Dems Rise to a Level of Absurdity on Judicial Nominees

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:01):
Radical nominees is what the Biden administration is going for
right now when it comes to court vacancies. They have
gone to a level of absurdity that I don't think
any of us could have imagined coming from Joe Biden.
So why is it happening now? Because they are having
to signal to the younger voters and the Democratic Marxist

(00:21):
Communist Party that they're willing to put in the most
egregious abusers of personal their personal beliefs over what the
law is actually saying. Let me give you an example
of this. Right now, Joe Biden has a nominee to
be the judge for the Southern District of New York.
So we're talking about the radical AOC world, the world

(00:42):
that's going after Donald Trump right now, the Alvin Bragg
people right of New York City. Her name is Sarah
Netburn and she puts ideology before everything when she is
on the bench. How do we know this, Well, she
put ideology before women's safety when it came to housing

(01:03):
a biological man, a six foot two man with a
penis in a woman's prison who was a sex offender,
a rapist.

Speaker 2 (01:13):
And she knew this when the Bureau of Prisons.

Speaker 1 (01:17):
Warned this radical judge against housing not just a convicted
serial rapist, but a convicted serial child rapist who's six
's two with a penis, who identifies a.

Speaker 2 (01:30):
Woman in a woman's prison.

Speaker 1 (01:34):
This judge, Sarah Netburn, disregarded the recommendation from the Bureau
of Prisons and housed the serial child rapists with women anyway. Now,
let me also tell you that she is up for
confirmation and Senator Ted Cruz got to ask her questions

(01:55):
about this decision.

Speaker 2 (01:57):
I want you to hear what she says. But what
we've also.

Speaker 1 (02:00):
Learned about this nominee is that this nominee also green
lit the secret search of journalists emails over the Ashley
Biden diary scandal, which I told you about yesterday. I'm
going to have that part of the story in a moment,
but first I want you to hear senter Ted Kruz

(02:22):
at her nomination or confirmation hearing. This is the judge
Sarah Netburn looking to get a big job in New York.

Speaker 2 (02:30):
Take a listen, well, Judge Thattburn.

Speaker 3 (02:32):
I want to continue on this line of questioning.

Speaker 4 (02:36):
In your court. What matters more the rights of individuals
or your political ideology.

Speaker 3 (02:43):
I apply the law to the facts.

Speaker 4 (02:45):
I asked a question, which matters more?

Speaker 5 (02:48):
Well, my political ideology doesn't matter at all, Okay.

Speaker 4 (02:51):
So I don't believe you, and I think this case
demonstrates that you are willing to subjugate the rights of
individuals to satisfy your political ideology. This case involves a
male defendant who raped a nine year old boy. Was
he guilty of that?

Speaker 3 (03:12):
Yes, the petitioner pled guilty to that.

Speaker 4 (03:13):
Okay, So he raped a nine year old boy. He
also raped a seventeen year old girl. Was he guilty
of that?

Speaker 3 (03:19):
He pled guilty. The petitioner pled guilty at that crime
as well.

Speaker 4 (03:22):
So was he guilty?

Speaker 3 (03:24):
I hope so, because she pled guilty to it.

Speaker 4 (03:27):
He was a he when he did this, that's correct,
and also criminal deviant conduct, which the record doesn't disclose
what that was exactly. Then, after serving in prison, mister
McLain was released for parole, but then violated the terms
of parole by having Internet and was sent back to prison.
One year after being released again, he was convicted of

(03:48):
having child pornography. Is that correct?

Speaker 5 (03:51):
I'm unclear on exactly the timeframe that you're at but
the petitioner was convicted of distributing child pornography.

Speaker 4 (03:57):
Child pornography that was images of adult violently.

Speaker 5 (04:00):
Raping children, abhorrent conduct, okay, for which there are real victims.

Speaker 4 (04:06):
And this individual six foot two biologically a man. A
minute ago you said that when this man decided that
he was a she, you said, this individual was quote
I wrote it down, sober and entirely a female. That
phrase struck me as remarkable. Did this individual have male genitalia?

Speaker 3 (04:29):
I think what I said, or at least that is.

Speaker 4 (04:31):
A verbatim quote entirely a female?

Speaker 3 (04:33):
Sorry, what I meant to say was hormonally a female.

Speaker 4 (04:36):
Okay, but that's not entirely. Did this individual have male genitalia?

Speaker 3 (04:41):
Yes?

Speaker 4 (04:42):
So you took a six foot two serial rapist, serial
child rapist with male genitalia, and he said, you know,
I'd like to be in a women's prison, and your
answer was that sounds great to me. Let me ask
you something. The other women in that prison do they
have any rights?

