Kash’s Corner: Biden’s Classified Documents Must Be Added to Investigation List of New Committee on Weaponization of Federal Government
In this episode of Kash’s Corner, we discuss revelations that Joe Biden mishandled classified documents during his tenure as Vice President and that this has been known since before the midterm elections. Kash Patel reflects on the disparity in the media’s treatment of this event versus the FBI’s raid on Donald Trump’s Mar-A-Lago.We also discuss the House’s new Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government and who they should be investigating. This includes Anthony Fauci, Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, as well as the FBI, DOJ, and other intelligence and law enforcement agencies, Patel says. Patel also reveals what Congress can do should any government employees violate their subpoenas.“If you can’t trust the Department of Justice, or they won’t do their job, the Speaker of the House, after a vote of the full Congress, can order the Sergeant at Arms, who’s the number one cop for Congress, to go and arrest individual citizens and government employees who violate congressional subpoenas,” explains Patel.
And at the end of the show, I'm going to give you some details about my new book, Government Gangsters, which is now available for pre-sale.
Jan, where would you like to start today?
There's a lot going on in Congress right now.
So we've got this new committee on the weaponization of the federal government.
And I know you've been thinking quite a bit about that.
We're going to do it a little bit of a deep dive there.
We also want to look at the COVID mandate at the DOD basically rescinding it and essentially Congress forcing them to do that, as far as I can tell.
And finally, there's this these classified documents at the Biden Penn Center that we're just learning about now, but apparently have been known about for quite some time.
Feels like a full episode to me.
And you forgot about the inherent contempt of Congress powers, which we're also going to talk about.
Right.
And this is something that's actually quite popular in social media right now, something that not a lot of people know about.
Yeah.
And I did not expect it to be so popular.
But we'll give you the real deal on the show.
Right, exactly.
Well, let's start with this, what some people are calling church two.
Yeah.
Just for everyone's refresher, back in the 70s, the intelligence communities was totally corrupt, and Congress found this, uh founded this standalone committee, as they call it, a select committee, called the church committee, named after one of the members to investigate the abuses and more importantly, fix it.
And it was successful in a large part, which is why over the last year or two, you've been hearing should Republicans take over the House of Representatives, they wanted a new church committee, church two, because of the corruption that we have talked about extensively, not just at FBI and DOJ, but in the intelligence community overall, including DOD, NSA, and CIA.
So they felt a new standalone committee was necessary.
Now, we also talked about last week topically the Speaker of the House and the negotiations and why they were so important.
Now you know why we said these negotiations were critical.
As a result of the negotiations, we have a subcommittee under the Judiciary Committee.
So as you know, the Judiciary Committee oversees FBI, DOJ, everything related to the federal courts, including some components of the intelligence community.
So while we don't have a standalone committee, we have something under the chairmanship of Jim Jordan, and it's called the Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.
Essentially investigating what we have been asking Congress to investigate, should the Republicans take over for years now.
So that was a major, major, major win.
Now it's time to do the work.
Right?
The hard part is standing up the committee, winning enough votes in the Congress to stand up the committee, getting the right leadership, empowering it to issue subpoenas and whatnot.
Now what lines of effort are they going to go out?
And I've been extensively involved behind the scenes in asking for and advocating for this style committee.
And I'm also going to be very public about what the committee should be doing.
and I'm available should the committee want to know how to proceed on any of these lines of efforts, but we can talk about them here.
We have talked on this show about some of the investigations that you feel are sort of the critical ones Well, why don't why don't we start there?
And we one of them is certainly kind of in this uh COVID realm.
Right.
So Fauci, I guess is the one-word name that you can say is deserving of an entire investigation.
What I think the subcommittee, the new church to, or whatever you want to call it, will focus on because it's the overall weaponization of government, is the underlying intelligence.
And that surround COVID origins, everything related to Wuhan Laboratory, everything related to gain of function, and everything related to why did the US fund it at all.
