Speaker 1: Welcome.
Speaker 2: It's Verdict with Center, Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you
Speaker 2: and Senator. We've got a lot to talk about tonight,
Speaker 2: including Hunter Biden's not shocking indictment at all and the
Speaker 2: media acting like this is a big deal when it's
Speaker 2: clearly not. It's the fixes already in. Plus, we've got
Speaker 2: a new update on Joe biden impeachment and his own
Speaker 2: words coming back to haunt him in a big way.
Speaker 2: But first, Center, let's walk through this indictment. This is
Speaker 2: a big nothing burger. In my opinion, they've in died
Speaker 2: him on the federal gun charges. This insulates the president,
Speaker 2: It protects the big guy. It focuses on crimes that
Speaker 2: are completely limited to Hunter Biden and no one else.
Speaker 2: In all the big crimes they could have charged them
Speaker 2: with today, they still have not done it.
Speaker 1: This is a fix. Do you agree?
Speaker 3: Sadly, I do, And we predicted this over a year
Speaker 3: ago on this podcast. We talked about how the investigation
Speaker 3: into the bidens if at the end of the day,
Speaker 3: the indictment that came in was a personal offense limit
Speaker 3: to Hunter Biden, if it was a drug offense, if
Speaker 3: it was a gun offense, if it was a personal
Speaker 3: tax offense that was limited to Hunter himself, then that
Speaker 3: was by design. That was by design to insulate Joe Biden.
Speaker 3: It's worth underscoring. We've said it before, but we cannot
Speaker 3: forget this is not about Hunter Biden. If his name
Speaker 3: was Hunter Smith, if he was just some poor, sad
Speaker 3: sack dealing with addiction and substance abuse, nobody would care.
Speaker 3: It wouldn't be national news, it wouldn't be a matter
Speaker 3: of public concern. The reason this matters is because there's
Speaker 3: considerable evidence that Hunter Biden solicited and received tens of
Speaker 3: millions of dollars from corrupt foreign players in exchange for
Speaker 3: official favors from his dad, Joe Biden, now the President
Speaker 3: of the United States. That's what matters. And so this
Speaker 3: this indictment. We said a year ago, if they just
Speaker 3: bring a gun crime, they're covering up for Joe. Now
Speaker 3: they're three three indictments. They are three counts of the indictment.
Speaker 3: Two counts are tied to Hunter Biden completing a form
Speaker 3: indicating that he was not using illegal drugs when he
Speaker 3: purchased a cult Cobra revolver in October of twenty eighteen.
Speaker 3: And the third count alleges that he possessed a firearm
Speaker 3: while using a narcotic. Now, those are crimes that I
Speaker 3: think Hunter clearly committed. That there's very little material dispute
Speaker 3: that he is guilty of those crimes. By the way,
Speaker 3: those indictments could have been brought years ago. The evidence
Speaker 3: was there has been there for years, and DOJ delayed
Speaker 3: and delayed and Delayden de Layden delayed. And this is
Speaker 3: all about insulating Joe Biden. Joe Biden does not bear
Speaker 3: any liability for Hunter being on crack while he illegally
Speaker 3: buys a gun. That's a bad development for Hunter. But
Speaker 3: the purpose of this is to insulate the White House
Speaker 3: and to let the Biden do OJ say, see we
Speaker 3: indicted to Biden, aren't we tough? And they're deliberately carving
Speaker 3: off and protecting Joe, who is the reason that the
Speaker 3: public rightfully cares about this.
Speaker 2: Well, let's talk about the comparing contrast to the plea deal.
Speaker 2: This is what he was gonna plead guilty to that
Speaker 2: they're now charging him with.
Speaker 1: How is this going to change?
Speaker 2: I mean, is the fact that they've it's not in
Speaker 2: a plea deal and they're gonna they they've charged him
Speaker 2: and died on this federal gun charge. Does that change
Speaker 2: the chances he might actually go to prison for any
Speaker 2: amount of time?
Speaker 3: It probably does.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 3: But if you look at it, we look at the
Speaker 3: evolution of this, we now know, and we've covered in
Speaker 3: previous podcasts that the Biden do OJ was initially prepared
Speaker 3: to have a plea deal where Hunter didn't have to
Speaker 3: plead guilty to anything. He could just enter an agreement,
Speaker 3: get not even a slap on the wrist, sort of
Speaker 3: a wave over the hand and everything goes away, and
Speaker 3: without even pleading guilty to anything. The Biden DOJ was
Speaker 3: prepared to give him complete and total immunity for any
Speaker 3: and all criminal conduct, especially especially especially the criminal conduct
Speaker 3: that implicated his father, and that really, I believe was
Speaker 3: the entire objective.
Speaker 1: Of this whole thing.
Speaker 3: Now, what happened to derail that plan when they announced
Speaker 3: they were indicting Hunter.
Speaker 1: That was the plan.
