Will Tanks Roll In Ukraine?

gifting is tricky. Omaha Steakes makes it easy to send friends and family what is sure to be an unforgetable gift. Go to Omaha steakes dot com and enter the code Cactus into the search bar to order the perfect gift package. This special holiday offer includes over twenty entrees to share with friends and family this holiday season. Some fan favorites are the Bacon Wrap, filet Mignawns, Gourmet Jumbo Francs, chicken breasts, sides,

and Desserts Plush. You'll save over fifty percent and get eight free burgers by typing Cactus into the search bar. These burgers are basically a steak between buns, and eight of them are totally free with this offer. Visit Omaha Steakes dot com. Enter Cactus into the search bar and save over fifty percent when you order the perfect gift package, plus get eight free Omaha Steakes Burgers Incredible Flavor, Incredible Value one hundred percent guaranteed. That's Omaha Steakes dot Com

and enter Cactus into the search bar. Verdict with Ted Cruz is sponsored by stamps dot com. If you're looking for ways to skip the trip to the post office and dodge all that hectic holiday shopping traffic, why not save time and money with stamps dot com. Stamps dot com lets you compare rates, print labels, and access exclusive discounts on UPS and USPS services all year long. Here at soundfront, we use stamps dot com to send you merch like that sweet sweet cactus hat, to do bus

on the road, and to save time and money. It just makes sense, especially if your business sends more mail and packages during the holidays. Whether you're selling online or running an office or a side hustle, stamps dot com can save you so much time, money and stress during the holidays and get discounts on postoffice and UPS shipping

services without making the trip. Discounts you can't find anywhere else, like up to forty percent off USPS rates and seventy six percent off ups going to the postoffice instead of using stamps dot com. It's kind of like taking the stairs instead of the elevator. If you spend more than a few minutes a week dealing with mail and shipping, stamps dot Com is a lifesaver. So save time and money this holiday season with stamps dot Com. Sign up with promo code Verdict for special offer that includes a

four week trial, free postage and a digital scale. No long term commitments or contracts. Just go to stamps dot com, click the microphone at the top of the page and enter code verdict Verdict. It's head cruise is also sponsored by American Hartford Gold. I'm sure I'm not the only one who's noticed everything is getting expensive. We are in the biggest economic crisis since two thousand and eight, with a government that's printing trillions and trillions of dollars. Consumer

prices are the highest we've seen in thirty years. Inflation is certainly here to stay, and if the government continues it's out of control printing and spending, the dollar could continue its free fall and lose its coveted role as a world reserve. Currency. So how do you protect your money, your retirement and your savings. Well, American Heartford Gold can show you how to head your heart earned savings against inflation by helping you diversify a portion of your portfolio

into physical gold and silver. They'll even help move your existing IRA or four oh one k out of the volatile stock market into a precious metals IRA. And they make it easy. They're the highest rated firm in the country, with an A plus rating from the Better Business Bureau and thousands of satisfied clients. And if you call them right now, they will give you up to fifteen hundred dollars a free silver on your first qualifying order. So don't wait, call them right 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 sixty eight one eight eight three or text Cactus to six five five three two. Welcome back to Verdict with Ted Cruz. I'm Michael Knowles, having deja vu all over again. Hold on just a second, Michael,

hold on just this again. Let let me jump in here because I think there's another very important topic that we might want to touch on right here at the top of the show. So, if I'm a senator, um, Jimmy Kimmel, can we address this for just a second, because Jimmy Kimmel has been going after you for about a week now. Yes, we're laughing because our viewers are probably aware of this. He's been tweeting out some kind of disturbing, disgusting images of you. Well, what do you

make of this? What is going on here? Well, look, Jimmy may be a Russian Communist at a minimum. He's clearly disturbed. And you know, I'm kind of reminded of the mean Girl's meme. You're kind of obsessed with me. Every night, Jimmy Kimmel's seems to be hitting me. In his monologue, he put out this really horrific photoshopped image of my head on this fat dude's naked body who is straddling an enormous hot dog, which which I don't know if this is like some homoerotic fatasy he has.

It's a little frightening. I guess I should be flattered that it is a ginormous hot dog, but I don't understand why this exists in the Twitter sphere. I will say, though, that I do have a standard policy, which is every time Jimmy hits me, and it seems to be a regular a regular occasion, I respond by simply observing that when Jimmy and I last saw each other, we played basketball. We played one on one hoops and long and short of it, and actually long of it because it was

a really long and ugly game. But the long and short of it is I kicked his ass, and so I've had some fun putting out a highlight video entitled Buckets and Blocks that consists of me hitting jump shots, driving to the lane, driving left, driving right, scoring on him, and then the blocks are just rejecting the hell out of his shots, one after the other after the other.

