Verdict with Ted Cruz - FOUR New Injunctions Against Trump, as Dems' Lawfare Continues plus Nike Funding Transgender Research & Dems in Chaos Nationwide

00:00:00.000 This is an iHeart Podcast.

00:00:02.660 Guaranteed human.

00:00:04.280 Welcome. It is verdict with Senator Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you.

00:00:07.820 It's nice to have you with us on this Friday morning.

00:00:09.880 And Senator, we've got some big stories to talk about today.

00:00:13.000 Today, we're going to talk about several issues.

00:00:15.400 We're going to talk about the ongoing lawfare that is being waged against President Trump and the Trump administration.

00:00:22.580 This is the strategy of the Democrats to use the courts to sue, sue, sue.

00:00:27.180 And sadly, they're finding radical district judges willing to enjoin the president over and over and over again.

00:00:35.000 Four lawsuits, four district court losses in the past 24 hours.

00:00:40.080 We're going to break them down so you understand what happened.

00:00:43.400 Next, we're going to talk about the radical transgender ideology that the left continues to embrace. 0.86

00:00:49.240 And sadly, a great many in corporate America do as well.

00:00:52.500 Tennis legend Martina Navratilova has called out Nike for funding transgender research, for undermining women.

00:01:01.420 We're going to talk about that and how it reflects just how radical the left continues to be.

00:01:06.880 And finally, we're going to talk about how the Democrat Party in Washington is breaking down, how the media is losing their minds.

00:01:13.640 And CNN, MSNBC, they are ringing the alarm bells that the Democrats' extreme policies are so out of touch with the American people that they're losing support every single day.

00:01:26.260 And yet, the Democrats' hatred of Donald Trump is so great, they can't pull back from their radical policy positions.

00:01:34.460 All of them we're going to break down in today's show.

00:01:36.340 Yeah, and you mentioned that last story, which in a very interesting way is going to connect with this first story.

00:01:42.340 It is being celebrated by the left and the media that these judges, I describe them as activist judges, are saying,

00:01:50.200 watch this, we're going to get involved and we're going to stop Donald Trump and what he's doing.

00:01:55.420 The mandate he has from the voters, he was elected president of the United States of America,

00:01:59.400 an agenda that is overwhelmingly popular with the majority of Americans.

00:02:02.800 And we're going to just stop what he's doing.

00:02:05.660 And this is another example of lawfare.

00:02:08.140 The fact that there are, though, four that have come down in a 24-hour period,

00:02:12.900 I got to ask the question, and there's so many listening that are going to want to know this, Senator,

00:02:18.140 which is, is this not orchestrated?

00:02:20.620 I mean, when you have four in a row, is that a coincidence?

00:02:23.740 Is that how the court systems work?

00:02:25.320 Or is this an orchestrated, clear effort?

00:02:28.500 They wanted a major smackdown on the president's agenda.

00:02:31.260 Well, it's orchestrated by the plaintiffs, but not the courts themselves.

00:02:36.520 But this is going to be the pattern we're going to see.

00:02:38.920 The last four years, we saw the left wage lawfare against Donald Trump by indicting him not once,

00:02:44.140 not twice, not three times, four different times.

00:02:46.900 We saw Democrats going to court to try to throw Donald Trump off the ballot because they were terrified the voters were going to elect him,

00:02:54.680 which, of course, they did.

00:02:55.700 That's the same reason they indicted him, because they were terrified voters were going to elect him, which, of course, they did.

00:03:01.940 Now, now that President Trump is back in office, this is the next phase of their lawfare.

00:03:07.320 And every single day of the Trump administration, we are going to see blue state attorneys general and left-wing activist groups filing lawsuits.

00:03:16.640 And they are filing them.

00:03:17.820 They are seeking out extreme left-wing judges.

00:03:20.920 They are going to blue jurisdictions, particularly blue jurisdictions, where they are confident they will get radicals in robes.

00:03:27.880 And so far, the pattern is having considerable success.

00:03:30.940 Now, I am hopeful that on appeal, the courts of appeals or the Supreme Court are going to reverse this.

00:03:36.560 But this is their strategy to try to stop the agenda that the American people elected President Trump to implement.

00:03:44.200 So let's start with the first one.

00:03:45.400 The first one is a case called League of Women Voters Election Fund versus Trump.

00:03:49.940 And it deals with election integrity.

00:03:52.280 Now, election integrity is an issue that has widespread support among the voters.

00:03:58.160 Voters want our elections to be secure.

00:04:00.840 And if you look at the United States, the United States laws concerning election integrity are far behind many other nations.

00:04:09.060 So, for example, India and Brazil are tying voter identification to a biometric database.

00:04:18.700 The United States, in contrast, largely relies on self-attestation for citizenship.

00:04:24.580 Germany and Canada both require the use of paper ballots, counted in public by local officials.

00:04:30.840 America, on the other hand, we have a patchwork of voting methods that lead to serious chain of custody problems. 0.88

00:04:39.840 Other countries, like Denmark and Sweden, they limit mail-in voting to those unable to vote in person.