These matters were never really publicized in terms of the intelligence they were spoken about on.
And I think this committee has a right and should have a mandate to go in there and subpoena those documents from everywhere in the government to say, why did Fauci go out there and lie to the American people about XYNZ?
And why didn't anyone stop him?
Where where was the investigative prowess from, say, the FBI or DOJ or NSA or CIA to say, wait a second, what this guy who is the number one health expert in America is wrong.
You know, those questions need to be answered.
It's not so much from my perspective, and people might not agree, it's not so much an attack on Fauci.
It's that he had a position of power and misled the world and the American people time and again, and it cost people their lives and it destroyed families.
And we haven't even talked about the vaccine mandate.
We're just talking about COVID origin.
So that's a piece of it.
Well, no, no, absolutely.
But the this the second piece that jumps to mind immediately is the sort of villa is the vilification of you know, incredibly competent scientists who were advocating for a rational traditional pandemic management policy, you know, which ended up being called the Great Barrington Declaration because they wanted to wrap it around something.
Right.
And and Fauci, if you recall, I mean, you recall, Epoch Times has done the best job in my opinion of the medical research behind what Fauci was talking about, COVID origins, the vaccine.
Um it's literally been the best reporting in media.
And Fauci attacked the Great Barrington Declaration.
And okay, based on what?
It wasn't science or data or medically available information, it was political rhetoric.
Why did the number one health officer in the land become a politician all of a sudden?
Those are questions that this subcommittee can do when it relates to Fauci COVID origins and the vaccine and the mandate.
And there's so many other questions they have to investigate.
Specifically, why did the Biden administration, and we're gonna get to this in a minute, mandate the vaccine for our service members.
You know, what science was that based on?
They just came in and said, you have to do this.
If our audience will recall, and we did an episode on it where I talked about it for the first time.
Yes, we in the Trump administration ran Operation Warfade, and yes, I, as the chief of staff there, said it was my duty in that leadership position to be one of the first to get vaccinated, because I thought it would be the basic failure of leadership to ask millions of employees at the Department of Defense to take said vaccine if I wasn't willing to take it.
Now, whether you believe in taking the vaccine or not, again, we've addressed that as a different issue.
But we never mandated it.
So we knew, as you have said repeatedly in the past, it was a new disease.
It was a new vaccine.
We have no medical data backing up its efficacy, its long-term effects, and its effect on children, which you know the epoch has reported on.
Well, and and and worst of all, there there was no studies from what we understand done to actually understand, you know, the the transmission issue and the transmission issue is kind of crucial here because many ethicists will argue there's never a case, an ethical case for imposing a mandate.
But the some ethicists will say, well, in a situation where it really stops a disease cold, maybe there's a case, right?
So I presumably that's the basis, that would have been the basis for these mandates, but it turns out this data never existed.
This is a great point to hammer home on.
This subcommittee can go out and subpoena every department and agency related to these issues and questions that we're talking about right now.
Where is your evidence?
Where is your reporting?
Where is your data to say the things we've just talked about?
And in my opinion, or in my guesstimation, they're gonna come up with um zeros.
They're not gonna have any data.
They're not gonna have any concrete evidence.
But the American people are owed that.
And that's it, that's the perfect example of constitutional oversight.
That is Congress's role as a third coordinate branch of government.
They're the legislative branch.
Their job is not just to make the laws and fund the government, they have to oversee a government that runs away and is corrupt and has waste, fraud, and abuse, like we did with RussiaGate.
So that's the purpose of this committee, and I think that's how it can cover everything related to COVID and Fauci.
Well, it's it's kind of unbelievable because we just talked about three things, right?
We talked about origins, we talked about these shelter in place, you know, course of policies, and we talked about vaccine mandates.
That feels like, you know, a massive job in itself for a committee or a subcommittee, but that that's not that's not all for this com subcommittee.
No, that's the good thing, right?