A few times I foul the hell out of him too, but it is it is a wonderful reminder that that and by the way, that that game came to pass. We actually raised eighty thousand dollars for charity to play that game. But neither one of us wanted to lose, and well one of us did, and Jimmy seems to be having a really hard time getting over it. Yeah,

this is a pretty extreme case of sour grapes. I think mixing that with his ideology and man like, I think the word you used as corrective was pretty disturbing, pretty disgusting, the things that he was posted on Twitter. It's uh, you know. I have to say the game was interesting because he didn't have a sense of humor about it. He was like really serious and like when we walked out on the court. We played at TSU

Texas Southern University. Six thousand people came out to watch the game, I mean, and it was as we're walking out there, he comes out to confetti cannons and like loud music and we had you know, Gus Johnson and Isaiah Thomas and we're broadcasting the event. But but as we're walking out, he turns to me and says, prepared to be humiliated. And it was not. It was not ingest. It was like Ivan Drago and Rocky for going. You know,

if he dies, he dies. That that was essentially his his his sentiment, and I think he thought he was going to have a great time dominating me, and that that is not in fact what happened. Now, I will say one of the ESPN announcers had a point he said, if doctor Naysmith had seen what happened year tonight, he would have invented a different game. It was an ugly game of basketball, but aw aws aw, and poor Jimmy's got to live with that the rest of his life. Yeah, well,

I think that's that's where we leave that. I mean, he can do a seller grapes on Twitter, but you've always got that win in your pockets. All right, Liz, we'll see you back at the end of the show to get into the mail bag. And frankly, I see why you had to get to that topic first, because as disturbing as the invasion by Russia of another country is, nothing could possibly be as disturbing as that photo on the hot dog from Jimmy Kimmel's account. So we will

see you at the end of the show. Now, Senator, into another disturbing topic. This is real. I mean, this is not just a more media hype about something. We know that Vladimir Putin invaded Georgia during the Bush administration. We know he invaded Crimea during the Obama administration. Now it appears that he is poised to go into Ukraine again. How credible is this? What does the timeline look like and why are we supposed to care? What are we supposed to do about it? Yeah, so it is, It

is very credible. The timeline is short. So there are right now over one hundred thousand Russian troops massed on the border of Ukraine, and those numbers are growing. They're growing on a daily basis. And the Biden administration over the past several days is declassified documents that suggest we could see an invasion of Ukraine as early as as the beginning of next year, as January of February of

next year. You know, there are several points, and this stuff is complicated, but you know, in many ways we're getting back to to really the the origins of Verdict. When we started, you know, our very first episode in the basement in the bowels of DC and on the first impeachment trial was explaining Ukraine and Burris an impeachment and natural gas and all of that. You remember, one of our first episodes said, all right, well what is Ukraine.

Let's start with that. You know, Ukraine is a country. It is a country that is to the west of Russia. It is a country that used to be to the part of the Soviet Union, and when the Soviet Union broke out, it's one of many countries that became its own independent country. Why does Russia want to invade Ukraine? The simple answer. Vladimir Putin has been very candid about it. He has said that he considers the dissolution of the Soviet Union to be the single greatest geopolitical disaster of

the twentieth century. He wants to reassemble the Soviet Union. He has images of Russian greatness and Soviet greatness and he wants to restore that, and that means he wants to conquer his neighbors. Now, why is this happening now? Some of it is testing a new president, and you're absolutely right that Russia and all of our enemies test

a new president. Some of it is a response to Biden's incredible weakness and ineffectiveness in Afghanistan and the disastrous withdrawal and surrender there, which we've talked about on Verdict, made every enemy of America much more likely to engage in aggression against US because they took a measure of the man in the Oval Office and determined Joe Biden

is unlikely to do anything about it. But There's another cause here, which we've talked about before on Verdict, but I think it is worth drilling down in some detail, and that cause of this Russian hostility is a decision Joe Biden personally made to surrender to Russia on Nordstream too, a natural gas pipeline that Russia is building from Russia to Germany. And that decision Biden took what had been a foreign policy victory that we had won, and he

turned it into a loss. And that is the direct but or cause of why Russia is prepared to invade Ukraine. Now let's start with what does a pipeline have to do with Ukraine? Because that that's not immediately evident to someone who is analyzing it and thinking through it. Well, I remember I had this thought when you when you brought it up center, and we we've talked about it a little bit on this show. But I would like because because it's things seem to be coming to a head.

