Latest / The Ben Ferguson Podcast / RECAP-Ten Verdict Predictions that ALL Came TRUE! (Part 1:1-5)

Transcript

RECAP-Ten Verdict Predictions that ALL Came TRUE! (Part 1:1-5) · The Ben Ferguson Podcast

0:01
Speaker 1: Welcome.
0:01
Speaker 2: It is Verdict with center Ted Cruz Ben Ferguson with
0:04
Speaker 2: you as always, and with this week being New Year's
0:08
Speaker 2: we had had an original plan which was to give
0:12
Speaker 2: you the top ten predictions that we made on Verdict
0:16
Speaker 2: in the last year that came true. They were big predictions,
0:20
Speaker 2: and it was to set the record straight for so
0:24
Speaker 2: many on the left and the media that listened to
0:26
Speaker 2: the show of just how right we were and how
0:29
Speaker 2: ahead of things we were. And if you listen to
0:30
Speaker 2: the show, you know that we compiled this list a
0:34
Speaker 2: list to help arm you so that you can fight
0:37
Speaker 2: back against the liberals and the narrative that they pushed
0:40
Speaker 2: out on so many things that they're oh so wrong on. Now,
0:44
Speaker 2: with this terrible tarist attack in New Orleans and the
0:47
Speaker 2: other terarist attack out in Las Vegas in front of
0:50
Speaker 2: the Trump Hotel, we clearly changed things and did a
0:54
Speaker 2: special podcast that came out on Thursday with the latest
0:58
Speaker 2: news we had there. If you missed that show, go
1:01
Speaker 2: back and listen to it because there's a lot that
1:04
Speaker 2: the Senator talked about, especially when it comes to the
1:07
Speaker 2: FBI and what should be happening come January the twentieth
1:10
Speaker 2: at the inauguration of Donald Trump and what changes we
1:14
Speaker 2: need to have immediately, make sure you go back and
1:16
Speaker 2: listen to that special pod we did on Thursday. Now
1:21
Speaker 2: it's Friday, and this was supposed to be part two
1:24
Speaker 2: of our list. What we've decided to instead to kind
1:27
Speaker 2: of reset all this because of the terrorist attack and
1:30
Speaker 2: that special episode is we are going to give you
1:33
Speaker 2: the first part of that list again right now for
1:36
Speaker 2: you in case you missed it, and then on Monday
1:39
Speaker 2: we will have for you the second part of that
1:42
Speaker 2: list of these predictions that we made months in advance,
1:47
Speaker 2: some of them over a year in advance, that became
1:49
Speaker 2: true in twenty twenty four heading into twenty twenty five.
1:53
Speaker 2: So with that being said, here is part one of
1:56
Speaker 2: that list of the predictions that became react that we
2:01
Speaker 2: called here on Verdict weeks, months and even over a
2:05
Speaker 2: year ago.
2:06
Speaker 3: We're going to go through ten predictions that on this
2:09
Speaker 3: podcast we have made that had proven correct and the
2:14
Speaker 3: principle going forward, if you want to know what's going
2:16
Speaker 3: to happen next, what's going to happen in twenty twenty five,
2:18
Speaker 3: what's going to happen in twenty twenty six, what's going
2:20
Speaker 3: to happen going forward. Well, listen to verdict, because we're
2:23
Speaker 3: going to keep making predictions. And so far our batting
2:27
Speaker 3: record is pretty damn good in including some predictions that
2:32
Speaker 3: at the time we made them were widely, widely ridiculed
2:37
Speaker 3: and deemed crazy tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theories. And now
2:43
Speaker 3: they are indisputably correct.
2:46
Speaker 2: And let's go back, and let's start with one that's
2:49
Speaker 2: way back, and now we have a lot more confirmation
2:52
Speaker 2: to say, yet again we were right. I want to
2:55
Speaker 2: go back to March the tenth of twenty twenty Rch tenth,
3:00
Speaker 2: twenty twenty. Get that in your head. We're in twenty
3:02
Speaker 2: twenty five now, January first, and you said that in fact,
3:08
Speaker 2: COVID nineteen you believe was coming from a lab, that
3:13
Speaker 2: this wasn't some man made this wasn't some organic thing.
3:16
Speaker 2: This was clearly man made. And if you said that,
3:20
Speaker 2: by the way, on social media, you were shut down.
3:24
Speaker 2: You were put into what we referred to as social
3:26
Speaker 2: media jail. Your reach was limited, you couldn't run ads.
3:30
Speaker 2: It changed looks.
