Speaker 1: Welcome in its verdict with Center, Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson
Speaker 1: with you and Senator I think we can just go
Speaker 1: ahead and start the show with simple we told you
Speaker 1: so on this show a long time ago, that there
Speaker 1: was in fact people that were working with the FBI
Speaker 1: in and around January sixth at the Capitol.
Speaker 2: You know, I got to say, at this point, it
Speaker 2: is getting striking. Everything that has decried as a conspiracy
Speaker 2: theory just a few months later is proven right. It
Speaker 2: wasn't that long ago where the media and Democrats were
Speaker 2: screaming if you said the COVID virus escaped from the
Speaker 2: Wuhan lab in China, you were painted as a crazy
Speaker 2: conspiracy theorist until it was confirmed very likely to be true.
Speaker 2: It wasn't that long ago. If you said, as we
Speaker 2: did on this podcast that Joe Biden has deteriorated mentally
Speaker 2: severely and will not be the Democrat nominee for president
Speaker 2: twenty twenty four, that was derided as a crazy conspiracy
Speaker 2: theory until again it was proven right. And it wasn't
Speaker 2: that long ago that if you said that the FBI
Speaker 2: had confidential human sources, had undercover agents at the January
Speaker 2: sixth riots, participating in those riots, as we did on
Speaker 2: this podcast that was decried as a crazy conspiracy theory.
Speaker 2: All three of those statements verdict was ahead of the curve.
Speaker 2: We laid out the facts for them early on, and
Speaker 2: now all three have been proven accurate. This week, the
Speaker 2: Inspector General of the Department of Justice revealed twenty six
Speaker 2: FBI informants were present on January sixth, multiple entered the
Speaker 2: capital and participated in the riots on that day. We're
Speaker 2: going to break all of that down, and we're going
Speaker 2: to lay out how this podcast laid out the evidence
Speaker 2: long before it was now acknowledged publicly. We're also going
Speaker 2: to talk about how the Biden administration in the final
Speaker 2: days it reminds me of you remember in the nineteen nineties,
Speaker 2: in the two thousand those films on Cable of Girls
Speaker 2: Gone Wild. Oh yeah, that is the Biden administration. They're
Speaker 2: drunk and screaming around like crazy and just pushing every
Speaker 2: crazy left wing theory that they have, and this is
Speaker 2: something that pisses me off. We're going to talk about
Speaker 2: the Biden administration is literally trying to auction off portions
Speaker 2: of the border wall that have not been constructed for
Speaker 2: as little as five bucks apiece. Why because they desperately
Speaker 2: don't want Trump to use it, so they're trying to
Speaker 2: basically rob the American taxpayers to keep an open border
Speaker 2: as long as possible. All of that is on today's podcast.
Speaker 3: Yeah, We've got a lot to cover.
Speaker 1: It is the holiday season, and this Christmas and Honika season,
Speaker 1: it is a time of hope and peace for many
Speaker 1: of us, but for those in Israel facing the ongoing war,
Speaker 1: it is a time of fear and a lot of uncertainty.
Speaker 1: The hardships are felt by everyone, with many people struggling
Speaker 1: to afford food and basicness cities during this holiday season.
Speaker 1: Many living through the war in the Holy Land are
Speaker 1: grieving the loss of loved ones while also enduring isolation
Speaker 1: and hunger. We must not let them feel forgotten by
Speaker 1: the rest of the world. And that's why I'm proud
Speaker 1: to say I partner with the International Fellowship of Christians
Speaker 1: and Jews. Now, your special holiday gift to the Fellowship
Speaker 1: helps provide a honk of food box filled with basic
Speaker 1: necessities and essentials to bring nourishment, warmth, and comfort to
Speaker 1: someone in need. So give the gift of hope and
Speaker 1: answered prayers this holiday season. Go to SUPPORTIFCJ dot org
Speaker 1: to donate now, that's support IFCJ dot org. Or you
Speaker 1: can call and give over the phone eight at eight
Speaker 1: four eight eight IFCJ. That's eight eight eight four eight
Speaker 1: eight IFCJ or four three two five. So let's just
Speaker 1: go back in time to start with this FBI story center.
Speaker 1: And I think there's a lot of Americans now that
Speaker 1: are just livid. I want to go back to what
Speaker 1: we already knew and the FBI's refusal to answer your
Speaker 1: question on this exact issue in twenty twenty three told
Speaker 1: us everything we need to know, which has now basically
Speaker 1: become true. Now set this up for everybody, say, know
Speaker 1: who you're talking to before I hit play.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm here questioning a senior official from the FBI,
Speaker 2: Jill Sanborn, about what happened on January sixth, and I'm
Speaker 2: trying to get just some basic facts. And for a
Speaker 2: spoiler alert, the FBI, like the Department of Justice both
Speaker 2: under Joe Biden, just stonewall. They refuse to answer anything.
