September 26, 2025 • 28 mins
-
-
The episode centers on the claim that former FBI Director James Comey was indicted on two counts of lying under oath to Congress.
-
Cruz and Ferguson argue that Comey falsely denied authorizing leaks to the press, while Andrew McCabe’s testimony and evidence suggest otherwise.
-
They frame this as proof that Comey politicized and weaponized the FBI against Donald Trump.
-
Comey’s public response is portrayed as political and deflective rather than factual.
-
The discussion also touches on the statute of limitations, prosecutorial strategy, and the likelihood of conviction.
- Comey indictment sparks fierce political reactions nationwide
-
-
Sniper Attack on Dallas ICE Facility (WATCH)
-
The podcast also covers a violent shooting at an ICE facility in Dallas, described as politically motivated.
-
Cruz personally recounts being on the scene shortly after the attack.
-
The shooter is linked rhetorically to left-wing ideology and anti-ICE sentiment, with parallels drawn to other recent politically motivated shootings.
-
The hosts criticize Democratic leaders for “demonizing” ICE and argue that their rhetoric fuels such violence.
-
-
Political Framing
-
The episode repeatedly frames these events within a broader narrative of political weaponization, left-wing hypocrisy, and anti-Trump bias.
-
Cruz portrays Comey as a partisan actor, contrasting his own questioning of Comey with McCabe’s admissions.
-
Violence against law enforcement is positioned as a consequence of inflammatory rhetoric by Democrats.
-
Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the The Ben Ferguson Show Podcast and Verdict with Ted Cruz Wherever You get You're Podcasts. And don't forget to follow the show on Social Media so you never miss a moment! Thanks for Listening
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Who do you hold responsible for the uptick and left
wing violent hunt the radical left rhetoric, the radical.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Left is causing the problem. They're out of control, they're
saying things and they're really dumb people. I mean, I
look at Crockett, I look at some of these people.
They're very low IQ people.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
Actually, you're listening to the forty seven Morning Update with
Ben ferguson.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
Good Friday morning. Nice to have you with us on
the forty seven Morning Update. And there's one big story
coming out of the White House, and that is this.
The former FBI director James Comy has been indicted on
two major counts. He could spin up to five years
in prison if he is convicted. So what is behind
(00:44):
these indictments and when did it actually happen. I'm gonna
break it all down for you, all right. I want
to take a moment talk about the economy. You've been
seeing what's happening on Wall Street, You've seen what's been
happening with interest rates, and you've probably seen gold prices
hitting all time record highs. Why because there is uncertainty
all over the world right now, and when there is
(01:06):
uncertain times, you want real answers about your financial stability. Well,
at Kurt Elliot Precious Metals, you get more than gold
and silver. You get trusted guidance from a team that
puts people first always. You also get transparency. This is
why I recommend them. Their mission is clear. They want
(01:27):
to help you protect what matters most with real metals,
real service, and real clarity. Now here's why I love
what they do at Kurt Elliot Precious Metals number one
bullyon only approach. They focus on investment grade medals, not
overpriced quote collectibles or gimmick products that cost you an
(01:47):
insane amount of money for what you're actually getting. What
they do is they sell you more metal for your
money and fair value when it's time for you to
actually sell. They also have upfront transparent pricing just eight
percent when you buy and zero commissions when you go
to sell. There are no hidden fees on top of
(02:09):
that ever, that is the reason why I recommend them.
They also make sure they give you personalized guidance for you.
You're never just a number, no pressure, always real answers,
and they make sure that you are in control. So
if you're ready for real, honest clarity and all of
the bs taken out. Visit k e PM dot com
(02:33):
slash ben that's k e PM dot com slash ben
to schedule your personal portfolio review. Ask about today's unique
market window and how the current silver to gold ratio
might work in your favor. Protect what matters plan with
clarity k e PM dot com slash Ben or seven
(02:57):
two zero six oh five thirty nine seven two zero
six oh five thirty nine hundred Kurt Elliott Precious Medals.
Smarter Metal Investing starts with them. It's the forty seven
Morning Update and it starts right now.
Speaker 3 (03:12):
Story number one.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
It is massive news. The former FBI director James Komy
has been indicted. And before I give you all those details,
a big question that the media is not talking about
is this, is there a history of James Komy leaking? Well,
that's what this whole indictment is about, leaking information to
(03:35):
the media and then lying about it. We know for
a fact that James Komy leaked records to Columbia professor
so it would hit the New York Times that prompted
the Russia Gate Special Council to be named. Yes, that
actually happened. He was trying to shop a story of
(03:56):
Russian collusion that the FBI had already described is user generated,
and he shopped it to the media to try to
induce a special counsel to go after Donald Trump. He
disclosed a memo we know to a professor at Columbia
Law School with a plan to have him share it
to the New York Times. This is just some of
(04:17):
the history of the corruption of James Comy. Well, now,
the former FBI director, James Comy has been indicted on
two counts, charges that were brought before the statue of
limitations expired. And this is a man who now wants
you to feel sorry for him, claiming that he's some
sort of persecuted political victim. Now, there's also a very
(04:39):
important back and forth between James Comy from about five
years ago with Senator Ted Cruz. You may have seen
it or heard it already, but Senator Cruz and I
set down to talk about just how important that back
and forth could be. And here's part of our conversation.
All right, So, Senator I want to start with this clip,
(05:00):
and I think this is a great starting point for
this indictment of the former REPBI director James Comy. This
is you questioning Comy back in September of twenty twenty.
This is the back and forth between the two of you.
