Speaker 1: Welcome.
Speaker 2: It is verdict to a Senator Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson
Speaker 2: with you, Senator, we have got a lot to talk about.
Speaker 2: Two major stories, the House formalizing the impeachment inquiry into
Speaker 2: Joe Biden, and for everyone listening, we are going to
Speaker 2: go deep into the legal aspect of this and what
Speaker 2: is the cause for this instead of the weaponization of
Speaker 2: impeachment which is what the Democrats did to Donald J.
Speaker 1: Trump.
Speaker 2: But before we get to that, Senator, I also want
Speaker 2: to talk about Hunter Biden and Hunter Biden's refusal to
Speaker 2: show for this deposition. He had this press conference on
Speaker 2: Capitol Hill but said I'm only willing to go public.
Speaker 2: I'm not willing to go behind closed doors. That is
Speaker 2: dictating to Congress what you will and won't do. Usually
Speaker 2: doesn't end well unless you know the deck is stacked
Speaker 2: on your half, on your side with a DOJ that
Speaker 2: refuses to prosecute. Is that part of how this is
Speaker 2: going to play out for him?
Speaker 3: Well, let me say, first of all, we now know
Speaker 3: the answer to what we talked about in the last podcast,
Speaker 3: which is whether or not Hunter Biden was going to
Speaker 3: defy the congressional subpoena and the answer is yes, and
Speaker 3: I'm gonna give credit where credits due. I thought the
Speaker 3: odds were about fifty to fifty. I could see him
Speaker 3: going either way, and you were one hundred percent on
Speaker 3: the other side. And so, Benjamin, you were right. I
Speaker 3: was at best fifty percent right.
Speaker 2: But I'm gonna frame. I'm going to frame this transcript
Speaker 2: and put it in my office.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: This is the first time in history of verdict I've
Speaker 2: gotten these accolades.
Speaker 3: Cut it off right now. I'm telling you, I'm manning up.
Speaker 3: I'm I'm admitting it. You didn't even have to rub
Speaker 3: my nose in it. I came forth right on the
Speaker 3: front end. Look, he refused to comply with a subpoena.
Speaker 3: There are a number of things that will flow from that.
Speaker 3: One of the things that will flow from that is
Speaker 3: the House I believe will hold Hunter Biden in contempt.
Speaker 3: That's significant, being held in contempt of Congress. That you
Speaker 3: can be jailed for being in contempt of Congress. And
Speaker 3: and but for that to happen, the Department of Justice
Speaker 3: has to prosecute you. And I got to say, one
Speaker 3: of the reasons why I think Hunter Biden is perfectly
Speaker 3: content to defy a congressional subpoena is he does not
Speaker 3: believe Daddy's Department of Justice will prosecute him, and so
Speaker 3: I think he and his lawyers feel like they can
Speaker 3: just ignore the subpoena. But when the contempt vote happens,
Speaker 3: and I think the votes will be there to hold
Speaker 3: him in contempt, that will be the next stage in
Speaker 3: the escalation. Now we talked about previously on verdict. Why
Speaker 3: often when you have someone come in for testimony, you
Speaker 3: proceed it with a closed door deposition where you get
Speaker 3: into more detail, you go back and forth, you prepare
Speaker 3: for the open hearing. And that's what the House Republicans did. Now,
Speaker 3: I will say At Hunter Biden's press conference, he said, quote,
Speaker 3: Republicans do not want an open process where Americans can
Speaker 3: see their tactics, expose their baseless inquiry, or hear what
Speaker 3: I have to say. What are they afraid of? I'm here,
Speaker 3: I'm ready. So I got to tell you, Ben, I
Speaker 3: would advice to Jim Jordan and James Comer take him
Speaker 3: up on his offer, hold him in contempt, fine, but
Speaker 3: also bring him to an open hearing. He has said
Speaker 3: he would testify in an open hearing. Yes, there are
Speaker 3: strategic advantages to doing a closed door deposition first, but
Speaker 3: get him under oath and in front of the American people.
Speaker 3: If the outcome of this is he defies the subpoena,
Speaker 3: he's held in contempt and nothing, nothing, nothing happens, that
Speaker 3: is a bad outcome. That is not an outcome that
Speaker 3: furthers justice. That is not an outcome that furthers holding
Speaker 3: Joe Biden accountable for his misconduct. And so I think
Speaker 3: the best Yes, they're irritated that he's defying their request,
Speaker 3: and I think they ought to hold him in contempt,
Speaker 3: but they also ought to schedule that open hearing for
Speaker 3: the first week the House is back in January and
Speaker 3: put him under oath on record on national TV and
Speaker 3: walk him through the evidence.
Speaker 2: If they do that, does that mean that you lose
Speaker 2: the chance for the closed door deposition? And is that
Speaker 2: also and I'm playing devil's advocate here, does that imply
Speaker 2: that you're basically conceding to the demands of Hunter Biden
Speaker 2: on the entire US Congress.
