Ted Cruz responds to the Democratic case against President Trump in the impeachment trial, and explains why the president is not guilty of any impeachable offenses. Ted Cruz is a conservative conservative senator from Texas who has served as a judge on the Supreme Court and served as solicitor general for the Justice Department.
00:00:13.220For 24 hours, House managers devoted hour upon hour to proving two factual propositions.
00:00:21.200Number one, that the president temporarily delayed military aid to Ukraine.
00:00:26.080And number two, that President Trump sought an investigation into Burisma, the Ukrainian natural gas company, and a corruption potentially involving Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.
00:00:39.460On those two points, they devoted more than half of their argument, arguing ad nauseum with sight after sight and clip after clip.
00:00:52.580Both of those points, everyone admits there is no dispute that the military aid was delayed, and there is no dispute that the president sought an investigation into Burisma.
00:01:04.240Indeed, he has said so on national television multiple times.
00:01:08.840Neither of those factual propositions are impeachable offenses.
00:01:13.720In fact, neither of those propositions are remotely contrary to law.
00:01:17.920Presidents have the authority and regularly have temporarily delayed foreign aid in circumstances where they had concerns.
00:01:26.540And when it comes to investigating corruption, a president has the authority and the responsibility to investigate serious claims of corruption.
00:01:37.980During their 24-hour opening argument, the Democrats built their case on the proposition that it was utterly fraudulent, that it was completely baseless, that there was no evidence to seek an investigation into Burisma and corruption.
00:01:54.240That proposition is laughable because not only was there sufficient evidence to seek an investigation into Burisma and corruption, there was so much evidence that there was a need, a legitimate need to investigate.
00:02:11.780That corruption or potential corruption still needs to be investigated today.
00:02:16.620And from there, the Trump lawyers should calmly, coolly, systematically walk through the mountains of evidence that raise major red flags, that raise major concerns about corruption, about the sitting vice president bragging about blocking a billion dollars in aid to Ukraine,
00:02:39.520until they fire the prosecutor who is investigating the company that is paying his own son a million bucks a year.
00:02:49.240The White House team should calmly, systematically prosecute that case.
00:03:36.440And I got to say to all the listeners, it is a testament.
00:03:39.780Look, I think there are a lot of folks in this country who care about substance and issues.
00:03:45.300And so much of what you get on TV, so much of what you get of talking heads is just people yelling at each other and doing sound bites.
00:03:52.680And I think people are interested in really trying to understand an issue, knowing facts, knowing con law.
00:03:58.420Look, as you know, Michael, we've talked with our team putting this together.
00:04:01.160And occasionally there's some discussion of, well, maybe we ought to dumb things down and then not actually get into complicated things.
00:04:07.220But look, I think people are interested in understanding.
00:04:11.260They don't have a million hours to dive in and drown in it, but they're interested in understanding issues.
00:04:16.080And I hope that this show now and going forward helps people really understand an issue and what's behind it and what you need to know to know what's going on.
00:04:24.620Of course, people are so much smarter than they get credit for.
00:04:27.340I think people are interested and no one's going to watch 20 hours a day of these extremely tedious impeachment trials.
00:04:36.300And the argument you just made is pretty interesting because basically what you're saying is, yes, on the basic facts that the Democrats laid out, we all agree it's not impeachable whatsoever.
00:04:46.960At the heart of this impeachment investigation is this potential corruption in Ukraine with the Bidens.
00:04:52.660And then the Trump team should just talk about that.
00:04:54.680But the big Trump argument is going to really begin on Monday in prime time when maybe some people are paying attention.
00:05:02.420But today you had a little, what, two-hour session.
00:05:13.020Look, I think for the two hours they did a good job of refuting some of the points that the House managers made and pointing out in particular all the things they left out.
00:05:23.160So they did an effective job of saying they showed you this clip from witness one, two, or three.
00:05:28.860But what they didn't show you is what they said next.
00:05:31.460And there were lots of good examples where they'd go to the video.
00:05:35.380And you could see senators kind of nodding.
00:05:37.700I think that's what the Trump lawyers did most effectively today is say, well, gosh, why didn't the House managers tell you that?
00:05:44.160And they pointed that out quite a bit.
00:05:46.660I think that was helpful for undermining confidence in the whole body of what the House managers presented over the last three days.
00:05:55.100So I couldn't see senators nodding because I was not there.
00:05:59.240I guess because it's so pivotal today, because now the Democrat case is over, the Trump case begins.
00:06:06.080If the Trump lawyers are saying, here's what the Democrats told you, but here's what they left out, what you're saying is that the Democrat arguments were deceptive.
00:06:25.140Here's a particular logical construct that the House managers used to be deceptive.
00:06:31.020They used this several times, and it's a logical construct of X, not Y.