3:31
Speaker 3: People in twenty twenty. In twenty twenty, Facebook and Twitter
3:35
Speaker 3: and Google, they were all actively suppressing saying that that
3:39
Speaker 3: COVID was a man made virus, that it was not
3:44
Speaker 3: something that had just naturally leapt from an animal to
3:47
Speaker 3: the human population, but rather that it escaped from a lab.
3:50
Speaker 3: It was suppressed. We now know that that Facebook, that
3:54
Speaker 3: doctor Fauci was communicating with Mark Zuckerberg asking him to
3:57
Speaker 3: suppress it. And yet somehow, starting back in March of
4:01
Speaker 3: twenty twenty, this show was laying out the facts, and
4:05
Speaker 3: for our loyal listeners and viewers, they were hearing the
4:08
Speaker 3: facts about COVID right at the very beginning. Give a
4:11
Speaker 3: list in March tenth, twenty twenty.
4:13
Speaker 4: This was just a bad case of bat soup. That
4:16
Speaker 4: people ate something they shouldn't have eaten, and that's how
4:18
Speaker 4: it spread. Others have pointed to this strange coincidence that
4:21
Speaker 4: there is a virus testing laboratory in Wuhan. Do we
4:26
Speaker 4: have any sense of the true origins of the virus, Well,
4:30
Speaker 4: we don't know for sure.
4:31
Speaker 3: I've asked medical experts and they've said, based on the
4:34
Speaker 3: sequencing of the genomes, it does not appear to be
4:37
Speaker 3: artificially created. That it appears to be a virus that
4:41
Speaker 3: has occurred in nature. You're right that a lot of
4:43
Speaker 3: people have focused on the Wuhan Virology Institute that is
4:48
Speaker 3: located right there, and indeed they've got researchers there that
4:52
Speaker 3: are studying coronavirus and studying bats. I mean that raises
4:57
Speaker 3: some obvious questions. At the same time, it's it's very interesting.
5:02
Speaker 3: Do you remember back last fall when when the Houston Rockets,
5:05
Speaker 3: when Daryl Mory, the general manager, tweeted out about Hong Kong.
5:09
Speaker 3: He said, stand with Hong Kong, stand for liberty, right,
5:12
Speaker 3: and and the NBA went crazy, and China went crazy,
5:14
Speaker 3: and the NBA apologized profusely. I have to admit, it's
5:19
Speaker 3: kind of the same thing that anyone suggests, well, well, gosh,
5:22
Speaker 3: you know, there are thousands, hundreds of thousands of cities
5:27
Speaker 3: all across the world. It just so happens this outbreak
5:29
Speaker 3: is there right where this virology lab is, and the
5:33
Speaker 3: collective media acts with this outrage of okay, take your
5:39
Speaker 3: take your tin hat off. How dare you even ask
5:41
Speaker 3: that question? You know it, it's obviously a question that
5:46
Speaker 3: people are going to inquire. Look, the first step needs
5:48
Speaker 3: to be stopping this this virus, stopping the disease and
5:51
Speaker 3: protecting human life. Right now. But but there are certainly
5:54
Speaker 3: going to be questions following up if if there is
5:57
Speaker 3: any connection or not, And that seems that least a
6:00
Speaker 3: reasonable question.
6:01
Speaker 2: I asked you listen to that, and again we're going
6:04
Speaker 2: back now to twenty twenty for that. You were spot
6:07
Speaker 2: on and that was something that the media and social
6:11
Speaker 2: media said made you a conspiracy theorist.
6:14
Speaker 3: Yeah, and listen, there are two predictions that that came
6:18
Speaker 3: out that we were laying out. Number one, that that
6:22
Speaker 3: COVID did not occur just naturally, did not occur in
6:25
Speaker 3: a wet market from someone eating bat soup, but rather
6:28
Speaker 3: than it escaped from a lab. And number two that
6:31
Speaker 3: in particular it came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
6:34
Speaker 3: And look, early on, you're dealing with limited information. I
6:38
Speaker 3: was trying to do my best to walk through that
6:40
Speaker 3: limited information. By the way, I got to say in
6:42
Speaker 3: that clip, Ben, you sound kind of funny there. You know,
6:45
Speaker 3: you don't have much of sun time. You know, you
6:48
Speaker 3: sound like you sound kind of like a yalea. It's
6:51
Speaker 3: a little weird.
6:52
Speaker 2: I've always, you know, wanted to know what I'd sound
6:54
Speaker 2: like if I went to the Ivy leagues and now
6:56
Speaker 2: I know, compliments of Michael Knowles for making that happen right.
