Peter Schweizer

These are essentially his siblings and their spouses and his son and his daughter. And what's significant is all six of these people are individuals that are connected to LLCs, these limited liability companies that the family had multiple listings of. And these are entities that all received money from these foreign entities.

These are essentially his siblings and their spouses and his son and his daughter. And what's significant is all six of these people are individuals that are connected to LLCs, these limited liability companies that the family had multiple listings of. And these are entities that all received money from these foreign entities.

It's also important to point out, John, that each one of these pardons, whether it's Hunter or the other five family members, The pardon specifically mentions any crimes that occurred beginning after January 1st of 2014. That's significant because all of the foreign deals, those involving China, Ukraine, and Russia, all started happening in early 2014.

It's also important to point out, John, that each one of these pardons, whether it's Hunter or the other five family members, The pardon specifically mentions any crimes that occurred beginning after January 1st of 2014. That's significant because all of the foreign deals, those involving China, Ukraine, and Russia, all started happening in early 2014.

So they clearly seem to be dated and designed to cover the transfers of those foreign funds.

So they clearly seem to be dated and designed to cover the transfers of those foreign funds.

Yes, in fact, they had. James Comer mentioned all of them. I think Comer actually has a new book out, which is quite good, by the way, where he mentions all of them. And I think there is a connection there. I think the fact that these are in the sights of congressional investigators is probably one of the things that prompted Joe Biden to issue this action.

Yes, in fact, they had. James Comer mentioned all of them. I think Comer actually has a new book out, which is quite good, by the way, where he mentions all of them. And I think there is a connection there. I think the fact that these are in the sights of congressional investigators is probably one of the things that prompted Joe Biden to issue this action.

Let's also keep in mind that this also, in a way, provides some protection of Joe Biden as well, Because if you do believe this was an influence peddling scheme, Joe Biden was certainly involved. And by pardoning his spouses and his children, it provides a guardrail of protection for him as well. So this is self-serving, not just something beneficial to his family.

Let's also keep in mind that this also, in a way, provides some protection of Joe Biden as well, Because if you do believe this was an influence peddling scheme, Joe Biden was certainly involved. And by pardoning his spouses and his children, it provides a guardrail of protection for him as well. So this is self-serving, not just something beneficial to his family.

Well, I think the most compelling evidence is that they have collected tens of millions of dollars, some $31 million, from these foreign entities, and there's no evidence of them giving anything legitimate in return. So in the case of China, for example, we know that they got $5 million from a Chinese businessman named Mr. Zhao.

Well, I think the most compelling evidence is that they have collected tens of millions of dollars, some $31 million, from these foreign entities, and there's no evidence of them giving anything legitimate in return. So in the case of China, for example, we know that they got $5 million from a Chinese businessman named Mr. Zhao.

There's no evidence that anything was given to him in return of a business nature. And people generally don't pass around $5 million without expecting something in return. So that has always been the mystery. And the fact that the Bidens have, A, denied that there was any money transference, and of course there was, and then they denied that Joe Biden was aware of this or involved.

There's no evidence that anything was given to him in return of a business nature. And people generally don't pass around $5 million without expecting something in return. So that has always been the mystery. And the fact that the Bidens have, A, denied that there was any money transference, and of course there was, and then they denied that Joe Biden was aware of this or involved.

We now know that he met with several of these people. makes it very clear that they were trying to cover something up. What Joe Biden did specifically in return for those funds, we don't know. But that's why I think we need to have continued congressional investigation. It's not about looking in the past and trying to punish a political opponent.

We now know that he met with several of these people. makes it very clear that they were trying to cover something up. What Joe Biden did specifically in return for those funds, we don't know. But that's why I think we need to have continued congressional investigation. It's not about looking in the past and trying to punish a political opponent.

It's about trying to unpack exactly what was done for this money so we can deter it from happening in the future with other political figures.

It's about trying to unpack exactly what was done for this money so we can deter it from happening in the future with other political figures.

