All Episodes
Previous Next
July 21, 2023 - Sean Hannity Show
33:57
Weaponizing Government - July 20th, Hour 2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This isn't iHeart Podcast.
Well, we're coming to your city Gonna play our guitars and Saying you will come to side.
We'll all be entire.
High Lemagna.
And if you want a little bang in your yin-yang, come along.
It's almost like a weekly TV show.
Yeah.
Yeah, indicted and desure.
When we invest in clean energy and electric vehicles and reduce population, more of our children can breathe clean air and drink clean water.
Soon data will be the 32nd freestanding have free 30 free 32 freestanding members.
Freedom is back in style.
Welcome to the revolution.
Yeah, we're coming to your city.
Gonna play our guitars and sing you a country song.
Sean Hannity.
The new Sean Hannity Show.
More behind-the-scenes information on breaking news and more bold, inspired solutions for America.
All right, our two Sean Hannity Show, 800-941-SEAN.
If you want to be a part of the program, So Robert F. Kennedy Jr., we announced last night in New York City, by the way, we will have a town hall with him.
He's he's certainly in the news an awful lot.
He's been polling, I think, at a very respectable 22% against Joe Biden.
It was not popular even among Democrats in the country, never mind independents and Republicans.
And but certainly controversial in some of his views.
Um but one of the issues that I think we've all got to think about is okay, if you believe in free speech, how how much how how how pure are your beliefs of this?
When people say things that you find grossly offensive, are you okay with that being put on, you know, a platform such as Twitter or Facebook or Instagram?
Or are you so offended that you want certain things banned?
And if you're gonna ban them, well then who's gonna decide what's get what gets banned?
You know, think about the impact of the pre-bunking by the FBI meeting weekly with big tech in the lead up to the 2020 election.
Uh even though they had Hunter Biden's laptop in December of 2019 and verified its authenticity in March of 2020, uh, and yet they were warning every big tech company that, oh, you might be a victim of a disinformation campaign.
It may be about Hunter Biden.
Well, that laptop uh story got censored in the weeks leading up to that important election, and um there's no doubt it had an impact.
None at all whatsoever.
So, anyway, so they're having hearings about this.
Congressman Greg Stooby of Florida is a member of the House Weaponization Subcommittee.
They had this hearing with RFK Jr. this morning, and uh he had a great exchange.
I want to play this for you.
There's a lot in this opinion, and I just, you know, I have limited time, but I think illustrating some of the actions that the Biden administration took to qu to censor speech is very important.
I'm gonna read specifically from the opinion.
Explicit threats are an obvious form of coercion, but not all coercion needs to be explicit.
I'm on page 97 of the opinion.
The following illustrative specific actions by defendants are examples of coercion exercised by the White House defendants.
A cannot stress the degree to which this needs to be resolved immediately.
Please remove this count immediately.
Sounds like a director from the White House to me to social media companies.
Accused Facebook of causing political violence by failing to censor false COVID-19 claims.
F. This is exactly why I want to know what reduction actually looks like.
If reduction means pumping our most vaccine hesitant audience with Tucker Carlson saying it does not work, then I'm not sure it's reduction, implying that they're reducing uh the information on that.
Questioning how the Tucker Carlson video had been demoted since there were 40,000 shares, wanting to know why Alex Baronson had not been kicked off Twitter because Baronson was the epicenter of disinformation and radiated outward to the pers persuadable public.
And I'm just skipping through here.
I'm not even going through all these.
Flatterly stated, not to sound Like a broken record, but how much content is being demoted, and how effective are you at mitigating reach and how quickly?
Flattery told Facebook, are you guys effing serious?
I want an answer on what happened here, and I want it today.
Sounds like a pretty explicit threat to me.
Again, quoting the opinion.
These actions are just a few examples of the unrelenting pressure the defendants exerted against social media companies.
This court finds the above examples demonstrate that plaintiffs can likely prove, likely prove the White House defendants engage in coercion to induce social media companies to suppress free speech.
You know, that is him reading examples of the Biden administration and their coercion.
And that's directly from the Missouri versus Biden case.
Eric Schmidt, now senator from Missouri, was the AG at the time.
Anyway, we welcome Congressman Stubbe of Florida.
Sir, welcome to the program.
Welcome back.
Good to hear your voice.
Yeah, Sean, thanks for having me.
I appreciate it.
All right, let's talk about your take number one on the hearings, the posturing of your your democratic colleagues on the committee, and your thoughts.
