← The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson
The 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson
UNCUT! ALL the Evidence of Joe Biden's Corruption with James Comer
01:19:19
Loading summary
Transcript177 lines
- [00:01]
Ben Ferguson
Well, let me first off say Merry.
- [00:03]
Ted Cruz
Christmas to you and your family. Senator Ted Cruz and I, Ben Ferguson, want to make sure that we wish you and your family again a very merry Christmas. And we also know that many of you are on the road going to see family and friends and celebrating the birth of Jesus Christ and you're probably looking for a little bit of entertainment and what to keep you awake on these drives. And we love that you're listening to the show right now. We decided what we were going to do is put unedited the entire three part series with James Comer together. This is going to be very big in when Congress comes back into session. It's going to have an awful lot to deal with the investigations into the Biden crime family. If there's any story from 2023 that's going to move into 2024, it's going to be this story. And that's why we wanted to make sure that if you did miss any of those three part series with James Comer that you to hear it here today. So we're going to play that for you, like I said, unedited in its entirety right now. And and again we want to also make sure we take a moment remember the reason for the season. This is about the birth of Jesus and the celebration of what he did for this for not only us but the entire world. It is incredible and I hope that you will take that time with your family to talk to your kids, your grandkids about the true meaning of Christmas. It has become obviously so commercialized and and I just want please take that moment, remind them what this season's all about. So again to you and your family, Merry Christmas and here is our unedited three part series all together with James Comer.
- [01:43]
Ben Ferguson
Senator, this is going to be a really fun multi part series and for everyone that's watching or listening, if you're listening to this episode, we ask you to please share it everywhere. We're going to say that on the very beginning front of this on social media, this is going to be multi part series with a dear friend of yours, Congressman James Comer, who's doing unbelievable work in the House going after the Biden crime family. And I want you to introduce your good friend.
- [02:08]
James Comer
Well James, welcome back to Verdict. This is your second time that you've been with us. We had you earlier this year for a two part series in which we broke down and you went through the details of the very systematic investigation you're leading in the House. We're now at the end of the year. And so we're coming back for yet another multi part series to really get into the substance. And a lot has been happening lately. We just had Hunter Biden defy a congressional subpoena. We just had the full House of Representatives vote to authorize formally the impeachment inquiry. And this week there's some breaking news. You're sending your investigative team on the road. Why don't we start by. Tell us about that.
- [02:54]
James Biden
Yeah. So obviously a lot of these people that we've asked for interviews and depositions, they're trying to use the holiday as an excuse why they can't come in and do it. So we decided we would make it more convenient on them and send our staff to depose them or interview them in their home area. So the first one we're doing is with the owner of AmeriCorps Health. And AmeriCorps Health was the healthcare company where James Biden, the President's brother, approached them because he heard they were financially distressed and said that because he's a Biden and because of his brother's contacts in the Middle east, that he could help them acquire all the capital they needed to get back on their feet from the Middle East. But they were going to have to pay Jim Biden first and they gave him $600,000. And by all accounts, Jim Biden completely defrauded AmeriCorps health. He never provided any funding or anything else. But what ironic about this for Joe Biden, not only was that a pure example of influence pedaling, Joe Biden received the last payment from AmeriCorps Health. They sent a check to Jim Biden for $200,000. The exact same day that Jim Biden received that $200,000 check from AmeriCorps Health, they wrote Joe Biden a check for the exact same amount, $200,000. So that was the first example of evidence that we found where Joe Biden directly benefited from the Biden family influence peddling scheme. So we're going to have our deposers down there talking to them about how this started and what role Joe Biden may have played and if they ever met Joe Biden and all of that. So that should be very interesting.
- [04:50]
Ben Ferguson
It's interesting you didn't mention the name Hunter Biden in that story of influence peddling. That is the part that I think many Americans have maybe not understood, which is this is the entire family that's been involved in getting paid. Can you go into that a little bit more about, about James Biden Not Just Hunter.
- [05:07]
James Biden
Yeah. I think James Biden probably committed just as many crimes as Hunter Biden. The only reason we don't know about James Biden is he didn't leave a laptop flying around. We've been able to subpoena his bank records, and I can tell you there's a lot of questions we have for James Biden. That's why he received a subpoena. We're working with his attorney, and we hope to have him in in January. But at the end of the day, this example with AmeriCorps health sure looks like securities fraud. I mean, I don't know how else you would describe it, but obviously they deserve due process, and they're going to have due process. But we know from court records this AmeriCorps health is in federal bankruptcy court. They obviously have accused Jim Biden of a lot of things. So this is all public record. And, you know, it shows that it wasn't just Hunter Biden. This was the whole Biden family. So AmeriCorps, Jim Biden, and Hunter.
- [06:06]
James Comer
So AmeriCorps Health paid Jim Biden $600,000. As best you can tell, did Jim Biden perform any. Any service for them, do anything of value for them?
- [06:18]
James Biden
According to the court records, AmeriCorps Health says no, other than he went there and, you know, made all these promises that, you know, Joe Biden's contacts, they would work together and help them get all the money from the Middle East.
- [06:35]
James Comer
But they never got any.
- [06:36]
James Biden
This is. They never got a penny. They never got one penny. And it looks like, Senator, on Jim Biden's bank statements, they tried to say that $600,000 payment was a loan. And I think that's a very important aspect of our investigation because from the notes that the whistleblowers have turned over, we know that sometime in 2018, the Bidens figured out that the IRS was breathing down their necks. They knew that they had all these suspicious activity reports from the banks that were accusing of money laundering and having shell companies and potentially taking bribes, and they changed the way they were operating. They went from receiving wires directly through the shelves to receiving payments and calling them loans.
- [07:28]
James Comer
I want to stop and unpack a lot of that. So we hear from the Democrats, we hear from the corrupt corporate media. There's no evidence. No evidence. No evidence, especially no evidence of Joe Biden's involvement. So I want to break down, because you had a lot of substance there on the shell companies. How many Biden shell companies did y'all uncover?
- [07:48]
James Biden
20. And let me make sure. Everyone understands this. A shell company is a company with no assets and no known purpose. So the bank email that we released two weeks ago showed the bank examiner saying they got this wire from China, and he says it's an investment company, but it's an investment company with no investment. And then the account that it went through was essentially a dormant account. So there's evidence that the bank examiners. And if you look at also the suspicious activity reports, the banks knew these were shell companies. And the banks did everything they were supposed to do by notifying treasury that, wait a minute. This politically exposed family, they're getting wires from our enemies around the world. We don't know what these wires are for. And they're going through companies that have no known purpose or no action.
- [08:37]
James Comer
So shell companies, they're not real businesses. This is not a dry cleaner. This is not a gas station. There are no employees. There are no paychecks. They're not a business in any sense. They. This is a legal entity. And it's a legal entity created to send money to. And it's what is often used for money laundering. It's what's often used to hide the source of the money. And you mentioned the suspicious activity reports. So let me ask for our listeners, what is a suspicious activity report and how many of them were filed on the Bidens?
- [09:10]
James Biden
A suspicious activity report is when the bank notifies the Treasury Cabinet that they believe their client may have committed a crime. Now, I want everyone to understand this. Banks don't just do this nonchalantly, like the Washington Post tried to say, no bank wants to file a Suspicious Activity Report center because when you do that invites the bank examiners to come in and investigate you. And the last thing a bank wants to do is see bank examiners walk through the front door. The Bidens had 170. 70 suspicious activity reports filed against him, which is unprecedented. I was a director of a bank for over a decade. Never has anyone received more than one or two. That. That, that was affiliated with my bank. And the. The fact that this family got 170 from six different banks on dozens of different accounts showed that there's something bad going on here because the banks are notifying the Treasury. I'm sorry, Treasury. We believe the vice president's family are involved in some type of fraud.
