The Jordan B. Peterson Podcast - 495. The CIA, Corruption, and the Biden Heirs | Miranda Devine

Episode Date: November 4, 2024

Dr. Jordan B. Peterson sits down with journalist and best-selling author Miranda Devine. They discuss her latest book, “The Big Guy,” which sheds new light on the darkest depths of the Biden family’s corruption. Ukraine ties, China distractions, Russian misinformation hoaxes, and the true net worth of Joe — it’s all in this episode. Miranda Devine is an Australian radio host, columnist, and writer who now lives in New York. She has written for the Sydney Morning Herald, the Sun-Herald, the Daily Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph, the Sunday Herald Sun, the Sunday Times, and the New York Times. Her 2021 publication, “Laptop from Hell: Hunter Biden, Big Tech, and the Dirty Secrets the President Tried to Hide,” details who Hunter Biden is, his drug addiction, his supposed dealings with his father both when he was vice president and now, and their manipulation of the establishment media to censor dissidents and suppress the opposition. This episode was recorded on October 26th, 2024 | Links | For Miranda Devine: The Big Guy: How a President and His Son Sold Out America (Book)https://www.amazon.com/Big-Guy-Inside-Scandal-Machine/dp/0063374811 "Laptop from Hell: Hunter Biden, Big Tech, and the Dirty Secrets the President Tried to Hide" (Book) https://www.amazon.com/Laptop-Hell-Hu... On X https://twitter.com/mirandadevine?ref... 

Hello everybody. So I had the opportunity today to speak once again to Miranda Devine. Now you may remember and you may not that I spoke to Miranda about her last book, Laptop from Hell. She has a new one called The Big Guy, which continues her documentation of the Biden family and deep state saga. Miranda is a journalist for the New York Post and she broke the laptop story, which was very rapidly dismissed as Russian misinformation by a cabal of ex-intelligence agents and operatives and was also suppressed on Twitter and Facebook and other venues. And Miranda has continued her work investigating the machinations of the deep state

in her new book, The Big Guy. And so that's what we talked about today. That and Trump Derangement Syndrome and the role of the legacy media, the transforming role of the legacy media, the role of the New York Post in being an advocate for center-right, genuine journalism. So, join us for that. So, Miranda, we spoke about a year ago. I think I released our first podcast on the 4th of October, and that was Laptop from Hell, which, you know, was a catchy title, and I thought after delving through your book, delving into your book and through the associated

material online that that was a pretty appropriate title. It tells a pretty, it tells an appalling story all things considered and one that hasn't produced nearly as much scandal as it should have, especially given the intelligence community's insistence, that infamous document of 51 signatories claiming that that was Russian disinformation. I really thought that was the crooked most, that was the crookedest political move that I've seen in the American landscape in my entire lifetime. That was appalling. And now you have a new book, The Big Guy.

And so I thought it'd be real interesting to have you walk us through that. First thing I'd like to ask maybe is, you know, obviously Biden has been sidelined, and we could talk about that in some detail because what the hell. And so viewers might be interested first in, well, why should we bother with this? Because he's now a bit player in a defunct drama. And so why don't you start with that and then let's move into the book per se. Yeah, thanks, Jordan. Look, it's important because the very same people, that sort of unaccountable cabal of the intelligence community,

the CIA, the FBI, the State Department and so on, that have protected Joe Biden for so long and his family from the consequences of their greed, are the same people who are propping up Kamala Harris now. And you see that because there is an overlap between the signatories of that dirty 51 letter that you just mentioned from the former intelligence officials falsely claiming that the laptop was a Russian disinformation operation.

There's about nine of them who also signed onto a letter claiming that Kamala Harris was the most capable and serious contender for Commander-in-Chief. So let's talk about some of the markers of success. Money, fame, power. Fame in and of itself is not a bad marker for success. Not everyone who's famous is useful and not everyone who isn't famous is useless. Why is there a small percentage of hyper successful men who are willing to sacrifice everything in pursuit of that success.

It's like if you intervene at the right time, you don't need to use power. Success is not a place you get to and stay. It also integrates the idea of the journey and the idea of the destination. and the idea of the destination. And so there now you have a definition of success. Okay, so what do you make of this? And why should we inform ourselves about the extent of the Biden family's misdoing? Once he's out of office, his family is off the national and international stage. We're going to turn our attention either to a Harris presidency, God

preserve us, or to a Trump presidency, which will be devastatingly interesting. Let's put it that way. So tell us about those signatories, those additional nine. Tell us what you make of the shadowy figures, so to speak. It always sounds like a right-wing conspiracy, doesn't it, that surround the Biden presidency and that would be influential with regards to a Harris presidency. Tell us what you make of that and what you've discovered. Well, the biggest story, I think, just like in Watergate, is the story of the cover-up and who's behind it. And I think the best way of seeing who they are and what their agenda is, is to look at the comparative presidencies and particularly in foreign policy of Joe Biden and Donald Trump and even Barack Obama.

I think the agenda of this cabal, what the Obama people used to call the blob, which was the CIA, the Pentagon and the State Department, what Donald Trump calls the deep state, these people view Donald Trump as an existential threat, not to America or democracy, as we're always told, but to them and their power and control over the presidency, which they have enjoyed for a long time. Certainly you can see it in their foreign policy agenda that was run by Obama and Biden. When Donald Trump came in, he just as a property developer from Queens approached every problem that way from first

principles using logic and common sense. And so he did the same with foreign policy. He saw a problem. What's the most effective and efficient way of dealing with it? And for example, when he first arrived in the White House, he had a meeting with Barack Obama who told him the biggest problem facing the United States is North Korea because they keep on setting off these sort of nuclear tests. And so Donald Trump set about fixing that and he was mocked mercilessly for his bromance with Kim Jong-un and for calling him Little Rocket Man and so on. But it worked. He successfully charmed