Yeah, no, those are great questions. Well, it's going to be challenged in court. A lot of people question whether you can grant pardon for a crime that may or may not have been committed that you haven't been charged for. That has never been done before.

Yeah, no, those are great questions. Well, it's going to be challenged in court. A lot of people question whether you can grant pardon for a crime that may or may not have been committed that you haven't been charged for. That has never been done before.

And there's a lot of legal scholars that say this just simply is too broad because you could essentially, under this construct, provide blanket immunity for a murder that was not discovered until later on. And that seems overly broad. As far as congressional investigations are concerned, absolutely, they can continue to investigate. Jim Comer, I talked to him recently.

And there's a lot of legal scholars that say this just simply is too broad because you could essentially, under this construct, provide blanket immunity for a murder that was not discovered until later on. And that seems overly broad. As far as congressional investigations are concerned, absolutely, they can continue to investigate. Jim Comer, I talked to him recently.

a couple of days ago, and he told me that he has advised the incoming Attorney General, Pam Bondi, that he believes that the Department of Justice needs to investigate this. You can ask people questions. You can do a criminal investigation, even if you're not targeting the specific family member. And I think Congress needs to investigate it because, again, It's not just about what the Bidens did.

a couple of days ago, and he told me that he has advised the incoming Attorney General, Pam Bondi, that he believes that the Department of Justice needs to investigate this. You can ask people questions. You can do a criminal investigation, even if you're not targeting the specific family member. And I think Congress needs to investigate it because, again, It's not just about what the Bidens did.

One of the true things about Washington, D.C., is if people figure out a way in power to make money for their family and they're not going to be caught, they're not going to be held liable, it will be imitated. So this notion of getting foreign entities to enrich your family when you're a decision maker in a position to help or hurt them could become widespread.

One of the true things about Washington, D.C., is if people figure out a way in power to make money for their family and they're not going to be caught, they're not going to be held liable, it will be imitated. So this notion of getting foreign entities to enrich your family when you're a decision maker in a position to help or hurt them could become widespread.

And I don't think anybody wants that.

And I don't think anybody wants that.

Well, some people like Professor Alan Dershowitz, Professor Emeritus of Law at Harvard, has said that this actually creates problems for the Biden family, these pardons do, because now when you are asked questions by a congressional committee or by Department of Justice lawyers, you cannot plead the Fifth Amendment because, of course, the Fifth Amendment prevents you from self-incrimination.

Well, some people like Professor Alan Dershowitz, Professor Emeritus of Law at Harvard, has said that this actually creates problems for the Biden family, these pardons do, because now when you are asked questions by a congressional committee or by Department of Justice lawyers, you cannot plead the Fifth Amendment because, of course, the Fifth Amendment prevents you from self-incrimination.

Now, if you are exempt from being prosecuted for these crimes— you presumably cannot plead the Fifth Amendment. So it may actually make things harder for the Biden family in terms of actually having to answer questions. But the key thing is those questions have to be asked.

Now, if you are exempt from being prosecuted for these crimes— you presumably cannot plead the Fifth Amendment. So it may actually make things harder for the Biden family in terms of actually having to answer questions. But the key thing is those questions have to be asked.

Of course. Happy to be with you.

Of course. Happy to be with you.

The Department of Justice, under Pam Bonney, who I think is going to be confirmed, and by the Congressional Oversight Committees, need to proceed. This is not about retribution. It's not about being vindictive. That certainly seems to be what people have accused Trump of doing. But if you look at his first term as president, he certainly did not prosecute Hillary Clinton or anyone else.

The Department of Justice, under Pam Bonney, who I think is going to be confirmed, and by the Congressional Oversight Committees, need to proceed. This is not about retribution. It's not about being vindictive. That certainly seems to be what people have accused Trump of doing. But if you look at his first term as president, he certainly did not prosecute Hillary Clinton or anyone else.

