Justice Corrupted: FBI STILL Refuses to Take Accountability for Politicization

And I want to get your reaction first off, to the FBI Director's inability to answer a very straightforward question about January the sixth and possible FBI informants here is what he was asked and his lack of response, well confidence in them and the other Twitter question we get a lot is did the FBI have undercover agents or paid informants or assets among the mob that stormed the capital on January sets Well, as I'm sure you can appreciate, Brett,

I can't really appropriately talk about when, where, and how we use confidential informants. Is it classified? Well, we have information that is about any number of topics that is law enforcement sensitive. But you should not read into my inability to answer a question because of my obligations as that as a clue or a hint in any way about how accurate your reader's tweet this I mean, Senator, that's not a very good answer for a lot of Americans, that one answers. We are getting a lot of the

footage it's going to come out of January sixth. Speak of the House. Kevin McCarthy's talked about being transparent. He believes it was politicized January sixth. Of January sixth committee was politicized. Are you satisfied with Director Ray's response? Absolutely? Not. That was a ridiculous answer. And listen, there is a fundamental problem at the FBI and at the Department of Justice.

It's something that we've talked about a lot on this podcast, which is that DOJ and the FBI have been profoundly politicized. The last book I wrote, Justice Corrupted, How the Left is weaponized legal system. And by the way, I would encourage folks go buy that book, I detail how first Barack Obama and now Joe Biden have turned dj and the FBI into partisan tools they used to attack their enemies.

On January sixth, in particular, there are enormous questions about the responsibility, the culpability of the FBI and the DOJ. What did they know, what was their involvement? And listen, let me say something about Chris Ray. So I've known Chris Ray a long long time when I came out of law school. I graduated law school in nineteen ninety five and the first judge I clerked for was a judge named Jay Michael Ludig. He was at the time

the top conservative federal appellate judge of the country. Judge Ludig and I were very, very close. He was like a second father to me. Judge Ludig was a very young judge. He was forty one years old. He had been on the Federal Court of Appeals for five years. He was appointed by George Herbert Walker Bush at age thirty six, so he was the youngest federal appellate judge in the country. Judge Ludig had been Antonin Scalia's very first law clerk the first year Antonin Scalia was on

the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. And so Judge Ludig was someone who was just He was an incredible judge. He taught me. He was really the first person after law school to teach me how to be a lawyer. So I knew Chris Ray because Chris clerked for Judge Ludig. I think it was three years before I did so. I was the fifth year Judge Leigue was on the court. I believe Chris was the second year Judge Ludig was on the court. And I've known Chris a long time. Chris is a good guy. He's a very smart lawyer.

He's a very decent man. He loves America. Chris is not a left wing activist. But I will tell you I've been incredibly disappointed with the job Chris Ray has done as the head of the FBI. And the reason, and I've had this conversation with Chris directly more than once. The reason is Chris is fundamentally he's a company man. He's someone who believes his job is defend the FBI. That his responsibility. He's someone who has been at DJ a long long time. He was the head of the

Criminal Division under George Herbert Walker Bush. He was someone who was a prosecutor for a long time. And he believes his responsibility is whatever the career lawyers the FBI has done, he needs to circle the wagons and defend them. And I have had energetic, at he even screaming conversations with Chris where I've said, listen, you are not helping

the FBI. When you are defending Democrat partisans who have corrupted the FBI, who have turned it into a weapon to advance the political interests of partisan democrats, it doesn't help the institutions. It weakens the institution. And on this question, listen, it is a matter of enormous public import to know whether the FBI had informants in the January six riots and what role they played, and as a matter of accountability, the public interest is massive. Now Chris doesn't want to

answer that. The FBI doesn't want to answer that because the obvious inference from their refusal to answer that is yes, they had FBI informants that participated in the And the question that arises from that, and this is something I talk about at length in the book Justice Corrupted, is the extent to which FBI agents or FBI confidential informants

incited the behavior. So one of the things I talk about in the book is the plot in Michigan to kidnap and murder the governor of Michigan, Democrat Gretchen Whitwer. Now that broke shortly before the twenty twenty election, and it was the sort of story that was really fabulously beneficial for Democrats because Democrats message was those crazy right wing Republicans and especially those Trump Republicans, are a bunch

of violent insurrectionist terrorists. They're terrible and we need to stop them and so, and it was a national story. I mean, they played it up. I remember it being used Democrats all over the country center that were like, this is something to seize on to basically attack Donald Trump on the national election, but also to say you don't want Trump Republicans in the House and the Senate, on the school board, city council. Yeah, they want to they want to murder you, and they want to take

out our politicians. And look, it was designed also for reasonable people that like, you know, reasonable people don't want to advocate violent acts of murder and terror. And so the media and the Democrats were trying to say, if you support Trump and the Republicans, you're in support of violent acts of terror and mayhem. And with the Gretchen Witwer's story, when it broke, you're like, holy crap, they want to kidnap and murder a governor. That really sounds bad. Now.