or threatened Kim Jong-un and Kim Jong-un was in his box. Similarly with Vladimir Putin. You didn't see Putin invading his neighbours like he did under Obama and like he did under under Obama and like he did under Biden immediately. With Donald Trump, he was also in his box. And Trump was sort of belligerent and charming at the same time with Putin. And he tells the story of saying to Putin something along the lines of, you know, I like those golden domes in Moscow, shame if something happened to them. And Putin and the other gangsters around the world, like President Xi, weren't quite sure what to make of Trump. He wielded, obviously, the mightiest military in the world. And was he crazy enough? Unpredictable, he seemed, to actually follow through on his threats. And he did in, he talks about peace through strength, but he was not afraid to

use strength. He wiped out Soleimani, the Iranian tough guy. Iran, for instance, was on its knees under Trump. They were broke. They weren't able to fund these proxies to go and attack Israel like they did last October 7. And of course, as soon as Joe Biden came in, they enriched Iran, reanimated the Iran nuclear deal that Donald Trump had wisely kiboshed, and they're off to the races.

So Trump managed to neutralize Iran. ISIS was a huge problem. People forget, but we saw these horrific videos of ISIS, you know, burning alive a Jordanian pilot in an orange jumpsuit in a cage, killing other people in these most horrific, torturing ways for public consumption, lowering a cage into a swimming pool with I think two Jordanians in it, beheading Americans, just horrible. And Donald Trump vanquished ISIS, never got much credit for it, because we all forgot that ISIS ever existed. And in the Middle East, he had the glimmerings of peace that had eluded so many presidents before him with the Abraham Accords for which he never really got much credit either. So just in this practical no-nonsense

way, he did better on the world stage than his predecessors and Joe Biden. But that earned him the enmity of this cabal because he was not following their agenda. And that's because Donald Trump is uncontrollable. And that's his great strength and maybe his weakness as well. He's always been uncontrollable. Even as a child, he talks about, he calls himself rambunctious and says that his parents at one point sent him to aptitude testing to,

in his words, find out what's wrong with him. And his father was quite disappointed with the results. Well, he's very assertive. He's a very assertive person. He's very extroverted and he's very high in openness and he's somewhat disagreeable. And so he's going to be a handful as a kid because all of that means headstrong, highly active. And that can be bad and that can be good. It depends on how well it's socialized.

And my sense with Trump is that he's relatively compassionate despite his low politeness and that he also has a pretty vicious work ethic. And so those are useful traits. So this cabal that you're describing, do you wanna, why don't you walk us through the makeup of that and also the motivations, who is it and what are their motivations? I know for example that the people who formulated the Abraham Accords faced an

awful lot of, well certainly skepticism and perhaps outright resistance from the State Department because the received wisdom at the State Department was, well, first of all, that such an agreement was impossible. And second of all, that it was particularly impossible if it didn't include Palestine because Palestine had to be first and foremost in any peace agreement. And that just turned out to be complete bloody nonsense.

And so, okay, so the Kabell, who is it and then what is it that you think they're protecting or attempting to accomplish for themselves? I'm very curious, for example, about your understanding of the Russia- Ukraine war because there's untold tens of billions of dollars being dumped into that state and anyone with any sense understands at minimum regardless of their stance with regard to the war that Ukraine was one of the most corrupt states in Europe which is really saying something because there was plenty of corruption there and God only knows where that money is going seriously. And so

And God only knows where that money is going, seriously. And so, let's walk through the cabal. You mentioned actors in a general sense, the CIA, the Pentagon, perhaps the FBI. Who are these people and what is it that they want? That's a great question and I never have got to the bottom of it. I just have a vague sense, just pulling back, for instance, the way that they have expended so much energy in demonising Russia and while taking their eyes off China, at least the public eyes off China. I can only think that considering that Russia, you know, as a tiny GDP is really not a threat to the United States, whereas China is, and is aggressively imperialistic in its actions, and that the Bidens were in fact part of the Belt and Road Initiative, which is President Xi's imperialist

plan to, I guess, take over the world, or at least to ensnare small countries in debt traps and plunder their minerals and extend his influence. As he's doing aggressively in the South China Sea, militarising those islands. Joe Biden as vice president was actually supposedly meant to stop that and stop China from stealing America's intellectual property. And instead, when he went to Beijing in December of 2013. He brought along his son Hunter and the Chinese knew exactly what that was about. He's there to do private business. And none of the aims that Joe Biden should have had on behalf of America were accomplished, but Hunter Biden certainly made money out of that trip. So, and he was given 10% of a Chinese company.

So I feel that there is a reason that they don't want the American people to be focused on China as a threat, which it is. And so when I say the cabal, the blob, the CIA, the Pentagon, the FBI, the Department of State, the Department of Justice, and in the Hunter Biden investigation case, the IRS were all involved in the protection of Joe Biden. But I think also in the grooming of Joe Biden very early on when he came into the Senate

at the age of 30, as a very green person without much foreign policy experience. He was really just a small time grifter from Delaware, but a man on the make and very ambitious for himself. And so I think he's not hugely intelligent. So the fact that he was identified early on and placed on the most powerful committee in the Senate, which was the Foreign Relations Committee, where for a decade he was either chairman or ranking member, you know, as his career evolved. I think that there were powerful mentors behind him who decided that, like maybe Tim Walz, that he was someone worth cultivating who would be a useful puppet for them in the future. And like Tim Walz, that very young Senator, Biden went to China. He was wined and dined there on the equivalent of Martha's Vineyard by the leading lights of

the CCP and came back just full of admiration and waxing lyrical about how wonderful China was just as Tim Walz did and to such an extent that the weekly standard thought that he was so foolish that they wrote a cover story about him mocking him for being sort of the Manchurian candidate. So maybe it is that they want to make us look at Russia as the existential threat, which is preposterous, and forget that China is there, which makes me think that there is a substantial amount of money Wall Street is involved in this cabal, that their interests are being served. And, you know, I'm, RFK Junior and others talk about the military industrial complex and the money that they get out of pursuing these foreign wars. When it comes to Russia and Ukraine, the people that were protecting Joe Biden in the blob, they turned a blind eye to his corruption.

