Speaker 1: Welcome its verdict. Was Senator Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson with you,
Speaker 1: and we have got two major stories that we're going
Speaker 1: to have to deal with. One of them deals with
Speaker 1: Hunter Biden and dited on nine tax related charges, three
Speaker 1: of them felonies, and we're going to break down these
Speaker 1: charges for you so that you understand exactly what's happening
Speaker 1: with that. Also, there was a very interesting questioning that
Speaker 1: took place in the judiciary of the FBI Director, Chrisopher Ray,
Speaker 1: and there was some pretty intense back and force between
Speaker 1: Senator Cruz and the FBI director.
Speaker 2: We're going to run through all of that for you
Speaker 2: as well.
Speaker 1: But Senator, we were not expecting this headline that Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden would be indicted on nine tax related charges, three
Speaker 1: of them felonies. This is obviously significant, especially when they
Speaker 1: thought they were going to have this sweetheart plea deal
Speaker 1: that the last second exploded because of whistleblowers.
Speaker 2: So how promising is this.
Speaker 1: It's a fifty six page indictment filed and I don't
Speaker 1: record in LA something that's never happened before, or is
Speaker 1: this still going to be a big Well, yeah, we
Speaker 1: indict in but he's still going to get a sweetheart deal.
Speaker 3: What's your reaction, Well, listen when you say we were
Speaker 3: not expecting this indictment. I don't think that's entirely accurate.
Speaker 3: Once the sweetheart plea deal collapsed, and it collapsed because
Speaker 3: there was public scrutiny. It collapsed because the IRS whistleblowers
Speaker 3: came forward. It collapsed because the House representatives held hearings.
Speaker 3: It collapsed because the federal district judge realized that signing
Speaker 3: off on this sweetheart deal would profoundly compromise the integrity
Speaker 3: of the court system. Once it collapsed, a larger indictment
Speaker 3: was much much more likely. This indictment that came down
Speaker 3: yesterday is nine different counts. It includes failure to file
Speaker 3: and pay taxes, It includes evasion of assessment, and it
Speaker 3: includes a false or fraudulent tax return. Three of the
Speaker 3: nine counts are felonies, and according to the Special Council,
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden quote engaged in a four year scheme to
Speaker 3: not pay at least one point four million dollars in
Speaker 3: taxes that he owed from twenty sixteen to twenty nineteen.
Speaker 3: Now one point four million dollars is an awful lot
Speaker 3: of money. Hunter Biden eventually did pay his taxes he
Speaker 3: got a sweetheart loan from a quote friend, But before
Speaker 3: he did so, according to the prosecutors, hunter Biden included
Speaker 3: quote false business deductions in order to evade assessment of
Speaker 3: taxes to reduce the substantial tax liabilities he faced. Prosecutors
Speaker 3: also allege in the indictment that he quote subverted the
Speaker 3: payroll in tax withholding process of his own company by
Speaker 3: withdrawing millions of dollars outside of its payroll and tax
Speaker 3: withholding process. The prosecutor is further alleged that hunter Biden
Speaker 3: quote spent millions of dollars on an extravagant lifestyle rather
Speaker 3: than paying his tax bills, and the indictment states that
Speaker 3: between quote twenty sixteen in October fifteenth, twenty twenty, the
Speaker 3: defendant that would be Hunter Biden, spent this money on drugs,
Speaker 3: escorts and girlfriends, luxury hotels and rental properties, exotic cars, clothing,
Speaker 3: and other items of a personal nature. In short, everything
Speaker 3: but his taxes.
Speaker 2: You look at that list that you just described there.
Speaker 1: They knew all of this, we assume when they gave
Speaker 1: him the sweetheart deal.
Speaker 2: So how did we go?
Speaker 1: And I think this is the part that's going to
Speaker 1: frustrate so many people that are listening right now. How
Speaker 1: did we go from a sweetheart deal to a fifties
Speaker 1: six page indictment and an indictment where they couldn't in
Speaker 1: theory get one before. And we can go back and
Speaker 1: remind people about, you know, all of the shadiness of well,
Speaker 1: can I get them to indict in Washington, d C?
Speaker 1: Can I get them indict in California where some of
Speaker 1: the crimes were committed. The statue of limitations was running
Speaker 1: out on some of the most egregious tax crimes. But
Speaker 1: to put it differently, maybe from what I said earlier,
Speaker 1: I'm shocked at now that we're looking at a fifty
Speaker 1: six page indictment filled with all of these different issues,
Speaker 1: and it goes back to sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, and nineteen
Speaker 1: taxes you know, on this timeline. But again, the statue
Speaker 1: of limitations apparently on some of the worst stuff is
Speaker 1: already you know, statues already hit.
Speaker 2: So therefore we couldn't go back to those.
Speaker 3: Now, Look, that's exactly right. These facts were all known.
Speaker 3: They were known a year ago, they were known two
Speaker 3: years ago, they were known three years ago. They were
Speaker 3: known four years ago. The Department of Justices dragged its feet.
Speaker 3: It has not wanted to bring this indictment the sweetheart deal.
Speaker 3: They were prepared to get signed off and be done
Speaker 3: and give Hunter Biden a complete get out of jail
Speaker 3: free card. The piece they didn't count on was the
Speaker 3: IRS whistleblowers coming forward and when they did so, when
Speaker 3: they brought forth testimony that the Biden Department of Justice
Speaker 3: was covering up for Hunter Biden, that the Attorney General
Speaker 3: had lied to Congress under oath, which is a felony,
Speaker 3: that the Attorney General had committed obstruction of justice, which
Speaker 3: is a felony, And that in particular, the Department of
Speaker 3: Justice had blocked investigation, any investigation into Joe Biden. That
Speaker 3: puts so much pressure on the court that the court
Speaker 3: could not sign off on the sweetheart deal. Now, I
Speaker 3: want to address in a minute the issue of Joe Biden,
Speaker 3: but let me just point out something extraordinary in this indictment.
