Speaker 1: So I am so excited for this next guest. You know,
Speaker 1: I love bringing truth tellers on this show, people who
Speaker 1: are fearless, standing up for what is right in the country,
Speaker 1: exposing corruption, exposing lies, and I don't know if anyone
Speaker 1: does it better than this guy. Peter Schweizer is going
Speaker 1: to be on the show, author of the new book
Speaker 1: red Handed. He's written multiple New York Times best selling books.
Speaker 1: But he goes out there and exposes the lies and
Speaker 1: the corruption of our public officials, and it's in abundance.
Speaker 1: So we're going to talk to him about what motivated
Speaker 1: him to step up, to dig in and to investigate
Speaker 1: these people. Why is it so important to him to
Speaker 1: expose corruption. We're also, of course going to get into
Speaker 1: the Biden family. What you need to know about their corruption,
Speaker 1: How involved is Joe Biden and has it influenced his
Speaker 1: decision making. So a lot to get to into DC's corruption,
Speaker 1: we'll get into the swamp and everything else. Stay tuned
Speaker 1: for the great Peter Schweizer. Peter, it's such an honor
Speaker 1: to have you on the show. I'm a huge fan
Speaker 1: of yours. You've done such great work trying to bring
Speaker 1: to light a lot of corruption that happens, which is
Speaker 1: an abundance sadly.
Speaker 2: So I appreciate you taking the time to join the show.
Speaker 3: Absolutely, Lisa, I'm looking forward to it. Thanks so much
Speaker 3: for having me. This will be fun.
Speaker 1: You know, there's a lot of conversations about the Bidens
Speaker 1: and corruption. What do you think they get wrong? What
Speaker 1: isn't being discussed?
Speaker 3: That should the fact that the Bidens have received tens
Speaker 3: of millions of dollars. We believe it's thirty one million
Speaker 3: based on the emails from four Chinese businessmen, and those
Speaker 3: four Chinese businessmen we know their names because again they're
Speaker 3: on the laptop. Those four businessmen have ties to the
Speaker 3: highest levels of Chinese intelligence, meaning that they are business
Speaker 3: partners with the Vice Minister of State Security. So this
Speaker 3: is not a oh, I'm going to steer a little
Speaker 3: bit of money to my nephew as part of a
Speaker 3: you know, only paving contract type of corruption. This is
Speaker 3: international global corruption from our chief adversary. The Bidens have
Speaker 3: received this money. There is zero evidence, zip not evidence
Speaker 3: that they performed any kind of legitimate business service for
Speaker 3: any of this money. And yet they receive the money
Speaker 3: and the intelligence connections of the people that sent them
Speaker 3: the money should make us all deeply, deeply concerned.
Speaker 1: And what's Joe Biden's role in it? Because I think
Speaker 1: there's some deference for Hunter Biden just because he's such
Speaker 1: a mess.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, this is a guy who thought parmesan cheese
Speaker 1: was I can't remember for those crack or cocaine. So
Speaker 1: you know, like he's got some issues. But what's Joe
Speaker 1: Biden's role and all of it?
Speaker 3: Well, Joe Biden is the planet around which all the
Speaker 3: moons in the Biden family rotate. You know, Hunter Biden
Speaker 3: certainly gets the most attention for his deals. But you know,
Speaker 3: a couple of books ago, I did a book called
Speaker 3: Profiles and Corruption, and we looked at the entire business
Speaker 3: family of the Bidens, and we found that there were
Speaker 3: at least five members of the Biden family who are
Speaker 3: cashing in on the name. So it's not just Hunter.
Speaker 3: I think the you know, people will say, well, you know,
Speaker 3: he has the drug addiction and all of that, which
Speaker 3: I think is true, but people are still shoveling money
Speaker 3: at him, and they are also shoveling money at other
Speaker 3: members of the Biden family. And then the question becomes
Speaker 3: why How is it that these these individuals with last
Speaker 3: Nam Biden are able to take in money when they're
Speaker 3: not really doing much discernible in return. How are they
Speaker 3: able to pull this off? And the answer, in my mind,
Speaker 3: no doubt, is the fact that they provide access to
Speaker 3: Joe Biden, that Joe Biden is willing to talk to people,
Speaker 3: meet people, listen to people in which his family is
Speaker 3: engaged in commercial activities, and that is worth the price
Speaker 3: of admission. That's what it seems like these foreign actors
Speaker 3: are essentially saying.
Speaker 1: Well, that's also to your point, and you've talked about this.
Speaker 1: I mean when Joe Biden was Vice president, you know,
Speaker 1: quite literally flying Hunter Biden around on Air Force two,
Speaker 1: greasing the wheels, shaking the hands of business individuals like
Speaker 1: he did in China.
Speaker 3: Yeah, he flew several times with his father and Air
Speaker 3: Force two. The famous one was the twenty thirteen December
Speaker 3: flight where his father's going to meet with Chinese officials.
Speaker 3: He's been anointed by Barack Obama, President of the United States,
Speaker 3: as the point person on China policy, and Hunter Biden
Speaker 3: flies to China with him and about a week after
Speaker 3: that trip is when Hunter gets juiced in he's given
Speaker 3: a ten percent ownership of this private investment fund that
Speaker 3: the Chinese government is funding. He had no background in finance,
Speaker 3: he had no background in China, and that timing is
Speaker 3: certainly suspect. But there are other examples, Lisa of it
Speaker 3: as well. We know from the emails that in twenty fourteen,
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden flew with his father when his father was
Speaker 3: meeting the president of Mexico, and that email by talk
Speaker 3: about it in Profiles and Corruption is particularly surprising and
Speaker 3: shocking because Hunter Biden is berating a Mexican businessman, and
Speaker 3: he's quite explicit. He says, look, I've given you what
Speaker 3: you wanted. I got you meetings in the White House.
