← The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson
The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson
Hunter Indictment Designed to Protect Joe, plus Massive Victory for 9/11 Families
00:42:26
Loading summary
Transcript23 lines
- [00:01]
Ben Ferguson
Welcome. It is the Verdict with Senator Ted Cruz, Ben Ferguson with you. And the big breaking news is obviously about the indictment obsession over Hunter Biden. Now, Senator, this one actually makes me angry. You've talked about this and, and really predicted it on this show long time ago that the whole reason why they were doing that plea agreement on the gun crime is that insulated the President. And it was the perfect crime to charge Hunter Bide with in that sweetheart plea deal because it insulated. And you couldn't connect any dots to the presidency or the Biden crime family with all the money going in and out of accounts and the suspicious activity reports, sure enough, the same guy that gave him the sweetheart deal, who's now the special prosecutor who's indicting him, is going after the first thing, the gun crime. I. I mean, you can't write the script any more ridiculous than this. And yet here we are.
- [00:59]
Senator Ted Cruz
Well, sadly, that is correct. The special counsel, David Weiss, we've talked about that. When Merrick Garland appointed him, it was illegal under the DOJ rules. A special counsel has to be outside the doj. But the reason that I believe that David Weiss was appointed special counsel is because he had already demonstrated he would give a sweetheart deal to Hunter Biden. He'd already demonstrated that he was willing to be complicit in the obstruction of justice at DOJ to, number one, prevent investigation into the more serious crimes from Hunter. Hunter Biden, and more importantly, to block any investigation into the big guy, into Joe Biden. And that that is the most important objective in the heavily politicized Biden doj. Now, on Wednesday, David Weiss, the special counsel, filed a pleading in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware stating that. That he intends to indict Hunter Biden. But what he intends to indict Hunter Biden about is a gun crime. Now, at this point, as we're discussing it, we don't know the details of exactly what that indictment will hold, but what we know is the gun crime is a crime that is uniquely limited to Hunter. There's no connection to Joe. There's no connection to Joe's corruption. There's no connection to bribery from Joe. There's no connection to Ukrainian oligarchs paying Hunter for access to Joe. There's no connection to Ukrainian oligarchs or Russian oligarchs or Chinese Communist officials paying Hunter for specific official favors from Joe Biden. Instead, the gun crime is a personal crime. And, and the talking point of the Democrats, the talking point of the media is listen Hunter Boyd Biden is a troubled soul with substance abuse problems, and he's struggling. I gotta say, looking at this, the gun crime is not the reason the public cares about Hunter Biden. The reason this is a matter of public concern is the official corruption of the then Vice President United States and today the President of the United States and trying to trumpet, look how tough we are. We're going against Hunter for the gun crime, especially given that David Weiss already negotiated the sweetheart deal. And by the way, his initial proposal is Hunter Biden doesn't plead guilty to anything of significance. His second proposal was Hunter Biden pleads guilty to criminal offenses, but serves not a day in jail. So this third iteration, I don't know, maybe it has some mild jail time, but it is designed, consistent with the pattern, to protect Joe Biden. And that is the overarching objective, I believe, of the incredibly politicized Biden doj.
- [03:58]
Ben Ferguson
You look at the doj, and we've also mentioned this before, but I want to take a moment to remind people if, if you're a lawyer and put your lawyer hat on for a second for us and explain this. If you're sitting in a room and you see all of the. All these crimes that they could investigate, and you see all the. The things that could tie you to the White House, could tie you to the presidency, could tie you to, to. To different whistleblowers, the irs, the FBI, everything that's come out. And then you said, okay, we got to give them something. So you pick if you're. Again, I'm saying this from like the standpoint of a Hunter Biden lawyer. You know, we sit in a room and we pick the charges we want against our guy. Would you have picked this charge as well? Because it has none of those things that you're really worried about in it.
- [04:45]
Senator Ted Cruz
Sure. It is uniquely focused on Hunter personally. There's no arguable connection with Joe Biden. It insulates Joe Biden. So, for example, there's no indictment, there appears to be no even meaningful investigation over Hunter Biden's text message on the. On the WhatsApp app to a senior Chinese Communist official where he says, quote, I am sitting here with my father, and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand and now means tonight. I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me, in other words, Joe Biden, and every person he knows, and my ability to forever hold a grudge, that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father. Now, that is direct evidence of Hunter Biden shaking down a Chinese Communist official for millions of dollars and threatening retaliation from Joe Biden, then the sitting Vice President of the United States. If they brought an indictment for that, that would be a serious legal, political, and even existential peril for Joe Biden. So of course, David Weiss, operating as the political protector in the Biden doj, is not going to bring that. Instead, he's going to bring a gun crime, which is specific to Hunter. And remember, the question to ask in each of these instances is, are they focused on Hunter or are they willing to address Joe, which is the real matter of public concern?