So I do want to be able to understand this. But I think I think there's this question of, as Barack Obama said, why do I care if Russia exerts influence in its traditional sphere of influence? What do I care about Ukraine? I don't know anything. Most people, as you point out, probably don't even know where Ukraine is on a map. And and what does it have to do with this pipeline. I guess I care about pipelines because I care when gas goes through the roof like

it is doing right now. But but where is the interest for the average American citizen? So Vladimer Putin is a bully, He's a thug, he's a tyrant. He commits murder and torture and lies and oppression on a regular basis, and he wants to dominate his neighbors. He wants to rebuild the Soviet Union. Now, look, we spent decades fighting a Cold War. The Soviet Union was a very dangerous adversary. It's not an America's interest to see Putin rebuild the

Soviet Union. It's not an America's interest to see an enemy who wants to defeat us gets stronger and more powerful. When it comes to energy, there's a second component of it, which is that Putin uses energy to blackmail Europe, to

force Europe to do what he wants. And you know, there's a phrase that John McCain used to use that I think is a really apt phrase, which is that Russia is a gas station with a country attached, which is the source of Putin's money that he uses to pay his army, to buy his tanks, to buy his missiles, to develop the nuclear weapons he has pointed at you right now in Nashville, pointed at every major country in America.

The source of that money is energy, selling oil and gas. Now, twenty fourteen was the last time Putin invaded Ukraine, and he invaded a section of uk Ukraine called Crimea, but then he stopped. He didn't go all the way into Ukraine. He didn't invade the entire country, didn't go into the capital, which you know, the capital. Everyone used to pronounce at Kiev, and now it's it's considered I guess more enlightened to

pronounce it Kiev. So I have to refer to one of my favorite dinners as Chicken Kiev apparently, not chicken Kiev apparently. Whether it's one syllable or two, I will leave that to the linguists. But the reason he didn't march into all of Ukraine is right now, the principal route that Russia uses to get its natural gas to

Europe is going through Ukraine. Is pipelines that go right through the middle of Ukraine, and Ukraine makes a bunch of money on these pipelines because it's how they send Russian gas to Europe to heat their homes, to provide energy for their homes and right so, Putin faced the risk if he if he sent tanks into the heart of Ukraine, if he invaded Kiev, that those pipelines could be destroyed, that they could lose their ability to get

their gas to market, and it protected Ukraine's safety and security. So what did Putin do in response? Well, the very next year, twenty fifteen, is when he began building the Nordstream two pipeline. And basically what he said is, all right, I don't want to have to go through Ukraine to get my gas to Europe, so let's build a pipeline that goes underwater and goes directly from Russia to Germany. That cuts Ukraine out of the process, so then we can march into Ukraine and they can't do a damn

thing about it. Well, he began building that pipeline. It took a lot of time. As we got to twenty nineteen, the pipeline was nearly complete. And I have been the leading voice, the leading actor in the Senate to stop this pipeline. Because this pipeline, if built, if online gives putin billions of dollars to attack Americans, attack our allies. I want putin week and I want him not aggressive

and hostile. So in the summer of twenty nineteen, I introduce legislation in the Senate to sanction the companies that were building Nordstream two. It was bipartisan legislation. I got brought together Republicans, Democrats, passed it through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, passed it through the entire Senate, passed it through the entire Congress, and President Trump signed it into law. Now here's something amazing, Michael. They were building the pipeline.

They were actively rushing trying to complete the pipeline. It was about ninety percent complete when President Trump signed the sanctions into law. They stopped building the pipeline that day, not the next day, not a week later, not a month later. The day the sanctions were signed into law, and they were designed because they would have bankrupted any company that continued to build the pipeline. So what happens next. This is December of twenty nineteen. The pipeline lays dormant

for over a year. By the way, one of the talking points today as well, it was ninety percent done. It was ninety percent done. Well, that's true, but a ninety percent done pipeline is zero percent done. It doesn't work till you connect both ends and turn it on, unless unless the oil is going to jump out and make it that last ten percent, then it's useless. Yep. So for over a year we had defeated this pipeline. We had won. It was a massive bipartisan victory over Russia.

It was a victory for Europe, it was a victory for Ukraine, and it was a victory for America. Then Joe Biden comes to office and the Biden foreign policy team. Number one, their view towards bullies and enemies of America is weakness, is weakness towards the Taliban and Afghanistan, weakness towards the Chinese communist weakness towards Iran, and weakness towards Russia. But number two, they really elevate Germany in their foreign policy.

And you know, I've joked that that the Biden foreign policy team has votive candle of Angela Merkel under their beds at night that they just they they worship Merkel for whatever reason. And Germany wants the pipeline. So Biden reversed course and surrendered on these sanctions. And here it's really quite amazing. The pipeline is stopped the day Trump signs the sanctions in December of twenty nineteen. Joe Biden

is sworn into office January twentieth, twenty twenty one. Do you know what day Biden Putin begins building the pipeline again? What day? January twenty fourth, twenty twenty one, four days after Biden puts his hand on the Bible, Putin begins building the pipeline. What you've what you've drawn here that I did not appreciate before it. Obviously I understood there's some connection here between this pipeline and and what Russia is doing in Ukraine. But the pipeline is a symbol.