- [10:16]
James Comer
Well, and James, let me make sure I understand. Let me make sure I understand this. Suspicious activity reports are relatively rare. There's something that the bank files with the Treasury Department when they believe there may be evidence of criminal conduct and if you or I or Ben went and created a shell company, a company that did nothing, that had no employees, that was not a going business, and that shell company began getting multimillion dollar wires from China, from Russia, from Ukraine, that would be the sort of conduct that would trigger a suspicious activity report if any of us did that. Is that right?
- [10:51]
James Biden
That's exactly right. And we released an email last week that kind of showed the thought process by a bank examiner. He was communicating with his superior. And in the end they filed a suspicious activity report. And this email kind of outlines it. The bank examiner said, wait a minute, this account is pretty much dormant. We don't know what this company is. All we know is that the President's son owns it. He got a $5 million wire from China. We had to contact him to prevent a thar. We said, I'm sorry, Mr. Biden, we need to know what this wire was. And he said it was a loan. And there's like, oh, a loan from China. Well, we need the loan documentation. And he said, I don't have any, which is ridiculous. No one would loan anyone $5 million without having some type of loan documentation. So then he said, we fear this could be a bribe because we know China influences politicians through vulnerable family members. And we've seen in the news where his ex wife said he was on drugs, he was in financial trouble. We believe this could be a real national security threat. That's as serious of an email as I've ever seen from a major bank examiner.
- [12:04]
James Comer
Yeah, look, that is very serious. And of course CNN doesn't cover that. MSNBC doesn't cover that. Abc, cbs, NBC, the corporate media, that email doesn't exist. Now, as far as the corporate media is concerned, one of the things that you mentioned a minute ago that I want to stop and drill down on a little bit, you said early on the Biden family business, they would just get wires from overseas that were payments through these shell companies. But then there came a time when the IRS started coming after them when they changed how they did business. And they began instead of getting wires that were straight out payments, they began calling them loans. Explain that a little bit more about when they did that and why they would have done that.
- [12:51]
James Biden
That change started happening somewhere mid 2018. And from 2014 to 2018, they were pretty consistent. They would, you know, after Joe Biden would meet with these people, or Hunter would fly on Air Force Two, or Joe would talk to him on the phone or have lunch with them, then money would flow through the shell companies. And then they would disperse the money through the shell companies to 10 different Biden family members once 2018 rolled in and they realized the IRS was rolling in on them. And they knew this because the IRS was talking to them. And the Irish whistleblower notes confirmed this. They changed the way they were doing business. Then they started taking money in, some of it directly through their personal account, some of it still through shell companies, but they were calling them loans. And the reason you do this is twofold. Number one, you don't report a loan on your taxes. So theoretically, if you got $5 million wire from China and you said it was a loan, you didn't have to put that on your taxes and the IRS would never know about it. And secondly, and this is the most obvious, you don't have to pay taxes on it then if it's a loan. And that's why I always said, we're going to follow the bank records. We're going to go with the bank statements in lieu of the tax returns. Because there's nowhere on your tax return does it show you have a loan. There's a place on your tax return to show where you pay loan interest, mortgage interest, or if you loan someone money, you receive interest. But there's nowhere on your tax returns would it say a loan. So if you just got the Biden's tax returns, you would never know about $14 million that we found, because they didn't report it to the IRS. They called it loans.
- [14:35]
James Comer
So 14 million was the amount of loans you found so far?
- [14:39]
James Biden
Yes, for Jim and Hunter Biden.
- [14:42]
James Comer
And look, just to underscore what you said, because it's important, by calling it a loan, number one, you don't have to report it to the irs. Number two, you don't have to pay taxes to the irs. But of course, it's gotta be a real loan. It can't be just fraud and. All right, I've gotten loans over the course of my life. I've got a mortgage on my house now. The mortgage on my house, the collateral is my house. I've gotten car notes. I borrow money to buy a car. The collateral on the car note is the car. If I don't pay the payments, they take the car back. Is there any indication that Hunter or Jim Biden had any collateral? $14 million of loans. Did they own $14 million of collateral that would serve as the basis for those loans?
- [15:31]
James Biden
Well, and I understand loans, thank God there's no loan documentation. We've asked for loan documentation. They won't produce Loan documentation, it doesn't appear they had anywhere near $14 million in assets. So if you get $14 million in loans, you really need to have about 18 or $19 million in assets, because that's the way that the banking rules are. You've got to, you know, have more than enough or you would be underwater. So, but here's the most concerning thing. Going through their bank records, they've received all this money that they call loans. There are hardly any loan repayments, any principal payments, and no interest payments.
- [16:12]
James Comer
All right, so this goes back to 2018, principal payment. 2018, they start getting loans. They get $14 million of loans. You're saying from 2018 to 2023, that's five years. There are very, very few loan repayments at all, either principal or interest. In other words, this is some sort of magic loan that you don't need collateral for, you don't have to pay back. And it sure is helpful if you want to, say, buy a lot of crack and prostitutes if you don't have to pay the loan back. Is that, Am I being fair in characterizing that?
- [16:45]
James Biden
That's exactly right. It looked like one loan for half a million dollars to one of the Bidens. They may have paid $110,000 back with no interest. The rest of the $14 million, we can't find where they've made a single payment and not a penny of interest.
- [17:01]
James Comer
But by the way, do they dispute this? Does Hunter claim. No, no, I paid that back. Does Jim Biden claim. No, no, I paid that back. Or did they dispute what you're saying?
- [17:10]
James Biden
Well, we. We're going to bring them in. You know, that's one reason we wanted to pose them. But, you know, you can look at the bank records, and there's no, there's no payments back.
- [17:21]
Ben Ferguson
Best case scenario, how much of the millions in loans, 18 million do you think they paid back?
- [17:27]
James Comer
If you're being generous, 14 million.
- [17:29]
Ben Ferguson
14 million.
- [17:30]
James Biden
I mean, 110,000.
- [17:33]
James Comer
Wow. It's, you know, good to be a Biden. So.
- [17:38]
James Biden
And look, at what point does a loan become income? You know, I don't know. That's a question.
- [17:43]
Ben Ferguson
What is the law?
- [17:45]
James Comer
Look, if the intent is to defraud the irs, if it is a fraudulent vehicle, the IRS can bring it for tax fraud. You can't, right, characterize something as a loan that is not, in fact, a loan that doesn't intend to be paid back. And I mean that on the face of it, I gotta tell you, I'd be ready to prosecute right now. Of course, I don't work at the Biden Justice Department. And so my marching orders aren't protect the big guy. And the statute of limitations is not far from running on these two. They've already let the statute of limitations run on what Hunter did with China back in 17. And the clock is ticking now. Now, we started with your telling us your investigators are going to talk with AmeriCorps Health Company about the $600,000 that was paid to Jim Biden. And you said 200,000 went straight to Joe Biden. Did that come from AmeriCorps or did that come from AmeriCorps to Jim and then Jim to Joe? What was the path of the money?
- [18:42]
James Biden
AmeriCorps to Jim and Jim to Joe.
- [18:45]
Ben Ferguson
So that, so the big guy is.
- [18:47]
James Biden
Getting his cut the same day. The same day. So in Jim Biden's bank account, the day he deposited that $200,000 check, I think he had like $4,000 balance. So he went from 4,000 to 204,000. Then he writes a check for 200,000 to Joe Biden. So he goes back down to 4,000. That wasn't real hard to trace. I would challenge anyone to debate me on tracing that check.
- [19:15]
Ben Ferguson
I have one other question on this money in general. We talk about the loan payments, but can we talk about the total sum of money that was coming into the. The, the Biden affiliated businesses? There were much bigger business deals that were done. And how hard is it to trace?
- [19:32]
James Comer
They're not businesses. Call them shell corporations. Businesses do something. Yeah, these, these are just bank accounts to park money.
