Welcome.
It is verdict with Senator Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson with you, Senator, We've got a lot to chat about, including words like MAGA and buying a Bible or going shopping at Dick's Sporting Goods could actually get you on a watch list with financial institutions in the US government.
We're going to deal with that.
Also, they're admitting now four years late that the Hunter Byden laptop is actually real.
Yes, the DJ doing that. We're going to deal with that.
But before we get to that, I want to break some news, and that is this, Senator, you decided that it was time to lead on an amicus brief on behalf of Donald Trump with the case that involves Colorado and that Supreme Court removing him from the state's twenty twenty four ballot. Not only did you file this amicus brief, but you were able to get more than one hundred and seventy lawmakers to sign on. This is significant, and yet a lot in the media are acting like this
didn't actually happen. Walk us through how important this amicates brief is and exactly the basis legal basis for why you decided to do this.
Well, we've talked at length about the Colorado Supreme Court decision throwing Donald Trump off the ballot, and the combination of Colorado and the main Secretary of State, I think, without hyperbole, is the greatest assault on democracy we've seen in our lifetimes. These are partisan, leftist democrats who are issuing rulings saying the voters should not be allowed to vote for Donald Trump. Mind you, these are democrats who posture all day long about how much they believe in democracy,
how they're defending democracy. And nothing says defending democracy better than stopping the voters from voting for your opponent. I mean, it is an absolute assault. So yesterday I filed an amicus brief on behalf of one hundred and seventy nine members of Congress. So I led the brief in the Senate. Steve Scalise, the majority leader in the House, let it in the House. And our brief is supporting Donald Trump, and it's urging the Supreme Court to reverse the decision
of the Colorado Supreme Court. As we've talked about it at length, and by the way, if you did not listen to our podcast a couple of weeks ago, doing a deep dive on the Colorado Supreme Court case. You should because it is substantive analysis that you will not get on CNN, you will not get an MSNBC, you will not get anywhere else. But this brief lays out the legal arguments, and we filed it yesterday with forty six Senators and a total of one hundred and seventy
nine members of Congress. And it is the main arguments we make. We make number one that under the language of the Fourteenth Amendment and Section three, that it does not prohibit Donald Trump from being a candidate. And we argue that federal legislation is required under the Fourteenth Amendment in forced section and that has not been enacted. We argue that that removing a candidate from the ballot denies
Congress the power to remove a Section three disability. So under the text of the fourteenth Amendment, it says someone who participates in an insurrection engages in an insurrection is ineligible from serving an office. But then it says Congress may vote to remove that disability. And we pointed out look, if the Colorado Supreme Court removes Trump from the ballot, that takes away Congress's ability to vote on the issue.
And decide it. And we argue beyond that that the question of whether Section three applies is what's called a political question. A political question is something that the courts cannot and will not decide, but that is instead left to the elected and political bodies in our country, that
it's left to Congress. Beyond that, we argue that under the text, in terms of the Fourteenth Amendment, Section three does not apply to former President Trump, that it applies to other members of the federal government, to lesser officers, but not to the president, not to the vice president. And finally, and this is a really important argument that we make, we argue that the Colorado Supreme Court's decision lacks neutral principles, and if it's upheld, it would lead
to widespread deballoting of political opponents. In other words, if the Colorado decision is upheld, you will see Democrats all across the country removing Republicans from the ballot. And you will see in a tit for tat republicans moving Democrats from the vallet. And that is bad for this country. It's bad for democracy. It's not the rule of law. It is a terrible outcome. And so what one hundred and seventy nine of us came together yesterday to say,
is the Supreme Court should reverse this? And as you and I have talked about, I believe it is incredibly important. I think it's a very real chance that the Supreme Court will reverse this unanimous. I hope and pray that they do, because I don't want to see a partisan divide, a six to three decision where the press can say, oh, all the Republicans voted one way, all the Democrats voted the other way. I think a unanimous decision saying the
voters are going to decide the next president. It's not going to be partisan Democrats, it's not going to be judges. It's going to be the voters of the people of America. I think a unanimous decision saying that would be incredibly important for the country, incredibly important for the rule of law, and incredibly important for the Supreme Court.
