during the Obama administration by a

writer in the Atlantic. And what got all the attention was a senior White House official in the Obama White House. In fact, a lot of people speculated it was Obama himself, but that was never conclusively confirmed. But this senior Obama official referred to Benjamin net and Yahoo, the Prime Minister of Israel, as chicken shit, and it was sort of a startling it. It got a lot of attention. My view was always that that actually wasn't much of news.

It was obvious that the Obama White House viewed net and Yahoo with contempt. They treated him like crap like. The fact that they directed that epithet to them was not surprising in the slightest for anyone who watched how they treated them. What was interesting in that same quote, senior Obama White House officials said, the good thing is,

and I'm paraphrasing, but this is pretty accurate. The good thing is we've delayed Israel from acting for so long that they're no longer capable, militarily capable of acting to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear arsenal. And those are chilling words where listen, I think Obama and Biden they're leftists that it's this same we were talking a minute ago with respect to China about the anti americanism on the left. They view American leadership in the world as illegitimate.

They think we have no right. What right do we have to deny to these peaceful little Iranians a nuclear bomb? That's just American arrogance. Well, you know what, people that want to murder us, I want to keep the weapons that they can use to murder us out of their hands. The left doesn't believe this. I totally agree with that, But then, Senator, what do you say to Look, this is a longstanding Democrat held belief. Even if they won't admit it publicly, they'll at least admit it on background.

And they've obviously been working toward a world in which Iran will have an easier time getting a nuclear weapon. Okay, what do you say to those who tell you, look, Iran talks a big game on destroying Israel. They're not going to destroy Israel. Iran is not going to come over and detonate a nuclear bomb in the United States. They have no reason to do it, no incentive to do it. A lot of countries have nuclear weapons for goodness sakes, you know, Pakistan, North Korea, a bunch of places.

We don't want to have nuclear weapons. They've got them. A lot of more people are going to get them. What's the big deal? This does not pose an existential threat to the United States. I think these are people that do not understand evil, and they don't understand. If history teaches anything it is that if somebody tells you they want to kill you, you should believe them, believe them.

I'll give one example, the so called father of the Iranian nuclear program, an Iranian scientist who has since gone to meet his maker, many say, at the hands of the Israeli Massad. He had written in his last will and testament that he wanted the following words written on his tombstone. Here lies a man who sought the annihilation of Israel. Not loving father, you know, good husband, No, no,

just soldier, sailor tinker Taylor. No, No, it's think about just how much hatred you have to have that that's what you wanted to be remembered for. I want to murder as many people as possible. That's like I'm a vicious, racist, bigot who wants to commit mass murder. And look, you talked about North Korea. North Korea with nukes is incredibly dangerous. Jong Un is a megalomaniacal, narcissistic dictator. It was a catastrophic mistake for the Clinton administration to screw up and

allow him to develop nuclear weapons. Now that he has them, there is some chance, possibly of something resembling rational deterrence, because the one thing that Kim wants is to stay in power, and he does know if he used a nuclear weapon that that would be the end of his regime, that that the imbalance of power, he would be destroyed. The danger with the Ayatola, and this is where religion is particularly dangerous, is that he's a theocratic zealot. It's

not just if he were an ordinary dictator. You may be able to have some real cost benefit analysis. But when you have a zealot who embraces death and suicide, it's it's it's like the math of suicide bombers. When you have people that are willing to strap dynamite to their chest and walk into a bus or walk into a shopping mall, ordinary deterrence doesn't work if they're willing

to blow themselves up. The Aetola knows if he detonated a nuclear weapon that the consequences would be hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Iranians killed in the war. I mean, the consequences would be devastating. The danger for a religious zealot is that he just might be willing to make that cost benefit analysis. If I get to murder, he might say millions of Jews, it's worth it that that