Because you're right.
And I have to remind people there are multiple committees in Congress, many, many, many committees, more than a dozen, that can do separate investigations on very specific lanes, i.e., the banking committee can go oversee the banking institutions and see whether or not they sent money for X, Y, and Z and was it corrupt purposes.
Here we have a church committee for the weaponization of federal government.
What they can do is if there was financial ties to what we just talked about, they can go investigate that as well.
But you're right, it's a large lift.
But what I'm told is that it's going to be very well staffed.
There's gonna be a large number of Hill staffers working on this as well as dedicated members from the Congress on this specific committee.
So I think it's possible to do that lift and the other ones we're gonna talk about.
Well, I'll I'll just add one more thing because you know the whole this whole question of censorship and narrative shaping, whether it's in COVID or whether it's in Russia, Russia, Russia, um obviously would be a central issue for this committee, right?
Absolutely.
And what I forgot to say was this committee was created by a house resolution.
That means, and we could put it up for our audience, it's now public, that the House specifically voted on the language setting up this subcommittee.
It did not exist before, like the church committee.
It's been given a new mandate, a new name, a new new entity entirely of its own that sits under the judiciary.
And it you can read the language in that resolution that specifically says this is what this subcommittee will do, these are its powers, this is its authority, and this is its uh ability to go out and investigate through multiple agencies and departments.
You know, and something strikes me also, you know, if this committee does a good job in its work, it will definitely um, you know, maybe help people, uh society at large, get more uh trust in Congress again.
Well, it's not just Congress, right?
Congress has a great opportunity here to do just that, restore it, because you don't have to be a pollster to know that the Congress has the lowest approval rating year over year over year because they fail, in my opinion, to represent the wishes of the American people that sent them there.
So it's a great chance for them to capture the emotion of a country and say you owe us constitutional oversight.
But at the same time, it's a great opportunity to hold people in government accountable for failing to do their jobs or politicizing the efforts, the weaponization of the federal government, as the committee is called.
It's aptly named.
And so, in my opinion, they really just need to focus on three big investigations.
We've just talked about one of them.
And if they do that plus two others, I think we will see some major results come the early spring here.
And just as a you know, reminder, because we have talked about this, what are the two others and we'll jump.
So the FBI and DOJ has to be another investigation based on all of the abuses from Russia Gate to the FISA abuses to the Twitter files to the coordination and conspiracy and collusion between big tech and FBI to rig presidential elections, Hunter Biden's laptop, Joe Biden's classified document possession, we'll get to that too.
But all of that can be nested under this weaponization of federal government subcommittee on an investigation of the FBI and DOJ.
So I think that's number two.
Traditionally, and I think we have to do away with this tradition, Congress has not asked um senior-level government employees who are not what we call SES and above to come and testify.
I think that is wholly inappropriate going forward.
Every single person, a government employee, whether you're a junior GS, as we call it, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, or 15, um, if you touched or you're part of a conspiracy or an effort to defraud the government or the American people, subpoena them.
Every one of them has to testify.
No more.
And just this week, Jan, the assistant attorney general at DOJ issued a letter on addressing this very issue because they're terrified that this Congress might subpoena personnel that aren't SES.
And what he reiterated in this letter was it's been tradition, please don't subpoena anyone that is not an SES level or higher.
They know that this Congress has the authority to do it, and they also know these corrupt government gangsters, as I've always called them, the corruption that the SES level folks can hide because they're part of the problem.
So we have to make sure this Congress pierces that tradition and subpoenas everyone involved in absolutely every matter we're talking about and every document involved.
And then, as we've always said, make everything public.
If you don't make everything public and you do it behind closed doors, it's a total waste of time in terms of oversight for the American people.
Now I'm not saying do everything out in the open right away.
We didn't even do that in Russia Gate, but have a methodol methodology To it.
