September 15, 2023 • 41 mins
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruz
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
Welcome.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
It's Verdict with Center, Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you
and Senator. We've got a lot to talk about tonight,
including Hunter Biden's not shocking indictment at all and the
media acting like this is a big deal when it's
clearly not. It's the fixes already in. Plus, we've got
a new update on Joe biden impeachment and his own
words coming back to haunt him in a big way.
(00:23):
But first, Center, let's walk through this indictment. This is
a big nothing burger. In my opinion, they've in died
him on the federal gun charges. This insulates the president,
It protects the big guy. It focuses on crimes that
are completely limited to Hunter Biden and no one else.
In all the big crimes they could have charged them
with today, they still have not done it.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
This is a fix. Do you agree?
Speaker 3 (00:46):
Sadly, I do, And we predicted this over a year
ago on this podcast. We talked about how the investigation
into the bidens if at the end of the day,
the indictment that came in was a personal offense limit
to Hunter Biden, if it was a drug offense, if
it was a gun offense, if it was a personal
(01:07):
tax offense that was limited to Hunter himself, then that
was by design. That was by design to insulate Joe Biden.
It's worth underscoring. We've said it before, but we cannot
forget this is not about Hunter Biden. If his name
was Hunter Smith, if he was just some poor, sad
(01:29):
sack dealing with addiction and substance abuse, nobody would care.
It wouldn't be national news, it wouldn't be a matter
of public concern. The reason this matters is because there's
considerable evidence that Hunter Biden solicited and received tens of
millions of dollars from corrupt foreign players in exchange for
(01:53):
official favors from his dad, Joe Biden, now the President
of the United States. That's what matters. And so this
this indictment. We said a year ago, if they just
bring a gun crime, they're covering up for Joe. Now
they're three three indictments. They are three counts of the indictment.
Two counts are tied to Hunter Biden completing a form
(02:13):
indicating that he was not using illegal drugs when he
purchased a cult Cobra revolver in October of twenty eighteen.
And the third count alleges that he possessed a firearm
while using a narcotic. Now, those are crimes that I
think Hunter clearly committed. That there's very little material dispute
(02:35):
that he is guilty of those crimes. By the way,
those indictments could have been brought years ago. The evidence
was there has been there for years, and DOJ delayed
and delayed and Delayden de Layden delayed. And this is
all about insulating Joe Biden. Joe Biden does not bear
any liability for Hunter being on crack while he illegally
(02:55):
buys a gun. That's a bad development for Hunter. But
the purpose of this is to insulate the White House
and to let the Biden do OJ say, see we
indicted to Biden, aren't we tough? And they're deliberately carving
off and protecting Joe, who is the reason that the
(03:17):
public rightfully cares about this.
Speaker 2 (03:20):
Well, let's talk about the comparing contrast to the plea deal.
This is what he was gonna plead guilty to that
they're now charging him with.
Speaker 1 (03:29):
How is this going to change?
Speaker 2 (03:30):
I mean, is the fact that they've it's not in
a plea deal and they're gonna they they've charged him
and died on this federal gun charge. Does that change
the chances he might actually go to prison for any
amount of time?
Speaker 3 (03:42):
It probably does.
Speaker 4 (03:43):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
But if you look at it, we look at the
evolution of this, we now know, and we've covered in
previous podcasts that the Biden do OJ was initially prepared
to have a plea deal where Hunter didn't have to
plead guilty to anything. He could just enter an agreement,
get not even a slap on the wrist, sort of
a wave over the hand and everything goes away, and
(04:06):
without even pleading guilty to anything. The Biden DOJ was
prepared to give him complete and total immunity for any
and all criminal conduct, especially especially especially the criminal conduct
that implicated his father, and that really, I believe was
the entire objective.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
Of this whole thing.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Now, what happened to derail that plan when they announced
they were indicting Hunter.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
That was the plan.
Speaker 3 (04:31):
The Biden Department of Justice was obstructing the investigation that
Merrick Garland had lied under oath to Congress. And given that,
the heat ratcheted up and they said, Okay, you got
to plead guilty, but will still make it a slap
on the wrist, Hunter, You still don't have to serve
even a day, even a minute in jail. We'll make
it all magically go away. And the critical piece that
(04:54):
was added to this is and you get a get
out of jail free card for all corrupt activity for Ivory,
for everything that was done, selling access to Daddy, selling
favors from Daddy. All of that is exonerated when you
sign on to this agreement with no jail time. Now,
what happened then is the whistleblowers came and testified before Congress,
(05:17):
and the global attention on this ratcheted up considerably, and
so suddenly they went before the federal district judge and
the judge asked, DOJ, so are you saying that everything
else Hunter's done? And mind you, the House representatives filed
a brief of the district judge laying out all of
the evidence of Hunter's potential other criminal conduct, of Joe
(05:39):
Biden's criminal conduct, and the judge asked, DOJ are you
saying you're not going to prove, prosecute anything else other
than this these counts on which you're giving him a
slap on the wrist, And doj got really nervous and
they said no, no, no, we're not saying that well, and
I think they just they lost their nerve to give
(06:01):
Hunter and really to give Joe, because Joe is always
the beneficiary of this corruption to get out of jail
free pass. That's what led to the plea agreement falling apart.
I think this is the third iteration. And by the way,
we predicted this third iteration that they would come back
and they would indict Hunter. But again it's on the
personal crimes. And if there's not a plea agreement, I
(06:25):
think the odds are significantly higher that Hunter serves some
jail time.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
But I also think.
Speaker 2 (06:34):
Look like I mean we were talking a day or
two days, or three days or a month. I mean,
if they were willing to give him no jail time
before and now they charge him with us if he's
found guilty, how much does that come to the discretion
of the judge or their minimums are sensing guidelines here?
Speaker 1 (06:51):
I mean, how concerned is he tonight?
Speaker 2 (06:53):
Okay, wow, I may actually spend real time in jail.
Speaker 3 (06:56):
Look, dealj wants to give him no jail time. They
wanted to give him a we doesn't even plead guilty
in anything. So this is not a true adversarial proceeding.
This is not a prosecutor who is seeking to hold
someone accountable. The reason Merrick Garland appointed David Wise as
special prosecutor is special counsel rather, is that he'd already
(07:16):
demonstrated that he was willing to obstruct justice and cover
up Joe Biden. That's the objective here, and so the
small level objective with this case. I think this case
probably gets resolved of the plea deal as well, and
the plea deal may require Hunter to serve six months
(07:38):
in jail. I think that's a real possibility, and they
may get nervous about having a commitment we will not
investigate anything else. Now, mind you, they intend not to
investigate anything else. And it wouldn't surprise me at all
to see THEOJ Yeah, to see doj say privately, look, wink, wink, nudge, nudge,
(07:59):
we're not going to invest at anything else. But we
can't say that in open court because it makes us
look like completely partisan, corrupted, compromised hacks. And it may
be that Biden's lawyers take that and that he serves
some time in jail. We do seem to have seen
some movement among Democrats among the press where they've decided
(08:23):
throw Hunter overboard a little bit in order to protect Joe.
It's why the last podcast on Wednesday, and by the way,
if you did not listen to Wednesday's podcast, you should
go back and listen to it. It was really important
explanation on the impeachment of Joe Biden. Why the Democrats
claim that there is no direct evidence of Joe's involvement
(08:45):
as corruption is a flat out lie, and we walked
through it chapter and verse on Wednesday's podcast. The fact
that they have shifted their defense to saying there's no
direct evidence of Joe's involvement in the hates that they've
collectively decided to cut bait and throw Hunter to some
extent to the Wolves. Now, I suspect Joe is still
(09:08):
not entirely comfortable with Hunter serving ten years. But at
this point I think the most likely outcome, absent enormous
public pressure, is Hunter pleads guilty to these charges, serves
some minimal jail time six months to a year, these
(09:29):
charges go away, and the investigation and everything else just
quietly disappears. Doj doesn't admit in court, they're not going
to investigate it. They simply say nothing else, and actually
that then serves as a shield for DOJ. When Merrick
Garland or anyone else from the Department of Justice is
(09:50):
brought before Congress, their response will be when asked about Hunter,
it's still an ongoing investigation, I'm sorry, we can't tell
you anything. When they have, I belie leave zero intention
to investigate the claims of bribery and corrupt selling of
official favors from Joe Biden because the Department of Justice
(10:13):
wants to protect Joe Biden above all else.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
Senator, it's also very interesting to see how the media
is covering this story, and I want to get into
that in a minute, because they're trying to make this
a big deal while also undermining the charges saying they're
actually weak, which is pretty hysterical. But first, let me
tell you about our friends and in viro clins. You
should choose an air purifier like your life depends on it,
because it just might. We've had more than thirty five
(10:38):
thousand wildfires that have devastated the US this year alone,
and the toxins, the particles and wildfire smoke can penetrate
our lungs and threaten our health. That's why in viro
Clins developed military grade air purification for your home, and
they just announced that they're having their biggest sale of
the year. You can get thirty percent off right now,
(11:01):
and Viroclints is specifically designed to wipe out airborne chemicals
and viruses known to cause illness, allergies, and difficulty breathing. Now,
I've got asthma and I have in vira Clints in
my bedroom and I can tell you it has made
a massive difference. This is also one of the cool
things about in viro Clintons. Even toxic gases and particles
(11:23):
found in wildfire smoke are no match. That's why the
US Navy selected in viro Clints protect and purify the
air in their facilities, and viraro Clintons comes with a
free professional air quality monitor, so you know your family's
breathing purified air. So save right now and get the
free air quality monitor and fast free shipping. That's over
(11:45):
a two hundred and fifty dollars savings right there. Loan
go to ekpure dot com use promo code verdict. That's
Ekcure dot com promo code verdict and save and get
in Vira Clints. It's amazing, Senator. I want to play
for you MSNBC. This is what they had to say
(12:06):
is they were breaking the news on the Hunter Biden
indictment on the federal gun charge, and they're trying to
turn this into a very big deal. Well at the
same time, the media, then an hour later is trying
to tell you that the case against Hunter Biden is
actually really weak.