Speaker 3: So this indictment lists some of Hudder Biden's expenditures, and
Speaker 3: when the prosecutors say he lived a lavish lifestyle, that
Speaker 3: does not begin to describe it. So, for example, ATM
Speaker 3: Cash withdraws. How much do you think he withdrew from
Speaker 3: ATMs in twenty sixteen?
Speaker 1: Knowing it's a hunter Biden, there's no telling because I
Speaker 1: can see this guy going high as a kite up there,
Speaker 1: for whatever nefarious reasons, grabbing as much cash out as
Speaker 1: he can.
Speaker 3: So the answer is two hundred thousand dollars and nine
Speaker 3: hundred and twenty two dollars. Holy crap, two hundred grand.
Speaker 3: You ever pulled two hundred grand out of an ATM?
Speaker 2: No? I think my only course of YEARN on my
Speaker 2: card is like five hundred bucks.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I'm confident I've never had a year in my
Speaker 3: life that I pulled two hundred grand out of ATM.
Speaker 3: All Right, so he pulled two hundred thousand, nine hundred
Speaker 3: and twenty two dollars in twenty sixteen, how much do
Speaker 3: you think he pulled out in twenty seventeen.
Speaker 2: I'm assuming in the hundreds of thousands.
Speaker 3: Again, five hundred and three thousand, six hundred and fourteen dollars.
Speaker 1: Can we just talk about the cash aspect of that
Speaker 1: for a second before you go to the next year's
Speaker 1: five hundred thousand dollars of cash. Just having that much
Speaker 1: cash in hand over a twelve months, he's more than
Speaker 1: a thousand dollars, right, more than one thousand a day?
Speaker 1: But what are you doing with that amount of cash?
Speaker 1: And it goes back to suspicious activity reports of all
Speaker 1: the bank accounts. Cash is king when you're doing I
Speaker 1: legal activities. And that's why you might if.
Speaker 3: You were buying drugs, if you were buying crack, if
Speaker 3: you were paying prostitutes. That's how you spend five hundred
Speaker 3: and three thousand, six hundred and fourteen dollars and twenty
Speaker 3: seventeen now five hundred grand in ATMs. I actually think,
Speaker 3: all right, so I'm fifty two, about to be fifty
Speaker 3: three years old. I believe in my entire life from
Speaker 3: birth to age fifty two, I don't think I've pulled
Speaker 3: five hundred and three thousand dollars out of ATMs and
Speaker 3: fifty three years I was shocked if I pulled that
Speaker 3: much out.
Speaker 1: I would be shocked if the average American pulls any
Speaker 1: more than seven to eight nine grand a year out,
Speaker 1: and that that would be I would think probably on
Speaker 1: the high end, because most people.
Speaker 3: To be honest, most shares I probably pulled. I don't
Speaker 3: know two three thousand dollars out of ATM. I don't
Speaker 3: know there's been a year that I pulled ten thousand
Speaker 3: out of an ATM. It's you know, I pull a
Speaker 3: couple hundred dollar dollars off to have just cash if
Speaker 3: I need to, like, you know, pay expenses, But most
Speaker 3: things I do in credit cards, Like five hundred and
Speaker 3: three thousand, six hundred and fourteen. All right, that was
Speaker 3: twenty seventeen. What do you think he's spent just on
Speaker 3: ATM cash withdrawals in twenty eighteen.
Speaker 2: I'm gonna guess over a half million dollars.
Speaker 3: Again, seven hundred and seventy two thousand dollars and five
Speaker 3: hundred and forty eight dollars. Wow, Like, holy crap, who
Speaker 3: the hell that that's two grand a day? Who pulls
Speaker 3: two thousand dollars a day? And by the way, that's
Speaker 3: two thousand dollars every day. That's on Monday, that's on Tuesday,
Speaker 3: that's on Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and back on Monday. Like,
Speaker 3: what are you doing with seven hundred and seventy two thousand,
Speaker 3: five hundred and forty eight dollars in the year twenty eighteen?
Speaker 4: All right?
Speaker 1: I will be completely honest with you, I don't know
Speaker 1: what the market rate is for drugs.
Speaker 2: I have no idea.
Speaker 1: I don't know how much how much a cost to
Speaker 1: do math or crack or any of these things. But
Speaker 1: a five hundred thousand dollars habit, to me, seems like
Speaker 1: that would be an insane amount that would probably at
Speaker 1: some point put you under if you were actually consuming
Speaker 1: that much that much in drug use. So I'm assuming
Speaker 1: this money is either going to other nefarious things like
Speaker 1: prostitution and who knows what else he could have been
Speaker 1: doing illegally with his cash in possible payoffs.
Speaker 3: And by the way, I'm going to say, there are
Speaker 3: other accounts that they're mentioned. And then twenty nineteen he
Speaker 3: has an amazing drop off. I don't know why twenty
Speaker 3: nineteen was a cheap year, but he falls all the
Speaker 3: way down to one hundred eighty six nine hundred and
Speaker 3: twenty dollars. And my guess is, I think one hundred
Speaker 3: and eighty six thousand is more than ever pulled out
Speaker 3: of an ATM in fifty two years. But that was
Speaker 3: a really mild year compared to his seven hundred and
Speaker 3: seventy two thousand dollars year. So from twenty sixteen to
Speaker 3: twenty nineteen, Hunter Biden pulled one million, six hundred and
Speaker 3: sixty four thousand and four dollars out of ATMs. All right,
Speaker 3: next category, payments various women twenty sixteen. What do you
Speaker 3: think it is?
Speaker 2: Payments various women?
Speaker 3: I don't even know what that means. That that's how
Speaker 3: the prosecutors have described it. I'm quoting it. It simply says,
Speaker 3: payments dash various women.
Speaker 2: Fifty grand.
Speaker 3: So twenty sixteen is a cheap year, four four hundred dollars.
Speaker 4: Okay, that's that.
Speaker 3: I don't know what payments various women means, but four
Speaker 3: grand is compared to the numbers we were talking about,
Speaker 3: relatively small. What do you think twenty seventeen.