You know, sometimes you have to go behind closed doors, sometimes you have to look at classified docs, but there are mechanisms in Congress to release that information, like we did during Russia Gate.
And so I want Congress to use that.
The third and last major investigation on the weaponization of government, I think has to be surrounded, as I've always said, about the border.
And while that's not necessarily DOJ, it's a piece of FBI, it's a big piece of DHS, and the intelligence community.
And the reason I want it nested in the weaponization of federal government is because of the intel.
What was the Biden administration's basis for making the decisions they have to change the border policy 180 from the Trump administration?
He just went down to Mexico, President Biden, and told the Mexican president, we've stopped the border wall, and the Mexican president thanked him for it.
What was the basis for that?
Did you do it on politics or did you do it on evidence in Intel?
And what about the border agents?
Are we funding them?
Why is it that we have record number of illegal emigrants crossing the border every month since Biden took office?
200 plus thousand last month alone.
Just think about that.
And they want them to keep coming.
And my big issue with the border is why are we not, as the United States government using our agencies, DHS, FBI, um, and our DOD and Intel components to follow known terrorists who enter the country illegally through the southern border and then disperse throughout the country?
We've reported on this show in the past how there are dozens by this government's own admission, dozens and dozens of known terrorists or people with known terrorist affiliations have illegally crossed the southern border, and we don't know where they are.
So that is a question I think this committee can also attack.
And one thing I would say that's tangentially related to sort of the FBI DOJ thing, and I know it's on the minds of a lot of people, is the whole January 6th matter.
You know, I'm not saying re-litigate January 6th.
We know the truth.
It's been documented heavily on this show and fantastically by the Epoch Times and the documentaries they've put out.
But my specific ask, it goes back to the FBI DOJ component, um, is this committee must subpoena every document relating to FBI confidential human sources?
We did a whole show on this that were involved with January 6th, Ray Epps and company.
He wasn't the only one.
How much money was he paid?
How long did the FBI have on his payroll before they airmailed him and who knows how many other confidential human sources into January 6th?
Were they responsible for instigating instances of violence that would not have otherwise occurred?
That is the definition of entrapment.
How many people have been arrested and detained in the DC jails based on that entrapment?
This documentation exists.
I know it exists because the FBI has extensive confidential human source files, but as I've dubbed it, it's the confidential human source corruption cover-up network.
The FBI hasn't to date had to release these files because they haven't had a Republican majority in Congress forcing them to do so.
So this committee means to make those demands of those documents, release them to the public, and then get Chris Ray to testify and Merrick Garland as to why they authorize these sort of invasive and I believe unlawful investigative techniques for a political narrative.
So those are the investigations I think they should focus on.
They'll splinter from there, and there can be one-offs, and I'll just give you a quick example of a one-off.
You know, why is it that the director of the FBI has his private jet that's funded by the US taxpayer dollar flown in from Manassas Airfield to Reagan National instead of taking his three-car up armored suburban motorcade 35 miles to take the plane?
It's 5,000 a pop every time that plane takes off and lands the 35 miles from Manassas to uh Reagan National.
I mean, you want to talk about waste, fraud, and abuse that is the single definition of it.
And we've actually have the flight logs from the plane, which we'll put up for our audience proving this, as we as my friend Steve Vaniness says, we have the receipts.
Um those types of splinter investigations could also take place under the bigger umbrella investigations as we talked talk about them.
And you know, and of course, the uh, you know, we could we'll get into this in another episode, but there has been massive failures at the FBI in terms of um sexual misconduct between employees, um, which affects their ability to do their jobs, uh, Jill Tyson being one example of it.
And uh those are splinter investigations that can come off from there.
Well, I speaking of January 6th, I just want to highlight, you know, this new big investigation by Joe Hanneman, our big reporter on this.
We obtained um basically the radio logs from the Capitol Police and found that there was this kind of radio silence during a very significant portion of the time of this capital breach and and everything that was happening there.
It's a very powerful story.
