Minnesota AG Crashes & Burns in Senate Testimony Covering up Fraud plus Dems Cause Largest Sewage Spill in History

This is an iHeart Podcast. Guaranteed human. Welcome. It is Vertic with Senator Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you as well. And if you're listening on the radio, welcome. So nice to have you. And if you like the show, you'll love the podcast that we do three days a week. So make sure you download Vertic with Ted Cruz wherever you get your podcasts. Also, it's on YouTube as well. Senator, as we start, I rarely get to give you a hard time. So we're just going to start with that. you are now officially on TikTok. And I just love the number of followers that you have because I don't get to give you a hard time, but it's very low, Senator. Like, extremely low. Forget the fact we just started the page. I just want to say how low it is. So if you want to, like, actually be seen when you follow Senator Cruz, like, you could be the first one, like, second one, third one. You could actually see their name. Like, it could actually be there. It is terrifying. It is pitiful. So we just opened a TikTok account two days ago. I am at a measly 2,000 followers, which is, look, it's two days into it. But, you know, I got to say my teenage daughters have already told me I'm not nearly cool enough to be on TikTok. I will not be doing teenage dance moves, although I will neither confirm nor deny I may have done them at their requests at home. But those videos are suppressed forever. We're also trying to bribe them for said videos so that we can put them on TikTok. There's a full court press from the staff. Well, look, I have deliberately stayed off TikTok because when the Chinese communists controlled it, I didn't want to be subject to their surveillance or propaganda. But because President Trump got the deal through and moved them to American ownership and control, we've opened up yet a TikTok account. So now we communicate on Twitter, on Facebook, on Instagram. And you are going to dance for Mardi Gras, though. I was told that's like one of the things, like certain holidays you'll do things, right? Ben, let me be clear. No matter how many beads you give me, the answer is no. No matter how many beads that TC gets, Center Cruise gets, I like that. Now, I'm going to test you here. Do you know what your handle is, right, when you set it up? Do you know? Yes, it's Ted Cruz. Oh, wow. I'm shocked no one took that from you. I thought the Chinese would have registered that years ago. Okay, so it's not at Ted Cruz America, Ted Cruz Flying Eagle. I thought we were going to have to get creative there. I like it. Ted Cruz. Same thing my Twitter handle is, which is Ted Cruz. I like it. So there you go. At Ted Cruz on TikTok, you can be one of the first ones to get on the edge there. Now, Twitter, we're north of 10 million between the two accounts, but we're just at 2,000 on TikTok, so we've got some work to do. Just north of 10 million. I love how that was. That is what you call a congressional flex there. That's exactly what that was. Yeah, I promised the family that was your rebuttal at home as well when they said you weren't cool enough for TikTok. I love it. So follow him there. Welcome to the crazy world of TikTok, and you can make him go forward and backwards with the boomerang thing. There's lots of things. It's going to be exciting to see what's out there. I can tell you're excited about that aspect of it. All right, we've got a lot to talk about. I may be doing every TikTok with a cat filter on, although I think that's like seven generations ago. That's very true. So we've got a lot to talk about on today's show. What are we going to be? There's some big news, So let's go through what we're going to talk about today. All right. So Keith Ellison, the attorney general of Minnesota, testified in the Senate this week. It was a train wreck falling off a bridge on fire and exploding. I think that is the understated way to put how well his testimony went. We're going to give you some excerpts of that. He refused to take responsibility for any of the massive fraud in his state. He refused to take responsibility for his own wrongdoing. He was angry, bitter, and partisan, so it was exactly what you would have expected from Keith Ellison. We're also going to talk about that Democrats are responsible for the single largest spill of sewage in American history. And that is not a joke. I am not making that up. And the press is not telling you about it. Well, Ben and I are. And finally, we're going to talk about the Save America Act, where it is, what the Senate needs to do to pass it, how we protect integrity in our elections. All of those are in today's pod and today's show. Yeah, it's going to be a good one. So make sure you download Verdict with Ted Cruz. Also, we're every year podcast. And you can also watch, as I mentioned earlier, on YouTube and even some