Sean Hannity Show - Fauci's Lies - March 17th, Hour 2

All Episodes

Previous Next

March 18, 2023 - Sean Hannity Show

39:30

Fauci's Lies - March 17th, Hour 2

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is an iHeart Podcast.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	And I'm Carol Markovich.
	And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast.
	What I told people, I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
	Nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked why.
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	From Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Listen to Fiasco Benghazi on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week, we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So Dell, a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	And welcome to the Sean Hannity Show.
	I'm Greg Jarrett.
	Pleased to be filling in for Sean, a Fox News legal analyst.
	Follow me on Twitter at Greg Jarrett, read my legal columns, and listen to my podcast, The Brief on my website, theGregger.com.
	And also you can pre-order my brand new book, The Trial of the Century.
	It's available online again for pre-order right now at Barnes and Noble.com or Amazon.com.
	Now hearings are taking place on Capitol Hill, digging deep into whether Dr. Anthony Fauci manipulated public opinion to conceal his own role in funding dangerous experiments inside the Wuhan Laboratory in China, where the deadly coronavirus may well have leaked, killing more than six million people worldwide.
	Joining me now to talk about it is Congressman Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio.
	He's chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.
	Also a member of the Oversight Committee, and importantly, the subcommittee that's investigating Dr. Anthony Fauci's suspected misconduct and cover up.
	Congressman, thanks so much for being here.
	I I watched the recent hearing of your subcommittee, and Dr. Robert Redfield was testifying that gain of function experiments in his judgment probably created and caused the virus, and it almost surely leaked from the Wuhan lab, killing more than six million people worldwide, more than uh a million Americans.
	Are you persuaded that Dr. Fauci played a role in all of that by spending U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund these dangerous gain of function research experiments inside that very Wuhan lab?
	Yeah.
	Uh Greg, I am convinced that that that's what happened.
	And maybe more importantly, I'm convinced that Dr. Fauci tried to cover it up and downplay it after he discovered what had happened.
	And remember that the task force gets formed on January 29th, uh, 2020.
	Two days later, January 31st, 1032 p.m., Dr. Fauci gets an email from Dr. Anderson.
	The email says virus looks engineered, virus not consistent with evolutionary theory.
	The next day he gets another email from Dr. Gary, which says virus is I don't know how this happens in nature, but it would be easy to do in a lab.
	Dr. Fauci gets those two guys on a conference call.
	After the conference call, three days later, those two guys changed their story 180 degrees.
	I think the reason they did that is because Fauci got him in line and said, fellas, we can't have this information getting out that we had funded gain of function research in a lab in China that was not up to code and was doing uh doing this gain of function research where where this virus most likely started.
	So that I think is what happened, and Dr. Fauci had to cover that up because he didn't want that information getting out there knowing he had done what he had done.
	Yeah, he had to Conceal his role and absolve himself in the deadliest man-made catastrophe, one of them in history.
	Now, uh, Congressman, the NIH now admits that it funneled money through a third party to that Wuhan lab for experiments that quote had the unexpected result of creating a coronavirus that was more infectious.
	That's a quote from the NIH.
	And the agency produced the records proving that they'd done that.
	So when Anthony Fauci denied that NIH ever funded gain of function research, uh, exactly these kinds of risky, deadly experiments.
	I mean, he was lying, wasn't he?
	And the last time I checked, lying to Congress is a crime.
	It's called perjury, as well as false statements to Congress.
	Would you agree?
	Yeah, it sure is.
	I mean, they used up this virus, but but Dr. Fauci tried to say somehow that that really wasn't gain of function, even though that that's exactly what happened, even though Dr. Redfield says that he believes it was it was gain of function research being done at this uh at the Wuhan Institute of Viology.
	Here's the other thing that I think is important.
	When those emails come out right at the start, January 31st, February 1st, and those emails come out.
	Dr. Fauci doesn't share them with Dr. Redfield, who's on the coronavirus task force.
	He doesn't share them with anyone else in the government.
	Just him and Dr. Collins get these virologists on a phone call, get their stories straight.
	Three days later, those same virologists just said, I don't know how this happens in nature, but it'd be easy to do in a lab.
	Those same virolis virologists change their tune 180 degrees and say now they say anyone who thinks they come from a lab, you're a nut job, you're a conspiracy theorist.