It's a physical representation of the imperial ambition of Vladimir Putin. The Whole point of the pipeline, other than saving a little bit of money, I guess, is to free up Russia to go pursue whatever imperial ambitions it has in Ukraine. So you kill the pipeline, you kill or at least seriously dampen the imperial ambitions. And if you give the OK on the pipeline, you are tacitly giving the OK on Russia going into Ukraine. Michael, That's exactly right. And

it's a point that I made repeatedly. It's a point that senators, both Republicans and Democrats made over and over and over again. It's also a point that was made

by Ukraine in Poland. So this summer, when Biden formally surrendered to Putin and waived the sanctions that were part of US law, Ukraine and Poland put out a joint statement condemning that decision and saying giving into Nordstream two creates a grave security threat against Ukraine and Central Europe because once the pipeline is on, Putin can drive the tanks into Ukraine and not worry about whether they destroy their pipeline or not, because he has another way to

get the gas to market. The amazing thing is, so where are we now on the pipeline. The pipeline is now complete. So Biden surrendered allowed Putin to complete it, but it's not on yet. And the reason it's not on is before it can be turned on, it has to go through certification. It has to go through the final regulatory approval in Europe before they can turn the pipeline on, which means Biden can stop this right now if he simply follows the law. So he has waived

the sanctions, he could revoke the waiver. And so you know, earlier today we had testimony in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee from Victoria Newland, who is the under Secretary of State, and I asked her directly, could President Biden today in those sanctions on Nordstream two by simply revoking his waivers? She said, yes, he could do it today.

If you want to stop Russian tanks from driving in into Ukraine and conquering them, Joe Biden needs to bring out a damn pen and piece of paper and impose the sanctions that Congress is mandated. But he didn't want to do it, and so Democrats are playing the blame game. It's amazing. You know, you asked why should we care about Ukraine? Listen, let me be clear. We shouldn't send

American troops to go defend Ukraine. I have no interest in sending American soldiers or sailors or airmen and marines to be in harm's way to go fight the Russian army. That's a bad idea. But we've got enormous leverage. These sanctions are using American economic power to stop military tyrants from dominating Europe and threatening America, and we should use them. We should also be providing lethal defensive weapons to Ukraine. Ukraine wants to defend themselves, but Russia's got a lot

better weaponry, a lot better equipment than Ukraine does. In Ukraine, I went and visited Ukraine back in twenty fourteen and went to the Maiden Square where where you had protesters were being shot in the square when they were standing up. And the people of Ukraine want to be allied with America. They want to be allied with the West, they want to be allied with Europe. They don't want to be

subject to Putin and Russia's domination. And it's in our interest for them to be an ally and so, but you know what, Joe Biden and the Democrats canceled the sale of lethal defensive military equipment to Ukraine. So they're not even helping the Ukrainians defend themselves. And if Biden doesn't change course, I think it is the odds are high that within ninety days Russia will have in invaded and sadly in all likelihood conquered Ukraine and taken a

major step towards reassembling the Soviet Union. Because Joe Biden is too weak to stand up to Putin. It is astounding. This is a scary prospect, obviously, but it's very important and people should bookmark this episode if you're listening to it, because what you're saying is right now, it's not too late. Joe Biden can't just say, well, whoopsie Daisy, there was

nothing I could do. It is not too late. They're actually concrete measures you could take right now that could stop this, that could prevent this next step in Russia's imperial ambitions. As usual, of course, we're running late, but I do have to get to one story before we get to the mailbag, and it's on this very same point of not too late. There are things we can do right now to maintain our way of life and

protect protect our freedoms and our rights. There was a move by Democrats, and unfortunately some Republicans I saw went along with this during the debate over the National Defense Authorization Act that would draft women, that would that would create this system where women could be drafted potentially to go die overseas. We touched on it when this was being debated on this show. I just had a visceral reaction to it. I thought, this is so disgusting, this

is so backwards. What kind of a country America is, basically say, basically wealthy, basically secure, and we're going to drag our daughters and send them overseas and draft. I thought, what reasonable person could ever get behind this? But it looked like it was a done deal. And then just in the past few days you and some of your colleagues sponsored and cosponsored and amendment to rip this out of the NDAA, and that appears to be successful. Well, look,

that's exactly right. And it's for over a decade there's been this effort to try to make girls and women subject to the draft, subject to being forced into the military against their wishes, and it is driven by the Democrats. The Democrats emphatically want to be able to draft our daughters, and sadly, there are a bunch of compliant Republicans that are scared to stand up to it. They think, oh, well, well if I say we shouldn't draft our daughters somehow

