Justice or Retribution?

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
John Bolton is the subject of an FBI investigation into
the possible misuse of classified docs. Is he being targeted
because he went after Trump and assisted in the impeachment
proceedings against him or is this the equal application of
the law. That's the big question here. Our text number

(00:21):
is seven zero four seven zero. I had posited in
the last segment we were talking about how this investigation
had started it during the Biden administration and then they stopped,
and I was thinking, well, maybe they stopped because they
liked the fact that Biden, I mean that Bolton was
going against President Trump had suited their purpose, so therefore

(00:44):
they weren't They didn't pursue the investigation that they had opened.
And the Texter excuse me on at four seven nine
says maybe the Biden administration held it over Bolton's head.
So I was thinking Bolton went against Trump and that's
why it's stopped. But what you're suggesting is that it
stopped after they asked Bolton to go after Maybe I

(01:06):
nobody knows but John Bolton, to be honest with you,
for sure, what happened there. So, but we do know
that it was started and then stopped under Biden. And
this current DOJ has picked it up. And the question
is is he being targeted or is this the equal
application of the laws? CJ in Boston, Welcome to w

(01:27):
r K. O. What do you think it is?

Speaker 2 (01:29):
Hey, good morning, Sandy. Oh what I think it is
that he was definitely targeted a few years ago by
a Washington judge named Royce Lambert. Uh the rule where
it happened.

Speaker 1 (01:48):
Are you talking who are you talking about? CJ?

Speaker 2 (01:51):
Well, I'm I'm talking about the judge.

Speaker 1 (01:54):
No, No, CJ. You said he was targeted. Who are
you talking about?

Speaker 3 (01:58):
Uh?

Speaker 2 (01:58):
He was targeted by the no CJ.

Speaker 1 (02:01):
Who is he?

Speaker 3 (02:02):
He is?

Speaker 1 (02:02):
Who are you talking about?

Speaker 2 (02:05):
Botham was definitely targeted.

Speaker 1 (02:06):
But that's what I'm all you said was he I
was trying to forget who you were talking about.

Speaker 2 (02:11):
That's all sorry about that. He was not targeted by
Donald Trump of the Trump administration. He was targeted by
that federal DC judge Royce Lambert. Where Lambert reviewed the
book that that he wrote. And here's here's what Lampet said.
He reviewed the private passages and the government alleged contained

(02:35):
classified information contained him convinced him that Bolton has and
I quote has gambled with the national security of the
United States and has exposed his country to ham and
himself to civil and potentially criminal liability that was set
by a federal judge long before this investigation began. So

(02:55):
where is the mainstream media on this? That's where it began.
The extreme media, there is no way to be found
because they are in have then are cancer that eats
away a democracy of this country. For many, many years,
they are not reporting on this. It was initiated by
the judge. The judge said this, and that's why this
Trump is administration is investigating this. But you know, I

(03:18):
have a dream here. I have a dream. I have
a dream that bot and goes to jail. I have
a dream that every every illegal in this country gets deported.
I have a dream that these democrats who say no
one is above the law except for them, get prosecuted
when they violate the law. I want to pay I

(03:39):
want to see a patriotic cleansing of the United States
of America.

Speaker 4 (03:42):
Sandy.

Speaker 2 (03:43):
I want to see these people who are committing these
illegal acts go to jail. I want to see Letsia James,
I want to see far I want to mostly see
the judge in that case, Judge Agron, who came from
Columbia get charged with a conspiracy to prosecute an innocent

(04:04):
man and have him deported back to Columbia. Okay, so
so much for the mainstream media because the mainstream media
is not going to report the truth, and the mainstream
media is not going to report the facts.

Speaker 1 (04:19):
Yeah, I don't disagree with you. I think that the
Trump administration has made an effort to bypass the legacy
media by bringing in by first of all, their unprecedented
use of social media, which is something President Trump done
has done from twenty sixteen on. Also, I think by

(04:39):
their inclusion of a non traditional media in the White
House press rooms and his willingness to speak with people
who are not on the main networks or cable channels,
I think they have tried to broaden that base out
a little bit to do exactly what you're talking about.
Walk around the press who don't don't report the news,

(05:01):
who only report things that follow their their agenda. I
think that that's starting to change, CJ. Don't you.