Speaker 3 (05:03):
Is that a question?

Speaker 4 (05:03):
Yes, the other women in that prison do they have
any rights?

Speaker 3 (05:06):
Of course, do.

Speaker 4 (05:07):
They have the right not to have a six foot
two man who is a repeat serial rapist put in
as their cellmate.

Speaker 5 (05:15):
Senator Cruz, I considered the facts presented to me, and
I reached a decision.

Speaker 4 (05:20):
I asked you a question a lot. I asked you
a question. Do they have a right not to have
a six foot two man who is a serial rapist
put in as their cellmate? Do those women have a
right to that.

Speaker 5 (05:31):
Every person who's incarcerated has the right to be safe
in their space.

Speaker 4 (05:35):
But you didn't think so. You didn't think so. And
in fact, I'm gonna give some quotes from your order
because Senator Kennedy is right. This is not a judge's order.
This is a political activist. By the way, the beginning
of your order says, at birth, people are typically assigned
a gender. I got to say that would astonish a

(05:56):
lot of Americans. A lot of Americans think, you go
to the hospital, baby is born, and congratulations, you have
a little boy a little girl the assigned agender. I
know you went to Brown, but it sounds like it's
in a college faculty lounge with no bearing on reality.
The Bureau of Prison argued what I'm saying right now
that if you put this person in a female prison,

(06:18):
there will be a risk of sexual assault to the women,
and you know what you did. You said you didn't
care about the women. I'm gonna quote what you wrote.
You wrote quote the Bureau Prisons claim penelogical interest in
protecting female prisoners from sexual violence and trauma. This interest
is legitimate, that's kind of you to say. But there
are no signs that petitioner is at risk of reoffending.

(06:39):
The record is devoid of evidence of incidents of violence
or assault during petitioners incarceration when she was the perpetrator,
only the victim. A theoretical risk of sexual assault by
the prisoner without more cannot support the BOPCE position. No
evidence theoretical have you dealt in what universe is someone
who is a serial, reap, repeat child rapist not at

(07:03):
a risk of reoffending?

Speaker 3 (07:04):
Senator? As I do in every case.

Speaker 4 (07:06):
Okay, I know you've been told to repeat the line.
I followed the law. I asked a question, in what
universe is someone who is a serial, repeat child rapist
not at risk of reoffending?

Speaker 3 (07:19):
Sir?

Speaker 5 (07:19):
I looked at the facts that were before me in
this case, all of the evidence, including the statements of
every warden who had supervised this.

Speaker 4 (07:28):
Petition, you also wrote. The BOP also posits the permitting
petitioner to live among women will be traumatizing and possibly
dangerous to them. This concern is overblown. I have to say,
if I were the father of one of those women,
and you decided that my daughter's cellmate was going to
be a six foot two man who over and over

(07:50):
and over again committed violent sexual assault, I would say
the entire justice system is absurd, and it is clear
on your record your pulletical ideology matters a heck of
a lot more than the rights of those women that
you endangered. I think you're a radical, and I think
you have no business being a judge.

Speaker 1 (08:09):
Senator Cruz is right, by the way, this is a
radical extremist who should not be on any court, not
because she's a leftist, but because she doesn't actually apply
the law or respect the law. You got to understand,
I don't care if you're a Republican or Democrat, as
long as when you were a judged, you are honest
as a judge.

Speaker 2 (08:29):
That's number one for me.

Speaker 1 (08:31):
Okay, if you are honest as a judge, then I
can move forward with you. I can respect you. I
can sit there and say that you are someone that
will look at the law and then decide on the law.
But this woman doesn't do that. She never does that.
She puts a radical extremists agenda ahead of safety and

(08:52):
the security of the people. And that's not all this
Biden nominee, a few years before she was nominated by
Joe Biden to a lifetime judicial appointment, signed off on
an order that compelled Google to secretly hand over to
criminal investigators information from the email account of the journalist

(09:14):
who had obtained Ashley Biden's diary. Netburn was eviscerated by
Republican centers, not just Cruise, but Kennedy and others for
her partisanship during her confirmation hearings this week, allowing the
repeat sexual offender to be housed in a female prison

(09:34):
because he said she was a He was a woman.
That's all it took. And she's like, yep, I'm all
on board. I'm totally fine with that. We've also learned
now that prior to her being nominated, maybe this is
what actually got her a job, or got her the nomination,
is the fact that Judge Netburn, as a federal magistrate