Well, what's interesting is the Democrats, because they can't, and mind you, no one in the Biden administration, the Biden family, or any Democrat is disputing that any of this information is wrong or false.
So when they can't win on the facts, they just start attacking you as racist, uh misogynistic, homophobic, whatever.
And so they're going after one of their own, RFK Jr., as a Democrat who's running for president against Joe Biden, and they're attacking him for being racist because he was trying to show through uh some of his tweets or quotes or whatever that uh the COVID vaccine and COVID affected different races differently.
So of course, their their uh which by the way is very controversial um uh on his part, but go ahead.
Yeah, so their their approach is not the fact is not agreeing with with the fact that yes, the Biden administration absolutely is working with big tech companies to censor speech.
They just attack him personally.
All right.
Let me play for you, Robert F. Kennedy addressing this letter signed by Democrats trying to disinvite him from the hearing.
And I think it was his words, an attempt to censor a censorship hearing, which was pretty funny.
Hearing was convenient to address.
This is an attempt to censor a censorship hearing.
The the charge is in as and and by the way, censorship is antithetical to our party.
It was and it was appalling to my father, to my uncle, to FDR, Harry Truman, uh Thomas Jefferson is uh chairman referred to.
It is the basis for democracy.
It sets us apart from all of the previous forms of government.
We need to be able to talk, and and the first amendment was not written for easy speech.
It was written for the speech that nobody likes you for.
Well, I mean, uh it's really true what he said by them sending that letter, you know, pretty much disinviting him, but you know, to his credit, he showed up anyway.
Yeah, and they were trying to, in the very beginning, uh basically close down the hearing and find him in contempt of Congress for the comments that he had made.
Uh and and he's absolutely accurate.
They are trying to censor him in a censorship hearing before the weaponization committee.
It's it's amazing the depth that this administration will go to to silence people.
We've seen it from the FBI, the DOJ, and at the highest levels in the White House, some of those things I quoted came from the highest levels of the White House.
And one of the statements that's in the uh Missouri v.
Biden hearing or the opinion is that this is coming from the highest level of the White House telling these social media companies to take people down.
Well, that is that is something that has to stop.
Now we also have, you know, uh Section 230 protections for content companies.
For example, any media company like like Fox News or ABC or MBC or CBS or or CNN or the New York Times, fake news CNN or or the Washington Post or MSDNC, you know, it they have liability issues at yet these big tech companies that are not supposed to be content providers, but yet they're making content decisions.
Um, and they have liability protection that no other news organization has.
Should that be taken away?
Yeah, I actually have a bill that addresses Section 230 and does significant reforms, and if you are market dominant in the marketplace and you violate people's First Amendment rights, uh, you would have you would lose your liability protection, and people like RFK Jr., uh the New York Post on the Hunter Biden laptop story could then sue those platforms.
Uh well, what's interesting is in some of this back and forth that's now uh in this opinion was Jin Saki and some of the people in the White House were veiled veiled threats to these social media companies that they were going to take away their Section 230 liability protection if they didn't fall in and do exactly what the White House wanted them to do.
Let me yeah, let me let me ask you this question.
At the end of the day, what should these big tech companies do?
For example, I find racism repugnant.
But if you go online at and I I don't even have access to any of my social media accounts anymore, to be honest, Congressman, I spent way too much of my spare time on it, became another job, and I realize that it's better off if my staff handles it, and if I really want to send out a tweet or something important, um I I just send it to them, they they have access to it.
They'll send it out for me after they probably argue with me that why are you starting another fight with Alec Baldwin or Jimmy Kimmel?
Um, but in fairness, if you're going to have a platform of speech, does that mean you have to accept that a lot of that speech is going to be repugnant, repulsive, offensive, and it's up to people to decide.
For example, I can't make people listen three hours a day to my radio show.
I'm trying.
If I could, and I could tie everyone down in a chair and force them to listen for three hours a day, it's a it's certainly something to think about, and I'm kidding, uh, or force them to watch my TV show and set their D V R and watch it every night at nine Eastern.
Um, I'd like that to happen, but I have to do a good show for that to happen because anybody can choose to watch or not watch, right?
So don't we all have the choice what to read, not read, and watch and not watch and listen to or not listen to?
Yeah, and the government shouldn't be in the business.
And in this example, the highest level of the government should not be in the business of censoring speech that they don't agree with.
And they may not agree with things that RFK Jr. has said, but that doesn't mean that Twitter and other Facebook and all these other social media companies should take it down.