Speaker 3: The Biden Department of Justice was obstructing the investigation that
Speaker 3: Merrick Garland had lied under oath to Congress. And given that,
Speaker 3: the heat ratcheted up and they said, Okay, you got
Speaker 3: to plead guilty, but will still make it a slap
Speaker 3: on the wrist, Hunter, You still don't have to serve
Speaker 3: even a day, even a minute in jail. We'll make
Speaker 3: it all magically go away. And the critical piece that
Speaker 3: was added to this is and you get a get
Speaker 3: out of jail free card for all corrupt activity for Ivory,
Speaker 3: for everything that was done, selling access to Daddy, selling
Speaker 3: favors from Daddy. All of that is exonerated when you
Speaker 3: sign on to this agreement with no jail time. Now,
Speaker 3: what happened then is the whistleblowers came and testified before Congress,
Speaker 3: and the global attention on this ratcheted up considerably, and
Speaker 3: so suddenly they went before the federal district judge and
Speaker 3: the judge asked, DOJ, so are you saying that everything
Speaker 3: else Hunter's done? And mind you, the House representatives filed
Speaker 3: a brief of the district judge laying out all of
Speaker 3: the evidence of Hunter's potential other criminal conduct, of Joe
Speaker 3: Biden's criminal conduct, and the judge asked, DOJ are you
Speaker 3: saying you're not going to prove, prosecute anything else other
Speaker 3: than this these counts on which you're giving him a
Speaker 3: slap on the wrist, And doj got really nervous and
Speaker 3: they said no, no, no, we're not saying that well, and
Speaker 3: I think they just they lost their nerve to give
Speaker 3: Hunter and really to give Joe, because Joe is always
Speaker 3: the beneficiary of this corruption to get out of jail
Speaker 3: free pass. That's what led to the plea agreement falling apart.
Speaker 3: I think this is the third iteration. And by the way,
Speaker 3: we predicted this third iteration that they would come back
Speaker 3: and they would indict Hunter. But again it's on the
Speaker 3: personal crimes. And if there's not a plea agreement, I
Speaker 3: think the odds are significantly higher that Hunter serves some
Speaker 3: jail time.
Speaker 1: But I also think.
Speaker 2: Look like I mean we were talking a day or
Speaker 2: two days, or three days or a month. I mean,
Speaker 2: if they were willing to give him no jail time
Speaker 2: before and now they charge him with us if he's
Speaker 2: found guilty, how much does that come to the discretion
Speaker 2: of the judge or their minimums are sensing guidelines here?
Speaker 1: I mean, how concerned is he tonight?
Speaker 2: Okay, wow, I may actually spend real time in jail.
Speaker 3: Look, dealj wants to give him no jail time. They
Speaker 3: wanted to give him a we doesn't even plead guilty
Speaker 3: in anything. So this is not a true adversarial proceeding.
Speaker 3: This is not a prosecutor who is seeking to hold
Speaker 3: someone accountable. The reason Merrick Garland appointed David Wise as
Speaker 3: special prosecutor is special counsel rather, is that he'd already
Speaker 3: demonstrated that he was willing to obstruct justice and cover
Speaker 3: up Joe Biden. That's the objective here, and so the
Speaker 3: small level objective with this case. I think this case
Speaker 3: probably gets resolved of the plea deal as well, and
Speaker 3: the plea deal may require Hunter to serve six months
Speaker 3: in jail. I think that's a real possibility, and they
Speaker 3: may get nervous about having a commitment we will not
Speaker 3: investigate anything else. Now, mind you, they intend not to
Speaker 3: investigate anything else. And it wouldn't surprise me at all
Speaker 3: to see THEOJ Yeah, to see doj say privately, look, wink, wink, nudge, nudge,
Speaker 3: we're not going to invest at anything else. But we
Speaker 3: can't say that in open court because it makes us
Speaker 3: look like completely partisan, corrupted, compromised hacks. And it may
Speaker 3: be that Biden's lawyers take that and that he serves
Speaker 3: some time in jail. We do seem to have seen
Speaker 3: some movement among Democrats among the press where they've decided
Speaker 3: throw Hunter overboard a little bit in order to protect Joe.
Speaker 3: It's why the last podcast on Wednesday, and by the way,
Speaker 3: if you did not listen to Wednesday's podcast, you should
Speaker 3: go back and listen to it. It was really important
Speaker 3: explanation on the impeachment of Joe Biden. Why the Democrats
Speaker 3: claim that there is no direct evidence of Joe's involvement
Speaker 3: as corruption is a flat out lie, and we walked
Speaker 3: through it chapter and verse on Wednesday's podcast. The fact
Speaker 3: that they have shifted their defense to saying there's no
Speaker 3: direct evidence of Joe's involvement in the hates that they've
Speaker 3: collectively decided to cut bait and throw Hunter to some
Speaker 3: extent to the Wolves. Now, I suspect Joe is still
Speaker 3: not entirely comfortable with Hunter serving ten years. But at
Speaker 3: this point I think the most likely outcome, absent enormous
Speaker 3: public pressure, is Hunter pleads guilty to these charges, serves
Speaker 3: some minimal jail time six months to a year, these
Speaker 3: charges go away, and the investigation and everything else just
Speaker 3: quietly disappears. Doj doesn't admit in court, they're not going
Speaker 3: to investigate it. They simply say nothing else, and actually
Speaker 3: that then serves as a shield for DOJ. When Merrick
Speaker 3: Garland or anyone else from the Department of Justice is
Speaker 3: brought before Congress, their response will be when asked about Hunter,
Speaker 3: it's still an ongoing investigation, I'm sorry, we can't tell
Speaker 3: you anything. When they have, I belie leave zero intention
Speaker 3: to investigate the claims of bribery and corrupt selling of
Speaker 3: official favors from Joe Biden because the Department of Justice
Speaker 3: wants to protect Joe Biden above all else.