00:04:47.000 And they don't count late-arriving votes, regardless of the date of the postmark.

00:04:51.940 Nonetheless, many American elections, particularly those in blue states, feature mass voting by mail,

00:04:58.240 with many Democrat officials accepting ballots without postmarks, or those received after Election Day.

00:05:05.840 Now, what does federal law say about this?

00:05:08.580 Multiple federal laws make it clear that only American citizens are prohibited to vote in federal elections.

00:05:16.360 And yet we see, particularly in blue states, that requirement, that legal federal requirement being violated.

00:05:22.320 Well, on March 25th of this year, President Trump issued an executive order that was called

00:05:27.220 Preserving and Protecting the Integrity of American Elections.

00:05:30.940 And it is focused on requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote.

00:05:36.600 Almost instantaneously, a group of left-wing organizations sued President Trump.

00:05:41.360 And they sued him in the District of Columbia Court.

00:05:44.800 And a liberal judge, Judge Colleen Collar-Cotelli, who was appointed by Bill Clinton,

00:05:51.260 granted a preliminary injunction and blocked the Trump administration from implementing the executive order,

00:05:56.520 from requiring proof of citizenship.

00:05:59.580 Her reasoning, I've got to say, makes very little sense.

00:06:02.840 Her reasoning, she says, well, the power to regulate elections is given to Congress and given to the states, not the president.

00:06:12.240 Well, she ignores the fact that Congress has legislated.

00:06:17.080 Congress has passed legislation making clear that only American citizens can vote in federal elections.

00:06:24.560 And so once Congress has acted, the Constitution, Article 2 of the Constitution, gives the president a duty to, quote,

00:06:32.960 take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

00:06:35.760 That's what the president is doing.

00:06:37.740 And yet, to left-wing activists, they don't want the president to enforce federal law.

00:06:44.260 And so this appeal will go to the D.C. Circuit.

00:06:47.240 It's going to matter immensely what the panel of judges are that are on the D.C. Circuit.

00:06:52.520 But this is one example, and we're going to go through several more,

00:06:56.960 of how left-wing groups are going to wage war against the president,

00:07:01.060 implementing what the American people elected him to implement.

00:07:04.020 They were all filed in very liberal courts in front of liberal judges that had no problem saying,

00:07:09.820 yep, I want to be a part of this lawfare.

00:07:11.800 The first one was filed in D.C.

00:07:13.820 The second one was filed in San Francisco.

00:07:16.260 And it deals with Trump's executive orders to cut off funding to sanctuary cities,

00:07:20.740 to cities that defy federal immigration law.

00:07:24.180 Again, this is the president seeking to enforce federal law.

00:07:28.600 And yet, the plaintiffs went and sought out a judge, Judge William Orrick.

00:07:32.060 He's an Obama appointee in San Francisco,

00:07:34.160 who granted an injunction against enforcing those executive orders.

00:07:38.020 Now, I've got to say, the plaintiffs were not surprised with this,

00:07:40.940 because this is the same district judge who granted the order against the exact same thing in the first Trump administration.

00:07:48.400 So they went back to the same judge.

00:07:50.400 They said, hey, would you do it again?

00:07:51.740 And by the way, in the first Trump administration, that went up on appeal to the Ninth Circuit.

00:07:56.160 The Ninth Circuit is consistently the most left-wing court of appeals in the country.

00:08:00.380 And the Ninth Circuit upheld that order, stopping the first Trump administration's order against funding sanctuary cities.

00:08:08.680 And sadly, the Supreme Court did not take that appeal.

00:08:11.400 You've got to assume this case will get appealed to the Ninth Circuit.

00:08:14.460 And the Ninth Circuit presumably will do the same thing it did last time.

00:08:17.960 And what we've got to hope for here is this time, the Supreme Court will take the case and reverse it.

00:08:22.660 The third case, the third case deals with DEI.

00:08:27.420 And in fact, the third and fourth cases both deal with DEI.

00:08:31.120 The Department of Education published a Dear Colleague letter reminding Title VI funding recipients

00:08:38.700 that they have to comply with anti-discrimination law.

00:08:43.080 And it made clear that Title VI and the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution bind the recipients.

00:08:49.240 And if you're getting federal money, you've got to comply with federal law.

00:08:54.040 Well, there were two lawsuits that were filed.

00:08:56.180 One that was filed in Maryland.

00:08:59.040 And in Maryland, they were in front of Judge Stephanie Gallagher, who was a Trump appointee.

00:09:03.540 Although I would note, Maryland is a state with two Democrat senators.

00:09:07.380 And the way it works with district judges is the senators have an enormous say.

00:09:11.780 So even though this judge was appointed by Trump,

00:09:14.260 she almost certainly was put forward by the Democrat senators in Maryland.

00:09:18.420 Judge Gallagher issued an injunction saying that the letter that was giving guidance to the recipients of federal funds,

00:09:25.800 that constituted a federal rule, a final federal action,

00:09:29.800 and that it was arbitrary and capricious and violated federal law.