When DJ went to trial, what happened is that initially when they went to trial, every single one of the defendants was their acquitted or had a hung jury. They couldn't convict anyone in The principal defense at the trial was that the FBI engaged an entrapment, that that it essentially the FBI had placed informants among these right wing

extremist groups. But the argument of defense council was these extremist groups were not particularly violent until the FBI informants kept saying, Hey, in the great idea to go kidnap and murder the governor. And they're like, oh, I'm not sure. It is like no, no no, no, this is a good idea. This is a good idea. And the law is that you can be prosecuted if you plan or commit an act of violence. But the government can't entice you into it.

It can't be their idea. They can't be the cause that causes you to go along with the corrupt plan. And at the trial in front of the jury's I mean, the Justice Department had a massive black eye because the defendants prevailed. And by the way, the special Agent in charge of the Detroit office of the FBI, who had this massive debacle of the prosecutions going south, on him because his agents had engaged in misconduct and incitement, got promoted, got sent to DC, and got put in charge of

the January sixth prosecutions. You literally can't make this up. They took the guy who had this enormous black eye. Yeah, and they said, you're the right guy to engage in political prosecutions. And here's what Chris Ray should say and listen. I hope, as I said, Chris is a friend. I hope Chris is listening to this podcast. I doubt he is, but I hope he is. Here's what Chris ought to do.

Chris ought to say publicly. Ordinarily, the FBI does not reveal confidential informants, and there are strong law enforcement reasons to do that. When we get some guy who goes undercover into a drug cartel, sure you want to keep that guy confidentially. You don't want to out them. So in the ordinary course of affairs, we protect those sources.

That being said, the public interest in knowing what happened on January sixth, what led to the riots, what led to the acts of violence, That public interest is so significant that we at the FBI are going to tell you how many agents did we have in that riot. How many confidential informants did we have in that riot? And I were based on the payroll? Yes, and what

were their roles in inciting the violent conduct? That is a matter of enormous public interest, and Chris ray it is answered there and consistently he refuses to answer that question. And I think he's doing a disservice to the American people by protect the bureaucrats at the FBI rather than accepting public accountability. Yeah, there's there's a name that's become very famous and it is a name from January six,

ray Epps. And I want to play something that you said about ray Epps when you were talking to the FBI, because it became senior official at the FBI that I was questioning about this. Yeah, and ray Epps is a guy in a name that everybody remembers from January six. And before I play that, I want to tell everybody about our friends over at Chalk. If you're a guy and you're ready to fight back and you're not ready to lose the war in a masculinity, then you need

to check out Chalk. Chalk is a way to help real American men maximize their masculinity by boosting testosterone levels up to twenty percent over ninety days. Now. I've been taking Chalk's mail Vitality Stack, and I can tell you it works. You can maximize your masculinity today at chalkhoq dot com. That's chalk hq dot com. Use the promo code Ben for thirty five percent off any Chuck subscription

for life choq dot com Code Ben fight back. Don't lose your masculinity and take Chalk check out the Vitality Stack today thirty five percent off promo code Ben. I want to play center for everybody listening. And this was you questioning as you mentioned a moment ago a top person at the FBI about Ray Epps and really about his disappearance from the public after he was so public on January the sixth. Take a listen, Miss Saburn, who is Ray Epps. I'm aware of the individual Sir, I

don't have the specific background to him. Well, there are a lot of people who are understandable about mister about mister ramps. On the night of January fifth, twenty twenty one, Epps wandered around the crowd that had gathered, and there's video out there of him channing tomorrow, we need to get into the capital, into the capital. This was strange behavior, so strange that the crowd began chanting fed fed, Fed, Fed, Fed fed. Miss Sandburn. Was Ray Apps a fed Sir?