- [06:34]
Ben Ferguson
I want to tell you real quick about our friends at Enviro Cleanse. You should choose an air purifier like your life depends on it, because it just might. More than 35,000 wildfires have devastated the US this year. The toxins and particles and wildfire smoke can penetrate our lungs and threaten our health. And that's why Enviro Cleanse develop military grade air purification for your home. And they just announced their biggest sale of the year. You can save a massive 30% off during their Labor Day sale. That's been extended. Enviro Cleanse is specifically designed to wipe out airborne chemicals and viruses known to cause illness, allergies, and difficulty breathing. Even toxic gases and particles found in Wildfire smoke are no match for Enviro Cleanse. That's why the US Navy selected Enviro Cleanse to protect and purify the air and their facilities. And Enviro Cleanse comes with a free professional air quality monitor. So you know your family's breathing purified air. So now is the time to save 30% off your air purification unit. I have one in my bedroom and it works. I have asthma. I can tell you, it's amazing. Get this free air quality monitor and fast free shipping. That's a $250 savings alone. Visit ekpure.com that's ekpure.com Use promo code verdict that's ekpure.com use code verdict ekpure.com center you mentioned that Weiss filed this paperwork and that's when everybody, of course, lost their mind. Oh, finally, Hunter Biden's going to get indicted. I rolled my eyes at it. You basically did as well. What does this say moving forward? And is there any hope that he might actually charge Hunter with other crimes or if this is what he's leading with, is this kind of probably going to be most of what we're going to get out of him.
- [08:32]
Senator Ted Cruz
In all likelihood, yes. Look, we've covered it in this podcast how initially David Weiss and the Biden Department of Justice wanted to cut a deal with Hunter Biden where he doesn't plead guilty to any serious crimes, where he gets off scot free on everything. And when there began to be some attention on this, in particular, what happened when the IRS whistleblowers came forward, they realized, oh, crap, we can't be that transparently political. So they reached agreement number two, the sweetheart agreement, where Hunter would plead guilty to a couple of misdemeanor charges. And the gun charge, which was the more serious charge, would be placed in deferred adjudication and he would serve zero jail time, not get a felony conviction, and he would have complete exoneration for any and all conduct. That includes corruption and bribery concerning burism in Ukraine, that includes corruption and bribery concerning Russia. That includes corruption and bribery concerning Communist China. Those are the serious charges. And the Biden Department of Justice entered a sweetheart deal where they said, we'll give you a pass on everything. Well, what happened is they filed that sweetheart deal. They expected it to be rubber stamped by the judge. But then the IRS whistleblowers went and testified before the United States Congress, testified before the House. Then one of the whistleblowers went on national television on cbs, and people looked at this and said, holy crap, this stuff is serious. This is real corruption. This is corruption that implicates the President of the United States. And I think what happened is the Biden DOJ realized this, this slap on the wrist. We can't give Hunter a get out of jail free pass for any and all criminal conduct in exchange for zero time in jail. And they still showed up in federal court hoping to push the plea agreement through. But when the judge asked them, is there a chance you might still indict Hunter for something else, they were forced to say yes. Not in fact, because they were investigating Hunter. I don't believe they are investigating Hunter. I don't believe they want to know what else Hunter did. Instead, I think they said yes, because given the hearings in the House of Representatives, given the whistleblowers, they knew that, saying, no, we're not even investigating. We don't even care if the President of the United States is shaking down foreign nationals for bribes. That was untenable. That was the sweetheart plea plea deal that ultimately got thrown out of court. And now I think the special counsel is going back and Trying to enter some variant. We'll see the details of it. And as I said, it may involve some nominal jail time. But this critical question, and we've discussed this for months and months and months on this pod, if the prosecution involves purely personal conduct by Hunter, if it involves drug possession, if it involves the gun crime, if it involves things that Hunter did on his own that only implicate a poor substance abusing and addicted child of the president, then it is a political smokescreen. Because the reason you've got the US Department of Justice focused on this is because this fact pattern seriously implicates official corruption by the President of the United States. And any prosecution, any indictment that ignores the evidence of corruption by the President of the United States is, I believe, designed to protect the President of the United States.