In my opinion, as long as it's not criminal, if the speech is not criminal, uh sexually explicit, pornographic, uh threatening in nature, then Americans, whether you agree with them or not, have the freedom under the first amendment of our constitution to be able to say what they feel and have their opinion.
Yeah.
Well, and what do you think about some of the controversial things?
I won't get into the list now.
Um next Tuesday, uh I've got a full hour with Robert Kennedy Jr.
I have a lot of questions for him.
But, you know, uh unlike a lot of other people that are interviewing presidential candidates, I don't view it as my role as the host to go in there and debate him.
I might have agreements with him.
Uh I I will never ever listen to any government official in my life again on any health issue uh because they got so much wrong about COVID and about vaccinations.
I th I think, you know, for everybody to have told us that if you got the shot, oh, you're never gonna get COVID, you'll never transmit COVID, uh, and and them knowing that mutations were a likely uh outcome and an evolution of a virus and not telling us that possibility and the truth about it, to me is just it's it's beyond criminal to me.
Yeah, I agree with you a hundred percent.
Uh very few people in my district are gonna believe what the CDC and the F FDA now say and what the things that Fauci said, especially when the Biden administration started uh pushing narratives that if you got the shot, you're not gonna get sick, and obviously the fact bear out that that wasn't the case.
And when Americans didn't agree with that or had other um opinions on whether it was effective or not, the Biden administration was using Twitter and Facebook and other social media platforms to completely shut them down.
And that's what's really, really um scary that we're in a place in our country where the government is okay at the highest level telling people how to censor individual speech.
I mean, the the opinion in the Missouri v.
Biden case is great.
Uh it it he talks about if all of these allegations are true.
This is the largest censoring of American speech in the history of our country.
And uh we we need to protect that at all costs.
All right, quick break, right back more with Congressman Stooby of Florida is on the uh House Weaponization Subcommittee.
That's the committee that held hearings with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. today.
Uh we'll get to uh more of his observations of this.
Your call's coming up.
Uh we have so much more to get to in the course of the program.
All coming up straight ahead as we continue.
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 SAS.
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.
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 SAS.
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.
All right, we continue with Congressman Stuby of Florida, member of the House Weaponization Subcommittee, had the hearing this morning on the weaponization of the federal government with RFK Jr. testifying today.
So at the hearing with RFK Jr. today, he made a point of saying I have never been anti-vaxxed, never told the public to avoid vaccination.
Let me play that.
I have never advised black Americans not to receive vaccines.
At one point you say I'm anti-vax, and that's a bad thing.
The other thing, the other moment you point out that all my children are vax.
I fact I'm fully compliant with the vaccine schedule myself, except for COVID.
I I I took flu vaccines for 20 years straight.
I have never been an anti-fax.
I have never told any I have never told the public avoid vaccination.
The only thing I've asked for, and my views are constantly misrepresented.
So that the truth of what I believe is not, we're not allowed to have a conversation with about that with the American people, which I believe vaccines should be tested with the same rigor as other medicines and medications.
All right, so he makes that statement in in your hearing.
And my question to you is um, and I've I've searched the record, and we have not found an instance specifically where he said don't get vaccinations.
Um, he himself has been very outspoken against them, which by the way, to me falls under the the realm of freedom of speech and opinion.
You know, and he's allowed to have that.
Yeah, he's absolutely allowed to have that.
He's allowed to express his opinion on that, and he's allowed to show evidence of of those opinions.
It's not criminal conduct, and then you have an administration who, oh, by the way, three days of them coming into their administration were suddenly trying to uh silence one of their now primary opponents.
Just like this the kind of stuff that they're doing to go after President Trump.
They're trying to go after RFK Jr. because he's a primary opponent, and they did that three days into their administration to start trying to censor.
Unbelievable.
Anyway, really interesting hearing today.
We appreciate you being with us, Congressman Stuby, great state of Florida.
We love having you on, sir.
Uh, thanks so much for being with us.
Thank you.
All right, 800-941 Sean, our number.
You want to be a part of the program.
The Sean Hannity Show, a thermo nuclear MMA assault on fake news.
And it is on right now.
All right, 25 to the top of the hour.
Our number 800 941 Sean.
If you'd like to be a part of the program, uh in a second, we'll get a huge breaking news story with our friend John Solomon of Justin News.com, FBI informant.
Remember the 1023 form, the FD 1023 confidential human source form.
Now you might want to recall that this source was highly valued by the FBI.
And and how do we know?
Because that source had been paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by the FBI for past information.