- [19:40]
James Biden
Right. And a lot of these shells had multiple bank accounts. That's what's taken so long to get the, the bank records in. We find more bank accounts. I mean, we're always finding more bank accounts and more accounts. But, you know, we've identified $24 million that we don't think they can explain what they did. There's more. We know where it is, but, you know, for time sake, I mean, this is, this is just the House Oversight Committee. I mean, no one in the government has investigated this. Anytime someone got close, like the Irish whistleblowers, they were told to stand down, usually by Leslie Wolf. And can you, can you explain what.
- [20:21]
Ben Ferguson
You mean by when they get close? You just said every time they got close, they were told to stand down. Leslie Wolf remind people of the pattern of how close they got to the Bidens and then how they were cut off.
- [20:34]
James Biden
According to the Irish whistleblowers in their notes and everything. Shapley and Ziegler have said has turned out to be true. We're seeing some of that in this recent indictment in California.
- [20:44]
James Comer
And Shapley and Ziegler are the two IRS whistleblowers. They're career employees. They're not partisan Republicans. Indeed. You know, indeed. They're Democrats.
- [20:54]
James Biden
Democrats.
- [20:54]
James Comer
But they came forward because they were horrified by what they saw. And tell us what they told us.
- [21:01]
James Biden
Well, they had. They knew that there was money laundering. They knew there was tax evasion. They knew there was tax fraud, and they had accumulated all this evidence. Now, they wanted to go in and raid a storage unit. They were told that there were documentation, you know, there were documents in a storage unit. And they said they also wanted to talk to Joe Biden. Well, that was the worst thing they ever said, because when they mentioned Joe Biden, that's when they were told to stand down and they were taken off the case. So the IRS rolled in on them. We know from talking to people and Jim Jordan talking to people at the Department of Justice that there were different jurisdictions looking into different things the Bidens had. Because when you get a suspicious activity report, the law is the treasury notifies the. The appropriate investigators, you know, whether it be the IRS or whether it be the Department of Justice. So they had to be getting notification of all this stuff going on, and they were told to stand down. We know from the. From the FBI sources that Charles Grassley found that they got these Credible document, this 1023 form that said Joe Biden had been involved in a bribery scheme, and yet no one with the FBI would allow them to investigate this any further.
- [22:25]
Ben Ferguson
So let's turn to the president now because. And I want to go through some of the lies. You go back, and I think we should play that montage of Joe Biden when he was running for president, saying, I made no money. I was never connected to my son, our family businesses. There was no connections to China. This is a lie. Everybody's looked at it. It's a lie. Take a listen to this.
- [22:51]
James Biden
How many times have you ever spoken to your son about his overseas business dealings?
- [22:56]
Joe Biden
I've never spoken to my son about.
- [22:57]
James Biden
His overseas business dealings.
- [22:59]
Joe Biden
I have never discussed with my son or my brother or anyone else anything having to do with their businesses, period. And what I will do is the same thing we did in our administration. There will be an absolute wall between personal and private and the government.
- [23:17]
James Biden
Do you stand by your statement that you did not discuss any of your son's overseas business?
- [23:22]
Joe Biden
Yes, I stand by that.
- [23:23]
Ben Ferguson
Congressman, you know that's a lie. I know that's a lie. The Senator knows that's a lie. But explain methodically for everyone watching and listening how we now have the facts to back up that he was lying to the American people. Every time he said that, every time the White House said it, every time every Democrat said it on his behalf, every surrogate on his campaign.
- [23:44]
James Biden
Well, when we began the investigation, the political narrative and the media narrative was that Joe Biden never met with or spoke to any of these mysterious people who were sending his family millions and millions of dollars. Now we know through pictures, text messages, emails, WhatsApp messages, and depositions from Devin Archer that Joe Biden talked to all of them. We also discovered the pseudonym emails where Joe Biden was using a pseudonym, a fake name, sending emails back and forth to Eric Sherwin, who was one of the main figures in this, in this influence peddling scheme. In fact, he was like, for all practical purposes, the bookkeeper or the chief financial officer. Joe Biden also said he had a wall between the government and his, his son's family business dealings. There was no. While he was communicating back and forth, there are hundreds of pseudonym emails between Joe Biden and Eric Sherwin. We believe there were. And the White House said there wasn't. The media said there wasn't. The National Archives wouldn't turn him over. And then, lo and behold, some of them pop up in this recent indictment in California. Some of these pseudonym emails between Joe Biden and Sherwin were brought out as evidence.
- [25:03]
James Comer
So this is how many fake email accounts and how many burner phones have y'all found for Joe Biden?
- [25:11]
James Biden
Well, I can't comment on the burner phone yet because we're still looking into that and triple checking some things. But with respect to the email, he's had at least three that he communicated three pseudonym emails that he used the government email for. And then he had some other pseudonyms we believe with some personal emails and some personal communication where he was, he was. They used code names like the Big Guy and Celtic and things like that, but clearly they were trying to hide something or they wouldn't have have been using the pseudonyms. But the fact that, you know, I didn't think we would find government emails from Joe Biden to these people involved in the influence pedaling scheme. But lo and behold, there are hundreds of them. They just used a pseudonym and one reason the House voted.
- [26:06]
James Comer
And let me ask you, James, on the fake emails, is it just a name if you had an email? Kentucky man, kentuckymanmail.com. you know, someone might pick a name of something. You know, Ben Ferguson, Ole Miss tennis star. Like, you know, maybe you pick that as an email. Are they signed using fake names or are they signed Ben or James or dad? How are they signed and how much on the face of it, are the emails trying to obscure the identity of the sender?
- [26:40]
James Biden
Well, they're all trying to obscure the identity of the sender. He signed different things. But, you know, a lot of times the emails aren't. Aren't signed, but he's communicating back and forth. And the most disturbing thing to everyone should be that Hunter was being copied, blind copied on some of these emails that where he was using pseudonyms pertaining to Ukraine at the same time he was going to. Joe Biden was going to go over there and fire Viktor Shokin, the prosecutor who was investigating.
- [27:15]
Ben Ferguson
Hold on, hold on. That is new news to me. You just said that you had a burner email account. The President is communicating with someone without their knowledge that Hunter Biden's being blind. Copied. Right, because you wouldn't know that email. Which also goes back to a bigger lie. They said that if he ever talked with his son about people around his business fear it was about the weather. Right. Things. It was. It was not about business. It was, you know, oh, we're just friendly. These are direct communications.
- [27:45]
James Comer
Were the Ukraine emails talking about the weather? Was it like it's going to be sunny on Tuesday?
- [27:50]
James Biden
No. And the emails weren't to Hunter. It was discussing with various members of the staff about his speech logistics and things like that. And they were copying Hunter. So these, this wasn't from a burner account. This was the government account. Joe Biden was just using a pseudonymous. And the reason we know Hunter was copied on it is because.
- [28:13]
James Comer
Say that again. So this is a government account, but Joe Biden is using just a fake name on a government account and is using that fake name to conduct government business and is secretly blind ccing Hunter.
- [28:30]
Ben Ferguson
He's sitting on the board of Burismo.
- [28:31]
James Comer
Who'S sitting on the board of Burismas, who's being paid $83,000 a month, who has no skills, who doesn't speak Ukrainian, who knows nothing about oil and gas, but has access to Daddy. Is that all of that accurate?
- [28:45]
James Biden
That's right. And the reason we found that email, it was on the laptop. Now, remember when we started this investigation, the laptop was Russian disinformation. But in Hunter Biden's last speech he gave when he defied the congressional subpoena, he Referenced the laptop a lot. So, you know, there's a lot of pieces you have to put together, and it's very complicated. It's very hard to explain. This was by design. This is an organized criminal entity. There's no question about it. They knew what they were doing. The president's son is smarter than people think. It just we see all the, you know, stuff about him on drugs and stuff. This was very organized, and the communications were many between Joe Biden and these various characters in these schemes, but they tried to hide it through the pseudonym.
- [29:41]
James Comer
All right, so how many phone calls do we know about between Joe Biden and various international business associates of Hunter? And how many meetings do we know about between Joe Biden and various international associates of Hunter?