- [12:19]
Ben Ferguson
Yeah. Don't be bamboozled over this. And that's the main point here. If they're going to do it this way, do not celebrate this. And I promise you the media is going to try to hoodwink you on this. They're going to say they're going to do big breaking news coverage. This is shock. Oh, my gosh, he's been indicted. And they're hoping that will suffice. And they can say, see, he was held accountable. That's, that's the game plan.
- [12:39]
Senator Ted Cruz
And by the way, by the way, remember, this is also designed for parody. See, we indicted a Biden. Now we can indict Trump four times and go after him and try to ban him from the ballot and end the presidential elections because we indicted Hunter for a slap on the wrist for a personal crime.
- [12:58]
Ben Ferguson
Yeah. And again, be ready for this because it's going to come and it's going to be absurd the way they do it, but this is how they're going to do it. I want to move to something else center that, that we really led the way on this issue getting out. And then the listeners did an amazing job of sharing. It was one of the biggest podcasts I think we've ever done together. And it dealt with the issue of 9 11. You issued a statement afterwards. And, and that also went viral. And you have a new statement, an update I want you to tell me about tonight. This goes back to that letter that the DOJ, or I should say the DOJ D sent out to families victims of 9 11. And they were letting them know in a heads up that we were probably going to do a plea deal with Khalid Sheikh Muhammad. And I think it was three or four other terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed we went through the history of who he is, the mastermind of 9 11, but also killed many other people and many other attacks around the world, innocent children, women, etc. And they were going to do a deal to, to spare him the death penalty so we could get him out of Gitmo and then close down Gitmo. That's the ultimate goal for the DoD and the Biden administration. We now have an update. Because of the outrage of so many listeners of the show and others and that story going viral, it looks like they're not going to get away with it.
- [14:21]
Senator Ted Cruz
That's exactly right. And I want to take a minute to thank the listeners a verdict, because I actually think you guys made a real difference in something that matters enormously in this country, which is, as we discussed on this podcast, the Biden administration sent out letters to the families of the victims who were murdered on September 11th and said, hey, we're contemplating a plea deal where Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and other conspirators behind the mass murder on September 11 would be spared the death penalty. They'd give it life in prison. They would be exempted from capital punishment. Despite the fact that they committed an act of war, despite the fact that they killed nearly 3,000 people. We'd spare them. And you know, when they sent this letter, it was initially getting almost no press coverage. No one was covering it. No one was discussing it. ABC didn't discuss it at the 6:00 news. NBC didn't discuss it. CBS didn't discuss it. CNN didn't discuss it. MSNBC didn't discuss it. The entire corporate media ignored it. You and I were so outraged by it that we sat down to do our pod and we actually had three topics. This was topic number one. We had two other topics. And we ended up deciding, you know what, the entire podcast is going to focus on this issue on September 11th, on the horrific terrorist attack that, that came after America, on what it meant and on the outrage. Listen, the Biden administration and we talked about in this, that podcast. And by the way, you ought to go back and listen to that podcast. You can go back and find. We did a full podcast on this September 11th effort of the Biden administration to spare the mastermind of September 11th. But I believe this is part and parcel of the Biden administration's effort to essentially abolish the federal death penalty. And before Joe Biden leaves the White House, I think he is going to pardon or commute the sentences of every single federal death penalty prisoner, including the racist lunatic who murdered Nine African Americans at the Mother Emanuel Church in Charleston, South Carolina, including multiple vicious terrorists and murderers. But as a result of this podcast, we focused the entire 30 minutes of the pod on the facts behind it. And we asked you, we said, if you're outraged, pick up the phone, call your House member, call your senator, call the White House and say, do not spare the September 11 mastermind. Well, we were about the only people shining a light on this. And it ended up people got worked up, which is good. They should have been worked up. We were worked up. It was wrong. It was outrageous. It was astonishing, what they're doing. Well, I gotta say, on. On Wednesday, the administration came out and announced that it was not going to accept the plea deal. And here's what prosecutors said in the filing. Quote, the administration declined to. Declines to accept the terms of the proposed joint policy principles offered by the accused in the military commission's case, United States vs Muhammad, et al. And so I think that is a real victory verdict listeners ought to feel proud of. Now, to be clear, the Biden administration gave themselves some wiggle room, so they may go back and take the deal, but they at least filed a court pleading saying they're rejecting the deal. That's a major victory. It was only the political pressure that came. And that political pressure was generated in very significant respect by the listeners of this podcast. But my view is the bastards that attacked America, that murdered nearly 3,000Americans, they ought to be prosecuted, they ought to be sentenced to death, and they ought to be executed. Because I think it's a matter of justice that people that committed horrific terrorist attacks on America, they should face the ultimate punishment. But the only way we'll be sure that happens is if the American people hold this administration to account and if they're too embarrassed and ashamed to let these guys off.