of the shorts on TikTok as well. All right. So let's start with Ellison testifying and really fail to take accountability for Minnesota and the fraud there. It is not surprising that he wanted to deflect in a major way. That's what he's decided to do, obviously, Senator. And I get the strategy, but it didn't really work out for him when he had to answer real questions. You can only dodge so much. Yeah, it did not work out at all. We're going to start with Josh Hawley, my colleague, who questioned Keith Ellison, did a very good job. Ellison was battling and dodging the whole time. But this was fiery, to put it mildly. Give a listen. Try another question. Are you familiar with the nine billion dollars in historic fraud out of your state, including the two hundred and fifty million dollars in the feeding our future program alone? You familiar with that? Don't turn to the pages in your book to get your potted answers. Are you familiar with it? Yes or no? Yes, I am familiar with very familiar, aren't you? Because the people who ran the feeding our futures program came to you in your official office in the state capital, December 11th, 2021, and asked for your help in getting investigators off their backs. they complained to you for upwards of an hour about state investigators going after them and they begged you to help them and you agreed to it amazingly and we know you did that's because it's all caught on tape every single sentence is caught on tape here's what you said let's take a look you said it's not a question you said to them send me the names of all these folks who are investigating them you said to them send me their names and i'll take that list and i'll call the person over at education who was investigating them and say, what's going on? Why am I getting these complaints? Then you went on to say, I already have my team working on this. What day should we get together to discuss it again? You made pledge after pledge to them. You said, we've got to make sure this guy who's investigating them stops it. You said, you have my attention. I'm concerned about this. You said, let's go fight these people, meaning the people who are investigating the fraud. Why'd you do it? Why'd you help him? Are you going to let me answer? Please. We're all ears. So first of all, you're cherry picking quotes out of there. Why did you help him? I thought you were going to let me answer. Why did you help him? Are you going to let me answer? Why did you help him? You let me answer and I'll answer you. Tell the truth and I'll let you answer. I will tell the truth. Good. Let's do that. That'd be a nice change. Why'd you help him? Now see, Mr. Chairman, I didn't come here to be insulted. I came here voluntarily. You came here for the truth. Let's have it. Why did you help him? The courts are here. They're in black and white. And every member of this audience can listen to the recording. It's 54 minutes long. It's all in public. You can Google it right now and listen to it. And listen to it all. Why did you help them? First of all, I didn't help them. You did help them. No, I did not. I certainly didn't. You're saying you didn't do anything for them. You didn't. You didn't. Well, wait a minute. I already have my team working on this again. That's not you? I have. It's a ventriloquist? My team, my team assisted with the information that led to the prosecution and conviction of these people. No, you didn't. You didn't look the finger to prosecute them. No, you did not. You didn't look the finger to prosecute them. It was like federal prosecution. You had all BS. You had whistleblowers coming to you as early as 2019. You're the one talking BS. Hey, listen. It's my time. You don't know what you're talking about, sir. Oh, you know, sir. You now have encountered the truth, and you don't like it. Why'd you take their money? Senator, you're a movie guy. Let's see how good you are. What's the movie where you can't handle the truth? Yes. Okay, Ben, you and I have been doing this too long. It is the greatest missed opportunity. It is the greatest missed opportunity in the history of Senate hearings that Keith Ellison didn't say. You want the truth? You can't handle the truth. I was like, come on. Oh I mean it was screaming for him to say it But listen the reality is Keith Ellison doesn want anything resembling the truth Josh is right That entire conversation is on tape and it is the criminals coming to the attorney general saying, would you stop the people who are investigating us to find our crimes? And the attorney general, this left-wing Democrat who was getting elected by these criminals said, sure, I'll help you. It's all on tape. Josh Hawley's question. Why'd you take the money? Let's let's listen to that question and what the facts are. And spoiler alert, Ellison's just going to lie. Give a listen. Why'd you take their money? Why'd you take their money? I didn't. You took $10,000. That's a false statement. $10,000. Nine days after the meeting. False You took $10,000. Here's what happened. They went to your office. They solicited money from you. They solicited help from you. That's also wrong. They came to your office. It was your official office. You met with them for 54 minutes. They asked you for help. You pledged it to them, and they talked repeatedly about money. In fact, it's all they talked about. That's a lot. Money, money, money, money. They said, we will put our dollars in the right place. We will support candidates that will fight to protect our interests. You replied, that's right. They said if you are securing your donor base and securing your power base, you can act the way you want. You replied, money is freedom. They said the amount of money circulating. I'm reading the transcript. The amount of money circulating in our community today is powerful. And we haven't realized it in a meaningful way. And you said, give me the specifics. And nine days later, you took $10,000 from people who were then indicted. It's in your reports. Why'd you do it? Was it worth it? You know what? This is a theatrical performance. This is the truth. This is what accountability looks like, of which you've had none. You helped fraudsters defraud your state and this government of $9 billion, and you got a fat campaign contribution out of it. You ought to be indicted. That's the truth. I think we've made the point. Let's keep the tender just a little more calm. I'll ask how I want to, Mr. Paul. He's lying, and that's the truth. Oh, no, this is all on the record, sir. Did you bother to investigate where the money that you facilitated their fraud for, where it went? Do you know where it went, what it was used for, the fraudulent money? I do because we just heard testimony about it yesterday. Because we were key players in the investigation. Hundreds of millions of dollars to terrorist groups, to transnational criminal organizations, to the drug trade, to drug trafficking, to child trafficking. And you took $10,000. That's a lie. And helped them do it. You know, the other thing is whistleblowers came to you as early as 2019. Let's look. As early as 2019. Don't talk over me. As early as 2019. It's my hearing, pal. As early as 2019. Don't call me, pal. Well, I should call you a prisoner because you ought to be in jail. Well, see what you can do about it. In 2019, whistleblowers came to you in your office and referred to you fraud allegations from feeding our futures. And you blew them off. Listen, your own state newspaper investigated. The Minnesota Star Tribune, the Partners in Nutrition, brought its concerns to the Attorney General's office in 2018 and in 2019, and you did nothing. You did nothing for years. The only action you took is once all these fraudsters came to your office and asked you to get involved and offered you money, then you got involved. Then you took the money, and then you got involved. They did not come to my office. You're completely wrong about that. You met with him for 54 minutes, and you took $10,000, and they also gave your family money. They gave your family thousands of dollars in campaign contributions in addition to what they gave you. This is a false statement. Let's put the sign back down. You know, this is completely untrue. The New York Post. Yeah, we know the New York Post. Minnesota Keith Ellison, AG, accepted campaign donations from individuals linked to the $250 million COVID fraud scheme after they were in your office. The donations came on December 20th. Sir, this is not— You met with them on December the 11th. And on January 20th, the FBI knocked over their headquarters. No, no. That's the sequence of events here. No, it's not. You've been right at the center of this fraud thing from the beginning. And you've enabled it. And, sir, you should resign. I mean, you look at this hearing and he's like, you know, good luck with that. Basically putting me in jail. He does seem incredibly arrogant and cocky for a guy that's being accused of all these things. But I guess they've just been conditioned, right? Like, yeah, yeah. He's never been called to account. And his response is just a lie. Say, that's a lie. That's a lie. That's a lie. By the way, he doesn't have any facts to the contrary. And when Josh lays out the receipts that he actually received the contributions, received them nine days after meeting with the fraudsters and promising to help them, he has no response other than scream liar, liar, liar. But look, it's not just that. Keith Ellison, like the rest of the Minnesota Democrats, is extreme and radical. Listen to him here refusing to condemn Louis Farrakhan's bigotry and anti-Semitism. This is Bernie Moreno, senator from Ohio, questioning him. Give a listen. I speak against anti-Semitism. I condemn it as repugnant and wrong. Let's pause there. You speak against anti-Semitism. Will you condemn Louis