Speaker 5 (12:20):
Breaking news.
Speaker 6 (12:21):
Now we have just learned and we just got the
paperwork that Hunter Biden, the President's son, has been indicted
for lying when buying a gun. I want to bring
an NBC's Garrett. Hey, Garrett, what can you tell us.
Speaker 7 (12:32):
Well, Chris, this indictment just unsealed in Delaware charges Hunter
Biden with three counts, all related to that gun purchase.
It describes two counts of knowingly making a false or
fictitious statement when purchasing a gun, basically accusing him of
lying about being addicted to drugs at the time he
was purchasing this weapon pistol in October of twenty eighteen,
(12:54):
and the third count is that he did knowingly possess
that same firearm while essentially while being addicted to a
controlled substance. So these are counts that were all thought
to have been dealt with in that plea deal that
fell apart a couple of months ago, kicking things back
to the US Attorney. Now special Council whis handling this
(13:15):
in Delaware, a former US attorney in the district of Delaware. Again,
this indictment on Field, dealing only with the gun and
drug charges. I think it's reasonable to presume we have
not heard the last of charges against the President's son,
given the scope of what was originally in front of
the US Attorney and then kind of fallen apart back
to the drawing board to bring forward these counts.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Now, by the way you said it fell apart, that's
not true. And then MS tries to tell you that
they don't think we've heard the last of the indictments.
Speaker 1 (13:44):
I don't believe that, do you.
Speaker 8 (13:46):
No, No, Look, this is designed to end the matter.
That's what the Biden Department of Justice wants. They want
to say we indicted him. They want to get a conviction,
and I think the conviction is likely. I don't think
the Biden team is going to try this. They may
try to do some pre trial motions and some procedural delays,
but I don't think they're going to want to take
(14:07):
this to a jury, so I think it's likely to
be resolved with a plea deal, and the plea deal,
in all likelihood will end up slightly stouter than the
slap on the wrists that they tried the second time.
But the purpose of this, and we predicted this a
year ago, this is not new. It's not surprising. The
purpose of this is to put to rest all of
(14:31):
the allegations of corruption against Joe Biden because the Biden
DOJ is looking to an election coming up November of
next year, and by the way, they're busy inditing Donald Trump,
which is also looking to an election coming up next year,
and when it comes to election interference, We've never seen
a Department of Justice behave like Merrick Garland and this
(14:53):
profoundly politicized Department of Justice.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
Now this case, by the way they have brought against him,
there's a lot of evidence that was from that laptop
from Hell and the and the pictures and the drug use.
I would argue it's probably a very strong case for
there to be a conviction against Hunter Biden.
Speaker 1 (15:14):
If you look at the evidence.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Yet CNN just barely an hour after this indictment comes out,
they start carrying water for Hunter Biden.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
And this is what they said, calling it a weak case.
Speaker 9 (15:28):
Jations of politics is right, often coming from the former
president himself in terms of what they say is to
to your justice system. But here you have it, as
we noted, first time in US history the son of
a president has been charged by the Justice Department. Kris Canal,
thanks so much. Going to turn it over to Borius
for some legal analysis.
Speaker 7 (15:45):
Yeah, let's chat with seeing and legal analyst Jennifer Rogers.
Speaker 10 (15:48):
Jennifer, obviously, again, this is a historic moment, the first
time DOJ has charged the son of a sitting president.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
Your reaction to the news.
Speaker 11 (15:56):
Well, Wars, I really think, you know, the first time
we had a charge against to former president, it was
important that prosecutors really took their time and built strong
cases based on compelling evidence. And I'm afraid the prosecutors
have not done that here. I certainly, if I were
making history, would not want to make it with this
set of facts and these laws. I think that this
(16:16):
case is weak. It's very, very rarely charged. This section
on being an addict in possession of a weapon. So
I think they have a lot of problems, both on
the factual side, which is why it's very rarely charged,
and on the legal side. After the Supreme Court's decision
in the Bruin case on the Second Amendment, a lot
of legal observers think that all these gun possession statutes
(16:39):
are in jeopardy. And we know that Hunter Biden's lawyers
will fight vigorously on the legal front, saying that after
the Supreme Court's decision that this conviction could not stand.
So I think they've got a lot of trouble here ahead,
and we'll see how it plays out. But I think
it's inadvisable, Sinner.
Speaker 2 (16:55):
When I heard this, I was dying to get your reaction,
because they're now telling you this case is so weak.
This is a dumb case to even bring up, even
though they're willing to do a plea deal on the
same case that got then blown up.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
So which one is it?
Speaker 3 (17:06):
Yeah, Look, Connor has already agreed to plead guilty to
these counts, so oddly enough, CNN, you know, I don't
know who that quote legal analyst is, but you could
have just called her a Democratic Party shill because she says, well,
first of all, the case against Donald Trump is incredibly strong.
It is meticulously researched. It is oh oh so powerful.
(17:26):
What utter and complete garbage. The case against Trump is
a political hatchet job, and they may get a conviction
before a DC jury that is ninety plus percent Democrat.
But I think the chances of that conviction standing up
on appeal are minuscule. But of course CNN is so
called legal analyst, is not going to tell you that.
(17:49):
And as for the claim that this charge is weak, okay,
the critical elements are did he buy a gun, yes,
as far as I know, there's no dispute about it.
Was he a drug addict? Yes, and I'm not aware
of any meaningful dispute about it. The guy was dishonorably
discharged from the military for his drug addiction. He's wrestled
(18:11):
with drug addiction for years. We have pictures and video
of him using illegal drugs. Did he lie on the form,
which is a felony, Again, there's no dispute about it.
He clearly checked the box lying on the form. So
to say the case is weak, I don't even know
(18:32):
a factual claim. An element of the crime that is
in dispute. And her final point, well, after the Bruin case,
you know, any gun claim is legally dubious.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
What nonsense.
Speaker 12 (18:45):
No, it's not.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
What is legally dubious is efforts from Democrats to restrict
the right to keep in bare arms of law abiding citizens.
There are, she says, lots of legal scholars doubt this
prevent No, that's not true. There have been laws in
the books for a long time prohibiting felons from possessing firearms.
(19:08):
I don't know of a single legal scholar who doubts
the validity of those provisions. This is part of that
same law that deals with people with serious drug addictions.
I again don't know of a legal scholar who challenges
those provisions. So her claim, Look, it's the typical leftist
claim that if a law abiding citizen has a right
(19:29):
to keep in bare arms, well that means everyone can
possess weapons. Let's just hand out hand out guns to
murderers in jail. It's like, no, No, that's not what
the Second Amendment says. That's not what it's ever been
understood to say. What the Second Amendment says is that
a law abiding citizen can defend himself, can defend his
or her family, can keep and bear arms. And so
(19:53):
I got to say, listening to it, there literally is
not a sentence in that so called legal analysis that
isn't us laughably false.
Speaker 2 (20:02):
Yeah, it's and they love to make up stuff, and
they do it every day, and even on the biggest
news days they'll come in with the propaganda just hours
afterwards to try to spend this in favor of the
Biden crime family.
Speaker 1 (20:13):
I also want to move on to the.
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Other begin and by the way, Ben, I want to
make clear that when I talk about what laws are
in dispute or not, the first big seminal case from
the Supreme Court establishing the individual right to keep in
bear arms was Heller versus District of Columbia. I am
(20:35):
very familiar with that case because I represented the State
of Texas and thirty one other states in that case.
I was part of the Supreme Court case that upheld
the individual right to keep in bear arms and it
was a it was a fundamental foundational case. Justice Scalia
wrote the majority opinion. And I'll tell you what we
(20:57):
said in our amicus brief on behalf of Texas and
third one other States. We said, of course, the laws
prohibiting felons from being in possession of firearms are legal
and constitutional. What government cannot do is stripped the right
to keep in bare arms from law abiding citizens. So
she claims lots of people dispute that with no apparent
(21:19):
awareness of what actually is are the underlying arguments concerning
the constitutional right.
Speaker 2 (21:26):
Yeah, great point there. I want to move to the
impeachment update. There was some very interesting fodder from James Carvill.
If you don't know James Carville, I'll just remind you
he's a.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
On the left.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
They would refer to him as a brilliant political mind,
a mastermind behind the Bill Clinton days. He is on
TV a lot, talking on MSNBC in other places about.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
The Democratic Party.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
He was on CNN and he had this to say
about the impeachment inquiry.