- [29:55]
James Biden
Well, Devin Archer, in his transcribed interview, testified that there were at least 20. Now, at least 20. Could be anywhere from 20 to 100, but he said at least 20. And now we know that Joe had lunch with some of these people. We didn't know he had lunch with the Russian oligarch who had sent Hunter Biden three and a half million dollars while Joe Biden was vice president. The same Russian oligarch who, when Joe Biden became president, was the one oligarch he left off the sanctions list when Russia invaded Ukraine. So, okay, just a lot of the.
- [30:31]
James Comer
Just say that again, because I think it's important for our listeners and our viewers. The Democrats, the White House, the corporate media, they all say there's no evidence of corruption. No evidence corruption and no evidence of Joe Biden's corruption. Just say what you just said again, because that is completely contrary to the talking points of the other side.
- [30:53]
James Biden
One of the things we found out when we interviewed Devin Archer was that Joe Biden actually had lunch with the female oligarch from Russia. The former mayor of Moscow's wife, the wealthiest lady in Russia. She had sent Hunter Biden three and a half million dollars while Joe Biden was vice president. And we have no idea what the Bidens did to receive the three and a half million dollars. That's one of the questions we would ask Hunter Biden in his deposition. So we didn't know. Joe Biden acted like he'd never met her. But Archer said, yeah, they had. They had a very long lunch or dinner, like several hours.
- [31:36]
James Comer
Do we know where they had lunch or dinner? Do we know that?
- [31:39]
James Biden
I think it was Cafe Milano, but I'm not. I'm not 100% certain. And when Joe Biden became president and when Russia invaded Ukraine, he announced sanctions against all the oligarchs in Russia, except one, the lady who had sent Hunter Biden three and a half million dollars.
- [31:59]
Ben Ferguson
And in the updated, because they've updated these sanctions throughout this war with Ukraine, have they ever then added her name to, to that list? Because several times they've updated and added new people to that list. Or has she been protected to date by the Biden crime family?
- [32:15]
James Biden
She's been protected today.
- [32:17]
James Comer
So, look, there's an important thing to underscore, and we've talked about this at length on verdict. Bribery, as everyone knows, who listens to this pod requires a quid pro quo Latin for this, for that. And so you need the, this, the payment, the benefit, and you need it in exchange for that. And that is typically a government either an affirmative failure or declining to do something that, because of the payment, in this instance, $3.5 million from a Russian oligarch to Hunter. And again and James jump in if anything I'm saying is wrong. But there's no indication Hunter did anything of value, has any expertise in anything related to Russia, has any services, has any skills, perform, did anything that someone would pay three and a half million dollars for. We do know that along with the payment, this Russian oligarch has lunch or dinner with Joe Biden while he is vice president. So that is direct access, direct conversation to Joe, hey, you know, I'm giving your son $3.5 million. You know, we don't know he said that, but it'd be kind of weird in the conversation that if either she or Hunter didn't tell Daddy, hey, this is the person that gave me $3.5 million, particularly if this is not proven, although we know the laptop makes reference with regard to China to 10% for the big guy. And to the extent that there is a pattern of Joe profiting directly off of Hunter's revenue, he would have a real reason to care about the 3.5 million. But the thing that is new, that is connected here, is that when Joe becomes president and he puts in sanctions on Russian oligarchs, the one person that is miraculously left off is the oligarch that gave Hunter $3.5 million. So that's a second example of a quo. We've talked quite a bit about the firing of Viktor Shokin. Victor Shokin was the Ukrainian prosecutor who was investigating Burisma. The oligarch that owned Burisma paid Hunter a million dollars a year and Joe Biden got him fired. That's a quo that would, I believe, support a bribery claim. This is A second quo that could support a bribery claim, which is not listing someone for sanctions who otherwise should be listed and who would have been listed but for the payment to your family member that qualifies as bribery as well. Is what I'm saying accurate?
- [34:56]
James Biden
It's accurate. I wish you were on the Oversight Committee to help me with all this, Senator.
- [35:01]
Ben Ferguson
I have a question for both of you. And I go back to when I was on the Bush campaign. Even as someone younger, there was a very clear warning that was given to us. And it was explicit. Be careful who you meet with. Be careful about any meeting on the clock or off the clock with anybody that could be nefarious. And that. I remember that meeting because it was such a important line here. Is there any reason. And I want to know more about the background of this oligarch and this woman, richest woman in Russia, connected directly to Vladimir Putin. You don't get the job as the mayor of Moscow without Vladimir Putin's explicit picking you and consent. And being in that world, would this be a meeting that our US Government would have warned against? Like, you don't meet with this type of person. You certainly don't do business with this type of person. You don't take three and a half million from this type of person. I mean, would that not be some sort of conversation that would have happened?
- [36:01]
James Comer
Of course. Listen, this is frigging weird. This is weird. This is not something that. Oh, this is typical what people in government do. You don't run around having dinner with Russian oligarchs. That is a strange thing to do. I don't know anyone else in government. I don't know anyone else in the Senate. I don't know anyone else in the House who does that. I don't know anyone else. Getting millions of dollars from foreign countries. It's fricking weird. James, I'm gonna go out on a limb. Have you received millions of dollars from any foreign country?
- [36:34]
James Biden
No, but I keep expecting the Associated Press or Washington Post to write that. But, no, I have not.
- [36:39]
James Comer
Look, the closest I've come is I got change. Chinese restaurant for dinner. Yeah, like, that is nuts. Who the hell. Like, it is weird. I mean, look, you know your 434 colleagues. I know my 99 colleagues. To the best of my knowledge, none of them. None other than Bob Menendez, who was under indictment. So let me set him aside. Because he's under indictment.
- [37:04]
Ben Ferguson
Yeah.
- [37:04]
James Comer
For this. That's actually a pretty powerful point. The only person I know who did something like this is currently being prosecuted for Receiving bribes because Bob Menendez, it is alleged, did government favors for Egypt, was paid tens of thousands of dollars, was paid in gold bars, and they're trying to put him in jail. Well, where is the indictment for Joe Biden? Because it's Joe Biden that's performing the government favors. And the closest analog I can find to someone who has done conduct similar to what Joe Biden did, although not as brazen, not as large scale, lucrative, not as lucrative, not involving as many countries. The closest analogy is Bob Menendez to Joe Biden. And if they're indicting Bob Menendez, why on earth are they not indicting Joe? And why are they not indicting Hunter for bribery? I get the tax claims, but we've talked at length about this. At the end of the day, this is not about Hunter Biden. If his name was Hunter Smith and he was some corrupt, messed up guy with substance abuse problems, none of us would be talking about it. He would be prosecuted. He'd face consequences. But it's not his life. It's not his personal demons that matter. It is when you have the Vice President of the United States and then the President of the United States selling official favors in a corrupt way to foreign oligarchs. There is a reason the Constitution specifies bribery as a ground for impeachment.
- [38:47]
James Biden
I agree. Well, one of the things that I wanted to get in here on the tax crimes that he was indicted on, that's from his W2 from Burisma. So that's like the most obvious thing. He got a W2 from Burisma. And whether he was supposed to be on the board or not, whether it was ethical or not, it wasn't illegal for him to be on the board. He gets a W2, which that's on the up and up. He just didn't pay taxes on it. He failed to pay taxes on the millions of dollars he got from Burisma that's listed on his W2. What he's never been pressed on are these millions of dollars in loans and all these fake write offs that he had in these shell companies. I mean, he probably owes 6 or 7 million more dollars that he hasn't been prosecuted on yet.
- [39:39]
Ben Ferguson
Because. Because they said it's a loan.
- [39:41]
James Biden
The most obvious.
- [39:43]
James Comer
So James, tell us about. About the fake write offs. Because. Because that's something that doesn't get discussed much.