- [18:40]
Ben Ferguson
My next question for you is this. Is this just a pause and delay strategy, Senator? And do we have to keep monitoring them, or does this put this to bed, especially for the victims and the families that were affected by 911 that got these, you know, I would say horrific letters from the Department of Defense saying that they may spare these guys lives after these men trained and did all that they did to kill their family members?
- [19:08]
Senator Ted Cruz
Well, we don't know entirely. What we know is that the prisoners not only wanted to be spared the death penalty, but they wanted the Department of Defense to accept a guarantee that they would not serve their sentences in solitary confinement, and that would allow them to eat and pray with other prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. They also wanted a civilian run program to treat brain disorders, to treat sleep disorders, and to treat gastrointestinal damage that they say the CIA caused during investigations. That's the demand the Biden administration turned down. There is a tiny bit of wiggle room that they could cut back and say, okay, we're not going to give you those concessions, but we are going to take the death penalty off the table. And one of the key reasons, I think there are two things going on in the Biden administration. One, these left wing radicals are ideologically opposed to the death penalty. They don't want anyone executed ever. They want to essentially repeal the federal death penalty now. They don't want to go through the constitutional process of supporting legislation in Congress trying to get the votes and repealing it as a matter of law. They just want to say, we, the executive branch, are going to refuse to enforce the death penalty and in fact are going to commute or pardon anyone convicted of the most egregious offenses in the country. I think a second objective, and again, we talked about this at length on the prior pod on this topic, is they want to close Guantanamo. And listen, when it comes to foreign policy, the Biden administration is a press release administration. In other words, they don't follow coherent foreign policy objectives. They don't have a strategic vision for defending this nation. Instead, they want a simple press release that lets them trumpet their moral virtue. So in Afghanistan, you know, you ask yourself, why was the, the surrender to the Taliban, the withdrawal from Afghanistan so utterly incompetent, such a disaster? A big part of the reason is the Biden White House viewed it as, hey, we want to be out of there by September 11, because then we can show how virtuous we are that we withdrew from the war by September 11th. The problem is when the military said, okay, if we leave that early, we need sufficient troops to maintain Bagram Air Force Base and also maintain Kabul airport. And the Biden White House said, nope, nope, we don't care. Pull them out. Abandon Bagram Air Force Base. We don't need a secure airfield. We haven't evacuated anyone. We haven't evacuated Americans. We haven't evacuated the Afghans who assisted us. But we have a press release to issue. So ignore the national security imperatives. Let's issue our press release. I think in the case of Gitmo, their objective is the same. They want a press release saying, we are closing Gitmo. In order to do that, they've got to remove the most dangerous terrorists from Gitmo. In order to do that, they have to send them to prisons in the continental United States. And in order to do that they either have to get a conviction or get a plea deal. And so I think part of the reason they want the plea deal is to shut Gitmo because they get a good press release from it. But I think the listeners of verdicts and millions of Americans stood up and said no and hell no.