00:09:34.820 Likewise, in New Hampshire, in both lawsuits, the Maryland and New Hampshire lawsuit,

00:09:40.620 it was the teachers union, the National Education Association, and the American Federation of Teachers that filed a lawsuit.

00:09:48.740 And in New Hampshire, the judge there likewise issued an order in joining,

00:09:56.160 in this case, it was Judge Landia McCaffrey, an Obama appointee, who granted the order

00:10:01.720 and said that it was vague, that the Department of Education's instructions were vague,

00:10:09.380 because you couldn't figure out what a DEI program is,

00:10:13.480 and so issued an injunction.

00:10:16.380 You know, it's amazing.

00:10:17.500 Everybody knows what a DEI program is.

00:10:19.760 And what the Department of Education is saying is,

00:10:22.440 if you discriminate based on race, that is illegal.

00:10:26.440 And we're not going to send you money if you are violating federal law.

00:10:31.060 By the way, that's the same thing the Sanctuary City's executive order said.

00:10:35.440 And yet, four district judges, four injunctions,

00:10:40.040 all the latest development in the battle of lawfare,

00:10:43.980 and I will say what we've got to hope for is,

00:10:47.560 number one, the courts of appeals stepping in and reversing these decisions,

00:10:50.940 but number two, ultimately, the Supreme Court stepping in and saying enough is enough.

00:10:56.380 The president has the authority and, in fact, the responsibility to enforce federal law.

00:11:01.840 So let's go through a couple different scenarios here.

00:11:04.140 Number one, I'm assuming that some of these judges know that a smackdown is going to come from this, right? 0.97

00:11:12.240 Like, they're not dumb. 0.80

00:11:13.980 So it's lawfare, but they know this is going to be a fight.

00:11:17.660 They seem to be okay with that, and they don't care that that may be coming.

00:11:23.340 Is that because this is the new plan of, hey, as long as you can delay

00:11:27.860 and then delay a little bit more and then delay a little bit more

00:11:31.800 and hold him up and the Trump agenda up,

00:11:34.540 then that's still success in a weird way to them.

00:11:37.420 Well, let me say, sadly, they don't know they're going to get a smackdown.

00:11:41.120 Well, number one, there are a lot of liberal court of appeals judges.

00:11:45.340 You looked at the San Francisco judge that enjoined the president's sanctuary cities executive order.

00:11:51.280 That judge knows the appeal goes to the Ninth Circuit, which is an extreme left-wing court.

00:11:57.580 And so that judge, I'm sure, is expecting the Ninth Circuit will agree with him.

00:12:01.100 And you do have a final backstop of the Supreme Court,

00:12:04.700 but the Supreme Court takes a tiny fraction of the cases that are appealed to the Supreme Court.

00:12:10.520 And so, listen, I think what the left-wing litigants are gambling is they sue on everything.

00:12:15.600 They're going to win a number of these cases.

00:12:18.280 Some may get overturned on appeal, but some will not.

00:12:22.060 And their approach, I think, is flood the zone.

00:12:25.620 It's the exact same thing they did when they indicted Trump over and over and over again.

00:12:30.380 Not just once.

00:12:31.380 They kept doing it over and over again, saying,

00:12:33.500 OK, if the New York case doesn't stick, we'll bring the D.C. one.

00:12:36.640 All right, if the D.C. one doesn't stick, we'll bring the Georgia one.

00:12:39.420 They're doing the same thing here.

00:12:41.220 They know many, if not most, will be overturned, but they're gambling,

00:12:46.480 and it's probably a right gamble, that not all of them will be overturned.

00:12:50.320 And so every single one of the policy matters that the president is implementing,

00:12:55.600 and to be clear, the president campaigned on these issues.

00:12:58.540 He promised the American people this is what he'd do.

00:13:01.320 And the Democrats, they don't want democracy, the will of the voters to be honored.

00:13:07.860 And so they're using the courts to attack, ultimately, the will of the voters.

00:13:12.680 So final question on this, and there's precedent, right, in the courts in theory.

00:13:17.200 We hear a lot about that.

00:13:18.760 Is there any way that the Supreme Court can say, stop it,

00:13:23.040 and you can't keep doing this over and over again for the next four years?

00:13:26.900 Or are they only able to say that basically on one issue or subject or lawsuit at a time?

00:13:32.740 Well, I'll give you some good news about these four district court decisions,

00:13:36.260 which these decisions were not nationwide injunctions.

00:13:40.520 We've talked about on this show before the phenomenon of nationwide injunctions we've seen.

00:13:45.620 A nationwide injunction is even more egregious, where you prevent the president from enforcing the law

00:13:51.720 or prevent a cabinet agency from enforcing the law against anybody anywhere in the country.

00:13:56.580 They didn't do that here.

00:13:57.960 What they did here is they issued an injunction only with respect to the parties who were suing.

00:14:03.400 So the Sanctuary Cities case, that case was brought by 16 left-wing cities.

00:14:08.760 And so that injunction applies to protect those 16 cities but nobody else.

00:14:13.680 That's at least a good sign.