Speaker 2: So listen back. This is over a year ago, and
Speaker 2: we're going to find out that everything I was asking
Speaker 2: about then well, it's pretty much proven true today. Give
Speaker 2: a listen. How many FBI agents are confidential in fullm
Speaker 2: ormans actively participated in the events of January sixth, Sir,
Speaker 2: I'm sure you can appreciate that. I can't go into
Speaker 2: the specifics of sources and methods. Did any FBI agents
Speaker 2: or confidential informants actively participate in the events of January sixth? Yes, Orday, Sir,
Speaker 2: I can't.
Speaker 4: I can't answer that.
Speaker 2: Did any FBI agents or confidential informants commit crimes of
Speaker 2: violence on January sixth?
Speaker 4: I can't answer that, sir.
Speaker 2: Did any FBI agents or FBI informants actively encourage and
Speaker 2: insight crimes of violence on January sixth?
Speaker 3: Sor, I can't answer that, Miss Sadburn.
Speaker 2: Who is Rey Epps? I'm aware of the individual, Sir,
Speaker 2: I don't have the specific background to him. Well, there
Speaker 2: are a lot of people who are ustandably are stard
Speaker 2: about mister f On the night of January fifth, twenty
Speaker 2: twenty one, Epps wandered around the crowd that had gathered,
Speaker 2: and there's video out there of him channing tomorrow we
Speaker 2: need to get into the capitol. This was strange behavior,
Speaker 2: so strange that the crowd began chanting fed fed Fed,
Speaker 2: Fed Fed Fed, Miss Sandburn, was Ray EPPSA fed? Sir?
Speaker 3: I cannot answer that question.
Speaker 2: The next day, on January sixth, mister F's is seen
Speaker 2: whispering to a person, and five seconds later, five seconds
Speaker 2: after he's whispering to a person, that same person begins
Speaker 2: to forcibly tear down the barricades. Did mister Epps urge
Speaker 2: them to tear down the barricades, Sir?
Speaker 3: Similar to the other answers, I cannot answer that.
Speaker 2: Shortly thereafter, the FBI put out a public posts seeking
Speaker 2: information on individuals connected with violent crimes on January sixth.
Speaker 2: Among those individuals in the bottom there is mister Epps.
Speaker 2: The FBI publicly asked for information identifying offering cash rewards
Speaker 2: leading to information leading for information leading to the arrest.
Speaker 2: This was posted, and then some time later, magically, mister
Speaker 2: Epps disappeared from the public posting. According to public records,
Speaker 2: mister Epps has not been charged with anything. No one's
Speaker 2: explained why a person videoed urging people to go to
Speaker 2: the capital, A person whose conduct was so suspect the
Speaker 2: crowd believed he was a FED would magically disappear from
Speaker 2: the list of people the FBI was looking at. Miss Sandburn.
Speaker 2: A lot of Americans are concerned that the federal government
Speaker 2: deliberately encouraged illegal and violent conduct on January sixth. My
Speaker 2: question to you, and this is not an ordinary law
Speaker 2: enforcement question, this is a question of a public accountability.
Speaker 2: Did federal agents or those in service of federal agent
Speaker 2: actively encourage violent and criminal conduct on January sixth?
Speaker 1: Not to my knowledge, sir, So let me just ask
Speaker 1: the obvious question center, what was the basis and how
Speaker 1: did the FBI, back when you were asking these questions
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty three, get away with not answering one
Speaker 1: of your questions.
Speaker 2: Well, unfortunately, particularly under Joe Biden, both the FBI and
Speaker 2: the DOJ behave as if they are utterly unaccountable to
Speaker 2: Congress and to the American people. So every time I
Speaker 2: asked the Department of Justice or I asked the FBI
Speaker 2: about anything about their abuse of power, about their politicized
Speaker 2: enforcement of justice, about their weaponization, they stonewall. Often they
Speaker 2: will say I don't know, I don't know, I don't
Speaker 2: know that. That has happened many times when you ask
Speaker 2: about them or they refuse to answer reasonable questions, or
Speaker 2: they do is they just as they do just there
Speaker 2: they say, they just stonewall.
Speaker 1: I can tell you, is that because that you don't
Speaker 1: have to worry about like any.
Speaker 3: Consequences.
Speaker 1: I mean they go into the meeting clearly saying, if
Speaker 1: there's a question you don't want I answer, just don't
Speaker 1: answer it.
Speaker 2: So, yes, there are several reasons. Number one, under the Democrats.
Speaker 2: And remember the Democrats have the majority in the Senate
Speaker 2: right now. So no Democrat cares about the answer to
Speaker 2: this question. No Democrat asks these questions. No Democrat will
Speaker 2: enforce a subpoena, no Democrat will vote for a subpoena,
Speaker 2: No Democrat will do anything do in post consequences. But
Speaker 2: not only that, Merrick Garland and the entire Department of
Speaker 2: Justice and the FBI, I think they have an arrogance
Speaker 2: that they believe they don't answer to anyone. And I'll
Speaker 2: tell you this is a problem that is extended. It's
Speaker 2: been a bipartisan problem. It's been a problem at DOJ
Speaker 2: and the FBI through Republican and Democrat administrations. I can
Speaker 2: tell you I spent over an hour today meeting with
Speaker 2: Cash Patel, who's President Trump's nominee to run the FBI.
