Speaker 1: Welcome.
Speaker 2: It is verdic with Center, Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with
Speaker 2: you and Cenator. This might be one of the craziest
Speaker 2: stories that I've seen in a while. The media and
Speaker 2: Democrats are now urging the White House to pardon a
Speaker 2: list that they're putting together. They're claiming that it's Trump
Speaker 2: so ledged enemies lists, but it's not. It's their list
Speaker 2: of people they're afraid might get in trouble with the law.
Speaker 1: And this is shocking.
Speaker 3: Well, the fallout from Joe Biden's pardon of Hunter Biden continues.
Speaker 3: One of the things we saw this week is the
Speaker 3: federal judge overseeing the criminal tax case against Hunter Biden
Speaker 3: slammed President Joe Biden for his incredibly dishonest press statement
Speaker 3: that accompanied the pardon and laid out that it is
Speaker 3: completely false and dishonest. We're going to talk about that,
Speaker 3: and then we're going to talk about what you just
Speaker 3: mentioned that we are seeing a full on lobbying effort
Speaker 3: by Democrats and by the corporate media. They want Joe
Speaker 3: Biden to pardon everyone. They want him to issue blanket
Speaker 3: pardons across the board. It is an incredibly open, brazen
Speaker 3: invitation for Joe Biden to abuse his power, for him
Speaker 3: to continue the weaponization of law enforcement. You know, they're
Speaker 3: two components to weaponization. One is targeting your enemies, but
Speaker 3: the other is protecting your friends. And the corporate media
Speaker 3: is being quite open that they want Joe Biden on
Speaker 3: his way out to protect all of his friends in
Speaker 3: a way that would be not only utterly corrupt, but
Speaker 3: without precedent in our nation's history. We're going to break
Speaker 3: that down in detail.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's truly incredible, and the list is one with
Speaker 2: some very very interesting names on it. I want to
Speaker 2: talk to you real quick about Berna and increased crime
Speaker 2: and violence around our country has just unfortunately gotten worse,
Speaker 2: and many people the number one thing that they care
Speaker 2: about is their personal safety and security. And if you
Speaker 2: have kids or grandkids, maybe they are eighteen or older
Speaker 2: living you know, off campus at college, maybe they're living
Speaker 2: on their own an apartment.
Speaker 1: You worry about them, but they're not twenty one yet.
Speaker 2: Or maybe you have someone in your family that doesn't
Speaker 2: feel condable carrying a firearm. Well that is where the
Speaker 2: Berna less lethal launcher comes in. It's an unbelievably effective
Speaker 2: way to defend yourself and de escalate a situation without
Speaker 2: the irreversible consequence of using deadly force. Now, look, I've
Speaker 2: had to use a real gun to protect myself and
Speaker 2: save my life. I had to pull the trigger. And
Speaker 2: I can tell you I love this burn a less
Speaker 2: lethal pistol because it gives me another option. Berna can
Speaker 2: save two lives. It's a great compliment to owning a firearm. Now,
Speaker 2: if you or your family is in a situation where
Speaker 2: you feel threatened, you can start with less lethal and
Speaker 2: this is legal in all fifty states. There are no
Speaker 2: permits or background checks needed. Now I own this myself
Speaker 2: and I've given them to lots lots of my family
Speaker 2: members so that they can protect themselves. Burna is a
Speaker 2: simple answer so that you can protect yourself. It's easy
Speaker 2: to use all age groups eighteen or older. The Burner
Speaker 2: launcher has powerful deterrence like tear gas and kinetic rounds,
Speaker 2: with a sixty foot range, meaning there's a lot of
Speaker 2: room between you and that threat, and one shot can
Speaker 2: incapacitate attacker for up to forty minutes. It's used by
Speaker 2: government agencies and law enforcing around the country, with over
Speaker 2: a half million units sold and I want to save
Speaker 2: you money. Go to Burnaby RNA dot com slash verdict.
Speaker 2: That's BYRNA dot com slash verdict for ten percent off
Speaker 2: your purchase that you can also see the videos there,
Speaker 2: so you know exactly how this works and you're going
Speaker 2: to be amazed like I was. That's by RNA dot
Speaker 2: com slash verdict for ten percent off all right centater
Speaker 2: So this all manifested out of the Hunter Biden pardon.
Speaker 2: It was such a broad pardon over a decade, for
Speaker 2: a multitude of sins. It started right when he started
Speaker 2: working for Barisma in Ukraine, if you want to timestamp
Speaker 2: this all the way up until basically now, and Democrats
Speaker 2: and the media are saying, Okay, that's not enough. They
Speaker 2: also seem to be wanting to give cover to Joe
Speaker 2: Biden to pardon everyone with the last name Biden and
Speaker 2: also give himself a pardon, which there's some issues with
Speaker 2: the law there. I want you to dive into that obviously,
Speaker 2: But are you shocked by how quick they're throwing out
Speaker 2: names of who they're worried about.
Speaker 3: Look, I think they are panicking. I think they are
Speaker 3: terrified about the incoming Department of Justice, about the incoming
Speaker 3: leadership of the FBI. They're terrified about Pam Bondy as
Speaker 3: Attorney General, They're terrified about Cash Battel as the director
Speaker 3: of the FBI, and they're scrambling to seek cover. You know,
Speaker 3: I will say the Hunter Biden pardon it is something
Speaker 3: that on this podcast we predicted a year ago. In
Speaker 3: January of this year, we predicted that Joe Biden would
Speaker 3: pardon Hunter Biden, and in fact we predicted that it
Speaker 3: was going to be in December of twenty twenty four. Well,
Speaker 3: as it so happened, it was December first that Joe
Speaker 3: Biden issued the pardon. He did it after spending an
Speaker 3: entire year lying about it over and over and over again,
Speaker 3: saying he would not pardon Hunter.