7:01
Speaker 3: And for long time Verdict listeners. Michael Knowles, my dear friend,
7:05
Speaker 3: Ben's dear friend was my co host for the first
7:07
Speaker 3: couple of years, and so that was Michael and me
7:09
Speaker 3: back then before Ben came on board. That was in March,
7:14
Speaker 3: March tenth of twenty twenty. Let's go forward a month
7:19
Speaker 3: later to April. To April we had a little more information.
7:22
Speaker 3: I want to listen. I want you to listen to
7:24
Speaker 3: Verdict laying out the evidence that this virus not just
7:29
Speaker 3: escape from a lab, but escape from the Wuhan Institute
7:32
Speaker 3: for Virology in Wuhan, China. Give a listen.
7:36
Speaker 4: I want to turn for a moment from the economy
7:39
Speaker 4: into the virus itself. And I want to take just
7:42
Speaker 4: a slight victory lap because I remember on this very show,
7:45
Speaker 4: Senator on March tenth, over a month ago, you suggested
7:50
Speaker 4: that there was very likely a link between the Wuhan
7:53
Speaker 4: Institute of Virology and this virus that just so coincidentally
7:58
Speaker 4: happened to occur within a couple of miles of that institute.
8:01
Speaker 4: During that time, the mainstream media said this was crazy.
8:04
Speaker 4: This was a conspiracy theory, there was no evidence of it.
8:07
Speaker 4: Now we are getting multiple reports all saying that the
8:11
Speaker 4: virus came from the lab. My question here is not
8:15
Speaker 4: my point is not just to take a victory lab.
8:17
Speaker 4: My question is did the US government know that the
8:20
Speaker 4: Wuhan Institute of Virology was conducting this sort of dangerous research?
8:25
Speaker 4: And if we did know, why didn't we stop it?
8:27
Speaker 3: Absolutely yes, the US government knew, and in fact, when
8:32
Speaker 3: you and I brought this up on March tenth, over
8:34
Speaker 3: a month ago, you're right, it was treated as tinfoil hat,
8:38
Speaker 3: conspiracy theory, nut jobbery. Well, it turns out there wasn't
8:43
Speaker 3: just one. There were two labs within miles of where
8:46
Speaker 3: this outbrook break occurred that were studying coronaviruses from bats,
8:52
Speaker 3: and that there were internal State Department wires before this pandemic,
8:57
Speaker 3: raising concerns about the security and the those labs and
9:01
Speaker 3: that an accidental a virus could escape and cause a
9:04
Speaker 3: global pandemic. But I'll tell you it's worse than that.
9:07
Speaker 3: And let me give you some breaking news right now,
9:10
Speaker 3: which is the US government was funding the Chinese research
9:17
Speaker 3: at the Wu Hunt Institute of Virology, your taxpayer dollars
9:22
Speaker 3: and my taxpayer dollars. And let me give you specifics
9:24
Speaker 3: that we just got today today in inquiring of the
9:28
Speaker 3: National Institutes of Health, did any of your money go
9:31
Speaker 3: to the wu Hunt Institute of Virology. The answer is yes,
9:35
Speaker 3: And here's what they told us in writing today. They said,
9:39
Speaker 3: in fiscal year twenty nineteen, the funding for the Wuhun
9:42
Speaker 3: Institute for Virology was seventy six thousand dollars and the
9:46
Speaker 3: three hundred and one dollars seventy six thousand, three hundred
9:50
Speaker 3: and one dollars. Now what did it go to? And
9:52
Speaker 3: I'm repeating what NIH has told me in writing. It
9:56
Speaker 3: went to It was part of an overall three two
10:00
Speaker 3: point seven million dollar funding program that went to six
10:05
Speaker 3: years in sites in China, Thailand, Cambonia, Laos, Laos, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia,
10:11
Speaker 3: and Banmar. And here's what they were studying. These are
10:15
Speaker 3: Nah's words. The project included studying viral diversity in animal parentheses,
10:22
Speaker 3: bats reservoirs, surveying people that live in high risk communities
10:29
Speaker 3: for evidence of bat coronavirus infection, and conducting laboratory experiments
10:37
Speaker 3: to analyze and predict which newly discovered viruses pose the
10:42
Speaker 3: greatest threats to human health center.
10:46
Speaker 2: It's pretty clear, and that's part two of this prediction.
10:49
Speaker 2: You were right as well.
10:52
Speaker 3: Yeah, look and we now know this like what we
10:54
Speaker 3: were predicting then that was crazy fringe theory has now
10:59
Speaker 3: all been confirm. Let's fast forward to February twenty twenty three.
11:03
Speaker 3: February twenty twenty three, The Washington Post reported, FBI director
11:07
Speaker 3: said COVID nineteen quote most likely originated from lab incident.