00:14:15.940 That being said, this battle will keep going over and over again.

00:14:19.520 And I'll tell you one of the things this underscores is why good principled judges matter so much

00:14:24.920 and why the president and the Senate need to keep putting strong court of appeals judges

00:14:29.640 on the bench to overturn this kind of nonsense.

00:14:32.220 Canadian women are looking for more. 1.00

00:14:35.540 More out of themselves, their businesses, their elected leaders, and the world around them.

00:14:39.660 And that's why we're thrilled to introduce the Honest Talk podcast.

00:14:43.300 I'm Jennifer Stewart.

00:14:44.560 And I'm Catherine Clark.

00:14:45.780 And in this podcast, we interview Canada's most inspiring women.

00:14:49.540 Entrepreneurs, artists, athletes, politicians, and newsmakers.

00:14:53.100 All at different stages of their journey.

00:14:55.280 So if you're looking to connect, then we hope you'll join us.

00:14:58.260 Listen to the Honest Talk podcast on iHeartRadio or wherever you listen to your podcasts.

00:15:04.240 All right, Senator, I want to move to this other big issue.

00:15:08.120 And that deals with some really shocking news from a woman. 1.00

00:15:13.140 And if you don't know her background, I think it's important to take a moment

00:15:15.360 so people understand who Martina Navratilova is.

00:15:18.000 She is the most decorated woman in women's tennis history.

00:15:23.240 The number of Grand Slams that she has won is just incredible.

00:15:27.300 She was one of the very first athletes to ever come out as being gay.

00:15:31.820 She has been a huge advocate in her career for LGBTQ community.

00:15:38.420 But then she stood up to them on men and women's sports. 0.68

00:15:42.480 And they started to attack her.

00:15:44.400 And she said, I'm not backing down.

00:15:46.240 There is a difference between men and women.

00:15:48.360 It is wrong to allow men to compete with women. 1.00

00:15:51.120 She even lost, like, she was kicked off of boards and different things that happened

00:15:56.040 in the community that she was in.

00:15:58.300 And I think she was shocked by the intolerance of all of these different radical extremist groups

00:16:05.580 that went after her because she said there is a difference.

00:16:08.760 Well, now she's not backing down again.

00:16:11.380 She is blasting a major company, Nike, over a shocking report

00:16:18.020 that they were actually doing research in trans-athlete research at Nike.

00:16:25.820 And she's like, what are you doing?

00:16:28.780 Well, let me say, first of all, you just said a minute ago, Martina Navratilova,

00:16:32.820 you said she won a lot of majors.

00:16:35.760 Nobody knows how many.

00:16:36.800 I will say, Ben, there's this thing called the Google that you have a phone,

00:16:42.260 you can type it in.

00:16:43.580 You actually just have to do Martina N, and it comes right up.

00:16:47.920 So give me the stats.

00:16:49.760 And right from the Google, it told me, one of the most successful tennis players of all time,

00:16:53.880 she was ranked as the world number one in women's singles for how many weeks? 0.58

00:16:57.720 How many weeks do you think?

00:16:58.640 You're the tennis player.

00:16:59.400 You play tennis at Ole Miss.

00:17:00.720 Oh, it's going to be hundreds.

00:17:02.000 I know that.

00:17:03.540 332 weeks.

00:17:04.540 Bam, there you go.

00:17:05.660 And she won 167 top-level single titles, 177 doubles titles,

00:17:14.120 and including an open-air record of 59 major titles, 18 in singles, 13 in women's doubles,

00:17:21.320 10 in mixed doubles.

00:17:22.700 And how many Wimbledon singles titles do you think she won?

00:17:26.820 And Wimbledon singles titles, I know this.

00:17:29.580 Hold on.

00:17:29.920 It's a trivia question for me.

00:17:31.400 You can't use the Google.

00:17:32.840 It's nine.

00:17:33.400 No, no, no.

00:17:33.700 It's nine.

00:17:34.120 I'm pretty sure it's nine.

00:17:35.040 Am I right?

00:17:35.820 Look at that.

00:17:37.380 Benjamin, okay.

00:17:38.700 See, you're a tennis guy.

00:17:40.540 It is nine, and I didn't know that, but if Wikipedia is right, then it is nine.

00:17:46.180 Anyway.

00:17:47.240 And here's another tidbit for you.

00:17:49.420 The French Open's coming up, and do you know how many she won there?

00:17:52.780 No idea.

00:17:53.780 She won two there.

00:17:54.960 I didn't read that far in Wikipedia.

00:17:56.540 No, no, no.

00:17:56.880 So she won two there, but that was like her hardest service to win on.

00:18:00.400 She doesn't like clay?

00:18:01.540 She does not like clay.

00:18:03.080 Look at that.

00:18:03.720 See, I knew clay.

00:18:04.620 You should be impressed that I knew the French Open was clay.

00:18:07.880 Exactly.

00:18:08.540 And so she was the one that completed the Grand Slam because she won the Australian Open,

00:18:12.320 I want to say three or four times, French Open twice, Wimbledon nine, and I think she

00:18:16.440 won the US Open.