Farrakhan's comments saying that Judaism is a dirty religion? You know, sir, I thought I was coming here to talk about immigration policy. That was a layup question, by the way. No, no, no. I thought I was talking about immigration policy. I didn't know that we were going to be talking about all these matters. I mean, I'm reluctant to just sort of, I mean, we already had one thing where we didn't mention immigration policy at all. I'm fine with you asking about questions around asylum and things like that. That makes a lot of sense to me. But now we're going off in all kind of different directions. I think there should be some scope to this hearing. And so thank you for your interest. And we both share a need to condemn. Senator, I love how it's almost like he's trying to steal a line from Donald Trump. They're like, thank you for your attention to this matter. You can't make it up. Well, and of course, he was completely unwilling to condemn Louis Farrakhan's vicious anti-Semitism. Keith Ellison is Muslim. Louis Farrakhan is Muslim. And they both have reveled in bigotry. Look, a related – he said he was willing to talk about immigration. Well, when it comes to the anti-ICE protesters in Minnesota, you remember the ones that burst into the church service and disturbed the Christian church? Well, Keith Ellison did an interview about that where he said, quote, I think that protest is fundamental to American society. You know, it's freedom of expression. People have a right to lift up their voices and make their peace, and none of us are immune to the voice of the public. And then he says, they're getting tender about a church service now. So he is, of course, siding with the anti-ice protesters who are disrupting a church service, which, by the way, is a violation of federal law, the Federal Face Act, and his statement, They're getting tender about a church service. That's just how intolerant he is. Just a minute ago, he refused to condemn Louis Farrakhan's bigotry and anti-Semitism. And instead, he said, can we talk about immigration policy? Well, that wasn't the best idea either. Bernie Moreno did ask him about immigration policy, and it didn't go so well. Give a listen. Mexico and Canada, do you consider those to be safe countries or no? Generally, I do, but there are certain circumstances. Generally, you do? Well, I mean, I'll just say this. You border Canada. Don't insult your neighbors to the north. No, I love my neighbors to the north. So is it a generally safe country? Generally, yes. So then somebody seeking asylum could certainly be safe in Canada and Mexico, no? No. So, like, if somebody, we do know that in Mexico, which is another country I truly admire and think it's a wonderful country, but there have been cases of persecution, people who have legitimate fear. People aren't safe in Mexico? Refugees cannot be safe in Mexico? Some might not be. And I think what I'm saying is... Maybe we shouldn't have a free trade agreement with them then. I didn't say that. Senator, he didn't like answering those questions at all, did he, after he already said he wanted to bring up the topic? Yeah, no, he did not. He did not like those questions at all And I got to say his testimony was nothing but a bunch of crap Now that actually happens to be highly relevant because our next story is really an amazing story that deals with Democrats and a bunch of crap. Democrats in Washington, D.C. and Virginia and Maryland are responsible for the largest sewage spill in American history. I want to read a headline to you. The failure in a section of a 72-inch sewer pipe in Maryland has released close to a billion, that's with a B, a billion gallons of raw sewage into the Potomac River just inside the Beltway. It's now considered the largest spill of wastewater in U.S. history. Maryland and Virginia Democrats haven't said a word. Nothing. They don't want you to know about it. They don't want you to know that this is like a massive oil spill, except it's raw sewage in the Potomac River. It is going to have an impact on everything there, including the fish and the crabs and the whole list goes on and on. And usually the left is like the scream and yell and show up for the wildlife and PETA and all of that when you have things happen that they don't like. But on this one, they're like, let's just be quiet and act like it's not happening and a billion gallons of sewage is going into the Potomac, right? We just won't cover it. We won't talk about it. A billion gallons of human waste, of human excrement, was dumped into the Potomac River. And Democrats, look, Democrats' answer to everything is government. We want government in charge. We want government in charge. And the dirty little secret, whether it's Minnesota or whether it's Maryland and D.C., is Democrats are really, really bad at government. They like power. Especially when they're in charge. Look at Mondani in New York. In