Speaker 2: I met previously with Pam Bondi, who's President Trump's nominee
Speaker 2: to be the Department of Justice. I am hopeful that
Speaker 2: both of them. I think both will be confirmed, and
Speaker 2: I'm hopeful that both of them will bring much much
Speaker 2: greater transparency to the Department of Justice and the FBI
Speaker 2: than we have seen under Joe Biden. That they will
Speaker 2: answer these questions, and based on the conversations I've had
Speaker 2: with them, I have real reason to be helpful because
Speaker 2: they're telling me that they intend to substantially increase the transparency.
Speaker 2: I think that's an obligation. I can tell you I
Speaker 2: have had this conversation directly with Chris Ray repeatedly, and
Speaker 2: he views his job as I've got to protect the FBI,
Speaker 2: and so when his people's stonewall, he's just going to
Speaker 2: circle the wagons around them and try to try to
Speaker 2: protect their stonewalling. And I think there's an obligation, particularly
Speaker 2: on something such as the riots on January sixth, where
Speaker 2: there is intense public concern, what was the involvement of
Speaker 2: the federal government of the FBI, and listen, we now know,
Speaker 2: not through any transparency from the FBI, but instead the
Speaker 2: Inspector General of the Department of Justice, Michael Horowitz, put
Speaker 2: out a report, and the report concluded just this week
Speaker 2: that twenty six FBI informants were present on January sixth
Speaker 2: in the crowd outside the Capitol, only three were assigned
Speaker 2: by the FBI to be present for the event. And
Speaker 2: now the Inspector General report stresses that none of the
Speaker 2: sources were authorized or directed by the bureau to quote
Speaker 2: break the law or quote encourage others to commit illegal acts.
Speaker 2: Now that's they weren't authorized and to do so. But
Speaker 2: what it doesn't say conclusively is they didn't do so.
Speaker 2: The report says, quote. Today's report also details our findings
Speaker 2: regarding FBI confidential human sources who were in Washington, d C.
Speaker 2: On January sixth. Our review determined that none of these
Speaker 2: FBI confidential human sources was authorized by the FBI to
Speaker 2: enter the capital or restricted area or to otherwise break
Speaker 2: the law on January sixth, nor was any confidential human
Speaker 2: source directed by the FBI to encourage others to commit
Speaker 2: illegal acts on January sixth.
Speaker 1: However, that sounds like some lawyer terms I know you're
Speaker 1: reading this, and I want to read. So it is
Speaker 1: it's written by weren't encouraged to break the law, like
Speaker 1: that's that's some that is written by a lawyer.
Speaker 2: No, no, no, no, no, you're actually you missed one of
Speaker 2: the verbs. I'm ready directed by the FBI to encourage
Speaker 2: others to committee the illegal acts. So there's a double that.
Speaker 2: There's a double set of verbs. It's saying the FBI
Speaker 2: did not order them to encourage others to commit illegal acts.
Speaker 2: That doesn't say they didn't encourage others, They didn't incite
Speaker 2: others to committee legal acts. It just says they weren't
Speaker 2: ordered by the FBI to do so. And it also
Speaker 2: says they weren't authorized to enter the capital or the
Speaker 2: restricted area. But interestingly enough, it concludes, however, that they
Speaker 2: went far beyond their authorization. So three confidential human sources,
Speaker 2: according to this report, were tasked by the FBI to
Speaker 2: attend the rally, and one of the three tasked by
Speaker 2: the FBI to attend the rally entered the Capitol building, which,
Speaker 2: minds you, the Biden Department of Justice contends is illegal
Speaker 2: and they're prosecuting people for it. The other two entered
Speaker 2: the restricted area around the Capitol, which I believe they
Speaker 2: are also prosecuting people for doing. And one thing to
Speaker 2: understand that if a confidential human source is directed to
Speaker 2: be at an event by the FBI, they're being paid
Speaker 2: by the FBI for their time. Here's what the report says. Quote.
Speaker 2: One FBI field office tasked a confidential human source to
Speaker 2: travel to DC to report on the activities of a
Speaker 2: predicted domestic terrorism subject who was separately planning to travel
Speaker 2: to d C for the January sixth electoral certification. A
Speaker 2: second FBI field office t a confidential human source to
Speaker 2: travel to DC to potentially report on two domestic terrorism
Speaker 2: subjects from another FBI field office who were planning to
Speaker 2: travel to DC for the events of January sixth. And
Speaker 2: a third confidential human source who had informed their handling
Speaker 2: agent that they intended to travel to d C on
Speaker 2: their own initiative for the events of January sixth, was
Speaker 2: similarly tasked by their field office to potentially report on
Speaker 2: two domestic terrorism subjects from other FBI field offices who
Speaker 2: were planning to travel to DC for the events of
Speaker 2: January sixth. Twenty three of the confidential human sources present
Speaker 2: on January sixth came to the Capitol on their own.