- [22:33]
Ben Ferguson
Yeah, it's especially this close to 9 11. It's so vitally important that we have this victory and especially for those family members that are victims all over again when they got this letter. And like you said, thank you to all you that listen for picking up that phone and standing up and saying no and calling your elected official. Because without you I don't think this would have happened. Let me tell you about patriot mobile. For 10 years patriot mobile has been America's only, only Christian conservative wireless provider. That's a decade now. You may not have heard of them because they were a smaller company that have grown over the last decade. And now it's time for you to make the switch if you've never done it before. Why? Because Patriot Mobile gets rid of the woke agenda by the Big tech has big Mobile has and they offer you dependable nationwide coverage. They give you the ability to access all three major networks which means you get the same coverage that you've been accustomed to without failing. Funding's the left's agenda. Did you know the big Mobile actually supports Planned Parenthood and has been for decades? Well, if you don't want your money going there, then switch to Patriot Mobile. And when you do, you're not just sending a message that you support free speech, religious freedom, the sanctity of life, the second amendment and our military are veterans and first responders. But your money that you pay is actually going to help those causes. Yes. Every time you pay your bill an extra cause charged to you, you're helping those causes. They have 100 US based customer service team that makes switching easy. You can keep your same cell phone number you have right now, keep your phone that you have right now and you can upgrade your phone if you want to. When you make the switch, call Patriot Mobile 878 Patriot. That's 878 Patriot. Use the promo code verdict to get free activation. When you use that promo code verdict878patriot or patriotmobile.com/verdict. Senator, I also want to ask you about another issue and that deals with the issue of climate. Climate change has become obviously an election year issue, at least for the Democrats. You can see it over the last couple weeks. They're kind of testing things, they're really pushing things here. But, but now we're finding out how academia deceives people about climate change. And, and this is something that I think is, is not just disingenuous, but it's really disgusting. They put out a new report that has actually come out and they say that there's, there's a new prediction that 1 billion deaths will happen from climate change this century. So you better get on board. Researchers from Canada, Australia have published this new study predicting 1 billion deaths from climate change over the next hundred years. Citing a scientific quote, consensus. The authors analyze, they say 180 studies on climate change and mortality covering a 1,000 ton rule. So this is a new theory which means for every thousand tons of fossil fuels burn, a person dies. Now this article was published and it contends that a future person, a future person is killed every time humanity burns a thousand tons of fossil carbon. They say based on that calculation that burning a trillion tons of fossil carbon will cause 2 degrees Celsius of global warming or AGW, which in turn they say will cause roughly a billion future premature death spread over a period of very roughly one century. I wish they use this type of logic when they were talking about unborn children that are killed. But, but of course they'll never do that. But this might be the most ridiculous fear mongering article and they say it's a scientific consensus now.
- [26:15]
Senator Ted Cruz
Well look, there is an enormous problem with the politicization of science and particularly when it concerns climate change, the dishonesty of science. I'm going to make a radical claim right now. I predict with absolute certainty that 7 billion people alive today will die in the next hundred years of climate change. Now mind you, there are a little over 7 billion people alive today and it is a virtual certainty that all of us will die in the next hundred years. And whether there was climate change or not, that assertion is unquestionably true. It just is utterly disingenuous to claim it's climate change that will cause it. Let me focus on. There was an article that came out on September 5th from guy named Patrick Brown. Now Patrick Brown is a PhD climate scientist and he is the co director of the Climate and Energy team at the Breakthrough Institute. And he wrote an article in the Free Press that I think is really consequential. I want to just read from you the beginning of the article. Quote, if you've been reading any news about wildfires this summer from Canada to Europe to Maui, you will surely get the impression that they are mostly the result of climate change. Here's the AP quote, climate change keeps making wildfires and smoke worse. Scientists call it the new abnormal. From PBS NewsHour, quote, wildfires driven by climate change are on the rise. Spain must do more to prepare, experts say. And from the New York Times, how climate change turn lush Hawaii into a tinderbox. And from Bloomberg, quote, Maui fires show climate change's ugly reach. Now here's Dr. Brown continuing from this quote, I am a climate scientist and while climate change is an important factor affecting wildfires over many parts of the world, it isn't close to the only factor that deserves our sole focus. So why does the press focus so intently on climate change as the root cause? Perhaps for the same reasons I just did in an academic paper about wildfires in Nature, one of the world's most prestigious journals. It fits a simple storyline that rewards the person telling it. The paper I just published, Climate Warming Increases Extreme Daily Wildfire Growth Risk in California, focuses exclusively on how climate change has affected extreme wildfire behavior. I knew not to try to quantify key aspects other than climate change in my research because it would dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival Science want to tell. This matters because it is critically important for scientists to be published in high profile journals. In many ways they are the gatekeepers for career success in academia and the editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain pre approved narratives, even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society. To put it bluntly, climate science has become less about understanding the complexities of the world and more about serving as a kind of Cassandra, urgently warning the public about the dangers of climate change. However understandable this instinct may be, it distorts a great deal of climate science research, misinforms the public, and most importantly makes practical solutions more difficult to achieve. This is a stunning indictment of the machinery and apparatus around quote, unquote science. Today the journals publish, quote unquote research that echoes the pre approved political orthodoxy they want published. And if you don't echo that, they don't publish you. And it is one of the many really corrupt aspects of how science and climate change reporting and academic work is really doing a disservice to the American people.
