Speaker 1: Welcome.
Speaker 2: It is verdict was Senator Ted Cruz ben Ferguson with you.
Speaker 2: We've got a lot to unpack on the show. That
Speaker 2: includes who is lying to US, Russia or the President
Speaker 2: of the United States of America on the nord Stream
Speaker 2: pipeline and who blew it up? Also the FBI Director
Speaker 2: Ray could be held in contempt of Congress, what does
Speaker 2: that mean? And the Southern Poverty Law Center coming after
Speaker 2: good conservative Christian American jet Again. Senator, let's first start
Speaker 2: with this shocking news on the Nordstream pipeline. This seems
Speaker 2: to be a major change in the White House's position
Speaker 2: despite we now know they were briefed back in June
Speaker 2: of twenty twenty two that apparently, and this is coming
Speaker 2: from the CIA, that Ukraine was planning and even practicing
Speaker 2: to blow up the nord Stream pipeline. Biden, if you
Speaker 2: fast forward from June to September of twenty twenty two,
Speaker 2: he came out and said this, after that pipeline was exploded. Quote,
Speaker 2: let me say this, it was a deliberate act of sabotage,
Speaker 2: and now the Russians are pumping out disinformation and lies.
Speaker 2: The President went on to say we'll work with our
Speaker 2: allies to get to the bottom of exactly what happened
Speaker 2: with precisely what happened. At my direction, I've already begun
Speaker 2: to help our allies enhance the protection of this critical infrastructure.
Speaker 2: And then, Senator, he said this quote, and at the
Speaker 2: appropriate moment, when things calm down, we're going to send
Speaker 2: the divers down to find out exactly what happened. We
Speaker 2: don't know what yet, we don't know exactly. But just
Speaker 2: don't listen to what Putin's saying, because he's saying, we
Speaker 2: know it's not true. Now I think he was trying
Speaker 2: to say because what he was saying, we know is
Speaker 2: not true. Senator, you hear this now. And if you
Speaker 2: look at the headline coming from the liberal Washington Post,
Speaker 2: Biden blamed Russia for the nord Stream pipeline attack, despite
Speaker 2: the CIA being briefed earlier on a uk Ukrainian plot
Speaker 2: to do exactly that.
Speaker 1: Blow it up.
Speaker 3: Your reaction, Well, today's story in the Washington Post is
Speaker 3: a big deal. And let's step back for a minute.
Speaker 3: On this podcast, we've walked through at great length what
Speaker 3: caused the war in Ukraine. There are many things that
Speaker 3: are frustrating about this war, but the most fundamental is
Speaker 3: that it was utterly preventable. This war did not have
Speaker 3: to happen, and it was caused by Biden's weakness and
Speaker 3: his complete capitulation to Russia. And to retread a little bit,
Speaker 3: but this is important to understand why this story in
Speaker 3: the post is significant. Putin has long wanted to invade Ukraine.
Speaker 3: He wants to reassemble the old Soviet Union. He longs
Speaker 3: for the days of what he perceives as Soviet greatness.
Speaker 3: If you're going to reassemble the old Soviet Union, Ukraine
Speaker 3: is the most important piece of it. And Putin previously
Speaker 3: invaded Ukraine. In twenty fourteen, he invaded Ukraine, invaded Crimea,
Speaker 3: which is the southern portion of Ukraine, but he stopped
Speaker 3: because Russia's primary source of revenue is selling oil and
Speaker 3: natural gas, and the natural gas pipelines run right through
Speaker 3: the middle of Ukraine, and if he invaded the whole country,
Speaker 3: he risked damaging or destroying those pipelines. So the next year,
Speaker 3: in twenty fifteen, he launched the nord Stream two pipeline.
Speaker 3: Nordstream two is an under sea pipeline underneath the Baltic
Speaker 3: Sea that runs directly from Russia to Germany. The entire
Speaker 3: purpose of it was to circumvent Ukraine so that when
Speaker 3: the pipeline became complete and active, Russia could invade Ukraine
Speaker 3: and not worry about the pipelines because it could get
Speaker 3: its natural gas to market. As you know, in twenty nineteen,
Speaker 3: I authored sanctions legislation that shut the nord Stream two
Speaker 3: pipeline down. Putin halted construction of the pipeline literally the
Speaker 3: day Donald Trump signed my sanctions legislation. At the law
Speaker 3: For over a year, from December twenty nineteen to January
Speaker 3: of twenty twenty one, the pipeline was dead and dormant,
Speaker 3: and nothing happened because the sanctions legislation that I authored
Speaker 3: and Trump signed had stopped it. Joe Biden became president
Speaker 3: on January twentieth, twenty twenty one. Four days later, January
Speaker 3: twenty fourth, Putin resumed deep sea construction of Nordstream two
Speaker 3: because Biden had foreshadowed incredible weakness that he was going
Speaker 3: to give into Russia. That foreshadowing proved accurate. Several months later,
Speaker 3: Biden formally waives sanctions on Nordstream two, gave putin a
Speaker 3: multi billion dollar gift. Fast forward to January of twenty
Speaker 3: twenty two. I forced a vote on the Senate floor
Speaker 3: to reimpose sanctions on Nordstream two. Every Democrat had voted
Speaker 3: with me twice to impose those sanctions. On the day
Speaker 3: of the vote, Biden, for the first time in his presidency,
Speaker 3: came to Capitol Hill and personally lobbied Democrat senators to
Speaker 3: vote against my sanctions legislation, to vote in favor of Russia,
Speaker 3: in favor of Putin, and forty four Democrats flipped their votes.
Speaker 3: They had voted with me twice, but at Biden's behest,
Speaker 3: they put partisan politics above us, national security, above standing
Speaker 3: with our allies. Now, when that vote was pending, President
Speaker 3: Zelenski of Ukraine publicly begged the Senate pass cruises sanctions legislation.
Speaker 3: It's the only way to stop Russia from invading Ukraine.
Speaker 3: The government of Poland put out a formal statement said
Speaker 3: pass cruises sanctions legislation. Without it, Russia will invade Ukraine.
Speaker 3: The Democrats flipped, the legislation failed, and just a few
Speaker 3: weeks later, Russia invaded Ukraine. Fast forward, We've now had
Speaker 3: the biggest land war in Europe since World War II,
Speaker 3: waging for over a year. Biden was so weak to Russia.
Speaker 3: He capitulated to Russia. He allowed Putin to complete Nordstream two.