Speaker 3: Yes and yes, and so what look losing the closed
Speaker 3: door deposition? There are some advantages to having that, sure,
Speaker 3: but you can litigate about it. For a year and
Speaker 3: get nothing. Or on your second point, they could be piqued,
Speaker 3: they could be annoyed. Well, gosh, no witness is going
Speaker 3: to dictate what we do because we're tough. Well, so
Speaker 3: what Look, there's a job to be done. And the
Speaker 3: good thing is you and I both know Jim Jordan
Speaker 3: and James Comer these are serious men focused on a
Speaker 3: serious task. And so I think the appropriate reaction is
Speaker 3: not to have your feelings hurt, and not even to
Speaker 3: be annoyed, although you are perfectly justified in being annoyed
Speaker 3: that a witness is effectively dictating the method in which
Speaker 3: he will testify. That is annoying, and in the vast
Speaker 3: majority of situations it's utterly unacceptable. In this case, there
Speaker 3: is a overriding interest of justice of putting the evidence
Speaker 3: before the American people. And remember this is something that
Speaker 3: you and I have said a lot on verdict. This
Speaker 3: is not about Hunter Biden. This is about Joe Biden.
Speaker 1: Great point.
Speaker 3: If the result of this is they spend the next
Speaker 3: year fighting over the contempt finding, that is a complete
Speaker 3: waste of time. We need the evidence in front of
Speaker 3: the American people that Joe Biden was corrupt, and in
Speaker 3: this Hunter Biden is an accomplice and he's a witness,
Speaker 3: but he's not the actual target. The only reason anyone
Speaker 3: cares about Hunter Biden is because he was integally involved
Speaker 3: in the alleged corruption and bribery of his father, who
Speaker 3: was vice president of the United States and is now
Speaker 3: the President of the United States. That's why they should say, fine,
Speaker 3: we'll have you first week of January in front of
Speaker 3: the full hearing on TV and will walk you systematic
Speaker 3: through the questions and might they get some surprises.
Speaker 4: Yes.
Speaker 3: Part of the reason you do a closed door deposition
Speaker 3: is so you don't get surprised. You get an answer
Speaker 3: in the deposition, and then when you do the hearing,
Speaker 3: if they say something different, you can confront them with, well,
Speaker 3: that's not what you said at our deposition. I get
Speaker 3: that that that that is strategically better. But my point
Speaker 3: is having Hunter testify under oath now versus not having
Speaker 3: him testify for the next year. It ain't even close,
Speaker 3: which is better for the pursuit of justice.
Speaker 2: All right, So let's say that what you're you're mentioning
Speaker 2: here happens. I want I want us both to go
Speaker 2: on the record. Would Hunter Biden show up for that
Speaker 2: public here and now I claims he would, right, but
Speaker 2: he was saying that because he wasn't going to show
Speaker 2: up for that, that was his way of getting out
Speaker 2: of the closed door. So let's say that that Jim
Speaker 2: Jordan and James Comer, they do this to speak of
Speaker 2: the House says, let's this our new strategy, Johnson, let's
Speaker 2: go with it. Do you believe that Hunter Biden would
Speaker 2: actually show for that open hearing?
Speaker 1: So again, I don't know.
Speaker 3: I think there is a significant chance he wouldn't show
Speaker 3: for the open hearing. But if you forced me to
Speaker 3: put odds to it, I'd probably say sixty forty he shows.
Speaker 3: I think there's a forty percent chance he backs out
Speaker 3: and said, oh I was just kidding. I'm not going
Speaker 3: to testify there either. But I think there's a sixty
Speaker 3: percent chance that he follows through. He is at this
Speaker 3: point defiantly said he's ready to go, and he's made
Speaker 3: that offer, and I think Ego and Vanity may compel
Speaker 3: him to go and testify in the open if that's
Speaker 3: what happens, what do you think? Where are your on?
Speaker 2: I think there's a zero percent chance he'd show up
Speaker 2: for the second one, because if he knows he doesn't
Speaker 2: have to show up for either, and they're not going
Speaker 2: to hold him in content because and you would know
Speaker 2: this legally, I don't. I'm asking you sincerely, if he
Speaker 2: didn't show up for the public hearing, what's the recourse there?
Speaker 1: Would it go to the j.
Speaker 3: They hold him in contempt and DJ again would would
Speaker 3: sit on their hands and do nothing.
Speaker 2: So if you're gonna if you're gonna be held in
Speaker 2: contempt the first time, why not double up on it
Speaker 2: and say nothing at all.
Speaker 3: Look, you're actually going very good legal advice for someone
Speaker 3: without a JD. There's a lot of force to what
Speaker 3: you say. Look, the reason I think it is slightly
Speaker 3: more likely than not that he shows up is is ego.
Speaker 3: It is entirely who he is. And they've been so
Speaker 3: braggadocious saying that he would do it that I think
Speaker 3: he would find it personally hard to back out of.
Speaker 3: But there's no doubt the risk averse the CYA approach
Speaker 3: is don't show up to either. By the way, that
Speaker 3: shouldn't be the risk averse approach. If we actually had
Speaker 3: a functioning Department of Justice that would go and prosecute
Speaker 3: you for contempt to Congress, then the risk calculus would change.
Speaker 3: But remember Congress held Eric Holder, then the Attorney General
Speaker 3: of the United States, in contempt, and DJ did nothing.
Speaker 3: Now Eric Holder was in charge of DJ, but they
Speaker 3: did nothing. And I don't expect the Biden DOJ to
Speaker 3: do any different.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I prosecuted and convicted for contempt to Congress. Biden's
Speaker 2: punishment could keyword could, if you're looking at the book,
Speaker 2: be up to one hundred thousand dollars fine and imprisonment.