Speaker 1: Is I'm assuming you got rid into it, So let's
Speaker 1: call it thirty grand.
Speaker 3: One hundred and thirty eight thousand, eight hundred and thirty
Speaker 3: seven dollars. Wow, Payments various women. What do you think
Speaker 3: twenty eighteen is?
Speaker 2: Double?
Speaker 5: It?
Speaker 3: Three hundred and eighty three thousand, five hundred and forty
Speaker 3: eight dollars. And then twenty nineteen, I don't know, he
Speaker 3: had a down year. Twenty nineteen it drops to just
Speaker 3: one hundred and fifty six thousand, four hundred and twenty seven.
Speaker 3: All right, Next category, Clothing and Accessory twenty sixteen, seventy
Speaker 3: eight thousand dollars, twenty seventeen, one hundred and thirteen thousand dollars,
Speaker 3: twenty eighteen, one hundred and fifty one thousand dollars, twenty nineteen,
Speaker 3: fifty three thousand dollars. How about tuition, extra education, extracurricular
Speaker 3: twenty sixteen one hundred and seventeen thousand dollars, twenty seventeen,
Speaker 3: ninety four thousand dollars, twenty eighteen, ninety three thousand dollars,
Speaker 3: twenty nineteen, it's a cheap year, four thousand dollars. Health
Speaker 3: beauty Pharmacy twenty sixteen, fifty four thousand dollars, twenty seventeen,
Speaker 3: one hundred and ten thousand dollars, twenty eighteen forty six
Speaker 3: thousand dollars, twenty nineteen, twenty six thousand dollars. Let's go
Speaker 3: down to by the way.
Speaker 2: This is this is what burning through cash sounds like.
Speaker 3: All right, So you talked about his spending money on prostitutes.
Speaker 3: There's actually a separate category that the prosecutors have enumerated
Speaker 3: called adult entertainment.
Speaker 2: So that would count the payments to women that would
Speaker 2: be separate.
Speaker 3: We assume, so twenty sixteen, four thousand, four hundred and
Speaker 3: eleven dollars to adult entertainment, pretty mild year. He was
Speaker 3: actually a pretty good boy. In twenty sixteen, twenty seventeen,
Speaker 3: not so much. Fifty six thousand, eight hundred and forty
Speaker 3: six dollars in adult entertainment twenty seventeen. I don't know
Speaker 3: what the hell happened in twenty seventeen. Trump became president.
Speaker 3: He got pissed off, He went out and parted his
Speaker 3: ass off. One hundred thousand dollars and three hundred and
Speaker 3: thirty dollars in adult entertainment in twenty seventeen, and then
Speaker 3: twenty eighteen it gets back down to a lower level.
Speaker 3: Twenty seven thousand, three hundred and seventy three dollars. This
Speaker 3: is And by the way, I'll give you one other category.
Speaker 3: There are multiple other categories here, but i'll read one
Speaker 3: another Rehab, drug and alcohol twenty sixteen seven thousand, six
Speaker 3: hundred dollars twenty seventeen, twenty eight thousand, six hundred dollars
Speaker 3: twenty seventeen thirty five thousand, six hundred and sixty nine dollars.
Speaker 3: So he's paying thirty five grand on rehab the same
Speaker 3: year he's spending one hundred grand in an adult entertainment. He's
Speaker 3: spending three hundred and eighty three thousand dollars on payments
Speaker 3: to various women, and he's spent spending seven hundred and
Speaker 3: seventy two thousand dollars on ATM cash withdraws. When they
Speaker 3: say that's an extravagant spending level, that ain't even close
Speaker 3: to describing the facts they lay out.
Speaker 1: Let me tell you about blackout coffee. Bidenomics is a
Speaker 1: complete and total disaster. But I don't let that or
Speaker 1: any of these other issues ruin my day. You want
Speaker 1: to know why, because I start my day with a
Speaker 1: hot America first cup of blackout coffee. Now, if you
Speaker 1: like a premium cup of coffee to start your day.
Speaker 1: And I got to get up every day and get
Speaker 1: on the radio at seven in the morning. I have
Speaker 1: to be ready to give the news. And that is
Speaker 1: why I have to have a good cup of coffee,
Speaker 1: not average, but a really good cup of coffee. Blackout
Speaker 1: coffee is one hundred percent of America, zero percent woke company.
Speaker 1: You know there's a bunch of woke caffee companies out there.
Speaker 1: The biggest ones are the wokest ones out there. Well,
Speaker 1: Blackout is one hundred percent committed to conservative values, from
Speaker 1: sourcing the beans to the roasting process, customer support and shipping.
Speaker 1: They embody true American values and accept no compromise on
Speaker 1: taste or quality.
Speaker 2: I'm drinking it every day. I can tell you this
Speaker 2: is true. You need to try Blackout Coffee.
Speaker 1: And if you've got someone on your Christmas list as
Speaker 1: a coffee drinker that loves premium coffee, go to Blackoutcoffee
Speaker 1: dot com slash verdict. That's Blackout Coffee dot com slash verdict.
Speaker 1: You'll use the promo code vertict and you're gonna get
Speaker 1: twenty percent off your first order, plus you can see
Speaker 1: all their incredible gift ideas for the holidays. It's Blackout
Speaker 1: Coffee dot com slash verdict. Be awake, not woke. Blackoutcoffee
Speaker 1: dot com slash verdict. If you look at the cash
Speaker 1: here and the spending, and I think this is where
Speaker 1: we should really hone in on following the money which
Speaker 1: goes back to Joe Biden, and the reality is all
Speaker 1: of the spinning habits that we just talked about and
Speaker 1: the way that they described it as again, the definditant
Speaker 1: engaged in a four year scheme to not pay his taxes.
Speaker 1: That's what it says in this United States District Court
Speaker 1: for the Central District, California.
Speaker 2: And they called a scheme.
