All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 18, 2021 - Sean Hannity Show
34:28
Verdict Watch - November 18th, Hour 2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is an iHeart Podcast.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
I'm Carol Markovich.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday normally on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm Ben Ferguson.
And I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes, inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So Dell a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
America trapped behind enemy lines.
Day number 96.
All right, day number 96, 109 days since Joe Biden.
Well, actually, 108 days, I think, since Joe Biden made the promise not to abandon Americans, and he did.
We won't forget them.
I met the families last night, two of the families of the 13 of our fellow Americans serving our country.
Two of the 13, their families were there.
How do you ever recover when all of this was preventable?
Joe Biden, everybody knew the Taliban was on the march.
They chose not to push them back, which would have been easy with simple drone strikes, the way Donald Trump defeated the caliphate in Syria and Iraq, which built up during the oh Biden Obama years.
They could have done that, bought them a lot more time.
They could have moved up the withdrawal date.
They could have done it in March, April, or as planned by Donald Trump in May.
They could have gotten out every American, every uh family member.
They've we have hundreds still there.
They could have gotten out the thousands of green card holders that are still there.
They could have gotten out all of our Afghan allies.
Many have now been hunted down and killed in broad daylight in the streets.
We now know life for women in the Islamic emirates of Afghanistan is back to the old way.
Beatings in the street.
They must be dressed a certain way.
No school, no work for women.
Where are liberals?
Why why aren't they, you know, we're all the human rights people?
We're all the Me Too people.
See the way women are being treated.
There was a way to do this the right way.
There was a if we're gonna give military equipment away, we could have given it to the resistance.
Anyway, it's day three, is the jury is still uh out in the written house case.
We're on verdict watch, of course.
Uh 800-941 Sean uh is our program.
As I mentioned at the beginning of the last hour, uh the Rittenhouse judge is slamming the media for their gross irresponsibility.
We went over the 10 debunked heinous lies about Kyle Rittenhouse, written by Miranda Devine, pretty powerful piece.
Uh we have the uh case of uh who's responsible.
You literally have have the written house judge now saying jurors followed last night by an MSDNC reporter, and apparently said, Well, I was told to do so by a boss, a producer in New York.
Now, MSDNC is saying just the opposite.
What's fat what's really so fascinating about all of this is when you look at this, and Jonathan Turley made a really good point in in his column about this.
This is extraordinarily dangerous.
Extraordinary.
Now, last evening a person identified as James Morrison claimed that he was a producer at MBC News and under the supervision of someone in New York for MSDNC.
The police, when they stopped him because he was following in the distance of about a block.
This is the bus holding the jurors.
The juror's bus actually has the windows concealed, and he was following in the distance about a block and went through a red light, pulled them over, and inquired of him what he was what was going on, and he gave the information and he stated he'd been instructed by a supervisor in New York to follow the jury bus.
And then he added, I have been instructed that no one from I have instructed that no one from MBC News will be permitted in the building.
And I agree with what Jonathan Turley's saying.
The seriousness of this cannot be overstated.
And it's not because the police thought MSDNC may have been trying to get the pictures.
If the jurors do believe that they're being followed and photographed, what does that do to their psyche and their ability to come to a the correct verdict?
There's already an enormous amount of pressure.
I have every belief they they see what's going on outside the courtroom uh outside the courthouse and they hear what's going on outside the courthouse.
You have a gentleman mentioned in Turley's column, Cortez Rice, BLM activists in Minnesota, previously shown in a video tape saying that the jurors were being videotaped.
That's intimidation of jurors.
You cannot have that.
Then of course you got the usual suspects running rushing to judgment.
I mentioned Tiffany Cross, you know, wanting the judge removed from this case.
Uh by the way, an elected Democrat, but why let facts get in the way?
Uh a columnist on on that pro on that same network stating that white non college educated voters supported Republicans in 2021, in part because they care about using their guns on black people and getting away with it.
Well, the people in this instant involved in this case that were shot were all white.
I know facts are, you know, things I guess interfere with narratives.