- [39:48]
James Biden
Yeah, well, you know, so in the shell companies, so he would wire, you know, say you got a $5 million wire, then he would wire different, you know, maybe $5 million wires to five different shell companies. And then he would take half that money and wire it to various Biden family members. You keep the other half in the shell. And he would pay for basic living expenses. And he would pay for things like prostitutes and drugs, and he would write them off as a business deduction. So at the end of the day.
- [40:21]
James Comer
Did you just say prostitutes and drugs were business deductions for Hunter Biden?
- [40:25]
James Biden
Yes, that was. That was part of the indictment in California. That was one of the things. He joined a sex club in California and paid for it out of a shell company that he claimed was his law firm, a Wasco. Now think about this. His law firm was paying his sex club membership and on his taxes, he put down that it was a golf country club membership so he could ride it off.
- [40:49]
James Comer
You know, Ben, I feel bad. When I was at a law firm, they didn't even pay for my parking.
- [40:53]
Ben Ferguson
Yeah.
- [40:54]
James Comer
I apparently need to.
- [40:55]
Ben Ferguson
One hell of a bonus structure over there.
- [40:57]
James Comer
Fundamentally differently.
- [40:59]
Ben Ferguson
One hell of a write off there. Go back to Joe Biden for a second and I want to play for you another montage of Joe Biden consistently saying, there's nothing. There's no there, there. There's nothing wrong here. I wasn't involved. And he also says the media has investigated this and no one's found any wrongdoing. Here's the President in a montage in his own words.
- [41:25]
Joe Biden
Every single solitary serious investigator, including your network and others have looked at this, have said there's absolutely zero basis to the accusation that I acted anyway inappropriately or that my son did. Every major national, international and local news operations looked into it has said it's a lie. This is the President's flat line. So there's not been a scintilla of evidence pointed out that anything is wrong. There's not a single solitary scintilla of evidence anywhere. There's not been one scintilla. The evidence that my son ever and ever.
- [42:02]
James Biden
Did I ever ask Meade anything?
- [42:03]
Joe Biden
Did I ever got involved in anything? I mean, come on. This is so. These guys are amazing.
- [42:11]
Ben Ferguson
So you think that everything that happened was kosher?
- [42:15]
Joe Biden
You know, there's not one single bit of evidence, not one little tiny bit.
- [42:20]
Ben Ferguson
Not one tiny bit of evidence. Is the President a liar Based on everything that you've seen and the idea that everybody's investigated this, they found nothing. Now the news media is reporting on some of this, so they're not even backing him up anymore.
- [42:34]
James Comer
So. And I gotta say, you know, Joe Biden is particularly fond of saying there's not a scintilla of evidence. And I couldn't help thinking of my favorite movie, the Princess Bride. You keep on using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. I'm not sure Joe knows what the word scintilla means. So let me just ask you directly, James, what is the most compelling evidence that you are aware of right now of corruption by Joe Biden?
- [43:06]
James Biden
Well, the fact that we found five payments to Joe Biden, that we traced the source of the payment directly from his family's influence pedaling scheme. So when Joe Biden says that he's never benefited from his family's influence peddling scheme, that is a lie. We have $250,000. That's a quarter of a million dollars, which for the self proclaimed poorest guy in Congress, that's, that's a lot of money. $250,000 directly to Joe Biden's back pocket from his family's influence pedaling teams. They want to say that was a loan repayment, which, that's a whole nother story. If, if you pay me back $250,000, Senator, then somewhere before you pay me back, I should have a check to you for $250,000. They don't have that. But let's, you know, I don't want.
- [43:56]
James Comer
To get into the 250. Give us the details of the 250. When was it paid from whom and where does it look like the money came from?
- [44:06]
James Biden
$200,000 came from Jim Biden and Sarah Biden to Joe Biden. That money came directly from that AmeriCorps health company that was an influence pedaling scheme led by Jim Biden. Okay, then $40,000 went from Jim and Sarah Biden to Joe Biden. That came from China. That was the 10% of $400,000. That was the company that Bob Alinsky said was going to be 10% held for the big guy. They got $400,000 wire.
- [44:38]
James Comer
Hold on, I got to stop you there because that's, I'm following this pretty closely. And that to me is something new. So I'm aware of the 10% for the big Guy that was in the information on Hunter's laptop. What I was not aware of is that you now have a payment from China. And direct evidence, by the way, not circumstantial direct evidence of a 10% payment straight to Joe Biden. Is that right? Elaborate on that. Because the fact that the Big guy is being paid 10%, the exact amount, the exact 10%, not 11%, not 9%, 10%. Exactly what was reflected, what Bobulinski told us. That's pretty compelling. So just explain that again. It's important not to miss this point.
- [45:26]
James Biden
If you'll remember the WhatsApp message where Hunter Biden was shaking down the Chinese nationals saying, we expect you to fulfill your commitment, a commitment that was made while Joe Biden was vice president. He said, my dad's sitting here beside me and we're going to unleash our wrath on you if you don't. Five days later, five business days later, $5 million pops into the Biden account. They immediately wire $400,000 to this shell company that was supposed to be the company that, that Joe Biden was going to be 10% owner of, according to Bob Linsky. From that $400,000, they start wiring different wires to different Biden family members in different shells. This is called money laundering, and it's confusing to explain, and that's by design. But anyway, they wire money to Jim Biden from that 400,000, and he writes Joe a check for $40,000. 40,000 is 10% of 400,000 in that particular shell that Joe Biden was supposed to have a 10% ownership in. That money came directly from China.
- [46:36]
James Comer
That's how close is the time period between the WhatsApp, the $5 million payment, the $400,000 payment, and the $40,000 payment?
- [46:47]
James Biden
I mean, a month.
- [46:49]
James Comer
So this is all really closely compressed. This is all.
- [46:53]
James Biden
And remember, when you transfer money to an account, you have to keep it in there at least 24 hours. So, you know, a lot of times you say, oh, there's two or three days difference. Well, maybe the bank wouldn't make it available. A lot of times when you deposit money in a bank, they'll say your funds may not be available for 24 hours or 48 hours or until next week. So they got the money to Joe about as quick as you can do it in banking terms, going through that many different accounts.
- [47:25]
Ben Ferguson
So then here's my question. We've talked about the tax issues with Hunter Biden and James Biden. I think there's some more questions there. But if all of this is happening and money is running through to the President or then vice president, what are the liabilities that we don't know about? I'm talking from a tax standpoint for the President of the United States of America.
- [47:49]
Ted Cruz
America.
- [47:49]
Ben Ferguson
Because what we do know is there's money flowing in, then they claim its loans, and there's claiming there's repayment of loans. But we don't see the reclaimment payments. So is that a tax issue for the president? Second one I have is this. If the bank accounts, these shell companies, were acting as piggy banks for Hunter Biden and the Biden crime family. We've also heard there were payments being made for things that benefited the vice president and the president through things that were done at their house, his house, home improvements, remodeling. What other benefits was President Joe Biden receiving through this money that wasn't directly coming to his bank account? And would that be a tax issue, in theory, for the president, United States of America?
- [48:35]
James Biden
I think so. So a lot of these shell companies had credit cards. So we got the bank accounts, and it'll say, all right, we spent $15,000 this month on our Citibank card or our Chase card or whatever. We have to subpoena the credit card companies and start going down these bank statements. I mean, this is stuff, this investigation, so big and so complex and so complicated. I mean, we're moving as quickly as we can for a little old congressional staff, this is stuff the IRS and the FBI and the Department of Justice are better suited to do. But we're doing the best we can. So we know from the laptop there were things Hunter Biden was paying for a value for Joe, like a new roof and a cell phone bill and things like that. But the 250,000.
- [49:22]
James Comer
Hold on a second. Did you just say Hunter Biden paid for a new roof for Joe Biden?