And there's no reason to believe that that would be taking place here. It's simply trying to get clarification and facts of what actually transpired and what these Chinese, Russian and Ukrainian entities actually got in exchange for sending millions of dollars to Joe Biden's family.

And there's no reason to believe that that would be taking place here. It's simply trying to get clarification and facts of what actually transpired and what these Chinese, Russian and Ukrainian entities actually got in exchange for sending millions of dollars to Joe Biden's family.

I think that's going to be the central question, John, going forward, because you have these large institutions, the Department of Defense, for example, or the CIA. These are entities that there's a reason people call them the deep state, because they're deeply embedded within those bureaucracies.

I think that's going to be the central question, John, going forward, because you have these large institutions, the Department of Defense, for example, or the CIA. These are entities that there's a reason people call them the deep state, because they're deeply embedded within those bureaucracies.

So you're going to have somebody who is confirmed as the SecDef or as the CIA director who is going to be having to deal with bureaucracies that are trying to counteract what you're doing. It's very hard to fight that kind of trench warfare at the same time as you're carrying out policies to deal with, say, the threat from China or the threat from Russia. So that is going to be the defining issue.

So you're going to have somebody who is confirmed as the SecDef or as the CIA director who is going to be having to deal with bureaucracies that are trying to counteract what you're doing. It's very hard to fight that kind of trench warfare at the same time as you're carrying out policies to deal with, say, the threat from China or the threat from Russia. So that is going to be the defining issue.

But I think it is the battle that has to be fought because it comes down to the question of are we actually governed by the people we elect?

But I think it is the battle that has to be fought because it comes down to the question of are we actually governed by the people we elect?

that we have chosen to represent us or are government decisions being made by unelected bureaucrats and are those unelected bureaucrats involved at some level in corruption and i think the history of our country demonstrates that absolutely they are so to me this is the marquee issue and it's a reflection of this broader concern that i have of what i call the globalization of corruption

that we have chosen to represent us or are government decisions being made by unelected bureaucrats and are those unelected bureaucrats involved at some level in corruption and i think the history of our country demonstrates that absolutely they are so to me this is the marquee issue and it's a reflection of this broader concern that i have of what i call the globalization of corruption

When we think of corruption, we think of the guy who's got a paving business back in some congressional district who wants some highway, federal highway dollars steered his way by the congressman. What we're talking about is foreign governments, in some cases those that are hostile to the United States, giving money to our elected officials and getting something in return.

When we think of corruption, we think of the guy who's got a paving business back in some congressional district who wants some highway, federal highway dollars steered his way by the congressman. What we're talking about is foreign governments, in some cases those that are hostile to the United States, giving money to our elected officials and getting something in return.

So this is not just rank and file corruption, which is bad enough. This is globalized corruption, and it's only going to get worse, not better, unless we actually do something about it.

So this is not just rank and file corruption, which is bad enough. This is globalized corruption, and it's only going to get worse, not better, unless we actually do something about it.

Well, I think on Capitol Hill, the House Oversight Committee, Jim Comer, I think has done an excellent job. He's fact-based, he's driven, and he's prepared to name names, which is the key in these investigations. So I expect a lot of activities in the House of Representatives. And I think in the Department of Justice,

Well, I think on Capitol Hill, the House Oversight Committee, Jim Comer, I think has done an excellent job. He's fact-based, he's driven, and he's prepared to name names, which is the key in these investigations. So I expect a lot of activities in the House of Representatives. And I think in the Department of Justice,

the next several weeks you're going to see a series of reviews done by senior attorneys at doj under pam bondi making decisions about some of the very controversial things that have happened with regard to say tony fauci who apparently lied before congressional committees What is the legal standard for lying before Congress? Did he cross that line?

the next several weeks you're going to see a series of reviews done by senior attorneys at doj under pam bondi making decisions about some of the very controversial things that have happened with regard to say tony fauci who apparently lied before congressional committees What is the legal standard for lying before Congress? Did he cross that line?