I cannot answer that question. The next day, the next day, on January six mister F's is seen whispering to a person, and five seconds later, five seconds after he's whispering to a person, that same person begins to forcibly tear down the barricades. Did mister Epps urge them to tear down the barricades, sir? Similar to the other answers, I cannot answer that. Shortly thereafter, the FBI put out a public post listing seeking information on individuals connected with violent crimes

on January sixth. Among those individuals in the bottom there is mister Epps. The FBI publicly asked for information identifying offering cash rewards, leading information leading for information leading to the arrest. This was posted, and then sometime later, magically, mister Epps disappeared from the public posting. According to public records, mister Epps has not been charged with anything. No one's explained why a person videoed urging people to go to

the Capitol. A person whose conduct was so suspect the crowd believed he was a FED would magically disappear from the list of people the FBI was looking at. Miss Sandburn. A lot of Americans are concerned that the federal government deliberately encouraged illegal and violent conduct on January sixth. My question to you, and this is not an ordinary law enforcement question, this is a question of a public accountability. Did federal agents are those in service a federal agent

actively encourage violent and criminal conduct on January sixth? Not to my knowledge, sir, I mean sent This seems to be the new playbook of anybody in government that doesn't want to answer question. They just say it's cloudsified or it's an ongoing invastigation. This is exactly what Ray just did in a simple question was asked about informants on January the sixth. So Chris Ray and the FBI should answer these questions. We need to have accountability, we need

to know Listen with Ray Epps. I don't know the man, I never met him, I don't know his background, but I will say you watch that video as I have, as many people have of him. Urging the crowd on January fifth, let's go into the Capitol and the crowd turns on him. They begin chanting fed, fed fed. That's weird, Ben, I've never seen anything like that when the crowd is like, wait a second, why is this guy trying to urge us to commit a criminal act? Maybe he's a private

individual with no connection to the FBI. If that's the case, it raises the question, why wasn't he charged. I mean, we have video of him urging people to enter the capitol. They've charged lots of people to enter the capitol. But if he was on the payroll of the FBI, then you had the federal government. You had law enforcement encouraging

criminal and violent acts. That's a very different scenario. And to date, the FBI refuses to answer how many FBI agents were there on January sixth, one ten, one hundred a thousand. I have no idea. And by the way, a lot of people figure, Okay, you're a senator, you're on the Judiciary Committee. The Judiciary Committee has oversight authority of the FBI. You know this. They briefed you on it. Nope,

they haven't told us a damn thing. What I know is what Chris Ray has said in public because when he testifies, and by the way, today Merrick Garland, the Attorney General, is testifying in front of us. He's going to Stonewall. Because Merrick Garland has been the most political attorney general we've ever had. And Chris Ray, it's not that he's a partisan leftist, it's that he believes his job is defend the senior bureaucrats of the FBI. And I got to tell you one of the amazing things

that's happened over the last couple of years. I regularly get FBI agents and DOJ prosecutors who come to me, who contact my office and they say, we love the Department of Justice, we love the FBI, we believe in the law enforcement mission, and we are incredibly unhappy at the politicization of our senior leadership. It is I revere the Department of Justice and the FBI. They're incredibly so I will tell you on the right, there are a bunch of people who say let's abolish the FBI. Now,

I don't think that's a good idea. The FBI does a lot of really important things. They fight child kidnappers, they fight drug dealers, they fight human traffickers, that they fight mobsters. I am very grateful for the law enforcement mission of the FBI. What I think we need to do is clean house at the FBI and get rid of the hardcore partisan Democrats who burrowed into the senior positions at the FBI and who've corrupted the FBI. And my biggest concern with Chris Ray is he's unwilling to

do that. He's unwilling to take that on and and and it is he ought to engage in radical transparency. And I'll point to two examples. Chris Ray out to follow. Number one, Elon Muskwini Twitter, where he publicly made he exposed the internal emails of the corruption at Twitter that broke the big tech oligopoly on political discussion. Secondly, in second you look at the job John Radcliffe did at the DNI as the Director of National Intelligence. So John

Radcliffe was appointed by Donald Trump. It was just a temporary interim appointment. I think he was there like six weeks. It wasn't very long. But John is a text and he's a friend. Did an incredible job because he opened up and made public many of the abuses of the DNI and the intelligence community how they'd been politicized, and in six weeks he made a massive impact. My advice to Chris Ray follow the example of Elon Musk and

followed the example of John Radcliffe. Prioritize the long term integrity of the FBI over your short term personal loyalty to the hardcore Democrat partisans and the senior rear positions to the FBI. If you want to save the institution, act boldly to save and strengthen and preserve the FBI.