We'll put the link actually in the bottom.
And frankly, you know, I I I don't know if I agree entirely on not looking back at January 6th, because I don't feel we, I don't think we know right now what really happened there.
I think you know, we've covered on the show that the January 6th committee sort of approach to the whole issue was politicized.
Right.
And so but as we've said on the show multiple times, you know, it would be great to know what really happened in the whole picture.
And I don't I don't know if there's a plan for this or not, but but it's important because there's a whole group of people, and there's even more, I think there's even more subpoenas that have gone up for even more people who are involved in this breach.
There's people that have been in jail for extremely long periods of trying to be and being treated incredibly inhumanely for things which are ostensibly misdemeanors.
I mean, it's just it's it's a very weird and apparently kind of over overshoot by governments.
No, I will I I agree with you, and I will bookend it, you know, with this.
A lot of people have been asking, you know, is this new Republican Congress and now that Kevin McCarthy's speaker, have they lived up to their expectations?
Are they going to live up to the expectations we've just outlined?
And I just want to talk about a couple of things real quick.
Kevin McCarthy just came out and said he might release the 14,000 hours of video surveillance that is in the possession of the United States law enforcement agencies.
That would be a huge win for January 6th alone, because we could release the sleuths as you always say.
But more importantly, there's evidence of innocence in there.
And there's probably evidence of FBI corruption and activity of the DOJ that's unlawful or unethical or improper in there.
So he said that.
Hopefully he follows through with that, and this committee has that evidence and is available to release to the public.
So, you know, since we're talking about Congress, I think we have to jump in and talk about this uh something that not a lot of people seem to know about that Congress can actually work outside of uh the Department of Justice and arrest people in certain situations where there's contempt of Congress.
So what is this all about?
Um a little bit of history here.
So right, so normally what happens, and we've seen it play out with the Steve Bannon case and the Peter Navarro case, Congress issues subpoenas because it has that ability to do so per the Constitution and the laws.
These investigations, they can only be advanced by the issuance of all these subpoenas for documents and for witnesses.
But what happens when a witness doesn't show up?
Or what happens when the director of the FBI doesn't produce the documents under subpoena?
It's a violation of a congressional subpoena.
Well, thanks to the January 6th committee that's now been disbanded, we've seen the power of not just a congressional subpoena, but what should happen when it's violated or if it's violated.
It should be referred to the Department of Justice for immediate prosecution.
That works when you have a Department of Justice who's that is not politicized.
That's not gonna work in this Department of Justice or this FBI with Garland and Ray, because they are not, in my opinion, going to take that matter seriously, or they're gonna take it and say, we'll investigate it, we'll take a look and do nothing with it and not take it to federal court.
And its prosecution must occur in federal court, um, like they did with the Steve Vanintra.
And so what happens when you don't have a Department of Justice who's willing to enforce the law unilaterally and not based on a two-tier system of justice.
Our founding fathers thought of this.
Our our congressional history speaks directly to it.
In my time in Russia Gate, when we were the first committee to issue, I think something like 17 subpoenas in the House Intel committee's history, we were investigating them.
They were not providing us with the documentation.
Of course, they weren't going to take a referral from Congress for a violation of a congressional subpoena.
It had their names on it.
So we researched it.
And there is this uh rule of law that's called the inherent contempt of Congress powers, which basically means and is set up for this precise scenario.
If you can't trust the Department of Justice andor they won't do their job, the Speaker of the House, after a vote of the full Congress, can order the sergeant at arms, who's the number one cop for Congress, to go and arrest individual citizens and government employees who violate congressional subpoenas.
And they can be detained.
They can go rent space at the DC jail, just like the FBI did for all the January 6th defendants, right?
So there's places to house them.
It's an extreme measure.
I will give you that.
But it was thought of for this very specific reason.
So is this Speaker of the House and is this congressional leadership team going to be willing to exact that measure of justice if the DOJ and FBI aren't willing to do it?