Speaker 2: And I want to just just let me stew in
Speaker 2: this for a second, because I think everyone listening right
Speaker 2: now probably feels this way. It is so frustrating to
Speaker 2: live in a country where there's such a blatant double
Speaker 2: standard in how the laws applied. You look at Peter
Speaker 2: Navarro and Steve Bannon. They were indicted on contempt charges
Speaker 2: for not complying with you with what many referred to
Speaker 2: as the illegitimate January sixth Committee. There was no basis
Speaker 2: to comply with the Democrats fake committee, right, that had
Speaker 2: fake Republicans on there, and it was done not the
Speaker 2: way that it's normally done historically. And yet those two
Speaker 2: men no problem being arrested and tried to ruin their lives.
Speaker 2: It's hard, I think for so many people listening right
Speaker 2: now to sit here and to be okay with this
Speaker 2: and to see the DOJ weaponized in this way. It
Speaker 2: was Matthew Graves who was the DC attorney who prosecuted
Speaker 2: Navara and Bannon.
Speaker 1: Let me remind everybody.
Speaker 2: He worked on the presidential campaigns for Joe Biden as
Speaker 2: well as other Democrats. And this is a process now
Speaker 2: where I think Americans are so frustrated. So do you
Speaker 2: agree that it's that we are all not crazy to
Speaker 2: be so irritated and frustrated at these two standards of
Speaker 2: justice that we're watching play out in real time.
Speaker 3: So I agree that everyone but Ben is not crazy. Look,
Speaker 3: it is absolutely a double standard. And if you don't
Speaker 3: believe me that it's a double standard, believe Joe Biden.
Speaker 3: Listen to this clip. In October of twenty twenty one,
Speaker 3: when asked this exact question, here's what Biden had to say,
Speaker 3: talk to.
Speaker 5: You so much today, You're not going to talk to anymore.
Speaker 4: By Congressional Subdinas on the January sixth committee, I.
Speaker 6: Hope that the committee goes after them hold.
Speaker 1: Him accountable, any prosecuting I do, yes, I do yes.
Speaker 1: That was the response from Again.
Speaker 2: You could hear in the background Marine one's spooling up
Speaker 2: there and he's saying, yes, you should be held accountable, Yes,
Speaker 2: you should be held in contempt. Before I get your
Speaker 2: response to that center, let me tell you about Blackout Coffee.
Speaker 2: Bidenomics is a complete until disaster. But I don't let
Speaker 2: that or any of these other issues ruin my day.
Speaker 2: You want to know why, because I start my day
Speaker 2: with a hot America first cup of Blackout coffee. Now,
Speaker 2: if you like a premium cup of coffee to start
Speaker 2: your day. And I got to get up every day
Speaker 2: and get on the radio at seven in the morning.
Speaker 2: I have to be ready to give the news. And
Speaker 2: that is why I have to have a good cup
Speaker 2: of coffee, not average, but a really good cup of coffee.
Speaker 2: Blackout Coffee is one hundred percent of America zero percent
Speaker 2: woke company. You know there's a bunch of woke coffee
Speaker 2: companies out there. The biggest ones are the wokest ones
Speaker 2: out there. Well, Blackout is one hundred percent committed to
Speaker 2: conservative values, from sourcing the beans to the roasting process,
Speaker 2: customer support, and shipping. They embody true American values and
Speaker 2: accept no compromise on taste or quality. I'm drinking it
Speaker 2: every day. I can tell you this is true. You
Speaker 2: need to try Blackout Coffee. And if you've got someone
Speaker 2: on your Christmas list as a coffee drinker that loves
Speaker 2: premium coffee, go to Blackoutcoffee dot com slash verdict. That's
Speaker 2: Blackout Coffee dot com slash verdict. You'll use the promo
Speaker 2: code vertict and you're gonna get twenty percent off your
Speaker 2: first order, plus you can see all their incredible gift
Speaker 2: ideas for the holidays. It's Blackout Coffee dot com slash verdict.
Speaker 2: Be Awake, not woke, Blackout Coffee dot com slash verdict, Centaer.
Speaker 1: You hear the president there.
Speaker 2: He made it clear, you defy these subpoenas, you deserve
Speaker 2: to be prosecuted, you deserve to be thrown in jail.
Speaker 2: That's what he said as President getting on Marine one.
Speaker 3: Well, that's exactly right, and it's a double standard. If
Speaker 3: they're going after someone in the Trump White House, then
Speaker 3: absolutely they want to hold them in contempt, they want
Speaker 3: to prosecute them, they want doj to go after them,
Speaker 3: and they're happy to do that. If it's Hunter's son
Speaker 3: who's covering up evidence of criminality from daddy, who happens
Speaker 3: to be the President of the United States, then the
Speaker 3: Biden Department of Justice they act like they're in army
Speaker 3: of the DNC that they do not behave like they
Speaker 3: have any obligation to the rule of law. Merrick Garland
Speaker 3: should be impeached and removed from office. He's been a
Speaker 3: disgrace as Attorney General. And part of why they do
Speaker 3: this is they know the Department of Justice is weaponized
Speaker 3: and politicized, and they also know that the media is
Speaker 3: thoroughly dishonest. So, for example, Hunter, when he was explaining
Speaker 3: that he would not not go to the closed door deposition,
Speaker 3: he said his father was not financially involved in his business,
Speaker 3: and financially Suddenly that word came in. Now, remember Joe
Speaker 3: Biden used to say he'd never talked with his son
Speaker 3: about his business, he never talked to his business associates.