Speaker 2: So of the twenty sixth that we were.
Speaker 1: Sorry, this is where my BS monitor goes off center.
Speaker 1: You're telling me that on January sixth, I'm supposed to
Speaker 1: believe that over twenty FBI informants just on their own accord,
Speaker 1: not being paid, not being directed by anyone in our government,
Speaker 1: just said no, let's go to January sixth and just
Speaker 1: see what happens.
Speaker 2: Well, that's what the report says. And it says of
Speaker 2: those twenty three, three entered the Capitol during the riot,
Speaker 2: and an additional eleven sources entered the restricted area around
Speaker 2: the capitol.
Speaker 1: So if eleven are restricted areas and three are inside,
Speaker 1: then my next question is how many of them have
Speaker 1: been charged with crimes?
Speaker 2: Well, the report doesn't answer that. And mind you, look,
Speaker 2: these are questions. These are all the questions that I
Speaker 2: was asking the FBI years ago, and that they were
Speaker 2: refusing to answer, and and and their view, there's an arrogance.
Speaker 2: They don't think the they owe the American people an answer,
Speaker 2: and and and and mind you, this FBI has has
Speaker 2: a bad pattern. If you look at the they brought
Speaker 2: a domestic terrorism case in Michigan. If you if you
Speaker 2: recall with the individuals that that were charged with attempting
Speaker 2: to kidnap and murder the governor Michigan, and and they
Speaker 2: prosecuted them, and they ended up having the case thrown
Speaker 2: out because because they concluded the FBI agents and trapped
Speaker 2: these guys that it was basically uh confidential human sources
Speaker 2: in the FBI that were saying, hey, don't you think
Speaker 2: this is a good idea. Let's let's let's go kidnap
Speaker 2: and murder the governor. And and the basic rule of
Speaker 2: criminal law is the federal government can't go entice you
Speaker 2: to commit a crime, all right.
Speaker 1: So so so then let's go back to January sixth
Speaker 1: that day and the questions that you were asking if
Speaker 1: if any of these FBI informants who are there on
Speaker 1: their own accord, is they want us to believe? Over
Speaker 1: twenty are there.
Speaker 2: And by the way, three were directed by the FBI
Speaker 2: to be.
Speaker 1: There, right, So if if the three that are being
Speaker 1: directed or directing people to commit crimes, let's start with
Speaker 1: those three then and then we'll move on to the
Speaker 1: other twenty.
Speaker 3: What does the law say about that? And the caple.
Speaker 2: So nothing in the report says whether these twenty six
Speaker 2: directed anyone to commit crimes.
Speaker 3: Correct.
Speaker 2: What the report says is the FBI didn't instruct them
Speaker 2: to encourage others to commit crimes. If you're whether they write.
Speaker 1: It or not, right, If you're a whay you're writing that,
Speaker 1: why are you writing it that way?
Speaker 3: Explain that? What is the strategy here? Is that?
Speaker 1: Because you and I know what the answer probably is,
Speaker 1: so therefore they're writing it that way.
Speaker 2: You know, Look, I don't know, and I will say
Speaker 2: I believe we will know much much more about this,
Speaker 2: uh in the next couple of months, once we have
Speaker 2: Pambondi and cash Ptel confirmed. I think they will release
Speaker 2: significantly more information to the public. I think they both
Speaker 2: understand the public has a right to know what was
Speaker 2: the FBI, what was the FBI's level of involvement, what
Speaker 2: was the culpability. I think there is significant public interest
Speaker 2: in the answers to that, and I think the Biden
Speaker 2: Department of Justice desperately wants to avoid anyone from knowing that.
Speaker 2: But you know what, that's the Democrats lost the election,
Speaker 2: and elections have consequences.
Speaker 1: So let's talk about the lie aspect of this real
Speaker 1: quick and what this means. Will there be accountability for
Speaker 1: the administration? Will there be accountability for the FBI if
Speaker 1: more of this comes out? Because revealing that twenty six
Speaker 1: FBI informants were presented, President, I should say on January
Speaker 1: the sixth, that is going against what we've been told
Speaker 1: since January the sixth.
Speaker 2: Well, to be fair, it's not clear to me that
Speaker 2: the FBI lied about this. We started this podcast playing
Speaker 2: my cross examination of a senior FBI official, and she
Speaker 2: just refused to answer me. She didn't lie, she didn't
Speaker 2: say no, they weren't there. She just said, I can't
Speaker 2: tell you that. I can't tell you that. I can't
Speaker 2: tell you that. So that's not a lie. That's not
Speaker 2: something that could be prosecuted for lying under oath Congress,
Speaker 2: because she just refused. That was stonewalling, that was a
Speaker 2: view I owe no responsibility to Congress. And understand listen
Speaker 2: at a hearing when members of Congress are questioning the administration.