I don't like women. What utter garbage. Listen, I've got two daughters. If my girls want to serve at the military, God bless them, I will encourage them. I will cheer them on. That is a choice that is open to them. If they decide they want to serve in that capacity, bravo, that's their choice. But there's a difference between opening up our military. We have men and women who serve honorably,

voluntarily and forcibly. Conscripting a woman and putting her in harm's way when there are real biological differences between men and women, and to women into the military into combat against their wishes is putting them at real risk. Are there some women that are badasses? Or there's some women that that could whip your butt or whip my butt? Sure, but probably not every woman. I'm confident, Michael, there is at least some woman who you could beat arm wrestling,

I hope. So I appreciate your confidence in me, Senator. I'm not totally sure, but thank you. For the compliment. I'm with you. I've got believe in you on that. But you know, this battle and I got to say it was really looking looking bad that that that the Democrats were ramming this through, that half of the Republicans were surrendering on this. And there's a long history on this issue. So I gotta tell you I've been fighting against this for for nine years, and on the Senate

Arm Services Committee. You know, one of the biggest proponents of drafting our daughters was John McCain. John mc kane loved the idea, and he was chairman of the Senate Arm Services Committee. I was on the Arm Services Committee, and I would battle him. I'd argue and yell, and McCain would curse at you. I mean he was he had a temper and he would yell and curse, and we had some epic battles. I seem to recall he

said some not very polite things about you. On occasion, every now and again he called me a whacko bird. I thought that was a particularly nice. In fact, I had some activists who gave me a baseball cap with whacko bird written on in a picture of Daffy Duck but so what would happen every year in the Senate arm Services Committee is he would fight for it, ram it through, and he would get enough Republicans to go along with the Democrats that he would succeed in that.

But I would work with conservatives in the House and we'd pull it out. And so I won those battles year after year after year, much to his volcanic rage. He was furious about it. So there's an interesting story on this, Michael. So, beginning of twenty seventeen, Donald Trump's the new president. He nominates to be the General Counsel of the Army a guy named Ryan Newman. Now Ryan, it's a great guy. He had. He was my chief counsel in the Senate. Ryan was a West Point graduate,

served in the Army. He was a captain in the Army. Ryan clerked on the US Supreme Court for Justice Alito. Ryan was a student of mine at the University of Texas Law School. So when I was teaching Supreme Court litigation, he was one of my very best students, and so I was very enthusiastic when President Trump nominated Ryan to be the General Counsel of the Army. So Ryan's hearing

is confirmation hearing is set. The day before his hearing, he goes in to meet with the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, John McCain, and he sits down in McCain's office and McCain asks him, says, Ryan, what are your views on drafting women? And Ryan gave exactly the right answer for a lawyer nominated to that job. And he says, Senator, that is a policy decision for Congress to make. Congress is elected to make that policy decision.

If I was confirmed as General Counsel of the Army, I would implement whatever policy decision Congress made, which is exactly the right answer. McCain looks at him and goes, bullshit, I want your personal views, and Ryan says, well, Sir, personally, I think it's a bad idea. McCain looks at him and says, get the hell out of my office, throws

him out of his office, cancels his hearing. The next day, and for the next couple of months, McCain refused to have a hearing with him, and ultimately the Trump White House with through the nomination and they named him instead Deputy General Counsel at the Department of Defense. Which doesn't

require a Senate confirmation. So McCain was so pissed off about the fact that I had been leading the fight for years against his efforts to draft our daughters, that he torpedoed an incredibly qualified guy's nomination to be General Counsel of the Army because he was mad at him,

and he was really mad at me. And I got to say, you know, John McCain was an incredible war hero, but he may be rolling over in his grave because once again we've beaten the efforts of the bad guys to try to draft our daughters and force him into combat. That is great stuff. You know. I'm sure having Professor Cruz on the old CV may not have helped your friend very much in this meeting with Senator McCain, but this is really great stuff. And I didn't know that.

I didn't realize that McCain had been pushing so hard for that. There are a number of Republicans who were pushing for it. Frankly, I found it disqualifying. I just I felt if you were of the view that we should forcibly draft America's daughters, you just don't get it. There's just something has gone wrong. In your political vision. I did not think that we were going to be able to get it out this time. I thought that the Democrats had succeeded. And so seriously, I mean this.