like two weeks, he's like, can't figure out how to get trash or melt ice or deal with the rat problem. Like that's what's happened in a few weeks. And by the way, D.C. for the last two weeks has been buried in snow. They can't figure out how to shovel the sidewalks. I mean, they're completely confused. I did an event with President Trump at the Treasury Department. I think it was two weeks ago where to get into the Treasury Department, I literally had to scale basically the snowbank that was about four feet high because there was no break in it. Apparently, nobody in the Washington, D.C. government can figure out where a sidewalk is. That's what people want on TikTok. You should have taken that video. That would have gone viral. And my press secretary was in four-inch spike high heels, and she managed to scale that icy snowbank. I thought she was going to break her neck. And the problem is she would have sued D.C. and D.C.'s judgment proof they have no money because they're run by Democrats. But listen to some more details on this sewage spill, because I'm curious, has this been on the 6 o'clock news on any of the networks? No. No one's talking about this. I mean, until we go through the rundown, I didn't know about this until we were planning the show for today, had not heard about it at all. The news is completely ignoring it. Here's the headline. Here's a little bit of the details. D.C. Water CEO David Gattis resolved to do everything possible to reclaim the Potomac River after last month's disastrous sewer pipe break, he said in an open letter to the community Wednesday. The failure in a section of 72-inch sewer pipe known as the Potomac Interceptor resulted in the release of hundreds of millions of gallons of raw sewage into the river just inside the beltway along the C&O Canal in Montgomery County, Maryland. It's considered the largest spill of wastewater in U.S. history. Quote, the Potomac River is a shared natural treasure. And in any event, and any event that threatens its health, understandably causes concern, frustration and a sense of loss. Those feelings are not only valid, they are also shared by all of us at D.C. Water. Gaddis said in the letter, not mentioning that's why Democrats are dropping a billion gallons of crap into the water that you care about. The letter went on to explain that on January 19th, crews noticed unusual activity in security cameras monitoring an odor control facility along the C&O Canal. I would imagine that would cause some unusual activity. A billion gallons, if you can't smell that, you've got a problem. Upon inspection, the crews discovered the break. In the days since the discovery, D.C. water personnel and contractors worked to, quote, contain the overflow, protect public safety, and begin repairs. A bypass system was constructed to pump waste around the damaged area of the pipe and reinsert it into a section of the structure downstream. Complicating the repairs was the discovery last week of a large rock dam blocking a significant section of the pipe about 30 feet south of the break. D.C. water is waiting for five large capacity pumps to arrive from. Where do you think they're coming from? Let me guess, Texas? And Florida. Texas and Florida. to increase pumping capacity. They're going to save the liberals from their own feces. They're sending large pumps to pump the billion gallons of crap that the Democrats have dumped into the water. They then plan to build a bulkhead near the break to divert more water so workers can safely remove the boulders. Apparently no one had noticed the boulders until then. And D.C. Water expects this to take an extra six weeks to accomplish. By the way, no way in the private sector it would take six weeks. I just want to be very clear about that. Like, in the private sector, it would not take you six weeks. And in the private sector, they would work 24-7 to get it fixed. Can I get an amen on that one? They would. But fortunately, the government is in charge, so it's cheap and efficient. Give a listen. Yes. Gaddis noted that D.C. Water will be dedicating resources not only to the repairs, but also to an environmental restoration program to mitigate the damage that's already been done. The letter detailed a $625 million investment to rehabilitate the Potomac Interceptor as part of a 10-year, $10 billion capital improvement program. A $10 billion capital improvement program, except for the minor detail of dumping a billion gallons of crap into the water. Gattis pointed out. The number is still going up, by the way, as we're speaking. I just want to be clear about that. Gattis pointed out that several tunnels they built along the northeast boundary are currently building along the Potomac have resulted in billions of gallons of combined sewage being prevented from entering the Anacostia and Potomac rivers through the utilities clean rivers project. So what he's saying is, well, yeah, we've