Speaker 3: And the result was exactly what Zelenski predicted, exactly what
Speaker 3: Poland predicted, exactly what I predicted on the Senate floor.
Speaker 3: Russia invaded Ukraine. Now several months ago, as we know,
Speaker 3: the nord Stream two pipeline was blown up. That was
Speaker 3: a big deal. This was a pipeline Biden had allowed
Speaker 3: Putin to complete, and when it exploded with undersea munitions,
Speaker 3: the Biden White House had a spin, and their foreign
Speaker 3: policy talkers had a spin. They said, Russia blew it up. Now,
Speaker 3: I got to admit, Ben I always found that a
Speaker 3: weird talking point. Sure, look, Putin's number one priority was
Speaker 3: to build the damn pipeline in order to enable him
Speaker 3: to invade Ukraine. Why would Putin blow up his own pipeline,
Speaker 3: which is what gave him the ability to engage in
Speaker 3: the war to re establish and recreate the Soviet Union.
Speaker 3: I always found that crap. So the alternative hypothesis was
Speaker 3: that the United States blew it up. Seymour Hirsch, who
Speaker 3: is a journalist who has done some good work, but
Speaker 3: he engages in a lot of fantastical work that has
Speaker 3: very questionable moorings to reality. He wrote a long article
Speaker 3: arguing in the United States blew it up. I have
Speaker 3: to admit I read Hirsch's article and I was pretty
Speaker 3: skeptical of it. And I was skeptical of it mostly
Speaker 3: because the Biden administration lacks the spinal fortitude to do it.
Speaker 3: It may well be in the United States' interest to
Speaker 3: blow the damn thing up, but I didn't believe Joe
Speaker 3: Biden and had the guts to give that order. So
Speaker 3: the Biden administration was saying Russia did it. That always
Speaker 3: struck me as boloney. Other people were saying, maybe the
Speaker 3: United States did it. That actually struck me as bolooney
Speaker 3: as well. I just don't believe Biden would be willing
Speaker 3: to do that. My view from the day it happened
Speaker 3: is I said, look who benefits from this? There's always
Speaker 3: a good analysis on foreign policy to ask who benefits.
Speaker 3: The obvious player that benefits is Ukraine. And so my
Speaker 3: view on the day this happened is the obvious player
Speaker 3: who have done this is Ukraine. If if and This
Speaker 3: is a big if if they have the technological capability
Speaker 3: to do it. And what I didn't know and I
Speaker 3: don't know today, is whether Ukraine had the ability to
Speaker 3: go nearly three hundred feet underwater and blow up that pipeline.
Speaker 3: If they did, it's a no brainer that blowing up
Speaker 3: Nordstream too benefits Ukraine and hurts Russia. This story in
Speaker 3: the Washington Post yesterday asserts that the CIA, the Biden
Speaker 3: CIA had credible intelligence that Ukraine blew up the pipeline.
Speaker 3: I don't know if that's true, and I'm going to
Speaker 3: readily say I've had lots and lots of classified briefings
Speaker 3: on lots and lots of topics. I've had zero classified
Speaker 3: briefings with information on this question. So I don't have
Speaker 3: any specialized information on who blew it up. Whether it
Speaker 3: was Russia, whether it was Ukraine, whether it's the United States,
Speaker 3: or whether it was someone else.
Speaker 1: I don't know.
Speaker 3: But I've read this Washington Post article, and I know
Speaker 3: the incentives and who benefits, and it strikes me as
Speaker 3: utterly plausible that Ukraine did this with the caveat that
Speaker 3: I don't know if they had the technological sophistication to
Speaker 3: do it. But if they did it, if they did
Speaker 3: have that capability, I absolutely believe Ukraine would do it
Speaker 3: and would benefit from doing it. If that is true,
Speaker 3: it means Joe Biden and the Biden White House lied
Speaker 3: to America over and over again from the moment this happened.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I want to ask you about the lies because
Speaker 2: the article, and this is the Washington Post, that's implying
Speaker 2: that basically the President United States America willfully lied to
Speaker 2: the American people may have helped spur this war to
Speaker 2: get even bigger while we were backing Ukraine. And before
Speaker 2: we get into the politics of that, I want to
Speaker 2: tell you real quick about our friends over at Patriot Mobile.
Speaker 2: If you are sick and tired of giving your money
Speaker 2: to woke companies, we have seen what woke comis have
Speaker 2: been doing recently. We've seen what's happened at Target, We've
Speaker 2: seen what's happened with Dizzy.
Speaker 1: The list now butt like going on and on.
Speaker 2: And if you are like me, where you're just fed
Speaker 2: up with it and you want to give your money
Speaker 2: to companies actually stand for your values, then you need
Speaker 2: to switch your cell phone to Patriot Mobile for years,
Speaker 2: big mobile comanies have been dumping millions and millions of
Speaker 2: dollars into leftist causes, and we had to deal with
Speaker 2: it because there wasn't another option.
Speaker 1: Now there is.
Speaker 2: Patriot Mobile is America's only Christian conservative wireless provider, offering
Speaker 2: dependable nationwide coverage on all three major networks, so you
Speaker 2: get the best possible service in your area without the
Speaker 2: woke propaganda push by leftists working hard to destroy this country.
Speaker 2: You are going to get amazing coverage as I mentioned.
Speaker 2: Plus when you pay your bill, a portion of your
Speaker 2: bill at no cost to you goes to support free
Speaker 2: speech and religious freedom, the sanctity of life, the Second Amendment,
Speaker 2: our military, our veterans or first responder heroes. And it's
Speaker 2: one hundred percent US based customer service team, so they
Speaker 2: make switching easy. Go online to Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict,
Speaker 2: Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict, or call them eight seven
Speaker 2: eight Patriot that's eight seven eight Patriot or Patriot Mobile
Speaker 2: dot com slash Verdict center. You look at the Washington
Speaker 2: Post and what they reported, they said based on Pentagon
Speaker 2: documents allegedly leaked onto Discord, a European nation briefed the
Speaker 2: Biden administration that the Ukrainian military had planned a covert
Speaker 2: attack on the undersea network using a small team of
Speaker 2: divers who reported directly to the commander in chief of
Speaker 2: the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Yet the President, knowing this, being
Speaker 2: briefed on this, told the American people Russia did this.