I will be rewarded with seventy two virgins. What they didn't mention that where that the virgins were gomer pile. But that's different. Yeah, you don't, you don't, you don't want They don't put it in the fine print. Yep. That is profoundly dangerous. And I think if it Ran acquires a nuclear weapon, the odds are unacceptably high. They would detonate it in the skies of Tel Aviv or Jerusalem or New York or Los Angeles. Now what are those odds. I don't know. I don't want to find

out that that's not a roll of the dice. I'm interested in finding out. Let's suppose Iran gets a nuke and that doesn't happen, they don't use it. The best case scenario, Well, if Iran gets a nuke, every other country in the Middle East suddenly will feel the urge to get nuclear weapons as well. The Saudi Arabians will want nukes, the UAE will want us, and Cutter will want nukes. They'll all want nukes to defend themselves against the Iranians. It's it's actually one of the ironies. I

joked that. Amazingly enough, Barack Obama inadvertently deserve the Nobel Peace Prize they gave him because he actually brought the Arabs and the Israelis together. All he had to do was negotiate a deal that would give the Iranians nuclear weapons, and the Arabs and Israelis said, are you frigging nuts, Let's put aside our differences. Yes, because because look they understand that an Iran with nukes, Iran today is the

leading state sponsor of terrorism. Even if they don't use the nukes, every other country in the Middle East gets nukes to counter Iran. Talk about a tinderbox that you're just like throwing gunpowder into. And on top of that, if Iran is willing to fund terrorists murdering Americans across the world today without nuclear weapons, how aggressive do you think they would be with nuclear weapons where they feel they have impunity. And by the way, that's the best

case scenario. So Obama ran deal, disastrous deal. They gave over one hundred billion dollars to the Ayatola. On the face of it, the deal was obvious it would end up with a nuclear weapon. Why number one at sunset it after a decade it went away. So on the terms of it, Obama was like, yeah, ten years from now, you can have a problem. Secondly, the deal gives them one hundred billion dollars, counts on them to be honest.

It provided that any inspection of nuclear facilities you had to give a RAN twenty one day's advanced notice just to tidy up the place. Yeah, you know, I've suggested I imagine a law that said, before a search warrant is executed on a drug dealer, you've got to give them twenty one a day's advanced notice of the place to be searched. Do you think you would find anything? Yeah? Probably not. Not only that, the deal, on the face of it says there's certain sites, sites designated as military

sites that are exempt from inspections. Now, if they're sites that are exempt from inspections, gosh, where do you think it is that they met? They will develop the nuclear weapons? Right, this was a deal as radical as the Obama folks were, as carry were. No one can look at this deal and conclude anything other than it. Ran will get a nuclear weapon under this deal. They were okay with it. Then Trump ended the deal most important national security decision

Trump made. I spent an enormous amount of time with President Trump urging him to end the deal. Well, now Biden wants to re enter the deal, and it is I think his top foreign policy objective to re enter the deal. Biden is desperate to enter a deal that will be worse than the Obama deal. It is an

ideological commitment. So I brought together a group of thirty three Senators wrote a letter to Biden making clear that under a law that we passed that that was the Iran Review legislation, that no deal can have force without being submitted to Congress first of all, for review and a vote. The Biden administration is going to ignore that law. They intended to fy that law. And by the way, the right way to do any deal is submit a treaty that takes two thirds of the Senate to ratify.

But they can't get the vote, so they're going to ram through a bad deal. Can they do that? Though? I mean, if they have to institution says the Senate's got to ratify treaties, then how how can the White House just go in and say, well, no, this isn't a treaty, it's just a it's a it's a nice it's a fun compact between friends, between nation friends. So that's basically what Obama did, and I and others made clear in order for this to have force, it has

to be a treaty. And and actually, here's a way to illustrate it is actually go back to the Trump administration. We're sort of jumping in the timeline, but let's go to the beginning of the Trump administration, both the State Department in the Defense Department under Donald Trump wanted to stay in the Iran deal. Rex Tillerson was Secretary of State. He said, we need to stay in the Rand deal. Jim Madis, who's a Democrat, was Secretary Defense, and he said,

we need to stay in. Maddis used to say, and he said this both public and private. He said, America gave our word, we need to keep our word. And I told him General and later Miss Secretary, No, America did not give our word right. There were two ways, and only two ways, that we give our word in a binding international context under the Constitution. Number one, through legislation that passes both houses of Congress and assigned it a law that is a formal commitment as a legal commitment.

Or Number two, the typical way for an international agreement, as a treaty negotiated and signed by the President and ratified by two thirds of the Senate. Those are the two ways America can give our word that are binding. This deal was neither, and we made absolutely clear to Obama that the Senate rejected it, and thankfully Trump ended up agreeing with me. He overruled his own secretary of State in his own Secretary Defense and ended the deal.