spilled a billion gallons, but we could have spilled billions more. I mean, look at all the crap we could have dumped in the river. And it's only the worst sewage leak in the history of the United States of America. And it's not leading on the nightly news. Let's just go be clear. If this happened in a conservative-run city, it would be on the nightly news. PETA would be out there losing their mind. All the environmental groups would be out there losing their minds. It would be on the front page of the newspapers nationally if it was a conservative place where the largest sewer spill in history had happened. But because it's Democrats, no one knows what's going on, probably unless you're listening to this show. And look, the consistency of the incompetence of Democrat leaders of government, whether it's Keith Ellison not able to stop fraud and, in fact, being complicit in fraud because he's profiting from it, whether it's the D.C. mayor who can't shovel snow on the sidewalk, whether it is D.C. and Maryland who dump a billion gallons of sewage into the river and into the water, or whether it's Gavin Newsom who, when you're facing the worst wildfires ever, has dumped the water into the Pacific. ocean so it's not available in the fire hydrants and everyone's houses burn. And by the way, the Marxist mayor of L.A., Karen Bass, who's in Africa during the fire and is so focused on DEI that she doesn't actually have the resources to fight the fire and California won't let them do fire mitigation strategies. All of this, there is a thread throughout it all, and it is incompetence and people paying the price Senator let talk about a big piece of legislation that a lot of people are very focused on this country A lot of voters voted on this issue specifically, and it deals with the Save America Act. And what has happened this week? Let's give an update to that. Well, the House of Representatives passed the Save America Act, passed it with only one Democrat vote. Every Democrat but one voted against it. The Save America Act requires proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote, and it requires a photo ID to vote. It's a very simple, straightforward, common-sense bill. It's now gone over to the Senate. I am leading the charge, pressing hard to get the Senate to take it up, to use every procedural tool we have to force the Senate to vote on it and pass it. This week I put out a video explaining the issues concisely, and the video went viral. It has over a million views. Give a listen. Give a watch. The House just passed the Save America Act. The Senate needs to take it up and pass it. I'm an original sponsor of the Save America Act. This is common sense legislation. This is legislation that requires proof that you're an American citizen in order to register to vote. And it requires a photo ID to go in and vote. Texas already requires a photo ID. It's an easy, common sense step to avoid voter fraud. the vast majority of Americans support photo ID, and yet Senate Democrats are doing everything they can to block it because they want more voter fraud. How do we take it up and pass it in the Senate? What I am urging my colleagues is that we should use every procedural tool we have to defeat a Democrat filibuster, and in particular, we should nuke what's called the zombie filibuster. Under the Senate rules, everyone has a right to filibuster, to talk as long as they want. We should require them to talk as long as they can. Go back to an old style talking filibuster like Jimmy Stewart did and Mr. Smith goes to Washington. Like I did in 2013 for 21 hours on the floor of the Senate. We should use the procedural rules to force the Democrats to do a talking filibuster and force them to keep talking. and talking and talking. And when they can't talk anymore, then we should pass the Save America Act. That's what I'm urging my colleagues to do. It's what President Trump wants us to do. And it's what I hope and pray we accomplish. Senator, you said it, I think, perfectly there. And explain a little bit more about what it would mean to nuke the zombie filibuster so that we get more context for that, so people understand, in essence, what they would be advocating for. Well, for most of the history of the Senate, the filibuster involved talking, involved standing up and talking and talking and talking. And in recent decades, the Senate has allowed simply whoever is filibustering to say, we're going to filibuster, you cast a procedural vote, and then you're done. And it's treated as blocked. But we don't have to do that. We can force them that there is what's called a two-speech rule in the Senate that limits every member of the Senate to two speeches on any legislative topic. And what I've been advocating, and Mike Lee has been advocating, and Rick Scott has been advocating, and Ron Johnson has been advocating, is that we force them to give the speeches, force them to