- [49:27]
James Biden
According to the laptop. According to the laptop. And remember, there's message from Hunter Biden to Hunter Biden's daughter saying, unlike Dad, I won't make. I won't make. You have to turn over 50% of your salary to me. So there's lots of references in the laptop where Hunter Biden was complaining about having to pay for stuff for dad, for Joe Biden. That's why we wanted to depose him. That's why we wanted. That was one of those questions.
- [49:54]
James Comer
Let's go to the deposition. Were you surprised that Hunter defied the subpoena and refused to sit for the deposition?
- [50:03]
James Biden
I wasn't. Because I felt like that indictment was done to protect him from this deposition. Because you've indicted him. Yes. You've indicted him for two things. The line on a gun application and his basic failure to pay taxes on his W2 income. Those are the two things that you really can't tie to Joe Biden. But the money laundering you can tie to Joe Biden. The loans, the tax evasion on that, the securities fraud, even the, even the problems with prostitutes and possible human trafficking and all that. You can tie that to Joe because some of that was at Joe's house. Apparently. There's lots of things that.
- [50:45]
James Comer
Hold on a second, James. You said possible human trafficking. What is the evidence we have of that?
- [50:51]
James Biden
There's a suspicious activity report filed against an escort service in Florida, and the suspicious activity report is on the escort service. But Hunter Biden is a subject of that suspicious activity report because he was a big customer and sending money to and from the bank notified. And this is public, not because of us. You're not supposed to leak these sufficient activity reports. But it's out there. It's out there on the Internet. I think it was in that Marco Polo report. But we, you know, it's real. And what it, what it said was the bank notify, I think it was J.P. morgan notified the treasury that we believe this. Our client is operating an escort service and the two prostitutes that they're paying are here illegally. One from Russia, one from Ukraine. I mean, you can't make this stuff up. And we don't know if they were human trafficked. We don't know if. All we know is they're not here legally. And we're pretty sure they're engaged in prostitution, which is illegal in Florida. And they list like two or three names of people that were spending a lot of money there. And Hunter Biden was at the top of the list, which is another reason they filed the sar, because they knew Russia and Ukraine, human trafficking. And at the time, he was living in Joe Biden's house. They were sending the prostitutes to him. He wasn't going there. So they were sending them across state lines, which is, you know, is there.
- [52:23]
James Comer
Evidence that they were sending the prostitutes to Joe Biden's house?
- [52:27]
James Biden
All we know is Hunter was living there at the time. We don't know if he was going to a hotel or whatever. But I'm just telling you what J.P. morgan said. Okay. I mean.
- [52:38]
James Comer
All right, so let me ask you about. Let me ask you about the deposition. So Hunters refused to testify. What happens next in the next week? Two weeks, three weeks, four weeks? What happens next?
- [52:50]
James Biden
Well, we're going to have to issue contempt of Congress charges. We'll run that through the oversight committee and now tell people how that works.
- [52:59]
James Comer
What are the mechanics of what has to happen?
- [53:01]
James Biden
I was hoping Jim Jordan would lead that through the judiciary, but it looks like we're going to do it through the House Oversight Committee. There's a lot of paperwork that's going to have to get done. Remember, we've got a new speaker of the House, all new staff rolling in. He kept some of McCarthy staff on till the end of the year. We got new staff coming in. So we're going to try to get all this accumulated as quickly as possible and then have a committee hearing and then hopefully mark it up on the floor. But there's a lot of legwork that has to be done, a lot of documentation that has to be accumulated. And we're doing this at a time when we're shifting a lot of people in the Speaker's office. And one thing, Senator, a lot of people don't realize, I have subpoena authority, but the speaker has to sign off on it. That's something that Darrell ISS talked about and Trey Gowdy's talked about and Jason Chaffetz. But you know, former Republican chairs, the Speaker's general counsel has to sign off on it because if it goes to court, they're the ones that represent us in court. It's the Speaker's general counsel. So there's, you know, there's some bureaucracy involved in these subpoenas. There's some bureaucracy involved in the contempt of Congress. But we plan on moving forward to that and we're working on it as we speak.
- [54:18]
James Comer
So let me ask you something. When you subpoenaed Hunter, he came back and said he was willing to testify, but only, only in an open hearing, not in a closed door deposition. Tell us from your perspective what the advantages are of doing a closed door deposition. First, before open public testimony.
- [54:36]
James Biden
We have tens of thousands of pages of documents, bank statements, emails, sworn testimony. We have hundreds and hundreds of questions, you know, probably close to a thousand questions in a deposition, you have one hour, the Republicans have an hour, then the Democrats have an hour, then you come back and have another hour, the Democrats have another hour. So, you know, easily you can get an eight hour deposition in, in a day, whereas we would have four hours. The staff would generally be the ones that would, which I have, you know, my lead deposer was the lead deposer at the Department of Justice in the, in the Trump administration under Bill Barr. So we've got the, you know, really good people that are really good at this and judiciary does too. Jim has good people. They were both going to be in there. We were going to ask them specific questions, hundreds of questions. If you have a committee hearing where you have 25 Republicans and 21 Democrats going back and forth yelling, the Democrats at the last hearing. They filed three motions to adjourn during the committee here and trying to disrupt it. You get five minutes each back and forth. We might get 40, 45 questions in. So it's a difference of 40 or 45 questions in a complete chaotic poop scene versus a sit down subsidy deposition where we could easily ask 800 questions. This is too important. This is an investigation of public corruption at the highest levels. This has been a substantive, credible investigation that we've accumulated mountains of evidence through bank records and emails. We have lots of questions. You just can't get that in, in a public hearing. But I want to have a public hearing with Hunter Biden and we will have a hearing with Hunter Biden after he gets deposed.
- [56:24]
James Comer
For what it's worth, James, and this is something that I've talked about on verdict recently. Look, you're in the middle of the fight. You're working your tail off with a lot of complicated stuff. I understand everything you said there and I agree there's a lot of force to the argument you're putting forward to the extent I can share some unsolicited advice, which I did in our last podcast. And you know, I'm a lawyer and a senator, so I'm in the business of giving unsolicited advice. But I would encourage y'all to go ahead and have him in a public hearing anyway. And I understand why it would be better to depose him. But. But from their perspective, they can litigate and fight this contempt for the rest of the year and run out the clock. And that's what they want to do. And I know you know this very directly, but just I want to remind our listeners this is ultimately about Joe Biden, not about Hunter Biden. And although the questions won't be as detailed, there won't be as much time in a public hearing getting Hunter publicly. He claims he will do it. And I would also encourage, and I don't know the House rules, the mechanics for doing this, but to the extent you can, I would encourage you if you do a public hearing with Hunter Instead of doing 5 minute rounds, do 10 minute rounds. In the Senate and the Judiciary Committee, we often do 7 minute rounds or 10 minute rounds. For a Supreme Court nominee, we do 30 minute rounds. The difference as a cross examiner of what you can get in a 10 minute round versus a 5 minute round is night and day. And so I would just, I think the value if we could get Hunter to testify in January and if your team could work with your down dais members to have all Right here are all the questions we need to get. Can you take this module? You take this module. So, you know, sometimes you and I both know there are hearings where you have members. They all do their own thing in their own running around like crazy for something like this. To the extent the down dies Republicans, each can take a particular issue and say, all right, I'm going to take my five or even better 10 minutes and ask the questions. Would it be as good as a deposition? No. But I think the value of doing that publicly. If Hunter would answer those questions, the legal jeopardy for Joe would be massive from that. And I think that outweighs the strategic benefit of waiting for the closed door deposition. So consider that I don't need an answer from you now, but that, you know, look, I've litigated a lot of cases, and that would be my pretty emphatic advice, is that don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Because getting Hunter on the record, in public on all the questions that we've been talking about, that is enormously valuable. And I don't want to see the clock run out, particularly if. Look, you and I are both hoping there's a good election in November, but it could be a bad election if. And if in November, the Speaker is Hakeem Jeffries, your committee's going away and they're in the deposition, they're in the public hearing, and it's all over. So we can hope we have a good election. But I think it's wise to assume that. That your clock may be at most 11 months.