Speaker 2: He blamed Russia for this, And you talked about the
Speaker 2: lie here. Why would he lie to us and why
Speaker 2: would he mislead the American people this way while also
Speaker 2: at the same time sending countless American tax dollars to Ukraine.
Speaker 3: Well, listen, let me be clear. I don't know for
Speaker 3: a fact that Biden was lying. What I do know
Speaker 3: is their story never made sense. Why would Putin blow
Speaker 3: up the pipeline that was integral to the Russian economies
Speaker 3: being able to sell natural gas to Europe. Why would
Speaker 3: Putin blow up the pipeline that enabled the invasion of Ukraine?
Speaker 3: Why would Putin blow up the pipeline that Joe Biden
Speaker 3: had wrapped in gift wrap and given him as a giant,
Speaker 3: multi billion dollar present, and that capitulation is what caused
Speaker 3: the invasion of Ukraine. It never made sense to me,
Speaker 3: so you know, I guess you could have some sort
Speaker 3: of sophisticated psyops that he blows it and blows it
Speaker 3: up and maybe he figures it weakens Europe's commitment to Ukraine.
Speaker 3: I just that that seems so attenuated to me. It
Speaker 3: sounds like boloney.
Speaker 2: The Post also said that this was they had a
Speaker 2: lot of details about the plan which had not been
Speaker 2: previously reported until now. They were apparently collected by European
Speaker 2: Intelligence Service. They were shared with the CIA in June
Speaker 2: of twenty twenty two, and they provided some of the
Speaker 2: most specific evidence to day linking the government of Ukraine
Speaker 2: to the eventual attack in the Baltic Sea. Now, if
Speaker 2: that's true, Senator and were, is there new questions that
Speaker 2: must be asked about American aid going to Ukraine? Or
Speaker 2: does that really have no bearing on that even if
Speaker 2: in fact they may have done this.
Speaker 3: Look, I don't think it has bearing at all. And
Speaker 3: in fact, if Ukraine blew up the pipeline, I say
Speaker 3: good on Ukraine. It's unquestionably their national security interest. It
Speaker 3: was the right thing to do. To be honest. If
Speaker 3: Donald Trump were still president, I think he may well
Speaker 3: have blown up the pipeline. But I don't think the
Speaker 3: pipeline would have been built, so I don't think he
Speaker 3: would have had to blow it up, and I don't
Speaker 3: think there would have been a war on Ukraine. Why
Speaker 3: because look rewind to twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen, twenty seventeen,
Speaker 3: twenty eighteen, everyone in Washington said, we can't stop this pipeline.
Speaker 3: We're hopeless, there's nothing we can do. When I wrote
Speaker 3: the legislation, it was targeted sanctions legislation. There was a
Speaker 3: specific company, the Allseas Company, that was building the pipeline,
Speaker 3: and I wrote the legislation that would bankrup the company
Speaker 3: if it continued building the pipeline even for a minute. Now,
Speaker 3: amazingly enough, we passed this legislation December of twenty nineteen.
Speaker 3: If you remember what else was happening in December twenty nineteen,
Speaker 3: the House of Representatives under Nancy Pelosi was impeaching Donald Trump,
Speaker 3: and not just in peaching Donald Trump, impeaching him for
Speaker 3: conduct concerning Ukraine. So I'm trying to pass legislation that
Speaker 3: is integral to Ukraine in the middle of the House
Speaker 3: impeaching Trump for Ukraine, and I need bipartisan support and
Speaker 3: to get this passed. I had to get support from
Speaker 3: the chairman and ranking members, so from the Democrat and
Speaker 3: Republican in the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate
Speaker 3: Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Banking Committee, and from
Speaker 3: Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell. That's eight players in the Senate,
Speaker 3: and I had to get support from the same eight
Speaker 3: players in the House in the middle of this police
Speaker 3: blood bath over the first Trump impeachment on Ukraine. And
Speaker 3: so in hindsight it remains a friggin' miracle we got
Speaker 3: it done. To be honest, part of the way I
Speaker 3: got it done is I didn't mention the word Ukraine
Speaker 3: at all. I'm like Ukraine, never heard of it, don't
Speaker 3: know what that is. Sorry, this is all about Russia
Speaker 3: and Germany. Has nothing to do with Ukraine. Never heard
Speaker 3: of it at all. We got it done, which remains astonishing.
Speaker 3: And by the way, I was on the phone repeatedly
Speaker 3: because it went off course about six times in the
Speaker 3: course of this negotiation. I was talking to different members
Speaker 3: and brought it back on course. Now, once it passed,
Speaker 3: there was a big lobbying effort within the Trump administration
Speaker 3: from the pro nordstream two forces that first of all,
Speaker 3: wanted the treasure well actually before that, they wanted the
Speaker 3: National Security Council to issue a signing statement that would
Speaker 3: cut the sanctions. And I ended up picking up the
Speaker 3: phone and calling Trump's National Security advisor, Robert O'Brien, who
Speaker 3: was a good friend of mine. Robert was in the
Speaker 3: NSC Christmas party at the time. This is December twenty nineteen,
Speaker 3: and I called over. I said, pull Robert out of
Speaker 3: the Christmas party. I need to talk to him right now.
Speaker 3: And I told Robert, I said, listen, this legislation is
Speaker 3: incredibly important. There are forces that are not positive and
Speaker 3: beneficial that are trying to get the White House to
Speaker 3: give a signing statement undercutting these sanctions. I said, if
Speaker 3: y'all do this, I'm going to go to the Senate
Speaker 3: floor and light you up. Please don't make me do this.
Speaker 3: I don't want to light you up. You don't want
Speaker 3: me to light you up. Do the right thing. Let's
Speaker 3: stand up and stop this. And Robert, to his credit, said, ted,
Speaker 3: I got this. It's taken care of. And he quashed
Speaker 3: the lobbying effort to save the pipeline. There was a
Speaker 3: second effort, and it was an effort to get the
Speaker 3: Treasury Department to issue guidance concerning the sanctions that would
Speaker 3: essentially allow the pipeline to keep being built again. It's December.
Speaker 3: I'm on the phone with Treasury. I'm also texting Mike Pompeo,
Speaker 3: the Secretary of State. I'm working with the Department of Energy.
Speaker 3: I'm working with the National Security Council. There was a
Speaker 3: big interagency battle. Long and short of it is, we
Speaker 3: won the internagency battle, and the people that were trying
Speaker 3: to get Treasury to gut the sanctions lost. I sent
Speaker 3: a letter to the CEO of All Ceas Corporation, which
Speaker 3: was the company that was building the pipeline. And as
Speaker 3: you know, Ben, I spent a lot of years practicing law,
Speaker 3: whether as Solicitor General of Texas or in private practice.