Uh Joy Reed attacking the trial, suggesting uh Rittenhouse's emotional breakdown on the stand was fraudulent.
Georgetown law professor Paul Butler concurring, saying it's the greatest performance of his life.
Reed adding Wednesday, if you want to know why critical race theory exists, the actual law school theory that emphasizes that supposedly colorblind laws in America often still have racially discriminatory outcomes, then look no further than the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse.
Other networks have said, you know, similar or even worse things.
Now NBC is denying what their own employee said.
Anyway, last night a freelancer received a traffic citation while the traffic violation took place near the jury van, the freelancer never contacted or intended to contact the jurors during deliberations, never photographed or intended to photograph.
How do they know?
That's just a PR statement.
While the traffic violation took place near the jury van.
Oh, a coincidence?
Are we really supposed to believe that?
Greg Jarrett has been following this case start to finish with us and Leo 2.0 Terrell, both Fox News contributors, both attorneys, thank you both for being with me, and with us here.
Greg, we'll start with you.
What's your take day three, anticipation building?
So that we read anything into the length of time it's taken this jury.
Well, it's tempting to do that, but um there have been no notes from the jury that raise red flags, like we're confused over the meaning of the law.
Or we're stuck, we're divided.
Um it's been contentious.
You know, you see that in other cases that result in a hung jury.
There's no message here that we're hopelessly deadlocked.
Instead, you know, the jurors seem to be doing uh due diligence, reviewing the uh evidence that's a video and uh and I suspect they're going over witness testimony and their discussions as well.
They're being very deliberate.
Well, wait a second.
What video are we talking about?
The high resolution video that the prosecution had and hid from the defense until two days towards the end of the trial.
Uh which video are we talking about here?
Why would the judge did the judge tell the jury that that was withheld from the defense?
No.
No.
Uh this was the subject of a motion for a mistrial.
That uh the the defense was sandbagged, failing to turn over as the law demands.
Important video evidence that uh the prosecution then used to claim falsely, I think, that Rittenhouse House provoked the encounters, therefore forfeiting his right to self defense.
Look, they have an obligation to turn over equivalent evidence to the defense in advance.
They didn't do it as grounds for a mistrial.
Uh, let's get your take.
Do you read anything into the length of time, Leo 2.0 Torot, and what about the withholding of the higher resolution video that the prosecution had until the final two days.
I agree with everything Greg just said.
I I'll think that you basically, I think the jury is doing their due diligence.
There's really three mini trials in this particular case because you had three alleged victims.
And my point is is that I think the jury wants to get it right.
I think it would be naive for anyone to believe that the jury is not aware of what's going on outside.
The judge is aware of what's going on outside.
So if they're going to render a verdict, they're going to render it correctly and do their job and go through everything.
I do believe that the defense has an ace in the hole because I don't think there's any question about it.
I think the defen the prosecution intentionally withheld evidence, and I think if the judge grants a mistrial with prejudice, I'll think he I think he'll be on solid grounds because there's a constitutional requirement.
Greg knows Brady versus Maryland.
They had to turn that information over.
They had to just turn that uh video over, and they failed to do so.
And I believe this prosecution is probably one of the worst for a state government to have this type of bunch of clowns to run a murder case.
Prosecution is required to seek justice, not a conviction, Sean.
And now Greg, the the judge addressed why he hasn't ruled yet on the issue of mistrials, because both the prosecution and the defense have an opportunity to pr present their case to the judge why it should or should not be declared a mistrial with prejudice in in this new case without prejudice.
I think the judge uh said yesterday, look, you uh prosecutor created this mess, um, and we have this motion for a mistrial that you didn't hand over evidence properly.
Uh Leo's right, Brady versus Maryland.
Uh some of that evidence, if you look at it closely, is exculpatory.
Uh so they have an obligation to do that.
And the judge said, you know, we're gonna have to have a hearing here.
We're gonna have to call witnesses and so forth.
So the judge has properly uh taken the the the now four different uh grounds for a mistrial under submission.
He could rule at any time.
I think his inclination is the jurors have worked hard.