- [59:50]
James Biden
I agree. Or less.
- [59:52]
James Comer
Yeah.
- [59:53]
Ben Ferguson
Let me ask.
- [59:53]
James Biden
I appreciate that.
- [59:54]
Ben Ferguson
Let me ask you this question, too, as we kind of put a wrap on this. I want to play Hunter Biden and I want to play what he said, because I don't know if, you know, a lot of people thought the White House was probably giving me advice. I think there seems to be a little bit of a rift now between the White House. We're seeing some leaks coming out. They didn't like what Hunter Biden did at this press conference. And that means he's kind of a rogue actor in this scenario. Right now, I want to get your reaction to just his demeanor and what he said. Take a look.
- [60:23]
Hunter Biden
Let me state as clearly as I can, my father was not financially involved in my business. Not as a practicing lawyer, not as a board member of Burisma, not in my partnership with a Chinese private businessman, not in my investments at home, nor abroad, and certainly not as an artist during my battle with Addiction. My parents were there for me. They literally saved my life. They helped me in ways that I will never be able to repay. And, of course, they would never expect me to. And in the depths of my addiction, I was extremely irresponsible with my finances. But to suggest that as grounds for an impeachment inquiry is beyond the absurd. It's shameless. There is no evidence to support the allegations that my father was financially involved in my business because it did not happen. James Comer, Jim Jordan, Jason Smith and their colleagues have distorted the facts by cherry picking lines from a bank statement, manipulating texts I sent, editing the testimony of my friends and former business partners, and mistakes stating personal information that was stolen from me.
- [61:56]
Ben Ferguson
He accuses you of manipulating text messages without any evidence and says that you guys are cherry picking lines. I got to get your response to that.
- [62:06]
James Biden
I've never seen such a display of arrogance and entitlement in my life. But I'm not surprised because, look, he's gotten away with this for years because he's a Biden. The rules don't apply to the Biden. But I don't know how you manipulate a text. Was his father beside him when he was extorting that Chinese national or not? That's a simple question the media should have asked then and there.
- [62:29]
Ben Ferguson
And they stopped the gps, right? They stopped the gps. You and I have talked about this here. We could have answered that question.
- [62:35]
James Comer
Well, okay. And it's important. Look, this is. There's a reason people hate lawyers. I listen to that as a lawyer. When they say manipulating a text, what they mean is one of the copies that was released of the WhatsApp text from one of the House members, they put a Chinese flag next to the Chinese person speaking to identify them. So, like, aha, you manipulated it. Because in the real one, there's not a Chinese flag. So it's true. For purposes of display, they added a Chinese flag to demonstrate that that was a Chinese person. When they say manipulated, what they don't mean what Hunter has never said. What his lawyers have never said is that one word of that text is inaccurate. What they have never said is, I did not send that. And we talked about on verdict. One possible defense he could have is, nope, that text is fake. I never sent it. Now, that's a defense you can make. But then you got to prove it. The fact that they haven't said that, much like Sherlock Holmes and the dog that didn't bark, the fact that they didn't say that tells you that they are implicitly admitting it is accurate. We also know that DOJ prevented any search of GPS data. Would be very easy to determine. Where was Hunter's cell phone at the moment that text was being sent? Where was Joe's cell phone? Were they in the same room? Were they sitting next to each other? The Biden Department of Justice does not want anyone to know the answer to that and so they blocked that. But by the way, that text is direct evidence. So next time you hear a Democrat or their shills in the media saying there's no direct evidence of Joe Biden's involvement, understand that WhatsApp text is direct evidence. It's not circumstantial. It is written testimony from Hunter about Joe's involvement in the shakedown. And I gotta say, by the way, Ben, I noticed something. So, James, in our last podcast, we held the New York Times to task because they took Hunter Biden's quote at the press conference that my father was not financially involved with my business and they misquoted it to say my father was not involved in my business. They deleted the word financially. And that was, I believe, a very deliberate deletion.
- [65:00]
James Biden
Absolutely.
- [65:01]
James Comer
Well, what's interesting, I just discovered something again, Let me ask the team put up the very last shot from the Hunter Biden video that we were watching. If we can put it on the screen now, if you notice, CNN did the same damn thing.
- [65:15]
Ben Ferguson
Yeah.
- [65:16]
James Comer
Look at the Chiron on the bottom. Hunter Biden. My father was not involved in any of my businesses. What he said was, my father was not financially involved in any of my businesses. CNN and New York Times both deleted the same word. By the way, they know how to quote what he said. Often a Chiron will be Hunter Biden, quote. Yeah, my father was not financially involved in any of my businesses. But understand CNN is on Team Biden. They're on Team Hunter, they're on Team Joe. And it reminds me of the famous CNN Chiron of the, of the reporter saying fiery but peaceful protest as a building is on fire with a Black Lives Matter antifa protest going on. CNN is happily editing out Hunter's comments to benefit the White House.
- [66:06]
Ben Ferguson
James, let me ask you one other question about this that I think is also very important and that is to remind people financially now, how many countries was the Biden crime family getting money from? We haven't even mentioned in the last hour. Romania, that's a country that has to be brought up. But you guys are fighting more money in more places with more people. And even Hunter Biden there. And what he said he Said with my foreign business dealings, plural, he was admitting, yeah, I'm getting money from everywhere in the world.
- [66:40]
James Biden
Yeah, we know he got money from China, Romania, Ukraine, Russia, Uzbekistan. We know that he was paid through China for stuff he did in the Congo. We know that Jim Biden operated primarily in the Middle East. So pretty much every bad country in the world is where the Bidens would target their influence peddling scheme.
- [67:06]
Ben Ferguson
Do you expect to get anything new about James Biden's money? I mean, we obviously know a lot about Hunters, but are you guys finding more and more of James? Because before Hunter Biden was of age, James was the bat, was the bag man. And then it kind of turned into, oh, hey, we've got a kid here that we can get to be the bag man. And we have an excuse for his actions, that he's a drug addict, which is exactly what Hunter Biden said in that video. I was in the depths of addiction. You should feel sorry for me. I just needed money from anybody. James Biden seems to be smarter and have done this for decades, while Hunter's kind of the pupil under him.
- [67:42]
James Biden
Yeah, we have a lot of questions for James Biden. Again, the reason no one knows much about him is he didn't leave a laptop lying around. But having looked at his bank records from his LLC and from his personal bank records, I have a lot of questions for James Biden.
- [68:02]
James Comer
Does it appear that James, Joe's brother, was as involved in this family business as Hunter was, or would you say they're equally complicit?
- [68:13]
James Biden
I wouldn't say he's as involved, but a lot of transactions in and out of James Biden's LLC were with the Biden shell companies. And then obviously the $240,000 that came from Hunter shell companies went through James Biden personal account, but. And had him write the money to Joe Biden. I think at the end of the day, when Joe Biden was saying, oh, there's not a shred of evidence, not shred of evidence, they thought that we would try to get their taxes. And I never wanted their taxes. I wanted their bank records. I've looked at enough tax returns. As a director of a bank, you want to look at the bank statements. Bank statements don't lie. And you would have never seen that money to Joe. You would never see any of these, these millions of dollars they're labeling as loans. If you had just subpoenaed the tax records, you had to get their bank statement.
- [69:10]
James Comer
And to be clear, the $200,000 payment that went from. From Jim to Joe that they claim was a loan repayment. There is zero evidence, or to use Joe's phrase, not a scintilla of evidence, that that was actually a loan that had ever gone from Joe to Jim in the first place. In other words, there has to be a loan in order for a loan to be repaid. Is there any evidence at all that that loan existed?
- [69:37]
James Biden
No. It's not hard to prove a loan. If. If you pay me back $100,000, then I should have a check to you for $100,000 at some point before you paid me back $100,000. That's pretty simple. And I think every American, even the financially illiterate ones, understand that.