Speaker 1: They said, it's evasion of taxes, failure to file and
Speaker 1: pay taxes, and false and fraudulent tax returns, a four
Speaker 1: year scheme to avoid over one point four million dollars
Speaker 1: in tax obligations, and he filed false returns. But then
Speaker 1: you go back and follow the money center, and that's
Speaker 1: where this really matters, where the rubber hits the road.
Speaker 1: What were the services rendered for the amount of cash
Speaker 1: coming in? He didn't offer any services, which goes back
Speaker 1: to the money laundering, which goes back to everything we've
Speaker 1: learned about Joe Biden. And we also have again from
Speaker 1: James Comer and Jim Jordan that there were a dozens
Speaker 1: of emails directly from the Burner email accounts of now
Speaker 1: President Joe Biden without his son being sees heed on them.
Speaker 1: Two Hunter Biden's business associates and partners. So the idea
Speaker 1: that he wasn't involved in his son's business world is
Speaker 1: a flat out lie.
Speaker 3: Well, on the face of it, the indictments that were
Speaker 3: just entered in yesterday against Hunter Biden, if he's convicted,
Speaker 3: could result in seventeen years of prison sentence. That's a
Speaker 3: long time. Seventeen years is not a slap on the wrist.
Speaker 3: It's not mild now, mind you. The Biden DOJ desperately
Speaker 3: tried to give Hunter Biden a slap on the wrist,
Speaker 3: and the public scrutiny that was caused by the irs whistleblowers.
Speaker 2: Blew that plan.
Speaker 3: But Ben, look, you know me, Well, what do you
Speaker 3: think enrages me the most about this indictment?
Speaker 1: I would assume the money laundering and the crimes is
Speaker 1: the way I would describe it in my opinion against
Speaker 1: women that he exploited.
Speaker 3: So that is infuriating. But that's not what enrages me
Speaker 3: the most. What enrages me the most are the words
Speaker 3: that are missing. And the words that are missing from
Speaker 3: this indictment are Joseph Robinette Biden junior.
Speaker 2: Look, so how do we keep those words out of there?
Speaker 3: So we have talked at length on this podcast, The
Speaker 3: Biden doj was obsessively focused on protect the big guy,
Speaker 3: protect Joe Biden. We talked about early on Joe wanted
Speaker 3: to protect his son. Look, that's admiral let every father
Speaker 3: wants to protect his son. But at some point the
Speaker 3: political apparatriics, at some point, the elected Democrats, at some point,
Speaker 3: the the corrupt corporate media decided, Okay, Hunter Biden is
Speaker 3: not savable. He's so messed up, he's going down, he
Speaker 3: is doing jail time, and they made the decision to
Speaker 3: throw Hunter Biden overboard. But the focus, the overwhelming focus,
Speaker 3: is we must, must, must, must, must protect Joe Biden. Now,
Speaker 3: we've also talked at length on this podcast how the
Speaker 3: only reason this is a matter of public concern is
Speaker 3: because of Joe Biden. Listen, Hunter, I've never met Hunter Biden.
Speaker 3: I don't know the guy, but everything about him, he
Speaker 3: seems like a deeply disturbed, sad individual. He is wrestling
Speaker 3: with demons. He has struggled with drug and alcohol addiction
Speaker 3: his entire life. If his name were Hunter Smith, you
Speaker 3: and I wouldn't be talking about this, And if we
Speaker 3: encountered him, we would feel bad for him. We'd hope
Speaker 3: he get treatment. We'd hope he get help. But if
Speaker 3: his name were Hunter Smith, he would not have made
Speaker 3: millions of dollars. There's nothing about Hunter Biden's skill set.
Speaker 3: There's nothing about his experience. There's nothing about what he's
Speaker 3: able to produce that would cause anyone to pay him
Speaker 3: millions of dollars. Look across the entire scope of the country.
Speaker 3: Find one other crackhead who gets paid millions of dollars.
Speaker 3: They don't to make millions of dollars, you have to
Speaker 3: perform some service.
Speaker 4: That is of value.
Speaker 3: The only service Hunter Biden performed was he delivered favors
Speaker 3: from Daddy. And understand, this is not an access case.
Speaker 3: This is not about he's a lobbyist. This is about
Speaker 3: I believe Joe Biden doing favors explicitly for the people
Speaker 3: who gave millions of dollars to his son, and also
Speaker 3: Joe Biden being prepared to exact retribution against the people
Speaker 3: who refused to pay millions of dollars to his son.
Speaker 3: We also know that James Comer has cataloged at great
Speaker 3: length a substantial sum of money that the Chinese communists
Speaker 3: paid to Hunter Biden, that the Ukrainians paid to Hunter Biden,
Speaker 3: that the Russians paid to Hunter Biden, A substantial amount
Speaker 3: of that made it directly to Joe Biden's bank account,
Speaker 3: So this was understand It is Joe Biden that was
Speaker 3: leading what you've referred to as the Biden crime crime family,
Speaker 3: and this indictment, it's designed on the face of it
Speaker 3: to look tough. Wow, we're going after Hunter. But every
Speaker 3: one of the offenses is specifically limited to Hunter. There
Speaker 3: is nothing. So David Wis and the Biden Department of
Speaker 3: Justice allow the statute of limitations to run on all
Speaker 3: of the violations concerning China. They just let it run.
Speaker 3: So this doesn't concern China, This doesn't concern the WhatsApp
Speaker 3: where Hunter says, I'm sitting here next to my father.
Speaker 3: Pay me the money now, or he will exact retribution
Speaker 3: that is not covered by this indictment. This is entirely
Speaker 3: putting the blame. And you and I have talked about this.
Speaker 3: If they were going to try to cover up for
Speaker 3: Joe Biden, this is what they would do. They'd try
Speaker 3: to make Hunter Biden the fall guy. And I got
Speaker 3: to admit, as I look at this indictment, It makes
Speaker 3: me angry because this is designed to be a different
Speaker 3: defense of Joe Biden to insulate him. These offenses, the
Speaker 3: one unifying theme is they're designed to be completely free
Speaker 3: of involvement with Joe Biden, and it ignores the broader
Speaker 3: question where did these millions of dollars come from? And
Speaker 3: the answer is Hunter Biden selling favors from Daddy, which
Speaker 3: the Biden Justice Apartment desperately wants nobody to know about.