Speaker 3: I've represented a lot of clients. I wrote a letter
Speaker 3: that was designed and I'm going to give a technical
Speaker 3: legal term to make the CEO sphincter titan so tight
Speaker 3: that he could form coal into diamonds. The letter said,
Speaker 3: you need to be advised that this legislation which I
Speaker 3: drafted creates sanctions that are immediate, that are non waivable,
Speaker 3: and that are fatal that are designed to destroy your company.
Speaker 3: And if you care about shareholder value, if you care
Speaker 3: about your executives, if you care about your employees, you
Speaker 3: will not continue to build this pipeline for even sixty
Speaker 3: seconds after the President signs this bill. If you do,
Speaker 3: you will destroy your company. Now, Trump signed the bill,
Speaker 3: if I remember correctly, at seven pm on a Thursday night,
Speaker 3: I was flying home to DC. Seven pm on a
Speaker 3: Thursday night, I land in DC, flying home to Houston
Speaker 3: rather from DC seven pm on a Thursday night, the
Speaker 3: company building the pipeline at Putin's direction announces at six
Speaker 3: forty five pm, fifteen minutes before they've immediately halted construction
Speaker 3: of the pipeline and set sail away. He had stopped
Speaker 3: this because it was an America's interest to stop this.
Speaker 3: Biden gave Putin this gift because he didn't have the
Speaker 3: strength to stand up to Russia and because he wanted
Speaker 3: to make nice with Germany. Yeah, and given that weakness. Look,
Speaker 3: if I think if this pipeline had been built, I
Speaker 3: believe Trump would have bombed the hell out of it.
Speaker 3: I think Trump would have blown it up, but he
Speaker 3: wouldn't have had to blow it up because Trump had
Speaker 3: stopped it by signing my legislation. It was Biden's weakness
Speaker 3: that caused the pipeline to be built, and so I
Speaker 3: think the chances that Biden would have acted to take
Speaker 3: out the pipeline are virtually nil. But I also think
Speaker 3: the Biden White House's spin that it was Putin who
Speaker 3: did it that never made sense.
Speaker 2: I want to ask you one other question about the
Speaker 2: White House now. They're shockingly at odds now with their
Speaker 2: liberal friend in town, the Washington Post, not answering detailed
Speaker 2: questions from the Post. Now, before I give you that quote,
Speaker 2: I want to tell everybody real quick about chalk. If
Speaker 2: you're a guy and you're getting a little bit older
Speaker 2: and you feel like you've lost some of your strength,
Speaker 2: some of your vitality, some of your focus, you're feeling
Speaker 2: like you've got fatigue, weakness, complacency, you're not alone. Testostrum
Speaker 2: levels have fallen off a cliff historically. In fact, they
Speaker 2: are at an all time low. Thankfully, the patriots at
Speaker 2: chalk choq dot com are helping real America men take
Speaker 2: back their right to probably maximize your masculinity by boosting
Speaker 2: your testosterum levels up to twenty percent over ninety days.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: I've been taking Chalk choq dot com for now several months,
Speaker 2: and I can tell you the Male Vitality stack works.
Speaker 2: You are going to get back what you lost, and
Speaker 2: that's the best part about it. You're going to get
Speaker 2: back that focus. You're gonna get back that feeling of strength.
Speaker 2: That's why I take Chalk. If you feel like you
Speaker 2: are dealing with just losing that edge, checkout Chalk choq
Speaker 2: dot com. Use the promo code Ben, and you will
Speaker 2: get thirty five percent off any Chalk subscription for life.
Speaker 2: That's promo code Ben, thirty five percent off anti chok
Speaker 2: subscription for life choqt dot com booshir at saws from
Speaker 2: levels of twenty percent over ninety day choq dot com
Speaker 2: center despite pledging, and this is the part where it
Speaker 2: looks like the Washington Post was really going after the
Speaker 2: Biden administration because they promised that they were going to
Speaker 2: get to the bottom this week. I read that statement
Speaker 2: at the very beginning of the podcast today. But despite
Speaker 2: pledging to get to the bottom of it, the Biden
Speaker 2: administration is completely silent, and apparently they already knew what
Speaker 2: was going to happen. They were briefed done it months before,
Speaker 2: So the President may have just been lying to us
Speaker 2: when he said he was gonna send divers down there
Speaker 2: and find out what's really going on. And the White
Speaker 2: House was asked about this yesterday. Here's what John Kirby
Speaker 2: had to say about it when he was asked by
Speaker 2: the press.
Speaker 1: It is the US actively investigating a limit? Why not
Speaker 1: that there are three European countries that have.
Speaker 4: Embarked on independent investigations of this, and we're comfortable in
Speaker 4: their ability to take a hard look at this and
Speaker 4: to come up with conclusions.
Speaker 2: He was hanging his head by the way, Senator, and
Speaker 2: you could barely hear him when he said. The reporter
Speaker 2: said is the US actively investigating? And he had his
Speaker 2: head down.
Speaker 1: He just said no.
Speaker 2: Like it wasn't like a proud no, It wasn't like
Speaker 2: absolutely not. I'm going to answer that, and I'm going
Speaker 2: to answer as quietly as I possibly can. Now, why
Speaker 2: do you think they're so quiet about this, because the
Speaker 2: last we heard they were going to investigate this by golly.
Speaker 3: Well, listen, the Biden White House knows their foreign policy
Speaker 3: failures are what caused the war in Ukraine. They also know,
Speaker 3: as we've talked about it at length on this podcast, that
Speaker 3: since the war began, they've been funding both sides of
Speaker 3: the war. They've been effectively supporting Iran by refusing to
Speaker 3: enforce oil sanctions on Iran. They've been funneling it billions
Speaker 3: of dollars into the Iotola. The Iotola has been using
Speaker 3: those billions of dollars to build drones, and those drones
Speaker 3: the Russians have been using to kill Ukrainians. So the
Speaker 3: Biden administration caused the war through its own weakness and
Speaker 3: now is funding both sides of the war, and so
Speaker 3: they are Look, I'll give John Kirby a little bit
Speaker 3: of credit that he's at least sheepish for the disaster
Speaker 3: that this administration has caused. But I got to say
Speaker 3: the answer he gave yesterday is utterly incompatible with the
Speaker 3: administration's answer when the pipeline blew up, when they claimed
Speaker 3: this was an investigation they were going to get to
Speaker 3: the bottom of well, while at the same time doing
Speaker 3: everything they could to suggest it's Putin. Putin.