He was, as Vice President, flying into Kiev regularly and lecturing the Ukrainians on the evils of corruption. But the Ukrainian people knew that his son was sitting on the board of Burisma, the most corrupt company in the most corrupt country in Europe. And so his words obviously were hollow. Hunter Biden was being paid a million dollars a year by this energy company despite the fact that he was at the time had a raging crack addiction and didn't have any expertise in the energy field or really much else. So, you know, that it seems that the quid pro quo for Joe to do the bidding of the blob, and he was very much a warmonger throughout his history in the Senate and the Foreign Relations Committee. He was wanting to bomb Yugoslavia. He was always about enlarging NATO, having particularly Georgia and

Ukraine join NATO, which was a deep provocation to the Russians. And, you know, Vladimir Putin has been very explicit about the way Russia views that NATO enlargement as being a provocation to war. So Joe Biden was happy to go along with all these things. And I feel like the quid pro quo for him and his family was that they were allowed to get a little backsheesh along the way. So do you have any sense of the extent of the Biden family wealth holdings? I mean,

I don't remember if I gathered this information from your book on the laptop, but perhaps I did. My understanding is that the Bidens have surrounded themselves with a very complex network of shell companies and that much money from foreign business dealings has been shunted through those companies. And that that involves extended members of the Biden family, most particularly, I guess this all centers at least to some degree on Hunter. And so what have you found out about the extent of the Biden family foreign holdings? And then I guess I'm also curious

as to what either implicit or explicit laws have been violated in consequence of this additional financial activity. I mean, it was strange to me, of course, going through Laptop from Hell, to understand that Hunter Biden had come along with his father on his foreign affairs voyages. I thought that was strange for two reasons. First reason being Hunter was not exactly behaving in an admirable manner at that point with regards to his personal habits, let's say. But that is, And so that was unwise for someone in the position of Joe to brook. If his son hadn't cleaned up his act personally and was all, you know, cracking hookers, maybe he wasn't the appropriate companion for businesses or for trips that involved

extraordinarily high stakes for the American people and the world. And then second, like, why, how in the world is it that business is being conducted at the same time? And so what's your sense of that? Let's talk about the holdings first, like what sort of amounts of money are we speaking about over what period of time? And then, what do you see as relevant with regards to the ethical and legal issues here? Well, I'll take my information from the Republican investigation in the House, the impeachment investigation of Joe Biden.

And they had subpoena power, they had the suspicious activity reports from all the banks. So they did quite a good job of following the money trail during Joe's vice presidency. And they found around about $30 million, not a huge amount of money for really having a president who's compromised, certainly in the eyes of China. So, there may be more, but they didn't find it. And for Joe Biden himself, there was really very little. They found two checks for $200,000, which were about 10% of a deal that Jim Biden were about 10% of a deal that Jim Biden had been involved with Hunter, a couple of deals. And so that was interesting because among the emails on the laptop is an email that talks about divvying up the equity in one particular Chinese deal. And they talk about 10% for the big guy, which was the nickname or the code name that Hunter

Biden's business partners used for Joe Biden. So these two $200,000 checks, they came from Jim Biden in a very convoluted fashion to Joe Biden. And they were sort of, the money was deposited into Jim Biden's account and then his wife took it out, moved it to another account, took it in cash, put it into a check. It was, it looked as if someone is trying to cover their tracks. Finally, there's a check written out to Joe Biden and in the memo line, it says loan repayment. And the Republican investigators were never able to prove that it was anything other than a loan.

The White House maintained that Joe Biden had lent his brother, Jim Biden, who was always falling on hard times, lent him money because he was being generous and that Jim Biden just repaid that money as he should have. So I can't say any more than that. Other than, there is some evidence on the laptop that I mentioned in the first book that Hunter Biden was funding Joe Biden, that he was paying some of his bills for the sort of maintenance and upkeep of his estate in Delaware, things like a painting and putting in a retaining wall and new air conditioning in a cottage on the grounds, new shutters, those sort of bills, you know,

a few thousand here and a few thousand there. And the only other thing I could find was that Hunter Biden was paying for a cell phone of Joe Biden's paying for the bill. So, you know, apart from that, I think Joe Biden was financially benefiting because the money that Hunter Biden was getting from various sources, including from Joe Biden's Delaware donors, was being used to pay family bills that otherwise Joe Biden might have been liable for, like for instance, to Hunter Biden's tuition and also his brother Bo's tuition at university, which Hunter complained bitterly about having to pay.

Okay, so the evidence directly linking Joe to untrackable payments, let's say, is relatively trivial by your own testimony. This $30 million that you referred to, what exactly is that? So that would be around 20 million or 20 to 25 million from China, mainly from this company CEFC, which was the capitalist arm of the Belt and Road Initiative. It was an energy company in China. And Hunter Biden and his business partners, Hunter was sort of actually seemed that he'd been scouted and groomed by CEFC from a couple of different directions.

They targeted him through a parent at his daughter's school on the one hand. And so he and his business partners in the last two years of Joe Biden's vice presidency were doing work for CEFC around the world in sort of opening doors because by that stage, the Belt and Road Initiative was a little on the nose and the countries were reluctant to take China's money because they had seen how other countries had been sort of damaged and compromised by China. So having the Biden name, Joe Biden, the esteemed vice president, having his name attached in joint ventures with CFC was very beneficial for them and allowed them to make inroads into countries where the Chinese alone might otherwise have had a problem.