	So the only intervening event seems to be that conference call where Fauci and Collins get on there and tell them what they're going to now stick to, what their story is going to be.
	And of course, as we pointed out in the hearing, three months later, both Dr. Anderson and Dr. Gary, these two virologists, they get a nine million dollar grant from Dr. Fauci.
	So I think his actions after this virus breaks out also confirm the idea that they were doing gain of function research at that lab.
	Yeah, and Fauci is trying to parse words here.
	He's trying to change the definitions uh by saying, well, uh, I didn't fund gain of function research.
	I funded reverse genetics.
	Well, I went through some of his past speeches in which he said reverse genetics is gain of function.
	So he's coming up with a vapid excuse to try to get out of potential perjury charges.
	No, he should he sure is.
	And this is this is one of the things we should do, Greg, is uh we should pass legislation that we that says we will not be funding gain to function research.
	And frankly, at a minimum, we shouldn't be funding it and doing it in China for goodness sakes with American tax dollars.
	So this is this is scary stuff.
	Um and the the other thing I think is real important.
	We're now hearing from the left and from Fauci and some of them that they're saying, well, it could be nature, it could be a lab leak, we're not sure.
	But you know, we need to move on.
	We need to well, that's not what you said back three years ago.
	You said anyone who questioned the bat to a pangolin, to a hippopotamus, to Joe Rogan, the nature theory, anyone who questioned that, they were crazy.
	They were conspiracy theorists, and you you censored people online like Dr. Badara.
	So you did all kinds of things, and now it's like, oh, well, you know, everything's fine.
	Let's move.
	That is not how this works when you did the kind of things that you did to people who were expressing a different opinion and frankly had a different hypothesis about how this uh how this virus began.
	I I think, as I said in my introductory remarks, I think Fauci is panicking now because he realizes that he's been caught uh and caught lying to Congress, which again is perjury.
	So the other day he blubbered on CNN.
	Prosecute me for what?
	This is craziness.
	What are they talking about?
	I mean, this is a guy who strikes me as realizing that, you know, you on the congressional committee have got his number.
	And, you know, I would like to see the Department of Justice uh conduct a criminal investigation, not into Fauci, not just into Fauci's role in helping to create this virus inside a lab, But then lying about it.
	Uh what are the what are the chances DOJ would do that?
	Well, they're probably pretty slim, but but but let's let's hope so.
	And and here's the here's the broader context as well.
	This wasn't the only thing he told us that wasn't true.
	I mean, think about it.
	They told us it wasn't our tax dollars.
	They told us it wasn't gain of function research.
	They told us it didn't leak from a lab, but they also told us there's no such thing as natural immunity.
	First virus in history, no such thing as natural immunity.
	I mean, think about that.
	They they told us that the vaccinated couldn't get the virus.
	They told us that the vaccinated couldn't transmit the virus.
	They told us that masks work.
	I mean, everything they told us turned out to be false.
	And while they're telling us all these things that turned out to be uh untrue, they were censoring people who were saying things that were actually true.
	So that that is the broader context, and it's it's why it's why so many people are so frustrated and set up with the three years of of frankly false information coming from our government and in particular coming from Dr. Falci.
	Let me switch topics now, if I may.
	My guest is Jim Jordan, uh chairman of the House Judiciary Committees and the Oversight Committee.
	Let me switch topics uh to something that you're dealing with on the other committees, and that is the Hunter Biden Joe Biden influence peddling investigations.
	You're a top member of the oversight committee.
	After resisting for so long, the Treasury Department is finally giving you access to the many about a hundred and fifty suspicious activities reports in which U.S. banks flag transactions that bear signs of money laundering and other criminal activities involving the Bidens.
	What can you tell us about that?
	Well, I think the probably the key term is the is the title of these these reports.
	They're called suspicious activity reports.
	And as the name would suggest, the name would imply that it's about suspicious banking activity.
	So maybe you have an account with very little money in it, and all of a sudden Shazam, here comes several million dollars being transferred into this account and then right away moved out and and and made payments are made to to Biden family members.
	Uh maybe you have accounts that are moving money amongst various di different accounts.
	These are all kind of things that raise suspicions uh at the Treasury Department and at these banks.
	And so uh Chairman Comer has been trying to get a hold of this information for a long, long time.
	It looks like now, finally, uh staff and members will be able to go view them in camera.