00:06:37.900So, for example, let me explain what that means.
00:06:41.420They say, for example, that President Trump and Republicans bought the narrative that Ukraine and not Russia interfered in the 2016 election.
00:07:06.180So when they say Ukraine, not Russia, look, it is obvious Russia tried to interfere in 2016, did interfere in 2016, invested real money, had a team of people pushing out fraudulent material online.
00:07:20.360That happened. That was real. And anyone who looks at the evidence recognizes that.
00:07:27.400But the fact that Russia did doesn't mean no other country did.
00:07:31.980So the way they frame it, and you'll see they do this all the time, that they say they push the fraudulent theory that Ukraine and not Russia interfered.
00:07:42.140So it's true that the Republicans are saying Ukraine interfered, but it's not true that Republicans are also saying, therefore, Russia did not interfere.
00:07:55.020If we said Russia did not interfere, that's a false statement.
00:07:58.240Russia did interfere, but they're using that construct to deceive you.
00:08:02.160I'll give you another example they've used about President Trump wanting an investigation into Biden and into Burisma.
00:08:10.300What the House manager said over and over and over again is the president wanted the announcement of an investigation and not an actual investigation.
00:09:44.420Stand up and say you'll do it publicly because the chances of you're following through are much higher.
00:09:48.680So the Democrats' trick here is that they're making a true statement and they're using the true statement to cover up for the false statement that they say immediately afterward.
00:09:59.200So if you – yes, and if you hear the Democrats, if you're – the media does this all the time.
00:10:03.300The media loves doing the you're saying Ukraine and not Russia interfered.
00:10:25.080Like you used the example that President Trump wanted the announcement of an investigation into the Bidens, but he didn't want an actual investigation.
00:10:39.980So imagine someone saying Democrats wanted the announcement of the Mueller investigation, but they didn't actually want the Mueller investigation to happen.
00:11:17.180And it's so deceptive that even – look, I've been paying close attention to this.
00:11:20.000There's a reason lawyers are so beloved.
00:11:21.640The most popular people in the country.
00:11:25.380Well, speaking of the most popular people in the country, I want to pivot a little bit here because you've now had this impeachment trial go on and on and on.
00:11:35.400In the 2020 election, we're now nine days out from the Iowa caucuses, right?
00:11:39.800This is the first big event of the presidential primary campaign.
00:11:43.200But you've got three Democratic senators who are stuck in Washington, D.C., in the impeachment trial, running for president.
00:11:50.260Well, and it's driving them bat crap crazy.
00:11:52.800Although, actually, technically, I have to correct you.
00:11:55.080Technically, we have four Democratic senators.
00:11:57.080Well, there's Bernie, there's Warren, and there's Amy Klobuchar.
00:12:02.000And nobody remembers Michael Bennett from Colorado is also still theoretically running.
00:12:10.340The only reason I pointed out is he launched his campaign.
00:12:14.720Literally, the whole basis for his campaign is a few months ago he stood on the Senate floor and screamed at me.
00:12:20.440And his launch campaign email, like what he talked about in the email launching his presidential campaign, is I yelled at Ted Cruz on the Senate floor.
00:12:30.040And I've got to say, I'm actually kind of a little offended that apparently yelling at me is not even worth a percent point in the Democratic primary for president.
00:12:39.640I have to say, this is a little embarrassing for me that I did not know that he was still running.
00:12:44.780It is more embarrassing for him, but I digress.
00:12:48.200Look, all of them are losing their minds not to be there.
00:12:51.480I mean, it was – you can see them, like during the trial, there'd be periods where each of them would be up in the back, and they'd be kind of pacing back and forth on the Senate floor.
00:13:00.820Well, you have an interesting perspective here because you know a thing or two about winning the Iowa caucuses.
00:13:19.540After the trial ended last night, actually Amy Klobuchar and I were visiting.
00:13:25.140She and I are friends, and she was – I don't want to pull an Elizabeth Warren and repeat things that were said to me in confidence or not said to me in confidence.
00:13:37.660I won't get into what Bernie and Elizabeth said to each other.
00:13:40.080But I think I can fairly say that Amy was chomping at the bit to run out and get on a plane and head back to Iowa.
00:13:48.720And she did tell me – we were talking about surrogates – and she did say she has a surrogate in Iowa who is, I think, a collegiate curling champion.
00:13:58.020Curling, that's the one where it looks like people are mopping the floor.
00:14:01.280Yeah, like the broom in front of the rock.
00:14:03.600Look, I'm from Houston, so we don't have snow or ice.
00:14:06.140So – but it strikes me as a very Midwest thing to have the collegiate curling champion as apparently a surrogate.
00:14:29.900And there's also a poll out of New Hampshire that has him in the lead there.