Speaker 1: Putin.
Speaker 3: Look, I think Putin's a very bad guy who does
Speaker 3: lots of stuff. He just rarely blows up his own stuff.
Speaker 3: He blows up other people's stuff rarely his own stuff.
Speaker 3: And and so you know, for the for the White
Speaker 3: House to be caught in at a minimum a massive inconsistency,
Speaker 3: if not a flat out lie, that's less than ideal.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I want to move also to another big story center.
Speaker 2: You and I covered this on Monday's episode, and if
Speaker 2: you missed it, go back and listen to it.
Speaker 1: It was actually the top.
Speaker 2: Of the charts for all day on Monday and Tuesday,
Speaker 2: we did a deep dive into what's going on with
Speaker 2: the FBI Director Ray. The House Oversight Committee is now
Speaker 2: going to move. We're being told on Thursday to hold
Speaker 2: the FBI Director, Christopher Ray, in contempt of Congress.
Speaker 1: Now why are they doing this?
Speaker 2: Well, this all goes back to the FBI Biden document,
Speaker 2: a document that they say equates to basically a bribery
Speaker 2: scheme money laundering, where the President was able to get
Speaker 2: his hands on five million dollars for favors when he
Speaker 2: was the vice president. James Comer, who saw that letter,
Speaker 2: he still doesn't have a copy of it himself, but
Speaker 2: was able to read it, had this to say on
Speaker 2: Capitol Hill after he walked out of that meeting.
Speaker 4: The claims made in the document are consistent with what
Speaker 4: we found and disclosed to you all in Romania. It
Speaker 4: suggests a pattern of bribery where payments would be made
Speaker 4: through shell accounts and multiple banks. There's a term for that,
Speaker 4: it's called money launder.
Speaker 1: That again, is.
Speaker 4: What the majority of the suspicious activity reports also said.
Speaker 4: So we feel that this accusation is consistent with a
Speaker 4: pattern that we're seeing frankly in other countries too.
Speaker 2: That's pretty damning when you start connecting the Dots center.
Speaker 2: You've got these documents, now you've got the suspicious activity reports,
Speaker 2: you've got the Hunter Biden laptop that is connecting a
Speaker 2: lot of these dots as well, and you've got now
Speaker 2: whistleblowers coming forward that are sharing information Intel. This is
Speaker 2: panning an extremely damning picture to the Biden crime family.
Speaker 2: And that is also why the White House must be
Speaker 2: feeling it because this is unprecedented. The White House has
Speaker 2: actually come out and claimed that the Biden family business
Speaker 2: quote represents no national security threat, and they even use
Speaker 2: John Kirby, the National Security Council Coordinator for Strategic Communications.
Speaker 2: He denied that the Biden family business schemes represent a
Speaker 2: national security threat, despite admitting he had not read the
Speaker 2: House Oversight Committee's report on the matter.
Speaker 1: Your reaction to that.
Speaker 3: Well, I think the FBI is facing a crisis of
Speaker 3: integrity and in the last podcast, and you're right, if
Speaker 3: folks have not listened to Monday's podcast, they should because
Speaker 3: we did a deep dive into this issue. The FBI
Speaker 3: has a report that was written because a whistle blow
Speaker 3: or an informant called in and said that they had
Speaker 3: evidence that Joe Biden as Vice president was directly involved
Speaker 3: in a bribery scheme, according to the leaks, in excess
Speaker 3: of five million dollars involving a foreign country, and apparently
Speaker 3: the foreign country is not China. The House of Representatives
Speaker 3: investigating this wanted to see that report. Initially, they subpoened
Speaker 3: that report, and the FBI said, go jump in a lake.
Speaker 1: We won't give it to you.
Speaker 3: And the House was prepared to hold Christopher Ray in contempt,
Speaker 3: and Chris Ray blinked and said, Okay, we'll give you
Speaker 3: the report, but James Comber and Jamie Raskin the chairman
Speaker 3: and ranking member of the committee investigating can review it yourselves.
Speaker 3: But you can't make it public, and so they brought
Speaker 3: it over, they showed it to him.
Speaker 2: Why is that normal, by the way, and why would
Speaker 2: you do that? Explain that?
Speaker 3: So, yes, and no, it's not bizarre. There are times
Speaker 3: when there's classified materials or confidential materials where the administration
Speaker 3: will say, we'll show this to you privately, and a
Speaker 3: classified briefing, you're confidential briefing. And what we talked about
Speaker 3: in Monday in the podcast is listen when you're dealing
Speaker 3: with a confidential informant. There are lots of instances where
Speaker 3: some informant provides some information, say on a drug cartel
Speaker 3: or the mafia. You know, you get some hit man
Speaker 3: who says, Okay, I'm going to tell you about the
Speaker 3: don and what he did that. You don't want the
Speaker 3: report from the informant made public because if it is
Speaker 3: made public, the crime boss will have that guy killed.
Speaker 3: And so it's not classified. Classified typically involves national security issues,
Speaker 3: it involves foreign policy issues. In law enforcement, it's not classified,
Speaker 3: but it is confidential. And law enforcement confidential is a serious,
Speaker 3: serious status because you want to protect the integrity of
Speaker 3: a law enforcement investigation and you want to protect the
Speaker 3: identity of an informant. What you and I talked about
Speaker 3: two days ago is the circumstances here are very different.
Speaker 3: Number One, presumably this informant is advising not on a
Speaker 3: mafia boss, not on El Chapo, not on some drug kingpin,
Speaker 3: but on Joseph Robinette Biden Junior, then the Vice President
Speaker 3: of the United States, now the President of the United States.
Speaker 3: One would assume the law enforcement interests are markedly less
Speaker 3: in that Biden is not going to have the guy whacked.
Speaker 3: And by the way, lefty Twitter went insane this week
Speaker 3: because we said in Monday's podcast, I said, it's reasonable
Speaker 3: to assume the threat to the informant's life is less
Speaker 3: given that he was informing on Joe Biden. And they said,
Speaker 3: oh my gosh, you know, Cruz is suggesting that Joe
Speaker 3: Biden is going to have someone murdered.
Speaker 4: It.