00:18:17.200 I want to say it was four or five times.

00:18:19.280 It was incredible.

00:18:20.540 But here's a tidbit about her, and this should impress everybody, because when she was in

00:18:26.760 the middle of all this winning, she was stripped of her citizenship when she was 17 or 18 and

00:18:33.820 asked the United States for political asylum.

00:18:37.480 And so not only was she winning, but she was in the middle of Czechoslovakia when it happened.

00:18:42.840 She was a Czech citizen, and all of this was going on.

00:18:46.300 So you talk about a woman that was incredible and focused and was able to pull all this off.

00:18:52.920 It tells you about how big of a leader she was, and I think that is something we should

00:18:59.060 just remind people of.

00:19:00.180 When you talk about her leading on this issue and coming out, and then yet saying it's wrong

00:19:05.700 for men to play in women's sports, like she's always been a leader on these types of issues. 0.97

00:19:10.500 Well, and listen, I will say, Martina Navratzlova, she's not a conservative.

00:19:14.100 She's not a person of the right.

00:19:16.200 But she is one of the greatest women athletes to have ever lived.

00:19:20.300 And she's shown real courage saying, look, if men compete in women's sports, men have

00:19:25.960 significant physiological advantages, and it's not fair.

00:19:29.780 It's not right.

00:19:30.680 I mean, she recognized even as one of the greatest women to have ever played, that if she was

00:19:34.700 playing against Pete Sampras, if she was playing against any of the top male players, that it

00:19:42.980 would not be fair and she would not stand a chance.

00:19:45.780 And that's the simple reality.

00:19:48.660 How much faster, so you played Division I tennis, how much faster does a male college

00:19:56.080 player hit a serve as compared to a top-level female college player? 0.95

00:20:01.180 When I was playing in college, if you were one of the top women in college hitting a big 1.00

00:20:07.460 serve, you were probably 100 to 103, 4, 5 miles an hour.

00:20:12.260 And that would be like less than 1% of women in college at that time doing that. 1.00

00:20:16.980 So that's top-level, top-level, the fastest serves women are hitting. 1.00

00:20:21.780 Now, how about men?

00:20:22.580 And a lot of them were probably 80 to 85, 86 miles an hour, would probably have been the

00:20:27.580 average then.

00:20:29.020 And men, the average was probably 105 to 110 was the average.

00:20:34.380 I mean, it's a significant difference.

00:20:36.340 And how about the top-level, the very best men?

00:20:39.060 Top-level, so the fastest serve I ever hit in my life, I think, was one, I want to say

00:20:43.760 it was 125, 126.

00:20:46.800 Yeah.

00:20:47.420 That's not a tennis ball, that's a bullet.

00:20:49.300 Yeah, I mean, it is.

00:20:50.080 I mean, there's a huge difference.

00:20:51.240 You add that extra 30 miles on top of where the women, where the men, it's night and day. 1.00

00:20:55.540 Okay, and I'm going to say this, I don't mean to be disrespectful.

00:20:58.280 I mean, you were a good college tennis player, but you weren't one of the very top men in the

00:21:02.380 country.

00:21:02.620 Correct.

00:21:02.880 Yeah, no, 100%.

00:21:04.520 I mean, the guys that were hitting the big serves, I remember one time practicing with

00:21:08.080 Andy Roddick, and Andy was hitting 137, 140s.

00:21:12.820 Wow.

00:21:13.600 John Isner, a buddy of mine, I think he has the fastest serve on record.

00:21:17.980 I want to say it was 147, if I remember correctly.

00:21:22.140 I mean, there's no woman that's going to hit that. 1.00

00:21:24.560 So that's 50% more.

00:21:25.900 147 is 50% more than you said, like, the top women college athletes would be serving about 1.00

00:21:31.500 100 or 102.

00:21:32.880 Correct.

00:21:33.880 I mean, that's why Martina Navratilova has been so clear, saying this is wildly unfair.

00:21:38.660 Well, what she did this week is she called out Nike, and this is a bizarre story.

00:21:43.980 It is a story published in the New York Times that laid out evidence that Nike is financing

00:21:49.180 a study of trans athletes.

00:21:51.540 And a study of trans athletes that was called out online on X by women's sportswear company

00:22:00.920 executive Jennifer Say, who went on social media and said, I'm still stunned by this.

00:22:06.320 Nike is funding a study that disfigured young boys to understand if they can be physically

00:22:13.580 impaired enough to compete with girls without significant, quote, retained male advantage.

00:22:20.160 Why is a sneaker brand doing medical experiments on children?

00:22:26.820 And Martina Navratilova retweeted that.

00:22:30.760 She said, Joanna Harper is going too far, as is Nike, needless to say.

00:22:35.120 And she calls out Nike, same company that docked Allison Felix for being pregnant. 1.00

00:22:40.680 So she left and formed her own company, Seish.

00:22:44.400 So thanks for nothing, Nike.