I hate, I hate to give a sincere compliment on the show, but great stuff. Just kudos, thank you, great stuff. I am so glad that you and some of your colleagues were able to pull this out and do the right thing. Absolutely wonderful. Should we bring this this is too nice? I feel I feel awkward being this nice? Shall we bring Liz back on? Absolutely a little bit of mail back before we go, By the way, speaking of someone who could beat both of us arm wrestling Liza, well,

well we'll have to. I'll have to save that at least for episode one hundred. We can't. We can't pull that out in episode ninety eight. But Michael, you might have to continue to feel awkward for just another second, because I do have to echo what you were saying. Senator Crew is on behalf of my daughter. I thank you for fighting this fight. It's the right thing to do, and it's a politically incorrect fight. In you know, this era of critical gender theory that the left is trying

to force on all of our children. But I sincerely, I sincerely thank you for fighting this fight on behalf of America's daughter and my own daughter. That being said, we have great questions from our Verdict plus community tonight, from our subscribers over on Verdict Plus and anybody who is not already a subscriber on Verdict Plus. We have a great deal between now and Christmas. You can become an annual subscriber for the very low, very cheap amount

of money fifty six dollars a year. This is basically the cheapest that you'll ever see it. So please join us over there if you want exclusive access to the Senator to be able to ask questions to Michael and to the Senator on these episodes. So, Senator Cruz, the first question is of course for you from Flow Brenton. This is a pretty interesting one. She says, I love Verdict, but right now Nancy Pelosi is abusing her position with

her January sixth Soviet style commission. The DJ is at her back, and call I cannot enjoy the entertainment of Verdict, Flow says, while our constitution is being torn to shreds, and not a single Republican congressman or senator stepping up to the plate to protect us. This is disgraceful. It's time to take care of business. So, Senator Crews, my question is, how do you address this anger that's not just felt by Flow but by the American people regarding

how the Democrats are handling the January sixth Commission. Well, listen, Flow is exactly right that what Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats are doing is a sham. It is a political kangaroo court. This is a commission set up in Congress that is all Democrats. And then when Kevin McCarthy, the leader of House Republicans, named some Republicans to it, Nancy Pelosi said, no, you can't have the Republicans you want, and so she put Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger on

there instead. Which when you have a Democratic speaker picking who's wants, let me tell you the conclusions are already decided. This is a political operation. The conclusions are that every Republican in America is a terrorist and the only hope for Americas for Democrats to rule us as our benevolent dictators for the next thousand years. That's the conclusion of the Nancy Pelosi January sixth Commission. That is designed to

be the conclusion. It is the purpose of the show trial, and it is consistent with the abuse of power we've seen from the Democrats. You know, I will say Flow's question talked about the Department of Justice and their abuse of power, and you're right that this is an incredibly

political Department of Justice. I can tell you that I, for one, am doing everything humanly possible to try to hold dj to account, to hold the Attorney General to account, to shine a light on their abuse of power, to shine a light on their partisan and political witch hunts and persecution of people for their political views, including free speech, whether it is targeting parents for going to school boards and speaking out, or targeting people on January six who

engaged in peaceful protest that is protected by the constitution. Violence is not if someone engaged in violence on January sixth or any other day of the year. If you violently assault a police officer, I don't care if your politics or right wing or left wing, I don't care where you fall. If you engage in violence, you should

be prosecuted. But the Democrats are cynically using those that did engage in violence as an excuse to target and go after the political speech of millions of Americans they just happen to disagree with, and it is a total abuse of power, and I agree we need to do

everything we can to hold them accountable. It is disappointing too, I think to see, you know, the Republicans Cheney and Kinsing are acting like democrats when they have a responsibility to their constitutions and to the American people to make sure that the DOJ isn't abusing their power. But they're not living up to that responsibility. So the next question is from our tried and true friend here on Verdict, this is real truth, Cactus. She asks, what happened at

the school in Michigan was terrible. I do think on a legal level, it is strange that they're pursuing charges against the parents. She asks, has this ever been done before? Do you think it will set a legal precedent to press charges against the parents of children who commit violent acts. Well, it's it's a good question, and we don't know all

of the facts of what happened there. It was a horrific school shooting of yet another troubled teenage boy who took a gun to school and opened fired on his classmates, and we've seen far too many of those, horrifically across the country. I've seen too many of those in the

state of Texas. I was at the Santa Fe High School just outside of Houston on the morning of that horrific shooting in Santa Fe High schools less than an hour from my house, so I was within minutes after the shooting, and it was it remains one of the worst things I've ever seen in my life. We've seen far too many of these. Whether the parents can and should be held to account depends on the facts and circumstances of what happened, and it also depends on what

the state law is. My understanding is in this circumstance that the parents had had purchased the firearms, had kept them in an unlocked drawer, I believe, where where their teenage son could access them. And it also appears from some of the back and force that the parents had good reason to know, or at least very seriously suspect that this was a deeply troubled child who could well

be endangered others. And if those are the facts, I think there are a lot of states, Michigan and others where parents could be held liable if if you you know, I'm a gun owner, but I keep I can keep our firearms locked up because I don't want our kids accessing our firearms. And I think responsible gun owners that that's what we do, is we don't want to see children, particularly young children, playing with guns having an accidental shooting. Lots of bad things can happen when kids have access

and unrestricted access to guns. All the more so depending on the facts of what the parents knew about their son, and if there were from the early discussions, the texts that were going back and forth between the shooter and his mom, it certainly seems like the parents knew that

this was a very unstable and very dangerous kid. And I would say that that there's a fairly long standing principle, certainly of civil liability, but even of criminal liability if you are recklessly allowing firearms to fall all into the hands of a child under your care who you have reason to know as a dangered others. So, Senator, that answer was absolutely outrageous because you have violated the rule

of modern political discourse. You didn't make it completely reductive and simplistic, and so I think what everyone is expecting is you need someone to say absolutely, one hundred percent ban all guns, repeal the Second Amendment, and throw anyone who owns a gun in the clank, or you know, you can do whatever you want with your gun, and you can leave twenty rifles on the roof of your home and with big signs that say, come take this rifle right here. But of course that's not the case.