Speaker 2: We're not doing so for our own edification. We're not
Speaker 2: doing so just because we think it'd be fun. We're
Speaker 2: doing so because we're trying to fulfill our responsibility to
Speaker 2: our constituents, in my case, to the thirty million Texans
Speaker 2: whom I represent, and ask questions on behalf of those
Speaker 2: Texans that I think they have a right to know
Speaker 2: and they have an interest in knowing. And so when
Speaker 2: the FBI and the Department of Justice arrogantly say I
Speaker 2: won't answer that, they're telling the American people you have
Speaker 2: no right to know what's going on. And I got
Speaker 2: to say, there is a reason. I don't think there
Speaker 2: is a single institution of government whose credibility and respect
Speaker 2: has been diminished more in the last four years than
Speaker 2: the FBI. And listen, that's tragic, I'm to tell you.
Speaker 1: By the way, the American people right now, it's it's
Speaker 1: like fifty over fifty one percent, if I remember correctly
Speaker 1: in the poet saw just the other day, say they
Speaker 1: do not have faith in the FBI.
Speaker 3: That is a travesty.
Speaker 2: Yeah. Look, And as I said, I spent over an
Speaker 2: hour talking with Cash Hotel today in my office, and
Speaker 2: one of the things I told him is I said,
Speaker 2: regularly in Texas when I'm back home, people will ask me,
Speaker 2: shouldn't we abolish the FBI, And I tell them, no, Look,
Speaker 2: the FBI does hugely important things. They stop terrorists are
Speaker 2: trying to murder Americans, they stop serial killers, they stop
Speaker 2: ch child predators and kidnappers. All of that. There is
Speaker 2: a massively important law enforcement and national security mission for
Speaker 2: the FBI. And one of the massive negative consequences of
Speaker 2: Joe Biden the Democrats weaponizing the FBI and DJ is
Speaker 2: far too many of their officials are spending time going
Speaker 2: after and trying to persecute the enemies of the White
Speaker 2: House rather than going after actual terrorists who want to
Speaker 2: murder Americans. And it is it I think, and I
Speaker 2: told Cashptell this today. I think he has He and
Speaker 2: Pam Bondy may have the two most difficult jobs in
Speaker 2: the entire administration because they have been nominated to restore
Speaker 2: integrity to two institutions that are tremendously important to the
Speaker 2: rule of law and keeping Americans safe.
Speaker 1: All Right, final question on this, because I want to
Speaker 1: move on to some of the other stuff. But I
Speaker 1: do think this is a very important question. If you
Speaker 1: are someone who has been convicted of all the crimes
Speaker 1: that they threw at you, you took a plea deal
Speaker 1: because you were so afraid of what the government was
Speaker 1: going to do to you because you were in and
Speaker 1: or around January sixth.
Speaker 3: Let's say you're an individual that was.
Speaker 1: Not violent, for example, and was not attacking the capital
Speaker 1: on that day, but you were there and they came
Speaker 1: after you. How could this affect your case now? Knowing
Speaker 1: and what does this mean for your status if you're
Speaker 1: in jail right now, knowing that this report reveals twenty
Speaker 1: six FPI formants were president on January sixth. With the
Speaker 1: questions now that we're talking about could that change your case?
Speaker 2: Well, it depends, could it?
Speaker 3: Sure?
Speaker 2: And listen, I have long said there's a fundamental distinction
Speaker 2: between those who commit crimes of violence and those who
Speaker 2: do not. If you commit a crime of violence, if
Speaker 2: you violently assault a police officer, I believe you should
Speaker 2: be prosecutor. I think you should go to jail. I
Speaker 2: don't think anybody has a right to assault a police officer.
Speaker 2: And that is true whether I happen to agree with
Speaker 2: your politics or disagree with your politics, nobody has a
Speaker 2: right to commit violence. Nobody has a right to violently
Speaker 2: attack a police officer. The flip side of that, everybody
Speaker 2: has a right to engage in peaceful protest and peaceful speech.
Speaker 2: And by the way, that's true whether I agree with
Speaker 2: you or disagree with you, I may love what you're saying,
Speaker 2: or I may hate what you're saying. You might be
Speaker 2: a complete idiot knucklehead. You might be a klansman or
Speaker 2: a Nazi or whatever. And I despise klansmen and Nazis.
Speaker 2: But you know what, they have a right to speak
Speaker 2: under the First Amendment. They don't have a right to
Speaker 2: commit acts of violence, but they do have a right
Speaker 2: to speak. Everyone has a right to speak. And what
Speaker 2: the Biden Justice Department has done is it is used
Speaker 2: a limited number of acts of violence as an excuse
Speaker 2: I believe to target and persecute a large number of
Speaker 2: people who are engaged in peaceful speech and protest. Now,
Speaker 2: I have, over and over and over again asked the
Speaker 2: Biden Department of Justice simple questions. How many people have
Speaker 2: been prosecuted for crimes of violence on January six? How
Speaker 2: many people have been prosecuted for nonviolent offenses on January six?
Speaker 2: How many people are in solitary confinement. They refuse to
Speaker 2: answer every question I've asked them in writing. They won't
Speaker 2: answer in writing. I've asked them in hearings. They won't
Speaker 2: answer in hearings. They stonewall, and they stonewall and they stonewall.