That's the question.
Um, after they fail to after they've already violated congressional subpoenas, which I believe they will do because they will delay and deflect and not produce documents and hope to run out the clock, as is their normal practice with uh this DOJ and FBI.
So that's just one example where Congress has this inherent power to basically adjudicate matters of congressional subpoenas that have been violated themselves.
Has this ever been done?
Not that I could find in history, um, though you'd have to ask someone smarter.
It might have been done once, and I just don't know.
A fascinating new bit of information, and it will certainly add a little bit of intrigue to everything we're seeing happen in Congress right now.
So let's jump to this uh third thing I want to talk about, which is this uh, you know, this disclosure of these 10 classified documents that were found at the Biden Penn Center.
And the the interesting thing is it seems like they were disclosed just before the midterms actually happened.
Yeah.
Oh man, I don't even know where to start on this one.
Um, as you can imagine from my background, you know, the handling and mishandling of classified information is something we have always taken extremely seriously.
And the way that the media has sort of castigated people in and around the Trump world for that investigation related to Mar-a-Lago when juxtaposition next to this, just lays bare to me the two-tier system of justice we are operating under, but furthermore, is an indictment of the fake news media, as I call them.
They have been a conspirator in the perpetuation of lies from the fraudsters in government, investigation after investigation.
And to me, that's what we have to use this investigation about Biden's classified document possession for, to highlight that disparity and to show the American public that we need to return to a universal system of law enforcement.
So let's let's lay this out in a timeline fashion, as I've been trying to you set it out perfectly.
The investigation started before the midterms, before we had one of the most important midterm election cycles in modern U.S. history.
The DOJ and FBI were asked to investigate this before then.
So people will say, now they are involved, they the DOJ and FBI with the further politicization of the law enforcement apparatus and further rigging of elections.
Russia gate, Hunter Biden's laptop, Joe Biden's possession of classified documents.
All you have to do is ask yourself what if they said President Trump or Don Jr. were in possession of classified documents a week before the election.
Do you think that story wouldn't have leaked?
It's a double standard.
Okay, so they buried it.
Why?
Obviously, they wanted it to not sway the elections for Republicans.
That couldn't be more clear.
But now we're in January of 2023, and this information has come out.
But before we get there, let's stay in November of 2022.
In November of 2022, in the second week, uh, around November 11th or 14th, I think, the Washington Post actually issued an article based on anonymous reporting that the investigators in the Mar-a-Lago raid had determined that President Trump would not be charged because he took the documents, and this is from the article, uh quote, for desire and ego.
Now, the Washington Post is no friend of President Trump or anyone in his universe.
That article wasn't widely spread.
Why did they write it?
They wrote it because those same people, in my estimation, knew about Joe Biden's classified documents leak case, and they were setting up the platform for down the road to say, look, the DOJ is treating everybody fairly, a former president and a sitting president.
They are going to, in my opinion, exonerate Joe Biden based on that same anonymous leak conclusion that investigators have made at the FBI and DOJ.
Now, I don't know for sure whether it's true, but you have to ask yourself why is the Washington Post once reporting that?
And then you have to connect it through just a couple of months later when now it's breaking that Joe Biden was in possession of classified information.
Okay, full stop there.
Now, Jan, have you seen the uh the picture of all the documents sprawled on the Biden center floor with the top secret cover sheets?
Of course not.
The FBI staged that charade at Mar-a-Lago on purpose.
And this is just another distinction of how they actually investigate these matters.
There's no photo of it.
We don't really know what's in there.
We'll get to what the media's reporting is in there, and if it's accurate, it's extremely troubling.
But Joe Biden just came out yesterday and said, or today maybe, and said, I have no idea what's in those documents.
Okay, let's put a pin in that.
The Biden Center is in Washington, D.C., whatever it's called, the Biden Penn Center, Penn Biden Center, whatever you want to call it.