Speaker 2: Senator, it's also very interesting to see how the media
Speaker 2: is covering this story, and I want to get into
Speaker 2: that in a minute, because they're trying to make this
Speaker 2: a big deal while also undermining the charges saying they're
Speaker 2: actually weak, which is pretty hysterical. But first, let me
Speaker 2: tell you about our friends and in viro clins. You
Speaker 2: should choose an air purifier like your life depends on it,
Speaker 2: because it just might. We've had more than thirty five
Speaker 2: thousand wildfires that have devastated the US this year alone,
Speaker 2: and the toxins, the particles and wildfire smoke can penetrate
Speaker 2: our lungs and threaten our health. That's why in viro
Speaker 2: Clins developed military grade air purification for your home, and
Speaker 2: they just announced that they're having their biggest sale of
Speaker 2: the year. You can get thirty percent off right now,
Speaker 2: and Viroclints is specifically designed to wipe out airborne chemicals
Speaker 2: and viruses known to cause illness, allergies, and difficulty breathing. Now,
Speaker 2: I've got asthma and I have in vira Clints in
Speaker 2: my bedroom and I can tell you it has made
Speaker 2: a massive difference. This is also one of the cool
Speaker 2: things about in viro Clintons. Even toxic gases and particles
Speaker 2: found in wildfire smoke are no match. That's why the
Speaker 2: US Navy selected in viro Clints protect and purify the
Speaker 2: air in their facilities, and viraro Clintons comes with a
Speaker 2: free professional air quality monitor, so you know your family's
Speaker 2: breathing purified air. So save right now and get the
Speaker 2: free air quality monitor and fast free shipping. That's over
Speaker 2: a two hundred and fifty dollars savings right there. Loan
Speaker 2: go to ekpure dot com use promo code verdict. That's
Speaker 2: Ekcure dot com promo code verdict and save and get
Speaker 2: in Vira Clints. It's amazing, Senator. I want to play
Speaker 2: for you MSNBC. This is what they had to say
Speaker 2: is they were breaking the news on the Hunter Biden
Speaker 2: indictment on the federal gun charge, and they're trying to
Speaker 2: turn this into a very big deal. Well at the
Speaker 2: same time, the media, then an hour later is trying
Speaker 2: to tell you that the case against Hunter Biden is
Speaker 2: actually really weak.
Speaker 5: Breaking news.
Speaker 6: Now we have just learned and we just got the
Speaker 6: paperwork that Hunter Biden, the President's son, has been indicted
Speaker 6: for lying when buying a gun. I want to bring
Speaker 6: an NBC's Garrett. Hey, Garrett, what can you tell us.
Speaker 7: Well, Chris, this indictment just unsealed in Delaware charges Hunter
Speaker 7: Biden with three counts, all related to that gun purchase.
Speaker 7: It describes two counts of knowingly making a false or
Speaker 7: fictitious statement when purchasing a gun, basically accusing him of
Speaker 7: lying about being addicted to drugs at the time he
Speaker 7: was purchasing this weapon pistol in October of twenty eighteen,
Speaker 7: and the third count is that he did knowingly possess
Speaker 7: that same firearm while essentially while being addicted to a
Speaker 7: controlled substance. So these are counts that were all thought
Speaker 7: to have been dealt with in that plea deal that
Speaker 7: fell apart a couple of months ago, kicking things back
Speaker 7: to the US Attorney. Now special Council whis handling this
Speaker 7: in Delaware, a former US attorney in the district of Delaware. Again,
Speaker 7: this indictment on Field, dealing only with the gun and
Speaker 7: drug charges. I think it's reasonable to presume we have
Speaker 7: not heard the last of charges against the President's son,
Speaker 7: given the scope of what was originally in front of
Speaker 7: the US Attorney and then kind of fallen apart back
Speaker 7: to the drawing board to bring forward these counts.
Speaker 2: Now, by the way you said it fell apart, that's
Speaker 2: not true. And then MS tries to tell you that
Speaker 2: they don't think we've heard the last of the indictments.
Speaker 1: I don't believe that, do you.
Speaker 8: No, No, Look, this is designed to end the matter.
Speaker 8: That's what the Biden Department of Justice wants. They want
Speaker 8: to say we indicted him. They want to get a conviction,
Speaker 8: and I think the conviction is likely. I don't think
Speaker 8: the Biden team is going to try this. They may
Speaker 8: try to do some pre trial motions and some procedural delays,
Speaker 8: but I don't think they're going to want to take
Speaker 8: this to a jury, so I think it's likely to
Speaker 8: be resolved with a plea deal, and the plea deal,
Speaker 8: in all likelihood will end up slightly stouter than the
Speaker 8: slap on the wrists that they tried the second time.
Speaker 8: But the purpose of this, and we predicted this a
Speaker 8: year ago, this is not new. It's not surprising. The
Speaker 8: purpose of this is to put to rest all of
Speaker 8: the allegations of corruption against Joe Biden because the Biden
Speaker 8: DOJ is looking to an election coming up November of
Speaker 8: next year, and by the way, they're busy inditing Donald Trump,
Speaker 8: which is also looking to an election coming up next year,
Speaker 8: and when it comes to election interference, We've never seen
Speaker 8: a Department of Justice behave like Merrick Garland and this
Speaker 8: profoundly politicized Department of Justice.
Speaker 2: Now this case, by the way they have brought against him,
Speaker 2: there's a lot of evidence that was from that laptop
Speaker 2: from Hell and the and the pictures and the drug use.
Speaker 2: I would argue it's probably a very strong case for
Speaker 2: there to be a conviction against Hunter Biden.
Speaker 1: If you look at the evidence.
Speaker 2: Yet CNN just barely an hour after this indictment comes out,
Speaker 2: they start carrying water for Hunter Biden.
Speaker 1: And this is what they said, calling it a weak case.
Speaker 9: Jations of politics is right, often coming from the former
Speaker 9: president himself in terms of what they say is to
Speaker 9: to your justice system. But here you have it, as
Speaker 9: we noted, first time in US history the son of
Speaker 9: a president has been charged by the Justice Department. Kris Canal,
Speaker 9: thanks so much. Going to turn it over to Borius
Speaker 9: for some legal analysis.
Speaker 7: Yeah, let's chat with seeing and legal analyst Jennifer Rogers.
Speaker 10: Jennifer, obviously, again, this is a historic moment, the first
Speaker 10: time DOJ has charged the son of a sitting president.