Speaker 2: It's infuriating. And you know, when I go home to Texas,
Speaker 2: people ask me those questions and I tell them frustratingly,
Speaker 2: I don't know the answer. Because the Department of Justice
Speaker 2: has the answer, they will not tell us. Well, here's
Speaker 2: the good news. I think they're getting ready to tell us.
Speaker 2: And I think they're getting ready to tell us because
Speaker 2: when Donald Trump becomes the president puts new leadership there.
Speaker 2: I think they understand that they're accountable to the American
Speaker 2: people in a way that the arrogance of this current
Speaker 2: administration believes they have zero accountability.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the question that many are asking is was this entrapment?
Speaker 1: And more importantly, why did it take us four years
Speaker 1: to learn about this? And that is I hope what
Speaker 1: we get some answers to as you're mentioning in this
Speaker 1: in this new administration. Amen, I want to get to
Speaker 1: this other story, and it deals with the border security,
Speaker 1: in the border wall. But before we do that, let
Speaker 1: me tell you about our friends over at Patriot Mobile.
Speaker 1: If you are like and you are just sick and
Speaker 1: tired of giving your money to companies who are actually
Speaker 1: fighting against your values, your family values, your Christian values. Well,
Speaker 1: if you've got a cell phone bill, you need to
Speaker 1: check who you're giving your money to, because Big Mobile
Speaker 1: has been giving big donations for years and years and
Speaker 1: years to radical democratic causes, candidates and organizations. I'm talking
Speaker 1: at the local, state, and national level. They've also been
Speaker 1: giving your money to organizations that support abortion on demand
Speaker 1: and are even paying for abortions. That is why Patriot
Speaker 1: Mobile was founded more than a decade ago by a
Speaker 1: group of conservatives Christians that said, hey, we got to
Speaker 1: have a cell phone, but why do we have to
Speaker 1: give our mind to people that are fighting against what
Speaker 1: we believe in. Well, in twenty twenty four, it is
Speaker 1: easier now than ever to.
Speaker 3: Make the switch.
Speaker 1: And when you do make the switch to Patriot Mobile,
Speaker 1: you're going to get the same nationwide coverage is the
Speaker 1: big providers, because Patriot Mobile operates on all three major networks,
Speaker 1: plus they backed up service with a coverage guarantee. Now,
Speaker 1: the best part is when you pay your bill, you're
Speaker 1: actually supporting and fighting for your First and Second Amendment rights,
Speaker 1: the sanctity of life, as well as sending with our military,
Speaker 1: our first responders, and our wounded warriors. Patriot Mobile takes
Speaker 1: about five percent of your bill every month at no
Speaker 1: extra cost to you, and they actually give it back
Speaker 1: to those to these types of organizations and causes that
Speaker 1: I just mentioned.
Speaker 3: So make the switch.
Speaker 1: You're gonna have a cell phone bill, why not make
Speaker 1: sure you're making a difference every month when you pay it.
Speaker 1: Go to Patriot Mobile dot com slash verdict. That's Patriot
Speaker 1: Mobile dot com slash verdict, or call them ninety seven
Speaker 1: to two Patriot right now, and you're gonna get a
Speaker 1: free month when you use the offer code verdict.
Speaker 3: So join me.
Speaker 1: Switch to America's only Christian conservative mobile provider, Patriot Mobile
Speaker 1: dot com slash verdict or nine to seven to Patriot
Speaker 1: for that free month of service today.
Speaker 3: All right, so let's go to the border.
Speaker 1: And this might be one of the biggest just asinine
Speaker 1: middle fingers from this administration. I don't know how you
Speaker 1: want to categorize this one, but when I saw this report,
Speaker 1: it actually made me angry. And that is that the
Speaker 1: Biden administration is saying, Hey, we don't respect the voters,
Speaker 1: We do not respect that the American people decided we
Speaker 1: want security at our southern border, and what are they
Speaker 1: doing to stick it to you? They're saying, all right,
Speaker 1: watch this, We're going to sell pieces of the border
Speaker 1: wall that have not been erected yet, just to say
Speaker 1: screw you to the American people.
Speaker 2: You know, I wish what you were saying was hyperbole.
Speaker 2: I wish it was an exaggeration, but it's not. The
Speaker 2: Daily Wire broke this story, and it's an exclusive story
Speaker 2: that is just it's stunning, it's infuriating. Here's the headline, exclusive,
Speaker 2: Biden races to sell off border wall parts before Trump
Speaker 2: takes office. The goal is to move all of it,
Speaker 2: all of it off the border before Christmas, an Arizona
Speaker 2: Border Patrol agent tells the Daily Wire. Let me read
Speaker 2: from this story. The Biden administration is using its final
Speaker 2: weeks to haul a massive amount of border wall materials
Speaker 2: away from the southern border to be sold off in
Speaker 2: a government auction on apparent effort to hinder President elect
Speaker 2: Trump's efforts to secure the border. The Daily Wire has learned.