There is such a thing as prudence, and our liberties require that we exercise them with prudence, and so I think that's a terrific way to view it. And it's obviously it's going to change state by state, and political activists are going to try to exploit these events as often they do, to score whatever ideological point they have. But but what's much more interesting than those shallow ideological points are the details or the facts and the questions

of prudence. Right because the mother allegedly texted her son, don't do it. As soon as she heard it on the news, the father reportedly called the police have reported that his gun was missing. He said he suspected that it was his son that was shooting. So these parents had some awareness. It also should spark the conversation not just about the laws that are currently on the books, but how should this be handled If parents are aware of this, are they culpable, should they be liable? What

should what should the laws be? And that's a policy discussion that politicians should have as well as talking about the diversionary the diversionary policies that some of these schools have implemented when they see red flags from these students, including violent drawings and violent comments, and how they handle that outside of the criminal justice system. Now, look, I think that's exactly right. And you look at some of

these shootings. You look at the shooting in Parkland and Florida, and there were all sorts of warning signs that that shooter. And by the way, one thing is a consistent policy matter I do. I will not say the names of any of these shooters. These evil bastards who commit mass murder, they want their names to go down and infamy, and I very consciously will never repeat their names because I'm

not interested in giving them that infamy. But the Parkland shooter, there were multiple interactions with law enforcement, and lets you pointed out a policy that politicians have put in place that when you had people that engage in acts of violence and threats against fellow students and the schools cover it up, and the schools don't report it to law enforcement, in the schools don't treat it seriously, it has the potential of escalating and putting the lives of other students

at real risk, right, and that that'll certainly be interesting to watch unfold in the case of what happened in Michigan, because the student apparently had had been called into the office for making violent comments and the school told his parents to get him counseling. Now, we don't know all the details of whether that should have been escalated to law enforcement, but there were certainly those red flags. Senator.

The next question is from Brent. Brent asks about a video that has gotten quite a bit of attention online. It's a Congressman Dan Crenshaw throwing shade at the Freedom Caucus. Like I said, this has made the rounds interesting comments from Congressman Crenshall here, what is your what is your stance on this video? On the comments from Congressman Crenshaw, listen, I've I've seen the video. I don't agree with what Dan had to say. I like Dan, I like him personally.

I think he's he's talented. I'm certainly grateful for his service to our nation. He'd be lost an eye defending the nation. I'm grateful for that. And he's a charismatic guys. He's got a sense of humor, he's got some some verb, and he's willing to fight. All of those are good things. You know. In this video he's he's singing the praises of Adam Kinzinger and he's crapping all over the Freedom Caucus. I think that's pretty misguided. I think Kensinger has gone

completely off the rails. And there's a reason that he's not running for reelection because Kensinger couldn't get re elected. And I think the Freedom Caucus, they are consistently the strongest conservatives in Congress. And you know, it's there is a particular contempt that that some congressional moderates have for conservatives who actually follow through on their promises. And you know,

it was interesting. I think the phrase that Dan used, he said, well, there are performance politicians and they are legislators. It is always a problem whenever you see someone use a word like legislator, and their voice always dropped an octave. I don't know why, but it's much more serious when it's a legislator. What they mean is someone who's going to cut a bunch of deals with Democrats and give in.

What they mean are the kind of Republicans who voted with the Democrats on the big infrastructure bill that just came in. That's what they mean. And actually the other phrase he didn't use it, but I was kind of surprised he didn't. The other phrase that the that you see congressional mods they love to use as they say, there are workhorses and show horses, and what's a show horse.

A show horse is anyone who actually does what they promise their constituents they would do, as compared to the workhorses who suck up to the Democrats and do what the Democrats want them to do. And you know, look, I guess it is easy sometimes for people to fall into that rhetoric. I think Dan was wrong in this one. There's also just an easy trap that unfortunately some I know a number of my conservatives have conservative friends have fallen into, which is and especially this is true in DC.