Everyone listening, This is really an important part of history
now and going to probably be an important part of
(05:21):
this case.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
To another topic. On May third, twenty seventeen, in this committee,
Chairman Grassley asked you, point blank, quote, have you ever
been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating
to the Trump investigation of the Clinton investigation? You responded
under oath quote never. He then asked you, quote, have
(05:44):
you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be
an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation
or the Clinton administration? You responded again under oath no. Now,
as you know, mister McCabe who works for you as
public life and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to
the Wall Street Journal and that you were directly aware
(06:06):
of it and that you directly authorized it. Now, what
mister McCabe is saying and what you testify to this
committee cannot both be true. One or the other is false.
Who's telling the truth.
Speaker 4 (06:21):
I can only speak to my testimony. I stand by
what the testimony you summarized that I gave in May
of twenty seventeen.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
So your testimony is you've never authorized anyone to leak,
and mister mccab if he says contrary, is not telling
the truth. Is that correct?
Speaker 4 (06:35):
Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony, but mine
is the same.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
Today, all right, I'm going to make a final point
because my time has expired. This investigation of the president
was corrupt. The FBI and the Department of Justice were
politicized and weaponized. And in my opinion, there are only
two possibilities that you were deliberately corrupt or wilfully incompetent,
and I don't believe you were incompetent. This has done
(07:01):
severe damage to the professionals and the honorable men and
women at the FBI because law enforcement should not be
used as a political weapon.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
All right, So you listen to that, and then you'll
look at the indictment. Count one false statement to the
US Senate that he had not quote authorized someone else
of the FBI to be an anonymous news source. Count
two call me obstructed the Senate Judiciary Committee's investigation through
his quote false and misleading statements. That is a big
(07:32):
smoking gun.
Speaker 2 (07:34):
Well it is. It's the basis of the indictment, and
this will be the central focus of the trial. Now,
James Comy put out a statement tonight on Instagram, and
his statement is striking in that it is a political statement.
It is not a statement about the facts of the law.
So give a listen to what James Comby said this
evening in response to the indictment.
Speaker 4 (07:55):
My family and I have known for years that there
are costs to standing up to Donald trum but we
couldn't imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not
live on our knees and you shouldn't either. Somebody that
I love dearly recently said that fear is the tool
of a tyrant, and she's right. But I'm not afraid,
(08:19):
and I hope you're not either. I hope instead you
are engaged, You are paying attention, and you will vote
like your beloved country depends upon it, which it does.
My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but
I have great confidence in the federal judicial system, and
(08:39):
I'm innocent, So let's have a trial.
Speaker 1 (08:43):
I love how he is a victim there and acting
like he's above all of this. But center, let's just
go back to three point thirty of twenty three, James
Comy tweeted out, quote, it's been a good day. That
is how I reacted it Trump being indicted in the
Alvin Bragg hush money case. So to act like he's
(09:04):
some sort of guy that's above all this. Look at
his own words.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Well, his statement he put out in response to this,
that could have been given by Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi
or Keen Jeffries or any other political Democrat. And in
fact he makes a call come out and vote. It's
a get out the vote message. This is a former
director of the FBI. But to give you a sense
of just how much he loathes Donald Trump, this is
(09:29):
a former director of the FBI who tweeted out to
the world a picture of shells spelling out eighty six
forty seven, in other words, slang for kill the current
president of the United States, Donald Van Trump. To say,
calling for the murder of the sitting president is not
appropriate for the former FBI director in an ordinary time,
(09:49):
that would be such an obvious statement that no one
would even think to say it. But that's just how
much James Comy loathes Donald Trump. And understand and when
Trump became president, the first time. In January of twenty seventeen,
President Trump unfortunately made a serious mistake, which is he
(10:11):
left James Comy in office. In hindsight, on January twentieth,
twenty seventeen, President Trump should have called James Comy and
said thank you for your service to the nation. Your
services are no longer required. I am certain President Trump
wishes he had done that. I think the White House
team believed that Komy could focus on law enforcement, could
(10:32):
not be politicized, and that assumption proved to be in error.
James Comy presided over weaponizing and politicizing the FBI. He
was part of weaponizing and politicizing the Department of Justice,
and it was because they hated Donald Trump, and frankly,
(10:52):
they were angry at the American people for electing him
in twenty sixteen, and so the FBI set out to
try to attack and to try to ultimately remove from
office the President of the United States. Now, again this
should not bear saying, but it is not the job
of law enforcement to determine the will of the voters.
(11:15):
Is wrong, and the elected president should no longer be president.
But that's what Comy presided over. And so when I
listened to him say I weep for the Department of Justice.
It really is. You know, there's a Yiddish word hootspot.
And I got to say, James Comy really ought to
have a T shirt with that printed on it because
he is grieving for the Department of Justice. Why because
(11:38):
he has been indicted for what I think is clearly
a felony. And we're going to break down in just minutes,
why exactly this is a felony, what the crime is?
And I want to point out nowhere in his statement
does Comy get into the actual facts. Nowhere in the
statement does he get into what he did in Nowhere
in the statement does he get into law. He just
(11:59):
gives up political statement. He will not be on his knees.
He calls Trump a tyrant who was ruling by fear. Look,
this is an indictment that was returned by a grand
jury in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and it was returned
because of I believe clear evidence demonstrating Comy committed felonies.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
Senator, I want to bring up a point that no
one in the media has brought up so far about
this indictment, and I brought it up on CNN, and
they were like all deer in headlights, there is something
about this case. And they were saying, oh, this is
just political retribution by Donald Trump that clearly they weren't
(12:40):
going to bring this case. He had to fire the
person in charge of this office in Virginia, had to
put in somebody that would weaponize the DOJ. Here's the
fact that most people don't know. James Comy's own son
in law was literally inside the prosecutor's office that was tasked.
(13:00):
Just think about this with indicting his father in law.
And so when you sit there and I look at this,
I'm like, man, the deep state got together to protect
James Comy at all costs. And as soon as the
indictment came out later in the day, James Comy's son
in law then gave his resignation letter because I guess
he just couldn't stop what was inevitable.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
Well, and look, I think what should govern this case
is the facts and the law. And I believe James
Comy should have been indicted five years ago. And indeed
I called upon him to be indicted five years ago.