- [31:05]
Ben Ferguson
When you look at not only the fact that this is how you get the money, and I do think it's an issue of follow the money as you just described it. Certainly it's an indoctrination on college campuses and among researchers. And the cash flow is if you believe in this, we will fund you. But, but when you make these out latest claims and then you treat them as fact, there's, there's nothing you can do to debate this with them. When you look at what they said here, they said this is a scientific consensus. And the authors say they analyze 180 studies. All of them, I'm sure were studies that were funded by radical lefties and global warming activists. Right, those that raise money, et cetera. But when they come out and say that, you know, we're gonna lose a billion people, you make it sound that bad. Is there any way to overcome that with anything else but this propaganda? And I think that's why they make these outlandish claims.
- [31:58]
Senator Ted Cruz
Well, it's why we need people in colleges and universities and think tanks in the academic world and in the scientific world to reject politicized science. Let me read a little more from Dr. Brown. Dr. Brown says, quote, so in my recent Nature paper, which I authored with seven others, I focused narrowly on the influence of climate change on extreme wildfire behavior. Make no mistake, that influence is very real. But there are also other factors that can be just as or more important, such as poor forest management and the increasing number of people who start wildfires, either accidentally or purposely. A startling fact. Over 80% of wildfires in the US are ignited by humans. I want to repeat that sentence because the, the corporate media will never say it. A startling fact. Over 80% of wildfires in the US are ignited by humans. Now here's what Dr. Brown continues to say in my paper. We didn't bother to study the influence of these other obviously relevant factors. Did I know that including them would make for a more realistic and useful analysis? I did. But I also knew that it would detract from the clean narrative centered on the negative impact of climate change and thus decrease the odds that the paper would pass muster with Nature's editors and reviewers. This type of framing with the influence of climate change, unrealistically considered in isolation, is the norm for high profile research papers. For example, in another recent influential Nature paper, scientists calculated that the two largest climate change impacts on society are deaths related to extreme heat and damage to agriculture. However, the authors never mention that climate change is not the dominant driver for either one of these impacts. Heat related deaths have been declining and crop yields have been increasing for decades despite climate change. To acknowledge this would imply that the world has succeeded in some areas despite climate change, which the thinking goes would undermine the motivation for emissions reductions. This is a narrative of so called scientific inquiry, scientific journals, academic journals that have abandoned, abandoned the mission of science. Science is about examining evidence, following the scientific method, beginning with the hypothesis, looking to evidence to disprove that hypothesis and determining what's happening. Today, an enormous amount of science is simply politics covered in scientific garb. And in no place is that more profound than in the world of climate change where there are billions of dollars connected to so called scientists telling the preferred political narrative, facts be damned.
- [35:14]
Ben Ferguson
Yeah, it is no longer about facts, certainly in academia where it's supposed to be about that, now it's about propaganda and indoctrinating people to this while they all fly on their private jets to climate change events, which I still laugh at the hypocrisy of that. Let me tell you about Chalk real quick. Quick, if you're a guy and you feel like you're losing your edge, you feel like you've just got fatigue that is set in, you want to be more active, but weakness and complacency win. You're not alone. There is a massive amount of men right now dealing with low testosterone levels. In fact, they're off a cliff historically to an all time low. Thankfully, the patriots at Chalk are here to help real American men take back their right to proudly maximize your masculinity by boosting testosterone levels up to 20% over 90 days. Now, I've been taking the male vitality stack now for months. It works. And if you want to boost your testosterone levels up to 20 over 90 days and get back your strength and vitality, you need to go to chalk choq.com Manufactured right here in the US of A, Chalk's natural herbal supplements are clinically proven to have game changing effects on your energy focus, your mood. So stop sitting on the couch, stop waiting to do active things in your life, go to chalk choq.com and use the promo code BEN. You're gonna get 35% off any Chalk subscription for life. That's Chalk C H O Q.com use promo code BEN for 35 off center. Lastly, while we were doing the show, there's some new audio that's come out and I want you to get your reaction to it. Bill Maher went on MSNBC and he said this, calling out the media for refusing to cover the Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, Biden crime family scandal. It's shocking to even have a working.