Speaker 1 (21:57):
Moving forward on the House side, take a look.
Speaker 13 (22:00):
What do you make of how the White House has
been handling it so far? Do you think they're being
aggressive enough or should there be a war room, should
there be a more outfront effort from them?
Speaker 4 (22:11):
Well, my honest opinion is the people they have leading
it are not very smart, and in fact they borderline stupid.
I mean James Comber or Jim Jordan and the people
in the House that are going to be on this
committee like Dan Goldman, Delica Plasciat I think is from
from Virgin Islands, Jamie ra Askin. These are very smart people.
(22:33):
I don't think the White House needs to worry too
much about this and left these congressional Democrats who are
a whip smart are just going to eat these people alive.
I so want them to do this. I can't tell
you how much I want them to do this.
Speaker 13 (22:49):
This is a very you want them to do the impeachment?
Speaker 9 (22:51):
What do you mean?
Speaker 4 (22:52):
I want them to hole hearings?
Speaker 13 (22:54):
Why do you think it's whole hearing?
Speaker 4 (22:56):
And I want I want to and I want to
let people the American public see how then how nonexistent
a case is present, did anything wrong? And I want
our people, who are quite effective lawyers to get them
on cross examination and do what they're gonna do and
make foods out of them.
Speaker 1 (23:14):
Senator, this is a new strategy.
Speaker 2 (23:17):
I'll give James, I'll give I'll give them a little
credit here, James Carvill's you know, it's a new strategy
to say that two of the most brilliant minds in
the house are idiots, right, Jesus, James Comer and Jim Jordan.
We've had them both on this show for multiple multi
part series. You should go back and listen to it
if you haven't heard what they said. But to say
that they're idiots and that you think that your team's
(23:39):
going to mop the floor with them, if this is
their true strategy, this could be really bad for the president.
Speaker 8 (23:45):
Well, listen.
Speaker 3 (23:46):
James Carville is one of the most talented Democrat strategists
that that therey is. He was the person responsible for
Bill Clinton's election, most responsible. He's the person most famously
associated with the phrase it's the economy stupid, which was
right behind Bill Clinton beating George Herbert Walker Bush and
(24:07):
getting elected president in the first place. And so Carvel
is a smart guy. But I got to say what
he just said on CNN is shockingly foolish and demonstrably wrong.
Speaker 8 (24:21):
Number one.
Speaker 3 (24:23):
To claim that James Comer and Jim Jordan are stupid
as he did is laughable. And let me ask our verdict. Listeners,
go back and listen to the podcast. We did two
podcasts with Jim Jordan. We did two podcasts with James Comer.
Go listen to him, go assess it's a deep dive
where you can hear them analyze the issues. That's just
(24:45):
absurdly false. And then he says, oh, and the Democrats
are suck good lawyers. He points to Dan Goldman. Now,
Dan Goldman is the freshman congressman from New York who
we've talked about in this podcast before. He's quickly jumped
into the role of being Hunter Biden's lead lawyer in
the House of Representatives and really Joe Biden's lead lawyer
in the House of Representatives. And that's consistent because he's
(25:08):
incredibly wealthy, he's the heir of a massive fortune. But
he's been a Democrat staffer. He was a Democrat lawyer
on the Trump impeachment, which was utterly ludicrous to begin with.
And he's already shown he's willing to just lie. Whatever
the talking point is from the left, Dan Goldman will
repeat it. He will repeat it without a hesitance. And
(25:29):
he says, oh, people should be afraid. I got to say,
I don't know a lot of lawyers that would be
afraid of Dan Goldman, because it is a bad strategy
for a lawyer to lie a politician, sometimes you can
get away with it because politicians can speak in environments.
If you do like Dan Goldman does, and you go
on CNN and MSNBC, your lies are never challenged. You're
(25:52):
in front of a forum where the corrupt journalists interviewing
you also want to lie about the thing you're lying about,
so you can say things and face no challenge whatsoever.
But where I think Carville is most foolish is saying, gosh,
this is a great thing for Democrats to have these
(26:15):
impeachment hearings. Careful, braer rabbit, Careful what you asked to
be thrown into it is in this instance, Look, Carville
is beating his chest and trying.
Speaker 8 (26:29):
To look tough.
Speaker 3 (26:31):
But the evidence, which we've discussed at great length of
Joe Biden's corruption is very significant. James Carville does not
want the American people to hear that evidence. Now, if
they watch CNN, if they watch MSNBC, if they watch
ABC or NBC, they won't hear that evidence. But if
(26:55):
we have hearings and hearings that the American people pay
attention to, they will hear that evidence and things like
over one hundred suspicious activity reports, reports that banks filed
about what appeared to be money laundering by the Biden
family over twenty shell corporations, corporations that don't have employees,
(27:15):
that don't manufacture anything, that are not real companies, but
the only purpose of them it is to launder money.
Up to five thousand, four hundred emails from fake email
addresses from Joe Biden to Hunter Biden, many concerning Ukraine,
(27:36):
multiple burner phones by Joe Biden, the testimony of a
confidential informant who says Joe Biden and Hunter Biden personally
solicited and received millions of dollars of bribes from a
Ukrainian oligarch. The WhatsApp text message from Hunter threatening saying
I'm sitting here next to my father and if you
(27:57):
don't give me millions of dollars, my father is going
to retaliate again us. You That evidence, one after the
other after the other, is compelling, And the average American
who is watching the corrupt corporate media doesn't know any
of it. And so what Carvil is doing. Look in
Wednesday's podcast, we said the Democrat talking point is there's
(28:18):
no evidence. The more savvy people are saying, no direct evidence,
because everything I just cited is evidence, although most of
that is circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence is powerful evidence on
which people are convicted of crimes every single day of
the year. But as we discussed in Wednesday's podcast, they're
at least two separate pieces of direct evidence. Number one,
(28:38):
the Hunter Biden text to the Chinese communist official threatening
retaliation from his father. That's direct evidence. And number two,
Joe Biden admitting on tape that he held a billion
dollars in US loan guarantees hostage to force the Ukrainian
government to fire the pro secutor who was investigating the
(29:02):
corrupt Ukrainian oligarch. That too, is direct evidence of one
of the critical elements of bribery. And so I got
to say, James Carvill, be careful what you wish for,
because if the American people hear this evidence, it stinks.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
Yeah, it really does. I want to tell you about
my friends over at Chalk.
Speaker 2 (29:19):
If you are a guy and you feel like you're
losing your edge, you feel like you've lost some of
that strength and vitality, and weakness and complacency have set in.
Maybe you want to work out, but you just don't
have the energy. Maybe you want to be more active,
but you're just sitting on the couch too much. Well,
testostrum levels have dropped off a cliff historically. They're now
at an all time low. Thankfully, the patriots at Chalk
(29:41):
choq dot com are helping real America men just like
you take back and proudly mask. Maximize your masculinity by
boosting testosterum levels up to twenty percent over ninety days.
Speaker 9 (29:54):
Now.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
I've been taking the Male Vitality Stack and it works.
I've been taking it for months and I can tell
tell you there is a huge difference. You can help
maximize your testosterone by boosting it up to twenty percent
over ninety days.
Speaker 1 (30:07):
Manufactured right here in the US of A.
Speaker 2 (30:09):
Chuck's Natural herbal supplements are clinically proven to have game
changing effects on your energy, your focus, and your mood.
So check them out. Go to chalksechoq dot com use
the promo code Ben. You'll get thirty five percent off
any chalk subscription for life. That's choq dot com. Use
promo code Ben for thirty five percent off. Senator, I
(30:31):
also want to ask you about this. The White House
had a very interesting response and this is the third
change now in the goalposts for Joe Biden's involvement with
Hunter Biden's businesses. The first was they never spoke about business. Ever,
then they change it to he was never in business
(30:53):
with his son. That was the goalpost moving yet again.
Now the White House is Ian Sam came out and
moved the goalposts again when he said this.
Speaker 14 (31:04):
The other allegations is the president was present at some
of the meetings between Hunter Biden and his business associates.
Why was the president at those meetings on those phone calls?
Speaker 7 (31:15):
Well, again, I think this is part of the right
wing's misinformation machine to try to confuse people about what
the truth is. The truth is that the President, as
he has said publicly for years, calls his family every
day to check in. He calls his son every day
to check in. He calls his other family members to
check in to see how they're doing.
Speaker 12 (31:33):
He loves them.
Speaker 7 (31:34):
They're a tight knit family. And what the GOP's own
witness testified in this case is that that's exactly what
the President was doing. He was checking in with Hunter
during a particularly hard time. I might add a time
where the family was going through Hunter's brother Bo's illness,
and of course the President checks in with his son
and talks to them, but again that witness testified no
(31:56):
business dealings of Hunter Biden's or anyone's was discussed in
these conversations, and so again they're trying to make this
sort of strange connection when their own investigation has disproven
these claims.
Speaker 14 (32:08):
Before I let you go in is the president response?
In terms of how the President has reacted to this,
especially as somebody who's been in politics and been at
Washington for as long as he has been, the idea
that he is now a subject to an impeachment inquiry
as president of the United States, what's his response to that.