(09:54):
judge in New York, signed the order compelling Google to
provide information from a Project Veritas journalist personal email account.
Court records now show Project Veritas James O'Keefe's organization that's
now defunct but had been around forever. He's still doing
his undercover journalism under his own name. But Project Veritas

(10:18):
purchased the diary after a woman said she found it
when she moved into a room previously occupied by Ashley Biden.
The conservative leaning journalist's outfit ultimately decided not to publish
the diary. Nonetheless, lawyers for Ashley Biden contacted the US
Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Maybe this

(10:39):
is exactly why now we understand she's getting this big
promotion because she was a good soldier. They decided to
contact the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York,
which turned the missing diary into a federal court case.
The contents of the diary, in which the president's daughter
discusses drug addiction and questions whether her sexual compulsion stem

(11:03):
from Joe Biden allegedly showering with her as a child,
had the potential to be politically explosive, reports The Daily Wire.
Netburn granted the ruling favorably to Ashley Biden in spite
of First Amendment implications. In December of twenty twenty, after

(11:23):
Joe Biden had won the presidential election, but while Donald
Trump was still in office, three and a half years later,
Joe Biden nominated Netburn for a lifetime appointment to the
position of District judge for the Southern District of New York.
The order that was signed by Netburn ordered Google to
turn over information associated with a personal email account of

(11:47):
a Project Veritas journalists, while forbidding Google from letting the
target know about it, preventing the journalism outfit from fighting
the move as well. Quote the information sought his relevant
material to an ongoing criminal investigation, and that disclosure to
any person of this investigation of this application and order

(12:10):
would seriously jeopardize the investigation, the order states. The application
for a search warrant was also sealed, making it unknown
exactly what prosecutors told Judge Netburn. The case became public
after prosecutors then executed a pre dawn raid at the
home of three former Project Veritas journalists, drawing condemnation from

(12:35):
even left leaning civil liberties groups. But who cares because
it's all gone off the rails now. Prosecutors eventually got
warrants from Apple as well and Microsoft and other providers
from other magistrate judges and press for them to remain sealed.
Also in twenty twenty two, Microsoft realized the case was

(12:57):
already well publicized, meaning the government could not legitimately argue
for sealing them, and prosecutors relented, filing an order to
end the non disclosure order which Judge Netburn had signed
to keep it all quiet. Fast forward to May of
twenty twenty two. That's when Project Veritas lawyers wrote to

(13:18):
Judge Netburn that the subpoenas were unprecedented government invasions into
the news gathering work of Project Veritas, which lawfully received
an abandoned diary and other personal effects previously belonging to
an adult child of then presidential candidate Joe Biden, saying

(13:39):
this there is no potential crime to investigate, only First
Amendment protected news gathering. They wrote saying that while the
government continues to peddle the lie that the diary or
other abandoned belongings were stolen, it has produced no support
for its false claim, even if it were. Precedence holds

(14:03):
that journalists may lawfully receive material from sources, even if
that material is illegally obtained by sources themselves. A great
example of this would be the Pentagon papers. Another example
of this would be what happened with Richard Nixon Netburn.
The judge did not immediately return a request for comment
to her chambers. Mike Davis, a Republican former Chief Council

(14:27):
for Nominations on the Senate Judiciary Committee who now leads
the Article three Project, a nonprofit focus on the judiciary,
told The Daily Wire that the order is another sign
that Netburn is two partisan for this new lifetime appointment nomination.
Couldn't agree more, saying this now we learn Sarah Netburn
ordered a secret search of a journalist's email account solely

(14:51):
to protect Joe Biden from the highly troubling abuse allegations
in daughter Ashley Biden's diary. Davis said after reviewing the order, saying, quote,
Sarah Netburn has proven she doesn't have the necessary judge
ship or independence to serve on the federal bench for
the rest of her life. That's probably why Joe Biden

(15:11):
picked her. I disagree a little bit. I think the
only reason why Joe Biden picked her is because she
protected Joe Biden from these claims by his daughter that
were incredibly damning to him, especially while he was running
for president. And so this is the way of saying, Okay,
she's a good one, she's a team player. Now here's

(15:32):
where the real cover up comes in. The White House
is claiming that it was unaware of the order when
Biden nominated Netburn and that it was therefore not a
factor in the decision. I don't believe that for a moment,
Biden's deputy Press Secretary Andrew Bates said, and it responds
to the Daily Wire, quote, we are unaware of such a

(15:54):
warrant and nothing regarding this case was a factor quote unquote.
I'm gonna just say right now, I think they're absolutely
lying to you and to everybody else about this nomination.

Speaker 5 (16:05):
Now.