You know, intentioning that you mentioned that because one of the questions that Ray was asked by Brett Bear was about social media companies censoring things when it came to the FBI having basically conversations them, conversations with them on the regular, sometimes daily in the run up to the election. I want to play that for you next. But before we get to that, I want to tell you about

Patriot Mobile. A lot of you have been switching to Patriot Mobile, the only Christian conservative cell phone company in the US, and you're switching because you're tired of giving money to companies that don't stand with your values. That is where Patriot Mobile comes in. They are the only Christian conservative cell phone coming to the US, and you get the same exact coverage that you have right now. You don't have to worry about switching coverage and losing anything.

At Patriot Mobile. They use the same G four and G five networks that you're on right now. Now, there is one difference. When you pay your bill, you're actually supporting conservative causes and organizations that you help support. That we're talking about organizations in sam for your First and your Second Amendment rights, the rights of unborn children, and

even helping with adoptions. If you are ready to stand up for what you believe in with the dollars you spend every month, switch your cell phone to Patriot Mobile and make a difference with every phone call eight seven eight Patriot. That's eight seven eight Patriot. Use the promo code Verdict. You'll get the best deals of the year. You can also go online to Patriot Mobile dot com

slash verdict that's Patriotmobile dot com slash Verdict center. I want to play this for everybody, and this is Chris Ray being asked about the social media companies and how much pressure where they putting on these social media companies that silence and sens their stories listened to this. Let's start with the laptop. The FBI has had access to this laptop for more than three years. Why is this

investigation on the Hunter Biden laptop taking so long? Well, the investigation is being led, as you may know, by a US attorney appointed in the last administration out of Delaware, and the FBI is actively supporting and working with that US attorney on that investigation. But the whistleblowers are telling these lawmakers that there was an internal effort to shut down the investigation from the beginning. Have you found that.

I have not found anything like that. All right, So let's talk about the FBI and what you told Big Tech or some agents did about the authenticity and providence of Hunter Biden's laptop. What about that? From an FBI perspective, the FBI does not It is not in the business of functioning as the truth police understood. We don't tell social media companies to censor anything. Well, or the Twitter

fun I suggest something different. I mean, there's an FBI request numerous times, Taiebee puts it out FBI San Francisco request to ban certain accounts. Twitter personnel in this case went on to look for reasons to suspend all four accounts that the FBI wanted to ban or suspend. Is it appropriate to flag social media accounts on Twitter or elsewhere due to politics or government policies when it comes to COVID? Is it appropriate to anyway? You're saying it

doesn't happen, but there's evidence that it had. We don't tell social media companies to ban accounts, but you suggest what we do is tell social media companies about information that we have about foreign disinformation campaigns by foreign actors, by foreign intelligence services, and those companies don't make decisions about what, if anything, they want to do about it. I mean, center, you hear what he's saying here, and he saying we don't tell social media company to censor anything. That,

I'm sorry, in my opinion, is a complete lie. The emails, the Twitter files show the complete op is that coming from the FBI. Look, you're exactly right, Ben. The Twitter files demonstrate that the FBI was repeatedly asking social media companies to censor stories they didn't like, And the most striking example is the Hunter Biden laptop. The Hunter and

Biden laptop. The story broke when the New York Post wrote about it in October of twenty twenty, right before the presidential election, and it was a story that was incredibly damaging to Joe Biden because it suggested corruption at the very highest level. And the FBI asked big tech, please censor this story. The FBI suggested a big tech it was Russian disinformation. Now we know that. Now know that was garbage. That was a lie. It was not

Russian disinformation. It was in fact true. The laptop is true. It's been confirmed. It was Hunter Biden's laptop. By the way, it's not me confirming it. Hunter Biden's lawyers in filings have said it was our laptop, and we're really unhappy that you took our client's laptop and made it public, like they have implicitly admitted. They tried to back that away when they realized, oh crap, we shouldn't have made that admission. But it was true and incredibly relevant to

the election. The FBI said please block it, and social media saluted said not only jump, but sir, how high? And again Chris Ray, he thinks he's defending the FBI. He's trying to say, Okay, my job is to defend my guys. Baloney. Your job is not to do that.