And is there a reason to open an investigation and to bring him in to ask him questions about that? So I think there's going to be a little bit of quiet before the storm, because, again, when you're dealing with these legal matters, you want to make sure that you are crossing all the T's and dotting the I's, because what gets you into trouble is when you don't do the prep work.

And is there a reason to open an investigation and to bring him in to ask him questions about that? So I think there's going to be a little bit of quiet before the storm, because, again, when you're dealing with these legal matters, you want to make sure that you are crossing all the T's and dotting the I's, because what gets you into trouble is when you don't do the prep work.

And Bondi certainly has a reputation for doing her prep work.

And Bondi certainly has a reputation for doing her prep work.

Yeah, there's no example in American history of a family member of a sitting president being pardoned, no less five members of the family, or six if you include Hunter. Also, these sort of preemptive pardons are really unprecedented as well, and those will probably be tested in court.

Yeah, there's no example in American history of a family member of a sitting president being pardoned, no less five members of the family, or six if you include Hunter. Also, these sort of preemptive pardons are really unprecedented as well, and those will probably be tested in court.

Well, I think one of the unanswered questions about the Biden family, and again, if you look at the pardons that were issued to Hunter Biden and the family, they run up specifically through December of last year. So any crimes that would have been committed in 2024 would be covered as well. And you wonder, well, what does that mean?

Well, I think one of the unanswered questions about the Biden family, and again, if you look at the pardons that were issued to Hunter Biden and the family, they run up specifically through December of last year. So any crimes that would have been committed in 2024 would be covered as well. And you wonder, well, what does that mean?

Well, that could be the Hunter Biden art deals that were very controversial. But I also think it's worth looking at this period when Joe Biden had that disastrous debate performance with Donald Trump, and he spent about four or five weeks refusing to get out of the race, and Hunter Biden moved into the White House.

Well, that could be the Hunter Biden art deals that were very controversial. But I also think it's worth looking at this period when Joe Biden had that disastrous debate performance with Donald Trump, and he spent about four or five weeks refusing to get out of the race, and Hunter Biden moved into the White House.

I believe, I don't have evidence to confirm this, I believe that the Biden family negotiated financial deals to secure his exit from that race. Whether that crosses the legal line and is illegal, I don't know. But I think that is worth looking into as well. It certainly fits their pattern of monetizing things. It certainly makes sense that Hunter Biden was at the center of it.

I believe, I don't have evidence to confirm this, I believe that the Biden family negotiated financial deals to secure his exit from that race. Whether that crosses the legal line and is illegal, I don't know. But I think that is worth looking into as well. It certainly fits their pattern of monetizing things. It certainly makes sense that Hunter Biden was at the center of it.

That's where a lot of this money would flow through. And that would, of course, raise questions about what they might be doing in the post-presidential years and the money they might be living off of in this case.

That's where a lot of this money would flow through. And that would, of course, raise questions about what they might be doing in the post-presidential years and the money they might be living off of in this case.

Oh, absolutely. I mean, you see that in the government grants. You also see that in the Department of Justice. You know, they will go after Morgan Stanley and say that, you know, you violated these laws. And then they will negotiate a settlement for $300 million. And we all think, OK, Morgan Stanley is now sending $300 million to the U.S. Treasury.

Oh, absolutely. I mean, you see that in the government grants. You also see that in the Department of Justice. You know, they will go after Morgan Stanley and say that, you know, you violated these laws. And then they will negotiate a settlement for $300 million. And we all think, OK, Morgan Stanley is now sending $300 million to the U.S. Treasury.

No, the Department of Justice under the Biden administration, under the Obama administration says, well, make a donation to these nonprofit organizations to rectify the problem. But these are activist groups that are being funded in this way. So you have this large infrastructure of entities and organizations.

No, the Department of Justice under the Biden administration, under the Obama administration says, well, make a donation to these nonprofit organizations to rectify the problem. But these are activist groups that are being funded in this way. So you have this large infrastructure of entities and organizations.