Speaker 7 (32:24):
You know, the President has been in politics for a
long time, and I think, as he would say, he's
seen a lot of malarkey along the way, but this
might take the cake. You know, he's focused on the
issues that actually matter to the American people. You just
saw him spending the last week traveling around the world,
shoring up our alliance as advancing national interests in Asia,
our economic interests in Asia, showing American leadership on the
(32:45):
world stage.
Speaker 9 (32:46):
He's coming back here.
Speaker 7 (32:47):
He's announcing today a quarter billion dollar investment in cancer research,
try to finally cure cancer. That's what his administration and
this president is focused on every day. They're focused on
the actual needs of the American people. And I think
what he would say is maybe the House Republicans should
join him.
Speaker 2 (33:03):
There's the pardon there where he says that Joe Biden
attended Hunter's business meetings because he loves him. That's the
new goalpost that they just moved significantly from they never
talked about business to then well they never work together.
Now it's well, he just went to the business meetings
because he loves him.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
Really, that's the new excuse.
Speaker 3 (33:23):
Well, look, I mean, what good and loving and devoted
father hasn't called in twenty times to his son's meeting
with corrupt oligarchs who are paying millions of dollars in
exchange for favors from that father while he's sitting and
serving as the vice president of the United States. I mean,
(33:43):
that's really just what any good dad would do.
Speaker 1 (33:46):
I mean, it really is.
Speaker 3 (33:49):
It's cynical because they point out that Joe's other son
tragically died of cancer, so they want to wrap it
in the sympathy of a human tragedy. To say, well,
of course, you know, listen, why was Hunter getting paid
the millions of dollars? I didn't hear him say a
(34:12):
word about that. There's no value Hunter provides. What was
the value Hunter brought? You know, Ben, you're a talented guy,
You're a charming guy. Are there any foreign ola garks
calling you up saying Ben, I want to wire millions
of dollars to you.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
Zero, That's not all you know.
Speaker 3 (34:32):
They don't do that to anybody. They only do it
if you were providing value. And what all of these
talking heads, what all of these democrat hacks are saying,
what all of the corporate media puppets are refusing to answer,
is is what did Hunter get in exchange for the
(34:54):
tens of millions of dollars? And according to the House
it could be north of twenty thirty million dollars. We're
talking massive amounts of money. And by the way, not
money from you know, normal American companies, not money from
our friends and allies. It wasn't money from France, it
wasn't money from Italy, it wasn't money from the United Kingdom,
(35:15):
it wasn't money from Japan. It was money from China, Russia, Ukraine.
They singled out nations with very significant antagonism and hostility
to America and some of the most corrupt nations on Earth.
(35:39):
And there is no innocent explanation. By the way, you
don't hear any of these Democrats explaining why did Joe
Biden have multiple book burner phones, Why did he have
fake emails? Why did he use fake emails to send
emails to his son Hunter about Ukraine on government email
while Hunter was getting paid millions of dollars. All of
(36:00):
that the Democrats want you to ignore and say, well, gosh,
Joe's just a loving dad, and that's what loving dads do.
They help their sons make thirty million dollars from corrupt
oligarchs who are enemies of America.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
So there was a montage that we played of Joe
Biden and the lies that had been told by him
as team others in the media.
Speaker 1 (36:24):
It went viral several weeks ago. I think it's.
Speaker 2 (36:26):
Important that we remind people and if you miss this
or you were looking for this audio, that's why I
want to play it for you again because it's so damning,
especially as we move forward to impeachment. Before I do that,
I want to tell you though about our friends at
Patriot Mobile. For ten years, Patriot Mobile has been America's
only Christian conservative wireless provider. And when I say only
(36:47):
trust me, they're the only one. The team over there
are amazing because not only do they take your dollars
when you pay your bill every month, but when you
pay your bill, you're actually supporting causes that you stand
up for. We're talking about freedom of speech, really, the
sanctity of life, the Second Amendment, are military veterans, first responders.
(37:08):
Now you get nationwide coverage, dependable nationwide coverage, and they
give you access to all three major networks, which means
you get the same coverage you've been accustomed to without
funding the left. You may not realize that Big Mobile
many of them actually give huge checks to Planned Parenthood.
That is why you need to switch to Patriot Mobile.
(37:29):
They have one hundred percent US based customer service team
and that makes switching easy. Keep your number that you
have right now, your same cell phone number, keep your
same cell phone, or upgrade to a new one. Their
team will help you find the best plan for your
needs and to save you money. Go to Patriotmobile dot
com slash Verdict that's Patriot Mobile dot com slash Verdict.
(37:53):
Use a promo code Verdict when you call them, and
you will also get the best deals of the year
plus free active vation eight seven eight Patriot.
Speaker 1 (38:02):
That's eight seven eight Patriot.
Speaker 2 (38:06):
I want to get back to this montage center that
was one that went viral and I hope you will
give this to your friends shared on social media because
it's another example of how many lives have been told
by the Bidens and how much the media has been
willing to cover for them. And this is what this
impeachment inquiry is going to be all about.
Speaker 15 (38:24):
Ever discussed with my son before my brother or anyone
else in being having to do with their businesses.
Speaker 13 (38:30):
President Biden met with at least fourteen of Hunter's business
associates while he was vice president.
Speaker 10 (38:36):
And Vice president Joe Biden at dinner with his son
Hunter along with Hunters of business associates from Ukraine, Russia,
and Kazakhstan, and the day after the dinner, a Barisma
executive said a note to Hunter, quoting dear Hunter, thank
you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity
to meet your father and spend some time together.
Speaker 6 (38:56):
Hunter's lucrative business dealings often included giving as much as
a percent of his earnings to his dad.
Speaker 16 (39:02):
The text read quote, I hope you all can do
what I did and pay for everything for this entire
family for thirty years. It's really hard, but don't worry
Onnlike Pop, I won't make you give me half your salary.
Speaker 15 (39:14):
His son Hunter, joining the then Vice president on the
official visit to Beijing. Unknown to the press, back then,
Hunter Biden was forming a Chinese private equity fund, planning
to raise money, including from Chinese investors. Ten days after
the Bidens trip, Shanghai authorities issued the fund's business license.
Speaker 17 (39:31):
And the Hunter introduced me as this is Tony Dad,
the individual I told you about that's helping us with
the business that we're working on in the Chinese.
Speaker 18 (39:40):
The email reads this way quote at the moment, there's
a provisional agreement that the equity will be distributed as
follows ten held by Hunter for the big guy.
Speaker 17 (39:49):
I have a thousand percent sit here and know that
the big guy is referencing Joe Biden. I met with
a former vice president in person multiple times.
Speaker 12 (39:58):
A newly revealed text message Joe's b Bolinski was apparently
warned by business partner James Gillier, don't mention Joe being involved.
It's only when you are face to face. I know
you know that, but they are paranoid.
Speaker 5 (40:10):
Chinese executives admitted to reporters that they were actually introduced
to the Vice presidents by Hunter.
Speaker 10 (40:16):
Biden, Hunter and the then Vice President seeing with a
pair of Mexican billionaires at the same time.
Speaker 15 (40:21):
Hunter had been working on energy deals in Mexico.
Speaker 16 (40:24):
Joe Biden also had a Hunter at his business partner,
fly On f was two to Mexico.
Speaker 5 (40:30):
His closest business partner.
Speaker 6 (40:31):
Hunters made at least nineteen visits to the White House
and other official locations, including a sit down with then
Vice President Joe Biden in the West Wing.
Speaker 18 (40:39):
There's photographic evidence of Biden on a golf out and
with both his son Hunter and a man called Devin Archer,
who was another member of the Parice Maboor.
Speaker 5 (40:47):
We also know that Devin Archer in that picture had
a meeting in the White House, one on one meeting
with Joe Biden about a week before.
Speaker 1 (40:55):
They joined the Maarice Mabour.
Speaker 2 (40:59):
You hear that, Senator, and this explains exactly why this
impeachment inquiry is going to be so important.
Speaker 8 (41:05):
Well, it does.
Speaker 3 (41:06):
It also explains why the Democrat talking point and the
corporate media talking point that there is no evidence of
Joe Biden's corruption. It is flatly false. And I gotta
say James Carvil saying he's really looking forward to hearings
on this, well, you know what, James so am, I.
Speaker 2 (41:24):
Don't forget download this podcast Monday, Wednesday Fridays. We also
do a really cool Saturday show now that is taking
some of the best segments that were later in the
show and we put them together for a review for
you for the week on Saturdays. Make sure that subscribe
or follow our auto download button depending on where you're
listening right now. And in the in between days, join
(41:46):
me on my podcast, the Ben Ferguson Podcasts. I'll keep
you updown the latest breaking news in between Verdict episodes,
So down with the Ben Ferguson podcast as well, and
we'll see you back here in a couple of days.
Welcome.
Speaker 2 (00:02):
It's Verdict with Center, Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you
and Senator. We've got a lot to talk about tonight,
including Hunter Biden's not shocking indictment at all and the
media acting like this is a big deal when it's
clearly not. It's the fixes already in. Plus, we've got
a new update on Joe biden impeachment and his own
words coming back to haunt him in a big way.