Speaker 4: He would not pardon Hunter.
Speaker 3: Kareem Jean Pierre, the White House Press Secretary, repeatedly just
Speaker 3: flat out lied. Multiple Democrats went on TV and flat
Speaker 3: out lied. The media flat out lied, and Ben We
Speaker 3: analyzed this in depth in Monday's podcast And by the way,
Speaker 3: if you didn't listen to Monday's podcasts, I'd encourage you
Speaker 3: to go back and listen to it.
Speaker 4: It was one of our most downloaded podcasts.
Speaker 3: We've ever done, because it really it breaks down how
Speaker 3: this was an absolute abuse of power, and it was
Speaker 3: also completely predictable. When Joe was saying, I'm not going
Speaker 3: to pardon Hunter, he was lying. Everybody knew he was lying.
Speaker 3: He knew he was lying, The people listening to him
Speaker 3: knew he was lying, the reporters knew he was lying.
Speaker 3: Kreean Jean Pierre knew he was lying. The Democrat senators
Speaker 3: who echoed those claims knew he was lying. And yet
Speaker 3: they were perfectly willing to lie as a political matter.
Speaker 2: And by the way, it even came out since we
Speaker 2: did the last show, reporting now from NBC News, and
Speaker 2: it was also reported by the New York Times that
Speaker 2: they were lying and planning for this pardon all the
Speaker 2: way back in June. And of course they were sources,
Speaker 2: but I mean they were going on TV, including the media,
Speaker 2: which is state sponsored media, when they're doing this, lying
Speaker 2: deliberately the American people knowing that they were already planning
Speaker 2: for this well.
Speaker 3: And it was in June of this year that I
Speaker 3: said on this podcast, the odds that Joe Biden will
Speaker 3: parter pardon Hunter Biden are one one hundred percent. It
Speaker 3: is absolutely certain he is lying, and everyone knows he's lying.
Speaker 4: Now they're quite open about oh yeah, we lied about it.
Speaker 4: Of course we did.
Speaker 3: And they're just trying to say, well, he's just being
Speaker 3: a dad. Every dad loves his son. Wouldn't you do this?
Speaker 3: And let's be clear, Number one, every dad would not
Speaker 3: lie to the American people for a year about it.
Speaker 3: If you were going to do it, then then you
Speaker 3: shouldn't lie about it. But number two, this is about
Speaker 3: protecting Joe. This is about protecting his own corruption. And
Speaker 3: I got to say, all right, So the federal judge
Speaker 3: who's overseeing the criminal tax case, Judge Mark Scarcy in California,
Speaker 3: slammed Joe Biden for his statement on the pardon, and
Speaker 3: I got to say the judge's comments, I've never seen
Speaker 3: anything like this. In my twenty plus years of practicing law.
Speaker 3: I've never seen anything remotely like this. Let me read
Speaker 3: to you from the judge's opinion that was issued. For example,
Speaker 3: the President asserts mister Biden quote was treated differently from
Speaker 3: others quote who were late paying their taxes because of
Speaker 3: serious addictions, implying that mister Biden was among those individuals
Speaker 3: who untimely paid taxes due to addiction, but he is not.
Speaker 3: In his pre trial filings, mister Biden represented that he
Speaker 3: quote was severely addicted to alcohol and drugs through May
Speaker 3: of twenty nineteen. Upon pleading guilty to the charges in
Speaker 3: this case, mister Biden admitted that he engaged in tax
Speaker 3: evasion after this period of addiction by wrongfully deducting his
Speaker 3: business expenses items he knew were personal expenses, including luxury clothing,
Speaker 3: escort services, and his daughter's law school tuition. And mister
Speaker 3: Biden admitted that he quote had sufficient funds available to
Speaker 3: him to pay some or all of his outstanding taxes
Speaker 3: when they were due, but that he did not make
Speaker 3: payments towards his tax liabilities even quote well after he
Speaker 3: had regained his sobriety, instead electing to quote spend large
Speaker 3: sums to maintain his lifestyle in twenty twenty. By the way,
Speaker 3: in twenty twenty, that would be when his father, Joe Biden,
Speaker 3: was running for president. According to the President. This is
Speaker 3: going back to Joe Biden's press release that accompanied the pardon. Quote,
Speaker 3: no reasonable person who looks at the facts of mister
Speaker 3: Biden's case can reach any other conclusion than mister Biden
Speaker 3: was singled out only because he is the president's son
Speaker 3: end quote. But two federal judges expressly rejected mister Biden's
Speaker 3: arguments that the government prosecuted mister Biden because of his
Speaker 3: familiar relation to the president and the president's own attorney
Speaker 3: general and Department of Justice personnel oversaw the investigation leading
Speaker 3: to the charges. In the President's estimation, this legion of
Speaker 3: civil servants the undersigned included are unreasonable people. In short,
Speaker 3: a press release is not a pardon. The Constitution provides
Speaker 3: the president with broad authority to grant reprieves and pardons
Speaker 3: for offenses against the United States, but nowhere does the
Speaker 3: constitution give the president the authority to rewrite history. I
Speaker 3: gotta say, Ben, I've never seen a federal judge take
Speaker 3: the bark off the sitting president of the United States
Speaker 3: the way that judge did. He just said, Joe Biden
Speaker 3: is flat out lying, and he is dishonest. And I
Speaker 3: gotta say the judge is exactly right. Every word of
Speaker 3: that opinion is absolutely right. And Joe Biden again, understand
Speaker 3: for a year when he said he wasn't going to
Speaker 3: pardon his son he was lying, and understand today when
Speaker 3: he issued the pardon, Joe Biden is still lying. And
Speaker 3: that's what the federal judge just said unequivocally.
