Speaker 1: It's Ato five. I think you about KRCD Talk station.
Speaker 1: A very happy Tuesday, always made extra special. This is
Speaker 1: the time of the week and moment of the hour
Speaker 1: when we get to the inside scoop with bright Bart News.
Speaker 1: As I always start out, bookmark the website b R
Speaker 1: E I T B A R T Breitbart dot com.
Speaker 2: You'd be very happy you did.
Speaker 1: They got wonderful reporting there, including the reporting from White
Speaker 1: House correspondent. Welcome back, Nick Gilbertson. It's a pleasure to
Speaker 1: have you back on the program.
Speaker 2: Nick. I hope you're doing well. Hey, Brian, doing very well.
Speaker 3: Thanks great, great to be here and.
Speaker 1: A good topic of conversation. Was an interesting revelation from
Speaker 1: the New York Times. I don't think they necessarily intended
Speaker 1: the article to turn out this way, but boiled Down
Speaker 1: effectively points out that Biden actually did not individually approve
Speaker 1: the names that a lot of the folks that he
Speaker 1: pardoned via the auto pen. Now this has been widely
Speaker 1: acknowledged that the auto pen was used rather than Joe
Speaker 1: Biden actually sitting down on a document and signing his
Speaker 1: executive orders, they have a machine that mimics his signature.
Speaker 1: That is okay to use many presidents have used it,
Speaker 1: but you must specifically authorize the use of the auto
Speaker 1: pen for something that you know what's in it. You
Speaker 1: can't just say there's no blanket authorization to use the
Speaker 1: autopen for some something. Some random individual in the administration
Speaker 1: decides he needs to be signed. But that sounds like
Speaker 1: what happens. Nick, break it down from our listening audience,
Speaker 1: would you please.
Speaker 3: Yeah, absolutely, Brian. So, there were like four batches of
Speaker 3: these pardons that Biden kind of issues here in the
Speaker 3: last few months as president. And three of the four batches,
Speaker 3: where you know, has to do with these categorical pardons
Speaker 3: that were like large sweeping pardons over these swaths of criminals.
Speaker 3: And the last, of course, was that those preemptive pardons
Speaker 3: on the last day in office of family members and touch.
Speaker 3: So yeah, the New York Times they buried it very
Speaker 3: very deep in the article here, which was it was
Speaker 3: written pretty I think friendly to Biden. Yeah, but quote,
Speaker 3: mister Biden did not end visually approve each name for
Speaker 3: the category oracle pardons that applied to large numbers of people.
Speaker 3: He and AIDS confirmed. So that's Biden admitting that for
Speaker 3: the Times rather, after extensive discussion of different possible criteria,
Speaker 3: he signed off on standards he wanted to be used
Speaker 3: to determine which convicts would qualify for a reduction in sentence.
Speaker 3: But apparently they were still getting this information after Biden,
Speaker 3: you know, had given his instructions and criteria from the
Speaker 3: Bureau of Prisons, and the list kept getting of you know,
Speaker 3: who's going to get pardon, kept getting edited, there were
Speaker 3: small changes to it, and quote according to The Times,
Speaker 3: rather than ask mister Biden to keep signing revised versions,
Speaker 3: his staff waited and then ran the final version through
Speaker 3: the auto pen, which they saw as a routine procedure.
Speaker 3: He aids said, So that's Biden's not seeing the final
Speaker 3: list of who he's signing off on to be pardoned there,
Speaker 3: and it just calls into you know question, I think,
Speaker 3: you know, many are questioning the legitimacy of these pardons
Speaker 3: now that have happened, and you have Oh, go ahead, Brian, Oh.
Speaker 1: No, no, I was gonna you conclude your thought. I'm sorry,
Speaker 1: I interjected prematurely.
Speaker 3: Okay, no, no worries.
Speaker 1: No, but I guess we're in an uncharted We're in
Speaker 1: uncharted waters. Here is this ever come up in a
Speaker 1: prior administration. I guess for as long as auto pens
Speaker 1: have been around, this is a potential issue, but I
Speaker 1: don't recall this ever coming up. That's somehow, in some
Speaker 1: way an executive order signed by auto pen might be
Speaker 1: void or negated because it didn't receive specific approval from
Speaker 1: the president.
Speaker 3: Absolutely, and there's I guess there was this process to
Speaker 3: which this kind of what would go through according to
Speaker 3: the Times, and you know their sources and emails they reviewed.