Speaker 1: Your reaction to the news.
Speaker 11: Well, Wars, I really think, you know, the first time
Speaker 11: we had a charge against to former president, it was
Speaker 11: important that prosecutors really took their time and built strong
Speaker 11: cases based on compelling evidence. And I'm afraid the prosecutors
Speaker 11: have not done that here. I certainly, if I were
Speaker 11: making history, would not want to make it with this
Speaker 11: set of facts and these laws. I think that this
Speaker 11: case is weak. It's very, very rarely charged. This section
Speaker 11: on being an addict in possession of a weapon. So
Speaker 11: I think they have a lot of problems, both on
Speaker 11: the factual side, which is why it's very rarely charged,
Speaker 11: and on the legal side. After the Supreme Court's decision
Speaker 11: in the Bruin case on the Second Amendment, a lot
Speaker 11: of legal observers think that all these gun possession statutes
Speaker 11: are in jeopardy. And we know that Hunter Biden's lawyers
Speaker 11: will fight vigorously on the legal front, saying that after
Speaker 11: the Supreme Court's decision that this conviction could not stand.
Speaker 11: So I think they've got a lot of trouble here ahead,
Speaker 11: and we'll see how it plays out. But I think
Speaker 11: it's inadvisable, Sinner.
Speaker 2: When I heard this, I was dying to get your reaction,
Speaker 2: because they're now telling you this case is so weak.
Speaker 2: This is a dumb case to even bring up, even
Speaker 2: though they're willing to do a plea deal on the
Speaker 2: same case that got then blown up.
Speaker 1: So which one is it?
Speaker 3: Yeah, Look, Connor has already agreed to plead guilty to
Speaker 3: these counts, so oddly enough, CNN, you know, I don't
Speaker 3: know who that quote legal analyst is, but you could
Speaker 3: have just called her a Democratic Party shill because she says, well,
Speaker 3: first of all, the case against Donald Trump is incredibly strong.
Speaker 3: It is meticulously researched. It is oh oh so powerful.
Speaker 3: What utter and complete garbage. The case against Trump is
Speaker 3: a political hatchet job, and they may get a conviction
Speaker 3: before a DC jury that is ninety plus percent Democrat.
Speaker 3: But I think the chances of that conviction standing up
Speaker 3: on appeal are minuscule. But of course CNN is so
Speaker 3: called legal analyst, is not going to tell you that.
Speaker 3: And as for the claim that this charge is weak, okay,
Speaker 3: the critical elements are did he buy a gun, yes,
Speaker 3: as far as I know, there's no dispute about it.
Speaker 3: Was he a drug addict? Yes, and I'm not aware
Speaker 3: of any meaningful dispute about it. The guy was dishonorably
Speaker 3: discharged from the military for his drug addiction. He's wrestled
Speaker 3: with drug addiction for years. We have pictures and video
Speaker 3: of him using illegal drugs. Did he lie on the form,
Speaker 3: which is a felony, Again, there's no dispute about it.
Speaker 3: He clearly checked the box lying on the form. So
Speaker 3: to say the case is weak, I don't even know
Speaker 3: a factual claim. An element of the crime that is
Speaker 3: in dispute. And her final point, well, after the Bruin case,
Speaker 3: you know, any gun claim is legally dubious.
Speaker 1: What nonsense.
Speaker 12: No, it's not.
Speaker 3: What is legally dubious is efforts from Democrats to restrict
Speaker 3: the right to keep in bare arms of law abiding citizens.
Speaker 3: There are, she says, lots of legal scholars doubt this
Speaker 3: prevent No, that's not true. There have been laws in
Speaker 3: the books for a long time prohibiting felons from possessing firearms.
Speaker 3: I don't know of a single legal scholar who doubts
Speaker 3: the validity of those provisions. This is part of that
Speaker 3: same law that deals with people with serious drug addictions.
Speaker 3: I again don't know of a legal scholar who challenges
Speaker 3: those provisions. So her claim, Look, it's the typical leftist
Speaker 3: claim that if a law abiding citizen has a right
Speaker 3: to keep in bare arms, well that means everyone can
Speaker 3: possess weapons. Let's just hand out hand out guns to
Speaker 3: murderers in jail. It's like, no, No, that's not what
Speaker 3: the Second Amendment says. That's not what it's ever been
Speaker 3: understood to say. What the Second Amendment says is that
Speaker 3: a law abiding citizen can defend himself, can defend his
Speaker 3: or her family, can keep and bear arms. And so
Speaker 3: I got to say, listening to it, there literally is
Speaker 3: not a sentence in that so called legal analysis that
Speaker 3: isn't us laughably false.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's and they love to make up stuff, and
Speaker 2: they do it every day, and even on the biggest
Speaker 2: news days they'll come in with the propaganda just hours
Speaker 2: afterwards to try to spend this in favor of the
Speaker 2: Biden crime family.
Speaker 1: I also want to move on to the.
Speaker 3: Other begin and by the way, Ben, I want to
Speaker 3: make clear that when I talk about what laws are
Speaker 3: in dispute or not, the first big seminal case from
Speaker 3: the Supreme Court establishing the individual right to keep in
Speaker 3: bear arms was Heller versus District of Columbia. I am
Speaker 3: very familiar with that case because I represented the State
Speaker 3: of Texas and thirty one other states in that case.