Speaker 2: And they seem to just be laughing in the face
Speaker 2: of justice and laughing in the face of Americans by
Speaker 2: the way, that have been held accountable. There's been a
Speaker 2: lot of whistleblowers that have come forward saying how angry
Speaker 2: they are over this. There's people that have gone to
Speaker 2: jail for less than what Hunter Biden did on the
Speaker 2: tax issues that are talking about how why is it
Speaker 2: that they had to go to jail for years and
Speaker 2: this guy gets to walk. There seems to be a
Speaker 2: lot of not just nepotism here, but anger from Americans
Speaker 2: that have had to face the music when they've committed
Speaker 2: many of the same crimes that he was accused of
Speaker 2: committing and have been convicted of.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and not only is the federal judge angry, but
Speaker 3: the IRS whistleblower reacted to Biden's claim, and Townhall reported
Speaker 3: said IRAS whistleblower reacts to Biden's ludicrous claim justifying Hunter's pardon.
Speaker 3: On Sunday night, President Joe Biden issued a sweeping pardon
Speaker 3: for his son Hunter Biden. It covers all potential crimes
Speaker 3: committed between twenty fourteen and twenty twenty four and the
Speaker 3: it and that goes through the quotes. But IRS investigator
Speaker 3: and whistleblower Joseph Ziegler, who testified in twenty twenty three
Speaker 3: about the special treatment being handed to Hunter by the
Speaker 3: Department of Justice, blasted Biden's claims as ludicrous. And here's
Speaker 3: the quote that Ziegler said, quote, I honestly think that's
Speaker 3: completely ludicrous. I'm a Democrat, and I'm a person that
Speaker 3: believes in the rule of law. When you look at
Speaker 3: what he was charged with, criminal tax of asion and
Speaker 3: what he pled guilty to. There are thousands of taxpayers
Speaker 3: who honestly file their taxes, they pay their taxes on time,
Speaker 3: and I think they should be disappointed by this because
Speaker 3: they're held to a standard that's different from the political elite.
Speaker 3: This was felony conduct after he was sober. It was
Speaker 3: clever that the President's letter didn't bring up any of
Speaker 3: that conduct. I got to say, that's exactly right.
Speaker 2: So you look at this and yes, they're getting the
Speaker 2: I think the White House is pretty clear is getting
Speaker 2: slapped around on the facts.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure they.
Speaker 4: Care and what is also out there at all.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean they're just kind of like, we got
Speaker 2: away with it. We planned to get away with it,
Speaker 2: we had an alibi. Were the alibi was that, well,
Speaker 2: my son was a drug addict, so therefore he shouldn't
Speaker 2: be held accountable for his actions while we were making
Speaker 2: money while we were exploiting his addiction, which I also
Speaker 2: think is sick on so many different levels that there
Speaker 2: was that many Biden family members taking these amounts of
Speaker 2: money in the tens of millions of dollars, knowing that
Speaker 2: they were putting Hunter Biden out there and enabling his
Speaker 2: addiction with the massive payments coming to him while they
Speaker 2: knew he was a drug addict.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and I got to say it, it is reminiscent
Speaker 3: what Joe Biden did with his son Hunter is reminiscent
Speaker 3: of how criminals will sometimes use juveniles to commit crimes
Speaker 3: because they know that juveniles, as a general matter, can't
Speaker 3: be held very accountable. They'll serve minimal prison sentences. So
Speaker 3: you know, drug cartels will use teenagers as drug mules
Speaker 3: because they know the juvenile can get off with a
Speaker 3: very light punishment. In this case, Joe Biden was willing
Speaker 3: to use his drug addict son as the bagman, as
Speaker 3: the one collecting all the cash. And to be clear,
Speaker 3: it wasn't just cash that went to Hunter. Hunter made
Speaker 3: millions of dollars. I mean, he was paying for prostitutes
Speaker 3: out of this, He was paying for drugs out of this.
Speaker 3: And to be clear, Hunter was not working for our allies.
Speaker 3: He wasn't working for France or Canada or the United Kingdom.
Speaker 3: He was working for oligarchs, corrupt oligarchs in Russia, in
Speaker 3: Ukraine and communist China. He saw bought out those who
Speaker 3: were enemies of America, and he sold favors from his dad,
Speaker 3: And it was incredibly lucrative and and and and there's
Speaker 3: a cynicism to using someone and and and listen, the
Speaker 3: strategy was always, well, if we get caught, you know,
Speaker 3: blame Hunter.
Speaker 4: Well he's he's an addict. And so that's the problem there.
Speaker 3: It's all about covering up Joe's misconduct.
Speaker 4: That's why this is an issue of public concern.
Speaker 3: If this were just some you know, poor sad Sack
Speaker 3: who was struggling with addiction, we wouldn't be talking about it.
Speaker 3: But it is because this is public corruption by the
Speaker 3: president of the United States and by previously the vice
Speaker 3: president of the United States, because much of this corruption
Speaker 3: happened while Joe Biden was vice president, and I got
Speaker 3: to say, what's happening now, I've never seen anything like it.
Speaker 3: Democrats and the corporate media, they are openly urging Joe
Speaker 3: Biden issue more pardoned. And we talked about in Monday's podcast,
Speaker 3: how right now Hunter has essentially a carte blanche for
Speaker 3: all any and every crime he has committed, every federal
Speaker 3: crime he's committed for eleven years.
Speaker 4: It's just wiped away.
Speaker 3: And the pardon power is that broad that it can
Speaker 3: do exactly that. But we pointed out that Joe Biden's
Speaker 3: brother faces real exposure. Well, I guess this should have
Speaker 3: been predictable, although I will say maybe I wasn't cynical
Speaker 3: enough because I didn't predict it.