So now the payments, apart from actually, no, even the diamonds, the payments, including a diamond to Hunter Biden were only paid after Joe Biden left to the vice presidency. Okay. So where does the $30 million end up? So some of it has gone to various other family members. Jim Biden got some, Hallie Biden, Hunter Biden's lover, the widow of his brother, Bo. You know, various other family members got it, but mostly it went up Hunter Biden's nose or down his throat with the crack pipe, the hookers,

and so on. He really squandered that money. He had enormous alimony payments to his ex-wife as well, I guess it went to pay that. His very lavish lifestyle, he's always lived high on the hog. He would have long benders at Chateau Marmont in LA. So, I mean, he just squandered the money. I think some of the money, there's a company called BHR that early in Joe Biden's vice presidency, that was the 10% stake that Hunter Biden got on that trip to Beijing with his father on Air Force Two in December of 2013. That may be worth several million dollars. We're not quite sure how much,

but Hunter had to hand over ownership of that to Kevin Morris, the mysterious Hollywood attorney who Hunter's business partners call the Sugar Brother, who really funded Hunter Biden's lifestyle in the last few years from 2020, paid off a lot of the problems that Hunter had that would have damaged Joe Biden's campaign, like his ex-wife was not getting paid, like paying off the IRS. His ex-wife had liens on her property and also she couldn't get a passport because of these IRS problems. So Kevin Morris managed to pay that off and also funded the child support that Hunter had

to pay to a woman in Arkansas who had his baby and had to file a paternity suit to prove through DNA that it was Hunter's son and then had to sue him for child support. And the ex-wife's problems and the baby momma's problems were both set to blow up in 2020 and the end of 2019 and damaged Joe Biden's campaign. So Kevin Morris comes in, you know, the knight in shining armor and takes care of all these problems. So they never become an issue for Joe Biden. And he continued to fund Hunter Biden until just recently. To the tune of he's he's testified, Kevin Morris, about $6 million, and he calls it a loan to Hunter Biden. But I'm looking at it, I mean, it could be as much as $10 million.

So the money is garnered through these backroom deals with foreign companies and then fundamentally squandered? Squandered, apart from this little BHR amount, we don't know how much it's worth, but now Kevin Morris owns BHR. So I suppose that's a down payment on all the money that he's given or loaned to Hunter. But the other interesting thing about Kevin Morris is that when the IRS investigators looking into Hunter Biden's business dealings wanted to interview Kevin Morris, and also there was an FBI investigation into whether the money that Kevin had given to Hunter was in violation of federal election laws because it was a donation in kind potentially to Joe Biden's campaign.

Whenever they tried to look into Kevin Morris, the prosecutors told them no. And finally, the IRS investigators were told by their prosecution team that the CIA had intervened, had summoned the prosecutors to Langley CIA headquarters and told them that Kevin Morris was off limits as a witness, that they couldn't interview him. And what were the grounds for that? Do you have any idea? No idea. It's very odd, but the only thing is that the CIA

is always a shadowy presence in this Biden tale of corruption. Wherever Hunter Biden falls into peril, this sort of invisible hand reaches in to save him. A couple of his business partners were approached to work for the CIA. Devin Archer tells me this, to work for the CIA, I guess makes sense.

You know, they were traveling around the world, liaising with people the CIA was interested in. Hunter Biden, before he joined the Burisma Board, was placed on the board of a CIA cutout. It's called the NDI. It's the democratic arm of an outfit called the National Endowment for Democracy, which is very strange. He put that on his resume. He boasted about it. And it's rather peculiar because it is a prestigious position and I presume it's because of his father. But I always wondered if it was sort of to signal that he was under the protection of the CIA when he was travelling

around Ukraine. I mean, he never went to Ukraine, but when he was involved with people in Ukraine. And so the CIA's involvement in a lot of this story just pops up and is intriguing. We talked about the Dirty 51 letter from the 51 former intelligence officials. 42 of them are 51 former intelligence officials. 42 of them are CIA. In fact, many of them still are active contractors even if they've retired. And that letter was instigated by Antony Blinken, who now is the Secretary of State, but at that point was a senior campaign official for Joe Biden. And he called a guy called Mike Morell, who had been acting director of the CIA and was hoping to be CIA director under Joe Biden. And Morell has testified that Antony Blinken put the idea for writing the letter into his brain. We know that because Mike Morrell has testified to that. Anthony Blinken denies it. But Mike Morrell has said under oath that he never had

the idea until Anthony Blinken called him. And in fact, there is an email that was procured by the congressional investigators from Anthony Blinken a few hours after the phone call to Mike Morrell. And it was a USA Today article, which was anonymously sourced probably from the same people that signed the letter claiming that Hunter Biden's laptop was Russian disinformation. And so it was obvious to Mike Morll what he had to do. Okay, so let's go down that rabbit hole for a minute. You know, Trump has been claiming since the last election that the election was stolen and the court cases that have made themselves manifest in consequence of his investigations, have generally found against him, at least at the local level.

And so it seems to me that he diagnosed the problem correctly but specified the level of corruption poorly. Now this is my understanding of the situation and so you tell me if you think I've got it right. So, Twitter censored the New York Post when the laptop story was broken, and that was a big deal because it was, and Facebook, and that was very close to the election, and that was a very damning laptop. And so, we don't know what effect on the election, which was a very close election, that censorship had, but we do know that the censorship occurred, and we know that those laptops were real, and we know that these 51 people signed a letter claiming that that was all Russian disinformation. And that word, by the way, that's a word I hate,

disinformation and misinformation. I think that those words, anybody who uses those words to indicate the presence of untrustworthy information is immediately suspect in my eyes, because those are propagandistic weasel words of the highest possible order, misinformation and disinformation. It's like, first of all, who the hell decides that? And that's really the fundamental issue here. But in any case, Russian disinformation.

OK, that was an outright lie. And that's 51 intelligence community agents who signed that letter. 51 is a lot. And so I don't understand why that isn't traitorous in the most fundamental manner, because it's a complete lie. It's a lie about a scandal. It's a lie that casts aspersions on a country that the West is now at war with, and as far as I am concerned, tilted the election in a manner that can't be easily quantified. And so, why did these 51 people do this? And what do you think Trump will and should do if he's elected with these people? Because what was it? Are they pleading ignorance? You know, and why isn't this 50 times the scandal that it has been?