Speaker 3: All of those proved wrong. Then the Biden White House
Speaker 3: said he was not involved, he was not in business
Speaker 3: with and now Hunter says his father is not quote
Speaker 3: financially involved in his business. They keep moving the standard.
Speaker 3: But you know what, really, let's play.
Speaker 2: Let's play Joe Biden saying this because if you remember,
Speaker 2: you go back to the first clip I want to play.
Speaker 2: People is from des Moines, Iowa, September twenty one, twenty nineteen.
Speaker 2: He was angry when he was answering Peter Deucy's question.
Speaker 2: Take a listen, how many.
Speaker 4: Times have you ever spoken to your son about his
Speaker 4: overseas business dealings.
Speaker 5: I've never spoken my son about his overseas med servians.
Speaker 6: I have never discussed with my son, or my brother
Speaker 6: or anyone else in being him to do with their
Speaker 6: business period. And what I will do is the same
Speaker 6: thing we did in our administration. Don't be an absolute.
Speaker 1: Wall between personal and private.
Speaker 6: In the government.
Speaker 4: Do you stand by your statement that you did not
Speaker 4: discuss any of your son's overseas business large, Dan barlast, I.
Speaker 3: Mean he lied to all of us, Enator, he did,
Speaker 3: and compare that to what Hunter said this week, it
Speaker 3: could compare compare that to the latest statement.
Speaker 1: Play that clip.
Speaker 5: Let me state as clearly as I can, my father
Speaker 5: was not financially involved in my business, not as a
Speaker 5: practicing lawyer, not as a board member of Parisma, not
Speaker 5: in my partnership with a Chinese private businessman, not in
Speaker 5: my investments at home or abroad, and certainly not as
Speaker 5: an artist. Story in my battle with addictions, my parents
Speaker 5: were there for me. They literally saved my life.
Speaker 2: By the way, Senator you and I predicted this was
Speaker 2: going to be the alibi all along. Oh yeah, he's
Speaker 2: an addict, and he and he went into it perfectly.
Speaker 2: He paused, he took a deep breath, and then he
Speaker 2: and then he lays it on real thick. I was
Speaker 2: an addict, and my parents were there for me and
Speaker 2: then listened the last part.
Speaker 1: They helped me in ways that I will never be
Speaker 1: able to repay. Of course, they would never.
Speaker 6: Expect me to.
Speaker 5: And in the depths of my addiction, I was extremely
Speaker 5: irresponsible with my finances. But to suggest that his grounds
Speaker 5: for an impiacement in Query is beyond the absurd.
Speaker 1: It's shameless.
Speaker 5: There's no evidence to support the allegations that my father
Speaker 5: was financially involved in my business because it did not happen.
Speaker 2: So it's pretty clear that both of them are lying
Speaker 2: to the American people.
Speaker 3: Well, but there's an important context. So that's a categorical
Speaker 3: denial that Joe Biden was financially involved in his businesses.
Speaker 3: But you know it's different.
Speaker 1: It's not under oath.
Speaker 3: It's not sorn testimony, which means he can lie to
Speaker 3: the reporters, and it's not a felony. If he had
Speaker 3: said the same thing, either in a closed door deposition
Speaker 3: under oath or in testimony in the house under oath,
Speaker 3: and if he'd lied, and you could prove he lied,
Speaker 3: that would be a felony. That would be the equivalent
Speaker 3: of perjury, and it would be it would be it
Speaker 3: would come with jail time attached to it. And so
Speaker 3: that's part of why Hunter doesn't want to be under oath,
Speaker 3: so he can lie without consequences. But he also knows
Speaker 3: that his lies will be amplified by democratic hacks in
Speaker 3: Congress and by the corrupt corporate media. So I want
Speaker 3: to I want to tell you what the New York
Speaker 3: Times did. So Hunter's opening sentence there, let me read
Speaker 3: it to you again. Let me state as clearly as
Speaker 3: I can, my father was not financially involved in my business.
Speaker 3: Now here's how the New York Times reported his quote.
Speaker 3: Let me state it as clearly as I can. My
Speaker 3: father was not involved in my business. The word financially
Speaker 3: the New York Times miraculously deleted. They are covering up
Speaker 3: for it. They're not journalists, they're liars. And it's not
Speaker 3: an accident. That wasn't a typo removing the word financially.
Speaker 3: Look you read financially, you're like, oh, okay, I get
Speaker 3: the joke, like like it's it's a bad dodge. And
Speaker 3: so The New York Times said, well, here's what he's
Speaker 3: an the way, We'll just delete it and have him
Speaker 3: say my father was not involved in my business, which was,
Speaker 3: of course the old lie Joe Biden told in Des Moine,
Speaker 3: but that lie is no longer operative.
Speaker 2: One other question on this before we move over to
Speaker 2: the impeachment inquiry. If Hunter Biden into your Hunter Biden's
Speaker 2: attorneys right now, what is your advice to him. The
Speaker 2: White House, we hear is getting very nervous. We see
Speaker 2: this from reporting, This come out from Access. It's not conservative.