Speaker 4: On Monday's pod.
Speaker 3: Suddenly the media is saying, pardon Joe Biden's brother, Pardon
Speaker 3: Joe Biden himself, Pardon everyone involved in the corruption, Pardon
Speaker 3: everyone involved in the FBI, Pardon everyone who have used
Speaker 3: their power, Pardon everyone who committed any criminal offense whatsoever,
Speaker 3: and I want you to listen to Let's start with
Speaker 3: this is an excerpt from MSNBC this week, urging pardons
Speaker 3: across the board.
Speaker 5: Brant of clemency. I hope that President Biden will also
Speaker 5: issue reemptive pardons to all of those people threatened by
Speaker 5: the unjustice of what will become the Department of Justice
Speaker 5: in the Trump administration. That of course includes Jack Smith
Speaker 5: and all of his staff, many Department of Justice lawyers.
Speaker 5: It includes President Biden himself. Although we don't know that
Speaker 5: anyone can legally pardon themselves, he will need a pardon
Speaker 5: because he is going to be harassed and charged for
Speaker 5: no crimes whatsoever. Donald Trump has promised that.
Speaker 2: If I'm reading this correctly, she just called for Joe
Speaker 2: Biden to pardon his entire administration because they believe that they,
Speaker 2: the entire administration, needs these pardons because of the activities.
Speaker 1: They were involved in. They're literally admitting to criminal activity.
Speaker 3: Well, and unfortunately, this was the most lawless administration we
Speaker 3: have ever seen, and I talked about at the beginning
Speaker 3: of this podcast. There are at least two components of
Speaker 3: weaponizing law enforcement. One component, and the most visible component
Speaker 3: is using law enforcement, using the DOJ. You're using the FBI,
Speaker 3: using the CIA, using the alphabet soup of the federal
Speaker 3: government to go after your political opponents, most notably to
Speaker 3: indict and prosecute Donald Trump four separate times, which is
Speaker 3: what the Democrats have done, both federally and at the
Speaker 3: state level, but also using it to go after pro
Speaker 3: life protesters, using it to go after people who engage
Speaker 3: in peaceful protest. On January sixth, using it as an excuse,
Speaker 3: using it to refuse to prosecute people who were violating
Speaker 3: federal law, committing felonies by threatening and protesting outside of
Speaker 3: Supreme Court justices homes Merrick Garland refused to enforce the
Speaker 3: law and just said, no, we don't enforce that law.
Speaker 3: Why because he disagreed with the Supreme Court and he
Speaker 3: wanted those judges threatened, he wanted their families. That's one component,
Speaker 3: But a second component is protecting the political allies of
Speaker 3: the president, and that weaponization has happened at great level.
Speaker 3: Look the IRS whistleblower testified, for example, that the special
Speaker 3: counsel David Weiss that was investigating Hunter Biden was repeatedly
Speaker 3: told there were boundaries he could not look into the
Speaker 3: big guy, he could not look into Joe Biden. That
Speaker 3: they were going to protect Joe Biden, there would be
Speaker 3: no investigation. So, for example, the WhatsApp message that Hunter
Speaker 3: Biden texted to the Chinese businessman the Chinese communists saying
Speaker 3: I'm sitting next to my father and you pay us
Speaker 3: millions of dollars right now, or my father is going
Speaker 3: to retaliate against you. Well, the investigator said, listen, we
Speaker 3: would like to subpoena the GPS data for Hunter Biden's
Speaker 3: phone and Joe Biden's phone. You could determine were they
Speaker 3: in fact sitting next to each other or not. There's
Speaker 3: an answer. That answer can be found. It can be
Speaker 3: found through a subpoena. And yet the Biden Justice Department said, no,
Speaker 3: we don't want to know if Joe Biden was sitting
Speaker 3: next to Hunter while he was shaking down Chinese communists
Speaker 3: threatening retribution from his father. We don't want to know
Speaker 3: if Joe Biden knew that you're not allowed to ask.
Speaker 3: That's an example of protecting your political allies. Well, now
Speaker 3: the press is being even more brazen. The Democrats are
Speaker 3: being more brazen and saying, look there are a whole
Speaker 3: bunch of people who committed lawless conduct, and we're about
Speaker 3: to have a Department of Justice at FBI who is
Speaker 3: willing to investigate and criminal conduct and willing to enforce
Speaker 3: the law regardless of party. I don't want them to
Speaker 3: target these guys because they're Democrats. I want them to
Speaker 3: enforce the law. If people committed criminal offenses did so
Speaker 3: deliberately and willingly, they should face consequences. And the Democrats
Speaker 3: are terrified out of their mind, and they are openly
Speaker 3: urging Biden pardon everybody.
Speaker 2: By the way, it's not just the Lady that we
Speaker 2: played earlier. This was clearly an orchestrated effort in the
Speaker 2: last twenty four hours, yes, to normalize this idea. And
Speaker 2: I want to go through the list and some of
Speaker 2: the tweets out there and another piece of audio I
Speaker 2: want to play for you. But before I do that,
Speaker 2: I want to tell you about our friends over at
Speaker 2: Patriot Mobile. If you are like me, and you are
Speaker 2: sick and tired of giving your mind to companies that
Speaker 2: fight against your values, then one big category you need
Speaker 2: to take a look at.
Speaker 1: Is your cell phone provider.