The degree to which big Tech got in bed with the FBI and actively censored the American people and had an effect of essentially rigging the election, it had an enormous consequence on the twenty twenty election that this story was suppressed, and the FBI is directly responsible in it. I don't understand why Chris Ray doesn't feel any responsibility for that. I just think he's his entire focus is

my job is protect my guys. Even if my guys are crapping all over the FBI and destroying its integrity, I got to defend the people that are hurting the FBI. I think that's a basic and profound misconception of the responsibility of the head of the FBI. And you would think, as a law enforcement guy, right, we're it's supposed to

be not political but right and wrong. If you saw members of your organization writing these emails that are clearly politically biased, that would just piss you off, for lack of a better way of saying it, and you would want at least make sure that doesn't happen anymore. And again he's saying, no, no no, no, we don't do this, Yes you do. It'sdn't writing oh, look and privately express his concerns with these issues. He's very good at saying, oh, I want to stay out of politics, blah blah blah

blah blah blah blah. By the way, I actually believe him. I think he would like the FBI to focus on law enforcement. I just think he doesn't have the willingness to take on the extremely partisan leftists, many of whom are now in the senior career leadership of the FBI, and he views it as I don't know, I don't want to speculate, but he's unwilling to take them on. Maybe he thinks he can't survive that. Maybe he thinks

it somehow damages the FBI. I don't want to impute motives to him, but the fact is he's unwilling to call him out. He ought he ought to hold accountable every person at the FBI that urged social media to censor the media and censor people for expressing their political views. He ought to make public. Here's every person the FBI had at January sixth, Every informant we had at January sixth. This is not a run of the mill mafia case. This is an issue of enormous national important the American

people need to know. I think he doesn't want to do that because the FBI would be embarrassed by those facts, and so he believes he can just stonewall and tell Congress go jump in a lake. We're not going to tell you, and the American people don't deserve to know. And I think he's wrong in that. There's something else that came up, and I was truly shocked by the FBI director's response, and it was a question about the drug cartels. There was some shocking for some Americans to see.

I unfortunately was not shocked by some of the testimony today by the victims when it comes to fetno and Washington, d C. Talking about how it's destroyed their family. There's a couple of them that have gone on viral, including one mother who lost not one but two sons to fetnel. And this is one of the reasons why I think it was very clear that there was a direct question asked to Ray from Brett Bear about this war, and

it is a war. It's a war with FETNOL, it's a war with the cartels, and he asked him is it time to designate the drug cartels as terrorist organizations, and we couldn't get a straight answer from the FBI director on that. Listen, it's on immigration. Do you believe

the cartels should be designated as terrorist organizations? Well, I do believe that the cartels represent a significant threat, and we have hundreds the FBI has hundreds of investigations that go into cartel leadership, and I'm interested in all appropriate legal tools that will help us go after them. We are going after them. Obviously, we're not responsible for the physical secure already at the border, but we recognize that

the threats emanating from the border are serious. Center. I'm gonna cut them off there because why can't he just answer that simple question with a yes, Because unfortunately the leadership of the FBI is too concerned with politics. The

answer shouldn't be yes, it should be hell yes. Look, we on a recent podcast, we walk through my cross examination of the head of the DA where I talked about the incredible harm that Mexican drug cartels carry out, where I've talked about the over one hundred thousand people that last year died of drug overdoses in the United States. The vast majority from Chinese fentanyl flooding over the southern border. Now the head of the FBI, I've sat down and

talked with her. I think she's actually kind of pretty similar to Chris Ray. She's a law enforcement person. She wants to prosecute the bad guys. Her answers were very political, and because she's not, I think a terribly political person, she was bad at it. She was repeating the Democrat talking points from this administration. So their talking point is the drugs that are flooding into this country are coming over the legal ports of entry and not over our

unsecured southern border. We don't have an unsecured southern border, they claim, despite the fact that five and a half million people have crossed illegally under Joe Biden, the worst illegal immigration in the history of our nation. That's the incredible record of the Biden administration. She was trying to repeat the talking points of no, no, no no, no. People don't cross illegally under over the southern border. If they do,

they certainly don't carry drugs. The facts into the country I asked her a very simple question, is the fact that these drug cartels have made tens of billions of dollars because of our open southern border. Is the fact that the single best thing that ever happened to the Mexican drug cartels with Joe Biden becoming president because they made massive amounts of money. Is it a good thing that these vicious criminal drug cartels have made tens of