This makes Watergate look like a backstory, as far as I'm concerned. Am I overestimating the impact of this? Do I have the story right? You have the story right, but you don't quite have the full enormity of it because that letter had to get cleared very quickly by a classification review board within the CIA. They saw how political the letter was and they realized that it needed to go upstairs. So they sent it up to Gina Haspel, the CIA director at the time under Donald Trump, via her number three, the chief operating officer who's testified to this.

So Gina Haspel greenlit that letter and allowed it to be published. When the CIA knew full well that this laptop was not Russian disinformation, because the FBI had had it for 10 months in their possession. The FBI very quickly had ascertained that it belonged to Hunter Biden, that it had not been tampered with, and that the evidence on it was fit to be used in court as evidence. And that's exactly what happened in June this year when Hunter Biden was convicted by a jury in part based on the evidence on the laptop for this gun problem. So, you know, that was a CIA domestic election interference operation. That was not just these former intelligence officials, as we've been told, this was these former intelligence officials, as we've been told, this was greenlit, this was waved through by the CIA Director Gina Haspel. And, you know, many of these CIA people, the 42

of the 51 who signed that letter, they were active contractors. They all have security clearances. They refuse to respond to any of our entreaties to explain themselves, maybe to apologize for what they did once it became clear that this wasn't Russian disinformation. The only ones... How about spend some time in jail? How about that instead of apologizing? I mean, this is... I just can't wrap my head around this story it's so it really confuses me because

you know, I've I have some people on the Democrat side that I communicate with with some degree of regularity and their response to Trump's allegations of election election fixing during the last election was that while he tried his case in court in multiple jurisdictions and all of the allegations were not supported by the judicial system. But then I look at it, see Trump strikes me as one of those people who puts his finger on things at a kind of a low resolution level that's accurate. But the details are a bit murky, and so I think he went about his skepticism incorrectly. And it was also very striking to me during his

debate with Harris that the laptop issue and the letter never reared their heads to any great degree, and he's never really used that as the primary evidence that the election was interfered with. But the election was interfered with because the laptop contained damning information, not least with regards to the timing of its release. It's like, what the hell was Hunter doing dropping off three laptops a week before his father announced his presidency. Like, psychologically, that's seriously suspect. Then the laptops turned out to be real, and they're pretty damn ugly. I mean, seriously.

Not only on the business corruption side, but on the personal corruption side. Hunter's a very distasteful person. Like, I felt like, you know know several showers after reading laptop from hell and I have some insight into what kind of character it requires to do the things that he does. Like the whole crack and hooker thing that's just not that cool and the affair with his brother's wife and the uploading of the sexual acts that he committed with her to Pornhub under the rubric Lonely Widow? Do you know how bloody demented and twisted you have to be, and angry and bitter and resentful and full of hate you have to be to do something like that? That's just

the sort of place you don't want to go to investigate, you know? It's really ugly. And then to have these former intelligence agents claim that this was false and that it was Russian disinformation. That's actually two crimes, right? One that it's false, one to associate it with the Russians who had nothing to do with it, and then to pull the wool over the eyes to do with it, and then to pull the wool over the eyes of the American people, and then to conspire with Twitter and Facebook right before an election to censor a major American newspaper who was reporting on what? The biggest scandal since Watergate.

So I also don't understand why Trump hasn't made more of that. Like that could have dominated the debate he had with Harris, for example. So, well, so what do you, what do you make of that? And you're also, you know, you're also making a case now that it wasn't just former CIA agents, let's say, but active CIA agents, and that they all knew exactly what they were doing. They did. And, you know, they're also among the signatories, there were five former CIA directors or acting directors, people like John Brennan, who was involved in the original Russiagate hoax,

which crippled the first few years of Donald Trump's presidency. Leon Panetta, who also signed the letter saying that Kamala Harris is, you know, the most capable, much better than Donald Trump to be commander in chief. And, you know, you talk about the censorship of the New York Post stories before the election. That was, we thought initially just Twitter and Facebook, but it was the FBI. The FBI had pre-bunked our story in meetings with the Facebook and Twitter executives in the weeks before the election. They warned them before our story came out to look out for a Russian hack and leak operation likely in October and likely involving Hunter Biden. And how did they know?

They had been spying on Rudy Giuliani. And so he's on his iCloud for a foreign agent registration violation investigation, which they never charged him over. So they obviously didn't find any evidence. He thinks, Rudy Giuliani thinks that the FBI was actually spying on him to spy on Donald Trump. But unfortunately for them, Donald Trump doesn't text very much

and neither does Rudy for that matter. But they would have seen the email that came to Rudy Giuliani in August of 2020 from John Paul MacIsaac, who was the laptop repair shop owner. And it was a very detailed and forensic email going through, particularly on Ukraine and Burisma, but all the crimes and concerns for national security he had from what he'd seen on the laptop and very cogent letter.

And if the people in the cabal who are taking care of Joe Biden, protecting him, if they'd seen that email, they would have been quite concerned about it and they would have had eyes on Giuliani and known that this story would probably get to the media at some point before the election. So they put all their ducks in a row to make sure that when that story did come out inevitably, that they could immediately kibosh it, immediately squash it. And they did a very good job of that with just three weeks left to the election. It was already the fact that Twitter and Facebook throttled our accounts, actually locked

the New York Post account for just for two weeks, until a few days before the election, gave pause to other media to follow up. And then the Dirty 51 letter that completely killed the story stone dead. And Mike Morell, who wrote that letter, he writes in emails to colleagues that the reason for the letter is to give Joe Biden a talking point in the debate coming up against Donald Trump. So that was a specific political operation instigated by the Biden campaign and carried out by the CIA. And it worked. Yeah. Well, it's, it's hard to even, it's hard to even know.