Speaker 2 (05:11):
Oh yeah, oh yeah. But as I said, the mainstream media,
and that's what most of these people get their news.
They're really uninformed of what really is going on in
this country. And that's that's what's that's what's allowed this
country to fall where it has under the Biden administration.
You know, it's the belief you know, real quick, Sandy,

(05:34):
You know who writes history? Who writes history?

Speaker 1 (05:38):
Writing history?

Speaker 2 (05:40):
Yeah, I say the mainstream media writes history. The mainstream
media are the ones that are portraying everyone. They are
the ones that are really writing history. I mean, to them,
Joe Biden is the best thing since slice bread. There
needs to be a lot of people under this Biden
administration that need to go to jail. And this country

(06:01):
is on a track right now of getting His greatness
back after it was stripped under the Body administration. And
you can see it across the country, mostly these black
leaders and cities and governors and states, people of color
who are resenting the national God coming into the cities
when they when the people actually want it. They want

(06:22):
to reduce crime, They want to increase crime, you know,
they want to protect the Albrego Gatsias of America, Okay,
and allow them to go back onto the streets and
murder and rape and pillage our communities. That is the
face of the new Democratic Communist Party, Sandy, and people
need to recognize this isn't the Democratic Party of our

(06:45):
fathers and our grandfathers. This is a completely radical political
party and it can be seen right in New York
with Mundani running for the mayor mayor of the City
of New York. Is what's happening here. Ocasio Cortez, Elizabeth Warren,
Bernie Sanders, They're all rallying around a true radical communists

(07:11):
and that's the party that this has become. And that's
something that the main seam media should be reporting on,
is the changes in the Democratic Party that have leaned.

Speaker 4 (07:23):
So far left.

Speaker 2 (07:25):
We are allowing communists to get into politics in the NI.

Speaker 1 (07:32):
Well, we've always allowed communists to get into politics. You
don't allow or just allow a party. We've been talking
about whether the Trump administration is exacting justice or retribution
in their investigation into James I'm sorry not James John
Bolton's possible misuse of classified documents and CJ from Boston

(07:55):
says justice when he wighed in the last segment and
he spoke about having a dream that democrats would be
held accountable. Do you share that dream? You want to
see democrats held accountable you both, might you know, just
get it to be honest with you, because it looks
like there are a lot of or a whole slew
of chickens coming home to rust lately. And we'll start

(08:17):
with one of the people that CJ mentioned, and that
was Leticia James. We all know Leticia James. She's the
woman who campaigned for Attorney General of New York on
getting Donald Trump, no matter what she had to charge
him with. You remember, I mean, I've always been flabbergasted
by this cut and this is James during her campaign

(08:40):
cut number eight. Please, Mike, I won Would you see
the people who say, oh, I'm not going to bother
to register to vote because my voice doesn't make a difference,
or I'm just one person.

Speaker 5 (08:53):
I say one, I say one name Trump, I should
motivate you.

Speaker 1 (08:58):
Don't be your asking both? Will you sue him for us?

Speaker 5 (09:02):
Oh, we're going to definitely assume we're going to be
a real paid in the ask.

Speaker 1 (09:05):
He's going to know my name personally.

Speaker 6 (09:07):
I love it.

Speaker 1 (09:08):
He probably does already. Wow. And you know, and she
delivered his promise. You know, she went after Trump for
insurance fraud. She accused him of inflating his assets and
defrauding lenders and insurance companies, and she also sought to
stop Trump and his sons from operating any businesses in

(09:29):
New York. Then what was pretty scary is you had
last year Judge Angron, who is somebody else that CJ mentioned,
ordered Trump to pay back more than three hundred and
fifty five million in a fine and barred Trump from
serving as an officer or director for any New York
corporation or any other legal entity in New York for

(09:53):
a period of I think it's three years. And the
judge claimed that Trump and the defendants participated in eighty
and abetting the conspiracy to commit insurance fraud. And Donald
Trump Junior and Eric Trump were also ordered to pay
millions of dollars, as was the Trump CFO, Alan Weiselberg,
and I think he was ordered to pay a million

(10:14):
dollars too. But the three hundred and fifty five million
judgment plus daily interest swelled to more than five hundred
million dollars, and Leticia James even took the initial step
to seize President Trump's assets after he couldn't secure a
bond to pay that outrageous judgment. But just to talk.