Um they've been here for weeks, they're deliberating conscientiously.
Let's see what they do.
And if if the judge thinks there's a miscarriage of justice here, he could rule on a mistrial.
So, in other words, the jury could come back with on on any of the uh charges against Rittenhouse with a guilty verdict, and it could be overruled by the judge and he can declare a mistrial with prejudice or without.
Right, but if the opposite happens and there's an acquittal, then the judge doesn't have to rule.
Judges don't want to rule unless they have to rule.
And so, you know, I think that maybe in the back of the judge's mind, I'm not gonna have to rule at all if the jurors acquit.
Do you think Leo 2.0 Toreau that the judge is inclined to declare a mistrial with prejudice?
Oh, I think if he does exercise the right to uh to if he does declare a mistrial, I think it would be with prejudice based on the constitutional violation.
And again, Greg Greg is spot on.
He doesn't want to rule, but he's gonna wait until the jury uh make their decision because he can rule at any time.
He figure not take it away from the jury, let it be uh after the after the jury verdict.
If it's unfavorable to Rittenhouse, if he does grant a mistrial, it in my opinion would be a mistrial with prejudice.
Uh that's gonna be uh a fascinating reaction, too.
Now, to what extent do both of you believe the noise outside the courtroom to the to the extent they may or may not know that this MS NBC reporter apparently told the police, according to reports uh in the Epic Times that they that they were told to follow this van.
Um what does what part might that play in the mind of jurors that have to make a very tough decision knowing what led up to this very situation, which was rioting in the streets.
Well, I can't believe that a freelance producer would be so stupid as to follow uh the jury.
Uh I mean, you know, and and his intention is irrelevant.
The effect is what is important.
If the jurors knew it, realized it, uh, on top of what they're hearing inside that jury room, amplified megaphones of protesters who want to convict Rittenhouse, screaming no justice, no peace.
No peace means we're gonna burn down your city unless you convict him.
I you know, I worry that that might unduly influence the jury.
The defendant has the paramount constitutional right to a fair trial.
Yes, protesters have a free speech right, but it always takes a back seat to the defendant's right to a fair trial.
They should have moved those protesters a block or two away and taken away their megaphones.
You don't have a constitutional right to amplify your voice.
I I wonder if in these high profile cases, we ought to just have automatic change of venues in the state, but out of the specific community impacted by it.
I still would think that's a jury of peers myself, but that might be open for debate.
Um anyway, Leo 2.0 Tarot, Greg Jarrett, you got your analysis has been amazing.
Thank you.
Uh when we come back, we'll hit the phones.
800-941 Sean is on number.
You want to be a part of the program.
Hey there.
I'm Mary Catherine Hammond.
And I'm Carol Markowitz.
We've been in political media for a long time.
Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
You're our kind of people.
Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So download Verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
800-941-SHAWN, our number, you want to be a part of the program.
Let us say hi to Gerard in Virginia.
Gerard, how are you?
Hi, Sean.
Uh quick comment.
Yes, sir.
In the form of a question, it tied in directly with uh what Greg Jarrett was saying.
How is it illegal to conduct electioneering within so many feet of a voting place, but legal to screen threats and intimidation on the steps of a courthouse and not be accused of jury tampering?
Listen, we've you you've you've got to balance freedom of speech rights, which we all support, um, even speech we don't like, with the ability of a jury not to be intimidated.
And you know, the idea that they have to cover the windows of the van carrying jury members uh speaks volumes to me about the circumstances they're living on, whether or not in retrospect the judge should have sequestered them.
I would be a supporter of that.
Uh but more importantly, knowing and hearing that knowing the situation leading up to this, everybody in that courtroom, every juror knows there's gonna be consequences with their decision.
Maybe that's one of the reasons they're being so deliberative and taking their time.
I don't know.
But you know what?
Uh we need to do everything we can do to protect, as I said, our institutions, the Capitol, our cities, police precincts, and that would go for courthouses and jurors that are doing their constitutional duty, and it's a thankless job.
You raise a good point.
Appreciate you being with us.
More of your calls next, 800-941-SHAWN.