11:12
Speaker 3: That's the FBI's position now. June of twenty twenty three,
11:15
Speaker 3: The New York reported New York Post reported quote. US
11:19
Speaker 3: taxpayers supported research in three Chinese labs that included risky
11:23
Speaker 3: gain of function experiments with coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute
11:27
Speaker 3: of Virology, the National Institution Institutes of Health NIH and
11:31
Speaker 3: the US Agency for International Development USAID provided two million,
11:35
Speaker 3: one hundred and sixty eight thousand, three hundred and forty
11:37
Speaker 3: five dollars in grant funding to the Chinese research institutions
11:40
Speaker 3: between twenty fourteen and twenty twenty one. According to the
11:43
Speaker 3: Government Accountability Office, The report shows one million, four hundred
11:47
Speaker 3: and thirteen thousand, seven hundred and twenty dollars in subgrants
11:51
Speaker 3: allocated by the Manhattan based EcoHealth Alliance went to the
11:55
Speaker 3: Wuhan Institute of Virology, where hazardous research was conducted on
12:00
Speaker 3: back coronaviruses. July of twenty twenty three, Reuters reported quote
12:05
Speaker 3: US suspends federal funding to Wuhan lab over non compliance.
12:09
Speaker 3: December twenty twenty four, Fox News COVID most likely leaked
12:15
Speaker 3: from Wuhan lab, social distancing not based on science, select
12:19
Speaker 3: committee fines. And then finally December twenty sixth of twenty
12:23
Speaker 3: twenty four, just a few days ago, The Wall Street
12:26
Speaker 3: Journal wrote the bomb Setshell story that we did an
12:29
Speaker 3: entire podcast on entitled Behind closed Doors the Spy World
12:34
Speaker 3: scientists who argued COVID was a lab leak. Well, there
12:37
Speaker 3: were scientists arguing that behind Closed Doors, but there was
12:40
Speaker 3: also the Verdict podcast making the argument laying out the
12:44
Speaker 3: facts right at the very beginning, and I gotta say,
12:46
Speaker 3: on COVID, we were proved exactly right.
12:50
Speaker 2: Final question on this prediction, looking forward, do you think
12:54
Speaker 2: we're going to learn a lot more about Fauci, the
12:57
Speaker 2: cover up, and COVID win Donald Trump is inaugurated after
13:02
Speaker 2: January twentieth.
13:04
Speaker 3: So I do, and I am urging the incoming Trump
13:06
Speaker 3: administration to engage in full transparency. That's a discussion I
13:10
Speaker 3: have had with Pam Bondi at the Department of Justice.
13:13
Speaker 3: That's a discussion I've had with with Cash Battel, who
13:16
Speaker 3: will be going to the FBI. It's a discussion I
13:19
Speaker 3: will have next week with RFK Junior, who will be
13:21
Speaker 3: coming in as HHS Secretary. Every one of them, I
13:24
Speaker 3: am urging, use full transparency, make it public, let the
13:29
Speaker 3: public know. And I'm going to keep pressing them to
13:31
Speaker 3: do that. And I think that they're going to follow through.
13:34
Speaker 3: We're going to know a lot more. That is a
13:37
Speaker 3: very good thing.
13:38
Speaker 2: Let's move on to another prediction. This may be one
13:42
Speaker 2: of my favorite predictions that we've ever made here on
13:45
Speaker 2: this show, because when we said it, we got a
13:48
Speaker 2: lot of pushback and there are a lot of people
13:51
Speaker 2: that said what you were saying was just absurd. We
13:55
Speaker 2: had our ten foil hats on again. I mean, there
13:57
Speaker 2: were people that were angry over this. And that was
14:00
Speaker 2: the big prediction that you made that Joe Biden would
14:05
Speaker 2: not be the twenty twenty four Democratic nominee.
14:11
Speaker 3: Well, that's right, And I made two related predictions. Number one,
14:15
Speaker 3: early on, I said, I believe Joe Biden would not
14:19
Speaker 3: be the Democrat nominee. He would not be on the
14:21
Speaker 3: ballot in twenty twenty four. I also predicted, I said
14:25
Speaker 3: the only people there were. When people were later talking
14:28
Speaker 3: about replacing him with Gavin Newsom or Gretchen Whitmer some
14:31
Speaker 3: other people, I said, no, that will never happen. The
14:35
Speaker 3: Democrat Party is a bean counting party. Next in line
14:40
Speaker 3: is Kamala Harris, and the Democrat Party cannot cannot push
14:45
Speaker 3: her aside, cannot push an African American woman aside for
14:49
Speaker 3: a white guy like Gavin Newsom. Their party would spontaneously
14:52
Speaker 3: combust if they tried to do that. So I said,
14:55
Speaker 3: the only people who could replace Joe Biden are Kamala
14:59
Speaker 3: har Harris or Michelle Obama. And I did lay out
15:03
Speaker 3: that I thought Michelle Obama. If I were a Democrat,
15:06
Speaker 3: I would much prefer Michelle Obama to Kamala Harris because
15:08
Speaker 3: Kamala Harris, as the whole world is seen, is a
15:11
Speaker 3: lousy candidate. So if you're a Democrat who wants to win,
15:15
Speaker 3: and you're stuck with Kamala Harris. There's only one human
15:17
Speaker 3: being who can push Kamala Harris aside. That is Michelle Obama.