So let me lay out the facts. And in December
of twenty twenty. So the questioning that we played in
the first segment was from September thirtieth of twenty twenty.
(13:42):
And by the way, the reason the indictment was brought
right now is the statute limitations was going to run
next week, and so they had to bring it before
the end of the statute limitations or they would not
be able to charge him. But on December tenth of
twenty twenty, here's the letter that I sent to Bill Barr,
then Thettorney General of the United States and Christopher Ray,
(14:03):
who was then the director of the FBI. Days before
the presidential election in twenty sixteen, a Wall Street Journal
article quoted an anonymous source confirming the existence of a
probe into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server
while serving as Secretary of State, an investigation that up
to that point, mister Comy and the FBI declined to confirm.
(14:27):
We now know that this leak was authorized by then
Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe. Mister McCabe initially
told FBI agents under oath that he did not authorize
the leak and he did not know who did, but
when confronted later with contrary evidence, he confessed both to
knowing about and authorizing the leak. We do not know, however,
(14:53):
whether and to what extent then FBI Director Comy was
aware of and authorized this leak after the fact. Mister
Komy has repeatedly stated, I'm sorry. Mister McCabe has repeatedly
stated that mister Komy knew of and effectively authorized the
leak by approving it. He told the Office of Inspector
(15:14):
General that quote, he and Komy discussed the October thirtieth
Wall Street Journal article in person on October thirty first,
twenty sixteen, and that at that meeting, quote, he told
Comy that he had authorized ad slash OPA and Special
Council to disclose the account of the August twelfth call
(15:35):
and did not say anything in any way to suggest
that it was unauthorized. According to mister McCabe, mister Komy
quote did not react negatively, just kind of accepted it
and quote thought it was a good idea that they
presented this information to the media. He again reiterated mister
(15:57):
Comy's involvement at a hearing last month at the Senate
Judiciary Committee. I asked mister McCabe, according to the Washington Times,
April eighteenth, twenty eighteen. Mister McCabe insisted that he told
his boss that he had authorized disclosure about the Clinton investigation,
but mister Comy has denied this claim, and mister McCabe
(16:19):
told investigators that mister Comy knew he had authorized disclosure
and agreed it was a good idea. Is that accurate?
Is that your testimony to this committee? Mister McCabe replied,
that is my recollection. Mister Comy, however, has sworn under
oath that he has neither authorized the leak nor knew
(16:41):
of mister McCabe's involvement. At a May twenty seventeenth hearing
before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Grassley asked, mister Comy,
have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports
about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation.
Mister Comy replied never. Senator Grassley then asked, have you
(17:04):
ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an
anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or
the Clinton administration? He testified no. And this October that
a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, mister Komy testified in response
to my questioning quote. I stand by the testimony that
(17:25):
you summarized that I gave in May of twenty seventeen.
Mister Komy's denial in front of the Senate is consistent
with his statement to the OIG. He told the OIG
that quote, he recalled seeing this article, but he did
not know how the disclosure about the paidag call in
the October thirtieth article happened. He said that he was
(17:47):
quote very concerned about that part of the article. Komy
told OIG he considered the disclosure about the paidag's call
problematic because it related the sensitive FBI information. The OIG
report continues, quote, according to Kmy, he discussed the issue
with mccab after the article was published, and at the
(18:09):
time mccab quote definitely did not tell me that he
authorized the disclosure of the paidag call. Comy said that
mccab gave him the exact opposite impression. Mister Comy asserted
that he took from whatever communication they had that mister
McCabe wasn't involved in the leak. And here's what's critical.
(18:31):
Mister Kmy and mister McCabe's statements are irreconcilently contradictory. Mister
mccab says that he told mister Comy of the leak
and that mister Komy approved, effectively authorizing the leak after
the fact. Mister Comy, on the other hand, has said
that he neither authorized the leak nor knew of mister
McCabe's involvement. One of them is lying under oath a
(18:56):
federal crime eighteen USC. Section sixteen twenty one. The American
people deserve to know who those are the facts, and
it is a simple binary choice. Either James Comy lied
under oath and committed to felony, or Andrew McCabe lied
under oath or committed to felony. Because what they said
(19:18):
is precisely opposite. There is not a world in which
neither of them committed a felony. And the only choice
is which one broke the law by bringing this indictment. Obviously,
the Department of Justice has determined it was James Comy
who lied under oath and broke the law, and that's
what the trial will be all about.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
All right, senat So here's what I've been hearing on
online from the media. They're like, hey, Donald Trump weighed
in on this too. Much, they're gonna get this thing
kicked out before it even goes to a judge. This
is a waste of the American taxpayer's dollars. And then
if that's noted up, they say, well, no one ever
gets indicted and they actually go forward and get a
(19:58):
conviction on someone in line to Congress because well, a
lot of people lie to Congress. And even if you
did lie, it may have been a mistake. It's gonna
be very hard to get a conviction. Break down how
this could roll out in court, what could happen.
Speaker 2 (20:10):
Well, at the end of the day, the factual predicate
behind this crime is not terribly complicated. As I mentioned,
there's a direct contradiction between James Comey's testimony under oath
before the Senate and Andrew McCabe's testimony under oath before
the Senate. They cannot both be true. One or the
other is deliberately lying, And how do we know which
(20:33):
one is likely to be lying? Well, the FBI, in
all likelihood, possesses the information that confirms who's telling the
truth and who's lying. Indeed, if you look at the
account of what occurred, mckab initially told the same lie
that Komy did. Mckayb initially said he didn't link the information,
(20:54):
he didn't authorize it, and he didn't know who did.