	Uh I I don't know why.
	I think in the past they were they were actually given to the chairman, but in this situation they're saying, no, no, you're gonna have to come in and look at it.
	You can't take you know, they can't take anything out, you're gonna have to come in and take notes and look at the information.
	So that's a step in the right direction, but we'll we'll we'll see.
	But uh again, when you have this many, 150 is what what's been reported, uh, suspicious activity uh banking records.
	I think that that says a lot, and we'll see what uh what the documents show.
	The chairman of the oversight committee, James Comer, uh says that the first SARS report shows money going from China to three Biden family members.
	And also your committee subpoena to the banking records of three of Hunter Biden's business associates, including John Rob Walker.
	Now, Congressman Cumber has said publicly that Walker was wired roughly three million dollars from Chinese Communist Party connected individuals, and then Walker forwarded the money to three Biden family members.
	And I suppose the question is what were those three Biden family members doing for millions in cash?
	What do you think?
	Yeah.
	What was the service?
	What was the what was the work?
	What was the expertise?
	What was done to warrant that kind of money?
	What were they being paid for?
	Uh I think that is the fundamental question, and frankly, I don't have an answer to it.
	I don't know that I don't know who does, but I know that Chairman Comer and the committee is committed to finding an answer to that sort of fundamental foundational question.
	What what were they providing that warranted being paid this sum of money?
	Uh if it's something legitimate, some bit legitimate business, okay, that's one thing, but we don't know what it is.
	Um were they providing legal counsel?
	Were they I don't know.
	Um now supposedly it's somehow connected to an energy uh energy interest that these these Chinese businessmen had, which kind of a concerning thing in and of itself.
	So we don't know, but again, that's the question I think we have to answer, and that um Chairman Colmer and the committee are committed to uh to finding out.
	Yeah, that Chinese energy deal with CEFC, the Uh, the Chinese company, again with close ties to the Communist Party.
	That netted the Bidens roughly six million dollars.
	Are are you convinced, Congressman, that Joe Biden was involved in his son's schemes?
	Well, we have an eyewitness who was part of this business operation, at least at one point, who came forward a few years ago, Mr. Bobolinsky.
	Uh, you have the emails that people say now are authentic.
	Um, you know, we thought they were authentic at the time, of course, uh, that that are part of the laptop.
	So you got documents that that suggest that strongly.
	You got an eyewitness who was part of the uh business operation, who says that.
	I think that's pretty compelling evidence.
	And then of course, now you have this these 150 suspicious activity reports that we're gonna get a chance to begin to look at.
	So I think all that that all that raises all kinds of concerns.
	Did it involve Joe Biden?
	I I guess that the short answer is we don't know, but there's a lot of evidence that seems to point in that direction.
	Uh and again, one of the one of the pieces of evidence is an eyewitness who was part of this deal.
	So um I I again I think that's why we do the investigation to make sure the country has the facts about what went on.
	Merrick Garland testified recently and insisted that there was no need for him to recuse himself, even though the federal regulations require it.
	They demand it.
	It's not optional.
	But he won't do it.
	And his excuse is well, the U.S. attorney David Weiss in Delaware, he's in, he has complete independence to do whatever he wants.
	Here's what I don't get, and and I think many listeners don't get.
	Weiss has been investigating this now.
	It's into its fifth year.
	How is and no criminal charges have ever been filed, despite a plethora of evidence on the laptop alone?
	How is it possible that you can conduct a five-year-long investigation into the president's son and likely the president himself, and no criminal charges?
	I bet you're asked that question as well.
	And what do you usually say?
	What are your suspicions, Congressman?
	And then there's a I think there's another fundamental question, and you've raised this.
	I think maybe you are the first to raise it is how is the decision made not to appoint a special counsel?
	And I'm not saying you have to have a special counsel here, but this would look this would look like the one situation that would most warrant a special counsel.
	So how was that decision made?
	Who was involved in saying no to a special counsel?
	Was it raised at all?
	I I think you know, we have a special counsel for President Trump.
	We have one now for the the classified documents with with President Biden.
	How is this situation not fit that category?
	So I think that's a fundamental question also.
	I don't know why it takes five years.
	I think a lot of people are asking.
	Uh the only one who had that would have that answer is the is the U.S. attorney in Delaware, I guess, and Merrick Arland, but I don't know that we're going to get any information from these guys uh if we ask that question.