15:22
Speaker 3: Now what I think happened. I think they tried with Michelle.
15:25
Speaker 3: I think Michelle said no. And so prediction number one
15:29
Speaker 3: that Joe Biden would not be the nominee that came
15:31
Speaker 3: one hundred percent correct. Prediction number two that he would
15:34
Speaker 3: be replaced either by Kamala Harris or Michelle Obama that
15:38
Speaker 3: came true as well, although I did think Michelle Obama
15:42
Speaker 3: had a very real possibility. So let's listen. This first
15:46
Speaker 3: excerpt is from September eighteenth, twenty twenty three, so more
15:51
Speaker 3: than a year, a year and three months ago, where
15:55
Speaker 3: I laid out laid out this possibility and give a listen.
16:00
Speaker 3: Here's the scenario that I think is perhaps most likely
16:04
Speaker 3: and most dangerous. In August of twenty twenty four, the
16:09
Speaker 3: Democrat kingmakers jettison Joe Biden and parachute in Michelle Obama,
16:16
Speaker 3: and I want you to pause and reflect on it.
16:18
Speaker 2: No, I'm pausing, and I'm reflecting, as we said, and
16:20
Speaker 2: so is everybody else listening right now.
16:22
Speaker 3: I view this as a very serious.
16:25
Speaker 2: Danger I'm smiling right now because it terrifies me, and
16:28
Speaker 2: I also could totally see this happening.
16:30
Speaker 3: So Michelle Obama, number one, you don't infuriate African American women,
16:35
Speaker 3: which is a critical part of the constituency that Democrats
16:39
Speaker 3: are relying on to win. But number two, you avoid
16:42
Speaker 3: the problem if you pick from any of the four.
16:44
Speaker 3: The other three are pissed because they're all, to some
16:48
Speaker 3: extent peers, they're rivals, they're all jabbin knives at each other.
16:52
Speaker 3: Michelle Obama, because she was first Lady, has the ability
16:56
Speaker 3: to kind of parachute in above all and say, hey,
17:01
Speaker 3: we're not picking among any of you. You guys can
17:03
Speaker 3: all fight it out. Next time. You're all gonna be
17:05
Speaker 3: on the same level. We're coming. This is the Obamas
17:09
Speaker 3: saving the day, and I think in terms of a
17:12
Speaker 3: solution that unifies Democrats, there ain't nothing like that. I
17:20
Speaker 3: also think Michelle is not all that eager to run
17:23
Speaker 3: for president, but to parachute in in August of twenty four,
17:27
Speaker 3: a couple of months before the presidency and suddenly wake
17:30
Speaker 3: up and be president not a bad gig. It's not
17:33
Speaker 3: a bad gig at all. Now, would she do it.
17:35
Speaker 3: I don't know. I've met Michelle, but I don't know
17:39
Speaker 3: her personally in any meaningful way. I don't know if
17:42
Speaker 3: she would do it. I do think Barack Obama is
17:46
Speaker 3: already running the Biden administration. I think he is already
17:49
Speaker 3: the puppet master behind this Biden White House. I don't
17:53
Speaker 3: think Joe Biden is the decision maker. And so when
17:56
Speaker 3: I see the media turning on Joe Biden right now,
18:00
Speaker 3: I think the odds of Michelle Obama parachuting in in
18:04
Speaker 3: August of twenty twenty four have risen dramatically, and that
18:09
Speaker 3: ought to scare the hell out of anyone who is
18:14
Speaker 3: unhappy about the direction this country is going and doesn't
18:17
Speaker 3: want us to go even crazier in an even worse.
18:19
Speaker 2: Direct, in an even worse direction.
18:22
Speaker 3: Well, and there you heard in September of twenty twenty
18:25
Speaker 3: three making the prediction that Joe Biden would be jettisoned.
18:28
Speaker 3: And by the way, at the time that happened, very
18:30
Speaker 3: few people were making that prediction. When we put that
18:32
Speaker 3: podcast out, it drove a lot of news. There were headlines,
18:36
Speaker 3: There were people that were shocked when I laid out
18:40
Speaker 3: that Biden was not capable, that his mental capacity had diminished,
18:45
Speaker 3: that he was not going to be the nominee, that
18:47
Speaker 3: the Democrats realized it, that they were going to jettison him.