But then the FBI All Inspector General confronted him with
contrary evidence. I don't know what the contrary evidence is,
but they put in front of him, mister McCabe, you
said you didn't leak this information. Well boom, here's the
evidence to the contrary And what did McCabe do. Oh crap,
you got me. Okay, you're right, I leaked it. I'm
(21:18):
the one who did it, and I talked to Comy
about it. I told him about it. So he admitted
that when he was caught in a lie. I don't
know specifically what confirming evidence the FBI and the Department
of Justice has, but they have enough that they caused
McCabe to reverse his first lie and instead to say, yes,
(21:40):
he did it, and Comy knew about it. And so
between the two, you know, it was interesting. When I
was questioning Comy, he said a couple of times, well,
I'm not going to characterize, as he put it, Andy's testimony. Well,
I get politically, that's a smart move not to characterize
Andy's testimony but you know what, his entire legal defense
is going to be, McCabe is lying because he doesn't
(22:03):
have an alternative. That's his only argument is when McCabe said,
under oath, good point that I know about it. Comy's
defense team is going to have to say McCabe was lying.
And by the way, mcab is going to be the
star witness at the prosecution. The prosecution is going to
put Andy McCabe on the stand and he's going to
(22:23):
ask them did you leak it? Now, I'm going to
predict Andy McCabe is going to say, yes, did you
talk to James Comy about it? Yes? Did he authorize it? Yes?
And the reason I'm going to predict he's going to
do all of that is because Andy McCabe testified to
that in front of Congress, and if he gives any
(22:43):
other answer, he'll be indicted for lying to Congress. So
he can't have it both ways. And I expect that
that Comy's lawyer will try to cross examine him and
we'll try to argue McCabe is lying. But it's very
difficult to see what I mcabe would have any incentive
to lie. He and Comy were thickest thieves. He was
(23:06):
only forced to admit the truth when confronted with contrary evidence. Again,
we don't know what that evidence is, but presumably the
FBI and the Department of Justice do so. I don't
know if it is contemporaneous phone calls, perhaps with the reporters.
I don't know if it is notes. I don't know
if it's emails. I don't know if it's testimony from
(23:26):
someone else at the FBI who said, hey, Andrew McCabe
told me to do this. But it is something, and
it was something that was compelling enough that it caused
Andrew McCabe to abandon line number one, and and so
at the end of the day, this is not a
complicated factual case. This is not some grand tapestry. It's
(23:48):
a he said, he said, she said. But you have
both testimonies under oath, and it's going to be a
question of what additional evidence is there to confirm who's
telling the truth and who's not. I also think I
will be surprised if James Comy's lawyer puts him on
the stand. Now, under our justice system, the prosecution cannot
(24:13):
force a defendant to testify. But I'm going to predict
James Comy is not going to take the stand because
if he takes the stand, he can be cross examined,
and he does not want to be cross examined, because
this is someone who presided over weaponizing the Department of
Justice with the objective of taking out Donald J. Trump
(24:36):
and getting under oath, getting cross examined by a skilled
trial attorney, and again under oath. By the way, if
he lies in his trial testimony, he can be indicted
and prosecuted again for lying under oath. Again, I don't
think his lawyer will do that. And so at the
end of the day, look, the press is going to
go on and on and say, well, Trump hates James Comy.
(24:57):
That is certainly true. But being hated by the president
is not enough to exonerate you from criminal conduct. And
in this instance, I believe Comy should have been indicted
five years ago because it was clear he had deliberately
lied to Congress. And look, we started by playing my
cross examination. This wasn't an absent minded lie. This wasn't oh,
(25:21):
I'm not paying attention. This was careful, This was deliberate,
this was strategic, this was planned. I believe this was
James Comy saying, I face no accountability whatsoever. I can
lie under oath and no one's going to hold me
to account. And I think he feels he feels clever,
but he also feels vindicated. Listen, James Comy was someone
(25:43):
who I think fancied himself as j Edgar Hoover. He
fancied himself as as an incredibly powerful director of the FBI,
empowered to remove the tyrant. That's what he said in
his statement tonight that he thinks Trump is a tyrant.
And I think when the American people elected him in
(26:04):
twenty sixteen, I think Comy was angry and he decided
he would use the power of the FBI to remove
the president elected by the people. And so I think
it is quite fitting that he is facing accountability for
committing criminal conduct. Let me repeat, this indictment is not
for being an opponent of Donald Trump. It is not
(26:26):
for being a political political figure on the other side
of Donald Trump. This indictment is for deliberately and knowingly
lying under oath to the United States Senate, which is
a clear and unmistakable felony. And I think Comy, I
think the odds are good that comy will be convicted,
(26:47):
and I think if he's convicted, I think he's going
to serve jail time.
Speaker 1 (26:51):
How much of it very quickly? Of his past we'll
come back to haunt him. He is a prolific guy
when it comes to leaking, he's a pro at. It's
not damages. He knows how to leak. Hell, he leaked
information that was apparently classified to make sure that there
was a special counsel that went after Donald Trump. We
know that for a fact. And it went to one
(27:11):
of his former law friends at a university that then
went to a newspaper. That is a fact. Will that
come up? And then the other question I have for
you quickly is this, will the testimony that the gay
before Congress be used in court or literally? Will senators
that interviewed him, would you guys go to court or
would they just use the testimony video?
Speaker 2 (27:30):
Yeah, I think they would use the testimony. They would
read or play the testimony. I don't think you're going
to see senators testifying and the record is clear and objective,
and so everyone knows exactly what his testimony was. In
terms of his past pattern, I think it could certainly
come in the prosecution might try to bring it in
to establish a pattern. That would be difficult. But I
(27:52):
think if Comey's lawyer argues, well, he couldn't possibly have
approved this, he never would have approved a leak, then
I think the problem secution would be able to get
all of that in as rebuttal to the defendant's argument.