Speaker 2: They've come out saying now the White House and people
Speaker 2: within the White House are very upset with this. They're
Speaker 2: very upset with the press conference he did. They think
Speaker 2: the press conference made things a lot worse. As White
Speaker 2: House insiders apparently said that those inside the White House
Speaker 2: are saying that he is ruining things for his dad's
Speaker 2: re election bid. It's an unwelcome distraction, is another apparently
Speaker 2: person said it inside the White House.
Speaker 1: Tax him, and you look at the polls, and polls matter.
Speaker 2: Biden is the least popular president in modern US history.
Speaker 1: Now.
Speaker 2: According to the five thirty eight poll, ce An m
Speaker 2: Poll Center has sixty seven percent disapprove of Biden's economy,
Speaker 2: saying that's the number one issue, and a red Field
Speaker 2: and Wilton Strategies pols there is a majority of Democrats
Speaker 2: are quote concerned about the Biden's ability to perform Joe
Speaker 2: Biden's ability to perform.
Speaker 1: His job now due to his age.
Speaker 2: You add that to what we've just witnessed over the
Speaker 2: last twenty four to forty eight hours, and this is
Speaker 2: where Democrats have got to be freaking out inside this
Speaker 2: White House. As one Democratic strategist who worked on Clinton's
Speaker 2: twenty sixteen campaign said, quote, I have a pit in
Speaker 2: my stomach about it. The email controversy was silly, but
Speaker 2: it was made to be a distraction and it worked.
Speaker 2: And now he says the Hunter story has the legs
Speaker 2: to ruin things for the Bidens.
Speaker 1: The Democratic strategists added, quote unquote.
Speaker 3: Look, I think there are a lot of democrats. I
Speaker 3: think there are a lot of people in the press
Speaker 3: that are getting very nervous about Joe Biden. The mounting evidence.
Speaker 3: You know, when you have twenty shell corporations, when you
Speaker 3: have hundreds of thousands of dollars and millions of dollars
Speaker 3: going back and forth and coming from communist China and
Speaker 3: coming from Ukraine and coming from Russia, and coming from
Speaker 3: corrupt oligarchs, when you have transfers, when you have check
Speaker 3: after check after check going directly to Joe Biden, when
Speaker 3: you have Joe Biden on tape getting caught lying about
Speaker 3: it over and over and over again. Of course the
Speaker 3: Democrats are nervous. Anyone paying attention recognizes there is very
Speaker 3: significant evidence of corruption. And the simple question to ask
Speaker 3: even the most rabid partisan democrat is what services did
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden have to sell? What would anyone pay him
Speaker 3: millions of dollars for? He has no discernible skills. So
Speaker 3: generally speaking, foreign oligarchs are not in the habit of
Speaker 3: paying millions of dollars just to random crackheads. What is
Speaker 3: it that he was selling, and there's only one possible answer,
Speaker 3: and that is favors from Daddy. That's what the democrats
Speaker 3: and the corporate media do not want you to focus on.
Speaker 3: Is what was given. Let's go back to the heart
Speaker 3: of impeachment, quid pro quo, what was given in exchange
Speaker 3: for those millions of dollars? And if you ask that,
Speaker 3: the only answer that anyone has proffered is at the
Speaker 3: milder level, access to Daddy and at the full criminal level,
Speaker 3: favors from Daddy. But that's really where that where the
Speaker 3: debate is now. Of course, democrats of the media ignore
Speaker 3: all of that and just say, no, there's no evidence
Speaker 3: at all. There's no direct evidence, is what they say.
Speaker 3: Of course, we did an entire podcast on how the
Speaker 3: no direct evidence lie is a lie. You can go
Speaker 3: back and listen to that podcast if you want. But
Speaker 3: of course democrats are nervous.
Speaker 2: Can you believe it is almost New Year's and that
Speaker 2: means it's time for New Year's resolution? Yours may be
Speaker 2: for all right, I want to get back in shape,
Speaker 2: I want to lose some weight. I'm tired of feeling
Speaker 2: like I've lost that strength and vitality. I used to
Speaker 2: have tired of feeling tired and just feeling complacent and weak. Well,
Speaker 2: don't wait till January one to get started. You need
Speaker 2: to call my friends at Chalk. Chalk can help you
Speaker 2: boost your testosterum levels up to twenty percent over ninety days. Yeah,
Speaker 2: you can get rid of that weakness and complacency. Low
Speaker 2: t is the number one problem. It has fallen off
Speaker 2: a cliff historically to an all time low. Thankfully, the
Speaker 2: patriots at Chalk are helping real American men just like
Speaker 2: you and I take back our right to maximize our
Speaker 2: masculinity by boosting testosterum levels up to twenty percent over
Speaker 2: ninety days. Now I'm taking Chalk in the Male Vitality Stack.
Speaker 2: And here's the part I love. One it's an unbelievable price,
Speaker 2: and two, it comes to my door automatically, so I
Speaker 2: can stay on my regiment and I don't have to
Speaker 2: worry about running out. It's manufactured right here in the
Speaker 2: US of A. Chalk's natural herbal supplements clinically proven to
Speaker 2: have game changing effects on your energy, on your folks,
Speaker 2: and on your mood and samina. So maximize your masculine today.
Speaker 2: Go to Chalkcchoq dot com. Use the promo code Ben
Speaker 2: for thirty five percent off any Chalk subscription for life
Speaker 2: and it will show up on time every single month.