Speaker 2: Let me tell you about Patriot Mobile.
Speaker 1: For ten years, Patriot Mobile has been America's only Christian
Speaker 1: conservative wireless provider. And when I say only trust me,
Speaker 1: they're the only one. The team at Patriot Mobiles started
Speaker 1: Patriot Mobiles so you didn't have to give your money
Speaker 1: anymore to woke big cell phone companies who were taking
Speaker 1: your dollars after you pay your bill and giving it
Speaker 1: back to liberal causes, including planned parenthood. Now, if you're
Speaker 1: sick and tired of giving your cash to woke individuals,
Speaker 1: if you're sick and tired of giving your money to
Speaker 1: woke candidates and to woke causes, then switch your cell
Speaker 1: phone bill right now. A Patriot Mobile offers dependable nationwide coverage,
Speaker 1: giving you the ability to access all three major networks,
Speaker 1: which means you get the same coverage that you're accustomed
Speaker 1: to without funding the left. Now, when you pay your
Speaker 1: bill to Patriot Mobile, this is the best part. They
Speaker 1: take a percentage of your bill every month at no
Speaker 1: extra costs to you, and they give it to organizations
Speaker 1: that support free speech, religious freedom, the sanctity of life,
Speaker 1: the Second Amendment, our military, our veterans, and our first
Speaker 1: responder heroes. They have one hundred percent US based customer
Speaker 1: service team making switching easy. You can keep your same
Speaker 1: number that you have right now, keep your same cell phone,
Speaker 1: or upgrade to a new one, and many times they
Speaker 1: save you money on your monthly bill on top of
Speaker 1: everything else they're doing. Go to Patriot Mobile dot com
Speaker 1: right now. That's Patriotmobile dot com. Or you can call
Speaker 1: them nine to seven to two Patriot. It's nine seven
Speaker 1: to two Patriot. Make sure you use the promo code
Speaker 1: Verdict when you call them or online, and you'll get
Speaker 1: free activation and the best deals of the year. One
Speaker 1: other question I want to ask you, Senator about this
Speaker 1: is you know Biden's lawyers have been pretty snarky with Congress.
Speaker 1: They've been saying that they're not going to appear for depositions.
Speaker 1: There is a very good chance that he will not
Speaker 1: show up this next week as he's been told to do.
Speaker 1: They say they only want to do a public hearing,
Speaker 1: which to put it, Let's be clear, Donald Trump's kids
Speaker 1: set for depositions for hours on end in a witch
Speaker 1: hunt investigation. Let's never forget that. We also know that
Speaker 1: Biden lied multiple times about his involvement with his son's
Speaker 1: business dealings, and new emails are proving that over and
Speaker 1: over again yet again. So if he doesn't show up
Speaker 1: and they do hold him in contempt, there's a problem
Speaker 1: because the DOJ, Biden's DOJ, the deep state would be
Speaker 1: the ones that would have to act on that contempt charge.
Speaker 1: And is there any chance And you just talked to
Speaker 1: Director Ray, you've talked to others the DOJ before, and
Speaker 1: the FBI is do you think they would pursue this
Speaker 1: against Hunter Biden, the President's cent or No?
Speaker 4: I don't.
Speaker 3: I think the Biden Department of Justice is the most
Speaker 3: political Department of Justice we've ever seen. I think this
Speaker 3: FBI is the most political FBI we've ever seen. I
Speaker 3: think they are covering up for Joe Biden with all
Speaker 3: of their might, and I think they're trying to limit
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden's exposure. I think they're willing to throw him
Speaker 3: overboard some but I think they want to limit his
Speaker 3: exposure when it comes to the testimony. We don't know
Speaker 3: right now if Hunter Biden's going to show up. You're
Speaker 3: right that Donald Trump's kids showed up for hours and
Speaker 3: hours and hours of deposition, so it's not clear why
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden should be different. He may try to stiff it.
Speaker 3: If he tries to stiff it, I fully expect the
Speaker 3: House Representatives to hold him in contempt and to vote
Speaker 3: out of contempt citation. But to enforce that that takes
Speaker 3: the Department of Justice. And I have zero confidence, not
Speaker 3: even one percent, zero confidence, this Department of Justice will
Speaker 3: do anything to enforce a contempt citation against Hunter Biden.
Speaker 3: And listen, part of it is their objective is protect
Speaker 3: Joe Biden. It is their overarching it is their obsessive objective.
Speaker 3: And so they don't want Hunter Biden testifying. They want
Speaker 3: to delay all of this. Part of the strategy, if
Speaker 3: you're defending someone from corruption, is every minute of delay
Speaker 3: is a good, good minute We're three years into the
Speaker 3: Biden presidency, and the initial lies he told he never
Speaker 3: talked with his son about his overseas business dealings, we
Speaker 3: now know that as a flagrant lie. It is wildly untrue.
Speaker 3: At every stage, everything Joe Biden has said has been
Speaker 3: proven a lie over and over and over again. But
Speaker 3: he's counting on the corrupt corporate media never to let
Speaker 3: people know, never to report on it.
Speaker 1: Brings me to also the fireworks that place this week,
Speaker 1: and it was between you and the FBI director. I
Speaker 1: want to play a large chunk of this. But before
Speaker 1: I do, set the stage, why was the FBI director
Speaker 1: before your committee in the Senate and what was this
Speaker 1: all about?
Speaker 3: Well, the FBI Director, Chris Ray was testifying before the
Speaker 3: Senate Judiciary Committee, and periodically the director of the FBI
Speaker 3: testifies before judiciary, and so I took the opportunity to
Speaker 3: question him. And there are a lot of topics I
Speaker 3: could have questioned him on. I could have questioned him
Speaker 3: for hours on end, but I only had seven minutes,
Speaker 3: and so I chose to use the seven minutes to
Speaker 3: focus on the politicization of the FBI and the refusal
Speaker 3: of the FBI to investigate the growing, the becoming overwhelming
Speaker 3: evidence of Joe Biden's corruption, and so that's what I
Speaker 3: asked him about.