I got to go back to a question about this amicus brief and just talking about the one hundred and seventy plus lawmakers that you're able to sign on to that that is not saying you hear very often for anything. How willing were others And I'm assuming very willing to jump on board so quickly with this amicus brief, and how significant will that be for those at the Supreme Court who will be reading this.
Well, look, remember this case was set for very expedited schedule. So the argument is February eighth, which is just a couple of weeks from now, and we had just about a week to draft this brief. And so I directed as soon as the Court took the case, I directed my team, let's draft a brief. This is the most important opportunity to defend democracy we've had in our country, and I wanted us to lead. So I got our
team drafting the brief. We drafted it, We had it prepared two days ago, and so two days ago we circulated it to other members of Congress. What I did yesterday is I went to the Republican Study Committee, which is the largest conservative group in the House, and I went there and I talked about the amicus brief, and Steve Scalise has circulated it. But I talked to about one hundred and fifty House members and I said, look,
this is incredibly important. This is a defensive democracy. We all ought to stand together, and that I think helped produce a lot of the House members who joined us. And then at our Senate lunch. You know we've talked about before when the senators in session, all the Senate Republicans, we have lunch together every Tuesday, every Wednesday, every Thursday. And so I stood up at Wednesday's lunch and I told everyone, I said, look, we've circulated this brief. It
is incredibly important. I'd like for all of us to be united. And it's a very quick timeframe. I said, look, we circulated on Tuesday. We needed an answer by Wednesday night, and so people had to decide very quickly. Usually you have more time because the Supreme Court, when its schedules an argument, you have much more time. But this is
an incredibly accelerated appeal. And we ended up getting out of forty nine Republicans, we got forty six Republican senators, so all but three joined the brief in a day and a half, and so I was very glad to see a total of one hundred and seventy nine members of Congress come together.
For ten years, Patriot Mobile has been America's only Christian conservative wireless provider. And when I say only, I mean it. They are the only one. Patriot Mobile is a fabulous supporter of this show, which is why I'm proud to partner with him, and I have been now.
For almost a decade.
Patriot Mobile offers you, as a conservative, two things that are going to be very important. Number one, dependable nationwide coverage, giving you the ability to access all of the major network towers that you're using right now, which means you get the same coverage that you've been accustomed to. But the most important thing is without funding the left. Now, when I say fund the left, you may say, what
do you mean. You may not realize just how much Big Mobile actually hates you and your family values, your faith, and how much they're giving to plan parenthood.
That's why I switched to Patriot Mobile. And when I look down at my phone.
I see Patriot up in the upper left hand corner, and I know that every time that I'm sending a message, every time I'm on that phone, I am supporting with my dollars an organization that supports free speech, religious freedom, the sancty of life, Second Amendment, as well as our military veterans and first responder heroes.
They have a one hundred.
Percent US based customer service team, which makes switching easy. I just had to switch over a phone the other day. It was easy. When I say easy, I mean easy. You get to keep your same cell phone number you have right now. You can keep your same phone you have in your hand, or upgrade it to a new one, and their team will help you find the best plan for your needs. Now, when you pay your bill, that's
when the real magic happens. They take a percentage of that bill at no cost to you, and they give it back to the conservative causes that I just mentioned. So you're making a difference and standing with your values instead of giving your money to companies that literally hate what you believe in. So make the switch by going to Patriot Mobile dot com slash verdict that's Patriot Mobile dot com slash verdict, or call them nine to seven
to Patriot that's nine seven to two. Patriot get free activation when you use the promo code verdict join me make the switch today. Patriotmobile dot com slash verdict that's Patriot Mobile dot com slash verdict are nine to seven to Patriot Center. Our last question on this brief, explain a little bit of what the court is going to be looking at with these amicus briefs. There are a lot of them that are obviously being written because it's such a big issue.
How do they prioritize them?
And does if an amicus brief is read by one justice, is it read by all of them?
How does that work?