(00:23):
But first, Center, let's walk through this indictment. This is
a big nothing burger. In my opinion, they've in died
him on the federal gun charges. This insulates the president,
It protects the big guy. It focuses on crimes that
are completely limited to Hunter Biden and no one else.
In all the big crimes they could have charged them
with today, they still have not done it.
Speaker 1 (00:44):
This is a fix. Do you agree?
Speaker 3 (00:46):
Sadly, I do, And we predicted this over a year
ago on this podcast. We talked about how the investigation
into the bidens if at the end of the day,
the indictment that came in was a personal offense limit
to Hunter Biden, if it was a drug offense, if
it was a gun offense, if it was a personal
(01:07):
tax offense that was limited to Hunter himself, then that
was by design. That was by design to insulate Joe Biden.
It's worth underscoring. We've said it before, but we cannot
forget this is not about Hunter Biden. If his name
was Hunter Smith, if he was just some poor, sad
(01:29):
sack dealing with addiction and substance abuse, nobody would care.
It wouldn't be national news, it wouldn't be a matter
of public concern. The reason this matters is because there's
considerable evidence that Hunter Biden solicited and received tens of
millions of dollars from corrupt foreign players in exchange for
(01:53):
official favors from his dad, Joe Biden, now the President
of the United States. That's what matters. And so this
this indictment. We said a year ago, if they just
bring a gun crime, they're covering up for Joe. Now
they're three three indictments. They are three counts of the indictment.
Two counts are tied to Hunter Biden completing a form
(02:13):
indicating that he was not using illegal drugs when he
purchased a cult Cobra revolver in October of twenty eighteen.
And the third count alleges that he possessed a firearm
while using a narcotic. Now, those are crimes that I
think Hunter clearly committed. That there's very little material dispute
(02:35):
that he is guilty of those crimes. By the way,
those indictments could have been brought years ago. The evidence
was there has been there for years, and DOJ delayed
and delayed and Delayden de Layden delayed. And this is
all about insulating Joe Biden. Joe Biden does not bear
any liability for Hunter being on crack while he illegally
(02:55):
buys a gun. That's a bad development for Hunter. But
the purpose of this is to insulate the White House
and to let the Biden do OJ say, see we
indicted to Biden, aren't we tough? And they're deliberately carving
off and protecting Joe, who is the reason that the
(03:17):
public rightfully cares about this.
Speaker 2 (03:20):
Well, let's talk about the comparing contrast to the plea deal.
This is what he was gonna plead guilty to that
they're now charging him with.
Speaker 1 (03:29):
How is this going to change?
Speaker 2 (03:30):
I mean, is the fact that they've it's not in
a plea deal and they're gonna they they've charged him
and died on this federal gun charge. Does that change
the chances he might actually go to prison for any
amount of time?
Speaker 3 (03:42):
It probably does.
Speaker 4 (03:43):
Uh.
Speaker 3 (03:43):
But if you look at it, we look at the
evolution of this, we now know, and we've covered in
previous podcasts that the Biden do OJ was initially prepared
to have a plea deal where Hunter didn't have to
plead guilty to anything. He could just enter an agreement,
get not even a slap on the wrist, sort of
a wave over the hand and everything goes away, and
(04:06):
without even pleading guilty to anything. The Biden DOJ was
prepared to give him complete and total immunity for any
and all criminal conduct, especially especially especially the criminal conduct
that implicated his father, and that really, I believe was
the entire objective.
Speaker 1 (04:24):
Of this whole thing.
Speaker 3 (04:25):
Now, what happened to derail that plan when they announced
they were indicting Hunter.
Speaker 1 (04:30):
That was the plan.
Speaker 3 (04:31):
The Biden Department of Justice was obstructing the investigation that
Merrick Garland had lied under oath to Congress. And given that,
the heat ratcheted up and they said, Okay, you got
to plead guilty, but will still make it a slap
on the wrist, Hunter, You still don't have to serve
even a day, even a minute in jail. We'll make
it all magically go away. And the critical piece that
(04:54):
was added to this is and you get a get
out of jail free card for all corrupt activity for Ivory,
for everything that was done, selling access to Daddy, selling
favors from Daddy. All of that is exonerated when you
sign on to this agreement with no jail time. Now,
what happened then is the whistleblowers came and testified before Congress,
(05:17):
and the global attention on this ratcheted up considerably, and
so suddenly they went before the federal district judge and
the judge asked, DOJ, so are you saying that everything
else Hunter's done? And mind you, the House representatives filed
a brief of the district judge laying out all of
the evidence of Hunter's potential other criminal conduct, of Joe
(05:39):
Biden's criminal conduct, and the judge asked, DOJ are you
saying you're not going to prove, prosecute anything else other
than this these counts on which you're giving him a
slap on the wrist, And doj got really nervous and
they said no, no, no, we're not saying that well, and
I think they just they lost their nerve to give
(06:01):
Hunter and really to give Joe, because Joe is always
the beneficiary of this corruption to get out of jail
free pass. That's what led to the plea agreement falling apart.
I think this is the third iteration. And by the way,
we predicted this third iteration that they would come back
and they would indict Hunter. But again it's on the
personal crimes. And if there's not a plea agreement, I
(06:25):
think the odds are significantly higher that Hunter serves some
jail time.
Speaker 1 (06:32):
But I also think.
Speaker 2 (06:34):
Look like I mean we were talking a day or
two days, or three days or a month. I mean,
if they were willing to give him no jail time
before and now they charge him with us if he's
found guilty, how much does that come to the discretion
of the judge or their minimums are sensing guidelines here?
Speaker 1 (06:51):
I mean, how concerned is he tonight?
Speaker 2 (06:53):
Okay, wow, I may actually spend real time in jail.
Speaker 3 (06:56):
Look, dealj wants to give him no jail time. They
wanted to give him a we doesn't even plead guilty
in anything. So this is not a true adversarial proceeding.
This is not a prosecutor who is seeking to hold
someone accountable. The reason Merrick Garland appointed David Wise as
special prosecutor is special counsel rather, is that he'd already
(07:16):
demonstrated that he was willing to obstruct justice and cover
up Joe Biden. That's the objective here, and so the
small level objective with this case. I think this case
probably gets resolved of the plea deal as well, and
the plea deal may require Hunter to serve six months
(07:38):
in jail. I think that's a real possibility, and they
may get nervous about having a commitment we will not
investigate anything else. Now, mind you, they intend not to
investigate anything else. And it wouldn't surprise me at all
to see THEOJ Yeah, to see doj say privately, look, wink, wink, nudge, nudge,
(07:59):
we're not going to invest at anything else. But we
can't say that in open court because it makes us
look like completely partisan, corrupted, compromised hacks. And it may
be that Biden's lawyers take that and that he serves
some time in jail. We do seem to have seen
some movement among Democrats among the press where they've decided
(08:23):
throw Hunter overboard a little bit in order to protect Joe.
It's why the last podcast on Wednesday, and by the way,
if you did not listen to Wednesday's podcast, you should
go back and listen to it. It was really important
explanation on the impeachment of Joe Biden. Why the Democrats
claim that there is no direct evidence of Joe's involvement
(08:45):
as corruption is a flat out lie, and we walked
through it chapter and verse on Wednesday's podcast. The fact
that they have shifted their defense to saying there's no
direct evidence of Joe's involvement in the hates that they've
collectively decided to cut bait and throw Hunter to some
extent to the Wolves. Now, I suspect Joe is still
(09:08):
not entirely comfortable with Hunter serving ten years. But at
this point I think the most likely outcome, absent enormous
public pressure, is Hunter pleads guilty to these charges, serves
some minimal jail time six months to a year, these
(09:29):
charges go away, and the investigation and everything else just
quietly disappears. Doj doesn't admit in court, they're not going
to investigate it. They simply say nothing else, and actually
that then serves as a shield for DOJ. When Merrick
Garland or anyone else from the Department of Justice is
(09:50):
brought before Congress, their response will be when asked about Hunter,
it's still an ongoing investigation, I'm sorry, we can't tell
you anything. When they have, I belie leave zero intention
to investigate the claims of bribery and corrupt selling of
official favors from Joe Biden because the Department of Justice
(10:13):
wants to protect Joe Biden above all else.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
Senator, it's also very interesting to see how the media
is covering this story, and I want to get into
that in a minute, because they're trying to make this
a big deal while also undermining the charges saying they're
actually weak, which is pretty hysterical. But first, let me
tell you about our friends and in viro clins. You
should choose an air purifier like your life depends on it,
because it just might. We've had more than thirty five
(10:38):
thousand wildfires that have devastated the US this year alone,
and the toxins, the particles and wildfire smoke can penetrate
our lungs and threaten our health. That's why in viro
Clins developed military grade air purification for your home, and
they just announced that they're having their biggest sale of
the year. You can get thirty percent off right now,
(11:01):
and Viroclints is specifically designed to wipe out airborne chemicals
and viruses known to cause illness, allergies, and difficulty breathing. Now,
I've got asthma and I have in vira Clints in
my bedroom and I can tell you it has made
a massive difference. This is also one of the cool
things about in viro Clintons. Even toxic gases and particles
(11:23):
found in wildfire smoke are no match. That's why the
US Navy selected in viro Clints protect and purify the
air in their facilities, and viraro Clintons comes with a
free professional air quality monitor, so you know your family's
breathing purified air. So save right now and get the
free air quality monitor and fast free shipping. That's over
(11:45):
a two hundred and fifty dollars savings right there. Loan
go to ekpure dot com use promo code verdict. That's
Ekcure dot com promo code verdict and save and get
in Vira Clints. It's amazing, Senator. I want to play
for you MSNBC. This is what they had to say
(12:06):
is they were breaking the news on the Hunter Biden
indictment on the federal gun charge, and they're trying to
turn this into a very big deal. Well at the
same time, the media, then an hour later is trying
to tell you that the case against Hunter Biden is
actually really weak.
