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

Transcript

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

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