So amicus briefs are read by all nine justices, And what will happen is all of the briefs in the case are sent to all nine justices. They will get briefs from the petitioner, who is the person who's appealing. They will get a merits brief from the respondent, who is the person who prevailed below, and they will get
a reply brief from the petitioner. And then beyond that, you will have amicus briefs supporting one party, supporting the other party, and you'll have some amicus briefs supporting neither party. And in a case, in a given case, you could have a lot of amicus briefs. I've when I was clerking at the court, I had where we had as many as like fifty sixty seventy amicus briefs, so lots
of people. Amicus is short for amicus curier, which is Latin for friend of the Court, and so an amicus brief is a brief that is filed by someone who's not a party but that wants to share their views and believe they're relevant to the issues before the court. I don't know how many amicus briefs were filed before the Court in this case, will know shortly from the docket sheet. But to get a brief from one hundred and seventy nine members of Congress is a big deal.
That is unusual, that happens very rarely.
When you say rarely, I'm trying to go back in history and remember any time where I've heard something like this when it comes to Supreme Court. I can't think of one. And I think that's one of the reasons why I am so excited that you did this, and also excited that many people also understood the urgency of this. And as you described it, having a Nino decision is good for America.
It's not a political decision.
It's good for this country on so many different levels that you can't just take political opponents off the ballot.
And that's clearly your goal here.
That's exactly right. And look, I filed a lot of amicus briefs for the Supreme Court in the Senate, particularly on religious liberty. And typically when I file an amicus brief, I get oh, ten to fifteen senators, and by the way those briefs get read, they get considered. We've tried
to write serious briefs. Actually, I've written several amicus briefs along with Mike Johnson, who is now the Speaker of the House, but before he was, he was just a member of the House who had been a religious liberty constitutional lawyer, and so he and I teamed up multiple times. Mike Johnson joined this brief, but he and I teamed up multiple times. But typically, you know, i'd get like I said, ten to fifteen twenty senators on board a brief,
and that was significant. To get forty six senators, to get a total of one hundred and seventy nine members of Congress, that is unusual. I've had moments so back two decades ago, when I was the Solicitor General of Texas, we had a case concerning the Pledge of Allegiance where an atheist living out in California, guy named Michael Newdow filed a lawsuit arguing that it violated the Constitution for the words one Nation under God to be in the
Pledge of Allegiance. And amazingly enough, this atheist one in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Ninth Circuit has consistently been the most liberal court of appeals in the country. And the Ninth Circuit ruled it violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment to have the words one Nation under God in the Pledge of Allegiance. That went up an appeal to the US Supreme Court, and I was
Solicitor General of Texas at the time. I drafted an amicust brief that ended up being joined by all fifty states. It's the only one I know of that every single
state joined. And we defended the Pledge of Allegiance. And I'll tell you at the very end, when we had about forty eight, I got on the phone with the sgs and in the states that were holdouts, and they were kind of arguing back and forth, and I said, look, you know, if your attorney general wants to be the only attorney general in the country that doesn't support the Pledge of Allegiance, all right, I mean that's I commend you for your courage. I'm not sure it's wisdom, but
it is certainly brave. And so you know, stand up and tell your voters to go jump in a lake. That that's really bold. And the last couple said, you know what, we'll join this brief too, and so we had fifty there. Anytime you get this many on board, it takes personal advocacy, and I don't think it would have happened in this brief had I not gone to the House and made the case directly to House members, and had I not stood up at the Senate lunch and made the case directly to my Senate colleagues.
I want to move Senator also to this other really shocking story, and it just shows you how bad our government has become. And I'm talking about the deep state here with the FEDS targeting conservatives with alarming new surveillance. The FEDS asked banking institutions to search private transactions without any type of warrants for terms like maga trump or other words that dealt with things that were biblical purchases.
That can include a Bible.
Also, keywords that they said that they suggested that banks look for in transactions would be things like sporting goods stores, like Dick Sporting Goods, Kabella's Bass pro Shop in More. This is such an abuse of power and a weaponization
of the federal government on the American people. When I hear this, I want to know, how is this not breaking the law to be able to do this without there being any probable cause or warns where they can just go to my bank and say, hey, if any of these things are there, we want to know about it.