Speaker 5 (12:20):
Breaking news.
Speaker 6 (12:21):
Now we have just learned and we just got the
paperwork that Hunter Biden, the President's son, has been indicted
for lying when buying a gun. I want to bring
an NBC's Garrett. Hey, Garrett, what can you tell us.
Speaker 7 (12:32):
Well, Chris, this indictment just unsealed in Delaware charges Hunter
Biden with three counts, all related to that gun purchase.
It describes two counts of knowingly making a false or
fictitious statement when purchasing a gun, basically accusing him of
lying about being addicted to drugs at the time he
was purchasing this weapon pistol in October of twenty eighteen,
(12:54):
and the third count is that he did knowingly possess
that same firearm while essentially while being addicted to a
controlled substance. So these are counts that were all thought
to have been dealt with in that plea deal that
fell apart a couple of months ago, kicking things back
to the US Attorney. Now special Council whis handling this
(13:15):
in Delaware, a former US attorney in the district of Delaware. Again,
this indictment on Field, dealing only with the gun and
drug charges. I think it's reasonable to presume we have
not heard the last of charges against the President's son,
given the scope of what was originally in front of
the US Attorney and then kind of fallen apart back
to the drawing board to bring forward these counts.
Speaker 2 (13:35):
Now, by the way you said it fell apart, that's
not true. And then MS tries to tell you that
they don't think we've heard the last of the indictments.
Speaker 1 (13:44):
I don't believe that, do you.
Speaker 8 (13:46):
No, No, Look, this is designed to end the matter.
That's what the Biden Department of Justice wants. They want
to say we indicted him. They want to get a conviction,
and I think the conviction is likely. I don't think
the Biden team is going to try this. They may
try to do some pre trial motions and some procedural delays,
but I don't think they're going to want to take
(14:07):
this to a jury, so I think it's likely to
be resolved with a plea deal, and the plea deal,
in all likelihood will end up slightly stouter than the
slap on the wrists that they tried the second time.
But the purpose of this, and we predicted this a
year ago, this is not new. It's not surprising. The
purpose of this is to put to rest all of
(14:31):
the allegations of corruption against Joe Biden because the Biden
DOJ is looking to an election coming up November of
next year, and by the way, they're busy inditing Donald Trump,
which is also looking to an election coming up next year,
and when it comes to election interference, We've never seen
a Department of Justice behave like Merrick Garland and this
(14:53):
profoundly politicized Department of Justice.
Speaker 2 (14:56):
Now this case, by the way they have brought against him,
there's a lot of evidence that was from that laptop
from Hell and the and the pictures and the drug use.
I would argue it's probably a very strong case for
there to be a conviction against Hunter Biden.
Speaker 1 (15:14):
If you look at the evidence.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
Yet CNN just barely an hour after this indictment comes out,
they start carrying water for Hunter Biden.
Speaker 1 (15:24):
And this is what they said, calling it a weak case.
Speaker 9 (15:28):
Jations of politics is right, often coming from the former
president himself in terms of what they say is to
to your justice system. But here you have it, as
we noted, first time in US history the son of
a president has been charged by the Justice Department. Kris Canal,
thanks so much. Going to turn it over to Borius
for some legal analysis.
Speaker 7 (15:45):
Yeah, let's chat with seeing and legal analyst Jennifer Rogers.
Speaker 10 (15:48):
Jennifer, obviously, again, this is a historic moment, the first
time DOJ has charged the son of a sitting president.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
Your reaction to the news.
Speaker 11 (15:56):
Well, Wars, I really think, you know, the first time
we had a charge against to former president, it was
important that prosecutors really took their time and built strong
cases based on compelling evidence. And I'm afraid the prosecutors
have not done that here. I certainly, if I were
making history, would not want to make it with this
set of facts and these laws. I think that this
(16:16):
case is weak. It's very, very rarely charged. This section
on being an addict in possession of a weapon. So
I think they have a lot of problems, both on
the factual side, which is why it's very rarely charged,
and on the legal side. After the Supreme Court's decision
in the Bruin case on the Second Amendment, a lot
of legal observers think that all these gun possession statutes
(16:39):
are in jeopardy. And we know that Hunter Biden's lawyers
will fight vigorously on the legal front, saying that after
the Supreme Court's decision that this conviction could not stand.
So I think they've got a lot of trouble here ahead,
and we'll see how it plays out. But I think
it's inadvisable, Sinner.
Speaker 2 (16:55):
When I heard this, I was dying to get your reaction,
because they're now telling you this case is so weak.
This is a dumb case to even bring up, even
though they're willing to do a plea deal on the
same case that got then blown up.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
So which one is it?
Speaker 3 (17:06):
Yeah, Look, Connor has already agreed to plead guilty to
these counts, so oddly enough, CNN, you know, I don't
know who that quote legal analyst is, but you could
have just called her a Democratic Party shill because she says, well,
first of all, the case against Donald Trump is incredibly strong.
It is meticulously researched. It is oh oh so powerful.
(17:26):
What utter and complete garbage. The case against Trump is
a political hatchet job, and they may get a conviction
before a DC jury that is ninety plus percent Democrat.
But I think the chances of that conviction standing up
on appeal are minuscule. But of course CNN is so
called legal analyst, is not going to tell you that.
(17:49):
And as for the claim that this charge is weak, okay,
the critical elements are did he buy a gun, yes,
as far as I know, there's no dispute about it.
Was he a drug addict? Yes, and I'm not aware
of any meaningful dispute about it. The guy was dishonorably
discharged from the military for his drug addiction. He's wrestled
(18:11):
with drug addiction for years. We have pictures and video
of him using illegal drugs. Did he lie on the form,
which is a felony, Again, there's no dispute about it.
He clearly checked the box lying on the form. So
to say the case is weak, I don't even know
(18:32):
a factual claim. An element of the crime that is
in dispute. And her final point, well, after the Bruin case,
you know, any gun claim is legally dubious.
Speaker 1 (18:44):
What nonsense.
Speaker 12 (18:45):
No, it's not.
Speaker 3 (18:46):
What is legally dubious is efforts from Democrats to restrict
the right to keep in bare arms of law abiding citizens.
There are, she says, lots of legal scholars doubt this
prevent No, that's not true. There have been laws in
the books for a long time prohibiting felons from possessing firearms.
(19:08):
I don't know of a single legal scholar who doubts
the validity of those provisions. This is part of that
same law that deals with people with serious drug addictions.
I again don't know of a legal scholar who challenges
those provisions. So her claim, Look, it's the typical leftist
claim that if a law abiding citizen has a right
(19:29):
to keep in bare arms, well that means everyone can
possess weapons. Let's just hand out hand out guns to
murderers in jail. It's like, no, No, that's not what
the Second Amendment says. That's not what it's ever been
understood to say. What the Second Amendment says is that
a law abiding citizen can defend himself, can defend his
or her family, can keep and bear arms. And so
(19:53):
I got to say, listening to it, there literally is
not a sentence in that so called legal analysis that
isn't us laughably false.
Speaker 2 (20:02):
Yeah, it's and they love to make up stuff, and
they do it every day, and even on the biggest
news days they'll come in with the propaganda just hours
afterwards to try to spend this in favor of the
Biden crime family.
Speaker 1 (20:13):
I also want to move on to the.
Speaker 3 (20:14):
Other begin and by the way, Ben, I want to
make clear that when I talk about what laws are
in dispute or not, the first big seminal case from
the Supreme Court establishing the individual right to keep in
bear arms was Heller versus District of Columbia. I am
(20:35):
very familiar with that case because I represented the State
of Texas and thirty one other states in that case.
I was part of the Supreme Court case that upheld
the individual right to keep in bear arms and it
was a it was a fundamental foundational case. Justice Scalia
wrote the majority opinion. And I'll tell you what we
(20:57):
said in our amicus brief on behalf of Texas and
third one other States. We said, of course, the laws
prohibiting felons from being in possession of firearms are legal
and constitutional. What government cannot do is stripped the right
to keep in bare arms from law abiding citizens. So
she claims lots of people dispute that with no apparent
(21:19):
awareness of what actually is are the underlying arguments concerning
the constitutional right.
Speaker 2 (21:26):
Yeah, great point there. I want to move to the
impeachment update. There was some very interesting fodder from James Carvill.
If you don't know James Carville, I'll just remind you
he's a.