So I think it's more likely to come in as
rebuttal evidence than directly proving a pattern. But my guess
is one way or another that evidence is going to
(28:14):
come in, and you're right, there's a clear pattern. Comy
has a long pattern of relying on media leaks to
advance his own.
Speaker 3 (28:19):
Personal gen Thank you for listening to the forty seven
Morning Update with Ben Ferguson. Please make sure you hit
subscribe wherever you're listening to this podcast right now and
for more in depth news, also subscribe to the Ben
Ferguson podcast and we will see you back here tomorrow
Who do you hold responsible for the uptick and left
wing violent hunt the radical left rhetoric, the radical.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Left is causing the problem. They're out of control, they're
saying things and they're really dumb people. I mean, I
look at Crockett, I look at some of these people.
They're very low IQ people.
Speaker 3 (00:19):
Actually, you're listening to the forty seven Morning Update with
Ben ferguson.
Speaker 1 (00:24):
Good Friday morning. Nice to have you with us on
the forty seven Morning Update. And there's one big story
coming out of the White House, and that is this.
The former FBI director James Comy has been indicted on
two major counts. He could spin up to five years
in prison if he is convicted. So what is behind
(00:44):
these indictments and when did it actually happen. I'm gonna
break it all down for you, all right. I want
to take a moment talk about the economy. You've been
seeing what's happening on Wall Street, You've seen what's been
happening with interest rates, and you've probably seen gold prices
hitting all time record highs. Why because there is uncertainty
all over the world right now, and when there is
(01:06):
uncertain times, you want real answers about your financial stability. Well,
at Kurt Elliot Precious Metals, you get more than gold
and silver. You get trusted guidance from a team that
puts people first always. You also get transparency. This is
why I recommend them. Their mission is clear. They want
(01:27):
to help you protect what matters most with real metals,
real service, and real clarity. Now here's why I love
what they do at Kurt Elliot Precious Metals number one
bullyon only approach. They focus on investment grade medals, not
overpriced quote collectibles or gimmick products that cost you an
(01:47):
insane amount of money for what you're actually getting. What
they do is they sell you more metal for your
money and fair value when it's time for you to
actually sell. They also have upfront transparent pricing just eight
percent when you buy and zero commissions when you go
to sell. There are no hidden fees on top of
(02:09):
that ever, that is the reason why I recommend them.
They also make sure they give you personalized guidance for you.
You're never just a number, no pressure, always real answers,
and they make sure that you are in control. So
if you're ready for real, honest clarity and all of
the bs taken out. Visit k e PM dot com
(02:33):
slash ben that's k e PM dot com slash ben
to schedule your personal portfolio review. Ask about today's unique
market window and how the current silver to gold ratio
might work in your favor. Protect what matters plan with
clarity k e PM dot com slash Ben or seven
(02:57):
two zero six oh five thirty nine seven two zero
six oh five thirty nine hundred Kurt Elliott Precious Medals.
Smarter Metal Investing starts with them. It's the forty seven
Morning Update and it starts right now.
Speaker 3 (03:12):
Story number one.
Speaker 1 (03:14):
It is massive news. The former FBI director James Komy
has been indicted. And before I give you all those details,
a big question that the media is not talking about
is this, is there a history of James Komy leaking? Well,
that's what this whole indictment is about, leaking information to
(03:35):
the media and then lying about it. We know for
a fact that James Komy leaked records to Columbia professor
so it would hit the New York Times that prompted
the Russia Gate Special Council to be named. Yes, that
actually happened. He was trying to shop a story of
(03:56):
Russian collusion that the FBI had already described is user generated,
and he shopped it to the media to try to
induce a special counsel to go after Donald Trump. He
disclosed a memo we know to a professor at Columbia
Law School with a plan to have him share it
to the New York Times. This is just some of
(04:17):
the history of the corruption of James Comy. Well, now,
the former FBI director, James Comy has been indicted on
two counts, charges that were brought before the statue of
limitations expired. And this is a man who now wants
you to feel sorry for him, claiming that he's some
sort of persecuted political victim. Now, there's also a very
(04:39):
important back and forth between James Comy from about five
years ago with Senator Ted Cruz. You may have seen
it or heard it already, but Senator Cruz and I
set down to talk about just how important that back
and forth could be. And here's part of our conversation.
All right, So, Senator I want to start with this clip,
(05:00):
and I think this is a great starting point for
this indictment of the former REPBI director James Comy. This
is you questioning Comy back in September of twenty twenty.
This is the back and forth between the two of you.
Everyone listening, This is really an important part of history
now and going to probably be an important part of
(05:21):
this case.
Speaker 2 (05:23):
To another topic. On May third, twenty seventeen, in this committee,
Chairman Grassley asked you, point blank, quote, have you ever
been an anonymous source in news reports about matters relating
to the Trump investigation of the Clinton investigation? You responded
under oath quote never. He then asked you, quote, have
(05:44):
you ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be
an anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation
or the Clinton administration? You responded again under oath no. Now,
as you know, mister McCabe who works for you as
public life and repeatedly stated that he leaked information to
the Wall Street Journal and that you were directly aware
(06:06):
of it and that you directly authorized it. Now, what
mister McCabe is saying and what you testify to this
committee cannot both be true. One or the other is false.
Who's telling the truth.
Speaker 4 (06:21):
I can only speak to my testimony. I stand by
what the testimony you summarized that I gave in May
of twenty seventeen.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
So your testimony is you've never authorized anyone to leak,
and mister mccab if he says contrary, is not telling
the truth. Is that correct?
Speaker 4 (06:35):
Again, I'm not going to characterize Andy's testimony, but mine
is the same.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
Today, all right, I'm going to make a final point
because my time has expired. This investigation of the president
was corrupt. The FBI and the Department of Justice were
politicized and weaponized. And in my opinion, there are only
two possibilities that you were deliberately corrupt or wilfully incompetent,
and I don't believe you were incompetent. This has done
(07:01):
severe damage to the professionals and the honorable men and
women at the FBI because law enforcement should not be
used as a political weapon.