(10:38):
You remember it. And when she won, I was going to
tell you something else, but before I do, I want
you to remember something. When she won the court case,
she's Leticia James stood on the courthouse steps trumpeting the
same phrase that John Bolton did when he was reveling
in the mar al Lago raid. And that phrase is

(10:58):
something you're going to hear over and over again from defendants,
and that is from Democrats. No one is above the law,
is what John Bolton said, and is what Letitia James
said as well. Cut eight A, Please, Mike, my message
is simple.

Speaker 5 (11:17):
No matter how powerful you are, no matter how much
money you think you may have, no one is above
the law. And it is my responsibility and my duty
and my job to enforce it. The law is both
powerful and fragile. And today in court it will prove
our case. I thank you all for being here, and

(11:37):
again justice will prevail.

Speaker 3 (11:39):
Thank you.

Speaker 1 (11:40):
Justice will prevail well. Last week and appeals court throughout
the massive civil fraud penalty against President Trump, and a
panel of five judges in the Appellate Division of New
York's court system said the verdict, which stood to cost
Trump more than five hundred and fifty million at this point,
and you know, really rock his real state empire was excessive,

(12:03):
according to them. President Trump's response to this was to
make a post on True Social that says, a great
win for America, total victory and the fake New York
State Attorney General Letitia James case. I greatly respect the
fact that the court had the courage to throw out
this unlawful and disgraceful decision that was hurting businesses all

(12:24):
throughout New York State. Others were afraid to do business there.
The amount, including interest and penalties, was over five hundred
and fifty million. It was a political witch hunt in
a business sense, the likes of which no one has
ever seen before, and was a case of election interference
by the city and state trying to show illegally that
I did things that were wrong, when in fact everything

(12:45):
I did was absolutely correct. In fact, you know, in
the face of all of this, it has been just
appalling for New York businesses on top of just a
personal attack against President Trump. And James of course is

(13:09):
not backing down. Even though the appeals court ruled against her.
She's vowed to appeal to the state's highest court, the
SJC is Supreme Judicial Court at their version of their
highest court. Even as the Justice Department has turned up
the heat on her, pursuing probes against her as well,
she doesn't care. She's got some stuff that's happening in

(13:29):
her personal life too. That makes that nobody is above
the law phrase a little bit sound, I think disingenuine.
In fact, one of the big issues coming against her
is mortgage fraud. The director of the Justice Department's Weaponization
Working Group, ed Martin, is calling on Leticia James to

(13:54):
resign as an act of good faith after starting investigation
into mortgage fraud involving her. That is shocker because basically
she's accused of misusing her or misusing the mortgage system,

(14:16):
and fraudulently putting down information that didn't exist. I'm sorry,
isn't that what she charged President Trump did. In a
letter to James lawyer Abby Lowell, ed Martin says that
James would best be served would best serve the good
of the state nation by resigning from her office to

(14:37):
address the issues in the criminal referral against her. Her
resignation would give the people of New York and America
more peace than proceeding. I would take this as an
act of good faith. I'm not sure that James knows
what good faith is. Her attorney apparently has responded, no, no, no,
we're not going to do that. She's not going to resign.

(14:58):
This investigation all stems from a letter Federal Housing Finance
Agency Director Bill Poulty sent to the AG Pambondi, asking
her to investigate and consider prosecuting James because she had
falsified bank documents and property records. She listed Virginia Home
as her principal residents, and he suggested she may have
been trying to avoid higher interest rates than often applied

(15:22):
to secondary homes. And so it looks like Letitia James,
you know, is violating those laws that she is charged
with defending. What was it she was saying again outside
the court known as above the law. Now James supporters
are saying that the mortgage fraud case against her is

(15:43):
a retribution. Are they right? Is this retribution like James,
like John Bolton? Is retribution? Or does this sound more
along lines of equal application of the law. Susan in Florida,
Welcome to WRKO. How are you, Susan?

Speaker 3 (16:01):
I mean, good morning, thanks for taking my call.

Speaker 4 (16:03):
As for John.

Speaker 3 (16:04):
Bolton, I think this is going to go deeper than
just a book that he wrote. I think he's been
subverting the United States for a very long time, and
I think it's going to You're going to find out
that he was probably selling military secrets for money. With

(16:24):
that being said, we'll see where this goes. I think
he will be arrested and I think justice will be done.
And he's just one of the many, many people within
the deep State that have been trying to submarine Why
would they want a submarine Trump? Why would they want

(16:45):
to bankrupt him, impeach him twice, try to convict him,
put him in jail for seven hundred years, and even
tried to kill him. Why do you think the deep
state would want to do that? Because he has it all,
he knows for every single person has done. And Executive

(17:06):
Order one three eight four eight an election interference and
that goes with the media, the judges, some of our
Republican congressmen, all our Democrat congressmen. They're all in big trouble.
That's that's not basically what I need to say. And
as a Letitia James, she'd been a lawyer up because

(17:26):
this is not only the way.