Look, this is an enormous abuse of power. It is an enormous violation of the privacy of Americans. This happened the House Judiciary Committee, Jim Jordan released the documents that they got from the Treasury Department. And this all happened after January sixth, twenty twenty one. So after January sixth, you had Joe Biden in power, and these zealots said, we are going to target our political enemies. We have the entire federal government as a weapon. We are going
to go after them. And this was driven by the Treasury Department's Office of Stakeholder Integration and Engagement in the Strategic Operations of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. And it's called Finnsen is the acronym, and it distributed materials to financial institutions that outlined quote typologies of quote various persons of interest. Now, those typologies included anyone using the term Trump,
anyone using the term maga. And they said, these are people more likely to be quote loan actor, homegrown, violent extremists. And according to the Judiciary Committee's analysis, Finnsen wanted this is a quote Finnsend wanted financial institutions of extremism indicators that include transportation charges such as bus tickets, rental cars, plane tickets for travel areas with noparent purpose, or the purchase of books, including religious texts, and subscriptions to other
media containing extremist views. Now what kind of religious books. Well, among them was the Bible. If you went and bought the Bible, the Biden Treasury Department was reporting that, Okay, we think you're in danger of being a terrorist because you purchased the Bible. So if if you had any financial transaction that included the word Trump or maga, they thought you were in danger of being a terrorist. If you bought the Bible, you were in danger of being
the terrorist. And they also instructed financial institution to query for transactions using certain codes like small arms and that that is an MCC code of three four eight four. Or Sporting and Recreational goods in supply that's an MCC code of five zero nine to one and the keywords and this is what Treasury specified. Cabella's, Dick Sportings Goods,
and Bass Pro Shop. And I'll point out Dick Sporting good in the middle of all the Democrat efforts to engage in gun control came out rather loudly against the second amendments. So as for me, I don't go to Dick's Sporting's Goods, but bess Pro Shops and Cabela's are both fantastic institutions, and if you shop there, the Biden administration wanted to know because if you go to bess Pro Shops, they think you're a likely terrorists. It's outrageous.
It's also, I think shocking how easily people were giving up this information. Why is it that we now find out that so many businesses are willing to just say here's everything when they're asked, not say hey, we'd get a warrant for this or show me some actual paperwork. It seems that almost all of these companies are complicit saying we're more than happy to help you invade on the privacy of our customers. From a standpoint you just
mentioned of Dick's Sporting Goods. When I look at companies that do this, I say, I'm never wanting to go there again, certainly not with a credit card.
Yep.
So it's not clear that the retailers we're engaged in this process. So it's not clear that Cabela's, are Dick Sporting good or Beast Pro shops were participating. This was directed at banks, and listen, banks. Banks are massively regulated by the federal government. They are dealing literally every day with their federal regulators. The federal government has enormous power over banks, and so I understand from a bank's perspective, Treasury is leaning on them and saying we want this information.
The federal government has the ability to shut down a bank, to destroy a bank's business if they disagree with you. And so it is an area where for big state leftists that want to know everything about your personal life. Banks are a real vulnerability because every one of us, if you're dealing with modern life, if you're depositing a paycheck in your bank account, if you're paying your bills with a bank account, if you have a credit card,
your financial records detail what you're spending money on. And by the way, the left, just like communist China, wants to know every single thing you spend money on. You know, one of the very first versions of the build Back Broke bill, they called it build back Better, but I think build Back Broke defined it more accurately. One of the earliest versions required banks to report to the federal government.
So if you're making a car payment, if you're making a rent payment, you know, we're not quite there, but we're not far away from. If you're filling up your tank with gas, you had to report to the federal government. And for leftist Elizabeth Warren and President she and China both want to know every single thing you spend a penny on. And this is an example of the Treasury Department. Janet Yellen, you know George Orwell's nineteen eighty four talked
about big brother. Janet Yellen is perfectly happy to be big sister and try to gather as much information about your personal financial transactions as humanly possible.