We'll be right back.
Holding them accountable.
Sean gets the answers no one else does.
America deserves to know the truth about Congress.
All right, 25 now to the top of the hour.
I mentioned earlier, Joe Biden blaming record high energy prices on oil companies and demanding an investigation.
This, of course, after he's been rejected again and again and again.
It's kind of like if, you know, somebody, a guy's asking out a girl, and she says no again and again and again.
No, she does not want to go out on a date with you.
Uh OPEC keeps as it keeps saying no.
They're not going to increase production, Joe.
The answer's no.
At some point, you gotta accept the answer is no, and stop being a stalker and begging people and countries that hate our guts.
It's pretty unbelievable.
Jennifer Grantholm, the energy secretary.
Her answer, uh, remember the laugh?
Here's what she did.
What is the grand home plan to increase oil production in America?
That is hilarious.
Would that I had the magic wand on this?
As you know, of course, uh, oil is a global market.
It is controlled by a cartel.
Trying to sound like Santa Claus.
Uh oh, if I had the magic treatment for this.
It's a it's a global market, and it's controlled by a cartel, and it's controlled by OPEC.
Here's the problem with that argument.
Donald Trump gave us energy independence.
You put the policies in place that took that away.
You are causing the high prices, you are destroying the economy, and you are destroying the budgets of every poor American and every middle class American who can't afford to heat their homes and fill their their cars anymore with gasoline.
Great job.
And you can't blame the oil companies because they want to produce more oil.
You won't let them.
Unbelievable.
800-941 Sean.
Oh, we did find this tape though of Jennifer Grantholm singing her gasoline song, her energy song.
Perfect for this job.
Listen.
I'm joking all you pollution shit.
You make a me go.
You turn to me.
I'm breaking this relationship Gasoline, gasoline You're driving me insane Gasoline, gasoline The world can play.
Trust me, trust me.
I'm just something new.
Someone better.
Better than you.
We had a good route, but now we're done.
You're poisoning an admin.
You don't even care, I've been dirty in my head Leading us on the end is near You can also do how to judge you too.
We gotta leave you in the ground.
About the toe.
We must look to the flow.
We gotta leave you in the ground.
Jason, Jason, you're driving chicken.
Just lean, Jess Lean.
Jason, Jessie, it isn't you.
All right, so this is now your energy secretary 2018 in a video singing about the end of gasoline and fossil fuels.
Okay, with the end of our production and the we, the United States artificially reducing the supply.
Yeah, that would not be a good thing.
And remember, Joe Biden, you you'll see your standard of living go up and your costs go down.
That's what he promised us, remember?
Here's how my plan works.
None of you.
None of you have your taxes raised.
Anyone making less than 400,000 will not see a penny in taxes raised.
You'll actually see your standard of living go up and your costs go down.
And why I'm gonna do this?
I'm gonna ask big corporations, the wealthy to pay their fair share.
Oh, okay.
Well, the poor middle class, they're bearing the brunt of this, disproportionately negatively impacted by Joe's policies.
800-941 Sean, our number, you want to be a part of the program.
Uh let's say hi to Perry is in New York.
Perry, glad you called.
I have no idea why you're as dumb as I am, and and living in this state that is the highest tax state now in the country.
That makes us dumb people.
I'm ad acknowledging my faults here.
I agree.
Dumbing dumb and dumber.
We'll make it a movie.
Uh dumb and dumber five, those that stayed in New York.
Go ahead.
Exactly, yes.
Uh, you know, I I I'm watching the news in regards to this trial, and I always thought it was against the law to intimidate a witness, to intimidate a jury, to coerce a jury, but it's okay to stand outside the courthouse.
And you know that's why it's taken so long.
I mean, I'm assuming, but I know it is that these people are scared.
They're scared to make a decision for themselves for their city.
So maybe somebody should start going outside and arrest a few of them.
Make an example.
Well now we got then the other way around, they'd arrest everybody.
Listen, arrest everybody.
I w uh it would we eventually will find out.
My assumption is, because they're outside the courtroom that the jury is hearing all of this.