He, Joe Biden, took those documents, the classified documents, which are being reported as classified at the top secret SCI compartmented level, the highest level of classification there is.
Some of them, some of them.
Some of them took those documents when he was vice president seven years ago.
Literally no one's talking about that.
So it's not like he took the documents the day he walked out of the White House's VP seven years ago and deposited them in the Biden Penn Center and never moved them again.
They've been moving for seven years.
Who put them there?
Who else knew they were classified?
What other people were involved in the transportation illegally, in my opinion, of the movement of classified documents.
And I love how the media is now saying somehow, well, it was locked in a storage unit.
Isn't that hilarious when documents found in the Trump Mar-Lago case were locked in a storage unit behind Secret Service protection?
As it's been reported.
Again, another distinction or another example of a disparate treatment, depending on who the target is.
Well, when it was referred for prosecution to the FBI and DOJ, it was assigned to this U.S. attorney in Illinois.
Why this guy?
This his name is Loush.
I think it's Dave or Dan Laus Jr.
He was the one of the only U.S. attorneys to be a holdover from the Trump administration.
Now you gotta ask yourself why.
He, Loush, was held over at the request of the two Democratic senators from the state of Illinois, Duckworth and Durbin.
They asked President Joe Biden to keep this guy on.
Do you think that happens accidentally?
Now, what they are going to do is attempt, in my opinion, a whitewash and say, oh, look, we had a Trump holdover.
Look at this case.
And it shouldn't have happened, but nothing to see here.
It's just another example of a totally pretextual politicization of the law enforcement apparatus by Garland and Chris Ray.
Uh why didn't they appoint a special counsel?
Well, so you know, there is a special counsel in the case of the Mar-a-Lago classified documents.
Jack Smith.
Right, but and you bring up a great point, and I don't want to dive too much into the Mar-a-Lago stuff for obvious reasons, but um did the US attorney general know at the time of the Jack Smith appointment that Joe Biden was also in possession of classified documents?
Look at the timeline.
Why wasn't a separate special counsel appointed for Joe Biden?
These questions have to be asked.
They're willing to appoint special counsels for political purposes.
That's what this FBI and DOJ have showed us.
And raise your hand if you've been subpoenaed by the FBI for the Mar-a-Lago rate.
This guy.
Okay.
Where are the hundreds of FBI agents, pursuant to the instruction of the DOJ, sending out subpoenas to the dozens and dozens of people in the Biden presidential campaign in the Biden vice presidency house in this current White House to investigate this classified in document leak to the degree that they are doing in Mar-a-Lago?
Hundreds of people, in my estimation, have been subpoenaed.
Why has that not happened here?
They've known them out of months, as you pointed out.
It's not like it broke yesterday that the investigation Just started.
It's a completely disparate treatment on a two-tier system of justice on how investigations are run.
And that is why this investigation needs to go to that subcommittee in Congress on the weaponization of the FBI and the federal government.
Because this DOJ has shown itself that it cannot do it and it will only do things that are politically convenient for it and this administration.
So I know we said three investigations, but we hadn't gotten to this one yet.
Seems like the subcommittee has a lot on its plate, but what would it need to do here for this fourth investigation that you're proposing?
Yeah, so in my opinion, this is another investigation of the FBI and DOJ for being politicized.
But what they should do, the subcommittee, is send out subpoenas for all the documentation, and no one's called for this yet, but I'm calling for it, that's sitting at the Biden Penn Center.
All of it.
They should also subpoena all the documents at the University of Delaware that the University of Delaware said it will not release publicly for another like 20 years or something.
I don't believe for one second, these are the only sets of government documents that Joe Biden took while he was vice president out of the White House.
And Congress is the only one that can pierce through that wall that is being put up by the University of Delaware and also subpoena the records at the Biden Penn Center.
And I think you will find more documents that uh may have classified markings on them or maybe were handled improperly.