Speaker 3: I got you a private meeting at the vice presidential mansion,
Speaker 3: which courses his dad. I've given you all those things. Now,
Speaker 3: where are the deals that you promised me? Which is
Speaker 3: to me a clear admission that this is paid to play,
Speaker 3: that this is access, that this is corruption. So Air
Speaker 3: Force one is certainly one example of that. There are,
Speaker 3: you know, numerous other examples. Frank Biden, who's Joe Biden's brother,
Speaker 3: got a special commendation to set up a solar energy
Speaker 3: company in Costa Rica, shortly after his brother had visited
Speaker 3: Costa Rica, and again, Frank Biden had no background in
Speaker 3: solar power or development or whatever. So when you have
Speaker 3: a powerful figure like Joe Biden and the word gets
Speaker 3: out on the street that you know there will to
Speaker 3: do deals and play ball, the opportunities are endless, and
Speaker 3: it can mean taking a phone call, taking a meeting,
Speaker 3: flying somewhere, or simply greasing the skids for a family
Speaker 3: member with a foreign leader.
Speaker 1: How long has corruption influenced Joe Biden's career. I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, obviously he's president. Now he's a vice president,
Speaker 1: but he also served as you know, head of the
Speaker 1: Judiciary Committee. It was pretty influential on Capitol Hill.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's always hard to know what is day one
Speaker 3: in corruption. I think a lot of times the way
Speaker 3: this works, people go into office, maybe they're idealistic, you know,
Speaker 3: Joe Biden probably was, I think, and then over time
Speaker 3: they come to believe that they are entitled to certain
Speaker 3: things because they don't get paid as much as they
Speaker 3: think they're worth. They work hard, they're doing things for
Speaker 3: the country, and it has this sort of corrosive effect.
Speaker 3: The early at signs to me with Joe Biden came
Speaker 3: in the nineteen nineties when he got special breaks on
Speaker 3: a mortgage. He is a US senator, he doesn't have
Speaker 3: a lot of money. He's not generating a huge amount
Speaker 3: of income. But he was able to afford the purchase
Speaker 3: of one of the DuPont mansions in Delaware because a
Speaker 3: bank MBNA, which is a big bank in Delaware, gave
Speaker 3: him a real sweetheart mortgage deal, you know, well below
Speaker 3: market rates. NBNA of course had business matters before the Senate.
Speaker 3: Joe Biden was helpful to them. Then if you go
Speaker 3: to the two thousands, Hunter Biden, you know, is out
Speaker 3: of law school. He's now looking for business ventures. He
Speaker 3: immediately goes into the lobbying business and he works for
Speaker 3: a lobbying firm that is lobbying his father on behalf
Speaker 3: of Delaware based entities. Then Hunter gets involved with an
Speaker 3: online gambling company lobbying for them with the Department of Justice.
Speaker 3: There are all kinds of criminal charges against them. His
Speaker 3: dad is the chairman of the Senate Judiciary committees you
Speaker 3: pointed out, So it starts to take hold. But I
Speaker 3: think the big step for the Bidens was when Joe
Speaker 3: became vice president because they were able to globalize corruption,
Speaker 3: meaning they could now really find international players that are
Speaker 3: willing to, you know, give them money that could be
Speaker 3: in Ukraine, Russia, China, you know, wherever you might want
Speaker 3: it to be. So this's the globalization of corruption that
Speaker 3: I think created really big opportunities for the Bidens. And
Speaker 3: it's kind of similar pattern to what the Clintons had.
Speaker 3: The Clintons went in Arkansas with sort of low rent corruption,
Speaker 3: but once Bill was out of the White House and
Speaker 3: his wife was in the Senate and she became Secretary
Speaker 3: of State, the level of corruption just exploded because there
Speaker 3: was so much they could do for so many foreign actors.
Speaker 1: Do you think anyone can spend that much time in Washington,
Speaker 1: d c. And not become corrupt?
Speaker 3: Very hardly. So it's a great question. I think it's
Speaker 3: very hard. It's very hard.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 3: You know, Bobby Jendall, who I worked on a book
Speaker 3: with years ago, served in Congress, and you know, he said,
Speaker 3: you get there and you have the right principles and
Speaker 3: you have the right commitment, and then what happens is
Speaker 3: like everybody thinks you're brilliant, everybody thinks you're good looking,
Speaker 3: everybody thinks you're going to be president, and your ego
Speaker 3: starts to inflate. And his point was after about three terms,
Speaker 3: it becomes really really hard. Now are there people there
Speaker 3: that are longer that are not corrupt. Absolutely, but I
Speaker 3: would argue they're probably the exception to the rule. And
Speaker 3: that's one of the reasons why Lisa I was usually
Speaker 3: not in favor of term limits. I think, let the
Speaker 3: voters decide. But I've come to the conclusion that the
Speaker 3: level of corruption is so great it accumulates the longer
Speaker 3: you stay there that term limits are really one of
Speaker 3: the most effective ways to deal with it. It doesn't
Speaker 3: eliminate the problem by any means, but it gets rid
Speaker 3: of people who are there for twenty thirty years to
Speaker 3: where the corruption becomes systematic, It becomes endemic and embedded
Speaker 3: in almost everything that they do. And it happens on
Speaker 3: both sides of the Aisle.
Speaker 1: We know money and power corrupt. You had mentioned Ukraine.
Speaker 1: I mean we have just sending tens of billions of dollars,
Speaker 1: just a continual flow of money to Ukraine is there
Speaker 1: without really accountability either, without really transparency of where it's going,
Speaker 1: what it's being spent on. Should Americans be concerned that
Speaker 1: there's a corruptive nature to the money, considering the Biden
Speaker 1: family has made money off of Ukraine in the past.
Speaker 3: Oh, absolutely, I think there should be. I mean, look,
Speaker 3: my view is I think what Russia's doing is terrible.
Speaker 3: I stand with the Ukrainian people. I think they should fight,
Speaker 3: and they are fighting for their own independence and we
Speaker 3: should support them. The problem is they have a very
Speaker 3: corrupt government in Kiev that is running things, and there
Speaker 3: are some sort of interesting connections that don't always get
Speaker 3: pointed out. I mean, you look at President Zelenski of Ukraine,
Speaker 3: who's been kind of rallying the Ukrainian people. Well, who
Speaker 3: was the one that effectively put Zelenski in power. It's
Speaker 3: a Ukrainian old guard named Kolomoyski. Kolomoyski is highly corrupt.