There's one called the International Democratic Institute that we're looking at that got $180 million in in grants from the federal government.

There's one called the International Democratic Institute that we're looking at that got $180 million in in grants from the federal government.

For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com.

For more on many of these stories and news you can trust, go to charliekirk.com.

No, I think you're right. And look, what you're seeing with Trump is the arrival of something we haven't seen since really the 1980s with Reagan, which is a grand strategy. Looking at the road, looking at the map around the world and tracing what the challenges, what the threats are and what the opportunities are for the United States.

No, I think you're right. And look, what you're seeing with Trump is the arrival of something we haven't seen since really the 1980s with Reagan, which is a grand strategy. Looking at the road, looking at the map around the world and tracing what the challenges, what the threats are and what the opportunities are for the United States.

And we are essentially in a bipolar world now where it's China and the United States. So each one of those issues you talked about, you're quite right. China's at the heart of it. I think you're particularly right on the issue of Ukraine, because what's happened is, look, I side with the Ukrainian people. What Russia did was terrible. Putin is responsible for this.

And we are essentially in a bipolar world now where it's China and the United States. So each one of those issues you talked about, you're quite right. China's at the heart of it. I think you're particularly right on the issue of Ukraine, because what's happened is, look, I side with the Ukrainian people. What Russia did was terrible. Putin is responsible for this.

But the fact that we have aggressively gone after Russia and essentially adopted the position that we're not going to have any negotiations has pushed Russia into the corner with China. which is actually not a natural fit. They're longtime rivals. They share a long border. But it's put Putin in this role of having to rely increasingly on China.

But the fact that we have aggressively gone after Russia and essentially adopted the position that we're not going to have any negotiations has pushed Russia into the corner with China. which is actually not a natural fit. They're longtime rivals. They share a long border. But it's put Putin in this role of having to rely increasingly on China.

If we are able to actually come up with a just peace agreement with Ukraine that moves Russia's isolation and dependence on China, that is a huge, huge win for the United States and a huge loss for China. So I think what's happening is very exciting. We'll see how successful these initiatives are, but I think the early indications are very, very good.

If we are able to actually come up with a just peace agreement with Ukraine that moves Russia's isolation and dependence on China, that is a huge, huge win for the United States and a huge loss for China. So I think what's happening is very exciting. We'll see how successful these initiatives are, but I think the early indications are very, very good.

Well, I think Zelensky went into the Oval Office and was supposed to sign an agreement. All sides expected that was going to happen. And Zelensky started to make a moral argument in the middle of the consummation of a deal. And I understand the moral argument he's making. But the fact of the matter is that Ukraine can't win this war.

Well, I think Zelensky went into the Oval Office and was supposed to sign an agreement. All sides expected that was going to happen. And Zelensky started to make a moral argument in the middle of the consummation of a deal. And I understand the moral argument he's making. But the fact of the matter is that Ukraine can't win this war.

You know, Russia, the estimate is our Russia's suffered up to 900,000 casualties, which for the United States, that would be like close to 2 million people, an extraordinary number. But Ukraine's numbers are just as bad, if not worse, in proportion to the population size. They're a third or a quarter the size of Russia. So as the war grinds out, they are not going to be able to win this war.

You know, Russia, the estimate is our Russia's suffered up to 900,000 casualties, which for the United States, that would be like close to 2 million people, an extraordinary number. But Ukraine's numbers are just as bad, if not worse, in proportion to the population size. They're a third or a quarter the size of Russia. So as the war grinds out, they are not going to be able to win this war.

So you've got to think about what's the best deal that we can get. And Zelensky is of the mindset that he doesn't want a deal. So he's trying to make a moral argument. And that's not the place to do it. So I think it was a big mistake on his part. And, you know, Europe is not really willing to back him.

So you've got to think about what's the best deal that we can get. And Zelensky is of the mindset that he doesn't want a deal. So he's trying to make a moral argument. And that's not the place to do it. So I think it was a big mistake on his part. And, you know, Europe is not really willing to back him.