The jury's very well aware of that there may be consequences to what their decision is.
That puts a lot of pressure on them.
And then what did they get last night?
Then they get this MSDNC NBC reporter following the jury bus, which by the way, has windows covered, so the jury doesn't have to see.
Now, in my opinion, the jury probably at this point should have been sequestered.
I'd also argue moving forward, high profile cases, I would I would say it's automatic you change the jurisdiction for the safety of the jury and and and not having it right in the heart of a the community where something like this happens.
Um but we'll see.
Uh you make a good point, Perry.
It's intimidating and it's intimidating the jury.
Uh JB is in California.
By the way, you're almost as dumb as we are in New York.
You come from the second highest tax state in the country, but you know, I'm guilty, so I'm I'm calling myself dumb.
Go ahead.
Well, it's an honor to speak with you, Mr. Hannity.
Uh yeah, we pay a lot of taxes here, and that's just goes with the territory.
Um my question was on the on um when he turned himself in, or I'm not sure when he was taken into custody, but I was kind of wondering how much ammo he turned in with his weapon.
You know, the inter the interesting thing is in the case of both Rosenbaum and the c in every case here, he fired one shot.
The guy that admitted this star witness of the prosecution that said he aimed a loaded gun at Rittenhouse before he fired, he only fired one shot.
He could have emptied the the magazine.
He didn't do it.
Well, I know, but uh that I haven't a heard anybody comment on how much ammo he turned in.
I mean, if he was out to kill people as a prosecution said, he would have been shooting all of his ammo, I would imagine.
Oh, but remember what the uh assistant DA said.
He uh he he came to a fist fight with a gun uh and he was a coward because he didn't want to use his fists.
Really?
Uh you have a you have a mob chasing you, and they're about to stomp on your face and smash it right into the pavement, and he defended himself.
Okay.
Somebody points a loaded gun at you.
I'm ha how do you use your fists at in that situation?
But that's the kind of crap that the that the prosecution put out there.
And while they did that, then they take a uh a weapon, whether loaded or unloaded, it doesn't matter.
Shows they don't know a thing about guns because they charged him with a crime that wasn't a crime because they didn't know anything about what real guns are, and in fact it it wasn't even illegal what they accused him and and and charged him with, and the judge threw it out.
Um, but then he points it right at people in the courtroom.
Now I don't that that's gun safety one oh one.
So obviously the prosecution thinks you should have used a fist against the guy aiming a pistol that's loaded in your at your face.
Great.
Good luck with that plan.
I don't think it's gonna work.
Illinois Josh neck, Sean Hannity Show.
What's going on?
Hey, Sean.
I hope everything's good.
Uh I just wanted to point out a fact that uh, you know, not a lot of People are discussing how the feds had the uh drone footage for the trial.
How come the feds are watching all this fold unfold and they're just sitting back and and watching it and letting it go?
Well, if for example, during the five hundred and nearly six hundred riots in the summer of twenty twenty, if in fact as a tool of the police they use surveillance as a means of of finding people that were responsible for crimes, uh that could be a useful tool for the police.
I wouldn't have a problem with that in the middle of a riot.
Right, right.
I understand that, but the whole concept of okay, you got a group of people that are doing things they shouldn't be doing, you know they have the assets and the ways to get a hold of uh at least law enforcement and say, hey, go to this area, this is what we got.
Almost every single solitary city where rioting occurred with dozens of dead Americans, thousands of injured cops, video galore.
We could identify the people that were committing the crimes involved in the riots, and most local prosecutors decided not to prosecute.
They only prosecute the only the only Democrats only care about one riot.
Not uh to me, all rioting is wrong.
And people that riot, you should be punished.
And and that means January 6th, as I said.
You had no right to go into that Capitol.
Yeah, and and people that did, I think some people got caught up in the moment.
I think there were some people based on where things were planted ahead of time.
There's some group out there, I don't know who they are, uh, that apparently had left it the day before.
Um but more importantly, why did they deny the National Guard that was called up by the White House and called up by the Capitol Police Chief?