Speaker 3: In fact, he owned a bank called Prevot Bank that
Speaker 3: received money from the IMF and basically eight billion dollars
Speaker 3: just disappeared, and everybody assumes Kolomoyski took it. Kolomoyski was
Speaker 3: also believed to be a silent partner in a Ukrainian
Speaker 3: energy company called Barisma, which is the energy company that
Speaker 3: employed Hunter Biden. So Kolomoyski is the guy that by
Speaker 3: most accounts financed the campaign for Zelensky and put him
Speaker 3: in power. So Zolensky has ties, he has obligations. And
Speaker 3: my view is I'm not an expert in foreign aid,
Speaker 3: but my view is, you know, let's give the Ukrainians weapons,
Speaker 3: let's send them food. But this notion that we should
Speaker 3: send them large blocks of cash, I think is a
Speaker 3: really stupid idea and it's an invitation to mass corruption.
Speaker 3: And the notion that you know, the Biden administration says, well,
Speaker 3: we're going to account for it all and we're going
Speaker 3: to you know, do audits. How are you going to
Speaker 3: audit Ukrainian banks when eight billion dollars just disappears, So
Speaker 3: that that should be a real concern. And the tragedy here,
Speaker 3: of course, is that it's the Ukrainian people are going
Speaker 3: to suffer because they've got this corrupt political class that
Speaker 3: rules over them.
Speaker 1: We're going to take a quick commercial break back with
Speaker 1: the great Peter Schweizer. I mean, we know that Joe
Speaker 1: Biden fired the prosecutor general who was looking into Tubarisma HOLDINGGGS.
Speaker 2: He you know, he bragged about it.
Speaker 1: Are there any examples to point two of how the
Speaker 1: money did influence decisions from Joe Biden, whether it be
Speaker 1: you know, as vice president or his time in the
Speaker 1: Senate or maybe even now.
Speaker 3: It's a great question, and I think it really depends
Speaker 3: on what type of corrupt arrangement is taking place between
Speaker 3: the Bidens and the Ukrainians or the Bidens and the Chinese.
Speaker 3: One could be basically a quid pro quo, which is,
Speaker 3: you know, we're going to give you this in return,
Speaker 3: we're going to expect that. I don't think, particularly with China,
Speaker 3: that's the way the relationship works. I think it's more
Speaker 3: of a retainer. I think it's more we're going to
Speaker 3: provide funding and we want you to, you know, generally,
Speaker 3: not press us too hard. And there's lots of examples
Speaker 3: of that. The Chinese use a term called elite capture.
Speaker 3: It's a strategy they employ and it's kind of genius
Speaker 3: if you think about it, because Lisa, what it basically
Speaker 3: says is, rather than going toe to toe with the
Speaker 3: United States, we're just going to buy off elements of
Speaker 3: their leadership class, whether it's in Washington or Silicon Valley
Speaker 3: or Wall Street and the Bidens, I think are a
Speaker 3: prime example of that. Having received this money, and China's
Speaker 3: very sophisticated in terms of what they're expecting from elites
Speaker 3: they capture. They don't expect them to be sort of
Speaker 3: you know robots that are spouting now is great and
Speaker 3: we love the CCP. They use an expression, and the
Speaker 3: expression is they're looking for big help with a little
Speaker 3: bad mouth. So, in other words, the things that matter
Speaker 3: most to them, which is, you know, essentially unfettered access
Speaker 3: to our financial markets, unfettered access to our technology, and
Speaker 3: unfettered access to our business market, you know, not tariffs
Speaker 3: on goods where they can sell goods and dominate the
Speaker 3: market in the United States. If you give them those
Speaker 3: three things and you want to ding them on the wigers,
Speaker 3: or you want to criticize them for human rights, or
Speaker 3: you want to say we stand with Taiwan, they don't
Speaker 3: really care. They're getting what they want from you. And
Speaker 3: that's I think the way in which we need to
Speaker 3: look at at the sort of behavior that the Bidens
Speaker 3: are engaged in. And there's no doubt there are numerous
Speaker 3: examples of how the Bidens have walked back and in
Speaker 3: the face of clear threat proposed by China in their conduct,
Speaker 3: the Biden camp has absolutely done nothing, and I think
Speaker 3: it speaks to this commercial relationship that exists.
Speaker 1: You'd mentioned Taiwan. How does Joe Biden deter China from
Speaker 1: invading Taiwan when they are looking at him is probably
Speaker 1: compromised and already bought and paid for.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's a good question. I think that what China
Speaker 3: wants from Taiwan is not war but the fruits of war,
Speaker 3: to paraphrase Winston Churchill. I think we will know more
Speaker 3: what mainland China is going to do after the January
Speaker 3: election next year. In Taiwan. There is the KMT party
Speaker 3: I believe it is, which is pro Beijing, pro Mainlan
Speaker 3: China is running pretty close in the polls with the
Speaker 3: ruling party, which is you know, Taiwan is an independent country,
Speaker 3: so I think they want to play out that election
Speaker 3: and see how it goes. They don't want a war
Speaker 3: with China because there is uncertainty associated with it, and
Speaker 3: all they have to do is look at what Russia
Speaker 3: is doing in Ukraine. Think about all the modeling that
Speaker 3: was done by the United States military, the UK NATO,
Speaker 3: the expectation was within seven days the Russians would effectively
Speaker 3: take over Ukraine. That's not been the case. Russian military
Speaker 3: far less effective than expected. The Ukrainian has a lot
Speaker 3: more fierce in their opposition than expected, and that has
Speaker 3: to be playing into the calculation of Xi, which is, yes,
Speaker 3: we've got this big military, but are we going to
Speaker 3: be bogged down fighting a war with Taiwan that is
Speaker 3: going to embarrass us? And I think that's part of
Speaker 3: the calculation. So to me, Taiwan is not a central
Speaker 3: issue for China. The central issue for China is their
Speaker 3: power position relative the United States. They believe that if
Speaker 3: the current trends continue, meaning they get access to our
Speaker 3: capital markets, they get access to our technology, they get
Speaker 3: access to our markets to sell their goods, they're going
Speaker 3: to win and they will be the superior power very soon.