Speaker 3: I was part of the Supreme Court case that upheld
Speaker 3: the individual right to keep in bear arms and it
Speaker 3: was a it was a fundamental foundational case. Justice Scalia
Speaker 3: wrote the majority opinion. And I'll tell you what we
Speaker 3: said in our amicus brief on behalf of Texas and
Speaker 3: third one other States. We said, of course, the laws
Speaker 3: prohibiting felons from being in possession of firearms are legal
Speaker 3: and constitutional. What government cannot do is stripped the right
Speaker 3: to keep in bare arms from law abiding citizens. So
Speaker 3: she claims lots of people dispute that with no apparent
Speaker 3: awareness of what actually is are the underlying arguments concerning
Speaker 3: the constitutional right.
Speaker 2: Yeah, great point there. I want to move to the
Speaker 2: impeachment update. There was some very interesting fodder from James Carvill.
Speaker 2: If you don't know James Carville, I'll just remind you
Speaker 2: he's a.
Speaker 1: On the left.
Speaker 2: They would refer to him as a brilliant political mind,
Speaker 2: a mastermind behind the Bill Clinton days. He is on
Speaker 2: TV a lot, talking on MSNBC in other places about.
Speaker 1: The Democratic Party.
Speaker 2: He was on CNN and he had this to say
Speaker 2: about the impeachment inquiry.
Speaker 1: Moving forward on the House side, take a look.
Speaker 13: What do you make of how the White House has
Speaker 13: been handling it so far? Do you think they're being
Speaker 13: aggressive enough or should there be a war room, should
Speaker 13: there be a more outfront effort from them?
Speaker 4: Well, my honest opinion is the people they have leading
Speaker 4: it are not very smart, and in fact they borderline stupid.
Speaker 4: I mean James Comber or Jim Jordan and the people
Speaker 4: in the House that are going to be on this
Speaker 4: committee like Dan Goldman, Delica Plasciat I think is from
Speaker 4: from Virgin Islands, Jamie ra Askin. These are very smart people.
Speaker 4: I don't think the White House needs to worry too
Speaker 4: much about this and left these congressional Democrats who are
Speaker 4: a whip smart are just going to eat these people alive.
Speaker 4: I so want them to do this. I can't tell
Speaker 4: you how much I want them to do this.
Speaker 13: This is a very you want them to do the impeachment?
Speaker 9: What do you mean?
Speaker 4: I want them to hole hearings?
Speaker 13: Why do you think it's whole hearing?
Speaker 4: And I want I want to and I want to
Speaker 4: let people the American public see how then how nonexistent
Speaker 4: a case is present, did anything wrong? And I want
Speaker 4: our people, who are quite effective lawyers to get them
Speaker 4: on cross examination and do what they're gonna do and
Speaker 4: make foods out of them.
Speaker 1: Senator, this is a new strategy.
Speaker 2: I'll give James, I'll give I'll give them a little
Speaker 2: credit here, James Carvill's you know, it's a new strategy
Speaker 2: to say that two of the most brilliant minds in
Speaker 2: the house are idiots, right, Jesus, James Comer and Jim Jordan.
Speaker 2: We've had them both on this show for multiple multi
Speaker 2: part series. You should go back and listen to it
Speaker 2: if you haven't heard what they said. But to say
Speaker 2: that they're idiots and that you think that your team's
Speaker 2: going to mop the floor with them, if this is
Speaker 2: their true strategy, this could be really bad for the president.
Speaker 8: Well, listen.
Speaker 3: James Carville is one of the most talented Democrat strategists
Speaker 3: that that therey is. He was the person responsible for
Speaker 3: Bill Clinton's election, most responsible. He's the person most famously
Speaker 3: associated with the phrase it's the economy stupid, which was
Speaker 3: right behind Bill Clinton beating George Herbert Walker Bush and
Speaker 3: getting elected president in the first place. And so Carvel
Speaker 3: is a smart guy. But I got to say what
Speaker 3: he just said on CNN is shockingly foolish and demonstrably wrong.
Speaker 8: Number one.
Speaker 3: To claim that James Comer and Jim Jordan are stupid
Speaker 3: as he did is laughable. And let me ask our verdict. Listeners,
Speaker 3: go back and listen to the podcast. We did two
Speaker 3: podcasts with Jim Jordan. We did two podcasts with James Comer.
Speaker 3: Go listen to him, go assess it's a deep dive
Speaker 3: where you can hear them analyze the issues. That's just
Speaker 3: absurdly false. And then he says, oh, and the Democrats
Speaker 3: are suck good lawyers. He points to Dan Goldman. Now,
Speaker 3: Dan Goldman is the freshman congressman from New York who
Speaker 3: we've talked about in this podcast before. He's quickly jumped
Speaker 3: into the role of being Hunter Biden's lead lawyer in
Speaker 3: the House of Representatives and really Joe Biden's lead lawyer
Speaker 3: in the House of Representatives. And that's consistent because he's
Speaker 3: incredibly wealthy, he's the heir of a massive fortune. But
Speaker 3: he's been a Democrat staffer. He was a Democrat lawyer
Speaker 3: on the Trump impeachment, which was utterly ludicrous to begin with.
Speaker 3: And he's already shown he's willing to just lie. Whatever
Speaker 3: the talking point is from the left, Dan Goldman will
Speaker 3: repeat it. He will repeat it without a hesitance. And
Speaker 3: he says, oh, people should be afraid. I got to say,
Speaker 3: I don't know a lot of lawyers that would be
Speaker 3: afraid of Dan Goldman, because it is a bad strategy
Speaker 3: for a lawyer to lie a politician, sometimes you can
Speaker 3: get away with it because politicians can speak in environments.
Speaker 3: If you do like Dan Goldman does, and you go
Speaker 3: on CNN and MSNBC, your lies are never challenged. You're
Speaker 3: in front of a forum where the corrupt journalists interviewing
Speaker 3: you also want to lie about the thing you're lying about,
Speaker 3: so you can say things and face no challenge whatsoever.