You start to believe the things that you hear everyone talking about it. And so if you hear constantly that Liz Cheney is this great Republican leader, or Adam Kinzinger even more ridiculous, if you hear it enough and you're surrounded by it, you kind of start to believe it, or at least some people do. And I just think that, as you said, Senator a little earlier, when we're talking about the January sixth Committee, the purpose of Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger in Congress right now is to do

what Democrats want them to do. They might have an R next to their name, but their actual utility at the crucial fights is to act as the sort of court jesters in the kingdom of liberalism. That's why they'll go on CNN. They won't generally go on the conservative channels. And so it's talk about a performance that we're seeing, talk about show voting that that to me is the most spectacular sensationalist performance of them all, and you can

see it on CNN. And when when you look at the Republicans who are constantly on S and N bashing other Republicans, that to me, those are the real, the real performance. Well, and their their purpose is even more than that. It's to be a beard. It's to cover up what's going on. This is a kangaroo court, and they're there because they have it are after their name, and it's to dress it up up as something it is not, so so that it has some modicum of credibility.

And listen, the reality of it is going to be. Kinsinger is not running for reelection because he couldn't get re elected. I think Liz Cheney is extremely likely to be beaten in her primary because she has basically told Republicans and conservatives in the state of Wyoming piss off. And and I think in a little over a year both of them will be regular contributors on MSNBC. And

so they're auditioning for MSNBC right now. Um, And and that's that's not exactly that that that is not exactly worthy of dropping your voices, uh to your voice two octaves and calling them great legislators as a result. That's right. This is the feeling you have. It's like when you when you see a friend of yours making any kind of decision that you don't think it's a great one. You'll say no, Dan get away from Kinsinger, don't don't do it, don't don't. Don't believe the lies, because we're

we're talking about truth and lies. I generally find that when I tune into CNN, I'm seeing a lot of lies, and when I tune into CNN, I tend to see a lot of Adam Kinzinger. You know what you're not saying when you turn into CNN, Chris Cuomo, it's too soon, the Senator, it's too soon. But oh my goodness, so right.

It's also the only reason that I'm the only reason I'm grateful for videos like this is because it shows us, as the voters, the true character of the people who are supposed to represent us, so it better informs our vote. So I'm disappointed in what Crenshaw said, of course, but it does. It does show us a little bit of his decision making process or his judgment, and for better for worse, we do need to know that as the voters.

On that note, if there is anybody on a college campus across the country who wants to bring Verdict with Ted Crews, the Senator with Michael Knowles to their campus this coming spring, submit your application by December fifteenth. You're can apply at yaf dot org slash verdict that is yaf dot org slash verdict to bring Verdict live to your college campus. It's a great old time. December fifteenth is the deadline, though, so submit those applications very very soon. Excellent,

Thank you, lez and Senator. I am so glad that you got to the most delightful news story where there's a lot of heavy news stories today, you know, talking about what's going on in Russia, how they're a little bit of hope there is still time maybe to stop things, if Biden will stand up and do it. The winds that we've had where we're pulling some of our conservative friends back from the precipice. But the most delightful story

is that the House of Cuomo has fallen. It's you know, it reminds us there's always a little silver lining in the storm clouds of politics. Michael. I will note one of my favorite words foreign words is shaden freud, the German word for taking pleasure in the suffering of others. And I'll suggest perhaps a slight tweak to that, which is let us revel in shadden Fredo, taking joy in the suffering of Fredo Cuomo, the troubled younger brother who I believe was last seen in a rowboat on Lake

Tahosts saying Hail Mary. And now he is on CNN no more, a legislator, a basketball champion, and a linguist as well. Senator. Thank you very much. I'm Michael Knowles. This is Verdict with Ted Cruise. So I tried to get the great and powerful J Hay to draw a cactus on the vesta board for this little, this little bit that we're doing, but he could not produce. So let me just tell you. We have a twenty percent off sale on the Verdict Merch store right now. You

can get one of those sweet sweet cactus hats. I would put one on for you to model it, but I'm a little vain of my hair today. I think i'mving a pretty good hair day, so I didn't want to mess it up. But go over to Verdict with Ted Cruise dot com slash shop and if you use the promo code Sam, then you will get twenty percent off the entire shop between now and Christmas. Twenty percent off. That's a really good deal. We have t shirts, we have cactus merch, we have hats, we have all kinds

of cool stuff over there. Between now and Christmas. You get the great deal twenty percent off if you use the promo code Santa. Then, I don't know. In the meantime, maybe the Great Powerful ja Hey will figure out how to put a T shirt or a cactus on the Vesta board. But while he's figuring that out, I invite you join us Verdict with Ted Cruise dot com slash shop to buy really cool merch. You get twenty percent off if you use the promo code Santa at checkout.

That's actually pretty good. 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 conservative causes, organizations, and candidates across the country. In twenty twenty two, Jobs Freedom and Security Pack plans to donate to conservative candidates running for Congress and helped the Republican Party across the nation.