And anyway, John will tell us how the FBI informant told the agents that Hunter Biden was hired by Barisma to protect Ukrainian the Ukrainian firm, the big energy giant from problems.
Which then goes back to what I think I was one of the only people screaming every day and every night about the real quid pro quo, Joe Biden bragging about leveraging a billion dollars and taxpayer dollars.
So that a prosecutor in Ukraine would be fired, son of a bee, they do it in six hours, and Hunter continues to get paid.
Anyway, we'll get to that in a second.
But first I want to remind you, my pillow, 20 long years now, celebrating their 20th anniversary, over 80 million my pillows sold.
Can you believe that?
Anyway, Mike Lindell, my pillow employees want to thank each and every one of you for giving uh by giving you the lowest price in history on their infamous MyPillow.
When you go to the Sean Hannity Square at MyPillow.com.
For example, the Queen Size My Pillow, just nineteen ninety-eight, regular price sixty-nine ninety-eight.
The king is only ten bucks more.
And in addition to this special anniversary offer on the pillows, you're also going to get deep discounts on other popular MyPillow products, their bed sheets, their mattress toppers, their pet beds, their towels, my slippers, so much more.
So now's the perfect time.
If you've been wanting to try out some of their other amazing uh products, just go to my pillow.com, click on the Sean Hannity Square, or call 800-919-6090.
Now, this offer has a 10-year warranty and a 60-day unconditional money back guarantee.
And let me tell you, if you've never gotten a MyPillow, just wait.
All the all the sleep you've been wanting, needing, craving, desiring, deserving is yours.
When it arrives, my pillow.com, Sean Hannity Square to take advantage of the 20th anniversary offer.
Uh, we welcome back to the program.
He is the editor in chief of just the news.com and also an investigative reporter, friend of the program, our friend John Solomon is with us.
Well, I guess we kind of now understand why that battle went on for week after week after week, and the FBI did not want to hand over the FD 1023 form.
And then the first time they handed it over, they handed over a redacted version.
The next time they allowed members of the House Oversight Committee to see it in a skiff.
Uh, and now finally, and by the way, the funny part was is James Comer already had a copy.
So they already knew what was in it.
Uh, but now we're learning a lot more about it, and you just broke this uh just just moments ago, John Solomon.
Yes, listen, it's a four-page memo from the summer of twenty twenty that indicates that the FBI first heard about these allegations in twenty seventeen from their trusted informant, and that this informant had direct access to the founder of Barisma Holdings, uh, a man named Zolchesky, an oligarch in Ukraine.
The oligarch knew that he was under investigation by the Ukrainian prosecutor Victor Shokin, and that he had hired Hunter Biden to make those problems go away.
And that he was uh that through Hunter Biden, his father, meaning Joe Biden, the vice president, would help these issues go away.
The the uh owner of Barisma had a problem.
He was about to buy an American company, and he was going to go get an IPO to raise money in the United States, and the corruption investigation was blocking him from doing that.
And Hunter Biden was brought in with his father to do that.
He understood the owner of Breesma, told the informant, he understood that it was going to cost ten million, five million to Hunter, five million to Joe Biden to make these problems go away.
He paid it, uh, even though he thought that Hunter Biden was stupid.
He didn't think he was very good.
He also knew that Hunter Biden had no evidence uh no background in natural gas.
It was simply to buy protection.
The FBI has known this for a long time.
They knew that Zolcheski bragged, and the uh other uh executives of Breesma bragged, they would never find the money to Joe Biden.
It would take ten years to find how they paid the money.
This has been sitting in the FBI files for a long time.
Now, Sean, I'm going to tell you something I've never told anyone else.
Only the Justice Department knows this.
This was the information provided to me in December 18 that started me on my original reporting in 2019.
Everybody thought it came from Rudy Giuliani and Lev Parnis.
didn't.
I turned over my notes to the Justice Department a couple of years ago, and they learned that I found out my story about Biden.
Hunter Biden's story I came on your show and told people about before impeachment in 2019.
And by the way, in fairness to you, when you first brought this to me, I I was skeptical.
I kept remember I kept pressing and I'm saying, but but explain this to me.
And and obviously you can't reveal your sources to me.
Um because they're so highly confidential, which I totally, as you know, respect.
And I was like, wow.
And then you had convinced me enough, and there was enough evidence out there.
Joe Biden, you're not getting the the you're not getting the billion dollars.
Unless you fire a prosecutor.