Speaker 3: But where I think Carville is most foolish is saying, gosh,
Speaker 3: this is a great thing for Democrats to have these
Speaker 3: impeachment hearings. Careful, braer rabbit, Careful what you asked to
Speaker 3: be thrown into it is in this instance, Look, Carville
Speaker 3: is beating his chest and trying.
Speaker 8: To look tough.
Speaker 3: But the evidence, which we've discussed at great length of
Speaker 3: Joe Biden's corruption is very significant. James Carville does not
Speaker 3: want the American people to hear that evidence. Now, if
Speaker 3: they watch CNN, if they watch MSNBC, if they watch
Speaker 3: ABC or NBC, they won't hear that evidence. But if
Speaker 3: we have hearings and hearings that the American people pay
Speaker 3: attention to, they will hear that evidence and things like
Speaker 3: over one hundred suspicious activity reports, reports that banks filed
Speaker 3: about what appeared to be money laundering by the Biden
Speaker 3: family over twenty shell corporations, corporations that don't have employees,
Speaker 3: that don't manufacture anything, that are not real companies, but
Speaker 3: the only purpose of them it is to launder money.
Speaker 3: Up to five thousand, four hundred emails from fake email
Speaker 3: addresses from Joe Biden to Hunter Biden, many concerning Ukraine,
Speaker 3: multiple burner phones by Joe Biden, the testimony of a
Speaker 3: confidential informant who says Joe Biden and Hunter Biden personally
Speaker 3: solicited and received millions of dollars of bribes from a
Speaker 3: Ukrainian oligarch. The WhatsApp text message from Hunter threatening saying
Speaker 3: I'm sitting here next to my father and if you
Speaker 3: don't give me millions of dollars, my father is going
Speaker 3: to retaliate again us. You That evidence, one after the
Speaker 3: other after the other, is compelling, And the average American
Speaker 3: who is watching the corrupt corporate media doesn't know any
Speaker 3: of it. And so what Carvil is doing. Look in
Speaker 3: Wednesday's podcast, we said the Democrat talking point is there's
Speaker 3: no evidence. The more savvy people are saying, no direct evidence,
Speaker 3: because everything I just cited is evidence, although most of
Speaker 3: that is circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence is powerful evidence on
Speaker 3: which people are convicted of crimes every single day of
Speaker 3: the year. But as we discussed in Wednesday's podcast, they're
Speaker 3: at least two separate pieces of direct evidence. Number one,
Speaker 3: the Hunter Biden text to the Chinese communist official threatening
Speaker 3: retaliation from his father. That's direct evidence. And number two,
Speaker 3: Joe Biden admitting on tape that he held a billion
Speaker 3: dollars in US loan guarantees hostage to force the Ukrainian
Speaker 3: government to fire the pro secutor who was investigating the
Speaker 3: corrupt Ukrainian oligarch. That too, is direct evidence of one
Speaker 3: of the critical elements of bribery. And so I got
Speaker 3: to say, James Carvill, be careful what you wish for,
Speaker 3: because if the American people hear this evidence, it stinks.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it really does. I want to tell you about
Speaker 1: my friends over at Chalk.
Speaker 2: If you are a guy and you feel like you're
Speaker 2: losing your edge, you feel like you've lost some of
Speaker 2: that strength and vitality, and weakness and complacency have set in.
Speaker 2: Maybe you want to work out, but you just don't
Speaker 2: have the energy. Maybe you want to be more active,
Speaker 2: but you're just sitting on the couch too much. Well,
Speaker 2: testostrum levels have dropped off a cliff historically. They're now
Speaker 2: at an all time low. Thankfully, the patriots at Chalk
Speaker 2: choq dot com are helping real America men just like
Speaker 2: you take back and proudly mask. Maximize your masculinity by
Speaker 2: boosting testosterum levels up to twenty percent over ninety days.
Speaker 9: Now.
Speaker 2: I've been taking the Male Vitality Stack and it works.
Speaker 2: I've been taking it for months and I can tell
Speaker 2: tell you there is a huge difference. You can help
Speaker 2: maximize your testosterone by boosting it up to twenty percent
Speaker 2: over ninety days.
Speaker 1: Manufactured right here in the US of A.
Speaker 2: Chuck's Natural herbal supplements are clinically proven to have game
Speaker 2: changing effects on your energy, your focus, and your mood.
Speaker 2: So check them out. Go to chalksechoq dot com use
Speaker 2: the promo code Ben. You'll get thirty five percent off
Speaker 2: any chalk subscription for life. That's choq dot com. Use
Speaker 2: promo code Ben for thirty five percent off. Senator, I
Speaker 2: also want to ask you about this. The White House
Speaker 2: had a very interesting response and this is the third
Speaker 2: change now in the goalposts for Joe Biden's involvement with
Speaker 2: Hunter Biden's businesses. The first was they never spoke about business. Ever,
Speaker 2: then they change it to he was never in business
Speaker 2: with his son. That was the goalpost moving yet again.
Speaker 2: Now the White House is Ian Sam came out and
Speaker 2: moved the goalposts again when he said this.
Speaker 14: The other allegations is the president was present at some
Speaker 14: of the meetings between Hunter Biden and his business associates.
Speaker 14: Why was the president at those meetings on those phone calls?
Speaker 7: Well, again, I think this is part of the right
Speaker 7: wing's misinformation machine to try to confuse people about what
Speaker 7: the truth is. The truth is that the President, as
Speaker 7: he has said publicly for years, calls his family every
Speaker 7: day to check in. He calls his son every day
Speaker 7: to check in. He calls his other family members to
Speaker 7: check in to see how they're doing.
Speaker 12: He loves them.