Speaker 1 (17:28):
No, I don't think it's going ony either for that matter.
To be honest with you, I don't disagree with you,
Susan at all. So does this make you do you
think that these are acts of vengeance or do you
think retribution? Or do you think these are basically holding
democrats accountable and to the standards that they themselves have set.

Speaker 3 (17:51):
This is pure evidence. I think once the FBI, the
new FBI, and the new d and I got in
there and they looked at all these things that they found.

Speaker 1 (18:02):
Yeah, but John Bolton investigation is moving forward starting Friday.
Is he being targeted or held accountable?

Speaker 4 (18:11):
And is.

Speaker 1 (18:15):
It's a writing on the wall for for other Democrats
as well. Letitia James we just talked about is up
on mortgage fraud charges. But so is Senator Adam Schiff
of California. But Schiff has maybe some bigger problems than
mortgage fraud coming down the road at him. We all
remember Schiff as the standard bearer for the anti Trump movement,

(18:38):
you know, the the remember during the during the the
Biden administration, every other day, if not every day, Schiff
was on on CNN or MSNBC shrieking from high heaven
regarding Donald Trump and making the most bizarre things, and

(19:02):
over and over again. I think you heard disfamiliar refrain
from Adam Schiff. Cut number two. Please, Mike, We're not
messing around here.

Speaker 6 (19:12):
We're moving very expeditiously. To me, this is an early
sign of whether our democracy is recovering, whether it's true
that no one is above the law, that the rule
of law must apply.

Speaker 1 (19:25):
No one is above the law. Where have I heard
that before? Remember how Schiff wrote a play and read
it into the impeachment record as if it were a transcript,
you know, making up what was said during the phone
conversation between President Trump and the president of the Ukraine.
You know, is Schiff right when he says no one's

(19:45):
above the law? I think, you know, I think he's right.
But the problem is, I don't think he ever thought
that it would apply to him. I think that's what
is shocking to him. He said, the case against Bolton,
by the way, is retribution. Cut number six. Please, I

(20:08):
think this is clearly retribution.

Speaker 6 (20:10):
I mean the idea that what they just picked John Bolton,
a prominent critic of the president, at random. What the
president is trying to do here is very systemic as systematic,
and that is, anyone who stands up to the president,
anyone who criticized the president, anyone who says anything adverse
to the President's interests, gets the full weight of the
federal government brought down on them.

Speaker 4 (20:31):
I think that.

Speaker 1 (20:31):
Would probably have more sway to it what he just said,
if it wasn't for the fact that he too is
facing an issue regarding classified documents. There's an investigation regarding
Shiff that regarding declassifying claims from a Democratic whistleblower that
Shiff approved the release of classified information on Trump that

(20:54):
allegedly would be used to indict him. That's according to
a report from the FBI. The whistleblower had worked for
Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee more than ten years,
and he told the FBI in twenty seventeen about this
that Shift had access to classified information while serving on
the House Intelligence Committee during his tenure in the House.

(21:17):
It's well, you know, he's a senator now, including serving
as its chair from twenty nineteen to twenty twenty three.
In a meeting, Schiff said that the group would leak
classified information which was derogatory to the President of the
United States. This is, according to the whistleblower, and the
information would be used to indict President Trump, and the

(21:38):
whistleblower blower said that this would be illegal, and upon
hearing his concerns, a bunch of members of the meeting
reassured that they would not be caught leaking classified information.
Now Shift denies this, of course, but it's not the
first time that he's been accused of leaking classified information

(21:59):
of the public. Look, the most recent charges from the
whistleblower are just the latest in a series of claims
that Schiff has done some pretty shady things in regard
to classified information. Just days after Joe Biden was sworn
in in January of twenty twenty one, Trump's former acting

(22:22):
Director of National Intelligence and the US ambassador from his
first administration, Rick Grannell, went on X to list out
issues with Adam Schiff. He says that I'm just reading
down that post that Schiff wouldn't return any call to