What will the outcome be of this, I guess you could say new investigation and is there any way to stop this from happening in the future, or as long as the Biden administration's in power, can they continue to get away with this abuse of power?
Well, look, we can have congressional oversight, and we will and the House will engage in it because the House has a majority, and so they can hold hearings. In the Senate, no Democrat cares. So in the Senate, we will not have a single hearing on this. Why because the consequence of having a majority in the Senate is whoever has the majority has the committee chairman. So I
am the ranking member on the Senate Commerce Committee. That means I'm the senior Republican on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. That's a committee that has jurisdiction over forty percent of the US economy. It's an enormously consequential committee. As the ranking member, I have the ability to fight hard for jobs and economic growth in the state of Texas, and I do that across the country and I do that every day. But what I don't have the ability
to do is I can't convene a hearing. Only the chairman can convene a hearing. So in the Senate. There is literally not a single Democrat that gives a dam that the Biden administration is violating your privacy by engaging in the searches because they all of them, they hate Donald Trump so much that they've been radicalized, and they believe it's perfectly justifiable to weaponize the federal government. So
you ask, what can Congress do. Look, if we had control of both bodies, we could pass legislation to stop this. Under a Chuck Schumer Democrat Senate. They're not going to pass legislation to stop it. No Democrat will support it. So that means we can do oversight. I can write letters, I can give speeches, I can shine a light on it. I can do this podcast. But I can't convene a hearing of the Judiciary Committee because Dick Durbin, the chairman,
won't do it. I can't pass legislation because no Democrat will support. And so at this point, elections have consequences, and as long as we're in the minority, what I'm limited to be able to do on something like this an abuse of power of the Biden administration is shine a light and do everything I can to encourage the American people to be outraged at this and hold their elected officials accountable for violating their privacy.
And clearly it should become an election year issue, especially for conservatives this time around, because I think this is the type of issue that will really connect with conservative voters who say enough is enough and stop treating us like we are terrorists just because we are conservatives. I go back and remind people what they did to parents. It should up been school board meetings putting out those
FBI memos, treating them like their domestic terrorists. This is the Democratic Party and their doj and what they will do to conservatives. It's twenty twenty four and a lot of us are trying to get our finances in order. There are some great news for homeowners. Interest rates have dropped and are now in the fives, a lot lower than they were last year. So if you've been buried in high interest credit card debt, now's the time to
break free. American Financing can help you access to cash in your home to pay off your high interest debt. Last year, their salary based mortgage consultants help customers save an average of eight hundred and fifty four dollars a month. That's like giving yourself a ten thousand dollars raise. What a way to start the new year. And if you start today, you may be able to delay two mortgage payments.
Call American Financing Today eight at eight six seven five forty ninety that's eight and eight six seven five forty ninety or Americanfinancing dot net MLS eighteen twenty three thirty four MLS Consumer Access dot org APR for the rates and the five start at six point four zero six percent for well qualified borrowers. Call eight and eight six seven five forty eight ninety for details about credit costs and terms.
Center.
Lastly, I want to move to another story that has broken. It's one that is captain obvious. Yeah, we already knew this, and yet somehow we've finally gotten the admission of something we all knew from the very beginning. Biden's Department of Justice is admitting now that Hunter Biden's laptop is in fact real. Four years after Biden's Laptop from Hell was falsely labeled misinformation, the DOJ is admitting it's real.
We also knew at the time. They knew it was real, and the FBI knew it was real.
And we also now know that those fifty plus leaders in the intelligence community, they knew that it was real when they lied to the American people to influence the election in the last presidential cycle.
Your reaction to this.