	All right.
	Congressman Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, top member of the Oversight Committee, also on the subcommittee investigating Dr. Anthony Fauci's cover-ups.
	Congressman, many thanks for being with us.
	Appreciate it.
	You bet, Greg.
	Thanks for all the good work you do.
	Take care.
	Thank you.
	We're gonna take a short break.
	I'm Greg Jarrett, filling in for Sean Hannity on the Sean Hannity Show.
	We'll be right back.
	Hey there.
	I'm Mary Catherine Hammond.
	And I'm Carol Markowitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
	That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass, you're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
	What I told people, I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
	Nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked why.
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	It's almost a dirty word.
	One that connotes conspiracy theory.
	Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
	Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
	We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
	You put two and two together.
	Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
	Benghazi is a rosetta stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
	I'm Leon Nayfock from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
	This is Fiasco Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Yeah, that's right.
	Locker up.
	Listen to Fiasco Benghazi on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	Hey there.
	I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	And I'm Carol Markowitz.
	We've been in political media for a long time.
	Long enough to know that it's gotten, well, a little insane.
	That's why we started normally a podcast for people who are over the hysteria and just want clarity.
	We talk about the issues that actually matter to the country without panic, without yelling, and with a healthy dose of humor.
	We don't take ourselves too seriously, but we do take the truth seriously.
	So if you're into common sense, sanity, and some occasional sass.
	You're our kind of people.
	Catch new episodes of Normally every Tuesday and Thursday on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen.
	What I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi.
	Nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked, why?
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	It's almost a dirty word.
	One that connotes conspiracy theory.
	Will we ever get the truth about the Benghazi massacre?
	Bad faith, political warfare, and frankly, bullshit.
	We kill the ambassador just to cover something up.
	You put two and two together.
	Was it an overblown distraction or a sinister conspiracy?
	Benghazi is a rosetta stone for everything that's been going on for the last 20 years.
	I'm Leon Nafok from Prologue Projects and Pushkin Industries.
	This is Fiasco Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Yes, that's right.
	Locker up!
	Listen to Fiasco Benghazi on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.
	Standing up for What's Right with America.
	We're back on the Sean Hannity Show.
	Welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show.
	I'm Greg Jarrett, filling in for Sean.
	I'm happy to be here.
	I'm a lawyer and Fox News legal analyst.
	Follow me on Twitter at Greg Jarrett.
	You can read my legal columns.
	Listen to my podcast The Brief on my website, the GregJarrett.com.
	And my new book, The Trial of the Century, is available now for pre-order online.
	Publishers Weekly calls it a colorful, dramatic account of one of the most consequential free speech debates in American history.
	The book is about the famous Scopes Monkey trial, a young school teacher in Tennessee, handcuffed, arrested, charged with teaching the science of evolution in a public school, which at the time was banned.
	Legendary defense attorney Clarence Darrow's withering cross-examination of fundamentalist leader William Jennings Bryan described at the time to the New York Times as the most amazing court scene in Anglo-Saxon history.
	Well, you can read about it in my new book, Trial of the Century.
	Pre order it now at Amazon.com or BarnesandNoble.com Or other booksellers online.
	I also have a new column out on my website.
	It describes how Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg appears determined to indict former President Donald Trump on legally feeble charges over the seven-year-old episode involving Stormy Daniels.
	And in a remarkable legal somersault, Bragg wants to turn a dubious misdemeanor business records violation into a felony by bootstrapping some imagined campaign violation.
	Joining me now to talk about it as well as the latest on the Hunter Biden Joe Biden investigation into suspected influence pedaling, John Solomon, an award-winning investigative journalist, is the CEO, founder, and editor-in-chief of Just the News, one of the best websites online.
	And John, thanks for being here.
	Always great talking to you.
	Before we get to the Biden investigation, what's your reaction to what Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg is doing here, resurrecting this dead seven-year-old case against Trump based on uh what I describe as a cockamami interpretation of the law, no credible evidence.
	And of course, the star witness Michael Cohen, an admitted liar.
	He went to prison for his dishonesty, and he obviously has an axe to grind against Trump.
	What do you make of this?
	Well, listen, uh uh if your case depends on a porn star and two disgraced lawyers, because you got two of them here, Michael Cohen and Michael Avenatti, uh, you're probably in some big trouble.