18:51
Speaker 3: The media ridiculed it. But you go forward to February
18:55
Speaker 3: of twenty twenty four, I went on Maria Barbiromo. I said,
18:58
Speaker 3: I think Obama's driving the train, which is which is
19:00
Speaker 3: also what I said back in September twenty twenty three.
19:03
Speaker 3: John Harwood, who you know, was the former journalist for
19:08
Speaker 3: the Wall Street Journal and for NBC, and who's a
19:12
Speaker 3: hard leftist, a vicious leftist. He retweeted my comments on
19:17
Speaker 3: Maria Barbaramo and his entire commentary was quote impossibly stupid conversation.
19:25
Speaker 3: So that was his learned journalistic view is that it
19:29
Speaker 3: was impossibly stupid to say that. I will tell you
19:35
Speaker 3: just just in November of this year, I retweeted Harwood
19:39
Speaker 3: shot at me and I just said, I want to
19:42
Speaker 3: know why nobody trusts the media. Just nine months ago,
19:46
Speaker 3: a fake quote journalist claimed it was quote impossibly stupid
19:51
Speaker 3: to observe that Joe Biden was not mentally competent to
19:54
Speaker 3: be president. Now everybody admits it. What say you, John
20:02
Speaker 3: Jay Harwood of course, Harwood didn't respond at all. He
20:06
Speaker 3: ignored it. All right, Let's go forward though. Not only
20:10
Speaker 3: did we lay it out in September of twenty twenty three,
20:13
Speaker 3: but then fast forward to the debate, the debate between
20:17
Speaker 3: Joe Biden and Donald Trump, that was on June twenty eighth,
20:22
Speaker 3: twenty twenty four. You and I recorded a Verdict podcast
20:26
Speaker 3: immediately after the debate. We went live, recorded it that night,
20:31
Speaker 3: and give a listen to what the Verdict podcast said
20:34
Speaker 3: the night of the debate.
20:36
Speaker 2: Tender Cruz. I didn't think it could actually be this bad.
20:41
Speaker 2: It was worse than even I think either of us
20:44
Speaker 2: could have imagined. And now the Democratic Party is screaming
20:48
Speaker 2: replaced the president.
20:49
Speaker 3: Well, you and I are sitting here at is ten
20:51
Speaker 3: seventeen pm Texas time, at is eleven seventeen pm East
20:55
Speaker 3: Coast time, the night of the debate. The debate just ended,
20:58
Speaker 3: and I have to say we have just witnessed what
21:00
Speaker 3: I believe is the most consequential presidential debate in US history.
21:05
Speaker 3: Sometimes debate change debates change things. Sometimes they don't. I
21:08
Speaker 3: believe to bite tonight's debate change things fundamentally, And I
21:13
Speaker 3: believe the odds have now skyrocketed. I believe the odds
21:16
Speaker 3: are north of eighty percent that the Democrat Party will
21:20
Speaker 3: remove Joe Biden from the ticket and replace him. And
21:23
Speaker 3: I believe they are likely to replace Joe Biden with
21:26
Speaker 3: Michelle Obama because Biden did so disastrously badly tonight that
21:31
Speaker 3: Democrats across the country are in utter freefall and complete panic.
21:36
Speaker 3: We're going to break all that down tonight.
21:38
Speaker 2: Yeah. And by the way, this was a prediction that
21:40
Speaker 2: you made on this show back in September of twenty
21:45
Speaker 2: twenty three, that the Democratic king makers could bring in
21:49
Speaker 2: Michelle Obama will break all that down center yet another
21:54
Speaker 2: prediction there Again, you go back and look at the
21:56
Speaker 2: night you made it right at that debate, and you
21:59
Speaker 2: said there's no way he's going to be on the ticket,
22:01
Speaker 2: and it was absolutely correct.