Speaker 3: So they don't want to change that. They don't want
Speaker 3: to disrupt that. Going to Taiwan could unify Asian countries
Speaker 3: in the United States and Europe in a way that
Speaker 3: could be detrimental to their larger goals. So I think
Speaker 3: that the you know, the strong focus that so many
Speaker 3: people have on Ukraine, I understand it, and the threat
Speaker 3: is real, But I don't think that is the chief
Speaker 3: objective of China. Their ambitions are much bigger than simply
Speaker 3: reuniting with Taiwan.
Speaker 1: Interesting, you talked about how you know China wants access
Speaker 1: and obviously they've already infiltrated a lot of our institutions,
Speaker 1: including Eric S.
Speaker 2: Welwell.
Speaker 1: But and Ian Feinstein by that matter, in Employega, you
Speaker 1: know which you know Trump was compromised. But Democrats literally
Speaker 1: either Datham or employees bise. But talk about the Penn
Speaker 1: Biden Center.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I mean the Pen Biden Center to me is
Speaker 3: an classic example of elite capture. So you know, Joe
Speaker 3: Biden leaves the Vice presidency sets up the pen Biden
Speaker 3: Center with the University of Pennsylvania. And I talk about
Speaker 3: this in my book if you look at the website
Speaker 3: when he set it up. Now this is twenty seventeen.
Speaker 3: He's served in the administration. Barack Obama did a pivot
Speaker 3: to Asia because of the rising threat from China, and
Speaker 3: in fact, Barack Obama said China had replaced Russia as
Speaker 3: the main strategic threat to the United States. Joe Biden
Speaker 3: sets up the Biden Penn Center, and they say, our
Speaker 3: goal is to protect Western values, and the three largest
Speaker 3: threats we face are Russia, terrorism, and climate change, no
Speaker 3: mention of China. China is not a threat according to
Speaker 3: the Biden Pen Center when it's set up. You know,
Speaker 3: that's kind of astonishing when you think about it. There
Speaker 3: is a picture of Joe Biden with President g Though
Speaker 3: on the website when they set it up as an
Speaker 3: example of kind of the international diplomacy he's engaged in.
Speaker 3: What raises a lot of concerns with people is the
Speaker 3: Biden Penn Center was set up. It kind of co
Speaker 3: mingles finances with the University of Pennsylvania. But when the
Speaker 3: Biden Penn Center was set up, you saw an explosion
Speaker 3: in donations from China. They dramatically increased to the University
Speaker 3: of Pennsylvania. And in fact, some of those donations, several
Speaker 3: multimillion dollar donations to the Biden Pen Center, actually came
Speaker 3: from entities that were connected to Hunter Biden's activities in China,
Speaker 3: so they're not random. And the Biden Pen Center really
Speaker 3: became a sort of a depository for members of the
Speaker 3: Biden team. So Tony Blincoln was there, who's now Secretary
Speaker 3: of State. He was collecting a paycheck. You know, Joe
Speaker 3: Biden's counselor in the White House was there for a while.
Speaker 3: There were multiple people, including Joe Biden, that were collecting
Speaker 3: large salaries there. And there's a lot of evidence that
Speaker 3: China was financing those activities in China in the Biden
Speaker 3: Penn Center. And on top of that, of course, you
Speaker 3: have this sort of weird discovery that classified documents were
Speaker 3: being stored at this academic institution in Washington, d c.
Speaker 3: So the Biden Penn Center is a problem, but you
Speaker 3: also have the University of Delaware set up a Biden Center.
Speaker 3: There's actually two centers. The one in Delaware doesn't get
Speaker 3: nearly the attention, but when he set up the Delaware operation,
Speaker 3: they took in six million dollars in Chinese donations. There
Speaker 3: had never been a single donation to the University of
Speaker 3: Delaware before Joe Biden's Policy Center was set up in China.
Speaker 3: So the Bidens have personally profited from their financial ties
Speaker 3: to China and the institutions that they have built in
Speaker 3: the University of Delaware and Penn, I would argue, you
Speaker 3: have also benefited from this Chinese large s and it's
Speaker 3: a huge problem. Again, These are not charities. They are
Speaker 3: doing this for a reason, and I think one of
Speaker 3: the things these Congressional committees need to get to the
Speaker 3: bottom of, Lisa, is what were they getting in return
Speaker 3: for this flow of money to the Biden family.
Speaker 1: You know, you had mentioned Blinken and some of the
Speaker 1: other members of the Biden administration. How many of our
Speaker 1: public officials, elected officials are similarly compromised as Joe Biden.
Speaker 3: It's a great question, and it's always hard to know
Speaker 3: the extent to which they're compromised. But if you look
Speaker 3: at the last four US ambassadors to China, including the
Speaker 3: one appointed by Donald Trump. Sadly, the last four US ambassadors,
Speaker 3: they all when they left the embassy and quit serving
Speaker 3: as a US ambassador, either they or their family members
Speaker 3: became consultants for Chinese companies. Timmy, That's just ridiculous and
Speaker 3: atrocious and has no place. So we have a problem
Speaker 3: with diplomats. We have a problem on Capitol Hill. By
Speaker 3: the account of registered lobbyists in Washington, DC, we found
Speaker 3: twenty three former senators and congressmen who right now are
Speaker 3: lobbying not just for Chinese companies, Lisa, but for Chinese
Speaker 3: companies dire directly tied to the Chinese military intelligence industrial complex.
Speaker 3: Twenty three former senators and congressmen are lobbying for those
Speaker 3: entities in Capitol Hill and someone are making a million
Speaker 3: dollars a year. So it's a huge problem. It's a
Speaker 3: problem with business leaders in Wall Street in Silicon Valley.
Speaker 3: So we have to do this reassessment in the country
Speaker 3: because we have, I think naively believed for decades that
Speaker 3: by engaging in commerce with China, China would become more
Speaker 3: like us. I think there's a lot of evidence that
Speaker 3: we've actually become more like China, and far from becoming
Speaker 3: more liberal. Over thirty years, I would argue that China
Speaker 3: today is far more repressive than it was twenty years ago.