Speaker 2: Videos obtained exclusively by The Daily Wire from a US
Speaker 2: Customs and Border Patrol agent show unused sections of the
Speaker 2: wall being hauled away on the back of flatbed trucks
Speaker 2: from a section of the border just south of Tucson,
Speaker 2: a hotspot for illegal crossings during the Biden administration. The
Speaker 2: agent estimates that up to a half mile per day
Speaker 2: of unused border wall is being moved. This is not
Speaker 2: a small amount, this is a massive amount. Continuing the
Speaker 2: quote quote, they are taking it from three stations, Nogalis, Tucson,
Speaker 2: and three points. The Border patrol agent, who was granted
Speaker 2: anonymity to speak freely, told the Daily Wire the goal
Speaker 2: is to move it all off the border before Christmas.
Speaker 2: And here's something If that doesn't make you furious, listen, listen,
Speaker 2: listen to this. The auction website shows that sales occurred
Speaker 2: as recently as December fourth, for precisely the types of
Speaker 2: materials being pulled off the border. Gov Planet has online
Speaker 2: auction set for December eleventh and December eighteenth for more
Speaker 2: border wall material, which is listed on the company's website
Speaker 2: as quote thirty two point nine to one feet by
Speaker 2: seven point nine to one feet steel ballered wall sections
Speaker 2: with grout. The bidding for each section of wall panels
Speaker 2: is set to begin at five dollars according to the website,
Speaker 2: and this article has multiple screenshots showing showing these being
Speaker 2: sold for five bucks apiece. I got to say, we
Speaker 2: talked in the first segment about the arrogance and unaccountability
Speaker 2: of the Biden Justice Department, of the Biden FBI. This is,
Speaker 2: at the end of the day, that identical arrogance, and
Speaker 2: it's an arrogance of Joe Biden, of Kamala Harris, of
Speaker 2: Alejandro Majorcis, of Merrick Garland. And let's be clear of
Speaker 2: Chuck Schumer and the Senate Democrats and Congressional Democrats. Every
Speaker 2: person in America knows that the voters of America voted
Speaker 2: to secure the border. They want that to happen. And
Speaker 2: you know what the Democrats are saying on the way out,
Speaker 2: screw you. We don't care. We don't care about the voters.
Speaker 2: And what we're going to do. If Trump's going to
Speaker 2: build the border wall, We're going to make it that
Speaker 2: much more expensive because we are so bitterly ideological that
Speaker 2: we will openly defy the will of the voters.
Speaker 3: And let's just be honest about the logic.
Speaker 1: If you're just talking about that, the logical math that
Speaker 1: you do here, there's no doubt that the Biden administration
Speaker 1: knows that this wall will be used, and if they
Speaker 1: do sell it all off before Chris at five dollars
Speaker 1: a panel, that this is going to have to be
Speaker 1: repurchased at a much higher price because they just sold
Speaker 1: what we had purchased before that has not been used
Speaker 1: and it will be used and it will be done.
Speaker 1: So this is just trying to make the American taxpayer
Speaker 1: suffer a little bit and to say we can't stand
Speaker 1: you and what you guys just voted for. This is
Speaker 1: a retribution for you voting them out of office and
Speaker 1: their way of sticking it to the American voter and taxpayer.
Speaker 2: Well, that's right now. I will say there's an aspect
Speaker 2: of this story that broke tonight. You and I are
Speaker 2: recording this very late at night. It's twelve fifty seven
Speaker 2: in the morning, Thursday night, and just this evening, the
Speaker 2: Lieutenant Governor of Texas, Dan Patrick, a good friend of mine,
Speaker 2: went on Laura Ingram Show, and he said the state
Speaker 2: of Texas is preparing to buy up the border wall
Speaker 2: segments from the Biden administration that they're selling for five
Speaker 2: bucks apiece and then donate them back to the Trump administration,
Speaker 2: and Dan Patrick says he has up to a billion
Speaker 2: dollars of state funds to work with. I want you
Speaker 2: to listen to Dan Patrick this evening on Laura Ingram
Speaker 2: laying this out.
Speaker 4: We mean business in Texas, and Tom Holmans means business
Speaker 4: and President Trump means business. And I don't know if
Speaker 4: you heard the latest today, Laura, but Joe Biden is
Speaker 4: now hauling off the border wall that's been lying down
Speaker 4: for years, and he wants to auction it off, starting
Speaker 4: at five dollars a piece. Message to your White House
Speaker 4: right now. I will bid on all of that wall,
Speaker 4: and we will buy it in Texas and we will
Speaker 4: give it to Donald Trump. So I'm going to find
Speaker 4: out first thing in the morning. Where are we going
Speaker 4: to take the bid. I've got a billion dollars in
Speaker 4: my pocket to do it. I write the budget with
Speaker 4: Senator Joan Hoffman.
Speaker 2: We have the money.
Speaker 3: We're going to have about.
Speaker 4: Six billion in our budget for bordershipper.