00:22:46.260 And I got to say, look, there are a lot of issues where the left has completely left the

00:22:52.680 American people behind sanctuary cities, embracing voter fraud, open borders, supporting illegal 0.86

00:22:59.840 immigrants and gang members and wanting more gang members brought to this country. 0.95

00:23:03.360 All of those are extreme.

00:23:04.660 But but I don't know that there is an issue that is more out of the mainstream and yet more

00:23:10.780 required by elected Democrats than demanding that men compete against and in women's sports

00:23:18.260 and boys compete in girls sports.

00:23:21.020 And it is it was a major issue in 2024 in the election.

00:23:26.880 President Trump used the issue.

00:23:28.300 I use the issue in my reelection campaign.

00:23:30.740 And I got to say, Senate races across the country use the issue.

00:23:34.360 And the American people said enough is enough.

00:23:36.880 And what's interesting.

00:23:37.640 All right.

00:23:38.600 So in my reelection, when I when I was running ads against my opponent because he had voted

00:23:44.420 repeatedly in favor of men competing in women's sports, the reporters thought, oh, well,

00:23:50.280 well, Cruz is competing to the crazy right wing kooks.

00:23:53.800 And they wrote articles like that.

00:23:55.380 And I actually laughed at them because we had done focus groups.

00:24:00.200 And in fact, we had done focus groups of undecided, moderate women in Houston and Dallas.

00:24:07.260 And we tested like 30 different messages on them.

00:24:10.600 You know, the number one message with undecided, moderate women in Houston and Dallas.

00:24:16.480 What was that?

00:24:17.300 Boys and girls sports.

00:24:18.660 There you go.

00:24:19.480 And the reporters didn't get it. 0.92

00:24:21.180 They're like, oh, these are crazy right wingers.

00:24:23.460 I'm like, no, no. 0.86

00:24:23.960 These are soccer moms. 1.00

00:24:25.220 These are soccer moms that are really pissed off. 1.00

00:24:27.840 And they don't want their daughter playing soccer with some dude who's going to kick them 0.80

00:24:33.060 and get a concussion.

00:24:33.840 They don't want their daughter playing volleyball with some dude that's going to spike the ball 1.00

00:24:37.440 on her.

00:24:38.300 They don't want you know, they watch the Olympics and saw two guys beating the hell out of women

00:24:45.280 boxers.

00:24:45.960 And they said enough is enough.

00:24:48.040 And what is amazing is even though the left is so far out of step, Nike's continuing to

00:24:54.060 double down and fund this extreme research.

00:24:56.860 And we had a vote a month and a half ago in the Senate on on stopping boys from competing

00:25:03.600 in girls sports.

00:25:05.020 Do you know how many Democrats voted in favor of protecting girls and women's sports?

00:25:09.860 I'm going to guess they voted as a party and none of them said we're going to be sane

00:25:13.300 today.

00:25:13.880 Absolutely correct.

00:25:15.040 Zero.

00:25:15.640 And this was after the November election.

00:25:17.820 If you live in a blue state and you happen to have a Democrat senator who pretends to

00:25:22.180 be moderate, which a lot of them do know that your senator likewise voted for boys to compete

00:25:27.920 against your daughters, for men to compete against women. 0.70

00:25:30.900 And that's fundamentally unfair.

00:25:33.060 And if you don't believe me, listen to the great Martina Navratilova.

00:25:36.600 Senator, by the way, just we were talking a moment ago about fastest serves ever in history.

00:25:40.520 I just want to give people the fastest.

00:25:42.000 So Sam Groth had the fastest serve at a challenger event, 163.7 miles an hour, and the fastest

00:25:49.660 recorded serve at an ATP tour.

00:25:52.520 So that's a senior, the highest level you can get event in tennis was by my good friend,

00:25:57.300 John Isner.

00:25:57.960 We went to one of his last matches to watch actually in Houston.

00:26:01.520 Yeah.

00:26:01.640 157 miles an hour.

00:26:04.240 So if you think there's a difference, but not a difference between men and women in sports.

00:26:07.820 Yeah.

00:26:08.200 Just look at those numbers.

00:26:09.240 You will never find a woman that has ever hit anywhere close to that.

00:26:13.040 There is a difference.

00:26:14.360 And Ben, let me say, I'm proud of you that even in the course of this show, you figured

00:26:18.520 out how to use the Google.

00:26:19.620 That was well done.

00:26:20.940 I try.

00:26:21.900 I, you know, I'm a quick learner here.

00:26:23.600 All right, let's turn to the Democratic Party in disarray.

00:26:28.860 And it's a real thing right now.

00:26:31.300 And CNN is saying it.

00:26:33.020 So don't trust us.

00:26:34.600 CNN having a freak out moment on TV with new polling data.

00:26:39.620 And here is what they said.

00:26:41.880 Yeah, this, I think, is a revolt, a revolt that is going on within the Democratic Party

00:26:46.880 right now.

00:26:47.540 Democrats and their leaders.

00:26:48.740 I mean, take a look nationally.

00:26:50.360 Hello, Democrats on Dem leaders in Congress.