Speaker 7: They're a tight knit family. And what the GOP's own
Speaker 7: witness testified in this case is that that's exactly what
Speaker 7: the President was doing. He was checking in with Hunter
Speaker 7: during a particularly hard time. I might add a time
Speaker 7: where the family was going through Hunter's brother Bo's illness,
Speaker 7: and of course the President checks in with his son
Speaker 7: and talks to them, but again that witness testified no
Speaker 7: business dealings of Hunter Biden's or anyone's was discussed in
Speaker 7: these conversations, and so again they're trying to make this
Speaker 7: sort of strange connection when their own investigation has disproven
Speaker 7: these claims.
Speaker 14: Before I let you go in is the president response?
Speaker 14: In terms of how the President has reacted to this,
Speaker 14: especially as somebody who's been in politics and been at
Speaker 14: Washington for as long as he has been, the idea
Speaker 14: that he is now a subject to an impeachment inquiry
Speaker 14: as president of the United States, what's his response to that.
Speaker 7: You know, the President has been in politics for a
Speaker 7: long time, and I think, as he would say, he's
Speaker 7: seen a lot of malarkey along the way, but this
Speaker 7: might take the cake. You know, he's focused on the
Speaker 7: issues that actually matter to the American people. You just
Speaker 7: saw him spending the last week traveling around the world,
Speaker 7: shoring up our alliance as advancing national interests in Asia,
Speaker 7: our economic interests in Asia, showing American leadership on the
Speaker 7: world stage.
Speaker 9: He's coming back here.
Speaker 7: He's announcing today a quarter billion dollar investment in cancer research,
Speaker 7: try to finally cure cancer. That's what his administration and
Speaker 7: this president is focused on every day. They're focused on
Speaker 7: the actual needs of the American people. And I think
Speaker 7: what he would say is maybe the House Republicans should
Speaker 7: join him.
Speaker 2: There's the pardon there where he says that Joe Biden
Speaker 2: attended Hunter's business meetings because he loves him. That's the
Speaker 2: new goalpost that they just moved significantly from they never
Speaker 2: talked about business to then well they never work together.
Speaker 2: Now it's well, he just went to the business meetings
Speaker 2: because he loves him.
Speaker 1: Really, that's the new excuse.
Speaker 3: Well, look, I mean, what good and loving and devoted
Speaker 3: father hasn't called in twenty times to his son's meeting
Speaker 3: with corrupt oligarchs who are paying millions of dollars in
Speaker 3: exchange for favors from that father while he's sitting and
Speaker 3: serving as the vice president of the United States. I mean,
Speaker 3: that's really just what any good dad would do.
Speaker 1: I mean, it really is.
Speaker 3: It's cynical because they point out that Joe's other son
Speaker 3: tragically died of cancer, so they want to wrap it
Speaker 3: in the sympathy of a human tragedy. To say, well,
Speaker 3: of course, you know, listen, why was Hunter getting paid
Speaker 3: the millions of dollars? I didn't hear him say a
Speaker 3: word about that. There's no value Hunter provides. What was
Speaker 3: the value Hunter brought? You know, Ben, you're a talented guy,
Speaker 3: You're a charming guy. Are there any foreign ola garks
Speaker 3: calling you up saying Ben, I want to wire millions
Speaker 3: of dollars to you.
Speaker 1: Zero, That's not all you know.
Speaker 3: They don't do that to anybody. They only do it
Speaker 3: if you were providing value. And what all of these
Speaker 3: talking heads, what all of these democrat hacks are saying,
Speaker 3: what all of the corporate media puppets are refusing to answer,
Speaker 3: is is what did Hunter get in exchange for the
Speaker 3: tens of millions of dollars? And according to the House
Speaker 3: it could be north of twenty thirty million dollars. We're
Speaker 3: talking massive amounts of money. And by the way, not
Speaker 3: money from you know, normal American companies, not money from
Speaker 3: our friends and allies. It wasn't money from France, it
Speaker 3: wasn't money from Italy, it wasn't money from the United Kingdom,
Speaker 3: it wasn't money from Japan. It was money from China, Russia, Ukraine.
Speaker 3: They singled out nations with very significant antagonism and hostility
Speaker 3: to America and some of the most corrupt nations on Earth.
Speaker 3: And there is no innocent explanation. By the way, you
Speaker 3: don't hear any of these Democrats explaining why did Joe
Speaker 3: Biden have multiple book burner phones, Why did he have
Speaker 3: fake emails? Why did he use fake emails to send
Speaker 3: emails to his son Hunter about Ukraine on government email
Speaker 3: while Hunter was getting paid millions of dollars. All of
Speaker 3: that the Democrats want you to ignore and say, well, gosh,
Speaker 3: Joe's just a loving dad, and that's what loving dads do.
Speaker 3: They help their sons make thirty million dollars from corrupt
Speaker 3: oligarchs who are enemies of America.
Speaker 2: So there was a montage that we played of Joe
Speaker 2: Biden and the lies that had been told by him
Speaker 2: as team others in the media.
Speaker 1: It went viral several weeks ago. I think it's.
Speaker 2: Important that we remind people and if you miss this
Speaker 2: or you were looking for this audio, that's why I
Speaker 2: want to play it for you again because it's so damning,
Speaker 2: especially as we move forward to impeachment. Before I do that,
Speaker 2: I want to tell you though about our friends at
Speaker 2: Patriot Mobile. For ten years, Patriot Mobile has been America's
Speaker 2: only Christian conservative wireless provider. And when I say only
Speaker 2: trust me, they're the only one. The team over there
Speaker 2: are amazing because not only do they take your dollars
Speaker 2: when you pay your bill every month, but when you
Speaker 2: pay your bill, you're actually supporting causes that you stand
Speaker 2: up for. We're talking about freedom of speech, really, the
Speaker 2: sanctity of life, the Second Amendment, are military veterans, first responders.