	And there's uh there are two ways that the modern uh judicial system seems to weaponize charges.
	One is by bringing them into court, the other is by leaking them and trying to change a perception in the court of public opinion.
	And the amount of leaks and detail that have been coming out of an investigation that should be done in secret, uh, I think concerns anyone who cares about the integrity of the investigation.
	It seems as though the prosecutors and their witnesses are trying to try this case in the press before a grand jury gets a legitimate chance to judge the credibility of the evidence and the witnesses.
	And uh I, you know, a lot of people I've talked to, I always try to keep an open mind.
	A lot of people I talked to said this is a enormous legal stretch.
	These are Democrat and Republican lawyers and former prosecutors who said, listen, this unless there's something we don't know, this is a big stretch.
	And I'm going to take you to one of them who we all know very well.
	We've all talked to him many times.
	Alan Dershwitz now.
	Let's put Alan Dershowitz in uh perspective.
	He's uh openly and avowedly liberal.
	He uh says he voted for Joe Biden in 2020.
	But he wrote a column in the last couple days stating very clearly that the effort to try to bring charges against Donald Trump in New York on this Stormy Daniels matter was akin to what the Jim Crow Southern prosecutors tried to do in the 1950s to discredit civil rights activists, basically weaponizing a non-existent charge to try to change someone politically, harm someone politically.
	Uh when a Joe Biden supporter is saying that maybe the prosecutors in uh New York ought to take another pause and think about what they're really doing here.
	Yeah, you would think Bragg would have enough on his plate uh with the out-of-control rampant crime in New York City.
	But instead, he wants to bring this politically motivated case based on zero evidence in zero law.
	It's really, I mean, it it just speaks volumes about you know how New York City is being operated this day.
	But let me move on to something.
	Can we mention one other thing that a lot of people might not remember?
	But it does show the dual system of justice.
	There was some stories back four or five years ago that in 2008, during the 2008 uh presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton had a staffer who had engaged in some form of bad sexual harassment, and they swept it under the rug.
	And the reason the victims couldn't talk in that case, and keep in mind that Hillary Clinton was based in New York at the time.
	The reason they couldn't speak was that she had executed non-disclosure agreements with the people that were involved.
	Um interesting that a non-disclosure agreement was okay for a Democrat presidential candidate in uh uh 15 years ago and even five years ago when it came to light, but they're the same uh circumstances with Donald Trump seems to have created some conceived um uh criminal case.
	I do think that people ought to go back and look at that Hillary Clinton case.
	It's been a long time since I looked at it, but I remember it very clearly.
	Yeah, absolutely.
	And by the way, you know, I mean, people should know that, you know, uh non disclosure agreements are perfectly legal, but you know, this is a DA who's trying to criminalize it and you know, abusing his authority and position of power,
	weaponizing the law for a political reason, very much like my book, Trial of the Century, weaponizing the justice system for what was then political and religious reasons.
	They were banning textbooks in schools that uh had a chapter on religion.
	They they were arresting school teachers for teaching out of the textbook, which was state approved.
	Again, weaponization of the justice system.
	Let me move on because you've got a terrific story out uh about how the oversight committee in the House has now been able, and I'm using your words to penetrate a labyrinth of at least a dozen bank accounts that were used to funnel money from foreign sources to Joe Biden's family.
	Tell us about that, John.
	Yeah, this is uh from an interview I did yesterday with uh Congressman James Comer, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee.
	Yeah, they were given access to uh the suspicious activity reports uh that the Treasury Department has had on record for many years, flagging uh transactions in and around and involving Hunter Biden and his business partners.
	And he said from that and from separate witness testimony, uh, because there are several cooperating witnesses, including a business partner very close to Hunter Biden, who also interacted with the finances of Joe Biden when he was vice president, that they now have identified at least a dozen accounts,
	and they expect there's going to be more, where money comes in from these foreign entities, it comes into LLCs, the LLCs move them to the private accounts of family members, and he said there are many family members involved in the sharing of this money, and then some of those personal accounts of the uh Biden family members then go on to pay off bills for Joe Biden, provide other financial benefits to Joe Biden.
	So, as he said at the end of the interview, we are getting very close to Joe Biden.
	That this was not an influence pedaling scheme that stopped at his son or his brother.
	This was a one that ultimately provided some uh financial benefit to Joe Biden.