Speaker 1 (16:06):
Last month, Amy Harris was sentenced to a month in
prison and three years of probation after pleading guilty to
taking the diary and selling it to Project Veritas for
forty grand Another man named Robert also pled guilty to
involvement in a conspiracy involving the diary. After the federal
government came down on them hardcore now. In the diary

(16:28):
published by Marco Polo, Ashley allegedly writes that she was
hyper sexualized at a young age and references showers with
her dad that were probably not appropriate. She writes while
contemplating her issues with sexual trauma, and said she was
resentful of her father because of the money control. On

(16:52):
September sixteenth, twenty nineteen, she wrote, I'm going to discontinue
this journal after I leave here.

Speaker 2 (17:00):
Last month, Ashley.

Speaker 1 (17:01):
Biden acknowledged that the diary was real in a victim
impact statement that originally filed under seal but made public
after The New York Times argued against its secrecy. In
the statement, Ashley Biden says the private diaries publication has
led to grotesque lies and that her stream of consciousness

(17:23):
thoughts were misconstrued, saying this my personal private journal was
stolen and sold for profits. She wrote, I ask your
honor to sentence Miss Harris to time in prison followed
by lengthy probation. Now Judge Netburn, who is all of
a sudden out of nowhere after hooking the Biden family up,

(17:46):
is up for a lifetime appointment to the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, and
the White House says, we knew nothing about this ruling
when we nominated her. We just randomly liked her, thought
she was a great person. Game over, they're lying to
you and this is part of the cover up. Yet again, folks,
So now we know for certain the diary, like the

(18:09):
laptop Hunter's laptop is real. Remember early on they were like, oh,
this may not even be her diary that we got.
That was Ashley's diary. Oh, I may not even be real,
right save with the laptop. Oh, we don't know if
it's real. Well, we know it's real. And the reason
why they didn't want you to believe it was real
early on is because the contents are extremely concerning and alarming.

(18:30):
Why is the media not all over this now that
it has been confirmed that it is in fact real.

Speaker 2 (18:35):
Well.

Speaker 1 (18:36):
In twenty nineteen, Ashley Biden, the then thirty seven year
old daughter President Joe Biden and his wife Jill, wrote
in her journal about showering with her father at an
inappropriate age, as well as her fears that as a
child she was sexually abused. Now again, this is coming
from Marine Callahan from the Daily Mail. The only person

(18:59):
that's put this out there explosive stuff, she writes, not
that you would have heard about it thanks to the
near well complete year long media blackout on this story,
just like they did early on with the Hunter Biden laptop.
After undergoing treatment and rehab, Ashley, by the way, moved
to a halfway house in Florida, where she left the

(19:20):
diary under a mattress. The diary, which also contained details
of her drug use, was then found in twenty twenty
by a Florida woman who quote unquote stole it, leaked
its contents online, and sold it for forty grand. All
that time, the Biden campaign let the left wing media
of its own well volition cast aspirations on the diaries

(19:45):
authenticity or dismissed it as right wing propaganda or plants
of dubious you know, you know, absurd things, just like
the Russia hoax. Right, just like they did same playbook
with Hunter Biden's laptop. The similarities here turns out both
are all too real, The writer writes for the first time,

(20:08):
Ashley now herself has now confirmed in a court document
made public that the diary is indeed authentic. Its contents
demand attention concern and hard questions for this White House.
Hyper Sexualized at a young age, Ashley writes at a
July twenty nineteen entry, what is this due to question mark?

Speaker 2 (20:31):
Was I molested? I think so?

Speaker 1 (20:34):
She wrote, note the period instead of a question mark.
One wonders if there wasn't really a doubt in Ashley's
mind because I was I molested?

Speaker 2 (20:45):
Period?

Speaker 1 (20:45):
I think so. She continues by writing this and her diary.
I can't remember specifics, but I do remember trauma. I
remember somewhat being sexualized with her first cousin, Caroline. I
remember I remember having sex with friends at a young age.
Showers with my dad, probably not appropriate, being turned on

(21:08):
when I was supposed when I wasn't supposed to be
Showers with my dad, she writes, showers with her dad.
Ashley also wrote in the same diary that she was
in treatment for sexual trauma. Let's pause here. The author
writes to state the obvious. If this were the diary
entry of a Trump daughter, the media would be at

(21:30):
deafcom one. This would be front page news, the sole
focus of special Rachel Maddow you know, losing her mind
on MSNBC and cn in primetime investigations would be all
about this.

Speaker 2 (21:44):
There would be a drum.