Speaker 1 (07:11):
All right, So you listen to that, and then you'll
look at the indictment. Count one false statement to the
US Senate that he had not quote authorized someone else
of the FBI to be an anonymous news source. Count
two call me obstructed the Senate Judiciary Committee's investigation through
his quote false and misleading statements. That is a big
(07:32):
smoking gun.
Speaker 2 (07:34):
Well it is. It's the basis of the indictment, and
this will be the central focus of the trial. Now,
James Comy put out a statement tonight on Instagram, and
his statement is striking in that it is a political statement.
It is not a statement about the facts of the law.
So give a listen to what James Comby said this
evening in response to the indictment.
Speaker 4 (07:55):
My family and I have known for years that there
are costs to standing up to Donald trum but we
couldn't imagine ourselves living any other way. We will not
live on our knees and you shouldn't either. Somebody that
I love dearly recently said that fear is the tool
of a tyrant, and she's right. But I'm not afraid,
(08:19):
and I hope you're not either. I hope instead you
are engaged, You are paying attention, and you will vote
like your beloved country depends upon it, which it does.
My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but
I have great confidence in the federal judicial system, and
(08:39):
I'm innocent, So let's have a trial.
Speaker 1 (08:43):
I love how he is a victim there and acting
like he's above all of this. But center, let's just
go back to three point thirty of twenty three, James
Comy tweeted out, quote, it's been a good day. That
is how I reacted it Trump being indicted in the
Alvin Bragg hush money case. So to act like he's
(09:04):
some sort of guy that's above all this. Look at
his own words.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Well, his statement he put out in response to this,
that could have been given by Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi
or Keen Jeffries or any other political Democrat. And in
fact he makes a call come out and vote. It's
a get out the vote message. This is a former
director of the FBI. But to give you a sense
of just how much he loathes Donald Trump, this is
(09:29):
a former director of the FBI who tweeted out to
the world a picture of shells spelling out eighty six
forty seven, in other words, slang for kill the current
president of the United States, Donald Van Trump. To say,
calling for the murder of the sitting president is not
appropriate for the former FBI director in an ordinary time,
(09:49):
that would be such an obvious statement that no one
would even think to say it. But that's just how
much James Comy loathes Donald Trump. And understand and when
Trump became president, the first time. In January of twenty seventeen,
President Trump unfortunately made a serious mistake, which is he
(10:11):
left James Comy in office. In hindsight, on January twentieth,
twenty seventeen, President Trump should have called James Comy and
said thank you for your service to the nation. Your
services are no longer required. I am certain President Trump
wishes he had done that. I think the White House
team believed that Komy could focus on law enforcement, could
(10:32):
not be politicized, and that assumption proved to be in error.
James Comy presided over weaponizing and politicizing the FBI. He
was part of weaponizing and politicizing the Department of Justice,
and it was because they hated Donald Trump, and frankly,
(10:52):
they were angry at the American people for electing him
in twenty sixteen, and so the FBI set out to
try to attack and to try to ultimately remove from
office the President of the United States. Now, again this
should not bear saying, but it is not the job
of law enforcement to determine the will of the voters.
(11:15):
Is wrong, and the elected president should no longer be president.
But that's what Comy presided over. And so when I
listened to him say I weep for the Department of Justice.
It really is. You know, there's a Yiddish word hootspot.
And I got to say, James Comy really ought to
have a T shirt with that printed on it because
he is grieving for the Department of Justice. Why because
(11:38):
he has been indicted for what I think is clearly
a felony. And we're going to break down in just minutes,
why exactly this is a felony, what the crime is?
And I want to point out nowhere in his statement
does Comy get into the actual facts. Nowhere in the
statement does he get into what he did in Nowhere
in the statement does he get into law. He just
(11:59):
gives up political statement. He will not be on his knees.
He calls Trump a tyrant who was ruling by fear. Look,
this is an indictment that was returned by a grand
jury in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and it was returned
because of I believe clear evidence demonstrating Comy committed felonies.
Speaker 1 (12:19):
Senator, I want to bring up a point that no
one in the media has brought up so far about
this indictment, and I brought it up on CNN, and
they were like all deer in headlights, there is something
about this case. And they were saying, oh, this is
just political retribution by Donald Trump that clearly they weren't
(12:40):
going to bring this case. He had to fire the
person in charge of this office in Virginia, had to
put in somebody that would weaponize the DOJ. Here's the
fact that most people don't know. James Comy's own son
in law was literally inside the prosecutor's office that was tasked.
(13:00):
Just think about this with indicting his father in law.
And so when you sit there and I look at this,
I'm like, man, the deep state got together to protect
James Comy at all costs. And as soon as the
indictment came out later in the day, James Comy's son
in law then gave his resignation letter because I guess
he just couldn't stop what was inevitable.
Speaker 2 (13:22):
Well, and look, I think what should govern this case
is the facts and the law. And I believe James
Comy should have been indicted five years ago. And indeed
I called upon him to be indicted five years ago.
So let me lay out the facts. And in December
of twenty twenty. So the questioning that we played in
the first segment was from September thirtieth of twenty twenty.
(13:42):
And by the way, the reason the indictment was brought
right now is the statute limitations was going to run
next week, and so they had to bring it before
the end of the statute limitations or they would not
be able to charge him. But on December tenth of
twenty twenty, here's the letter that I sent to Bill Barr,
then Thettorney General of the United States and Christopher Ray,
(14:03):
who was then the director of the FBI. Days before
the presidential election in twenty sixteen, a Wall Street Journal
article quoted an anonymous source confirming the existence of a
probe into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server
while serving as Secretary of State, an investigation that up
to that point, mister Comy and the FBI declined to confirm.