Speaker 3: But so I guess Biden would you know, indicate in
Speaker 3: these meetings what criteria he wanted for these you know,
Speaker 3: batches of pardons to top advisors like cheapest staff Jeffrey
Speaker 3: Siance and White House counsel Ed Ciskel, and then they
Speaker 3: would relay so that like those wishes from Biden to
Speaker 3: their assistants I guess, who reportedly weren't in the meetings themselves.
Speaker 3: Then the assistance would craft reports that would get reviewed
Speaker 3: by senior advisors like Science and Ciscol, as well as
Speaker 3: others in the meetings, and then they'd make their way
Speaker 3: to this woman, Stephanie Feldman, who is the White House
Speaker 3: Staff Secretary and was reportedly in charge of the auto
Speaker 3: pen So it's kind of like, you know, zience and fiscal.
Speaker 2: On the list.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and it looks like they're the gatekeepers to you know,
Speaker 3: what Biden said, and and you know, and they're they're
Speaker 3: relaying the information. So I think it comes down to
Speaker 3: it looks pretty interesting here this process through through which
Speaker 3: through which these approvals went through.
Speaker 1: So it sounds me like assuming that Biden was you know,
Speaker 1: coherent enough and capable enough of deciding what criteria he
Speaker 1: wants in connection with these just literally thousands of convicted criminals,
Speaker 1: he says something to the effect, Okay, if they're convicted
Speaker 1: for a non violent drug charge and fill in the
Speaker 1: blank xyz, then I would approve a pardon, but not
Speaker 1: naming a specific person. So you take the list of criteria, Okay,
Speaker 1: they meet these check marks, ABC and D, and Jeff
Speaker 1: Science writes them down on a list and decides who
Speaker 1: the people are that actually meet the criteria without Joe
Speaker 1: Biden seeing it, approving it specifically, and then off it
Speaker 1: goes to the secretary in charge of the autopen and
Speaker 1: it's signed.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And certainly that's what the Times report indicates, even
Speaker 3: though they don't say it write that explicitly, they kind
Speaker 3: of you know, play oh yeah, play around with the
Speaker 3: work a little bit.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I read the article.
Speaker 1: They dance around it as well as they can, but
Speaker 1: I I mean, they did write that this is what happened.
Speaker 1: So it puts these things on in the focus of
Speaker 1: maybe trying to find them to have them legally declared void.
Speaker 1: Now moving over from the prisoners, and we can argue
Speaker 1: all day long and whether or not those they're appropriate,
Speaker 1: But the preemptive pardons, it was the autopen used for
Speaker 1: the likes of Fauci for example, because I know, I
Speaker 1: guess Senator rand paul Is is going to go take
Speaker 1: a crack at relaunching the criminal investigation into doctor Fauci.
Speaker 1: So was the autopen used for those? Because I read,
Speaker 1: at least in multiple places that Joe Biden actually wielded
Speaker 1: his own pen when he signed a pardon for his
Speaker 1: son Hunter.
Speaker 2: But what about the other ones?
Speaker 3: Yeah, I know Hunter was earlier than the other ones.
Speaker 2: I believe the other.
Speaker 3: Ones came on January nineteenth, and those were you know,
Speaker 3: some family members I think doctor Fauci as well, and others.
Speaker 3: And it's pretty interesting because so you know, we don't
Speaker 3: know exactly how involved by the you know, Biden held
Speaker 3: a meeting till late in the evening of January nineteenth.
Speaker 3: According to the article about who you know certain pardons
Speaker 3: he wanted, and one antidote in there too is pretty
Speaker 3: interesting is Jim Clyburn, you know, actually who was instrumental
Speaker 3: in getting South Carolina to flip for Biden in the
Speaker 3: twenty twenty Democratic primary, spoke with the president or was
Speaker 3: with the president earlier that day and convinced him to
Speaker 3: add somebody to the pardon list. So pretty interesting. It
Speaker 3: kind of I think it shows how impressionable.
Speaker 2: Maybe Biden was malleable.
Speaker 3: So yeah, exactly right. So this pardon list gets I
Speaker 3: believe it came from a Cisco aid, you know, And
Speaker 3: this is very shortly after this meeting concludes. Her is
Speaker 3: still going at like ten pm at night, and it
Speaker 3: gets from a Cisco aid and I think over to
Speaker 3: a Zience aid and it gets forwarded over to you know,
Speaker 3: Zience and Feldman, who is again the White How Staff
Speaker 3: secretary in charge of the pen and apparently within three
Speaker 3: minutes of receiving this draft of apparently you know, a
Speaker 3: draft summary of some pardons Science hits quote reply all
Speaker 3: according to the Times, and then he wrote, quote, I
Speaker 3: approve the use of autopen for the execution of all
Speaker 3: the following parties. So I yes, approve the use of
Speaker 3: autopen for the execution of all the following parts. Not
Speaker 3: I Joe Biden, right, Not I approved this with Joe Biden.