	And uh uh reason that's significant to me is about two years ago uh I corroborated some emails that were on uh on the uh famous laptop uh that showed that Eric Schwerin, the business partner now cooperating with the uh congressional investigators,
	wrote Hunter Biden saying that he had paid uh some of his father's bills using Hunter Biden's money, and then later that Joe Biden wanted to repay his son for some of the things, so he was going to divert Joe Biden, the vice president, was going to divert some of his Delaware tax refund to repay some of the money uh that Hunter Biden had laid out for him.
	So this evidence gets further corroborated by the bank transfers that uh James Comer uh went and reviewed yesterday, and his uh comments are very he spent a lot of time talking about Joe Biden.
	He said, Listen, if we corroborate this the way we think we're going to, Joe Biden might have a tax problem.
	He also may have an ethics problem because gifts and loans to elected officials are supposed to be disclosed on your ethics form.
	So you can see where this investigation is going.
	The bullseye has moved from Hunter Biden, his tax issues and all of his other quadrial problems, to uh the president himself based on the cash flow that they now see.
	So, John, this money is being funneled to the Bidens through limited liability corporations, shell corporations, uh, to evade detection, one would assume.
	Uh that's smacks of money laundering, doesn't it?
	Well, that was always, as you know, um uh a concern that uh Ron Johnson and uh Chuck Rassey, who first looked at the SARS back in 19 and 20 raised, it is a concern that some of the prosecutors who got referred this information, the Delaware prosecutor, uh Mr. Weiss uh also uh was reportedly looking at money laundering as one of the many possible things that went on here.
	It's very interesting.
	Listen, people could sell set up an LLC for a very legitimate reason, or you could use it as a shell corporation.
	What uh what James Coler said in the interview yesterday, very specific, very precise with his words is we looked at a lot of these LLCs, and they don't have any expertise for the work that they allegedly were doing, and none of the work ultimately ends up resulting in any real business deals.
	They look like money changes hands, but no business deal gets executed.
	He uses the Chinese Energy Company and some other examples.
	Uh So when you see a company set up for a purpose, but it actually doesn't do that purpose, and the only thing it does is money comes in and then it's immediately thrown out of the account to a personal account.
	It looks like they're laundering money to potentially gain political influence inside the Biden family.
	That's the suspicion.
	That's the concern.
	There's another element that he's tied together, why he really believes that this isn't just bad business deals, that this is an influence peddling scheme.
	He says that in the last year of Joe Biden's vice presidency.
	He's thinking of returning to the public sector after a private sector after 40 plus years in uh in uh political office.
	He says that uh Joe Biden starts meeting with a lot of the business partners that are fuddling this money to his son.
	So he's directly involved in the um the engagement uh with these business partners.
	He's meeting with his son's business partners who are moving the money to family members and family members, then moving the money to provide some personal benefit to Joe Biden.
	That's a very important evidentiary line.
	Again, we want to wait and see.
	Um, did Hunter Biden, Joe Biden deserve uh the assumption of innocence, the benefit of the doubt, until we get all the facts out there, but Comer's very careful, very specific, and you kind of get a sense what evidence he's now relying on.
	Bank records and cooperating witnesses, much like a mob prosecutor would.
	Very interesting moment in this investigation.
	Yeah, and I think they've turned a corner because now the Biden treasury department is finally being forced to give the oversight committee access to the roughly 150 suspicious activity reports that the banks flag to the financial crimes unit at the Treasury Department.
	In other words, these we suspect these are representative of potential crimes.
	They've also subpoenaed the records of John Rob Walker, a close business partner of Hunter Biden, uh, you know, three million dollar wire transfer to Walker, and then he distributes it according to the evidence to various Biden family members.
	And John, we're talking about, you know, not just a couple of family members, but you know, apparently, according to Chairman Comer, uh, you know, we're talking about six or seven Biden family members, right?
	Uh, that's what it looks like.
	Yeah.
	And a dozen accounts, uh half dozen family members.
	He said one of them shocked them.
	It's not a name they've put out there yet.
	We've we've talked about some brothers and of course Hunter Biden, some business partners and friends.
	He said one family member shocked uh James Comer.
	He was shocked to see that this person was involved in receiving money and forwarding it on to the family.
	Uh, we don't know who that person is it.