It's hard to even know what to say about that. Okay. So, so now Hunter Biden has fallen off the media radar. And so is Joe. I mean, this is also extraordinarily peculiar. I just don't understand any of this. It's like, I, so Joe Biden is too cognitively impaired to be the candidate for the next presidency, but somehow it's okay that he's still president. So that's,

and now, and we don't hear anything about Joe Biden. I mean, it's not surprising in some ways because of all the election hype, but still he is president. And so hearing something about him from time to time would seem to be appropriate. So I'm not sure what you make of that. And then the same as far as I'm concerned is true of Hunter. It's like he was in a trial and he was sentenced. I don't even know what happened in consequence of that. Like what is Hunter Biden's status at the moment? And what do you make of

the fact that Joe Biden has vanished into the ether during this presidential run? Well, Hunter Biden was convicted in June of gun felonies in Delaware by a jury. He's awaiting sentencing, which is after the election. Why is it after the election? Convenient, of course. And then in September, he pleaded guilty on the first day of his felony tax fraud trial in California. And so again, sentencing will be after the election. And I'm told, at least on the tax fraud by the IRS whistleblowers, that that would carry for Hunter significant jail time, at least

a couple of years. So no doubt Joe Biden will pardon Hunter after the election before January 20. And even though Joe Biden has said that he wouldn't do that, and there's no doubt that he will do that. And he will get a free pass from the media who will say, well, this is his only surviving son and he's a good family man and how can you be glad shim? Yeah, so nothing will happen of that. As for Joe disappearing, yeah, I mean,

this is very convenient to the Harris campaign because she needs to distance herself as vice president from the disasters of the Biden-Harris administration, you know, the economy, the inflation pressures that people are feeling, and also the 10 to 20 million illegal migrants that have flooded over the border, and among them, murderers, rapists, and terrorists. And the American people in every corner of this country where these illegal migrants have been flown into by the administration to pretend that there's no overcrowding issue at the border. Every town and city in this country is affected.

We saw that in the Springfield, Ohio dramas that Donald Trump quite cleverly brought to the fore when he talked about eating the cats and eating the dogs or eating the pets. So I think that the media, of course, is complicit with most of them with the Democrats, I call them the Democrats' handmaidens. So they will do whatever helps the Harris campaign and that is just to disappear Joe Biden, who'd become so unpopular with the American people that there was no way that he would win the election, which I assume is really why they ousted him from re-election. He had no chance of winning and Donald Trump was doing very well in the polls. And I think Donald Trump's actually regained the momentum he had against Joe Biden and has successfully tied Kamala Harris to the disasters of the Biden-Harris administration.

But also she herself has been a really dud candidate, so she hasn't been able to rescue the situation. And the thing about Joe Biden is that he is still president. He's president until January 20 of next year. And there's a lot of serious problems happening in the world, but he doesn't seem to be in control. So when Israel just recently started attacking Iran, which is a pretty big deal. There was no situation room for Joe Biden. He was holing out in his home in Delaware, as he often does, and there was nothing from Kamala Harris. There was just silence. There was just a statement saying, well, good luck to Israel, I guess. So they're not

behaving as a proper administration. And the cabal that controlled Joe Biden and will control Kamala Harris, I guess they're the ones in control. Yeah, so how do you understand the successful removal of Joe Biden? Like, he was president, I presume he could have said no, but he didn't. How are we to understand the fact that he was president one day and the presidential candidate one day and then not the next? I mean, how much of that do you think is, let's say, the reality of his cognitive decline, which we still know really nothing about as far as I can tell.

It seemed so self-evident that it was undeniable, but I'm not even sure what to make of that given the evidence that the Democrats also potentially concluded that Biden was unelectable. That was partly because of the evidence of his cognitive decline. But what do we make of the fact that he was so unceremoniously dumped? I mean, that seems to me to indicate that the sense that there are a multitude of forces operating behind the scenes, so to speak, is accurate. But what do you make of that? You know, it was evident, as you say,

that Joe Biden had cognitive problems from, you know, I was in Iowa and New Hampshire in the 2020 election earlier that year. And it was clear then to everybody in a room that saw him struggling to read just regular stump speeches from a teleprompter in a small town hall. But he was protected, his cognitive issues were covered up.

But what a weapon to have to wield over the head of a president to control him if he didn't do what you wanted. And so I just felt, you know, every time he had to go out and do a big set piece like the State of the Union or, you know, a G20 meeting or something, he performed okay. You know, everyone was watching him, expecting him to stumble and blather, but he actually seemed quite cogent. So his cognitive problems seemed to be intermittent and maybe, you know, they're related to, he had some brain aneurysms in the 1980s and brain surgery that may be a factor. But he certainly seems to have and still has times where he is compass mentis. And I don't know whether that can be controlled, but they seem to be able to control it, the

timing of it for these big set pieces. And yet when he did that debate against Donald Trump, it was as if he was let go out without a safety net, without a tightrope, without whatever drugs that they normally gave him. He was just left just desolate. You know, He was there on the stage, blank eyed, unable to form sentences. He was dead man walking. So if you wanted to get rid of him, that would be the way to do it. I don't know if that was deliberate or if it was an accident, but if you were the people around him and you saw him in that state before he was going onto that stage that night against Donald Trump with no notes and no teleprompter. Surely you would have staged an intervention and said, oh, he's got COVID or something

and stopped him going out there. So they let him go out there and destroy himself. And then for a couple of weeks, it seemed that he would hang on and I had some insight into the people in the background around his family and they were digging in. There was no way they were going to bail out. He was insisting that he was going to stay and Hunter wanted him to stay and Jill, Dr. Jill wanted him to stay. But he didn't and the reason he didn't was because the donors about a week or so after the debate rallied around and just said there is no way that they were going to support the Democratic Party if Joe was the candidate. And what we found out about that in actually in an article in the New York

Times on September 24th was that Kamala Harris was part of that because one of her best friends is Lorene Jobs, the widow of Steve Jobs. She's a billionaire, the richest woman in America. And she, according to the New York Times, got her staff member who used to work for Barack Obama to do some focus group polling, which found that there was no way that Joe Biden could win the election. And she circulated that damaging information around the other Democrat donors. And after that, they put their foot down and said, Joe has to go. Now, I don't think Joe Biden knew that until that New York Times article came out, because straight after that article, he started big-footing Kamala Harris and doing her damage.