(22:44):
coordinate on D and I reforms. The reforms were asked
for by career officials for years. Shiff complained when I
appointed the first female head of counter terrorism who is
a career person, SHIFT and the team regularly leaked classified information.
That's what Grinnell put up on X And then you
go forward and to a couple of years ago. Former

(23:07):
Secretary of State and CIA director Mike Pompeo also accused
Schiff of leaking documents. He said that Adam Schiff led
to the American people during my time as CIA Director
and Secretary of State, I know the elite classified information
that had been provided to him. He said that in
an interview on a cable television interview, and he said

(23:30):
that he held back information with the House Intelligence Committee
because he was not comfortable when Shift led the panel
that stuff was going to be kept secret. In twenty eighteen,
President Trump on X posted, Adam leaves close committee hearings
to illegally leak confidential information must be stopped. So there's
a lot of charges here. Whether there's actually something behind
them is why there is currently an investigation. And what's

(23:57):
happened now is the DOJ has subpoenaed an Apple account,
the Apple account data of the Intelligence Committee, including Shift
for the time that he was there, and to see
if any of this is true. The Justice Department's internal
watchdog under Biden, opened the investigation into the subpoenas and

(24:17):
published a report in twenty twenty four that found that
the DJ was not following the rules it was supposed
to in regard to congressional documents. Now Shift denied leaking
any classified intelligence in twenty twenty then, but he said
he couldn't confirm the same for other House Democrats. So
he's already trying to blame other people for things that

(24:45):
he may have done. And it's not the only issue
facing Shift. As I mentioned before, you can't forget that
he landed in hot water last spring when the US
Federal Housing Agency sent a letter to the Department of
Justice sound the alarm that in multiple cases Schiff had
falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable

(25:07):
learn loan terms, impacting payments from two thousand and three
to twenty nineteen for his Potomac, Maryland property. And he's
currently under criminal investigation for mortgage fraud. Now he's denied
any wrongdoing. Says that this is all a baseless attempt
at political retribution. Cut number six A please Mike mortgage company.

Speaker 7 (25:32):
Fanny May says, your quote engaged in a sustained pattern
of possible occupancy misrepresentation on several loans. Are these allegations true?
How do you respond to them?

Speaker 6 (25:43):
They're patently false? And the president knows that. In the
Housing Agency, president's person Poulty knows it. He's essentially doing
the president's bidding against me, against Letitia James, against this
person on the Federal Reserve. Mortgage is their new way
to go after their critics.

Speaker 1 (26:03):
Mortgage is a new weapon. Well, you can only use
mortgage fraud as a weapon if in fact you've done
something wrong. You can't make it up. It only works
if you have in fact filed something you shouldn't have filed,
or responded to something that in a false way. Does

(26:23):
he have a point here? Am I being too hard
on Adam shift? Is he right? Is this retribution against
the guy that led the charge to impeach President Trump?
Or is this a case of a Democrat who thought
that he was above the law and that no one
is above the law? Phrase never applies to him, you know?
Is he getting caught in a wrongful act? And let's

(26:46):
not forget you know, in regard to Adam Schiff this
that he's also heavily implicated in Russiagate, So says d
and I Telsey Gabbard cut number nine.

Speaker 8 (26:59):
Please, it's all in hundreds of pages of documents that
I've declassified and released that show point by point exactly
what happened through this timeline that showed this very dangerous
thing that occurred in the creation of Russia Gate, the
creation of this manufactured intelligence assessment that essentially had the

(27:22):
intent of undermining the voices and votes of the American
people who elected Donald Trump. They were not happy with
the outcome of that election.

Speaker 1 (27:31):
They weren't. Adam Schiff wasn't. He was an incredibly vocal
lawmaker amid the Russian collusion claims. Most notably, remember the
House censured him in twenty twenty three over his promotion
that Trump's twenty six campaign twenty sixty campaign colluded with Russia. Now,
so I mean he is just he's this is what's

(27:54):
been going on. At the eleventh hour of Biden's tenure.
Schiff was among the lawmakers who served on the committee
who were granted the January sixth Committee who were granted pardons. Remember,
Biden specifically granted preemptive partons to members of Congress and
staff who served on the Select Committee and the US
Capital NDC Police officers who testified before the Select Committee
and this was all about Russia Gate in January sixth,

(28:18):
you know. Now in August this past you know, August,
one of Ship's staffers confirmed that a legal defense fund
has been established for him in response to the charges
that have been made against him. They say that it's
clear that Donald Trump and his MAGA allies will continue
weaponizing the justice system to attack Senatorshift for holding this

(28:40):
corrupt administration accountable, and this fund will ensure he can
fight back against these baseless smears while continuing to do
his job. Is Shift being persecuted or prosecuted? Which do
you think it is?