(14:27):
We now know that this leak was authorized by then
Deputy Director of the FBI Andrew McCabe. Mister McCabe initially
told FBI agents under oath that he did not authorize
the leak and he did not know who did, but
when confronted later with contrary evidence, he confessed both to
knowing about and authorizing the leak. We do not know, however,
(14:53):
whether and to what extent then FBI Director Comy was
aware of and authorized this leak after the fact. Mister
Komy has repeatedly stated, I'm sorry. Mister McCabe has repeatedly
stated that mister Komy knew of and effectively authorized the
leak by approving it. He told the Office of Inspector
(15:14):
General that quote, he and Komy discussed the October thirtieth
Wall Street Journal article in person on October thirty first,
twenty sixteen, and that at that meeting, quote, he told
Comy that he had authorized ad slash OPA and Special
Council to disclose the account of the August twelfth call
(15:35):
and did not say anything in any way to suggest
that it was unauthorized. According to mister McCabe, mister Komy
quote did not react negatively, just kind of accepted it
and quote thought it was a good idea that they
presented this information to the media. He again reiterated mister
(15:57):
Comy's involvement at a hearing last month at the Senate
Judiciary Committee. I asked mister McCabe, according to the Washington Times,
April eighteenth, twenty eighteen. Mister McCabe insisted that he told
his boss that he had authorized disclosure about the Clinton investigation,
but mister Comy has denied this claim, and mister McCabe
(16:19):
told investigators that mister Comy knew he had authorized disclosure
and agreed it was a good idea. Is that accurate?
Is that your testimony to this committee? Mister McCabe replied,
that is my recollection. Mister Comy, however, has sworn under
oath that he has neither authorized the leak nor knew
(16:41):
of mister McCabe's involvement. At a May twenty seventeenth hearing
before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Grassley asked, mister Comy,
have you ever been an anonymous source in news reports
about matters relating to the Trump investigation or the Clinton investigation.
Mister Comy replied never. Senator Grassley then asked, have you
(17:04):
ever authorized someone else at the FBI to be an
anonymous source in news reports about the Trump investigation or
the Clinton administration? He testified no. And this October that
a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, mister Komy testified in response
to my questioning quote. I stand by the testimony that
(17:25):
you summarized that I gave in May of twenty seventeen.
Mister Komy's denial in front of the Senate is consistent
with his statement to the OIG. He told the OIG
that quote, he recalled seeing this article, but he did
not know how the disclosure about the paidag call in
the October thirtieth article happened. He said that he was
(17:47):
quote very concerned about that part of the article. Komy
told OIG he considered the disclosure about the paidag's call
problematic because it related the sensitive FBI information. The OIG
report continues, quote, according to Kmy, he discussed the issue
with mccab after the article was published, and at the
(18:09):
time mccab quote definitely did not tell me that he
authorized the disclosure of the paidag call. Comy said that
mccab gave him the exact opposite impression. Mister Comy asserted
that he took from whatever communication they had that mister
McCabe wasn't involved in the leak. And here's what's critical.
(18:31):
Mister Kmy and mister McCabe's statements are irreconcilently contradictory. Mister
mccab says that he told mister Comy of the leak
and that mister Komy approved, effectively authorizing the leak after
the fact. Mister Comy, on the other hand, has said
that he neither authorized the leak nor knew of mister
McCabe's involvement. One of them is lying under oath a
(18:56):
federal crime eighteen USC. Section sixteen twenty one. The American
people deserve to know who those are the facts, and
it is a simple binary choice. Either James Comy lied
under oath and committed to felony, or Andrew McCabe lied
under oath or committed to felony. Because what they said
(19:18):
is precisely opposite. There is not a world in which
neither of them committed a felony. And the only choice
is which one broke the law by bringing this indictment. Obviously,
the Department of Justice has determined it was James Comy
who lied under oath and broke the law, and that's
what the trial will be all about.
Speaker 1 (19:37):
All right, senat So here's what I've been hearing on
online from the media. They're like, hey, Donald Trump weighed
in on this too. Much, they're gonna get this thing
kicked out before it even goes to a judge. This
is a waste of the American taxpayer's dollars. And then
if that's noted up, they say, well, no one ever
gets indicted and they actually go forward and get a
(19:58):
conviction on someone in line to Congress because well, a
lot of people lie to Congress. And even if you
did lie, it may have been a mistake. It's gonna
be very hard to get a conviction. Break down how
this could roll out in court, what could happen.
Speaker 2 (20:10):
Well, at the end of the day, the factual predicate
behind this crime is not terribly complicated. As I mentioned,
there's a direct contradiction between James Comey's testimony under oath
before the Senate and Andrew McCabe's testimony under oath before
the Senate. They cannot both be true. One or the
other is deliberately lying, And how do we know which
(20:33):
one is likely to be lying? Well, the FBI, in
all likelihood, possesses the information that confirms who's telling the
truth and who's lying. Indeed, if you look at the
account of what occurred, mckab initially told the same lie
that Komy did. Mckayb initially said he didn't link the information,
(20:54):
he didn't authorize it, and he didn't know who did.
But then the FBI All Inspector General confronted him with
contrary evidence. I don't know what the contrary evidence is,
but they put in front of him, mister McCabe, you
said you didn't leak this information. Well boom, here's the
evidence to the contrary And what did McCabe do. Oh crap,
you got me. Okay, you're right, I leaked it. I'm
(21:18):
the one who did it, and I talked to Comy
about it. I told him about it. So he admitted
that when he was caught in a lie. I don't
know specifically what confirming evidence the FBI and the Department
of Justice has, but they have enough that they caused
McCabe to reverse his first lie and instead to say, yes,
(21:40):
he did it, and Comy knew about it. And so
between the two, you know, it was interesting. When I
was questioning Comy, he said a couple of times, well,
I'm not going to characterize, as he put it, Andy's testimony. Well,
I get politically, that's a smart move not to characterize
Andy's testimony but you know what, his entire legal defense
is going to be, McCabe is lying because he doesn't
(22:03):
have an alternative. That's his only argument is when McCabe said,
under oath, good point that I know about it. Comy's
defense team is going to have to say McCabe was lying.