And so those are the unique abilities of this subcommittee.
The DOJ and FBI aren't going to do it.
Uh, we know that.
They are going to try to uh bury this thing and say uh nothing to see here.
And the media is already trying to carry their water for them.
They're saying, oh, it's it's different, but we haven't talked about the documents.
If the media reporting to CNN, who is no friend of President Trump in his administration, is right, said the documents that were seized that had classification markings on them were related to Ukraine, China, Iran, and possibly Russia.
Okay.
From my time in government, as a former chief of Savage Do D and the former Deputy Director of National Intelligence and the former head of counterterrorism, those four countries surmise some of our most sensitive intelligence collection we have.
That means it's the most compartmented classified highly secret information in the U.S. government.
Why did Joe Biden take it?
Why did he now come out and say doesn't know anything about it?
How is it possible that he doesn't know anything about it?
And what will those documents show?
We, the American people, ultimately need to see those documents.
Do they relate to his son, Hunter Biden?
Do they relate to his dealings with Barisma and the CCP and the amount of money he was paid?
Do they relate to Hunter or Joe Biden firing a Ukrainian prosecutor essentially via blackmail while withholding U.S. funds to Ukraine until that man is fired and that man in the Ukraine was investigating his son Hunter Biden.
All of those questions must be answered.
So this is going to play off for some time.
It puts a unique lens on now the Mar-Lago investigation.
And you've seen the mainstream media doing tap dance after tap dance, trying to find distinctions.
And I agree, there is a distinction.
If the reporting is true in the media, then Joe Biden mishandled classified information.
Wholly separate and different.
And who's going to hold him accountable?
But I think the biggest takeaway is the following, which I've been saying for a long time, especially as a former deputy director of national intelligence.
A sitting president of the United States is the sole arbiter of classification.
That means he's the sole classifying authority.
Period.
Full stop.
He and he alone can classify and declassify anything he wishes or she wishes.
You know who does not have that power, Yan?
A vice president of the United States, which is made abundantly clear now by putting these investigations on parallel tracks between Biden and Trump as it relates to classified documents, especially when you go back and look at the Office of Director of National Intelligence, which was created after 9-11, which specifically talks about the classification authorities and where it vests and where it does not vest in their regulations.
So I think for our audience, you know, that is the biggest takeaway because we've been saying it for a long time because it's the law.
But the media, ever since the Mar-a-Lago investigation became public, has trampled on that fact to muddy the waters and to Attack President Trump.
Now let's see if the media reports accurately on the distinction and the biggest takeaway, in my opinion, between the authority of a sitting president and a sitting vice president when it comes to classified documents.
Well, it seems like the subcommittee really is going to have its hands full.
I think it's time for a shout-out, Cash.
Indeed, Jan, but before I get to the shout-out, I'd like to just tell our audience briefly about my newest book, Government Gangsters.
It's now available for pre-sale at governmentgangsters.com.
What's in it?
Well, I thought it was always going to be valuable to the American public to do a deep dive on the deep state.
And we name every government gangster by name.
But more than that, we say how they failed in their mission to serve the American people and the teams they surrounded them with to defraud us and to fail protecting America's interests.
But more importantly, in the book, I tell you how each agency and department can be saved and freed from corruption and how we exact accountability for the American people.
So check out governmentgangsters.com.
We're doing some pretty cool things on personalized copies and signed copies.
And as always, I appreciate your support of all the books we put out.
Thank you so much.
And this week's shout-out goes to Cassie Hansen, a dual fan of American Thought Leaders and Cash's Corner, like so much of our audiences.
Thank you so much for watching our shows.
Thank you so much for posting on Cashers Corner's board.
Thank you for participating in the live chats.
And if you don't know what I'm talking about, you've been missing some lively live chats every night, every Friday night at 8 p.m. on Cash's Corner.
And keep posting.
We read all of your commentary, keep coming in on the live chat, and we answer your questions live time.