Speaker 2: You may not realize, but big Mobile is giving big
Speaker 2: donations and having a big impact when it comes to
Speaker 2: supporting democratic causes, candidates and radical organizations, organizations that are
Speaker 2: paying for abortions for example. Now, if you don't want
Speaker 2: your money going there, then you need to know about
Speaker 2: Patriot Mobile. They've been around for more than a decade
Speaker 2: and many Americans they're second tired of companies using their
Speaker 2: dollars against them, and that is why Patriot Mobile was
Speaker 2: created because they said, we need to have companies that
Speaker 2: still believe in America and our constitution. Patriot Mobile, well,
Speaker 2: they're on the front lines and they take about five
Speaker 2: percent of your bill every month, that no extra cost
Speaker 2: to you, and they fight for our First and our
Speaker 2: Second Amendment rights. They fight for the sancty of life,
Speaker 2: and they stand with our military, our first responders are
Speaker 2: wounded warriors. So if you want to take a stand
Speaker 2: for conservative causes and put America first, then switch to
Speaker 2: Patriot Mobile today. You're gonna get the same nationwide coverage
Speaker 2: as the big providers because Patriot Mobile operates across all
Speaker 2: three major networks. So the coverage you have now, you're
Speaker 2: gonna get the same coverage when you switch. Plus, they
Speaker 2: back their service with a coverage guarantee. They have one
Speaker 2: hundred percent US based customer service team and that means
Speaker 2: it's easy to switch. They'll find the best plan for
Speaker 2: you and your needs. You keep your same number you've
Speaker 2: got now, keep your phone you have now, or up
Speaker 2: grade to a new one. All you gotta do is
Speaker 2: go to Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict. That's Patriot Mobile
Speaker 2: dot com slash verdict. Or call them nine to seven
Speaker 2: to two Patriot. And if you call him right now,
Speaker 2: you're going to get a free month of service when
Speaker 2: you use the offer code Verdict. So call him nine
Speaker 2: seven to two Patriot and make a difference to every
Speaker 2: phone call you make or Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict.
Speaker 2: All right, so let let's go back to this list,
Speaker 2: and it was a list that Democrats put out. They
Speaker 2: started adding names to the list and saying this is
Speaker 2: somehow Trump's list, even though they're the ones creating out
Speaker 2: a thin air. So early in the day yesterday, it
Speaker 2: started with, well, it needs to the president needs to
Speaker 2: pardon himself. That also means he would need to pardon
Speaker 2: his brother. And then they added Joe Biden to the list,
Speaker 2: and then the list just started expanding to like everyone
Speaker 2: that worked for him that may have done something wrong
Speaker 2: or illegal. Alex Majorkis, for example, was on the list,
Speaker 2: James call me on the list, Andrew McCabe on the list.
Speaker 2: Peter Struck, you may remember that guy who said we're
Speaker 2: gonna stop back in sixteen, We're gonna stop Downald Trump
Speaker 2: from becoming president. Brus or Nellie or Rod Rosenstein. And
Speaker 2: then an expanded from there to the point where The
Speaker 2: Atlantic has an article saying there needs to be mass pardons.
Speaker 2: And this conversation took place on MSNBC.
Speaker 6: You argued, we defend norms by defending norms, not preaching them.
Speaker 6: A lot of happens between now and then. And I
Speaker 6: wonder how you're thinking about the president's pardon power today
Speaker 6: and how he should wield it.
Speaker 7: Well.
Speaker 8: Back in twenty seventeen, I thought that Trump was an aberration,
Speaker 8: an unusual and.
Speaker 7: Black swan, if you will.
Speaker 8: And my thought was that you had to defend the
Speaker 8: norms of the rule of law, the governance, and the
Speaker 8: only way to do that was to maintain them even
Speaker 8: in the face of.
Speaker 7: His aberrational behavior.
Speaker 8: Today, I think we know that Trump is not an aberration.
Speaker 8: He's a phenomenon, he's a movement, and as such, what
Speaker 8: we have to do is recalibrate how we respond to that.
Speaker 7: And it now strikes me as.
Speaker 8: Essential to at least begin to play to the edge
Speaker 8: of the field, to go as far as the law
Speaker 8: permits in combating the authoritarian excesses of Trump.
Speaker 7: And the way I wrote about in The Atlantic is
Speaker 7: the pardon power.
Speaker 8: A pardon for Hunter Biden, a pardon for Trump's critics
Speaker 8: would be completely normative breaking, and it would be out
Speaker 8: of character, out of historical tradition. But at this point
Speaker 8: I was listening to your earlier your earlier broadcast. You
Speaker 8: were talking about kash Fittel. He's got a list of
Speaker 8: sixty people he wants to prosecute.
Speaker 7: That's a real list. Will he do all of them?
Speaker 7: I don't know. Will there be resistance of the FBI?
Speaker 8: Probably, But one of the realities of being investigated is
Speaker 8: that investigation has a cost, even if you're not prosecuted.
Speaker 7: In the end.
Speaker 8: You have to hire a lawyer, the mental cost, the time,
Speaker 8: the resources, And so it strikes me as perfectly reasonable
Speaker 8: to ask, what can President Biden do within the bounds
Speaker 8: of law, even if it would not be normatively traditional
Speaker 8: to save his allies from that. And the answer is obviously,
Speaker 8: pardon them.
Speaker 2: Let's just stop there, And he said more but let's
Speaker 2: just die. Let's break that down. Senator, he's saying, it's
Speaker 2: personally perfectly reasonable for Biden to pardon any Trump critic
Speaker 2: and says, well, it's a cost issue because you'll have
Speaker 2: to get a lawyer. Well, no crap, Like everybody around
Speaker 2: Trump knows that they tried to financially break so many
Speaker 2: people around Donald Trump that worked to the White House
Speaker 2: tried to financially ruin them. I have friends I'm not
Speaker 2: going to say their names who worked at the White
Speaker 2: House who were strapped with legal bills over a half
Speaker 2: a million dollars just having to answer questions in and
Speaker 2: around what happened on January sixth, even though they weren't
Speaker 2: involved in it.