Speaker 3: So this grand experiment of engagement has failed. All that
Speaker 3: succeeded in doing is strengthening China and enriching American political
Speaker 3: elites to the detriments of ordinary Americans.
Speaker 1: I mean, it begs the question who side are these
Speaker 1: people on?
Speaker 3: It does, and you know, it's funny because part of
Speaker 3: the motivation clearly is money. For people like I think
Speaker 3: the bidens. You could look at Mitch mcconnlin, his family
Speaker 3: there's certainly a story to tell there. But then you
Speaker 3: get to some of the others that have kind of
Speaker 3: honestly very weird, praiseworthy things to say about the CCP
Speaker 3: in China, people like Elon Musk or people like Bill Gates.
Speaker 3: I mean, these are people who have hundreds of billions
Speaker 3: of dollars, so I don't really think the motivation here
Speaker 3: is money. The motivation here seems to be ego. It
Speaker 3: seems to be hubris. You know, you take Bill Gates,
Speaker 3: who is praised the Chinese government for how efficient they are.
Speaker 3: Of course, it's very easy to be efficient when you
Speaker 3: have no property rights or an independent judicial system or
Speaker 3: free elections. But Bill Gates has praised that government, and
Speaker 3: he's done considerable business with that government. He doesn't necessarily
Speaker 3: need the money, but they stroke their egos. So you know,
Speaker 3: a few years ago, China, you know, announced it was
Speaker 3: the you know, the the one hundred years of the
Speaker 3: founding of the Chinese Communist Party, and they listed the
Speaker 3: thee hundred most influential people in world history. So this
Speaker 3: is everybody. Now, Jesus was not on the list, but
Speaker 3: Bill Gates was. Bill Gates was next to Marx and
Speaker 3: Lenin and Mao and and you know, for some of
Speaker 3: these guys, that sense of feeling important. You know, Bill
Speaker 3: Gates talks about going and meeting with President G and
Speaker 3: sharing ideas with him and discussing with him how to
Speaker 3: deal with health issues, and you know, G is very appreciative,
Speaker 3: and you know, Bill Gates says, you know, G works
Speaker 3: so hard for the Chinese people. Those motivations are harder
Speaker 3: to unpack. And I don't think they're financial, but I
Speaker 3: would argue that some of those individuals, very wealthy individuals,
Speaker 3: are also compromised, if if in a slightly different way.
Speaker 1: How much influence does China have on our industries and
Speaker 1: or institutions. I mean, we've seen it with the NBA,
Speaker 1: and you know obviously with the Bidens, But to what
Speaker 1: extent it's a huge.
Speaker 3: Huge problem, particularly Silicon Valley and Wall Street. You know,
Speaker 3: flashback to twenty seventeen when when President Trump put tariffs
Speaker 3: on Chinese goods, Beijing was apoplectic. So where did they do,
Speaker 3: they say, did they send a bunch of diplomats to Washington? No,
Speaker 3: they actually send government officials to Wall Street, and they
Speaker 3: went to the big firms Blackstone, Black Rock, Morgan Stanley,
Speaker 3: and they said, hey, guys, look, you need to fix
Speaker 3: this because if you don't fix this, we're shutting you
Speaker 3: down in China. And you literally had American financial institutions
Speaker 3: going to Washington lobbying the Trump White House, lobbying Capitol
Speaker 3: Hill on behalf of the Chinese government. That's a huge problem.
Speaker 3: And what China does is they dangle access to the
Speaker 3: market in front of these people, and they are literally
Speaker 3: willing to sell their I mean, I'll just give you
Speaker 3: one brief example. There's a guy named Ray Dalyo who
Speaker 3: is a head of Bridgewater Associates. It's the biggest private
Speaker 3: hedge fund in the world, well known Wall Street figure.
Speaker 3: In twenty seventeen, he wrote a book called Principles, which
Speaker 3: describe the people that have affected his life and influenced
Speaker 3: him the most. And he goes on and on and
Speaker 3: on and on in this book about this guy named
Speaker 3: won Ki Shan in China, and he talks about him
Speaker 3: in sort of prophetic terms, that this man is a
Speaker 3: profoundly wise man, profoundly influential, a remarkable force for good.
Speaker 3: And I've learned so much from won Ki Shan, and
Speaker 3: I thought, okay, who's won Ky Sean. Well, it turns
Speaker 3: out he's the second most powerful man in China and
Speaker 3: he's President J's enforcer. In fact, the Economist magazine calls
Speaker 3: him the most feared man in China, because if you
Speaker 3: get disappeared in China, chances are Wyan Kishan the guy
Speaker 3: that's arranged it. So I thought to myself, what on
Speaker 3: earth is prompting a smart guy like Ray Dalyio to
Speaker 3: say something like this. Well the answer came about a
Speaker 3: year year and a half after he released this glowing
Speaker 3: book talking about Wonky Sean. That's when Bridgewater Associates became
Speaker 3: the first hedge fund in the world to be allowed
Speaker 3: to sell its products to people in mainland China. And
Speaker 3: I think it's that simple. I mean, that is what
Speaker 3: selling your soul looks like. And unfortunately, there's a lot
Speaker 3: of people in finance and in Silicon Valley that are
Speaker 3: prepared to do that. And it's an enormous problem. I
Speaker 3: don't know exactly what the solution is, but we've got
Speaker 3: to address it in some way because these individuals are
Speaker 3: literally building up our chief competitor at our expense.