Speaker 1: No, Actually, what I.
Speaker 3: Said is, presumably I would hope Joe Biden is not
Speaker 3: going to have someone murdered. But if that's the case,
Speaker 3: the FBI's interest in keeping this confidential is much less. Moreover,
Speaker 3: the public interest, a serious, credible allegation of bribery and
Speaker 3: corruption by the then vice president, now the president of
Speaker 3: the United States. That's a big damn deal. And so
Speaker 3: Comer saw the document and he left the briefing and said,
Speaker 3: the American public has a right to know what's in
Speaker 3: this document. We want to make it public. And Chris
Speaker 3: Ray said, Nope, not going to do it. And so
Speaker 3: what's going to happen tomorrow on Thursday, is the House
Speaker 3: is going to vote to hold Chris Ray in contempt
Speaker 3: of Congress. Now, let me give a couple of consequences
Speaker 3: of this one.
Speaker 1: This is a real.
Speaker 3: Problem for the FBI. Look, the FBI uses subpoenas every day.
Speaker 3: They use subpoena as all the time to get information
Speaker 3: they need in law enforcement investigations. To have the director
Speaker 3: held in contempt for failing to comply with a subpoena
Speaker 3: is a big problem for all of the rest of
Speaker 3: the FBI's ambit. But secondly, this is I believe a
Speaker 3: crisis in integrity for the FBI, and so I want
Speaker 3: to make a very direct appeal. I went this week
Speaker 3: on Hannity and I made this appeal to Chris Ray.
Speaker 3: But I'm gonna make it on this podcast as well.
Speaker 3: I know Chris Ray, Well, Chris.
Speaker 1: Don't do this to the FBI.
Speaker 3: If Chris Ray stiff arms the House, if he forces
Speaker 3: the House of Representatives to hold him in contempt, it
Speaker 3: will do massive damage to the integrity of the FBI.
Speaker 3: Chris Ray is a company man. He believes he's defending
Speaker 3: the FBI by circling the wagons and not handing material over.
Speaker 3: But your job is not to protect the hardcore left
Speaker 3: wing partisans who burrowed into senior career positions at the FBI. Instead,
Speaker 3: it's to protect the institution, to protect the rule of law,
Speaker 3: to protect the Constitution. You are ultimately accountable to the
Speaker 3: American people, and the American people have a right to
Speaker 3: know if there's credible evidence that the president of the
Speaker 3: United States was involved in bribery from a foreign nation.
Speaker 3: It is difficult to imagine an issue of greater public importance.
Speaker 3: And so I'm calling on Chris Ray. Do the right thing.
Speaker 3: Hand this document over, don't dig in as a stubborn
Speaker 3: institutional warrior and end up being held in contempt of Congress.
Speaker 3: Now you might think, gosh, I'll be fine because the
Speaker 3: Biden DOJ is so politicized, they'll never prosecute the contempt holding.
Speaker 3: And that's true. The chances that Merrick Garland will prosecute
Speaker 3: Chris Ray for contempt are zero point zero percent. But
Speaker 3: the damage to the integrity of the FBI will be
Speaker 3: massive if Chris Ray refuses to give in to public accountability.
Speaker 3: So I'm calling on the director of the FBI, Donald
Speaker 3: Trump appointed you. You're not a left wing partisan. Your
Speaker 3: loyalty is not to the rabid partisans and the senior
Speaker 3: positions of the FBI. Your loyalty should be to the
Speaker 3: Constitution and the American people. And that means you should
Speaker 3: hand this document over for the people to assess it
Speaker 3: on the.
Speaker 2: Merits when it comes to the investigation side of it.
Speaker 2: And this is obviously a little bit separate from Ray,
Speaker 2: but the House Oversight Committee's probe found that the Biden
Speaker 2: family businesses over the course of several years received and
Speaker 2: this is the most important part about the whistleblower and
Speaker 2: also this new accusation that there was five million dollars
Speaker 2: in a bribery scheme to then Vice President Joe Biden
Speaker 2: for favors from America over the course of several years.
Speaker 1: And this is what we at least know of now.
Speaker 2: The Biden family businesses and their shell companies center received
Speaker 2: at least ten million from business schemes in Romania and China.
Speaker 2: You look at how much money we're finding here, and
Speaker 2: a lot of people believe this other five million is
Speaker 2: going to be coming in from Romania. This is a
Speaker 2: massive amount of money coming in, and it's coming in
Speaker 2: to business associates designing a web of companies over twenty
Speaker 2: that we know of, many of which were formed during
Speaker 2: Joe Biden's vice presidency, and the committee said.
Speaker 1: In total, of the Biden.
Speaker 2: Family business associates and their companies received over ten million
Speaker 2: from foreign national companies, the committee found. And that's just
Speaker 2: ten million alone, outside of everything else.
Speaker 3: Look, this is utterly bizarre. I do not know any
Speaker 3: person in public life. I don't know any senator, I
Speaker 3: don't know any House member. I don't know any member
Speaker 3: of the executive branch whose family members received millions of
Speaker 3: dollars from foreign nations and foreign companies. This is not typical,
Speaker 3: This is not usual. It is utterly bizarre. We know
Speaker 3: that Hunter Biden received over a million dollars a year
Speaker 3: from Barisma, the Ukrainian natural gas company. We know that
Speaker 3: up to a dozen Biden family members received millions of
Speaker 3: dollars from Chinese communist countries. Now they're these allegations about
Speaker 3: a mysterious third country. We don't know what that is.
Speaker 3: Now that there's additional allegations about Romania, we don't know
Speaker 3: the details of that. It is bizarre. Why are your
Speaker 3: family members getting millions of bucks? Look foreign nations, Ben,
Speaker 3: You're a really successful guy. You're a well respected radio host.
Speaker 3: You've been you've been a talk radio host with a
Speaker 3: national following since you were literally twelve years old, which
Speaker 3: is a little bit bizarre.
Speaker 1: A freakish prodigy. I'll take that compliment any day.
Speaker 3: But okay, let me just ask you right now on
Speaker 3: the record, under oath. Yeah, have the Chinese communists paid
Speaker 3: you millions of dollars?
Speaker 1: Never? Have they paid you a dollar?
Speaker 3: No? Like, who the hell does that?
Speaker 4: Like?
Speaker 1: Who the hell has all of these companies either?