By the way, isn't that odd that a vice president is interested in firing a prosecutor in Ukraine and withholding a billion taxpayer dollars to get it done and demanding it be done in six hours and son of a bee, he brags they did it.
And then Hunter stupidly goes on Good Morning America, where he admitted he had no experience at all in oil, gas, uh, coal, energy, or Ukraine, and is asked, Well, why do you think they paid you all this money?
I I don't know.
That was his answer.
I don't know.
Maybe because of your father.
So when he fired Victor Shokan, the prosecutor, Hunter continue to get paid John Solomon.
I don't know uh where I grew up, I have a word for that.
I'm not sure where you grew up, what word you would use, but sounds to me like a quid and a pro and a quo.
Well, listen, that's what the informant was told.
Went in the presence of the owner of the company, Mr. Zolchesky, the oligarch, the Ukrainian oligarch.
Zolchovsky said he had already paid the Bidens, presumably, to deal with Shokin, presumably to fire the Ukrainian prosecutor who is getting in the way of Ukraine uh Boris Maholding's business plans.
These this is extraordinary that the entire time President Trump was being impeached the entire time, I was being smeared and you were being smeared, telling us this is a conspiracy theory.
The FBI knew there was credible information from a trusted informant that this actually went down exactly the way I was told.
The Justice Department has my notes from 2018.
They know how I got this story.
They've known all along that this story was credible.
And all those members of Congress who smeared all the people who looked at this story, all those members of uh the FBI and the news media that smeared us, they didn't know until today.
But I can tell you now, I knew this information.
I did not know the FBI.
I believe the reason the FBI sources came to me was because they were having trouble getting this investigated, and so they went to a reporter who had done some good stuff on Russia.
But we had this nailed, and now that the American public can see this was never a conspiracy theory.
There was very serious concern that Joe Biden and Hunter Biden had been bribed to make a Ukrainian corruption case go away for one of his clients.
Next week, I believe we're gonna learn some more explosive information about what Joe Biden did to assure Barisma that he was taking care of them.
We're gonna learn that next week.
Wow, I mean, this is amazing.
Let's talk about Devin Archer and what we might hear from him next week.
Yeah.
I believe that Devin Archer will be able to identify various times that Joe Biden did things specifically to uh help Hunter Biden's clients.
I won't get into more specifics than that right now.
I think you'll learn more next week.
But my reporting indicates that uh he was a witness, Devin Archer, who was on the Briesma board along with Hunter Biden.
He was a witness to moments where Joe Biden did things that benefited Hunter Biden's clients, including Burisma.
I think you'll learn more about that next week.
Uh but uh the the that will be a Biden insider.
Remember, we have another Biden insider that has now said, Yeah, Joe Biden met with the Chinese guys, Rob Walker, family friend, basically saying that Joe Biden didn't tell the truth when he looked in the camera and said, I never met with any of my son's business partners.
Rob Walker said no, he did.
I was there.
I think Devin Archer will be able to give similar testimony, similar information to Congress.
And listen, he's Well, let me ask you, what is Devin Archer now have in it for him?
Is it the fear that they might go a lot deeper considering the investigations going on, especially in Comer's committee and and Jim Jordan's committee, and that a lot more is coming out on the Biden family syndicate, and there's way more countries than were originally that we originally knew about and the speci suspicious activity reports they have copies of all the the shell corporations,
the LLCs that were not built for any real business dealings, but to just funnel money through.
Um you think Devin Archer is looking for something here?
Because if he is, and if he's looking for pr to protect himself, that would probably be a pretty big motivation.
In other words, is he ready to flip on the Bidens?
I think Devin Archer just wants to tell his side of the story.
He's been uh portrayed uh by others, and he has his own firsthand knowledge of what went on, including in the tribal scheme that he was convicted, uh tribal bond scheme.
I think he has some things to reveal on that.
I think he he he has seen the Bidens give one account, which by the way, just keeps eroding, right?
Everything Joe Biden has said is falling apart.
Uh uh I think he wants to set the record straight.
That's my my reporting indicates he he he doesn't have an animus one way or the other.
He's not there to protect the Bidens or to harm the Bidens.
He just wants the American public to know what really went on, and I think we'll get some very valuable information that will fill in some of the gaps here.
What is evidently clear now, overwhelmingly clear.
Joe Biden said his money didn't get his family got no money from China.
They did.
The lawyers confirmed that.
They said, I never did anything to meet with my son's business partners.
And Devin Archer will extend that.
Rob Walker already confirming that.
Uh uh, Joe Biden said there was no reason to investigate his son.