Speaker 1 (21:39):
On the left.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
They would refer to him as a brilliant political mind,
a mastermind behind the Bill Clinton days. He is on
TV a lot, talking on MSNBC in other places about.
Speaker 1 (21:49):
The Democratic Party.
Speaker 2 (21:51):
He was on CNN and he had this to say
about the impeachment inquiry.
Speaker 1 (21:57):
Moving forward on the House side, take a look.
Speaker 13 (22:00):
What do you make of how the White House has
been handling it so far? Do you think they're being
aggressive enough or should there be a war room, should
there be a more outfront effort from them?
Speaker 4 (22:11):
Well, my honest opinion is the people they have leading
it are not very smart, and in fact they borderline stupid.
I mean James Comber or Jim Jordan and the people
in the House that are going to be on this
committee like Dan Goldman, Delica Plasciat I think is from
from Virgin Islands, Jamie ra Askin. These are very smart people.
(22:33):
I don't think the White House needs to worry too
much about this and left these congressional Democrats who are
a whip smart are just going to eat these people alive.
I so want them to do this. I can't tell
you how much I want them to do this.
Speaker 13 (22:49):
This is a very you want them to do the impeachment?
Speaker 9 (22:51):
What do you mean?
Speaker 4 (22:52):
I want them to hole hearings?
Speaker 13 (22:54):
Why do you think it's whole hearing?
Speaker 4 (22:56):
And I want I want to and I want to
let people the American public see how then how nonexistent
a case is present, did anything wrong? And I want
our people, who are quite effective lawyers to get them
on cross examination and do what they're gonna do and
make foods out of them.
Speaker 1 (23:14):
Senator, this is a new strategy.
Speaker 2 (23:17):
I'll give James, I'll give I'll give them a little
credit here, James Carvill's you know, it's a new strategy
to say that two of the most brilliant minds in
the house are idiots, right, Jesus, James Comer and Jim Jordan.
We've had them both on this show for multiple multi
part series. You should go back and listen to it
if you haven't heard what they said. But to say
that they're idiots and that you think that your team's
(23:39):
going to mop the floor with them, if this is
their true strategy, this could be really bad for the president.
Speaker 8 (23:45):
Well, listen.
Speaker 3 (23:46):
James Carville is one of the most talented Democrat strategists
that that therey is. He was the person responsible for
Bill Clinton's election, most responsible. He's the person most famously
associated with the phrase it's the economy stupid, which was
right behind Bill Clinton beating George Herbert Walker Bush and
(24:07):
getting elected president in the first place. And so Carvel
is a smart guy. But I got to say what
he just said on CNN is shockingly foolish and demonstrably wrong.
Speaker 8 (24:21):
Number one.
Speaker 3 (24:23):
To claim that James Comer and Jim Jordan are stupid
as he did is laughable. And let me ask our verdict. Listeners,
go back and listen to the podcast. We did two
podcasts with Jim Jordan. We did two podcasts with James Comer.
Go listen to him, go assess it's a deep dive
where you can hear them analyze the issues. That's just
(24:45):
absurdly false. And then he says, oh, and the Democrats
are suck good lawyers. He points to Dan Goldman. Now,
Dan Goldman is the freshman congressman from New York who
we've talked about in this podcast before. He's quickly jumped
into the role of being Hunter Biden's lead lawyer in
the House of Representatives and really Joe Biden's lead lawyer
in the House of Representatives. And that's consistent because he's
(25:08):
incredibly wealthy, he's the heir of a massive fortune. But
he's been a Democrat staffer. He was a Democrat lawyer
on the Trump impeachment, which was utterly ludicrous to begin with.
And he's already shown he's willing to just lie. Whatever
the talking point is from the left, Dan Goldman will
repeat it. He will repeat it without a hesitance. And
(25:29):
he says, oh, people should be afraid. I got to say,
I don't know a lot of lawyers that would be
afraid of Dan Goldman, because it is a bad strategy
for a lawyer to lie a politician, sometimes you can
get away with it because politicians can speak in environments.
If you do like Dan Goldman does, and you go
on CNN and MSNBC, your lies are never challenged. You're
(25:52):
in front of a forum where the corrupt journalists interviewing
you also want to lie about the thing you're lying about,
so you can say things and face no challenge whatsoever.
But where I think Carville is most foolish is saying, gosh,
this is a great thing for Democrats to have these
(26:15):
impeachment hearings. Careful, braer rabbit, Careful what you asked to
be thrown into it is in this instance, Look, Carville
is beating his chest and trying.
Speaker 8 (26:29):
To look tough.
Speaker 3 (26:31):
But the evidence, which we've discussed at great length of
Joe Biden's corruption is very significant. James Carville does not
want the American people to hear that evidence. Now, if
they watch CNN, if they watch MSNBC, if they watch
ABC or NBC, they won't hear that evidence. But if
(26:55):
we have hearings and hearings that the American people pay
attention to, they will hear that evidence and things like
over one hundred suspicious activity reports, reports that banks filed
about what appeared to be money laundering by the Biden
family over twenty shell corporations, corporations that don't have employees,
(27:15):
that don't manufacture anything, that are not real companies, but
the only purpose of them it is to launder money.
Up to five thousand, four hundred emails from fake email
addresses from Joe Biden to Hunter Biden, many concerning Ukraine,
(27:36):
multiple burner phones by Joe Biden, the testimony of a
confidential informant who says Joe Biden and Hunter Biden personally
solicited and received millions of dollars of bribes from a
Ukrainian oligarch. The WhatsApp text message from Hunter threatening saying
I'm sitting here next to my father and if you
(27:57):
don't give me millions of dollars, my father is going
to retaliate again us. You That evidence, one after the
other after the other, is compelling, And the average American
who is watching the corrupt corporate media doesn't know any
of it. And so what Carvil is doing. Look in
Wednesday's podcast, we said the Democrat talking point is there's
(28:18):
no evidence. The more savvy people are saying, no direct evidence,
because everything I just cited is evidence, although most of
that is circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence is powerful evidence on
which people are convicted of crimes every single day of
the year. But as we discussed in Wednesday's podcast, they're
at least two separate pieces of direct evidence. Number one,
(28:38):
the Hunter Biden text to the Chinese communist official threatening
retaliation from his father. That's direct evidence. And number two,
Joe Biden admitting on tape that he held a billion
dollars in US loan guarantees hostage to force the Ukrainian
government to fire the pro secutor who was investigating the
(29:02):
corrupt Ukrainian oligarch. That too, is direct evidence of one
of the critical elements of bribery. And so I got
to say, James Carvill, be careful what you wish for,
because if the American people hear this evidence, it stinks.
Speaker 1 (29:16):
Yeah, it really does. I want to tell you about
my friends over at Chalk.
Speaker 2 (29:19):
If you are a guy and you feel like you're
losing your edge, you feel like you've lost some of
that strength and vitality, and weakness and complacency have set in.
Maybe you want to work out, but you just don't
have the energy. Maybe you want to be more active,
but you're just sitting on the couch too much. Well,
testostrum levels have dropped off a cliff historically. They're now
at an all time low. Thankfully, the patriots at Chalk
(29:41):
choq dot com are helping real America men just like
you take back and proudly mask. Maximize your masculinity by
boosting testosterum levels up to twenty percent over ninety days.
Speaker 9 (29:54):
Now.
Speaker 2 (29:54):
I've been taking the Male Vitality Stack and it works.
I've been taking it for months and I can tell
tell you there is a huge difference. You can help
maximize your testosterone by boosting it up to twenty percent
over ninety days.
Speaker 1 (30:07):
Manufactured right here in the US of A.
Speaker 2 (30:09):
Chuck's Natural herbal supplements are clinically proven to have game
changing effects on your energy, your focus, and your mood.
So check them out. Go to chalksechoq dot com use
the promo code Ben. You'll get thirty five percent off
any chalk subscription for life. That's choq dot com. Use
promo code Ben for thirty five percent off. Senator, I
(30:31):
also want to ask you about this. The White House
had a very interesting response and this is the third
change now in the goalposts for Joe Biden's involvement with
Hunter Biden's businesses. The first was they never spoke about business. Ever,
then they change it to he was never in business
(30:53):
with his son. That was the goalpost moving yet again.
Now the White House is Ian Sam came out and
moved the goalposts again when he said this.
Speaker 14 (31:04):
The other allegations is the president was present at some
of the meetings between Hunter Biden and his business associates.
Why was the president at those meetings on those phone calls?
Speaker 7 (31:15):
Well, again, I think this is part of the right
wing's misinformation machine to try to confuse people about what
the truth is. The truth is that the President, as
he has said publicly for years, calls his family every
day to check in. He calls his son every day
to check in. He calls his other family members to
check in to see how they're doing.
Speaker 12 (31:33):
He loves them.
Speaker 7 (31:34):
They're a tight knit family. And what the GOP's own
witness testified in this case is that that's exactly what
the President was doing. He was checking in with Hunter
during a particularly hard time. I might add a time
where the family was going through Hunter's brother Bo's illness,
and of course the President checks in with his son
and talks to them, but again that witness testified no
(31:56):
business dealings of Hunter Biden's or anyone's was discussed in
these conversations, and so again they're trying to make this
sort of strange connection when their own investigation has disproven
these claims.