22:04
Speaker 3: Well, to be fair, what I said was the odds
22:06
Speaker 3: were north of eighty percent that he would be pulled
22:08
Speaker 3: off the ticket. That prediction that Joe Biden would be
22:12
Speaker 3: removed from the ticket, which by the way, is unprecedented
22:15
Speaker 3: and was almost universally ridiculed in the media, that prediction
22:20
Speaker 3: came one hundred percent true. I also articulated there were
22:23
Speaker 3: only two people who could replace him, Kamala Harris or
22:26
Speaker 3: Michelle Obama. I believe Michelle Obama was more likely. The
22:29
Speaker 3: Michelle Obama thing did not come to pass, but the
22:32
Speaker 3: Kamala Harris thing did. And in fact I predicted that
22:36
Speaker 3: the Democrat Kingmakers with jettison Biden in August of twenty
22:41
Speaker 3: twenty four. They in fact did so on July twenty
22:46
Speaker 3: first of twenty twenty four, so I was ten days
22:48
Speaker 3: off in terms of predicting it. And by the way,
22:51
Speaker 3: to be clear, I predicted that way back in September
22:53
Speaker 3: of twenty twenty three, so over a year earlier. I
22:57
Speaker 3: predicted within ten days when they would throw Biden off
23:00
Speaker 3: the ballot. And I'm gonna make actually a brand new
23:04
Speaker 3: prediction here. I'm going to predict that in the next
23:07
Speaker 3: year or two we're going to get confirmation that there
23:12
Speaker 3: was serious outreach to Michelle Obama to see if she
23:16
Speaker 3: was willing to replace Joe Biden on the ballot, and
23:20
Speaker 3: that Michelle Obama said no. I don't know that, but
23:23
Speaker 3: my instinct, my judgment tells me that happened, and we'll
23:27
Speaker 3: see in the next year or two if that gets confirmed.
23:30
Speaker 3: We'll have a subsequent podcast. If that gets confirmed publicly,
23:33
Speaker 3: we'll go back and revisit it regardless. Prediction number three,
23:38
Speaker 3: Joe Biden will not be the nominee. Check true. Prediction
23:42
Speaker 3: number four Joe Biden will be replaced by either Kamala
23:45
Speaker 3: Harris or Michelle Obama check true. So that's four predictions.
23:51
Speaker 3: Let's move on to prediction number five.
23:53
Speaker 2: Number five is another big one here, and that is
23:57
Speaker 2: the prediction that Joe Biden would pardon death Row inmates.
24:03
Speaker 2: You said that it was gonna happen, and it did.
24:07
Speaker 2: Plus the even more i would say disgusting deal that
24:12
Speaker 2: was given out to Khalead Sheik Muhammad, the mastermind of
24:16
Speaker 2: nine to eleven to spare his life, the mastermind of
24:20
Speaker 2: nine to eleven, and a man that was also before
24:23
Speaker 2: even nine to eleven involved in many other terrorist attack
24:26
Speaker 2: that killed women and children and the elderly innocent bystanders
24:30
Speaker 2: that he did around the world.
24:33
Speaker 3: Well, and this is a prediction that we made on
24:36
Speaker 3: August eighteenth, twenty twenty three. Give a listen to what
24:40
Speaker 3: we said back in August of twenty three. Any Way,
24:43
Speaker 3: I'm going to make a prediction as well, which is
24:46
Speaker 3: that these are not the only mass murderers that I
24:51
Speaker 3: think this administration is going to refuse to follow federal
24:55
Speaker 3: law and impose the death ben I'm going to make
24:57
Speaker 3: a prediction right now, which is Joe Biden, before war
25:00
Speaker 3: he leaves the White House will commute the sentence of
25:04
Speaker 3: every federal prisoner on death row. That he will do
25:08
Speaker 3: it for every one of them. And that includes It
25:12
Speaker 3: includes the white supremacist and Nazi who murdered nine African
25:18
Speaker 3: Americans at the Mother Emmanuel Ame Church in Charleston, South Carolina,
25:23
Speaker 3: in a horrific hate crime. He's on federal death row.
25:26
Speaker 3: It includes the Boston bomber who murdered innocent people by
25:30
Speaker 3: exploding a bomb at the Boston Marathon. One of the
25:34
Speaker 3: two brothers is still alive. He's on death row. And
25:38
Speaker 3: my prediction right now is Joe Biden intends to spare
25:44
Speaker 3: every one of these mass murderers, every one of them.
25:47
Speaker 3: Many of them are racist, bigoted, homicidal lunatics, and I
25:53
Speaker 3: think we're going to see him commute all of their
25:56
Speaker 3: sentences before he leaves the White House.
25:58
Speaker 1: Well, if you won't, if you won't take out the
26:00
Speaker 1: mastermind of nine to eleven, and you won't give him
26:03
Speaker 1: the death penalty. Is there anyone that you'll give it to?
26:06
Speaker 1: I mean, it doesn't. It doesn't get any worse than this.
26:10
Speaker 2: It doesn't. And yet that's exactly what he's done.