Look, this is a stunning admission. It means Joe Biden lied to the American people. Hunter Biden lied to the American people. Just about every single elected Democrat in America lied to the American people. Just about every single corporate media outlet that repeated the Democrat talking points lied to the American people. I want to read you what the
Biden Department of Justice just filed the federal court. This is from a brief and the heading is, while investigating the defendant for tax violations, investigators obtained evidence showing his prior gun purchase was illegal because he was addicted to controlled substances. And here's the paragraph. In August twenty nineteen, IRS and FBI investigators obtained a search warrant for tax
violation for defendant's Apple iCloud account. In response to that warrant, in September of twenty nineteen, Apple produced backups of data from various of the defendant's electronic devices that he had backed up to his iCloud account. Investigators also later came into possession of the defendant's Apple MacBook Pro, which he
had left at a computer store. A search warrant was also obtained for his laptop, and the results of the search were largely duplicative of information investigators had already obtained for Apple. That means the Biden Department of Justice is admitting the Hunter laptop is real. It was his laptop, he left it the repair station. The information on it is accurate. They knew it was accurate. They knew it
was accurate in twenty nineteen. They knew it was accurate because they had the information from Hunter Biden's Apple iCloud account and it was the same thing. So they knew it was real. And yet they did not make that public. And Joe Biden and Hunter Biden and just about every elected Democrat lied to the American people and said this is not real, This is not his laptop, this is Russian misinformation, this is planted by Vladimir Putin, and the media,
the corporate media was utterly complicit. They repeated it over and over and over again. And by the way, to the best of my knowledge, so we now have the Biden DOJ saying every word they said was a lie. I'm not aware of a single corporate media outlet that has apologized that has retracted what they've said. The New York Times, to the best of my knowledge, has not, The Washington Post has not, ABCNBCCBS is not, MSNBC has not, CNN has not. They are perfectly happy to have lied
to the American people. And by the way, lied to the American people in October of twenty twenty, right before the presidential election. They all lied to the American people. And now the Biden DOJ has admitted it was a lie, and DOJ knew it was a lie then, and they were perfectly happy with that lie being told to the American people.
We play the liar in chief.
This is the then candidate Joe Biden at a president to debate, standing next to Donald Trump, and I'll start with this guy, and then you can hear him throughout that entire campaign cycle.
Fifty former national intelligence folks who said that what this he's accusing me of is a Russian plan. They have said that this has all the four five former heads of the CIA, both parties say what he's saying is a bunch of garbage. This is classic Trump. We have four days left and all of a sudden, there's a laptop.
There's overwhelming evidence that from the intelligence community that the Russians are engaged, that the story from the fall of Altri Sunbunder said yes, yes, yes, I know you'd ask it.
I have no response to another.
It's the lastest effort in this desperate campaign to smear me and my family. The vast majority of the intelligence people will have come out and said, there's no basis at.
All, no basis at all. Turns out he was lying the entire time. By the way, he knew it was the laptop of his son. He knew it wasn't Russian disinformation, and hundred did too, and the DOJ knew it as well, and the FBI knew as well. At this point, center, how do you trust anything coming out of this FBI and this DOJ.
If this is what they're doing in the process, you can't.
They've demonstrated that they're willing to be partisans, They're willing to lie to the American people, and they don't feel they have any obligation to the truth. I mean, this does enormous damage to the Department of Justice, the FBI, because they knew as a fact that what Biden was saying, that what was being said public was a total lie. And by the way, the fifty quote intelligence professional professionals. You know who organized that group?
Who was that?
Tony Blincoln and Secretary Tilly.
Wickins job was then he was working for the Biden campaign.
He was working for the Biden campaign, and he got rewarded. I get to say, as a president about the biggest plum you have to offer is Secretary of State is the most prestigious cabinet position. And for the job of organizing all these intelligence officials to lie, every one of these fifty. By the way, a reporter, if there's any honest reporter in America, they ought to ask every one of these fifty you lied to the American people weeks before
a presidential election. Are you embarrassed or do you apologize to the American people? What did you do wrong to cause you to lie to the American people? Did you abuse their trust? Are you and shamed of your role? Now? I don't think there'll be a single reporter that asked them that, because the corporate media participated the lies as well. They're not embarrassed, they're not ashamed, and they're certainly not going to ask the liars who participated in What is
you want to talk about election interference? This is blatant election interference.
Not only that, but it brings up a new lie. It's one that represented James Comer was talking about on Hannity. He had this to say about the new life from Joe Biden and the Biden crime family, about.
The art that his son was selling. Take a listen.