Speaker 1: It kind of makes you question if it's possible to
Speaker 1: untangle ourselves from China.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think there are areas that we can, and
Speaker 3: we must. It's going to be painful. My view is,
Speaker 3: I don't know if if China even sells potato chips
Speaker 3: in the United States, but if it's somebody like potato
Speaker 3: chips or soybeans, I don't really have a problem with it,
Speaker 3: because the ordinary, ordinary Chinese people are in a sense,
Speaker 3: the main victims of the CCP, and they've got to
Speaker 3: make a living. What I have a problem with is
Speaker 3: the technology and the medical supplies and their ability to
Speaker 3: manipulate and control us through it. Let's remember during COVID,
Speaker 3: President Trump raised the issue of you know what he
Speaker 3: called the Kung flu or the you know, the China
Speaker 3: virus and its origins from a Chinese lab, and what
Speaker 3: do the Chinese governments say? The Chinese government issued a
Speaker 3: statement saying, you know, if this continues, we may shut
Speaker 3: off the export of antibiotics to your country and you
Speaker 3: will be living in a sea of COVID. That's what
Speaker 3: they said, and I think they meant it, And actually
Speaker 3: the rhetoric in Washington did kind of ratchet down. That's
Speaker 3: a problem. And so when we have this economic tie
Speaker 3: to them, and it's in critical strategic industries I would say,
Speaker 3: like green energy technologies. I mean, Biden's plan for expanding
Speaker 3: green energy is a giveaway to Beijing. Eighty percent of
Speaker 3: solar panels and of battery technologies are made in China,
Speaker 3: so we need to decouple that. Other strategic industries, certainly
Speaker 3: in electronics and medicals, those areas we need to decouple.
Speaker 3: If people are buying blue jeans or T shirts that
Speaker 3: are made in China, I have less of a problem
Speaker 3: with that, and I think we can allow that commerce
Speaker 3: to continue. But in these strategic industries we absolutely must
Speaker 3: decouple ourselves.
Speaker 1: I think Trump is really right about bringing back manufacturing
Speaker 1: here in the United States. Particularly to your point, I mean,
Speaker 1: we should not be relying on China for eighty to
Speaker 1: ninety percent of our antibiotics. That's absurd and dangerous too.
Speaker 1: To your point when they threaten to withhold them, Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, you look at the Biden fami.
Speaker 2: Have crimes been committed.
Speaker 3: I believe they have. It's you know, I always preface
Speaker 3: things by saying I'm not a lawyer, and you know
Speaker 3: it's also the challenge in Washington is that, you know,
Speaker 3: political families are very, very smart. They do a lot
Speaker 3: of corrupt things, and our laws are written in such
Speaker 3: a way that unless you can demonstrate an explicit quid
Speaker 3: pro quo, you know you are. Let's say, Senator Booth
Speaker 3: from the great state of Florida, if I come in
Speaker 3: to see you, I know you would never do this,
Speaker 3: but I'm just giving you this scenario.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I was like, I always, I always people give scenarios.
Speaker 3: I'm like, yeah, exactly, I'm just just for just completely
Speaker 3: illustrative purposes, hypothetical exactly. But you know, if you're the
Speaker 3: senator from the state of Florida and I came in
Speaker 3: and I gave you a shoe box of money and said,
Speaker 3: Senator Booth, I need you to vote for this bill,
Speaker 3: and you voted for that bill, that is absolutely a
Speaker 3: crime because it's a quid pro quo. I said, I'm
Speaker 3: going to give you money, and you took that action. Now,
Speaker 3: if I came to you as a senator and I said,
Speaker 3: you know, Senator Booth, I know you've got this adult child.
Speaker 3: Let's say I'd love to hire them as a quote
Speaker 3: unquote consultant for my business. And you're like, oh, that's great.
Speaker 3: And I'm going to pay them two hundred and fifty
Speaker 3: thousand dollars a year. They don't really have to show
Speaker 3: up all that much, you know. I'll let them know
Speaker 3: when we need them. Oh and by the way, there's
Speaker 3: this legislation I'm really concerned about, you know. And here's
Speaker 3: why I'm concerned about it. If I don't ask you,
Speaker 3: but you end up voting for that bill, I've accomplished
Speaker 3: the same thing. But is that illegal. It's not an
Speaker 3: explicit quid pro quo, and our laws are more fuzzy.
Speaker 3: So part of the problem we have is, you know,
Speaker 3: these people are not dumb when people say, you know,
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden is this drug addict, and Hunter Biden went
Speaker 3: to Yale Law School when he has personal problems, but
Speaker 3: he's smart in the way that he communicates what he
Speaker 3: says and what he did doesn't say, in the manner
Speaker 3: in which they conduct their business. The Bidens are that way,
Speaker 3: the Clintons were that way. Certainly Republicans who have engaged
Speaker 3: in the smart way. So the question of whether something
Speaker 3: is illegal is hard to answer, but I think it
Speaker 3: evades the larger point, which is I think in either
Speaker 3: scenario fictional scenario, that I laid out. I think anybody
Speaker 3: would look at that and said, either one of those
Speaker 3: is just wrong. The fact that you go to jail
Speaker 3: for the first one and then the second one, I
Speaker 3: hire your kid and I accomplish the same thing. People
Speaker 3: think that's terrible too, and want that to stop. The
Speaker 3: problem is our laws. It's hard to create laws that
Speaker 3: deal with very, very clever, corrupt behavior.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, I mean you've got the Pelosis killing it
Speaker 1: in the finance. What their investments, you know, it's like
Speaker 1: they seem to you know, obviously he seems to always
Speaker 1: be ahead the curve her husband there.
Speaker 3: Yeah, Pelosis have been very smart about this. I did
Speaker 3: a segment years ago with sixteen minutes on how the
Speaker 3: Pelosis would get initial public offerings of stock. I mean,
Speaker 3: this is just genius. Where you know, Visa, for example,
Speaker 3: wanted some legislation killed when Nancy Pelosi was Speaker of
Speaker 3: the House. Her husband was given access to five thousand
Speaker 3: IPO shares of stock before the public listing, and they
Speaker 3: made one hundred thousand dollars in a single day. Well,
Speaker 3: the only people that were really I think rightfully given
Speaker 3: access to those IPO shares of stock were investors, board members, etc.
Speaker 3: But suddenly you have Paul Pelosi that's given access to
Speaker 3: the ice these IPO shares of stock, and Nancy Pelosi
Speaker 3: kills the visa legislation. Is that illegal? I think it's
Speaker 3: highly unethical, and I think it ought to be investigated.
Speaker 3: But to the point we're making earlier, if she had
Speaker 3: taken one hundred thousand dollars cash and they told her
Speaker 3: don't vote this, you know, don't vote for this, and
Speaker 3: she took their advice, that would be an explicity legal act.