He he requested why why I was the n I was in the National Guard for nine years here in Illinois.
It has to do with the mayor as well as the governor, because if they've got to send the National Guard in, then they look bad.
Listen, I I I my view, knowing there's that many people marching to the Capitol, and tensions are high post election November 2020.
I agree they should have sent them in.
They should have sent them in to protect our institutions.
Yeah.
And guess what?
It would have prevented what happened from happening.
You know, it's sad.
And just like we could have prevented what happened in Seattle and in Portland and in New York and in Minneapolis and all around the country, Kenosha, if we would use basic law enforcement techniques.
Remember, they don't even want police to be able to use tear gas, which has historically been used to disperse crowds.
They don't want police to be able to do their job.
And now police are afraid to do their job.
Because if they do their job, they the the likelihood of them getting in trouble for doing their job is higher than it's ever been.
And you see now that that cops have become targets themselves.
Though those mobs, those rioters in the summer of 2020, they had no problem pelting cops with bricks.
You know what it's like to get hit in the head with a brick, a rock, a bottle, a Molotov cocktail?
That's why thousands of cops were injured.
Where's Liz Cheney's interest in that part?
Where's our lectures on the Constitution on that part?
Where's our lectures and and and why isn't she calling for a commission on those riots?
Oh, that's right.
Her real reason is to purge the party of Donald Trump.
And so now she has formed an unholy alliance with the very people that referred to her father as a war criminal and as a murderer and as a liar and a crook.
Quick break right back to the phones, 800 941 Sean, as we are on verdict watch still, W O Right, back to our busy phones.
Let's go to Mark in Indiana.
Mark, you're on the Sean Hannity show.
Hey, Sean, good afternoon.
What's going on?
Uh real quick, I just wanted to say, you know, that that prosecutor up there in Kenosha, he needs to be put sent to in front of uh ethics committee for everything he's doing with uh against the in the written house trial.
It's just uh I mean the way that judge has been reprimanding him, it's just it's been pretty pathetic and pretty embarrassing.
And uh listening to other people talk, it's uh uh I guess you know, this is basic law one oh one.
Listen, I th the judges yet to rule on the motions, both motions of a mistrial, one with prejudice, one without.
A lot can happen.
And let's wait, watch and see.
All right, Mark, thank you.
Uh Thomas, North Carolina.
Thomas, you have one minute.
It's all yours.
Go.
Hey, Sean.
What I'm concerned about with the case is the precedence that's set going forth with future cases in the event of a guilty verdict.
You know, I'm not an attorney or anything.
I don't pretend to be more intelligent than I am.
But my understanding is that you make legal arguments, you cite case law from previous trials.
And so what are we gonna are they gonna argue like, oh, hey, look, in the Written House case, despite being a clear case of self-defense, it's argued by the prosecution.
You know, hey, we all take a beating from time to time.
And so your right to self-defense doesn't begin in until you've already been assaulted.
Do I have to wait until defend myself?
You're right on every front.
Um it's almost like we now you're guilty until you prove yourself innocent.
I mean, think about this.
They they had to in every instance in this trial prove that Kyle Rittenhouse, uh, like for example, thank God there was eyewitness testimony, video testimony of room running away, and then the lead, the star witness of the prosecution.
Yeah, I pointed it and I put pointed a loaded gun at Kyle Rittenhouse.
And then the videotape evidence, the eyewitness testimony.
You know, it this this to me would be a very easy, not guilty verdict.
I don't know what the jury is doing, how wide it's taken so long.
But we'll find out.
I mean, now the judge also opened the door for lesser charges.
Maybe they feel compelled to do something because they feel pressure from outside the courthouse, and in the back of their minds, some people might be worried about what the consequences to their decision could be.
That should not factor into their thinking, but they are human, and that has to cross their mind.
800, 941 Shauna's on number.
Quick break, right back.
You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
We got you.
Now I'm Carol Markowitz.
And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
Normally is about real conversations.
Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally on the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast.
I'm Ben Ferguson, and I'm Ted Cruz.
Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
So Dell, a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
▲
Export Selection