Speaker 4: Look, that's absolutely right.
Speaker 3: But I got to say, the hypocrisy is even more
Speaker 3: rich than that. So the person, the man whose voice
Speaker 3: you're hearing is a guy named Paul Rosenwick. Now, who
Speaker 3: is Paul Rosenwick. Well, he was a deputy Assistant secretary
Speaker 3: in the Department of Homeland Security under George W.
Speaker 4: Bush and listen, I know Paul.
Speaker 1: A little bit.
Speaker 3: I don't know him well, but I know him socially
Speaker 3: around DC lawyer circles. He wears a bow tie every
Speaker 3: day and he was one of the like he would
Speaker 3: run around Federalist Society events and he he was part
Speaker 3: of the sort of Republican lawyer cadre during the George W.
Speaker 4: Bush campaign.
Speaker 3: He is also someone who Donald Trump has broken his
Speaker 3: brain and Trump derangement syndrome is a very real phenomenon,
Speaker 3: and he is he is now advocating that Biden pardon everybody,
Speaker 3: Pardon every critic of Trump, Pardon every member of the cabinet,
Speaker 3: Pardon his entire family, Pardon anyone who may have committed
Speaker 3: any crime, because he doesn't want anybody to be held
Speaker 3: account for breaking the law. Now I'm going to tell
Speaker 3: you what the particular irony is. Paul Rosenwig is also
Speaker 3: one of the leaders of a group called the sixty
Speaker 3: five Project. Now what is the sixty five project? It
Speaker 3: is this left wing group and it's Paul Rosenwig, and
Speaker 3: it's also David Brock, who was Hillary Clinton's attack dog,
Speaker 3: who went a filing complaints trying to get Republican lawyers
Speaker 3: disbarred for supporting Donald Trump and Paul Rosenwike. His group
Speaker 3: filed a complaint with the Texas Bar asking that I
Speaker 3: be disbarred.
Speaker 4: Understand this guy way before the Texas Bar.
Speaker 1: I remember that story. But this is the guy that
Speaker 1: was actually doing it.
Speaker 4: Yes, yes, he was doing it.
Speaker 3: And so I'm going to read to you from the
Speaker 3: New York Times story when they filed this complaint, and
Speaker 3: it says, this is a quote from the complaint quote,
Speaker 3: mister Cruse played a leading role in the effort to
Speaker 3: overturn the twenty twenty elections. And while the same can
Speaker 3: be said about several other elected officials, mister Cruse's involvement
Speaker 3: was manifestly different. This is what the complaint says. He
Speaker 3: chose to take on the role of lawyer and agreed
Speaker 3: to represent mister Trump and Pennsylvania Republicans in litigation before
Speaker 3: the US Supreme Court. In doing so, mister Cruz moved
Speaker 3: beyond his position as United States Senator and sought to
Speaker 3: use more than his Twitter account and media appearances to
Speaker 3: support mister Trump's anti democratic mission. So understand their complaint
Speaker 3: is that when I was asked when the appeal in
Speaker 3: twenty twenty challenging Pennsylvania's violating the Pennsylvania Constitution and changing
Speaker 3: the law in Pennsylvania. When that was appealed to the
Speaker 3: Supreme Court, I was asked, if the court takes it,
Speaker 3: would you be willing to argue the case? And Donald
Speaker 3: Trump asked me that, and I said, yes, if the
Speaker 3: Court takes it, if four justices decide they want to
Speaker 3: hear this case, and I believe they should have heard
Speaker 3: the Pennsylvania case, that I'll do the oral argument. Their argument,
Speaker 3: Paul Rosenwagg's argument is because I said yes I would
Speaker 3: represent a client before the Supreme Court, I should be disbarged.
Speaker 3: So he's talking about the cost of frivolous complaints at
Speaker 3: attacking people.
Speaker 4: Well, he was one of the point people doing it.
Speaker 3: And by the way, thankfully the Texas Bar is not
Speaker 3: an insane, woke nest of lunatic.
Speaker 4: And so what did the Texas Bar do.
Speaker 3: They threw their complaint out as frivolous and baseless, so
Speaker 3: it got thrown out.
Speaker 4: It was absurd.
Speaker 3: But this is someone who was asking that I be
Speaker 3: barred from practicing law. And by the way, this group
Speaker 3: has gone after over and over and over again, lawyers
Speaker 3: who dared to represent Donald Trump. So they're willing. When
Speaker 3: we talk about weaponization, weaponization of law enforcement, and weaponization
Speaker 3: of law I got to say Paul rosenwagg is a
Speaker 3: great example of that. He's happy to go and attack
Speaker 3: and try to bankrupt people. You mentioned the look at
Speaker 3: the end of the day, if they come after me,
Speaker 3: I am a sitting senator, I have the ability to
Speaker 3: raise money, I can defend myself. I am not a
Speaker 3: particularly faint flower. I am not a vulnerable person who
Speaker 3: if they want to come after me, let's go. And
Speaker 3: they're going to regret picking that fight. But they're a
Speaker 3: bunch of people in the Trump administration who twenty somethings
Speaker 3: or thirty somethings.
Speaker 4: They were young.
Speaker 3: People, and these bastards when after them tried to bankrupt them.
Speaker 3: They had hundreds of thousands or more in legal expenses
Speaker 3: and they tried to make it. And by the way,
Speaker 3: these are the same people that publicly said if you
Speaker 3: worked for Trump, we're gonna do everything we can to
Speaker 3: make you unemployable. To pressure law firms, they shouldn't hire you.
Speaker 3: To pressure companies, they shouldn't hire you. They wanted to
Speaker 3: destroy anyone who was willing to work with Donald Trump.
Speaker 4: That's the viciousness.