Speaker 3: And by the way, even worse, like your aunt Bertha
Speaker 3: is getting millions of bucks. I don't know if you
Speaker 3: have an aunt birth I don't know if Joe Biden
Speaker 3: has an aunt Bertha. But what the hell they're like
Speaker 3: rounding up any Biden family member. You know, idiot cousin
Speaker 3: Lenny who's like babbling to himself let's give him one
Speaker 3: hundred thousand dollars. Like that reeks of corruption at a
Speaker 3: level that is weird. And the only way the corporate
Speaker 3: media can can whitewash this is to ignore it because
Speaker 3: you can't explain, well, gosh, isn't everybody on the take
Speaker 3: from communist China? No, no, they're not. This is a
Speaker 3: big damn problem, and it's why Chris ray owes it
Speaker 3: to the American people to be forthcoming. He doesn't work
Speaker 3: for the bureaucrats, he doesn't work for Merrick Garland. He
Speaker 3: works for the American people and he should behave like
Speaker 3: it this money.
Speaker 2: And again it was very clear that James Comer was
Speaker 2: tipping his hat a little bit that this five million
Speaker 2: bribery scheme has dealt something with probably Romania. The reporting
Speaker 2: that we have, and this has again before this report,
Speaker 2: was that from November twenty fifteen to May twenty seventeen,
Speaker 2: there was a company called Bladen Enterprises. They paid Robinson
Speaker 2: Walker LLC over three million. Now, this Blade and Enterprise
Speaker 2: is a report to be this company that was used
Speaker 2: to conduct business in Romania from a shady Romanian oligarch.
Speaker 2: Robinson Walker is the Biden family business partner who collectively
Speaker 2: sent the Biden family that one point three million to
Speaker 2: all of those Biden family members from the Biden crime
Speaker 2: family really exploded in the number of Biden's and the
Speaker 2: Biden family accounts. Now we know received approximately one million,
Speaker 2: thirty eight thousand from the Robinson Walker LLC. Account after
Speaker 2: this Romanian company deposit money in his accounts. Now the
Speaker 2: committee revealed all of this based upon wire transfers that
Speaker 2: was part of all these suspicious activity reports. And in total,
Speaker 2: sixteen of the seventeen payments from this bladant enterprises to
Speaker 2: Robinson Walker LLC were made while Joe Biden was the
Speaker 2: Vice President of the United States of America, knowing that
Speaker 2: money was coming in when he was the vice president. Senator,
Speaker 2: Is there going to be any accountability.
Speaker 3: For that from the Biden Department of Justice. I don't
Speaker 3: believe their will, But from the House of Representatives, I
Speaker 3: hope and believe their will. I will commend James Comer,
Speaker 3: I'll commend Jim Jordan. They had been I have been
Speaker 3: trying to drive this from the Senate. I had been
Speaker 3: pushing this from the Senate. The problem is the Senate
Speaker 3: Democrats have the majority and Senate Democrats. There is not
Speaker 3: a single Democrat, not one who gives a damn about
Speaker 3: whether the President of the United States is directly implicated
Speaker 3: in a bribery scheme involving foreign nations, because if they
Speaker 3: gave a damn, they'd do something about it. Look, I'm
Speaker 3: in hearings every week from the Judiciary Committee. One of
Speaker 3: the Democrats could ask a witness about it. None of
Speaker 3: them ever have. Dick Durban as chairman of the Judiciary Committee,
Speaker 3: he could convene a hearing, he hasn't. Bob Benendez is
Speaker 3: chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. I serve on that
Speaker 3: as well. He could convene a hearing he hasn't. He
Speaker 3: could ask a question, he hasn't. None of the Democrats
Speaker 3: in the committee have asked questions. They don't care, And
Speaker 3: unfortunately Senate Democrats are putting partisan politics. Go to Richard
Speaker 3: Nixon and Watergate. You want to know why the Nixon
Speaker 3: White House fell, Why Nixon resigned while that scandal came down.
Speaker 3: It was because Republicans had the testicular fortitude to stand
Speaker 3: up and say this is corrupt, and will stand up
Speaker 3: to our own party and say no. Is there even
Speaker 3: one Democrat and by the way, they don't need to
Speaker 3: call him out and say it's corrupt that they could
Speaker 3: just start by saying, wow, these allegations are serious. We
Speaker 3: need answers like that's not much. That's asking for a
Speaker 3: tiny little mustard seed of integrity in the House. If
Speaker 3: there's been a House Democrat who's done that, I haven't
Speaker 3: seen it. Every hearing they have. The House Democrats all
Speaker 3: act like the Praetorian Guard, or actually more like the
Speaker 3: sort of legally blonde cheerleaders with mini skirts and pom
Speaker 3: poms surrounding Joe Biden in the White House. But none
Speaker 3: of them that I've seen, has a shred of integrity
Speaker 3: to say, gosh, that would be a problem. If the
Speaker 3: President of the United States on the is on the
Speaker 3: take from a foreign nation, one of them should do so.
Speaker 3: And by the way, when was the last time CNN
Speaker 3: asked about this? MSNBC asked about this, ABC asked about this.
Speaker 3: I will say CBS, to their credit, has covered this
Speaker 3: a little bit, so it's almost the only outlier from
Speaker 3: the corporate media who's dared to cover it. But where's
Speaker 3: the where's the sixty minute special? Where's the uh? You
Speaker 3: remember Ted Koppa, Where's Nightline? Yeah, corruption in the White House.
Speaker 3: The corporate media does not care. Where are Woodward in Bernstein?
Speaker 3: There are no Woodward in Bernstein's. Apparently reporters don't exist anymore.
Speaker 1: Great point.
Speaker 2: I want to ask you quickly about something else, and
Speaker 2: that deals with the Southern Poverty Law Center has now
Speaker 2: added per to write groups to the same list of
Speaker 2: hate groups that they put them next to.
Speaker 1: Now the clue clicks Klan.