Now his son's gonna plead guilty to tax evasion.
And by the way, we knew that tax evasion goes to this very transaction in Ukraine.
And now we knew the FBI had strong reason before Joe Biden became president to suspect he was involved in a bribery scheme.
All of that debunks what Joe Biden said when he did his last job interview with the American people, looked in the camera.
Oh, by the way, he also told us the laptop was fake, and it wasn't.
Joe Biden lied to get hit in his final job interview with the American people in the fall of 2020.
He lied on multiple fronts, according to the evidence now in front of us, and he got his job because he misled the American people.
That is the one thing, no matter what comes of this, that is now clear to the American people.
He did not tell them the truth about lots of things.
And the question is, why?
All right, quick break.
More with investigative reporter, editor in chief, just the news.com, uh, John Solomon on the other side.
All right, we continue.
Uh big breaking news from our friend John Solomon at just the news uh dot com and is this is a a blockbuster story today about the FBI informant uh with a uh 1023 form, told agents for the FBI that Hunter Biden was hired by Barisman to protect Ukraine from problems uh and the Ukrainians from problems involving the investigation into Barisma,
which greatly benefited the Bidens financially.
Let me go to what Chuck Grassley released late yesterday showing this Ukrainian oligarch claiming he was coerced into making the payoff, and that's the owner of of Barisma, uh Mikola Zladochevsky, I believe is how you pronounce the name,
telling this FBI informant that obviously was very trusted, having been paid a lot of money in the past by the FBI, saying specifically at this coffee shop in Vienna, Austria, that quota cost five million to pay one Biden, five million to pay another Biden, uh, according to the the FD 1023 port uh report that you're uh you're reporting today.
Do we know if Comer's committee we knew about the five million for sure, right?
Do we know for sure that 10 million got transferred?
Well, listen, but no one has found this money yet.
We've seen all we've seen transferred so far is about three point seven million dollars that went into the accounts.
Well, yesterday it came out in that committee hearing six point five from Ukraine.
Mul mostly believed to be from U cre you from um Barisma.
I think there are multiple people that paid uh the Hunter Biden team in bur uh in Ukraine.
I wrote a story about another oligarch that did some investment with.
No, I mean it gets confusing.
Um I'm not trying to complicate this.
They had so many forward deals going at once, it's hard to track.
I don't believe to this moment they have tracked a full amount of ten million dollars.
What we do know from the FBI record that I got a hold of two years ago is that 3.7 million came through in monthly payments of I think eighty-three thousand six hundred and sixty-seven dollars for a period of two years.
It rolls up to about three point seven million dollars between what Devin Archer and Hunter Biden got.
There is a pursuit of to try to find this other money.
In this document, Zolchevsky and the other Ukrainian executives brag, it's gonna take them ten years to find how we really paid the money.
But here's the most important thing that both Zolchevsky and his top guy, the man who de on a daily basis dealt with Hunter Biden, the guy named Badin Pazarski, told the informant.
He told the informant they paid Hunter Biden to take care of problems through his father.
His father was part of the package, according to this informant report, quoting directly the Ukrainian Barisma officials who knew what was going on.
That is so significant.
Joe Biden was part of the package, according to this.
And the problem that they wanted to deal with was the dealing with Victor Shokan, that Ukrainian prosecutor that was in fact investigating Barisma.
Those are really significant revelations.
They confirm what I was told in December 18, what I began reporting at the Hill in 2019.
It confirms what Ron Johnson and Chuck Grassley first reported in 2020.
It confirms everything that your show focused on in 2019, 2020, 2021.
We now know that the Ukrainians saw Joe Biden and Hunter Biden as a package that they purchased when they paid this money to Hunter Biden.
By the way, it also shows that the Ukrainians didn't think very much of Hunter Biden's gas knowledge or his overall skill set.
They they called him uh I don't want to know if the word stupid, but they called the use pejorative terms like was not smart.
Let me read you.
Pajarski, the Ukraine official replied that Hunter Biden was not smart.
Uh all right.
They try to ignore us, John Solomon, but guess what?
They can't.
This is this is now coming to a head.
Republicans and those two committees, Oversight and Judiciary are doing their job.
Uh thanks, John Solomon, editor-in-chief, Justin News.com, investigator reporter.
We always appreciate it, John.
Thank you.
All right, when we come back, state of the economy, so much more.
800 nine four one Sean, our number.
We'll get to your calls.
Some of these you know oh, we have an update on Jason Aldeen, by the way.
We'll get to that today.
▲
Export Selection