Speaker 3: And the Pelosis have been masters, masters at manipulating the system,
Speaker 3: enriching themselves in massive ways, and doing so in a
Speaker 3: way that kind of obscures the legality of it. It's
Speaker 3: kind of a gray area.
Speaker 1: When it's pretty infuriating as they vote and perpetuate policies
Speaker 1: that harm, you know, the financials of everyday Americans, whether
Speaker 1: it's driving up gas prices or you know, inflation or
Speaker 1: whatever it is. It's pretty infuriating when they're obviously leveraging
Speaker 1: their positions to get rich.
Speaker 2: You know, you look at the Department.
Speaker 1: Of Justices investigation and to Hunter Biden, do you think
Speaker 1: that we'll bring them to Joe Biden. Do they even care?
Speaker 1: Is that going anywhere as the classified documents into Joe
Speaker 1: Biden going anywhere?
Speaker 2: Is it all just a joke.
Speaker 3: Well, it's a good question. I don't really know the
Speaker 3: answer of it. I was more optimistic early on. So
Speaker 3: I wrote a book called Secret Empires in twenty eighteen,
Speaker 3: which was the first book that exposed the Biden's China
Speaker 3: deals and you know the extent of the Barisma deal
Speaker 3: and all of that. And I was contacted by the
Speaker 3: FBI at that time, who said, we're interested in this,
Speaker 3: we want to talk to you. I had a line
Speaker 3: of communication that was all good, and literally four months
Speaker 3: after my book was published, this grand jury was convened
Speaker 3: to look at the deals in China. So I was
Speaker 3: very optimistic. I was very excited. And then a year
Speaker 3: went by and I said, okay, well, you know these
Speaker 3: things take time. Two years went by. We're now five
Speaker 3: years into this investigation. And I think the revelations of
Speaker 3: this whistleblower from the IRS who's come forward are very
Speaker 3: very interesting because if you simply look at the issue
Speaker 3: of tax evasion hunter Biden, there's just in mind clearly
Speaker 3: has committed felony level tax evasion. He owed millions of
Speaker 3: dollars in taxes, he never paid money, and a lot
Speaker 3: of his earnings from overseas. They can be in the
Speaker 3: grand jury in twenty eighteen, and then in twenty twenty two,
Speaker 3: years after they're investigating it, he gets this California lawyer
Speaker 3: to pay two million dollars of what he owes the irs.
Speaker 3: That doesn't matter, I mean in similar cases, people are
Speaker 3: prosecuted almost immediately. In these circumstances, there were even emails
Speaker 3: on the laptop where his accountant is saying have you
Speaker 3: paid taxes on any of this money? And Hunter Biden
Speaker 3: blows him off, and he didn't pay taxes on it.
Speaker 3: So you look at that, you look at the fair
Speaker 3: of violations. These are the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Clearly
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden was representing foreign entities before the US government.
Speaker 3: There are multitude of examples in the emails and meetings
Speaker 3: that he set up with people that met with his
Speaker 3: father when he was vice president. There are emails where
Speaker 3: people say do we need to register under Pharah because
Speaker 3: we're setting up these meetings and hunter Biden doesn't respond.
Speaker 3: And yet the Justice depart and has gone after Republicans
Speaker 3: for fear of vir relations, I would argue rightfully so,
Speaker 3: by the way, but there's this massive inconsistency. So we
Speaker 3: are five years into this grand jury and I've pretty
Speaker 3: much had it. I'm an optimist by nature, but the
Speaker 3: fact that this continues to drag on and now you've
Speaker 3: got the luxury granted of a meeting Hunter Biden's lawyers
Speaker 3: apparently meeting with DOJ officials a few days ago to
Speaker 3: discuss this. I just don't think they would lend this
Speaker 3: kind of soft treatment to anyone else politically in the
Speaker 3: business world. And it speaks to a huge problem because Lisa,
Speaker 3: if you look at the decline of civilizations in world history,
Speaker 3: the sign of decline that is the most troublesome. It's
Speaker 3: not elections, although elections are really important. It's when the
Speaker 3: judicial system serves the interests of certain powerful people and
Speaker 3: it treats other people differently. That's when a civilization is
Speaker 3: in trouble and is in decline. And that's what we see,
Speaker 3: I think in spades with the Bidens right now.
Speaker 2: Sadly, that's what we have. I'm in with you unfair.
Speaker 1: I think it should be in force, but it's being
Speaker 1: selectively enforced.
Speaker 2: To your point.
Speaker 1: You know, that's the problem with our society today, just
Speaker 1: like you know, you look at the Clinton's team getting
Speaker 1: immunity and talking to the FBI, where you know they
Speaker 1: don't grant that to Michael Flynn for instance.
Speaker 3: Exactly. Great point, great point, you know.
Speaker 1: So that's where we are today in this really sad state.
Speaker 1: You know, you've written multiple New York Times best selling
Speaker 1: books on corruption, bringing truth to light, exposing all of
Speaker 1: this stuff.
Speaker 2: How'd you get into that? You know why? Corruption? You
Speaker 2: know what, what about.
Speaker 1: It gets you up in the morning and you just
Speaker 1: have that perseverance and desire to get to the truth
Speaker 1: and investigate.
Speaker 3: Well, part of it least is it just kind of
Speaker 3: pisses me off. That's part of it. But I mean,
Speaker 3: more to the point, I think, you know, we have
Speaker 3: a obviously a big philosophical ideological debate taking place in
Speaker 3: our country today between progressives and additional conservatives, America Firsters,
Speaker 3: whatever you want to call them. There's this ideological debate
Speaker 3: going on, But I think there's more driving the debate
Speaker 3: than that. I do believe corruption is driving a lot
Speaker 3: of what we're seeing in Washington, DC. And it's a
Speaker 3: reason why you see Republicans that get elected being traditional
Speaker 3: fiscal conservatives, we're going to hold spending, and then suddenly
Speaker 3: two years later they're spending money like drunken sailors. Because
Speaker 3: there's a business model. And the business model is when
Speaker 3: you grow government, you create opportunities for enrichment. You're creating
Speaker 3: more demand for your services, you have more power, you
Speaker 3: have more influence, you can pick more winners and losers.