Speaker 2: Now you get nationwide coverage, dependable nationwide coverage, and they
Speaker 2: give 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 left. You may not realize that Big Mobile
Speaker 2: many of them actually give huge checks to Planned Parenthood.
Speaker 2: That is why you need to switch to Patriot Mobile.
Speaker 2: They have one hundred percent US based customer service team
Speaker 2: and that makes switching easy. Keep your number that you
Speaker 2: have right now, your same cell phone number, keep your
Speaker 2: same cell phone, or upgrade to a new one. Their
Speaker 2: team will help you find the best plan for your
Speaker 2: needs and to save you money. Go to Patriotmobile dot
Speaker 2: com slash Verdict that's Patriot Mobile dot com slash Verdict.
Speaker 2: Use a promo code Verdict when you call them, and
Speaker 2: you will also get the best deals of the year
Speaker 2: plus free active vation eight seven eight Patriot.
Speaker 1: That's eight seven eight Patriot.
Speaker 2: I want to get back to this montage center that
Speaker 2: was one that went viral and I hope you will
Speaker 2: give this to your friends shared on social media because
Speaker 2: it's another example of how many lives have been told
Speaker 2: by the Bidens and how much the media has been
Speaker 2: willing to cover for them. And this is what this
Speaker 2: impeachment inquiry is going to be all about.
Speaker 15: Ever discussed with my son before my brother or anyone
Speaker 15: else in being having to do with their businesses.
Speaker 13: President Biden met with at least fourteen of Hunter's business
Speaker 13: associates while he was vice president.
Speaker 10: And Vice president Joe Biden at dinner with his son
Speaker 10: Hunter along with Hunters of business associates from Ukraine, Russia,
Speaker 10: and Kazakhstan, and the day after the dinner, a Barisma
Speaker 10: executive said a note to Hunter, quoting dear Hunter, thank
Speaker 10: you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity
Speaker 10: to meet your father and spend some time together.
Speaker 6: Hunter's lucrative business dealings often included giving as much as
Speaker 6: a percent of his earnings to his dad.
Speaker 16: The text read quote, I hope you all can do
Speaker 16: what I did and pay for everything for this entire
Speaker 16: family for thirty years. It's really hard, but don't worry
Speaker 16: Onnlike Pop, I won't make you give me half your salary.
Speaker 15: His son Hunter, joining the then Vice president on the
Speaker 15: official visit to Beijing. Unknown to the press, back then,
Speaker 15: Hunter Biden was forming a Chinese private equity fund, planning
Speaker 15: to raise money, including from Chinese investors. Ten days after
Speaker 15: the Bidens trip, Shanghai authorities issued the fund's business license.
Speaker 17: And the Hunter introduced me as this is Tony Dad,
Speaker 17: the individual I told you about that's helping us with
Speaker 17: the business that we're working on in the Chinese.
Speaker 18: The email reads this way quote at the moment, there's
Speaker 18: a provisional agreement that the equity will be distributed as
Speaker 18: follows ten held by Hunter for the big guy.
Speaker 17: I have a thousand percent sit here and know that
Speaker 17: the big guy is referencing Joe Biden. I met with
Speaker 17: a former vice president in person multiple times.
Speaker 12: A newly revealed text message Joe's b Bolinski was apparently
Speaker 12: warned by business partner James Gillier, don't mention Joe being involved.
Speaker 12: It's only when you are face to face. I know
Speaker 12: you know that, but they are paranoid.
Speaker 5: Chinese executives admitted to reporters that they were actually introduced
Speaker 5: to the Vice presidents by Hunter.
Speaker 10: Biden, Hunter and the then Vice President seeing with a
Speaker 10: pair of Mexican billionaires at the same time.
Speaker 15: Hunter had been working on energy deals in Mexico.
Speaker 16: Joe Biden also had a Hunter at his business partner,
Speaker 16: fly On f was two to Mexico.
Speaker 5: His closest business partner.
Speaker 6: Hunters made at least nineteen visits to the White House
Speaker 6: and other official locations, including a sit down with then
Speaker 6: Vice President Joe Biden in the West Wing.
Speaker 18: There's photographic evidence of Biden on a golf out and
Speaker 18: with both his son Hunter and a man called Devin Archer,
Speaker 18: who was another member of the Parice Maboor.
Speaker 5: We also know that Devin Archer in that picture had
Speaker 5: a meeting in the White House, one on one meeting
Speaker 5: with Joe Biden about a week before.
Speaker 1: They joined the Maarice Mabour.
Speaker 2: You hear that, Senator, and this explains exactly why this
Speaker 2: impeachment inquiry is going to be so important.
Speaker 8: Well, it does.
Speaker 3: It also explains why the Democrat talking point and the
Speaker 3: corporate media talking point that there is no evidence of
Speaker 3: Joe Biden's corruption. It is flatly false. And I gotta
Speaker 3: say James Carvil saying he's really looking forward to hearings
Speaker 3: on this, well, you know what, James so am, I.
Speaker 2: Don't forget download this podcast Monday, Wednesday Fridays. We also
Speaker 2: do a really cool Saturday show now that is taking
Speaker 2: some of the best segments that were later in the
Speaker 2: show and we put them together for a review for
Speaker 2: you for the week on Saturdays. Make sure that subscribe
Speaker 2: or follow our auto download button depending on where you're
Speaker 2: listening right now. And in the in between days, join
Speaker 2: me on my podcast, the Ben Ferguson Podcasts. I'll keep
Speaker 2: you updown the latest breaking news in between Verdict episodes,
Speaker 2: So down with the Ben Ferguson podcast as well, and
Speaker 2: we'll see you back here in a couple of days.