Speaker 2: Choq dot com promo code Ben thirty five percent off
Speaker 2: and booster A testos from levels up to twenty percent
Speaker 2: over ninety days CENTA. I want to move to the
Speaker 2: other major issue, and they are very much intertwined, but separate,
Speaker 2: and so let's look at this completely separately for a moment.
Speaker 2: The House formalizing the impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden. There
Speaker 2: has been a lot of media protection on this story,
Speaker 2: and I think it's important that we remind people why
Speaker 2: this impeachment matters, why it's not a witch hunt, how
Speaker 2: it's different from what the Democrats did against Donald J.
Speaker 1: Trump when they knew.
Speaker 2: For example, the Stell dossier was created by the DNC
Speaker 2: and Hillary Clinton paid for by them. The FBI categorized
Speaker 2: the still Dousier as user generated, meaning it was crap.
Speaker 2: They even offered a million I think it was a
Speaker 2: million dollars to Christopher Steel to authenticate anything in the dousier.
Speaker 2: Couldn't do it, and yet they still used it and
Speaker 2: weaponized it. To try to overthrow the will of the people.
Speaker 2: And so I want people to understand that impeachment is important.
Speaker 2: It shouldn't be used a political weapon, and Republicans are
Speaker 2: not using it as a political weapon. So let's go
Speaker 2: back and remind people why the House is formalizing this
Speaker 2: impeachment inquiry.
Speaker 3: Well, the reason the House says opened the impeachment inquiry
Speaker 3: is because there is serious evidence of corruption. There is
Speaker 3: serious evidence of bribery on behalf of the President of
Speaker 3: the United States, and it's from multiple directions. But you know,
Speaker 3: Jim Jordan sent out a very simple tweet that I
Speaker 3: think is powerful. What Jim Jordan said was quote four
Speaker 3: facts that will never change. One Hunter Biden sat on
Speaker 3: Barisma's board, absolutely true. Two he was unqualified to do so,
Speaker 3: absolutely true. Three Barisma pressured him to get DC to
Speaker 3: act on policy issues in Ukraine. And four Joe Biden
Speaker 3: did just that. Now, of those four facts, the only
Speaker 3: one the Democrats argue against even slightly is number three.
Speaker 3: And they have some disputes. They say, well, well, no,
Speaker 3: Barisma didn't really want the prosecutor fired who was investigating
Speaker 3: the corrupt oligarch who owns Barisma, because he was a
Speaker 3: bad prosecutor, so they didn't really want him fired. Now,
Speaker 3: I got to say, that is an incredibly weak argument,
Speaker 3: and it is contrary to the evidence the House is compiled.
Speaker 3: But that's the whole of their argument. And so remember
Speaker 3: when they say no direct evidence. We talked a minute
Speaker 3: ago about what is bribery. Bribery is quid pro quote
Speaker 3: this for that. That's the Latin phrase that was for
Speaker 3: Joe Biden to get the prosecutor fired in Ukraine. And
Speaker 3: we know that Joe Biden did that. We know that
Speaker 3: the quot happen because Joe Biden has confessed on video
Speaker 3: that he flew to Ukraine that he held over a
Speaker 3: billion dollars in US taxpayer funds that are guaranteeing loans
Speaker 3: to Ukraine. He held them hostage and said you will
Speaker 3: not get that money unless you fire the prosecutor. And
Speaker 3: then his response, we've talked about at length, was son
Speaker 3: of a bitch. They fired the prosecutor. So the quo
Speaker 3: is admitted, it is stipulated. Joe Biden has confessed on
Speaker 3: video to it. The only question is the quid, which
Speaker 3: is was he paid or and by the way, paying
Speaker 3: his family for that that official act is also bribery.
Speaker 3: So it doesn't matter whether the money went directly to
Speaker 3: Joe Biden's bank account or whether it simply went to
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden's bank account. We know that he was making
Speaker 3: eighty three thousand dollars a month. Hunter was to sit
Speaker 3: on a board. Now, mind you, I don't know of
Speaker 3: another board anywhere on Earth that pays eighty three grand
Speaker 3: a month to board members.
Speaker 1: That is bizarre. Just on the face of it.
Speaker 3: It's a lot more than Exxon Mobile pays their board members.
Speaker 3: It's a lot more than any board I've ever heard
Speaker 3: of pays their board members. And remember, Hunter Biden had
Speaker 3: zero experience in oil and gas. He didn't speak Ukrainian.
Speaker 3: I'm not even sure he could find Ukraine on a map.
Speaker 3: What he did have was Daddy's cell phone. What he
Speaker 3: did have was Daddy's fake email addresses. What he did
Speaker 3: have was Daddy's burner phones. What he did have was
Speaker 3: access to Daddy. And I got to say it was
Speaker 3: a good investment. If you're a corrupt olagark and you
Speaker 3: hire Skippy boy here and Daddy uses the full force
Speaker 3: of the US government to get the prosecutor fired, who's
Speaker 3: coming after you. That is a great investment. So that
Speaker 3: is number one right at the heart of the impeachment inquiry.
Speaker 3: But number two, we have the WhatsApp where Hunter is
Speaker 3: shaking down a Chinese communist and saying, I'm sitting here
Speaker 3: next to my father, and he's threatening retaliation from Daddy,
Speaker 3: not from Hunter, from Daddy, from Joe Biden if they
Speaker 3: didn't pay him millions of dollars. And we know that
Speaker 3: they paid him millions of dollars. So that again, look,
Speaker 3: bribery can be on either front. It can be either
Speaker 3: for getting a benefit, but it can also be bribery.