Speaker 3: So that motivates and incentivizes our elected and unelected officials
Speaker 3: to engage in growing the size and scope of our
Speaker 3: government because they can self enrich and corrupt. And I
Speaker 3: think that's a huge problem. Once you make something not
Speaker 3: just a policy goal, but a selfish, self and Richmond goal,
Speaker 3: you are going to have a group of motivated people
Speaker 3: that are aggressively going to cling to power. And I
Speaker 3: think one of the sort of issues you see on
Speaker 3: this issue of you know, the intelligence communities and the
Speaker 3: FBI and they're sort of butting heads with Donald Trump
Speaker 3: and their opposition to Trump. Part of it is they
Speaker 3: don't want, you know, some things necessarily revealed, or they
Speaker 3: don't want their powers restricted some of the things Donald
Speaker 3: Trump is. But part of it is they've got a
Speaker 3: great business model going. I mean, you leave the FBI,
Speaker 3: you immediately become a consultant to all these companies, to
Speaker 3: all these overseas actors. It really looks pretty greasy, but
Speaker 3: nobody inside the Beltway talks about it. So I think
Speaker 3: a lot of what we see happening in Washington is
Speaker 3: being driven by corruption. And I figure that, you know,
Speaker 3: there are a lot of great people fighting the philosophical battle.
Speaker 3: I felt like the corruption part was unrepresented, so I
Speaker 3: dove right in.
Speaker 1: We're going to take a quick commercial break. Please stay
Speaker 1: with us. Are Republicans doing a good job digging into
Speaker 1: this stuff in the House?
Speaker 3: I think yes and no. I think the Oversight Committee
Speaker 3: is doing some good work. But I think the mistake
Speaker 3: that's made is we need to be thinking like prosecutors.
Speaker 3: They're not prosecutors on the committee. They're part of a
Speaker 3: congressional committee. But you need to be smart about it.
Speaker 3: And I think every time something comes out, you hold
Speaker 3: a press conference, you hold an announcement, here's three other
Speaker 3: Biden family members that have made money. It soon becomes
Speaker 3: white noise. I mean, if you're doing it every other day,
Speaker 3: it's like white noise. Okay, Yeah, well this isn't a
Speaker 3: big deal, because I heard sixteen more of them, like
Speaker 3: over the last two months. So I'm more in favor
Speaker 3: of thinking like a prosecutor, collecting the information, holding it tight,
Speaker 3: and then bringing people before the committee and really asking
Speaker 3: them specific questions, saying, you know, you know, to Hunter
Speaker 3: Biden or to the business partner, did you did Joe
Speaker 3: Biden help you in any way? And when they say no, say, well,
Speaker 3: you know that's interesting because I've got this email where
Speaker 3: it says that Hunter talked to his dad about this
Speaker 3: very deal. So I want them to be smart in
Speaker 3: that way. I feel like part of the challenges people
Speaker 3: on that committee, they have other assignments, they have other responsibilities.
Speaker 3: There's a whole debt ceiling debate going on. It's very
Speaker 3: very hard to focus on this one singular thing. But
Speaker 3: I do think like you have to have at least
Speaker 3: three or four members of that committee who are laser
Speaker 3: focused on this issue. It can be complicated, it's easy
Speaker 3: to obscure, and if you don't know the details, it's
Speaker 3: going to be very very easy for Team Biden to
Speaker 3: spin this.
Speaker 1: That's a really good point, Peter Schwizer, anything you want
Speaker 1: to leave us with before we go.
Speaker 3: There are a lot of things I'm discouraged and frustrated about,
Speaker 3: but I am optimistic about my country because I know
Speaker 3: the principles it was founded on. I know what ordinary
Speaker 3: people want and need. I think those values are still bedrock.
Speaker 3: So don't get discouraged. If you get discouraged when you
Speaker 3: hear this kind of stuff, or you get discouraged when
Speaker 3: Lisa is talking about the crazier things going on in Washington,
Speaker 3: don't get discouraged. That's exactly what they want you to do.
Speaker 3: To get discouraged, unplugged, and go away. And if they
Speaker 3: accomplish that, it's going to make their win a lot easier.
Speaker 3: I think we're going to win, but even if we're
Speaker 3: going to lose, I want to make it as hard
Speaker 3: as possible for them for them to be victorious. So
Speaker 3: my message would be, don't lose heart, you know, be informed,
Speaker 3: know that this is happening, and then engage and fight
Speaker 3: for your country.
Speaker 2: I love that, you know.
Speaker 1: I keep being like, this is the hill I die,
Speaker 1: and then there's just so many hills.
Speaker 3: Well, and the thing is pretty soon there won't be
Speaker 3: any other hills. You know, this is it, and you
Speaker 3: know the old joke about there's no other country to
Speaker 3: escape to. There isn't. I mean, this is it, so
Speaker 3: so you know, let's stand and fight.
Speaker 1: I I agree, Peter, appreciate what you do. I've always
Speaker 1: been a huge fan, so it's an honor to have
Speaker 1: you on the show. I thank you so much for
Speaker 1: taking the time.
Speaker 3: I enjoyed it. Great questions, Lisa, and thanks for having me.
Speaker 2: That was the great Peter Schweizer.
Speaker 1: Had actually had emailed him before to try to get
Speaker 1: him on the show, but couldn't get him, and then
Speaker 1: i ran into someone who works for him, and so
Speaker 1: I'm so glad to have him on the podcast.
Speaker 2: Truly a fan of his. He does such a good.
Speaker 1: Job at taking all these really complicated issues and making
Speaker 1: it digestible with explaining why it matters. So just appreciate
Speaker 1: what he does and just cool to have him on
Speaker 1: the show. So thank you at home for listening every
Speaker 1: Monday and Thursday. But of course you can listen to
Speaker 1: it whatever you want because it's a podcast. I want
Speaker 1: to think Drew Steele, who stepped in for John Cassio today,
Speaker 1: for putting the show together. You can find us on
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts. Love reading your reviews and ratings until next time.