Speaker 3: Down Joe by the costs, don't drive up the costs.
Speaker 1: It's only five bucks of five bucks, I noticed to
Speaker 1: the wall, and I will go in and buy it all.
Speaker 3: Ye I'm tell you, yeah. Well, what does this tell
Speaker 3: you about the Biden people?
Speaker 4: Tells you they're essentially green lights.
Speaker 3: There a lot more people coming in.
Speaker 4: Yeah, they're despicable what they're doing to the American people,
Speaker 4: and the American people obviously aren't tolerated. That's why they
Speaker 4: were thrown out. But the idea, We've been trying to
Speaker 4: buy this wall form from them for four years and
Speaker 4: they wouldn't sell it to us.
Speaker 2: And you know what, I'm going to.
Speaker 4: Check in with our Department of Public Safety. Maybe we
Speaker 4: need to start pulling over these trucks to be sure
Speaker 4: they don't have too much weight on those trucks. Maybe
Speaker 4: these trucks need to be slowed down. We need to
Speaker 4: do everything we can in Texas to stop them. The
Speaker 4: taxpayers paid for this, and they want to stop President
Speaker 4: Trump in thirty eight or thirty nine days from rebuilding
Speaker 4: the wall. I want to This is the legacy of
Speaker 4: Joe Biden. He lets off his son, he's letting off
Speaker 4: all these criminals. He's doing everything he can with these
Speaker 4: blue state governors and mayors to destroy this country. They
Speaker 4: are traders to this country, leaving terrorists, leaving murders, leaving
Speaker 4: rapist in this country, and now he wants to sabotage
Speaker 4: this president before he takes off. It is disgraceful and
Speaker 4: discussing he will go down as the worst, most despicable
Speaker 4: president in the history of this country because no one
Speaker 4: has done more to damage this country and hurt American citizens.
Speaker 3: I would agree with you on that.
Speaker 1: I think the point he's making here is absolutely right.
Speaker 1: But even if it's five hours, you're double paying for
Speaker 1: something that we've already paid for, and it's just solely
Speaker 1: out of spite.
Speaker 2: Well, and let me say number one, thank god for Texas.
Speaker 2: Thank god for Texas stepping in into that leading Dan,
Speaker 2: I'm glad you're doing that, but I've got to say also, listen,
Speaker 2: I'm going to call on the incoming administration to investigate
Speaker 2: whoever made the decision to do this. And let me
Speaker 2: be clear. Let's say you're a government official, Ben and
Speaker 2: you're pissed off at the people who are coming in
Speaker 2: after you. They're mad at You're mad at the voters
Speaker 2: because they elected someone different. And let's say, for example,
Speaker 2: that you're running you're running a police department. Your dad's
Speaker 2: a cop, You're running a police department, and you've got
Speaker 2: a bunch of police cars that let's say we're forty
Speaker 2: grand apiece, and you're mad because there's a new sheriff
Speaker 2: that's been elected, and so you decide to take the
Speaker 2: forty thousand dollars police cars. Let's say you got ten
Speaker 2: of them, and you go out and say, I'm going
Speaker 2: to auction the forty thousand dollars police cars off for
Speaker 2: five bucks apiece because you want your successor not to
Speaker 2: have any police cars. And so you sell forty thousand
Speaker 2: dollars police cars for five bucks apiece. I'm going to
Speaker 2: tell you right now that is theft from the taxpayers.
Speaker 2: The idea, I guarantee you those segments of the wall.
Speaker 2: They don't cost five dollars, they don't cost fifty dollars,
Speaker 2: they don't cost five hundred dollars, they don't cost five
Speaker 2: thousand dollars. And I got to say it is grotesque,
Speaker 2: and I am calling right now for the incoming administration
Speaker 2: to investigate every person that made the decision to steal
Speaker 2: from the American taxpayers because they are such bitter partisans
Speaker 2: that they want to deprive the federal government of assets
Speaker 2: that the taxpayers paid for. You don't have the right
Speaker 2: to do that it doesn't matter. Nobody has the right
Speaker 2: to steal from the federal government. If you're selling segments
Speaker 2: of this wall for five bucks apiece, that, in my view,
Speaker 2: is absolute theft.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I couldn't agree with you more.
Speaker 1: Don't forget to share this podcast wherever you are on
Speaker 1: social media so people can hear what we're exposing on
Speaker 1: the show.
Speaker 3: Every day.
Speaker 1: Hit that subscribe or follow or auto download button. Make
Speaker 1: sure you listen to this Monday, Wednesday, Friday my show.
Speaker 1: I'll keep you up to date on what's happening on
Speaker 1: those in between days. So grab the Ben Ferguson podcast
Speaker 1: as well, and I'll keep you updated there and the
Speaker 1: center and I will see you back here also for
Speaker 1: our week in review, which we do if what you
Speaker 1: may have missed some big stories during the week. We
Speaker 1: do a weekend review on Saturday, so you can grab
Speaker 1: that as well, and we'll see you back here Saturday morning.