There were two particular incidents that were notable. One was that she had picked a fight with Ron DeSantis, the governor of Florida, over his hurricane preparation, saying that he'd ignored a phone call from her. He came back, you know. So it was a big to do. And suddenly Joe Biden pops up on camera and says, oh, you know, Ron DeSantis is a great guy. We have nothing but good relations. He's talked to me about the hurricane and, you know, he's very competent and everything's fine. So that was really undermining Kamala Harris in a very obvious and

embarrassing way in real time. And then there was another occasion around that time, which was Kamala Harris was on stage in Detroit, all the network cameras were on her, and suddenly Joe Biden strolls into the press room in the White House, where he has never been in his entire presidency, and decides to take a press conference. And he didn't really have much to say, other than that he and Kamala were locked at the hip. They were singing from the same song sheet. They were on the same page. And I guess he also wanted to make sure that Kamala didn't.

She was just about to take credit for the ending of the impending Longshoreman strike. So I guess he didn't want her to take credit for that. But I surmise from the timing of this that Joe Biden wasn't aware of Lorene Jobs' role in the donors pulling their support from him. And knowing that Kamala Harris regarded Lorene Jobs as family, she brought her into the White House when she was sworn in as part of her family group. I think probably Joe Biden figured out that Kamala had sneakily stabbed him in the back, and so he was paying her back in that way.

Also telling her, don't you dare throw me under the bus. Don't you dare start distancing yourself from my achievements. There was some background reporting that he was very angry and Dr. Jill Biden was very angry about a speech that Kamala had given in Pittsburgh about economics and she hadn't once mentioned Bidenomics or paid tribute to Joe Biden. So she's unable to distance herself and shortly after he big-footed her like that in those two occasions, she made probably the biggest flaw mistake of her campaign, which was she went on

air and she was asked, what would you do differently from Joe Biden? And she said nothing. I can't think of a single thing. Yeah, right. Which was an amazing. I again, that just my jaw has been open many times in the last multiple months. And that was certainly one of the events that caused that reaction. I mean, it stunned me at two levels. And the first was while she had been striving to present herself as someone who had a new economic plan and to segregate herself from the Biden-Harris administration, and at minimum,

you would have expected the Democrats to be cynical and competent enough to have prepared her to answer that question. Even if she believed, you know, even if she did believe that she would have done nothing different, she should have been wise enough to have something to say that was a little bit more detailed than that. It was as if the question hadn't occurred to her. You know, I think Joe Biden is, he's just a brilliant political strategist, a very cunning, Kameny Hall style guy. And I think he's outsmarted all the Democrat brains trust, and certainly outsmarted Kamala Harris. To him, sure, he would like the Democrats to win,

he doesn't like Donald Trump. But really, if Kamala Harris didn't win, he then stands alone as the man who managed to vanquish Donald Trump when Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris couldn't. And also he's vindicated in that he would have been a better candidate that he should have been able to stay on. Right, right, right. Yeah, so at minimum, he's a man with seriously mixed motivations. And I suspect the same is true of his family. Okay, so two things. I'd like to turn our attention to Kamala. What, I don't know what to make of her. I'm always, this is a terrible thing to say, but I'm going to say it anyways. Well I'm always, it's always a mystery to me to watch women who seek power.

There are advantages to men in seeking power that aren't there for women. So for example, power makes men very attractive to women. But power doesn't make women attractive to men. And that's a big difference. Like, if you looked at socio-biological differences between men and women, that's probably the biggest difference. The correlation between socio-economic success and sexual success for men is 0.7, which is a walloping correlation. It is the biggest predictor of male success on the mating side by a huge margin. Nothing even comes close.

The relationship for women is zero. And it might even be slightly negative because, well, because high status women are intimidating to men. And so what happens to high status women are intimidating to men. And so what happens to high status women is their mating pool shrinks. It vastly expands for men and it shrinks for women. Now, you know, people don't like biological views of human beings. That doesn't really affect me much. But one of the consequences for me, psychologically speaking, is I don't know what to make of women

who are hell-bent on power. So Hillary Clinton's a good example, you know, I mean she was hell-bent on power for 50 years. That's a long time. Like that's obsessive. Now she wanted, perhaps she wanted to go down in history as the woman's, as the, you know, as the United States first female president. And I can understand that as an ambition, I suppose, to some degree. But, um, Kamala is a real mystery to me because it isn't obvious to me at all that she has any real interest in policy. Like she doesn't seem to me to have any interest in the administrative side of things on the policy side. What the hell is up with her?

What is she after as far as you're concerned? Now maybe I'm asking you to speculate out of your bailiwick, but you're well informed. I'm curious about that. What do you think she's...what drives her? Yeah, I don't know other than I think that she had a very clever mother and father, PhDs, and she was not academically clever at all. So maybe she wants to prove, even though her parent or her mother is no longer with us, that she's worthy. She doesn't seem actually to me to be particularly interested in power. She's more interested in the accumulation of status, I think, through her career.

Um, and she's always had... Celebrity, basically? Like, is it a celebrity play rather than a power play? Maybe celebrity. I mean, she seems a little shy to me, a little nervous. I, uh, she doesn't really seem to enjoy any of these public outings that she does. She doesn't seem to enjoy the interviews. She is a mystery.

I've talked to friends of hers who say that she's really not dumb, but she thinks you're dumb, which may be why she speaks in these sort of baby talk, sing-songy way. Oh yeah, that's appalling. She always sounds like she's lecturing to a room full of retarded kindergarten children. It's so appalling. And there's a terrible condescension that's associated with that. And people, even if she's not interested in power if she presumes the idiocy of her audience a contempt definitely what will you say makes itself present with that and you don't guide people well when you're contemptuous of them. This is something Trump is very Trump is

very distinct from Harris in that regard, and I think distinct from the Democrat elite per se, who are very supercilious when it comes to the working class, or even the middle class for that matter, especially if you think about class in terms of education. Trump is not dismissive of ordinary people, so-called ordinary people. He's actually extremely good at interacting with people in a spontaneous way. And I think he actually enjoys it. And I don't think it's an act because I don't think you can fake that.