Speaker 3: And at the same time, they're urging Joe Biden pardon
Speaker 3: everybody because people who actually committed felonies, we don't want
Speaker 3: them investigated, and we certainly don't want them prosecuted.
Speaker 1: It's amazing the lawfair here.
Speaker 2: And I want you to hear the second part of
Speaker 2: what he had to say as well, because this goes
Speaker 2: back to I think the broader theme here, which is
Speaker 2: everyone that we believe that may have done something wrong,
Speaker 2: we need to protect them now so that Republicans cannot
Speaker 2: look at the crimes that we committed and prosecute us.
Speaker 1: Keep listening, Yeah.
Speaker 6: I mean it seems to you, and I think to
Speaker 6: other folks as well, that the argument about the institutional
Speaker 6: preservation in this moment is best relegated to academics, and
Speaker 6: that in reality, it's time to play political hardball.
Speaker 7: And it sounds like you're extending that.
Speaker 6: Not just to the pardon power, but to other levers
Speaker 6: that the Democrats might be able to pull. I'll read
Speaker 6: an excerpt from your Atlantic piece. It has become painfully
Speaker 6: self evident. The democratic self restraint is a form of
Speaker 6: unilateral disarmament that neither persuades Trump to refrain from bad
Speaker 6: behavior nor wins points among the undecided. It is time,
Speaker 6: well past time for responsible Democrats to use every tool
Speaker 6: in their tool kit. Does any part of that, I
Speaker 6: guess worry you, you know, I mean one it could
Speaker 6: have said the Democrats when they were in control the
Speaker 6: cenationship have gotten rid of the filibuster and done stuff. Well,
Speaker 6: now it seems like the philibuster is the only thing
Speaker 6: that's actual are going to stop Trump from enacting probably
Speaker 6: the broadest, most pernicious parts of his agenda. So how
Speaker 6: do you, I mean, how do you think about the
Speaker 6: cost benefit analysis here?
Speaker 7: Well, of course it worries me. It has to.
Speaker 8: It has to worry any sensible thinking person to argue
Speaker 8: for breaching norms that have guided our country for two
Speaker 8: hundred and fifty years. On the other hand, I don't
Speaker 8: think the democratic self restraint is what is going to
Speaker 8: stop Trump from acting.
Speaker 7: If in the end, Trump and the Republican.
Speaker 8: Majority think that the filibuster is a barrier to whatever
Speaker 8: it is that they want, for example, they're going to
Speaker 8: get rid of it anyway, whether or not the Democrats
Speaker 8: had done so in the in the prior Congress, and
Speaker 8: so it strikes me as essential to begin trying to
Speaker 8: take steps that can't be reversed or irreversible steps in
Speaker 8: defense of say, voting rights, for example, expanding the franchise
Speaker 8: guaranteeing fed really against state entrepreneces. We would still have
Speaker 8: to contend, obviously with the Supreme Court. But for two
Speaker 8: years the Democrats had a majority from both houses, and
Speaker 8: instead of doing transgressive, normative things like changing the electoral
Speaker 8: rules to prevent Trump's cheating, they did normal democratic things.
Speaker 8: They passed the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act,
Speaker 8: and all good things, I'm sure from their perspective.
Speaker 7: But they thought that that.
Speaker 8: Would be how to reclaim America, and turned out they
Speaker 8: were wrong.
Speaker 2: I mean, centaer As, you just listened to this. Do
Speaker 2: you want to talk about the threats to democracy? Holy crap.
Speaker 3: So look, I gotta admit I don't know this bow
Speaker 3: tide clown. I've met him once or twice over the
Speaker 3: last twenty years, but I don't know him at any
Speaker 3: personal level. But he is I They're deliberately dishonest or
Speaker 3: profoundly ignorant because like one statement he made there that
Speaker 3: is just laughing, laughably false. He's like, well, if Trump
Speaker 3: wants to get rid of the filibuster, he just will.
Speaker 3: I'm gonna quantify to you. So I said six months ago,
Speaker 3: the odds that Joe Biden will grant a part pardon
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden were one hundred percent. I'm gonna give you
Speaker 3: the odds that the filibuster will be ended in the
Speaker 3: next two years with the Republican majority in the Senate,
Speaker 3: and they are the obverse of one hundred percent. They
Speaker 3: are zero point zero zero zero zero zero percent. There
Speaker 3: is literally not a point zero zero zero zero zero
Speaker 3: one percent chance it is. It will not happen. There
Speaker 3: are not ten votes to end the filibuster. And he's
Speaker 3: just that there's something about Trump derangement syndrome that that
Speaker 3: that that that it's bizarre and pathological, that that that
Speaker 3: all people afflicted with it can say is orange man bad,
Speaker 3: arch man bad. And and there's also look, I gotta say,
Speaker 3: Sigmund Freud has got to be spinning in his grave
Speaker 3: because the left and the never Trump and unfortunately the
Speaker 3: never Trump Republicans is a really tiny sliver of kind
Speaker 3: of DC folks who've lost their minds, but they engage
Speaker 3: in a degree of Freudian projection that is amazing. So,
Speaker 3: for example, all of these people beat their chest and
Speaker 3: say we love democracy, but they also are saying, well,
Speaker 3: they're aspects of Trump's agenda that are horrific. Well, there
Speaker 3: was an election in November and the voters voted for Trump,
Speaker 3: and he laid out what his agenda was, and the
Speaker 3: voters said, yeah, that's what we want. There were seven
Speaker 3: battleground states. Donald Trump won all seven. It wasn't close,
Speaker 3: it wasn't ambiguous. It was a clear and overwhelming result.