But and it was the most important foreign policy decision. Now Biden's trying to negotiate it. The reports are they're close to a deal. The one thing that saved us from a deal so far as the Iranians are so extreme, they see so much weakness with Biden that they're demanding an even bigger sweet deal that Obama gave him. Their unreasonableness may delay this a little bit. But what the eyetolas holding out for is he's saying to Biden, what I want as a commitment that will last and will

last beyond this administration. And what I've said repeatedly is Joe Biden can't give you that because the next Republican president who comes in is going to rip this deal up, just like the last Republican president is. This is disastrous, but Biden wants to sign it anyway. Well, speaking of acts of violence, I think our listeners are going to commit acts of violence, potentially with nuclear weapons on me if we don't get to at least one mail. Bad question.

So I want to get to that before we go. There were a number of great questions that came in this one though, is completely out of left field, and it ties in with a little bit of a news story, so I wanted to bring it up from Spack says, what is Ted Cruise's view regarding the legality of illicit drugs?

Love the show. I've been a fan from episode one, and it ties into the news because Joe Biden might not be able to give us very much in this economy, but he is promising to give out free crack pipes, so it's a topic at the top of people's minds.

It's a great question. But let me stop, Michael, how is that not a headline from the Babylon b It literally is the case of the Biden administration is giving out free crack pipes, because this will be good for America if everyone's smoking crack, you know, talk about a great crime policy as many people on crack as possible. These are your Democrats. He actually went further. He said that crack pipes were important for racial equity, which seems extremely offensive to me to say that, but so not

only extremely offensive. If you were to come up with a conspiracy theory, this would usually be attributed to Republicans. If you were to say racist and the media conspiracy theorists always claimed them to be Republicans the CIA, so this is another one. CIA wants to give crack pipes to minorities to destroy minority communities. That sounds like a conspiracy theory, except Biden is saying that's what he wants to do. It's like, holy crap, you want to fight

for minority communities. Get the kids off crack. Don't give them crackpipes. All right, that's a good rule of thumb. Get get the kids off crack. Yes, reasonable people can disagree on lots of questions here, but I think we can all agree don't give the kids crack pipes. Amen. Not a great idea. Just say no. Just say no. Because we're high on life. We're high on all of this. Uh, we're high on all this great content that we're trying to bring to our Verdict listeners. So if you haven't

subscribed already, you should go go and subscribe. You can get your merchant Verdicts with Ted cruz dot com slash shop. You can sign up for Verdict Plus on locals. There's a whole there's a whole other series right now on Verdicts Plus, hosted by our friend Liz Wheeler. It is called The Cloakroom, and I think we have Liz with us right now. Hi, Michael High, Senator, we do. Indeed, we are now, believe it or not, on episode three

of The Cloak Room on Verdict Plus. So if you haven't joined us at Verdict with Ted Cruise dot Com Slash plus, please do. We're actually going to do a deep dive into the Democrat crack pipe controversy. There's I mean, I guess I should be used to saying sentences like that since we've had to deal with Hunter Biden for the last however many years. At this point, it's a low blow. I know, I couldn't resist. I couldn't resist.

But this is a good conversation. This is about the philosophy of the thing right, whether the libertarian version of the conservative version of the war on drugs is not only the most effective, but the most constitutional. So we're going to dive into this. This is a topic, as you know, that creates a little discord among the republic among members of the Republican Party, so that's always fun to dive into that. Again. The Cloak Room is a brand new series on Verdict Plus with Senator Ted Cruiz.

It's cohosted by me, Liz Wheeler. Basically, I'm going to pick the Senator's brain like I would in a strategy session. It's behind the scenes peak into the details of what goes on in DC, just like the actual cloakroom of the Senate. So you can join us at Verdict with Ted Cruise dot com slash Plus. To join us, use the promo code Cloakroom for a one month free trial on your annual subscription. You don't want to miss it. We have talked about many different things, Stacy Abrams not

wearing a mask. We've talked about foreign policy and how to create a foreign policy philosophy so that when things like China happens, or things like Russia and Ukraine happened, you know how to apply that foreign policy. It's Verdict with Ted Cruise dot Com slash Plus. Promo code Cloakroom for one month free trial on your annual subscription. Sounds wonderful, Liz, I intend to raise a glass to the new series. I intend to raise a cigar. I will not raise

a crack pipe. I'm Michael Knowles. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz. See you next time. This episode of verdict with Ted Cruz is being brought to you by Jobs, Freedom and Security Pack, a political action committee dedicated to supporting concern ovative causes, organizations, and candidates across the country. In twenty twenty two, Job's Freedom and Security Pack plans to donate to conservative candidates running for Congress and help the Republican Party across the nation.