And by the way, mcab is going to be the
star witness at the prosecution. The prosecution is going to
put Andy McCabe on the stand and he's going to
(22:23):
ask them did you leak it? Now, I'm going to
predict Andy McCabe is going to say, yes, did you
talk to James Comy about it? Yes? Did he authorize it? Yes?
And the reason I'm going to predict he's going to
do all of that is because Andy McCabe testified to
that in front of Congress, and if he gives any
(22:43):
other answer, he'll be indicted for lying to Congress. So
he can't have it both ways. And I expect that
that Comy's lawyer will try to cross examine him and
we'll try to argue McCabe is lying. But it's very
difficult to see what I mcabe would have any incentive
to lie. He and Comy were thickest thieves. He was
(23:06):
only forced to admit the truth when confronted with contrary evidence. Again,
we don't know what that evidence is, but presumably the
FBI and the Department of Justice do so. I don't
know if it is contemporaneous phone calls, perhaps with the reporters.
I don't know if it is notes. I don't know
if it's emails. I don't know if it's testimony from
(23:26):
someone else at the FBI who said, hey, Andrew McCabe
told me to do this. But it is something, and
it was something that was compelling enough that it caused
Andrew McCabe to abandon line number one, and and so
at the end of the day, this is not a
complicated factual case. This is not some grand tapestry. It's
(23:48):
a he said, he said, she said. But you have
both testimonies under oath, and it's going to be a
question of what additional evidence is there to confirm who's
telling the truth and who's not. I also think I
will be surprised if James Comy's lawyer puts him on
the stand. Now, under our justice system, the prosecution cannot
(24:13):
force a defendant to testify. But I'm going to predict
James Comy is not going to take the stand because
if he takes the stand, he can be cross examined,
and he does not want to be cross examined, because
this is someone who presided over weaponizing the Department of
Justice with the objective of taking out Donald J. Trump
(24:36):
and getting under oath, getting cross examined by a skilled
trial attorney, and again under oath. By the way, if
he lies in his trial testimony, he can be indicted
and prosecuted again for lying under oath. Again, I don't
think his lawyer will do that. And so at the
end of the day, look, the press is going to
go on and on and say, well, Trump hates James Comy.
(24:57):
That is certainly true. But being hated by the president
is not enough to exonerate you from criminal conduct. And
in this instance, I believe Comy should have been indicted
five years ago because it was clear he had deliberately
lied to Congress. And look, we started by playing my
cross examination. This wasn't an absent minded lie. This wasn't oh,
(25:21):
I'm not paying attention. This was careful, This was deliberate,
this was strategic, this was planned. I believe this was
James Comy saying, I face no accountability whatsoever. I can
lie under oath and no one's going to hold me
to account. And I think he feels he feels clever,
but he also feels vindicated. Listen, James Comy was someone
(25:43):
who I think fancied himself as j Edgar Hoover. He
fancied himself as as an incredibly powerful director of the FBI,
empowered to remove the tyrant. That's what he said in
his statement tonight that he thinks Trump is a tyrant.
And I think when the American people elected him in
(26:04):
twenty sixteen, I think Comy was angry and he decided
he would use the power of the FBI to remove
the president elected by the people. And so I think
it is quite fitting that he is facing accountability for
committing criminal conduct. Let me repeat, this indictment is not
for being an opponent of Donald Trump. It is not
(26:26):
for being a political political figure on the other side
of Donald Trump. This indictment is for deliberately and knowingly
lying under oath to the United States Senate, which is
a clear and unmistakable felony. And I think Comy, I
think the odds are good that comy will be convicted,
(26:47):
and I think if he's convicted, I think he's going
to serve jail time.
Speaker 1 (26:51):
How much of it very quickly? Of his past we'll
come back to haunt him. He is a prolific guy
when it comes to leaking, he's a pro at. It's
not damages. He knows how to leak. Hell, he leaked
information that was apparently classified to make sure that there
was a special counsel that went after Donald Trump. We
know that for a fact. And it went to one
(27:11):
of his former law friends at a university that then
went to a newspaper. That is a fact. Will that
come up? And then the other question I have for
you quickly is this, will the testimony that the gay
before Congress be used in court or literally? Will senators
that interviewed him, would you guys go to court or
would they just use the testimony video?
Speaker 2 (27:30):
Yeah, I think they would use the testimony. They would
read or play the testimony. I don't think you're going
to see senators testifying and the record is clear and objective,
and so everyone knows exactly what his testimony was. In
terms of his past pattern, I think it could certainly
come in the prosecution might try to bring it in
to establish a pattern. That would be difficult. But I
(27:52):
think if Comey's lawyer argues, well, he couldn't possibly have
approved this, he never would have approved a leak, then
I think the problem secution would be able to get
all of that in as rebuttal to the defendant's argument.
So I think it's more likely to come in as
rebuttal evidence than directly proving a pattern. But my guess
is one way or another that evidence is going to
(28:14):
come in, and you're right, there's a clear pattern. Comy
has a long pattern of relying on media leaks to
advance his own.
Speaker 3 (28:19):
Personal gen Thank you for listening to the forty seven
Morning Update with Ben Ferguson. Please make sure you hit
subscribe wherever you're listening to this podcast right now and
for more in depth news, also subscribe to the Ben
Ferguson podcast and we will see you back here tomorrow
Host
Ben Ferguson
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.