Speaker 3: And they also gave Republicans the majority in the Senate,
Speaker 3: in the House. And you know what, MSNBC, they don't
Speaker 3: care about democracy. These never Trump loans. They don't care
Speaker 3: about democracy. They don't care about the mandate from the
Speaker 3: people that the voters have decided. They're not saying, you
Speaker 3: know what, the voters decided they agree with this agenda.
Speaker 3: They want the border secured, they want integrity restored to
Speaker 3: the Department of Justice of the FBI. They don't care
Speaker 3: about that. And I've got to say, you know, I'm reminded,
Speaker 3: so so do you remember at the end of the
Speaker 3: Trump first term. There were lots of stories, and by
Speaker 3: the way, MSNBC breathlessly reported it about Republicans who were
Speaker 3: coming to Trump and saying, please give me a pardon,
Speaker 3: Please give me a pardon. And all these different Republicans
Speaker 3: were allegedly mostly House Republicans, were alleged to have asked
Speaker 3: for a pardon.
Speaker 4: And by the way that it.
Speaker 1: Was twenty four to seven, they were losing their minds.
Speaker 3: And there were reporters who claimed that I wanted a pardon,
Speaker 3: and let me be clear, that was always utter bs.
Speaker 3: Not only did I not want to parton, not only
Speaker 3: did I not ask for a pardon, but if Trump
Speaker 3: had asked me, hey, should I pardon you, I would say, hell, no,
Speaker 3: I haven't committed any came. I don't want to pardon.
Speaker 3: People who want pardons are people who who have likely
Speaker 3: committed crimes.
Speaker 4: And no, absolutely not. But it was all made up.
Speaker 3: It was an entirely fanciful fantasy. But and look, I
Speaker 3: don't know there may have been some individual House members
Speaker 3: who asked for it. I don't know about that, but
Speaker 3: I can tell you the press was breathlessly reporting all
Speaker 3: these Republicans that we're seeking pardons. And the irony is
Speaker 3: what is happening right now, you said at the outset
Speaker 3: of this pod.
Speaker 4: And this is important.
Speaker 3: This is orchestrated, This is concertive, This is not spontaneous.
Speaker 3: There has been a decision made by Democrats and by
Speaker 3: the corporate media. We're going to try to number one,
Speaker 3: pressure Joe Biden to give pardons to everybody. But number two,
Speaker 3: we're going to try to normalize it by talking about, Hey,
Speaker 3: isn't this a great idea, Let's just pardon everyone?
Speaker 4: And why?
Speaker 3: And their reason is pardon everybody because Orange man bad
Speaker 3: that that is their only reasoning, and it is Sigmund
Speaker 3: Freud would be amazed at the level of projection. They
Speaker 3: are literally doing exactly what they claim Republicans falsely claim
Speaker 3: Republicans were doing.
Speaker 2: I will say this what worries me the most about
Speaker 2: this Senator, and will end with this, But I do
Speaker 2: want to get your reaction is that if they do this,
Speaker 2: does it not signal to Democrats in the future when
Speaker 2: they get control of the White House. Just abuse your power,
Speaker 2: do whatever the hell you want to do. Go after
Speaker 2: your political enemies, and you can expect a pardon for
Speaker 2: any crimes you commit.
Speaker 3: Well, listen, that's been signaled already. As you know, I
Speaker 3: wrote an entire book entitled Justice Corrupted, How the Left
Speaker 3: is weaponized the legal system, and it talked about how
Speaker 3: Barack Obama that what Richard Nixon attempted to do, Barack
Speaker 3: Obama succeeded in doing. He weaponized the federal government. And
Speaker 3: then when Trump became president, these hardcore partisans burrowed in
Speaker 3: to the career positions and they waged war on Donald Trump.
Speaker 4: They tried to destroy the president.
Speaker 3: They hated the fact that the voters had elected him,
Speaker 3: and they wanted to stop him from implementing the policies
Speaker 3: the voters had elected him to implement. And now under
Speaker 3: Joe Biden, they're open and brazen. Alejandro Majorcis may be
Speaker 3: the single most lawless cabinet member who has ever served
Speaker 3: in our nation's history. And that is a remarkable statement.
Speaker 3: And so of course these radicals want Mayorcis to get
Speaker 3: a pardon because if he's committed criminal activities, they don't
Speaker 3: want him held to account. They want no accountability whatsoever.
Speaker 3: And listen, this is the same you think about it.
Speaker 3: In four years of the Biden administration, how many people
Speaker 3: has he fired none that I'm right, I don't know
Speaker 3: of a single one, including everyone in charge of the
Speaker 3: disastrous Afghanistan withdraw that was an absolute debui was it
Speaker 3: did enormous damage to US national security, and nobody was fired.
Speaker 3: Nobody lost their job. You look at the disasters, you
Speaker 3: look at the people in charge of the border. The
Speaker 3: people in charge of the border presided over the largest
Speaker 3: invasion at our southern border, our nation's history, the worst
Speaker 3: illegal immigration in our nation's history, and nobody lost their job.
Speaker 3: You literally wonder what the hell does someone have to
Speaker 3: do in this administration to lose their job. Well, now
Speaker 3: it turns out not only do they want nobody to
Speaker 3: ever lose their job, they want Biden to issue pardons
Speaker 3: so that nobody who committed federal crimes is ever, ever,
Speaker 3: ever held accountable. This is chapter two of the politicization
Speaker 3: and weaponization of law enforcement.
Speaker 1: It really is.
Speaker 2: We're gonna keep covering it, We're gonna keep talking about this,
Speaker 2: and make sure you share this podcast wherever you can
Speaker 2: on social media. That's why we do the show so
Speaker 2: others can hear it as well. Thank you for supporting us.
Speaker 2: As always, we do this show Monday Wednesdays in to
Speaker 2: hit that subscriber auto download button and the center and
Speaker 2: I will be back with you on Friday morning.