Speaker 1: I want to play a chunk of this because it's
Speaker 1: really important, and I hope that every vertical listener will
Speaker 1: make sure that you take this and share this podcast
Speaker 1: so that you can let people know about what these
Speaker 1: questions were, the really important questions. And also I would
Speaker 1: argue the shocking response from the FBI Director Ray, take
Speaker 1: a listen to this.
Speaker 4: Thank you, miss Chairman. Director Ray.
Speaker 6: Welcome.
Speaker 3: As you know, I am deeply concerned about the conduct
Speaker 3: of both the Department of Justice and the FBI, particularly
Speaker 3: in the last three years during the Biden administration. I
Speaker 3: think the Department of Justice has been profoundly politicized under
Speaker 3: Attorney General Merrick Garland, and I think the FBI has
Speaker 3: as well. And unfortunately, I think you've been unwilling to
Speaker 3: stand up to senior career officials and the FBI.
Speaker 6: Who's allowed the FBI to be politicized.
Speaker 3: I'll tell you I regularly speak with FBI agents across
Speaker 3: the country who are unhappy about the integrity of the
Speaker 3: institution being weakened because DOJ is being treated as a
Speaker 3: political weapon.
Speaker 4: I want to talk in.
Speaker 3: Particular about the investigation into multiple allegations of corruption concerning
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden and Joe Biden, because the Department of Justice has,
Speaker 3: I think from the outset, tried at every step to
Speaker 3: stop investigation into corruption from Joe Biden. As you're aware,
Speaker 3: a WhatsApp text message was sent to Henry Zao, a
Speaker 3: senior Chinese communist, from Hunter Biden that reads as follows,
Speaker 3: I'm sitting here with my father and we would like
Speaker 3: to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled.
Speaker 3: Tell the director that I would like to resolve this
Speaker 3: now before it gets out of hand, and now means
Speaker 3: tonight and Zee. If I get a call or text
Speaker 3: from anyone involved in this other than you, Zanger, the Chairman,
Speaker 3: I will make certain that between the man sitting next
Speaker 3: to me and every person he knows, and my ability
Speaker 3: to hold a grudge, that you will regret not following
Speaker 3: my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call
Speaker 3: with my father now. Democrats and those in the media
Speaker 3: trying to defend the White House repeatedly say there is
Speaker 3: no direct evidence of Joe Biden's involvement in his son's corruption. Well,
Speaker 3: this is a text that is direct evidence that is
Speaker 3: stating that it is his father that is going to retaliate. Now,
Speaker 3: an IRS whistleblower, Gary Shapley, testified before the House of
Speaker 3: Representatives that the natural step he wanted to follow was
Speaker 3: to determine whether Joe Biden was in fact sitting next
Speaker 3: to his father when this threat was made to extort
Speaker 3: millions of dollars from a Chinese communist. And what the
Speaker 3: IRS whistleblower testified is that when he tried to find
Speaker 3: out whether Joe Biden was sitting next to Hunter, that
Speaker 3: the DOJ blocked getting the GPS data on Joe Biden's phone.
Speaker 3: Did the FBI try to ascertain where Hunter Biden was
Speaker 3: and where Joe Biden was when this text was sent?
Speaker 5: Well, I think the questions you're asking go to the
Speaker 5: ongoing investigation being led by a special counsel wise, and
Speaker 5: so I'm not going to be able to discuss what
Speaker 5: is or is in scope.
Speaker 2: Now.
Speaker 3: Look, there's been testimony under oath from the IRS whistleblower
Speaker 3: that you did not seek the GPS data, And you're right.
Speaker 4: David Weiss. The special prosecutor is in charge.
Speaker 3: Of it, and it is David Weiss and his underlings,
Speaker 3: who the accord of the IRS whistle blowers, have alleged
Speaker 3: that they're the ones try to stop the investigation. They
Speaker 3: allow the statute of limitations to run on many of
Speaker 3: the most serious violations. Not only that, IRS whistleblower Shapley
Speaker 3: testified that on September, third Assistant US Attorney Leslie Wolfe
Speaker 3: explicitly told investigators that, despite having probable cause to search, quote,
Speaker 3: there is no way a search warrant would be approved
Speaker 3: when the evidence in question was located inside of Vice
Speaker 3: President Biden's guest house. Wolf stated that quote, the optics
Speaker 3: prevented such a search. Is the FBI do they make
Speaker 3: a routine practice of allowing partisan political optics to prevent
Speaker 3: investigating serious evidence of corruption.
Speaker 5: My instructions to our people on this and on every
Speaker 5: other investigation are that we are to follow the facts
Speaker 5: wherever they lead, no matter who likes it, no matter
Speaker 5: what political influence.
Speaker 3: And why did maybe GBS state on where Hunter Biden
Speaker 3: and Joe Biden were again center with respect, I can't
Speaker 3: this is an ongoing inspection, and Director Ray, you and
Speaker 3: I have gone round around on this because I understand
Speaker 3: anytime you're asked about this, the answer is.
Speaker 4: It's an ongoing investigation.
Speaker 3: Of course, the investigation is an ongoing You're not doing
Speaker 3: the work. You got whistleblowers pointing out that you're not
Speaker 3: doing the work and you are hiding behind the skirts
Speaker 3: of the Attorney general. Look, the whistleblower also testified that
Speaker 3: the Attorney General when he came before Congress. Go to
Speaker 3: the next chart, came before Congress lied under oath to
Speaker 3: this committee.
Speaker 4: The Attorney General.
Speaker 3: Testified to this committee in response to my questioning, I
Speaker 3: have pledged not to interfere with the Hunter Biden investigation.
Speaker 4: I have carried through on that pledge.