Let me ask you about the other two issues the stories that John Solomon was reporting on. One is the art dealer and the testimony that was given. Were we not told that they had an ethics agreement that Hunter would not know the people that purchased his art. Now we know that Joe Biden, the big guy himself, was speaking to the art dealer directly. That was testimony apparently that you received. And what do you have to say about the cocaine that the FBI knew about in twenty
eighteen as it relates to his gun holster. We have only about a minute left.
This is another major law that Joe Bidens told the American people. The White House said they had an agreement in place to provide maximum ethics. We really thought they probably had something in place. It probably wasn't worth the paper that it was written on. But we were shocked to learn from George Burgess in the transcribed interview that he's never even heard from anyone from the White House.
He didn't know anything about an ethics agreement. He had never even seen in the news where there was an ethics agreement. So, you know, again, another live of Joe Biden, another Live of the White House. Nothing is panting out that Joe Biden said with respect to his family shady business teams. We're going to bring Hunter Biden in. We're going to get answers from from all of these people.
They're going to get answers from all these people.
These are just some of the questions they're going to get to ask in theory if he shows up Hunter Biden, And I gotta imagine that if you're you know, any one of these Republican congressmen are women that may get to ask him questions, or James Comer, Jim Jordan, you've got to be chomping at the bit to get answers.
Well, I got to say, we're really in an unusual moment of time. Listen, politicians are not known for tremendous honesty. To put it mildly, but as a general matter, presidents of the United States do not routinely lie to the American people. And I'm not suggesting that's because all of our presidents have been paragons of integrity. I think there have been presidents that would certainly have been willing to lie. But the reason presidents typically don't commit direct lies to
the American people is they get caught. And when they get caught, it undermines their credibility and it hurts you. And most politicians, even if they're venal and self serving, they don't want to get caught to lie because it hurts their credibility. The Biden presidency has been unique in the history of our country, with the willingness of Joe Biden and every person who works for him to lie on a daily basis, over and over and over again
and not spin. Look, everyone spins. I don't fault a White House Democrat or Republican for spinning, for trying to put a good twist on the facts. Straight out lies things that are demonstrably absolutely false. What you just played Joe Biden saying this laptop is Russian disinformation. He knew it was his son's laptop. His son knew it was his son's laptop. It was his son's laptop. It was a flat out lie. There's not that that's not a
matter of perspective. That's just blatantly false. Why is it that Joe Biden, unique among presidents, lies on seemingly a daily basis to the American people? And the reason is because the American corporate media is broken. You want to know who's responsible for Biden's lying. Jake Tapper, and you and I have talked about in my last book that just came out a couple of months ago, Unwoke, How
to Defeat Cultural Marxism in America. I have an entire chapter I talk about the leftist takeover in major institutions. I have an entire chapter on journalism, and I talk about how Jake Tapper used to be a journalist. He used to care about truth, and then Trump broke Kim and he is now a propaganda see is a shell of his former self. You know, Jake Tapper, you work for years for CNN. Jake Tapper knows that Biden is lying on a daily basis. And you know what Jake
Tapper doesn't do, he doesn't call about. And the fact that Jake Tapper behaves like a cheerleader and pretorian guard for the White House, like a propagandist for the White House, like Pravda for the White House, it makes the White House more and more likely to lie because they know they will not get caught anywhere other than Fox News and right wing media and they don't care what they say.
Yeah, no doubt about it. It's going to be very interesting to see.
Also, how much of an election your issue this is and achilles heel for the president specifically because they're now admitting, yeah, they lied about all of it. And if that's what you're admitting, how is that going to change things moving forward? We're going to keep you updated on that. Don't forget we do this show Monday, Wednesday and Fridays. Make sure you hit that like subscribe and or auto download button, especially if you are on Apple, make sure that you
hit that like button there. Also, please share this podcast on social media wherever you are on social media. And lastly, don't forget that you can listen to my show The Ben Ferguson podcasts on those in between days. I will keep you up to date on the latest breaking news on those in between days, and we'll see you back here for the week in review on Saturday as well.