Speaker 1 (21:45):
Beat of every Sunday show and on ed from now
until election Day, the left wing press demanding answers of
Donald Trump. I judge Donald Trump as everything from a
racist to a rapist, and never failed to regurgitate accusations,
no matter how old or inconsistent, has conveniently ignored similar

(22:08):
allegations against Joe Biden. More on those later, Marine continues
to write. She then says. Last month, the New York
Times reported that the woman who stole Ashley's diary was
sentenced to time hard time in prison. Did the Times
cover what was actually in the diary, question mark, not

(22:30):
one bit, not even a hint of its contents. Instead,
they led with the thief's brazen scheme to steal the
diary of President Biden's daughter and sell it to a
right wing group and hope of disrupting the twenty twenty election.
Linked within this story was a letter written by Ashley, who,
in fairness, has never asserved the diary was a fake.

(22:52):
Unlike Hunter in his laptop, Her letter, dated April eighth,
and addressed to the trial judge, confirms the diary's legitimate
see saying this my personal private journal, she writes with
stolen and sold for profit. I will forever have to
deal with the fact that my personal journal can be
viewed online. The theft is indeed terrible, but so too

(23:16):
is what Ashley's diary entries might imply. In one passage,
she writes in her childhood hyper sexualization extended to beating
her blank due to overhearing parents having sex. That's in
her diary, folks, And yet The New York Times, as
with nearly all things negative to Biden, insists there's nothing

(23:39):
to see here and that they're covering Biden as critically
as Trump.

Speaker 2 (23:43):
Sure.

Speaker 1 (23:44):
In an interview earlier this month, executive editor Joe Cohn
claimed that his paper is not and will not be
an instrument of the Biden campaign con is either delusional, shameless,
or cowed by the wokery infesting his newsroom. Try googling
Ashley Biden's diary, You'll find scant media coverage, and what

(24:09):
you do find will be about the theft, not about
what's written in the diary itself, you know, the actual
news and trying to determine the root causes of her
sex addiction, actually listed the following in her diary, my
mother not emotionally available. My father was message I could
get love from men. Quote I'm not your mother, blanket

(24:34):
being taken away, not letting myself go to bathroom, being
wiped until too late in the game. While this list
itself isn't necessarily the most well strange passage, I guess
the best way to say it from the diary. Collectively,
this all raises serious questions for doctor Jill and Grandpa

(24:58):
Joe with his repeat hair sniffing and shoulder rubbing of
women and young girls.

Speaker 2 (25:03):
The author continues to write in.

Speaker 1 (25:05):
The Daily Mail Joe with the multiple allegations by at
least eight women of unwanted touching or worse. Here is
former Senate Stafford Tara Reid, largely dismissed by the media
during the twenty twenty election cycle, in March of that year,
saying this quote, I remember he just had me up
against the wall, and the wall was cold. It happened

(25:27):
all at once. His hands were on me and underneath
my clothes. He went down my skirt but then up
inside it, and he penetrated me with his fingers. When
he got finished doing what he was doing, I pulled
back and he said, come on, man, I heard you
like me. Reid continues. For me, it was like everything

(25:51):
everything shattered in that moment. I looked up to him.
He was this champion of women's rights. In my eyes,
That's what they used to say about the late Democratic
Senator Ted Kennedy, iffy with women in his personal life,
but great and legislating for them.

Speaker 4 (26:10):
Now.

Speaker 1 (26:10):
The author goes on to say even more about this.
But what I go back to is why is it
that there's no one here in the media willing to
write the story that a the journal is real and
be what's in the journal? It's a very simple question.

(26:31):
You look at what was just said there, You look
at the journal, and Marine Callahan is saying in the
Daily Mail, this should be a massive story. And by
the way, it should be a massive story. But the
media is going to bury it. Everything that his own
daughter wrote, they are going to bury it. They're going

(26:55):
to make sure that no one is asked about this
on the campaign or at the White House press briefing.
Why would you ever answer any of these questions? Is
the and why would you ever talk about it? We
just move on and we act like it's not real.
We act like it never happened. We act like it's
not a thing. That is what they will do to

(27:18):
protect this president at all costs, moving in to this
major election cycle now. As uncomfortable as much of that
was that I just read to you, it's important because
I promise you, if it was a Republican it would
be game over.

Speaker 2 (27:36):
I promise you.

Speaker 1 (27:37):
If this was Donald Trump's child that wrote this in
a but a diary, there would be a full blown
federal investigation. There would be local and state investigations that
would be opened. They would have made sure that somebody
had to testify about this, saying that no one is
above the law. All I'm asked looking for is that

(28:00):
same standard here. Make sure you share this podcast with
your family and your friends. Please and help us by
writing us a five star review, and I'll see you
back here tomorrow