00:26:53.000 The belief that they will do the right thing when it comes to the economy.

00:26:56.400 Last year at this time, 80% believed that the Democratic leaders in Congress would do

00:27:00.780 the right thing when it comes to the economy.

00:27:02.100 Keep in mind, this is Democrats.

00:27:03.560 Look at where we are now.

00:27:04.740 That number has been slashed in half to just 39%.

00:27:08.800 Holy Toledo, that is the lowest number by far in Gallup polling.

00:27:13.580 The lowest previous was just 60%, which is 21 points higher than this.

00:27:17.860 Democrats hate, hate, hate, hate what their congressional leaders in Washington are doing right now

00:27:23.940 on the key issue of the day.

00:27:25.780 The economy and their confidence has fallen through the floor, Mr. Berman.

00:27:29.020 All right, Chuck Schumer is the Senate Democratic leader right now.

00:27:32.520 How are feelings about him, particularly in New York?

00:27:35.100 Yeah, let's go to the state of New York.

00:27:36.860 It's what's always on my mind, right?

00:27:39.080 We're in the state of New York right now.

00:27:40.620 New York Democrats on Chuck Schumer view him favorably.

00:27:44.520 In December of 2024, that was just a few months ago, it was 73%.

00:27:48.800 Look at where that number has fallen to in just a few months.

00:27:52.020 It is now down to just 52%.

00:27:54.520 That is the lowest I could ever find in Siena College on how Democrats in Chuck Schumer's

00:27:59.680 home state view him.

00:28:00.720 And keep in mind, if you're thinking about a primary challenge, it would be a few years

00:28:03.620 away.

00:28:04.200 But Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's favorable rating among Democrats is considerably higher in the

00:28:09.220 60s, so he is doing quite poorly in his own home state of New York.

00:28:13.760 I never thought I'd see the day in which just 52% of New York Democrats review Chuck Schumer

00:28:17.780 favorably.

00:28:18.400 It's almost unfathomable.

00:28:19.940 It's almost unfathomable.

00:28:22.240 Now, here's the takeaway for me, Senator.

00:28:24.940 The fact that AOC has a higher approval rating than Chuck Schumer means the Democratic Party

00:28:31.120 is dead.

00:28:32.580 The Socialists, Marxists, and Communists have taken it over.

00:28:36.540 And now they're out with these old guys.

00:28:38.840 We also saw one of your colleagues, Dick Durbin, hanging it up, saying, I'm out of here.

00:28:43.600 I'm not running for re-election.

00:28:45.820 Well, what is stunning about that is a couple of things.

00:28:48.320 Number one, as they're relaying poll numbers that show Democrats unhappy with the Democrat

00:28:54.140 leadership in Congress, the reason they're unhappy is they think Chuck Schumer is not crazy 0.60

00:29:00.400 enough. 0.73

00:29:01.620 They think Akeem Jeffries is not crazy enough.

00:29:04.260 The problem, and listen, we're in a very polarized society.

00:29:09.160 Both sides are pulling further and further apart.

00:29:12.380 But people that identify as partisan Democrats, they hate Donald Trump.

00:29:17.900 And I'm not quite sure what they want Chuck Schumer to be doing, maybe lighting himself on 0.63

00:29:22.300 fire on the Senate floor, running around naked, screaming at the top of his lungs.

00:29:26.800 I don't know.

00:29:28.160 You know, maybe they just want him to join AOC and Bernie Sanders on their Fight the

00:29:32.760 Oligarchy tour.

00:29:33.760 All to be clear, they're flying around in private jets to fight the oligarchy, which

00:29:38.540 actually may symbolize today's Democrat Party more than anything else they could do to get

00:29:44.640 off their private jet and stand up and say, fight the oligarchy. 1.00

00:29:48.080 And by the way, George Soros, thanks for the money. 0.96

00:29:50.760 But the Democrats want their elected leaders to be even more crazy.

00:29:57.160 And this is after four years of absolute shambles of the Obama administration.

00:30:01.980 And what's striking also about that clip you played is CNN, which is a propaganda outlet

00:30:08.060 for the Democrat Party, is panicking.

00:30:10.740 They can't believe it.

00:30:12.120 They are terrified.

00:30:13.920 The media is in desarray.

00:30:15.660 You mentioned Dick Durbin, Democrat senator from Illinois, announced he was not running

00:30:20.860 for re-election.

00:30:21.740 Look, Dick Durbin is the number two Democrat in the entire Senate.

00:30:27.300 He is number two only to Schumer, and he's calling it quits.

00:30:30.560 He is also the top, the ranking member, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

00:30:35.660 He used to be the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

00:30:38.800 And so they've got senior Democrats that are saying, get me out of this place.

00:30:43.260 Well, and by the way, he said something that was really interesting.

00:30:45.660 How low the bar has fallen.

00:30:47.740 So Dick Durbin's excuse for why he's not running for re-election was, in essence, well, I don't

00:30:53.000 want to become Joe Biden.

00:30:55.440 And he put it this way in the interview.

00:30:58.220 Listen.