billions of dollars? Now look for any cop and for any honest law enforcements, for anyone running the DA, the answer ought to be hell yes, Like, just like Chris Ray, should we designate the Mexican drug cartels as terrorists? Hell? Yes, they are engaged in murder and torture and horrific acts

of violence. They are terrorist organizations. But much like the head of the DA that we played that cross examination, I think last week, he doesn't want to say that because heat gets that the political taskmasters in the White House don't like that answer, so he just dodges, and I just wish that. And by the way, eventually the head of the DA, after I asked her I think four times, finally and reluctantly said yeah, it's a terrible thing.

Like vicious drug cartels, they make roughly half their money from drug trafficking, roughly half their money from human trafficking. It is a terrible thing that Joe Biden has given tens of billions of dollars no hitting. Why didn't you say that the first four times you asked I asked you because she was trying to follow the partisan talking points. I think that's sadly what Chris Ray is doing there too. Yeah,

I no doubt about it. I want to ask you lastly about one of the thing that Chris Ray said in that debt with Wuhan. The FBI is one of two parts of the government now, the Department of Energy and the FBI are saying they believe the most likely cause of COVID nineteen is actually that it came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. That came from a lab, that didn't come from animals, didn't come from a wet mark, didn't come from all of those other lies. And I

want to play for you his response on Wuhan. But before we get to that, let me tell you about August of precious metals. If you've been saving for a long time for retirement, then you probably know more than others that right now it's a really important time for you to be able to protect your assets and that

is where august of Precious Metals comes in. They can help you protect your assets with a gold ira or a four one K and they're different why because they'll also tell you if a gold ira isn't your answer, they give you the facts. A lot of it depends on how you've saved, for how long you've saved, and when you're retiring or if already retired. August of Precious Metals is all about protecting your money in this crazy economy, and it's really important the closer you get to retirement

because you have no time to make up losses. So if you've saved a hundred thousand dollars or more, take a look and get their free guide. Now, more importantly than that, sign up for free for their web conference. I have done this and I did it before I invested my money which I want to protect and I use gold and silver for a portion of that. Call them and sign up for the web conference eight seven

seven four gold Ira. That's eight seven seven four gold Ira, or visit Augusta Precious Metals dot com say I sent you and they'll pay your fees for up to ten years. That's Augusta Precious Metals dot com, Agusta Precious Metals dot com. Senator. Lastly, I want to get your reaction to the FBI director. He was asked about the lab leek question. It was pretty simple what he had to say in response here.

It is the FBI has for quite some time now assessed that the origins of the pandemic are most likely a potential lab incident in Wuhan. Let me step back for a second. You know, the FBI has folks, agents, professionals, analysts, virologists, microbiologists, etc. Who focused specifically on the dangers of biological threats. I mean, this was probably the most candid answer he had during the entire interview, and he actually says, Look, for a long time, we've considered the lab to be the most

accurate quote theory here. Yeah, listen, this is the only answer in the interview that we've discussed tonight that I like. In respect, the FBI under Joe Biden concluded that the most likely explanation for COVID nineteen was that it escaped from a Chinese government lab. They concluded that with what they call moderate confidence, and so in the intelligence community,

when you have a conclusion and intelligence. You have sometimes conclusions with low confidence, sometimes with moderate confidence, sometimes with high confidence. The FBI concluded it with moderate conferences. This weekend we had the bombshell report that the Biden Department of Energy came to the same conclusion. They concluded that the most likely source for COVID nineteen was a Chinese government lab. Now, they were less certain about it than

the FBI. They said they concluded that with quote low confidence, but they still thought their assessment, their best judgment was that was the most likely source. Now, as regular listeners of this podcast, now we have been laying out the facts on the origins of COVID nineteen four three years. Go back and listen. I actually tweeted today, go listen to the podcast that we put out in March of

twenty twenty. Look, the pandemic broke on the national scene in January and February of twenty twenty, so this was early. This was right when the pandemic was starting, and we put out a podcast in March of twenty twenty. We put out a second podcast in April of twenty twenty, so right at the outset where we walked through the

evidence that this virus originated at a Chinese government lab. Now, at the time, the Democrat talking points and the corporate media talking points and the Chinese Communist Party talking points were all the same, which is that it is a crazy tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theory to say that it came from a Chinese government lab. We walked through on