Speaker 3: The irs whistleblowers of alleged the Attorney General lied under
Speaker 3: oath a felony. Was the Attorney General telling the truth
Speaker 3: when he said this? Was the Attorney General telling the
Speaker 3: truth when he said, I have pledged not to interfere
Speaker 3: with the Hunter Biden investigation, and I have carried through.
Speaker 5: In my pledge. Again, I can't speak to the Attorney
Speaker 5: General's testimony. I can only tell you what my instructions
Speaker 5: have been to our people.
Speaker 3: Has there been political interference in the investigation into Hunter
Speaker 3: Biden and Joe Biden, not that I have experienced. Were
Speaker 3: the investigators allowed to investigate whether Joe Biden was complicit
Speaker 3: in the corruption?
Speaker 5: Again, there is an ongoing investigator asking you about corruption
Speaker 5: from DJ Were.
Speaker 4: They allowed to investigate Joe Biden?
Speaker 3: Or is the whistleblower telling the truth that DOJ said?
Speaker 3: Joe Biden's off limits. No questions about the big guy.
Speaker 5: And as to what is in scope or not in
Speaker 5: scope of the ongoing investigation, I would refer you to
Speaker 5: Special Council Wiites.
Speaker 6: That is not me hiding behind anything center.
Speaker 5: That is a long standing policy that has been in
Speaker 5: place direct multiple administrations, a risk going back years, a
Speaker 5: responsibility to the FBI not to allow it to be
Speaker 5: a partisan tool and a partisan weapon.
Speaker 3: The testimony, and by the way, the FBI has done nothing.
Speaker 6: And I have not and I will not.
Speaker 4: Have you opened an investigation.
Speaker 3: And to whether the Attorney General led under oath to
Speaker 3: Congress and whether the Attorney General instructive.
Speaker 6: Justice, I'm not going to go down that road here.
Speaker 4: I know you're not. That's the point.
Speaker 3: Nobody thinks you've opened an investigation because you're not willing to.
Speaker 3: And the amazing thing is directory I've known you thirty years.
Speaker 3: You're not a partisan Democrat. You're simply sitting blithely by
Speaker 3: while career partisans in your agency allow it to be weaponized.
Speaker 3: And you are damaging the FI and you were damaging
Speaker 3: the Department of Justice. Let me ask you also, the
Speaker 3: whistleblower testified that investigators wanted to execute a search warrant
Speaker 3: on a storage unit used by Hunter Biden, and instead
Speaker 3: they tipped off Hunter Biden's lawyer before the.
Speaker 4: Search warrant was carried out.
Speaker 3: Is it typical FBI practice to tip off the subject
Speaker 3: of a search warrant before the search warrant so they
Speaker 3: can remove any evidence that's incriminating.
Speaker 5: What is typical is that when you're dealing with an
Speaker 5: individual who has a protective detail, it is typical for
Speaker 5: agents to be in contact with.
Speaker 3: Does the protective detent details the protective detail guard the
Speaker 3: storage unit?
Speaker 5: Again, I can't speak to the storage unit specifically. What
Speaker 5: I can tell you is.
Speaker 3: They why Why would the FBI tip off the subject
Speaker 3: of a search warrant about the storage unit that was
Speaker 3: going to be searched beforehand? Does that not undermine the
Speaker 3: very essence of an investigation that DOJ is purporting.
Speaker 5: To undertake again, I'm not going to be able to
Speaker 5: got specific investigative sets.
Speaker 4: Who will take it?
Speaker 6: You're not.
Speaker 3: Nobody answers these questions, and it's why people are furious
Speaker 3: with the cover up, because you don't believe the FBI
Speaker 3: is accountable to Congress or to the American people.
Speaker 4: Your time is up, Dirktoray has requested a five minute recess.
Speaker 6: Five minutes.
Speaker 5: I'll just let me just send it if I might
Speaker 5: just quickly respond and then respond code to the break,
Speaker 5: thank you.
Speaker 6: I understand why this is frustrating. I do.
Speaker 5: But it is also the case that these policies that
Speaker 5: I am referring to about my inability to discuss ongoing
Speaker 5: investigations and certainly internal deliberations related to ongoing investigations are
Speaker 5: policies that have not only been in place for many,
Speaker 5: many years through multiple administrations of both parties, but but
Speaker 5: in fact these were policies that were actually strengthened under
Speaker 5: the last administration, and that my predecessor was faulted in
Speaker 5: a fairly scathing Inspector General report for not following it.
Speaker 4: Way say that, in my mind, you have an obligation
Speaker 4: call it out.
Speaker 3: He's engaged in this job, you have an obligation to
Speaker 3: call out corruption.
Speaker 1: Senator, I understand him saying it's not going investigation, but
Speaker 1: hiding behind that. When you're talking about basic things that
Speaker 1: the FBI didn't do clearly to protect the Biden family.
Speaker 1: He should still be able to answer those questions, shouldn't.
Speaker 3: He He should, and he's stonewalling, and there's an arrogance
Speaker 3: of the director of the FBI. Look, as I mentioned
Speaker 3: in my questioning, I've known Chris Ray for thirty years.
Speaker 3: He clerked for the same federal judge I clerked for.
Speaker 3: He's not a liberal Democrat. That's the amazing thing. I
Speaker 3: think Chris Ray still believes he's a Republican. I think
Speaker 3: he still believes he's a conservative. He just is unwilling.
Speaker 3: He's a company man. He's unwilling to take on the
Speaker 3: career officials at the FBI who are rabid partisans, who
Speaker 3: are left wing zelots. And he also he buys into
Speaker 3: the notion that he has no response ability to the
Speaker 3: American people, no responsibility to Congress, no responsibility to be
Speaker 3: accountable or transparent. So he views his obligation no sorry,
Speaker 3: ongoing investigation piss off jump in a lake. I'm not
Speaker 3: going to answer your question. Look, you've got two IRS
Speaker 3: whistleblowers who've come forward and alleged felonies from the Attorney General.