00:30:59.280 Senator, yesterday after you made your announcement that you would not be seeking re-election,

00:31:03.080 there were a number of Democrats who privately really applauded your choice, saying that it

00:31:06.600 was something, the right thing to do, to step aside and perhaps let a younger generation

00:31:10.880 of politicians step to the forefront.

00:31:13.100 We know the idea of Democratic elected officials and age has been a hot topic in recent years.

00:31:20.220 Do you hope, do you agree with that thinking?

00:31:22.200 Do you think it is time now for younger politicians, the next generation to come forward?

00:31:27.440 Well, I think it's more complex.

00:31:31.260 It is not just a question of a number, what your age is.

00:31:33.940 Look at Bernie Sanders, for God's sake, still drawing thousands and thousands of people out

00:31:38.360 for rallies.

00:31:39.520 And he's a few years older than I am.

00:31:42.320 The bottom line is, are you competent?

00:31:44.100 Can you still do the job?

00:31:45.800 That's the question the voters should ask.

00:31:47.760 But should a new generation be interested in public service?

00:31:50.720 You bet.

00:31:51.220 I've spent my time in office trying to encourage younger people to get involved.

00:31:57.020 Senator Durbin, it's Ali Vitale.

00:31:59.340 I wonder if I can pick up on something you just said, this idea of, are you competent?

00:32:03.420 Are you able to do this job in the Senate?

00:32:05.500 As you see this push from the grassroots that Lemire is talking about here, do you think

00:32:09.820 enough of your colleagues are asking themselves those fundamental questions about if they can

00:32:14.080 continue to serve?

00:32:15.980 I think so.

00:32:16.720 I think if you're honest about yourself and your reputation, you want to leave when you

00:32:22.620 can still walk out the front door and not be carried out the back door.

00:32:25.740 I mean, you hear that and it's basically saying, well, I'm not going to pull a Joe Biden and

00:32:30.520 other people need to look at this as well.

00:32:32.360 He was, I think, clearly knocking Joe Biden in that and what he just said as well.

00:32:37.520 Well, and nobody in that discussion acknowledged that Dick Durbin spent four years lying to the

00:32:43.100 American people, saying that Joe Biden was not senile, that he was mentally capable to

00:32:48.880 do the job.

00:32:49.500 By the way, CNN spent four years lying to the American people, screaming that it was a conspiracy

00:32:54.220 theory to point out what is obviously true and was obviously true then, that Biden's mental

00:33:00.160 capacity was severely diminished.

00:33:01.880 I will say this, and actually it might surprise you.

00:33:04.700 I'm going to say something nice about Durbin.

00:33:06.280 So I've served with Durbin for 13 years on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and I'll tell

00:33:11.520 you what I tell any nominees that are coming before judiciary, I tell them Durbin is the

00:33:18.100 single most dangerous Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, because I think he's the smartest

00:33:22.240 Democrat, and he is radical and extreme, but he's very good at sounding reasonable.

00:33:29.820 There are other Democrats that are radical and extreme as Sheldon Whitehouse and Adam Schiff, 0.95

00:33:33.740 but they sound like lunatics. 0.99

00:33:35.560 When they're ranting, everyone knows they're lunatics. 0.98

00:33:38.600 Part of what makes Durbin such a dangerous questioner for Republican nominees or Republican

00:33:44.360 witnesses is he's very good at masking his extreme policies in ways that sound much more

00:33:51.640 reasonable than his colleagues, and so I will say for Democrats, seeing Durbin hang it up

00:33:57.120 is a real loss to them.

00:33:59.180 Yeah, no doubt.

00:33:59.780 Don't forget, we do this show as a podcast, so make sure you download Verdict with Ted Cruz.

00:34:05.380 We do it three days a week.

00:34:06.800 Don't miss an episode.

00:34:08.000 Grab it, and we'll see you back here next week and on our podcast on Monday morning.

00:34:13.680 This is an iHeart Podcast.

00:34:16.280 Guaranteed human.

00:34:17.000 And we'll see you next week.

00:34:18.300 Bye.

00:34:28.760 Sayang southey. 0.85

00:34:30.560 Bye.

00:34:31.620 going.

00:34:32.600 Bye.

00:34:33.660 Bye.

00:34:34.260 Bye.

00:34:34.320 Bye.

00:34:35.120 Bye.

00:34:36.040 Bye.

00:34:36.260 Bye.

00:34:37.180 Bye.

00:34:38.160 Bye.

00:34:38.680 Bye.

00:34:39.120 Bye.

00:34:40.980 Bye.

00:34:41.740 Bye.

00:34:42.140 Bye.

00:34:42.780 Bye.

00:34:43.320 Bye.

00:34:43.700 Bye.

00:34:44.420 Bye.

00:34:45.020 Bye.

00:34:46.000 Bye.

00:34:46.420 Bye.

Verdict with Ted Cruz - April 25, 2025

FOUR New Injunctions Against Trump, as Dems' Lawfare Continues plus Nike Funding Transgender Research & Dems in Chaos Nationwide

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript