Peter Schweizer
speaker
868 appearances
9 recordings
6 series
first heard Jan 2025
last heard 21 Feb
Peter Schweizer’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsRecordings per month over the last 12 months — 7 in all, peaking in Jan 2026 with 5.
Appearances
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Of course. Happy to be with you.
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.
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.
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.
Showing 821–840 of 868 · page 42 of 44
← Previous
Next →