The Guardian had a really interesting survey that they put out yesterday where they asked all these European countries, people, you know, do you think that Ukraine needs more financial and military support vis-a-vis Russia? And majorities in every single country say absolutely yes. Then the second question is, would you like your country to give more to the Ukrainian cause?

The Guardian had a really interesting survey that they put out yesterday where they asked all these European countries, people, you know, do you think that Ukraine needs more financial and military support vis-a-vis Russia? And majorities in every single country say absolutely yes. Then the second question is, would you like your country to give more to the Ukrainian cause?

And clear majorities all said no. So, you know, Europe doesn't want to do anything other than moralize. So the fact of the matter is you've got to cut a deal. It's got to be a just and fair deal. Putin has already paid an enormous price for this invasion, as he should have. But you've got to try to cobble something together.

And clear majorities all said no. So, you know, Europe doesn't want to do anything other than moralize. So the fact of the matter is you've got to cut a deal. It's got to be a just and fair deal. Putin has already paid an enormous price for this invasion, as he should have. But you've got to try to cobble something together.

And I think Zelensky thought he would go there and moralize and it would actually be to his benefit. And of course, Trump and J.D. Vance said, no, we're not going to do that.

And I think Zelensky thought he would go there and moralize and it would actually be to his benefit. And of course, Trump and J.D. Vance said, no, we're not going to do that.

Yeah, well, he's suggesting it because he wants it, but he's not going to get it. I mean, of course, if you're the Ukrainian president, of course you want the United States to say we're going to protect you. The fact of the matter is the logical entity to protect Ukraine in terms of security guarantees is Europe. It's not the United States.

Yeah, well, he's suggesting it because he wants it, but he's not going to get it. I mean, of course, if you're the Ukrainian president, of course you want the United States to say we're going to protect you. The fact of the matter is the logical entity to protect Ukraine in terms of security guarantees is Europe. It's not the United States.

You can look back to the 1980s. I was a huge Reagan fan. The United States was not near bankruptcy when Reagan was president. The GDP ratio to our national debt is astronomical compared to what it was in the 1980s. We cannot afford to have those security guarantees. So, you know, as somebody put it online,

You can look back to the 1980s. I was a huge Reagan fan. The United States was not near bankruptcy when Reagan was president. The GDP ratio to our national debt is astronomical compared to what it was in the 1980s. We cannot afford to have those security guarantees. So, you know, as somebody put it online,

You have a Europe, a region with 300 million people asking the United States with less people to hold off a country with 160 million people, which is Russia. It's absurd. Europe needs to step up. If they want to sermonize and say this is important, they should provide security guarantees. The British, French militaries and the Germans could absolutely do it.

You have a Europe, a region with 300 million people asking the United States with less people to hold off a country with 160 million people, which is Russia. It's absurd. Europe needs to step up. If they want to sermonize and say this is important, they should provide security guarantees. The British, French militaries and the Germans could absolutely do it.

And the minerals deal, the genius in my mind of the minerals deal, is not just that it benefits the United States strategically in getting the minerals, but it does wed us to Ukraine. We now have something of value for us that gives us an interest long after Donald Trump leaves the Oval Office, whose ever president is going to be concerned about making sure that our mineral interests in Ukraine.

And the minerals deal, the genius in my mind of the minerals deal, is not just that it benefits the United States strategically in getting the minerals, but it does wed us to Ukraine. We now have something of value for us that gives us an interest long after Donald Trump leaves the Oval Office, whose ever president is going to be concerned about making sure that our mineral interests in Ukraine.

So it weds us to them without offering an absolute military guarantee.

So it weds us to them without offering an absolute military guarantee.

I think Doge is terrific. And I think I'm very encouraged about where it seems to be heading. I think what you're seeing on the left is kind of a reaction mode because Trump's doing it. They're automatically against it. But there's also, I think, a deeper element here, Alex. I mean, we talk about, you know, the waste and the abuse. which are, of course, huge components of this.

I think Doge is terrific. And I think I'm very encouraged about where it seems to be heading. I think what you're seeing on the left is kind of a reaction mode because Trump's doing it. They're automatically against it. But there's also, I think, a deeper element here, Alex. I mean, we talk about, you know, the waste and the abuse. which are, of course, huge components of this.

Transgenders in Guatemala, ridiculous expenditures here. But there's a deeper battle that's going on here because a lot of this money that flows through these grants and through these contracts are to the political class in Washington, D.C. It's a business model. You look at USAID and some of these government agencies. You

Transgenders in Guatemala, ridiculous expenditures here. But there's a deeper battle that's going on here because a lot of this money that flows through these grants and through these contracts are to the political class in Washington, D.C. It's a business model. You look at USAID and some of these government agencies. You

huge amounts of the contract money actually never goes to the developing world. It stays in the Washington Beltway to consultancies that are run by political operatives that help get people elected. So part of the pushback in Washington, D.C. is I think from the fact that, wait a minute, this slush fund that we operated for all these years is being shut down or is being exposed.

huge amounts of the contract money actually never goes to the developing world. It stays in the Washington Beltway to consultancies that are run by political operatives that help get people elected. So part of the pushback in Washington, D.C. is I think from the fact that, wait a minute, this slush fund that we operated for all these years is being shut down or is being exposed.

So that's part of the resistance. And that to me is the most valuable thing. Yes, are they buying pens and pencils for, you know, $25 a piece and that's a waste. Of course, the deeper issue for me is the fact that this has been a tool of paying off political allies and campaign contributors with our money. It's a business model and that's being exposed.

So that's part of the resistance. And that to me is the most valuable thing. Yes, are they buying pens and pencils for, you know, $25 a piece and that's a waste. Of course, the deeper issue for me is the fact that this has been a tool of paying off political allies and campaign contributors with our money. It's a business model and that's being exposed.

That's the most valuable thing that's happening.

That's the most valuable thing that's happening.

Yeah, no, I mean, I think that's a bad one. But here's the challenge we face, right? I mean, and this is how bad Washington, D.C. is. If you give a $2 billion government grant to an organization that had $1,000 that was just started up a couple of months before, That actually may not be illegal. That's the shocking thing. And that's the problem.

Yeah, no, I mean, I think that's a bad one. But here's the challenge we face, right? I mean, and this is how bad Washington, D.C. is. If you give a $2 billion government grant to an organization that had $1,000 that was just started up a couple of months before, That actually may not be illegal. That's the shocking thing. And that's the problem.

So if we're looking for Stacey Abrams to go to jail over this, it's probably not going to happen because they know how these games are played. And there was probably technically no law that was violated. But what you're seeing is what I call legal graft. It's like the old Tammany Hall corruption. They do things within existing law.

So if we're looking for Stacey Abrams to go to jail over this, it's probably not going to happen because they know how these games are played. And there was probably technically no law that was violated. But what you're seeing is what I call legal graft. It's like the old Tammany Hall corruption. They do things within existing law.

Nobody's going to go to jail, but it's absolutely as corrupt as something that is illegal. That's why it needs to be halted, and that's why it needs to be prevented from happening. So exposure and embarrassment is great, and we need to find out who the decision makers are, make sure they can't do it again. But we should probably not expect anybody to go to jail because it's probably not illegal.

Nobody's going to go to jail, but it's absolutely as corrupt as something that is illegal. That's why it needs to be halted, and that's why it needs to be prevented from happening. So exposure and embarrassment is great, and we need to find out who the decision makers are, make sure they can't do it again. But we should probably not expect anybody to go to jail because it's probably not illegal.

Remember, the people doing this are the people that write their own rules. Yes. So they're going to know what the rules are and they're going to avoid doing something illegal.

Remember, the people doing this are the people that write their own rules. Yes. So they're going to know what the rules are and they're going to avoid doing something illegal.