26:13
Speaker 3: Well, So my prediction again in August of twenty three,
26:17
Speaker 3: is that that he would he would remove the death penalty,
26:19
Speaker 3: that he would commute the death penalty for the federal
26:21
Speaker 3: death row prisoners that has come to pass. Now, to
26:24
Speaker 3: be clear, this prediction proves slightly off. I predicted that
26:29
Speaker 3: he would commute the sentence of every single federal death
26:32
Speaker 3: row prisoner. He instead commuted the sentence of thirty seven
26:37
Speaker 3: out of the forty federal death row inmates. And so
26:41
Speaker 3: there were three he did not. And interestingly enough, the
26:43
Speaker 3: three he did not are the three that I identified in October,
26:48
Speaker 3: or rather in August of twenty twenty three. So the
26:51
Speaker 3: three he did not were the murderer at the Tree
26:54
Speaker 3: of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, the murderer at the Mother
26:58
Speaker 3: Emmanuel Church in Charles in South Carolina, and the Boston
27:02
Speaker 3: marathon bomber. And those three are the only three he
27:04
Speaker 3: did not. Now I identified those three because they're the
27:07
Speaker 3: most horribly egregious, they're the most famous and infamous that
27:12
Speaker 3: they are. Two of the three at least are vicious,
27:16
Speaker 3: unrepentant racists. And so I have to say my prediction
27:20
Speaker 3: it was not one hundred percent right. It was ninety
27:22
Speaker 3: two point five percent right, because instead of commuting forty
27:26
Speaker 3: death sentences, Biden commuted thirty seven out of forty, and
27:30
Speaker 3: he left the three most egregious and famous ones off
27:33
Speaker 3: the table. Why because they knew that the press was
27:36
Speaker 3: so utterly corrupt that without those three that they would
27:40
Speaker 3: get almost no criticism for it, That would you would
27:43
Speaker 3: just go under the carpet, not really be seen. And
27:48
Speaker 3: I have to say I underestimated the incredible cynicism. And
27:54
Speaker 3: I got to say nonetheless that that is a profound
27:59
Speaker 3: disrespect for the rule of law. Among those that that
28:02
Speaker 3: Biden did commute the sentences was was a Nazi and
28:06
Speaker 3: an Aryan Brotherhood racist. You know, Joe Biden stepped forward
28:11
Speaker 3: and said, hey, we're the Democrat Party, We're here. We're
28:14
Speaker 3: here for Nazis and klansmen. I mean it. But ninety
28:21
Speaker 3: two point five percent prediction correct. And sadly, another element
28:25
Speaker 3: of this prediction just just became confirmed moments ago. So
28:31
Speaker 3: so this episode, we were talking about the plans to
28:36
Speaker 3: spare the life of Khaleade Shake Mohammad, the mastermind of
28:39
Speaker 3: nine to eleven, and this podcast put enormous public pressure
28:44
Speaker 3: on the White House. The White House Koreem John Pierre
28:46
Speaker 3: was asked about it, and the heat became so much
28:49
Speaker 3: that they backed off of it. Well, sadly, the news
28:52
Speaker 3: just broke that they're going back to trying to spare
28:55
Speaker 3: Khalead Shak Muhammad. They're trying to do it literally on
28:59
Speaker 3: the way out that door. And the contempt that Joe Biden,
29:03
Speaker 3: this entire White House has for the voters. They are
29:05
Speaker 3: trying to break everything on the way out the door.
29:08
Speaker 3: They're trying to frustrate Donald Trump every way they can.
29:11
Speaker 3: They are such vicious partisans that there is no respect
29:17
Speaker 3: for the Constitution, for the rule of law, no respect
29:20
Speaker 3: for the voters. They don't care what the voters said
29:23
Speaker 3: in November. They are trying to literally break everything on
29:27
Speaker 3: the way out the door. And I gotta say it
29:29
Speaker 3: is grotesque.
29:32
Speaker 2: It really is. We're gonna have part two of our predictions.
29:35
Speaker 2: We will continue this on Friday morning, so may make
29:39
Speaker 2: sure you hit that like subscribe auto download button, and
29:42
Speaker 2: we will keep giving you hard hitting predictions so you
29:45
Speaker 2: know what's actually gonna be happening in this new year.
29:48
Speaker 2: It is going to be a very fun one, especially
29:50
Speaker 2: with Trump in office, Republicans control of the House in
29:53
Speaker 2: the Senate, and we're gonna have a lot of predictions
29:55
Speaker 2: for you, So make sure that subscriber auto download button,
29:58
Speaker 2: and on Friday will have part two two of this. Also,
30:00
Speaker 2: don't forget grab my podcast, the Ben Ferguson Podcasts on
30:04
Speaker 2: those in between days and I'll keep you update on
30:06
Speaker 2: the latest breaking news as well, and we'll see you
30:08
Speaker 2: back here Friday morning.