It's not easy to fake that. People can see through that quite quickly. No, and people are also very sensitive, let's say, to slights that they might experience from people who are higher up on the power hierarchy than they are, right? So you have to step very lightly if there is that gap in status to not offend people. And Trump is very good at that. And Harris, well, when she's over explaining something painfully to idiots, that's a, that's a, she's on, she's entirely on the opposite side of the spectrum with regards to how she treats her, the people that she's dealing with.

So yeah, I don't understand her at all. And do you notice how when she's doing the lecturing, she adopts this very haughty nasal tone, which is exactly that. So, you know, I'm Queen, you know, Mary Antoinette sitting up here on my throne, looking down my nose at you little people. And I think that's why the Democrat elite and she all hate Donald Trump because he sort of represents, he eats McDonald's. I think he really is, you know, his sensibility is with, you know, the average American. And I agree, I don't think he's putting it on, you know, he's fat and he has these earthy tastes and they despise him because how dare one of the deplorables, the hobbits, how dare they enter into the sanctuary of elite power?

Yeah, that's definitely what it looks like to me. And that's exactly it. I think that's part of the cause of Trump derangement syndrome. It's classist beyond belief. It's the absolute horror of the educated elite that someone as preposterous in taste and demeanor, so déclassé as Donald Trump could possibly presume to put himself forward as competent and useful. And isn't it appalling to watch all the fools who he's manipulated support him when we, the elite, are there to take care of everyone's needs and feather our own beds in the most appalling possible manner. And unfortunately, because he's now surrounded himself with

absolutely brilliant people like Elon Musk and JD Vance, RFK Jr., that confounds their theory of the case. Yeah, well, I just released a video last week talking about exactly that because, you know, Trump is a preposterous character in many ways. I mean, he's, he kind of reminds me of Colonel Tom Parker. You know, he's got this bigger than life salesy element that's really quintessentially American. I mean, and I'm not saying that in any derogatory sense because America is a powerhouse economically and part of that is the salesman culture and it isn't salesman culture isn't high class, right? It's not aristocratic. It's it's huckstery even but Hey marketing and communication are necessary. Like they're seriously necessary.

I mean, maybe they're 85% of a successful business enterprise. So you better be good at it. And Trump is very good at it. And so, and then, you know, he scares people because he's got this kind of narcissistic element that goes along with that extremely high extroversion. And also this kind of impolite viciousness that's part of his sense of humor and even his capacity to bully to some degree and so there is a narcissistic tilt in Trump although his personality is very complex and he was president for

four years and he didn't conduct himself on the international stage like a true narcissist would, because narcissists would be perfectly happy to sacrifice American servicemen, let's say, to their grandeur across time. But even more importantly, perhaps, real narcissists don't share the stage with people like Elon Musk, or JD Vance for that matter, or Tul Gabbard or Kennedy right because they're competitors for the public eye and they're competitors with regards to perceived competence as well and maybe even perceived fame because certainly Musk exceeds Trump in well virtually every social comparison element that you could conjure up, it's very difficult

to compete with Elon Musk. And the fact that Trump is willing to share the stage with him and to listen to him mitigates for me against any, it's certainly one of the factors that mitigates any concerns about, let's say, like a truly malignant narcissism. And so, I think we should probably move over to the Daily Wire side. I know what I want to talk to you about there. I think so for everybody who's watching and listening, I think I'd like to talk to you

about how you and the New York Post to some degree managed to be something of a bastion of actual journalism in an absolute sea of sycophantic propaganda and what exactly that's been like. So for everybody watching on the daily wire side, you want to or who's planning to, you have to remember that it was Miranda and the New York Post people who broke the 100 laptop story and suffered the consequences thereof and who have been diligently attempting something approximating genuine journalism. And so I'm very curious about what that is like. And so I think that's what we'll discuss on the Daily Wire side. So everybody who's watching and listening, you could join us there. Miranda, is there anything else

you want to bring to people's attention before we turn to the Daily Wire interview? Not really, other than I think that it really is quite frightening that these same people in the CIA and the State Department and so on, the blob, are so implacably opposed to Donald Trump. And so he's already suffered two assassination attempts. I just don't know to what lengths they will go to ensure that he never takes power again, because he's a lot older and wiser than he was. We're all less naive than we were back in 2020 now that we've seen unfold at least a portion of this agenda and the dirty tricks that were played on Donald Trump to make sure he didn't win in 2020, certainly by

suppressing our story. And so I think that they know that he will come in and clean them up and he's got a good team behind him, including Elon, who will help him do that, who are loyal to him and smart and an RFK junior, for instance, who knows the, or at least has suspicions about the extent of the evil of the deep state in terms of what happened to his father and his uncle. So, so Donald Trump poses an even greater threat than he did in 2020 to the... By a lot. Yeah. So I don't know what they will do, but I think I would put nothing past them. Yeah, well, I mean, maybe we'll close with this. It isn't obvious to me what Trump should do with

those 51 people. Like letting them off the hook certainly doesn't seem like an appropriate response. You know, trying them for treason seems a lot more appropriate to me. And so, and maybe I'm not a lawyer, and I don't even know if that's possible, but I haven't seen an act that reeks of treason more, more egregiously in my entire lifetime as a political observer. And so, that also does seem to me to indicate that there's some people who are going to feel that they're desperately being shunted into a corner from which there's no escape. And as you intimated, God only knows what people in that situation are capable of. I guess we're going to find out, aren't we? Mm. That's right.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, well. It's frightening thought. We're in for interesting times. That's for sure. So, all right. Well, we'll go off to the Daily Wire side and we'll talk about doing journalism in a sea of propaganda.

And so everybody can join us there. Thanks very much Miranda, much appreciated. And for all your work. Thanks, John. I mean, you guys at the New York Post, that's real journalism. So isn't that something to see?