	We're digging deep into that, but it does um it does raise a lot of questions about how how far uh ranging was this, who got benefits.
	We know from earlier testimony, uh an uncle and uh uh and an aunt of Hunter Biden were going on a shopping spree funded, we believe, by a foreign entity.
	There's a lot of rumblings, but now he's saying there was a uh a previously unknown member of the family who routed money uh uh from a foreign entity up and through to the um uh president or uh to the president's family.
	So we're watching that very closely.
	Uh there's a pattern, and I think that's one of the things that uh James Comer stressed.
	It didn't happen just one or two times, it's over and over again in almost all of the pays, the countries that are doing this are adversarial.
	Uh Russia, Ukraine, China, uh uh he mentioned yesterday um United Arab Emirates.
	He said there's a Middle East connection we haven't focused on yet.
	All of those are our countries he says that should raise a red flag, and they did raise a red flag at the banks.
	That's why the SARS were filed.
	Yeah.
	Uh before I let you go, I want to uh make mention that you guys at Just the News.
	You're you're gaining access to more whistleblowers than anybody.
	And so people need to stay tuned for that, right?
	We've got about 30 seconds left.
	Yeah, we do.
	In fact, we're trying to hire some more reporters, and we're doing a little subscription campaign now.
	If you go to Justin News.com slash subscribe, if you subscribe, we're gonna take every money from the subscription uh to hire some more reporters.
	We need about four or five reporters.
	We're we're dealing with more than 50 whistleblowers in the last six months blowing the whistle on government wrongdoing under Joe Biden's presidency.
	That is amazing.
	You you you are always all over this breaking news, one of the best investigative journalists in America, John Solomon of Just the News.
	Go to the website, uh help them out if you can with this endeavor for whistleblowers and more reporters and so forth.
	John, many thanks for being with us here on the Sean Hannity Show.
	Appreciate it.
	Greg Great Honor.
	Can't wait to see your book.
	I'm getting excited.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, it's called uh The Trial of the Century, available now for preorder online.
	We're going to take a quick break.
	More when we come back on the Sean Hannity Show.
	I'm Greg Jarrett.
	Filling in for Sean.
	It's time to take back America.
	This is the Sean Hennedy Show.
	And welcome back to the Sean Hannity Show.
	I'm Greg Jarrett.
	Coming up next, another one of America's best investigative journalists, Peter Schweitzer, also best selling author.
	You're not gonna want to miss our discussion about some of the latest breaking news.
	He's all over it.
	We'll be right back.
	I'm Greg Jarrett.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show.
	Hey, did you know the Pure Talk saves the average family close to a thousand dollars a year when they switch from the big carriers, ATT, Verizon T Mobile?
	Well, that's right.
	You can save a fortune, and you get the exact same service as these big carriers.
	You get their ultra fast 5G, you can get unlimited talk and text and plenty of data, and it's only 30 bucks a month.
	And with Pure Talk, they are so sure you're going to love their service, they back it up with their 100% satisfaction money back guarantee.
	So instead of paying a fortune to the big carriers, cut your bill in half with Pure Talk, my cell phone company.
	Then start enjoying great perks like a U.S. customer service team.
	They're going to make your switch easy, and you'll be supporting a company that's veteran owned and shares your values and has you covered with their money back guarantee.
	It's simple to make the switch, style pound 250, say the keyword save now.
	Do it now, you save an additional 50% off your first month.
	That's pound 250, keyword save now from our friends at Pure Talk, Simply Smarter Wireless.
	When I told people I was making a podcast about Benghazi, nine times out of ten, they called me a masochist, rolled their eyes, or just asked why.
	Benghazi, the truth became a web of lies.
	From Prolog Projects and Pushkin Industries, this is Fiasco Benghazi.
	What difference at this point does it make?
	Listen to Fiasco Benghazi on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday.
	Normally on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts.
	I'm Ben Ferguson.
	And I'm Ted Cruz.
	Three times a week we do our podcast, Verdict with Ted Cruz.
	Nationwide, we have millions of listeners.
	Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we break down the news and bring you behind the scenes inside the White House, inside the Senate, inside the United States Supreme Court.
	And we cover the stories that you're not getting anywhere else.
	We arm you with the facts to be able to know and advocate for the truth with your friends and family.
	So down a verdict with Ted Cruz now, wherever you get your podcasts.

▲