00:14:32.660And I think that has a lot of Democrats scared out of their mind.
00:14:38.840There are an awful lot of Democrats who I think think if Bernie gets the nomination, it reelects Donald Trump, which is obviously not what Democrats are looking to do.
00:14:52.940Two nights ago at dinner when we were on the dinner break, several of us Republican senators were sitting there having dinner, and one of the senators observed – laid out a theory that the reason the House managers had thrown Joe Biden under the bus,
00:15:13.580had put so much of an argument on Burisma and Hunter Biden that it ensures that a big part of the Trump legal team's argument on Monday will be here's all the evidence of corruption of Joe Biden and Hunter Biden and Burisma.
00:15:26.680Well, you mentioned this the other night that one of the big takeaways from the Democratic impeachment argument is they were just throwing their nominal presidential frontrunner, Joe Biden, right under the bus.
00:15:36.500Well, one of my Republican colleagues laid out a theory at dinner that the Democratic superdelegates had soured on Joe Biden.
00:15:45.100So in the – for people who have not paid close attention to this very corrupt system that the Democrats have to pick their presidential nominee, there are delegates.
00:15:53.760So you win a state and you get delegates, you know, if you win the state.
00:15:57.100But there are also superdelegates who are these kind of party elites that get to pick whoever they want.
00:16:02.720And let me explain it more simply. Look, the Democrats are statists. They're the party of elitists.
00:16:08.640They're the party of concentrated power dictating and controlling your life.
00:16:13.520It's reflected in a lot of things about the Democrats. One of the things that's reflected are these superdelegates, these people that have the power in many ways to decide their nominee.
00:16:22.640There are no Republican superdelegates. Republicans, we believe in this crazy thing called democracy where actually the voters should decide.
00:16:28.520Go to the polls and pick your candidate.
00:16:29.940But the Democrats have something like 900 superdelegates that are the party elite.
00:16:35.020And you've got to remember, look, these are people that are very comfortable with saying every decision in your life government should make for you.
00:16:42.680And so having the party elite control nominations, I mean, look, those superdelegates played a big part in taking Bernie out last time and making Hillary the nominee.
00:16:52.300So your your Senate colleague who shall remain nameless unless you want to make some news right now.
00:16:58.220I will honor that confidentiality. But I don't know that the theory is right.
00:17:01.420But it was a significant topic of discussion around the dinner table that that if that if the if the Democratic superdelegates have soured on Biden.
00:17:11.540Right. That manifesting this by putting him in a maelstrom where he goes down.
00:17:18.540Yeah. And presumably you see the self-described Democratic moderates going to, I don't know, Bloomberg or Klobuchar or Buttigieg.
00:17:29.420I don't know where they go, but they presumably go somewhere.
00:17:32.380That would be it didn't make any sense to me.
00:17:35.620And when you said it to me earlier and said they threw Biden under the bus, it didn't make sense to me why the House Democrats would have done that unless it is unless they don't think he can beat Bernie.
00:17:49.160And so I don't know if that's going on or not.
00:17:50.760Wow. But it was a surprising tactical decision of the House Democrats.
00:17:54.460And hopefully look when when the Trump legal team puts their case on a lot of lawyers, when they argue a case, particularly when you're responding, they spend their whole time sort of going point by point and refuting.
00:18:07.460So the other side has 10 points. Let me answer point one with point one a point two with point two a.
00:18:13.740I actually think that's a terrible way to argue, whether in a court of law or in a court of public opinion, kind of like a tit for tat argument.
00:18:23.460I think the right way to do it and what I hope that the president's lawyers do on Monday is tell a story, tell a story, lay out an affirmative narrative.
00:18:36.220I'll give Adam Schiff credit. He told a story. He told a narrative.
00:18:40.220We need to do the same. And I hope we're not just sitting there going tit for tat and refuting all the points of the Democrats.
00:18:46.560It's it's it's it's why a few minutes ago where I gave an example of an argument to use on Monday, it's the affirmative case that a president has the authority and the responsibility to investigate serious allegations of corruption.
00:18:58.900That is fundamentally an explanation. You know, when I was arguing Supreme Court cases, I used to obsess with what's the narrative.
00:19:08.100And actually, the test I tried to think about is when when the judge or justice went home that night and his or her five year old grandson said, what'd you do at work today, Papa?
00:19:22.240I wanted to own that next sentence. If I could own the sentence that that judge or justice describes to his or her grandchild.
00:19:36.000You've won the case that framing the narrative. Sun Tzu says every battle is won before it's fought.
00:19:41.320It's won by choosing the terrain on which it will be fought. The Democrats are trying to frame the narrative.
00:19:46.280The Trump team needs to come in and frame the narrative. And I think the strongest ground is, can a president investigate corruption when there is real evidence of corruption?