this podcast. And by the way, Anthony Faucian writing was asking Mark Zuckerberg, at the head of Facebook, please suppress anyone making the arguments that this came from a Chinese government lab. I gotta tell you, Ben, I remain amazed how the Verdict podcast did not get censored at the time, because we were one of the very few places on planet Earth that you could hear those facts. For whatever reason, they didn't take us on and censor us. And three years ago we laid out the facts. Let me point

to three data points that are really compelling. Number One, the wu On Institute for Virology. The Wohan Institute for Virology is a Chinese government lab and it studies viruses. That's why it's called an institute for virology. It studies not just viruses, but it focuses in particular on coronaviruses. The particular type of virus that COVID nineteen is. It doesn't just study coronaviruses. It studies coronaviruses from bats. And by the way, the best scientific evidence we have is

that COVID nineteen came from a coronavirus carried by bats. Now, the bats that carry the coronavirus don't occur naturally around Wuhan. How far away are they? The closest bats are about nine hundred miles away in caves, a long long way away from Wuhan. Where is the Wuhan Institute for Virology. It is a few hundred yards away where the wet market where the first major outbreak of the COVID pandemic occurred.

You can literally drive a golf ball from the Wuhan Institute for Virology to the Wuhan wet market where the pandemic occurred. I want you to think, at just as a statistical matter, what are the odds that a pandemic in a coronavirus carried by bats would occur at a wet market a few hundred yards away from a government lab studying coronavirus is carried by bats. They are the odds are incredibly low that that is a coincidence. That's

fact number one. Fact number two, we now know that not one, not two, but three different employees of the Wuhan Institute for Virology in November of twenty nineteen, so a couple of months before the pandemic erupted on the worldwide scene November of twenty nineteen, they checked themselves into hospitals for serious health conditions. That suggests. It doesn't prove, but it is a powerful suggestion that those may have

been among the first public outbreaks of COVID nineteen. Fact number three, what did the Chinese Communist government do after the pandemic erupted. Well, we know that months before the pandemic they had begun buying and hoarding ppe protected personal equipment, things like masks and gloves. They had done it in advance of the pandemic. That suggests for knowledge. We also know that they directed the Wuhan Institute for Virology to

destroy the samples of the coronaviruses they were studying. That suggests guilt, as we talked about in a previous podcast, in a court of law, in a civil case or criminal case, if an individual destroys evidence, a judge can instruct the jury. You may draw a negative inference from the destruction of evidence. You may conclude that the destruction of evidence demonstrates a guilty mind, demonstrates that the evidence

would incriminate whoever destroyed the evidence. In this case, it was a Chinese common discovernment and the obvious inference is that COVID nineteen was a virus they were studying at the Wohanna Institute for Virology and it escaped and caused this pandemic. I also think, I think, I actually think the evidence is overwhelming of that. And by the way, the evidence was overwhelming three years ago. What the hell took Biden Department of Energy three years to get there.

I'm glad they got there, and I'm glad the FBI got there, But why did it take so long? This podcast we figured it out three damn years ago, in March of twenty twenty. Go listen to that podcast. We laid out the evidence then, and by the way, I gotta say, it's one of the reasons why listen. I would encourage folks who listen to this podcast, and we have an amazing community of Verdict listeners, share it with your friends because you learn things here on this podcast

that you will not learn watching TV news. You will not learn reading the newspapers, you will not learn listening to the radio. This podcast is designed to tell you what's happening before its news. And I gotta say the FBI, I'm glad that Chris Ray is willing to say that. But at the same time, the corporate media and big tech, and Chris Ray is protecting and apolologizing for big tech.

Big tech and the corporate media did everything they could to stigmatize, to silence, to suppress anyone laying out the evidence that this came from a Chinese government lab, no doubt about it. It It was a very interesting interview and even more fun to hear your response the FBI director Ray here. And it's the goal of this podcast, like you said, to give you what's happening even before it happens.

Wuhan's a great example that we will see you guys with a special Verdict taping We're gonna be doing live from the stage at Seapack in just a couple of days, so make sure you listen to that show as well. Don't forget share this podcast of your family and friends. Write us a five star review. It helped us reach more people that don't know about this show, so please do that. It helped us tremendously on the charts, and we will see you back here in a couple of days, Live from the stage of Seapack