Speaker 4 (28:55):
They?

Speaker 1 (28:56):
Is he right? Is this because he's an outspoken critic?
Or like John Bolton, like Letitia James? Did he do
something wrong? And is he finally being held accountable for it?
Let's talk to Dan in New Hampshire. Dan, welcome to
w RKO. How are you, sir?

Speaker 4 (29:12):
Yes, I totally agree with you and I like to
take and I always love how these Marxist communist democrats
they keep using the word democracy. Okay, in a republic,
the individual is protected and a guy like James Madison
was very careful in using the proper words like federal

(29:33):
national republic.

Speaker 3 (29:35):
You know.

Speaker 4 (29:35):
So I don't want to go too far to that,
but it's just interesting, you know. So yeah, I totally
agree with you. I mean, the corruptions deep here. You
get the Pelosis who was involved in a lot of
using federal federal grant money to buy land in tell

(30:00):
for a rail system, a high speed rail system, okay,
with Pelosi's husband and Dianne Feinstein's husband who is involved
in that, okay, And they all, both of them used
federal grant money both times for a profit. And even
the last investor who bought it, he used federal grant money.

(30:23):
So the American taxpayer got screwed three times, got ripped
off three times in that deal. And on top of it,
when you look at Dominion Machines, they're owned by Blum
Capital Partners. Richard Blum is on the board and is
the husband of Diane Feinstein, and Paul Pelosi is a

(30:44):
major investor in Blump Capital. So it's it's it's unbelievable, Sandy,
And I hope, okay that John Bolton gets who was
National Security advisor. I hope this guy gets arrested anderiously
investigated but I also hope the husband of Magne Gulander,

(31:06):
my congress woman in who here she gets arrested because
his name is Jake Sullivan, the national security advisor on
the corruptor Biden, who is stoking. He's a neo kon.
He's so with Biden was stoking this war in the Ukraine.
When he was crying for NATO, he said, our policy

(31:28):
is an open door policy, meeting, a policy for NATO
advisement into the Ukraine, even putting military bases into Ukraine
and every NATO country along the Russian border.

Speaker 3 (31:42):
You know.

Speaker 4 (31:42):
So it's unbelievable. And on top of it, you gotta
look to Bolton. The other thing there is Bolton was
a he was a US ambassador of.

Speaker 3 (31:59):
NATO.

Speaker 4 (32:00):
Excuse me, just uh so, just like Lisa Mark, Lisa Cardi, uh,
William Burns c I a uh headed head of the CIA.
He was involved. Okay, these guys, Lisa Cardy and them,
and and William Burns was involved in Ukraine. Uh, Lisa

(32:20):
Monaco again involved, Victorious Newitt, who served under Bush Junior,
who served under uh Obama, Clinton, Biden, all involved in Ukraine.
Even her husband Robert Kagan. It's interesting how they use
different names. As I'm going through this, you know, it's crazy.

(32:42):
It's crazy.

Speaker 1 (32:43):
No, No, the length the list goes on and on
and on, Dan, I have to say. But so I
take it from what you're saying is that you think
that these are people who have been held themselves above
the law for a long time and are finally being
held at hanunible. So you don't believe this is persecution.
You think this is prosecution.

Speaker 4 (33:05):
Part of the Union, Sandy, you're doing a great job,
and it's part of the uniparty charade. They're all involved. Bolton,
You're gonna find out in this stuff that he was
tied in with all these people, these names, even Antony Blincoln,
Secretary of States under corrupt Joe Biden, and even he
was stoked in the Ukraine War because he was crying

(33:28):
that he went to Lavrov and said that the US
reserves right to put missile systems into Ukraine and every
nation in NATO along the Russian border. So that's when
that was the last straw when the war broke out,
right there.