talk. And when they're done talking, then you can vote on it. But the thing is, there's a price to that. Because they can fight back, and in particular, they can do what's called suggest the absence of a quorum. That means we have to be able to produce 50 senators on the floor. There are 53 of us. That means we need 50 bodies. It would entail very long hours. It would entail all-nighters. It would entail 50 of us being willing to stand together. It's not clear right now that we have 50 Republicans willing to do that. I'm trying to make the case this is a fight worth fighting. But it would be a massive and extended, this could extend days or even weeks. But I think we should be fighting with everything we got. I think this issue is important enough. It merits fighting. And so I'm trying to make that case to my colleagues. All right. Let me ask you a question. If you nuke it the way that you described it, is it just for this one issue and then things go back to the regular order of business, how it works normal now? Or would that change it moving forward? Explain that. So this is different from nuking the filibuster. So nuking the filibuster, that phrase involves breaking the Senate rules to change the Senate rules. So what happens, and we saw, for example, the Democrats nuked the filibuster for cabinet appointees and judicial appointees. And the way they did it, the Senate rules made it clear in the terms of the Senate rules that a nomination required 60 votes to go forward to proceed to it. However, what happened was Harry Reid, when he was majority leader, any ruling of the chair can be challenged on the floor of the Senate and 51 senators can overrule the ruling of the chair. And so Harry Reid inquired of the chair, what is the rule and was told the rule is 60 senators. And then he said, I appeal the ruling of the chair and the Democrats all voted party line. And when they did that, that becomes a binding precedent. So they broke the rules of the Senate to change the rules of the Senate. It is still in the Senate rules that a filibuster can be used to stop legislation. And I will say we have used that. Republicans have used that to stop terrible legislation from the Democrats. I think that's an important safeguard. So it is valuable is the point that people need to also understand. It's very valuable. If the Democrats had succeeded in nuking the filibuster when Joe Biden was president and when they had the House and Senate, they would have passed legislation, number one, striking down every photo ID law in the country and striking down every election integrity law in the country. Number two, making D.C. and Puerto Rico both states and electing four new Democrat senators. Number three, making every illegal alien in America a U.S. citizen and giving them immediate voting rights, which would have, among other things, turned Texas bright blue instantaneously. And number four, they would have packed the U.S. Supreme Court and added four left-wing justices immediately to it. But I think that would have been, I don't want to be hyperbolic, but I think that would have been essentially the end of the republic. There's no way to turn that around if they do that. And so how do you put that back in Pandora's back? Once that box is open, it's game over. It's that agenda. And notice the Democrats' top policy agenda is all to rig the game and make it impossible to ever defeat Democrats again. There's nothing they value more than staying in power. That's what they wanted to do. This is not nuking the filibuster in terms of changing the Senate rules. This is using the existing Senate rules and just enforcing them, making them stand up and speak. And one of the advantages of it is if they're standing up and speaking for hours and hours on end, trying to stop requiring proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote, trying to stop photo ID. Look, both of those popular policies are incredibly popular. 70, 80 percent of Americans agree with photo ID for voting. More than 70 percent of African-Americans agree with it. More than 70 percent of Hispanics agree with it. More than 70 percent of Democrat voters agree with it. And so this is a fight we should be having. And I'm urging my colleagues, let's stand and fight for voter integrity. Yeah, great point there. Don't forget, we do this show as a podcast Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Hit that subscriber auto download button wherever you get your podcasts. Also, follow us on social media, on TikTok. Center Cruise there now, at Ted Cruise. We're also both on Instagram and on X and Facebook as well. And you can watch this show on YouTube, as I mentioned earlier. So make sure you do that. If you've been listening to us on the radio, thank you for joining us. You'll see us back here on this station next week. And we'll see you on the podcast all week long. This is an iHeart Podcast. Guaranteed human.