Speaker 3: A director of the FBI has an obligation to answer
Speaker 3: questions about that. I asked a very simple question, did
Speaker 3: you try to ascertain the GPS data about where Hunter
Speaker 3: Biden was and where Joe Biden was when Hunter Biden
Speaker 3: sent the email asking for bribes trying to shake down
Speaker 3: the Chinese communists for bribes. The email, on its face
Speaker 3: says he's sitting next to his father, Joe Biden. If
Speaker 3: he's in fact sitting next to his father, it directly
Speaker 3: implicates Joe Biden in trying to extort millions of dollars
Speaker 3: from Chinese communists, much of which ultimately went to Joe
Speaker 3: Biden himself. What the RS whistleblower said is they wanted
Speaker 3: to get that GPS data that is readily ascertainable, and
Speaker 3: the Biden DOJ blocked it. There is nothing to prevent
Speaker 3: Chris Ray from answering the question did you try to
Speaker 3: seek that GPS data?
Speaker 4: Yes or no? Did DOJ blockett? Yes or no?
Speaker 3: He refuses to answer, and his shield to everything. He
Speaker 3: says it's an ongoing investigation. But as we've discussed, it's
Speaker 3: not ongoing. They are deliberately not investigating Joe Biden. And
Speaker 3: so it is a view that there's a hubris. We
Speaker 3: are the FBI. We don't have to answer your questions.
Speaker 3: And I got to say it is profoundly harmful to
Speaker 3: the rule of law and the integrity of the FBI
Speaker 3: to have the leadership of the FBI refuse to provide
Speaker 3: even the barest minimum of transparency or accountability.
Speaker 2: Let me also tell you about Chalk.
Speaker 1: If you're a guy and you feel like you've lost
Speaker 1: your strength and vitality, and like weakness and complacency are
Speaker 1: setting in. The problem is men's testostrom levels are off
Speaker 1: a cliff historically at an all time low. Thankfully, the
Speaker 1: patriots at Chalk are helping real America men just like you,
Speaker 1: take back and proudly maximize your masculinity by boosting your
Speaker 1: TESTOSTERM levels up to.
Speaker 2: Twenty percent over ninety days. Now.
Speaker 1: You can check out Chalk at choq dot com and
Speaker 1: check out the mail Vitality Stack. Why because it's manufactured
Speaker 1: right here in the US of A. Chalk's natural herbal
Speaker 1: supplements are clinically proven to have game changing effects on
Speaker 1: your energy, your focus, your mood, maximize your masculinity. Today
Speaker 1: at chalk dot com, and when you use the promo
Speaker 1: code Ben, you're gonna get thirty five percent off. Let
Speaker 1: me say again, You're gonna get thirty five percent off
Speaker 1: any Chalk subscription for life.
Speaker 2: So boost your testostrom levels twenty percent.
Speaker 1: Of ninety days. Get rid of that weakness and complacency.
Speaker 1: Choq dot com promo code Ben for thirty five percent off,
Speaker 1: sen Oor. Last question for you, and I want to
Speaker 1: go back to the FBI director and really the advantage
Speaker 1: that the Biden family has, which it seems that everybody
Speaker 1: is covering for them. The House Oversight Committee put out
Speaker 1: this tweet saying Hunter Biden must appear for his deposition
Speaker 1: on December the thirteenth. Chairman Comer and Jim Jordan will
Speaker 1: initiate contempt of Congress proceedings if Hunter does not appear.
Speaker 1: He has obviously said I will only appear before a
Speaker 1: public hearing. That's not what they're subpoenating for. In your gut,
Speaker 1: will Hunter Biden appear or will he be a no show?
Speaker 4: Look?
Speaker 3: I put the odds at about fifty to fifty on that.
Speaker 3: I think it could go either way. I think there's
Speaker 3: a chance Hunter appears, and I think he could be defiant.
Speaker 3: He could be he could be hiding behind his lawyers.
Speaker 3: I also think there's a very real chance he just
Speaker 3: doesn't show up. He just says, go pound Sand if
Speaker 3: he does. If he refuses to show up, the House
Speaker 3: will vote in CONTENTMP. But once the House votes him
Speaker 3: in contempt, nothing will happen because the Biden DOJ will
Speaker 3: not do anything to enforce the contempt sanctioned. Remember the
Speaker 3: House Representatives held Eric Holder in contempt when he was
Speaker 3: Attorney General under Barack Obama and nothing happened. Now why
Speaker 3: did nothing happen Because to enforce the contempt finding, DOJ
Speaker 3: has to bring it. And you know what, Eric Holder
Speaker 3: was in charge of DJ, and so magically Eric Holder said,
Speaker 3: you know, when I think of things that I want
Speaker 3: to prosecute, the contempt finding against me is not one
Speaker 3: of them. I think the chances of Merrick Garland doing
Speaker 3: anything to enforce a contempt finding against Hunter Biden are
Speaker 3: very close to zero. And so look, there's a chance
Speaker 3: Hunter shows up. He did publicly say he was willing
Speaker 3: to show up it was in public, but either way,
Speaker 3: I do not expect him to be forthcoming. Whether if
Speaker 3: he shows up, he's not going to say much of substance,
Speaker 3: and if he doesn't show up he feels he can
Speaker 3: defy the subpoena without meaningful consequence.
Speaker 2: It's going to be a very very very interesting week.
Speaker 1: We're going to cover all of it for you, so
Speaker 1: make sure you hit that follow or subscribe or auto
Speaker 1: download button. Apple has changed algorithms recently, so make sure
Speaker 1: if you're listening on Apple right now, you hit that
Speaker 1: follow button so that you don't miss an episode.
Speaker 2: We do this Monday, Wednesday, Friday.
Speaker 1: We also have a weekend review on Saturdays as well,
Speaker 1: and download my podcast, the Ben Ferguson Podcast, and I'll
Speaker 1: keep you up to date on those in between days
Speaker 1: as well with the latest breaking news and the Senator
Speaker 1: and I will see you back here for the weekend
Speaker 1: review on Saturday