Speaker 3: Pay me money, give me a benefit, or else I
Speaker 3: will do this bad thing through government to you. That's
Speaker 3: also bribery. You know, if if a prosecutor for US
Speaker 3: attorney says give me a million dollars or else I
Speaker 3: will indict you, and you give him a million dollars
Speaker 3: and he doesn't indict you, that's bribery. In this case,
Speaker 3: the retaliation that Hunter was threatening from Daddy, it would
Speaker 3: absolutely constitute bribery on Joe's part. And mind you, the
Speaker 3: irs whistleblowers say that in the investigation they wanted to
Speaker 3: get the GPS data It's very simple to ascertain when
Speaker 3: Hunter sent that WhatsApp text, was he in fact sitting
Speaker 3: next to Joe. You'll have Hunter's GPS data, You'll have
Speaker 3: Joe's GPS data if they're in the same room, if
Speaker 3: they're sitting next to each other. That goes right to
Speaker 3: the heart of that Joe knew and was in evolved
Speaker 3: in shaking down these corrupt foreign players. That's why the
Speaker 3: house has now opened to the impeachment inquiry.
Speaker 2: For more than ten years, Patriot Mobile has been America's
Speaker 2: only Christian conservative wireless provider. They stand behind their values
Speaker 2: and they stand behind exceptional service. They're an example of
Speaker 2: putting the cause ahead of profit, and that is why
Speaker 2: I am proud to partner with him. Starting today, Patriot
Speaker 2: Mobile is extending their Black Friday deal with the Every
Speaker 2: Friday Matters deal, and you can get a free smartphone
Speaker 2: when you switch today. Patriot Mobile offers dependable nationwide coverage,
Speaker 2: giving you access to all three major networks, which means
Speaker 2: you get the same coverage you've been accustomed to without
Speaker 2: funding the radical left. Now, when you switch to Patriot Mobile,
Speaker 2: you're supporting free speech, religious freedom, the sanctity of life,
Speaker 2: are veterans and first responders, and more than just that.
Speaker 2: They are actually a one hundred percent US based company
Speaker 2: with customer service teams that make switching easy. So you
Speaker 2: can keep your same number you have right now, you
Speaker 2: can keep your existing phone, or for a limited time,
Speaker 2: get a free smartphone from Patriot Mobile. Go to Patriot
Speaker 2: Mobile dot com slash ferguson or call them nine to
Speaker 2: seven to two Patriot use the promo code Friday seven six.
Speaker 1: That's Friday seven six.
Speaker 2: Again, get a free smartphone with promo code Friday seven
Speaker 2: to six.
Speaker 1: That's the limited time offer.
Speaker 2: Join me make the switch today at Patriot Mobile dot
Speaker 2: com slash ferguson. That's Patriot Mobile dot com slash ferguson
Speaker 2: or nine to seven to two Patriot SATA. I want
Speaker 2: to get your reaction to something that was said on MSNBC.
Speaker 2: They're claiming now that Biden's impeachment inquiry is quote Trump's retribution.
Speaker 1: Take a listen to this.
Speaker 7: The fact that there is no there there probably doesn't
Speaker 7: bother the likes of Jim Jordan. I think Representative McGovern
Speaker 7: got it right when he said and Trump asks them
Speaker 7: to jump, they say how high, and.
Speaker 1: That they're now jumping.
Speaker 7: They're now jumping for Trump. This is his retribution and
Speaker 7: it's a pr a pr very cynical, pr driven attempt
Speaker 7: to besmirch Biden without any.
Speaker 1: Evidence, without any evidence. You just went through that evidence.
Speaker 2: But this is what we're up against the media saying
Speaker 2: this is just retribution for Trump.
Speaker 1: No, it's not, this is based on the facts.
Speaker 3: Well, MSNBC is not actually a journalistic outlet. They are propagandists.
Speaker 3: They are the left wing of the Democrat Party. So
Speaker 3: they're going to repeat that and ignore the facts altogether.
Speaker 3: They won't cover the facts. Look, if you watch MSNBC,
Speaker 3: you have no idea that Hunter Biden sent a WhatsApp
Speaker 3: text to a Chinese communist shaking him down for millions
Speaker 3: of dollars. You don't know that because you know what,
Speaker 3: if they don't report on any evidence, then they can
Speaker 3: send idiots on camera to say there's no evidence. And
Speaker 3: if all you watch is MSNBC, you're you're right, You're
Speaker 3: there is no evidence because they won't report on any
Speaker 3: of the evidence. It's purely circular. And that is part
Speaker 3: of why the Democrats their behavior is so bad. The
Speaker 3: corrupt corporate media facilitates their blatant dishonesty, because the corporate
Speaker 3: media has every bit as dishonest as the White House is.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think we should end with this. James
Speaker 2: Comer took to the floor of the House. This is
Speaker 2: the man that's been digging into all this. He's been
Speaker 2: a guest on Verdict. There's a two part series. You
Speaker 2: can go back and listen to it, but I want
Speaker 2: you to hear what he had to say on the
Speaker 2: floor of the House.
Speaker 1: Just as a reminder, Kentucky's recognized for three minutes.