Speaker 1 (33:43):
Yeah, no, I don't I got to hold you there, Dan,
I don't disagree with you. Thank you so much for
the call. I appreciate it very much. Yeah, there's a
there's a whole laundry list of people who have who
who didn't think the law applied to them, I think.
And what was ironic is about most of them. Most
of them have made, if not all of them, have

(34:04):
made public statements that no one is above the law
before they turn around and do something that anybody else
will be held accountable for. And Adam Schiff, for instance,
it is not the only Democrat in the cross hast
for Russia Gate who has stood out there and said
no one is above the law. Does the name Hillary
Clinton ring a bell with anybody? The woman who blamed Russia, Russia,

(34:24):
Russia for the loss to Donald Trump in twenty sixteen.
You want to hear the cut cut four a please, Mike.

Speaker 9 (34:34):
I was on the way to winning until the combination
of Jim Comey's letter on October twenty eighth and Russia
WikiLeaks raised doubts in.

Speaker 3 (34:45):
The minds of people who.

Speaker 9 (34:47):
Were inclined to vote for me but got scared.

Speaker 1 (34:50):
Off Russia Russia, Russia, Russia WikiLeaks the reason why she
didn't win. She's one of the proponents of Russia Russia Russia.
She's also one of those people who who picked up
the familiar refrain you gotta have you got to know
it's right and no one is above the law. Cut

(35:10):
number four, please, Mike.

Speaker 9 (35:14):
No one is above the law, and the rule of
law in a democracy, you know, has to be our standard.

Speaker 1 (35:26):
Wow, no one is above the law. That would hold
more weight with me if she hadn't been accused of
of basically sending out, you know, national security level documents
on an email and then lying about it destroying the server.

(35:47):
That was something that I thought was was was pretty interesting.
She's facing an ethical complaint.

Speaker 4 (35:55):
Now.

Speaker 1 (35:55):
I don't know if you know about this, but there's
there's a watchdog called calling on the Arkansas State Bar
to probe whether her involvement in the Russia investigation into
President Trump should affect her ability to practice law in Arkansas.
It's filed by a group called Democracy Restored this week,

(36:15):
and it cites the Arkansas Rule of Professional Conduct involving
dishonesty and prejudice to the Administration of Justice, and what
they want is a formal review of the conduct of
Hillary who is a licensed attorney in the state of Arkansas,
connection with her actions during the twenty sixteen presidential campaign. Now,

(36:38):
this is all resurfaced after the Judiciary Committee released previously
classified documents related to the Russia Gate that shed more
light on President Clinton's role in it. And within this
release of documents, there is what they call an annex
or a group of documents would suggest that she approved

(36:59):
a land created by one of her advisors. I believe
it was John Podesta, to release false information with a
purpose to smear her political opponent during a presidential campaign
and distract from the news surrounding her own legal accusations.
That's what's in the complaint that they have filed against her,
And what the complaint says is this revelation demands an

(37:22):
already overdue inquiry into Clinton's fitness as a member of
the Arkansas Bar and the plank goes into the complaint
goes into a great deal of detail outlining her connection
to the anti Trump opposition research that dates back to
April twenty sixteenth, and alleges. The complaint alleges that her

(37:43):
campaign not only elevated unverified and unvetted information to injure
her political opponent, but cites recently released records the DNI
records at Telsea Gabbard release to allege that she personally
signed off on an effort to amplify this bad intelligence
to the media and federal law enforcements. That sounds pretty

(38:09):
serious to me. The letter acknowledges. The letter to the
Bar acknowledges that no criminal charges have yet been filed,
and that's the threshold that you need to disbarse somebody
to violate. The American Bar Association's rules relating to those
who commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on that

(38:31):
lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer is basically
the bar that you have to reach. But recently released records,
the ones that Telsea Gabbard was talking about before, have
increased the prospect of a federal investigation into her conduct.
In fact, one of the one of the texters, text

(38:54):
line seven zero four seven zero nine seventy eight, says,
how come no Hillary rate? I think there might be Well,
for all, it's been how many years, so I'm not
sure how much information is left, but there might be
a Hillary raid coming of Chappaqua. I don't know, you know,
if if in fact they think there's anything they can
they can still get But this ethics complaint, you know,

(39:16):
comes after months of the administration pledging to fully investigate
you know, Russia, Russia, Russia, the Russia, the debunked Russia
collusion narrative against President Trump. And you know, this goes
along with Telsey Gabbard's stripping security clearances from thirty seven
current and formal intelligence officials, accusing them of politicizing and

(39:40):
manipulating intelligence, and so bit by bit, I think it's
getting done. But the question becomes, are they being targeted
because they don't like President Trump and have actively worked
against him? Or are they being prosecuted