Speaker 14 (32:08):
Before I let you go in is the president response?
In terms of how the President has reacted to this,
especially as somebody who's been in politics and been at
Washington for as long as he has been, the idea
that he is now a subject to an impeachment inquiry
as president of the United States, what's his response to that.
Speaker 7 (32:24):
You know, the President has been in politics for a
long time, and I think, as he would say, he's
seen a lot of malarkey along the way, but this
might take the cake. You know, he's focused on the
issues that actually matter to the American people. You just
saw him spending the last week traveling around the world,
shoring up our alliance as advancing national interests in Asia,
our economic interests in Asia, showing American leadership on the
(32:45):
world stage.
Speaker 9 (32:46):
He's coming back here.
Speaker 7 (32:47):
He's announcing today a quarter billion dollar investment in cancer research,
try to finally cure cancer. That's what his administration and
this president is focused on every day. They're focused on
the actual needs of the American people. And I think
what he would say is maybe the House Republicans should
join him.
Speaker 2 (33:03):
There's the pardon there where he says that Joe Biden
attended Hunter's business meetings because he loves him. That's the
new goalpost that they just moved significantly from they never
talked about business to then well they never work together.
Now it's well, he just went to the business meetings
because he loves him.
Speaker 1 (33:20):
Really, that's the new excuse.
Speaker 3 (33:23):
Well, look, I mean, what good and loving and devoted
father hasn't called in twenty times to his son's meeting
with corrupt oligarchs who are paying millions of dollars in
exchange for favors from that father while he's sitting and
serving as the vice president of the United States. I mean,
(33:43):
that's really just what any good dad would do.
Speaker 1 (33:46):
I mean, it really is.
Speaker 3 (33:49):
It's cynical because they point out that Joe's other son
tragically died of cancer, so they want to wrap it
in the sympathy of a human tragedy. To say, well,
of course, you know, listen, why was Hunter getting paid
the millions of dollars? I didn't hear him say a
(34:12):
word about that. There's no value Hunter provides. What was
the value Hunter brought? You know, Ben, you're a talented guy,
You're a charming guy. Are there any foreign ola garks
calling you up saying Ben, I want to wire millions
of dollars to you.
Speaker 1 (34:29):
Zero, That's not all you know.
Speaker 3 (34:32):
They don't do that to anybody. They only do it
if you were providing value. And what all of these
talking heads, what all of these democrat hacks are saying,
what all of the corporate media puppets are refusing to answer,
is is what did Hunter get in exchange for the
(34:54):
tens of millions of dollars? And according to the House
it could be north of twenty thirty million dollars. We're
talking massive amounts of money. And by the way, not
money from you know, normal American companies, not money from
our friends and allies. It wasn't money from France, it
wasn't money from Italy, it wasn't money from the United Kingdom,
(35:15):
it wasn't money from Japan. It was money from China, Russia, Ukraine.
They singled out nations with very significant antagonism and hostility
to America and some of the most corrupt nations on Earth.
(35:39):
And there is no innocent explanation. By the way, you
don't hear any of these Democrats explaining why did Joe
Biden have multiple book burner phones, Why did he have
fake emails? Why did he use fake emails to send
emails to his son Hunter about Ukraine on government email
while Hunter was getting paid millions of dollars. All of
(36:00):
that the Democrats want you to ignore and say, well, gosh,
Joe's just a loving dad, and that's what loving dads do.
They help their sons make thirty million dollars from corrupt
oligarchs who are enemies of America.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
So there was a montage that we played of Joe
Biden and the lies that had been told by him
as team others in the media.
Speaker 1 (36:24):
It went viral several weeks ago. I think it's.
Speaker 2 (36:26):
Important that we remind people and if you miss this
or you were looking for this audio, that's why I
want to play it for you again because it's so damning,
especially as we move forward to impeachment. Before I do that,
I want to tell you though about our friends at
Patriot Mobile. For ten years, Patriot Mobile has been America's
only Christian conservative wireless provider. And when I say only
(36:47):
trust me, they're the only one. The team over there
are amazing because not only do they take your dollars
when you pay your bill every month, but when you
pay your bill, you're actually supporting causes that you stand
up for. We're talking about freedom of speech, really, the
sanctity of life, the Second Amendment, are military veterans, first responders.
(37:08):
Now you get nationwide coverage, dependable nationwide coverage, and they
give you access to all three major networks, which means
you get the same coverage you've been accustomed to without
funding the left. You may not realize that Big Mobile
many of them actually give huge checks to Planned Parenthood.
That is why you need to switch to Patriot Mobile.
(37:29):
They have one hundred percent US based customer service team
and that makes switching easy. Keep your number that you
have right now, your same cell phone number, keep your
same cell phone, or upgrade to a new one. Their
team will help you find the best plan for your
needs and to save you money. Go to Patriotmobile dot
com slash Verdict that's Patriot Mobile dot com slash Verdict.
(37:53):
Use a promo code Verdict when you call them, and
you will also get the best deals of the year
plus free active vation eight seven eight Patriot.
Speaker 1 (38:02):
That's eight seven eight Patriot.
Speaker 2 (38:06):
I want to get back to this montage center that
was one that went viral and I hope you will
give this to your friends shared on social media because
it's another example of how many lives have been told
by the Bidens and how much the media has been
willing to cover for them. And this is what this
impeachment inquiry is going to be all about.
Speaker 15 (38:24):
Ever discussed with my son before my brother or anyone
else in being having to do with their businesses.
Speaker 13 (38:30):
President Biden met with at least fourteen of Hunter's business
associates while he was vice president.
Speaker 10 (38:36):
And Vice president Joe Biden at dinner with his son
Hunter along with Hunters of business associates from Ukraine, Russia,
and Kazakhstan, and the day after the dinner, a Barisma
executive said a note to Hunter, quoting dear Hunter, thank
you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity
to meet your father and spend some time together.
Speaker 6 (38:56):
Hunter's lucrative business dealings often included giving as much as
a percent of his earnings to his dad.
Speaker 16 (39:02):
The text read quote, I hope you all can do
what I did and pay for everything for this entire
family for thirty years. It's really hard, but don't worry
Onnlike Pop, I won't make you give me half your salary.
Speaker 15 (39:14):
His son Hunter, joining the then Vice president on the
official visit to Beijing. Unknown to the press, back then,
Hunter Biden was forming a Chinese private equity fund, planning
to raise money, including from Chinese investors. Ten days after
the Bidens trip, Shanghai authorities issued the fund's business license.
Speaker 17 (39:31):
And the Hunter introduced me as this is Tony Dad,
the individual I told you about that's helping us with
the business that we're working on in the Chinese.
Speaker 18 (39:40):
The email reads this way quote at the moment, there's
a provisional agreement that the equity will be distributed as
follows ten held by Hunter for the big guy.
Speaker 17 (39:49):
I have a thousand percent sit here and know that
the big guy is referencing Joe Biden. I met with
a former vice president in person multiple times.
Speaker 12 (39:58):
A newly revealed text message Joe's b Bolinski was apparently
warned by business partner James Gillier, don't mention Joe being involved.
It's only when you are face to face. I know
you know that, but they are paranoid.
Speaker 5 (40:10):
Chinese executives admitted to reporters that they were actually introduced
to the Vice presidents by Hunter.
Speaker 10 (40:16):
Biden, Hunter and the then Vice President seeing with a
pair of Mexican billionaires at the same time.
Speaker 15 (40:21):
Hunter had been working on energy deals in Mexico.
Speaker 16 (40:24):
Joe Biden also had a Hunter at his business partner,
fly On f was two to Mexico.
Speaker 5 (40:30):
His closest business partner.
Speaker 6 (40:31):
Hunters made at least nineteen visits to the White House
and other official locations, including a sit down with then
Vice President Joe Biden in the West Wing.
Speaker 18 (40:39):
There's photographic evidence of Biden on a golf out and
with both his son Hunter and a man called Devin Archer,
who was another member of the Parice Maboor.
Speaker 5 (40:47):
We also know that Devin Archer in that picture had
a meeting in the White House, one on one meeting
with Joe Biden about a week before.
Speaker 1 (40:55):
They joined the Maarice Mabour.
Speaker 2 (40:59):
You hear that, Senator, and this explains exactly why this
impeachment inquiry is going to be so important.
Speaker 8 (41:05):
Well, it does.
Speaker 3 (41:06):
It also explains why the Democrat talking point and the
corporate media talking point that there is no evidence of
Joe Biden's corruption. It is flatly false. And I gotta
say James Carvil saying he's really looking forward to hearings
on this, well, you know what, James so am, I.
Speaker 2 (41:24):
Don't forget download this podcast Monday, Wednesday Fridays. We also
do a really cool Saturday show now that is taking
some of the best segments that were later in the
show and we put them together for a review for
you for the week on Saturdays. Make sure that subscribe
or follow our auto download button depending on where you're
listening right now. And in the in between days, join
(41:46):
me on my podcast, the Ben Ferguson Podcasts. I'll keep
you updown the latest breaking news in between Verdict episodes,
So down with the Ben Ferguson podcast as well, and
we'll see you back here in a couple of days.
Host
Ben Ferguson
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.