- [69:55]
James Comer
All right, two more questions. I want to get to. What do you make of the fact that the countries that are doing business with Hunter and Jim Biden are all countries that are shady, that have corrupt oligarchs, that are, to various degrees, enemies of America, that they don't do business with any of our close allies. You don't see them doing business with England. You don't see them doing business with France or Germany. You don't see them doing business with Japan. You don't see them doing business with Canada. I mean, there are lots of countries where people can do business with them, where it's not necessarily shady. You go out of your way to find places like Russia and China that says something. What do you make of that?
- [70:35]
James Biden
I think that was their business model. We know they sold the Biden brand, but where did you sell the Biden brand? You sold the Biden brand in shady countries. You revolved the business model around people who are in trouble. Burisma, the Romanian foreign national, the Russian oligarch. China is always in trouble because no one wants them in the United States. We don't want China buying farmland. We don't want China buying our energy companies. But they use the Bidens to try to get their foot in the door. Everywhere they operated were in countries where we have problems with bad people from bad countries.
- [71:16]
James Comer
All right, last question. Something Hunter mentions at the end of that press conference that's kind of gratuitously tossed on there. He says, dad wasn't involved in burisma in my legal practice, such as it was in my businesses. And then he says, or with me as an artist. And it kind of pops out of nowhere there. What do you make of that? And what is your take on, quote, Hunter as an artist?
- [71:45]
James Biden
Well, Hunter was never an artist until Joe became president. And it looks like their. Their Their business model changed from 2014 to. To 2018. They were taking wires directly through those shell companies. Then the IRS rolls in on them. Then they start trying to say this money they were taking in from influence pedaling were loans. Then once Joe became. They stopped all of that, and Hunter started selling art. So I believe the influence peddling may still be going on. It's going on through the art sales. We need to know who's purchasing this artwork. That's why.
- [72:23]
James Comer
Do we know that? Do we know who's purchasing the artwork and how much they're paying?
- [72:28]
James Biden
We think we know of two people, and they're part of the people we're trying to bring in to ask questions or to depose. So that's something every American should want to know, who's buying this artwork?
- [72:39]
Ben Ferguson
So even with the investigation going on, and this is, this is just to make it clear, the American people where we are now, there's no reason to believe that the Biden said, okay, they're onto us. Let's shut it down. They just said, okay, they're onto us. Let's change the way that we're operating our business. We found out, for example, that the first American hostage that was released from Hamas was. Had a family member who had bought artwork from Hunter. Biden is another example of still now this is going on in real time.
- [73:08]
James Comer
So do we have evidence? Do we know how many paintings Hunter has sold to whom and for how much? Those are basic questions. Since Joe became president, do we know whether he sold one painting, 50 paintings, or 100 paintings?
- [73:26]
James Biden
We know he sold several. They bragged about it. The art director, George Burgess, he's one of the people we expect to depose. Hopefully, in January we'll ask those questions.
- [73:36]
Ben Ferguson
And is any of Hunter Biden's art ever hung in any government buildings or the White House? That would, in theory, raise the price of that artwork, the value of that artwork, because we know that artwork, where it hangs, can increase the value significantly.
- [73:51]
James Biden
I don't know that that'll be a great question. We can ask George Burgess.
- [73:54]
James Comer
But the point you made that there's no evidence Hunter was an artist until daddy became president is rather amazing. Every artist I've ever known, they've been an artist their whole life they've been painting. Usually people have been painting since they were kids. If you want to be a commercial artist, most people don't start off saying, I'm going to paint something and sell it for half a million dollars. Is the Biden family blocking your committee getting the information on how many paintings have been sold to whom and for how much?
- [74:26]
James Biden
Well, somebody's blocking it. Again, that's. That's the question we're going to ask the art gallery owner and we're going to ask Kevin Morris, who's the Hollywood attorney. And we believe he has a lot of inside knowledge over this artwork and who's purchasing the artwork.
- [74:41]
James Comer
This would be the Hollywood attorney that paid off Hunter's back taxes?
- [74:45]
James Biden
Yeah. The media reports that he's paid Hunter 2 1/2 million dollars, but it's $5 million. It's $5 million from this Hollywood attorney he never met until Joe was the nominee to be president.
- [75:01]
James Comer
He never met the guy.
- [75:03]
James Biden
Never met the guy. We had the picture when. The first time they met, it was at a political fundraiser. So this guy, he didn't grow up with, wasn't friends with like, Devin Archer, Bob Alinsky, these guys, and he met this guy. Now this guy has loaned him $5 million at least.
- [75:21]
Ben Ferguson
Don't have to put that in your taxes. I guess that's the perk, right?
- [75:24]
James Comer
I tell you, this, this is. James, thank you. This has been very helpful. And I want us to close. We've heard mountains and mountains of evidence of corruption, mountains of evidence of corruption of Hunter Biden, mountains of evidence of corruption of Jim Biden, mountains of evidence of corruption of Joe Biden. I want us to close with Karine Jean Peer claiming there is no evidence. So just give a listen to what the White House is saying, and then we're going to look at the newspaper headlines that have followed.
- [75:55]
Karine Jean-Pierre
What we're seeing from House Republicans is wasted time. And it is certainly, you know, baseless political stunt. That's what we're seeing. And they're leaving. House Republicans are leaving this week to go, you know, enjoy a nice holiday. Right. As most Americans should. But what happened to the funding to Ukraine? Just ask me about Ukraine. They haven't been able to get that done. They haven't been able to fix, help us fix what's going on at the border. They haven't been able to get that done. They haven't been able to start a conversation on how we're going to avert a shutdown in January. They haven't been able to do that. And so look, you know, there's been zero evidence, zero evidence. You can ask me about engagement and what the President has done with his, his family in conversation, but there's no evidence. There's.
- [76:40]
James Biden
Wait, wait.
- [76:40]
Karine Jean-Pierre
But there's no evidence. There is no evidence that the President has done wrongdoing. There's none, Absolutely none. None. And that is just a fact. You've heard it from Republicans themselves. So they're wasting their time. Instead of doing the work on behalf of the American people, they go after the President's family. That's. But that's a waste of time.
- [77:04]
James Comer
Every time she says no evidence, no evidence, no evidence, it's a lie. But here, take a look at how Reuters reported the House vote on impeachment. Biden Impeachment Inquiry authorized by House Republicans, comma, despite lack of evidence mind you, this is news Next headline New York Times House approves Biden Impeachment Inquiry as GOP hunts for an offense. Republicans are pushing forward with a former investigation even though their year long scrutiny of the President, his family has turned up no evidence of high crimes or misdemeanors. That is complete BS by the way. Washington Post still lacking evidence House GOP votes to Formalize Biden Impeachment Inquiry. Lawmakers have said the step will put them on a stronger legal footing for any court challenges related to their investigations. Understand Reuters, the New York Times, the Washington Post and Karine Jean Pierre on behalf of the President are lying. And James, thank you for joining us because you have laid out an enormous amount of evidence that apparently you don't exist. The House doesn't exist, the investigation doesn't exist, the bank records don't exist, the WhatsApp doesn't exist. Burisma doesn't exist. $24 million doesn't exist. $240,000 to Joe Biden doesn't exist. None of that exists because we're told there's no evidence. These are lying shills. But the truth will out. Thank you for all you're doing. And James, have a Merry Christmas.
- [78:34]
Ben Ferguson
Congressman, again, thank you so much for joining us. Senator, this is such an important conversation, obviously. And I will say to everyone that's listening, make sure that you help us get the word out. Whether you're on Facebook or on YouTube or on X, you can grab the video and watch. You can share the video there and also share the podcast links because without you, the verdict listeners, this show doesn't happen. And when you share it on social media, you bring so many others into the conversation and allow them to hear the facts of what the mainstream media is not covering. I'll say it again, thank you to James Comer and Jim Jordan for all their hard work and we hope you enjoyed everything that we talked about. The Senator and I will see you back here in a couple of days.