Speaker 2: Before we get to this shocking story, I want to
Speaker 2: tell you about our friends that Gusta Precious Metals. Let's
Speaker 2: talk about your retirement for just a second. You've seen
Speaker 2: what's been going on. You've seen some of the bank failures,
Speaker 2: You've seen what's happening with interest rates. You've seen what's
Speaker 2: been happening on Wall Street and the changes in the
Speaker 2: housing market. If you are stressed out and you've watched
Speaker 2: some of your retirement disappear, you know there's no time,
Speaker 2: especially if you're at retirement age, you're in retirement right
Speaker 2: before it to makeup losses. And that is where gold
Speaker 2: can come in and help you diversify your portfolio. Augusta
Speaker 2: Precious Metals is a company that I use why because
Speaker 2: they will even tell you if gold is not right
Speaker 2: for you and your portfolio based on what you're trying
Speaker 2: to accomplish, or your age or how much you've saved. Now,
Speaker 2: the other thing about it, GUS is they don't just
Speaker 2: send you a free guide on gold.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: They do that absolutely and it's a ton of information,
Speaker 2: but they do a one on one web conference with
Speaker 2: you and actually talk about you. They don't do one
Speaker 2: size fits all. So if you have one hundred thousand
Speaker 2: dollars or more that you've saved for retirement, Augusta will
Speaker 2: actually pay you in pure gold to learn how a
Speaker 2: gold IRA can protect you. That's a big deal, a
Speaker 2: pure gold coin for free. Reach out to Augusta Precious
Speaker 2: Medals a day and get started with gold. Don't let
Speaker 2: the bank failures get you down or stressed out. Get
Speaker 2: this free gold and get some peace of mind. Eight
Speaker 2: seven to seven the number four gold Ira eight seven
Speaker 2: seven the number four gold Ira to learn how to
Speaker 2: protect your retirement and get your free gold coin. That's
Speaker 2: Augusta Precious Metals dot Com.
Speaker 1: All right.
Speaker 2: Lastly, Senator, the Southern Poverty Law Centers added parental rights groups,
Speaker 2: including a group that I've had on my show Moms
Speaker 2: for Liberty several others to its hate map, which plots
Speaker 2: conservative groups a lot side chapters of the Klux Klan.
Speaker 1: Your reaction to that.
Speaker 3: Well, the Southern Property Law Center, unfortunately, is a profoundly dishonest,
Speaker 3: rapidly partisan left wing organization. It has a business model
Speaker 3: where it gets very wealthy left wing billionaires to write
Speaker 3: them big checks in order to try to tar anyone
Speaker 3: right of center and to call them hate groups. Among
Speaker 3: other groups, they've called the Alliance Defending Freedom, which is
Speaker 3: one of the most important organizations nationally for defending religious liberty,
Speaker 3: for litigating and winning national Supreme Court victories in front
Speaker 3: of the Supreme Court. So you literally have this organization
Speaker 3: of public interest lawyers who are winning religious liberty victories
Speaker 3: before the Supreme Court, that the Southern Poverty Law Center
Speaker 3: calls a hate group like the Nazis of the kak.
Speaker 3: They also call the Family Research Center, which is a
Speaker 3: fantastic family research council with a fantastic organization that that
Speaker 3: is is pro life, is pro traditional values, that fights
Speaker 3: for family values across this country. They labeled them as
Speaker 3: a hate group, and in fact, the Southern Poverty Law
Speaker 3: Center's direction. Designation of the FRC as a hate group
Speaker 3: led one radical, deranged, angry leftist to show up with
Speaker 3: a gun trying to murder people at the FRC, and
Speaker 3: thankfully there was a security guard who heroically stopped this crazed,
Speaker 3: attempted murderer from carrying out the hate that was inspired
Speaker 3: by the SPLC. SPLC is so radical. They had a
Speaker 3: lawyer just recently that worked for them who was arrested
Speaker 3: for being an Antifa terrorist in Atlanta and participating in
Speaker 3: terrorist riots against law enforcement. Mind USPLC said when their
Speaker 3: own employee was nominated to be was indicted as being
Speaker 3: an Antifa terrorist, said, we stand by our employee. That's
Speaker 3: who they are. By the way, their director of litigation,
Speaker 3: a radical left winger Joe Biden, is dominated to be
Speaker 3: a Federal Court of Appeals judge, and the Democrats happily
Speaker 3: stood with her. Well, now the Southern Poverty Law Center
Speaker 3: is going on offense, and they've decided to target moms
Speaker 3: for Liberty. Let me say moms for liberty. They are
Speaker 3: phenomenal women. They are moms who are standing up for
Speaker 3: their kids. And you want to know the power of
Speaker 3: moms for liberty. Let me tell you someone who would
Speaker 3: not have the first name in his title, and that
Speaker 3: would be Governor Glen Youngkin. Without moms for liberty, Governor
Speaker 3: Glen Youngkin would be Glen Youngkin. There'd be no governor.
Speaker 3: We'd have Governor Terry mccauliffe. Because Virginia, which Biden won
Speaker 3: by nearly ten points, Virginia flipped red and white of
Speaker 3: Virginia flip read it flipped red because moms stood up
Speaker 3: and they were ticked off at the left wing takeover
Speaker 3: their schools. They were ticked off at the woke ideology.
Speaker 3: They were ticked off at Loud County, at the school
Speaker 3: district covering up for a sexual predator, a boy wearing
Speaker 3: a skirt the girl's restroom assaulted and raped a girl.
Speaker 3: They were ticked off at the critical race theory being
Speaker 3: taught to their kids. And Moms for Liberty energized moms
Speaker 3: in Virginia across the country. They also energize moms who
Speaker 3: were mad at the school shutdowns and said, look, our
Speaker 3: kids deserve schooling. These radical ideologues are shutting down schools
Speaker 3: and hurting our children. And these moms engaged, They spoke
Speaker 3: out they're powerful. They flipped Virginia from blue to red
Speaker 3: to the shock of the left wing establishment. What as
Speaker 3: the Southern Property Law Center said, moms they're defending their
Speaker 3: kids are a hate group. I'm gonna say right now,
Speaker 3: the SPLC is a radical left wing hate group. I'm
Speaker 3: gonna use that term. They hate you, they hate me,
Speaker 3: they hate America, they hate conservatives, they hate the Constitution,
Speaker 3: they hate the Bill of Rights, they hate families, they
Speaker 3: hate moms, they hate dads, they hate anyone who stands
Speaker 3: up for this country. And I gotta say for the
Speaker 3: SPLC to go after moms for liberty is disgusting.
Speaker 1: Senator is always it's a pleasure, don't forget.
Speaker 2: You can download this show and hit that subscribe auto
Speaker 2: download button or the follow button if you're on Apple,
Speaker 2: so you don't miss an episode. Monday, Wednesdays and Fridays
Speaker 2: we do the show, So make sure you download and
Speaker 2: subscribe Center.
Speaker 1: I'll see you back here in a couple of days.