Speaker 4: Thank you, Chairman Cole Mister Speaker, I rise today to
Speaker 4: support House Resolution nine eighteen. Joe Biden has repeatedly lied
Speaker 4: to the American people about his family's corrupt influence peddling schemes.
Speaker 4: He told the American people he never spoke to his
Speaker 4: son about his family's business dealings. He claimed there was
Speaker 4: an absolute wall between his official government duties as Vice
Speaker 4: President and his family. He said his family never made
Speaker 4: money from China. All of these are blatant lies. Our
Speaker 4: investigation has revealed how Joe Biden you of participated in
Speaker 4: and benefited from his family cashing in on the Biden
Speaker 4: name around the world Since January, we have learned some
Speaker 4: of the following. The Bidens created twenty shell companies, most
Speaker 4: of which were created while Joe Biden's vice president. The
Speaker 4: Bidens and their associates then raked in over twenty four
Speaker 4: million dollars through these shell companies from China, Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhtan,
Speaker 4: and Romania between twenty fourteen and twenty nineteen. At least
Speaker 4: ten members of the Biden family have benefited or participated
Speaker 4: in these schemes. The Bidens layered these payments through their
Speaker 4: bank accounts to hide the sources of the money. The
Speaker 4: banks even flagged many of these transactions in more than
Speaker 4: one hundred and fifty suspicious activity reports to the Treasury Department.
Speaker 4: One bank investigator was so concerned about Hunter Biden's financial
Speaker 4: transactions with the Chinese company that he wanted to reevaluate
Speaker 4: the bank's relationship with him. He noted that his transaction
Speaker 4: served and I quote no current business purpose end quote.
Speaker 4: That's what I call a shell company. According to Devin Archer,
Speaker 4: a Biden family associate, Joe Biden was the brand of
Speaker 4: the business. The brand showed up. Joe Biden spoke to
Speaker 4: his son's associates by speaker phone over twenty times, dined
Speaker 4: with foreign oligarchs and a Barisma executive, and had coffee
Speaker 4: with his son's Chinese associate, all when he was Vice president.
Speaker 4: Weeks after Joe Biden left the vice presidency, money from
Speaker 4: this Chinese Communist Party linked entity began to make its
Speaker 4: way to the bank accounts of several Biden family members.
Speaker 4: Based on one Biden associate's interview with the FBI, these
Speaker 4: payments were sent to the Bidens as a quote thank you.
Speaker 4: Ask any Justice Department public corruption investigator about the importance
Speaker 4: of payments received after one leaves public office. It's a
Speaker 4: hallmark of corruption. We are now at a pivotal moment
Speaker 4: in our investigation. We will soon depose and interview several
Speaker 4: members of the Biden family and their associates about these
Speaker 4: influenced peddling schemes. But we are facing obstruction from the
Speaker 4: White House. The White House is seeking to block key
Speaker 4: testimony from current and former White House staff. It's also
Speaker 4: withholding thousands of records from Joe Biden's time as Vice president.
Speaker 1: John President Biden must be.
Speaker 4: Held accountable for his lives corruption and obstruction. I urge
Speaker 4: my colleagues to support this important and necessary resolution.
Speaker 1: I yield back, Senator.
Speaker 2: I think you and I both can say listening to
Speaker 2: him lay that out. Thank goodness, we've got people in
Speaker 2: the Republican movement, conservative movement like James Comer who's been
Speaker 2: willing to do this hard work and methodically do it
Speaker 2: the right way.
Speaker 3: Yes, and that's more substance than MSNBC is aired in
Speaker 3: a year, like in those three minutes that they can
Speaker 3: claim no evidence because they won't air that. They don't
Speaker 3: actually want you to hear what the evidence is. They
Speaker 3: only want their talking heads that are chilling for a
Speaker 3: corrupt White House. And it's look, that's why Verdict so
Speaker 3: many listeners keep coming to Verdict because you find out
Speaker 3: information here that the corporate media will not tell you.
Speaker 3: And this podcast is designed to give you that information
Speaker 3: and equip you to go talk with your friends and
Speaker 3: family and loved ones and co workers and and go
Speaker 3: engauge the lies and counter them with truth.
Speaker 2: Absolutely, don't forget. We do this show Monday, Wednesday and Fridays.
Speaker 2: Make sure you hit that subscribe or follow button. The
Speaker 2: algorithms have changed on Apple. A lot of you have
Speaker 2: by default kind of unfollowed the show. You may not
Speaker 2: even realize that, so make sure you check if you're
Speaker 2: listening on Apple and hit that follow button. You'll have
Speaker 2: to check back every couple of weeks. They have changed
Speaker 2: it up. It's frustrating, but it's their new algorithm. It's
Speaker 2: just how it works, so make sure you follow that
Speaker 2: as well, and don't forget if you miss some shows
Speaker 2: during the week. We have our weekend review on Saturdays
Speaker 2: as well for the highlights of some of the biggest
Speaker 2: things you may have missed during the week. It also
Speaker 2: helps us on the charts now more than ever with Apple.
Speaker 2: If you will write us a five star review that
Speaker 2: helps us reach people with these new algorithm changes, it's
Speaker 2: more important than ever, so if you'll do that for
Speaker 2: us as well, we greatly appreciate it and the Center
Speaker 2: and I will see you back here in a couple
Speaker 2: of days.