00:19:55.560Because if that's the question, then we win. The answer is hell yes. Right.
00:20:00.700That will be very interesting to watch on Monday, because that is when this is all going to kick off.
00:20:06.180And I hope hope people take that advice before we go.
00:20:09.320Obviously, we only have a couple of minutes and we've got to get you on an airplane.
00:20:11.520I want to get to a couple of mailbag questions. First one from June. June wants gossip.
00:20:17.940Senator Cruz, what are the other senators saying behind the scenes?
00:20:21.000Any juicy gossip or are you going to be cautious to your Democrat or to your other colleagues?
00:20:27.160So yesterday when Adam Schiff did his closing and he rolled out the line that he'd read in CBS that President Trump had said any Republican who votes against him will have their head on a pike.
00:20:39.220Mm hmm. That pissed a lot of Republicans off.
00:20:43.480I mean, I mean, really. Schiff was booed.
00:20:46.280Huh. I don't know how much of that came across on TV.
00:20:49.480I couldn't see it. And in particular, he was booed by senators like Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski who sit next to each other.
00:20:55.960Senators who are going to be very important if the Democrats want to advance.
00:21:00.140And they recoiled and in fact, several were murmuring under the breath, their breath.
00:21:04.940Not true. Not true. And you actually saw Schiff kind of shake it and said, well, I hope it's not true.
00:21:09.920I hope it's not true. That was an interesting moment that that stuck with people.
00:21:15.660That is pretty juicy gossip. I think you gave June what she came for from.
00:21:20.160From from Melody, Senator Cruz, why are the four Democratic senators who are still running for president allowed to be part of the Senate jury?
00:21:30.280Because the senators are sort of the jury in the impeachment trial.
00:21:35.620It seems like a huge conflict of interest for them to be allowed to vote in the impeachment trial.
00:21:40.200Well, it's a good question and it is a conflict of interest.
00:21:43.240But but the answer is that that that we're not jurors in the sense of a typical jury.
00:21:48.420There are all sorts of things about impeachment that have nothing to do with with being a typical jury.
00:21:54.840You wouldn't be allowed to sit on a jury if you knew the defendant.
00:21:57.740You wouldn't be allowed to sit on the jury if you knew the prosecutor.
00:22:00.720You wouldn't be allowed to sit on the on the jury if if you were having conversations with the defendant or the prosecutor.
00:22:07.600We're discussing the issue. You wouldn't be allowed to sit on a jury.
00:22:10.040If you were publicly discussing the issues, if you were taking positions, the Senate is not a jury.
00:22:16.900In fact, in the Bill Clinton impeachment trial, senators were referred to as jurors and Tom Harkin stood up and objected, said, I object to senators being described as jurors.
00:22:28.980And Chief Justice Rehnquist upheld that objection because senators are jurors, but also judges and the framers when they wrote the Constitution, they knew that senators would be politicians.
00:22:41.660They understood that they were they were politicians. They got that. They were reposing in the Senate.
00:22:46.720They hoped that the Senate you would have leaders of sufficient weight and seriousness and gravitas to consider the issues, to conduct a fair trial.
00:22:56.220But but they also knew there would be senators running for president. That's not new.
00:23:01.060That has been true for a long time. Right. And so, yes, they have interest.
00:23:06.000There are people that have interest on all on all side on all sides.
00:23:09.800But you're supposed to put that aside and follow the law.
00:23:14.080And so for me, I've said from the beginning, I believe the president will be acquitted.
00:23:18.820I think he should be acquitted. But but the reason is my job is to follow the constitutional standard.
00:23:24.760And the constitutional standard for impeachment is high crimes or misdemeanors.
00:23:28.540And the House manager's case doesn't meet that standard. Right.
00:23:32.480It doesn't. Well, then this actually leads into our last question from Tommy.
00:23:36.080Question from a Canadian. Are there any Democratic senators you believe will vote against impeachment?
00:25:02.040So be sure to tune in then. In the meantime, please continue to subscribe and leave those five star reviews.
00:25:07.220We just I can't tell you how exciting it is that we are now the number one podcast in the country.
00:25:14.280And equally exciting is to have a senator walk down from the Capitol and give us a behind the scenes look into impeachment.
00:25:20.580So we'll see you back on Monday. This is Verdict with Ted Cruz.
00:25:32.040This episode of Verdict with Ted Cruz is being brought to you by Jobs, Freedom and Security Pack,
00:25:37.840a political action committee dedicated to supporting conservative causes, organizations and candidates across the country.
00:25:44.420In 2022, Jobs, Freedom and Security Pack plans to donate to conservative candidates running for Congress and help the Republican Party across the nation.
00:25:54.280This is an iHeart podcast. Guaranteed human.