- [37:08]
C
Democracy, but it's so funny. I mean After I was on Joe Rogan the other day and yes, we were. I don't understand how they can equate this equivalency between Trump and Biden. And in a lot of cases, I guess Joe's now for Trump, you know, pretty much out there saying it. Do I love everything about Biden? No. But, you know, I just don't understand how they can look at what Trump did now. Does the Hunter Biden scandal stink? It really does. Stinks to the high heavens. I mean, that's real corruption there that a lot of the left wing media will not cover. But it's nothing like what Trump did. There's just no equivalency to be. You could, you can say what about ism for anything. But like I said to him, you just can't tell unlike things apart if you see that the same way. But you know, they also shouldn't cover up what by, I mean, if, if, if Don Jr. Sure had done the things that Hunter Biden did, it would be every day.
- [38:21]
Senator Ted Cruz
Yeah, I hear you on that. I got one.
- [38:22]
C
He found cocaine in the White House. Whose could it be? Who does cocaine around it? We can't figure it out.
- [38:30]
Ben Ferguson
I mean, you hear that. And yeah, he said some things about Trump, but this is Bill Maher calling out MSNBC on msnbc saying, you guys won't cover this and you would be covering every day if it was anything with the Trump team. And basically, you guys are full of it and wusses.
- [38:47]
Senator Ted Cruz
Look, I don't personally know Bill Maher. I've never met him. And he's someone who is a doctrinaire liberal. He is a man of the left. But he represents in many ways just how radical the Democrat Party has been. Because to Bill Maher's credit, he's remained a consistent doctrinaire liberal. So he actually believes in principles like free speech. He believes in principles like religious liberty. He's willing to speak out against the asinine radicalization of the Democrat Party. So he's spoken out against the extreme transgender ideology. He's pointed out that, saying that suddenly massive percentages of our children are transgender and should be sterilized and have medical operations to try to change their physical appearance of sexuality. That, that is an extreme and dramatic shift in our society. And what he's saying here. Listen, you and I disagree with his assessment of the relative merits of, of Trump's conduct versus Biden's conduct. But I'm going to give him credit for acknowledging Biden's conduct because MSNBC doesn't do that. That's the outlet he was on. CNN doesn't do that. ABC doesn't do that. NBC doesn't do that. CBS barely does that. It does that a little bit. And you know, I will credit him for saying, listen the evidence. Now, if you're a regular verdict listener, you know the evidence. You know the evidence that Joe Biden personally solicited and received millions of dollars of bribes from foreign oligarchs and enemies of America. That is a big damn deal. But the fact that Bill Maher, I have multiple times retweeted, pushed out Bill Maher's monologues and excerpts on his show, at some point I'll go on a show. I haven't. We actually invited Bill to be on this podcast and he was willing to do it and we just couldn't make the scheduling work. So I hope at some point we have Bill Maher as a guest on this pod and we've talked about. I'm willing to go on a show and we haven't been able to make that scheduling work either. But I hope at some point I'd like to have a conversation with him. I've never spoken to the man, but I respect that. As an old school liberal, he's actually holding the line of an old school liberal. And looking around at the Democrat Party going, you people are crazy. And looking around at the media going, when you don't cover serious evidence of corruption by the President of the United States, that undermines the integrity of what you claim to be, which is journalism. And that's. It's yet another indication of just how radicalized the Democrats have become.
- [41:41]
Ben Ferguson
Yeah, it was a nice break there, certainly from the reality of what you see every day on MSNBC and the shock on the face of the MSNBC host when he was saying this was maybe the best part of all, because it was like, I cannot believe he's saying this. I cannot believe he's saying this. I absolutely loved it. For that reason, if nothing else, don't forget we do this show three days a week. Make sure if you're listening on Apple, you hit that subscribe button right now or auto download button if you're living somewhere else or the listing somewhere else or the follow button. And I do a podcast in the in between days. So if you want to listen to something else, download the Ben Ferguson podcast as well. And I'll see you there on the days when you're not listening to Verdict and we'll see you back here in a couple of days.