Speaker 3: I ran this by Joe Biden. I I personally approved.
Speaker 3: So I think that's I mean, that's a major issue.
Speaker 3: And I think too, as you know, this kind of
Speaker 3: web kind of you know, people pull strings here and
Speaker 3: kind of follow along where this story goes. I feel
Speaker 3: like some of these people in the Biden administration will
Speaker 3: probably start, you know, turning on each other here as well,
Speaker 3: so we'll see, you know, you never know, but well,
Speaker 3: I mean absolutely.
Speaker 1: The vehicle as an attorney, I'm wondering the vehicle that
Speaker 1: would end up, you know, addressing this in front of
Speaker 1: a court standing becomes an issue. But I guess if,
Speaker 1: for example, if you take Rand Paul's illustration he wants
Speaker 1: to go after doctor Fauci criminally, Fauci will assert his
Speaker 1: preemptive pardon as a defense to that, and then Rand
Speaker 1: Paul would say no, that presidential pardon is null and
Speaker 1: void because Joe Biden didn't give specific authorization for the
Speaker 1: autopend use on it. So that would be a vehicle
Speaker 1: to litigate whether or not these are void.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that would be a brilliant vehicle. Absolutely, And I
Speaker 3: think you just laid it out there perfectly, Brian. Yeah,
Speaker 3: Rand could absolutely explore, h explore that option.
Speaker 1: I think, well, well, and I guess there are other
Speaker 1: criminal investigations could be looked into too, like the multiple
Speaker 1: Shell corporations that were behind the scene, which seemed to
Speaker 1: be the vehicle to blunder a whole bunch of money
Speaker 1: to the Biden family.
Speaker 3: Yeah, absolutely, to all those Shell companies that buy and
Speaker 3: was or Hunter Biden was involved with, you know, Joe
Speaker 3: Biden's brother there was involved with just just you know,
Speaker 3: really amazing stuff here and it uh yeah, just again,
Speaker 3: this this, this whole situation here with the auto pen
Speaker 3: with these clemency decisions, just I think calls into question
Speaker 3: even more so. You know, you know, as this scrutiny
Speaker 3: builds in the in the mainstream media, because we you know,
Speaker 3: we've been scrutinizing by mental acuity, you know, throughout the administration. Yeah,
Speaker 3: you know, kind of getting on board here and finally,
Speaker 3: you know, ending the game of pretend that nothing was
Speaker 3: nothing seemed to be wrong. Yeah, I think it just
Speaker 3: one of you tied it all together. It raises monumental questions.
Speaker 3: And I think President Trump kind of pointed to that
Speaker 3: yesterday too when when he said, you know, this is uh,
Speaker 3: I believe quote, this is a tremendous scandal and maybe
Speaker 3: something we haven't seen in fifty two one hundred years.
Speaker 1: If ever, right, Well, and certainly that would be the case. Uh,
Speaker 1: there is a a congressional committee that's been put together
Speaker 1: to look into this. I guess I'm wondering because at
Speaker 1: some point it seems that Jeff Zion is going to
Speaker 1: be subpoena or asked to testify about what happened and
Speaker 1: whether or not Biden actually gave his specific authority for
Speaker 1: the autopen use. Someone's going to testify about this.
Speaker 3: Yeah. Absolutely. So we'll see if Science or Feldman get
Speaker 3: you know, get called in here to what one of
Speaker 3: these committees to you know, get questioned by Congress about
Speaker 3: this and you know, tell their side of the story
Speaker 3: or give testimony, and it will be interesting to see,
Speaker 3: you know, what you can get out of get out
Speaker 3: of them in those committees as well as you know
Speaker 3: how willing some of them may or may not be
Speaker 3: to testify in this well.
Speaker 1: And that goes so that goes to your point about
Speaker 1: the wheels maybe falling off on this is if Jeff
Speaker 1: isn't to lie, like, for example, if Biden did not
Speaker 1: give specific authority and it was Jeff who specifically authorized it,
Speaker 1: he may not want to testify to the contrary on
Speaker 1: that because he puts his own freedom in peril by
Speaker 1: lying to Congress. So I guess we'll have our popcorn
Speaker 1: out and wait and see what unfolds on this one. Nick,
Speaker 1: I don't know what else we can say about it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I agree. I think we just got to follow
Speaker 3: the story here and see where see where it ends up.
Speaker 3: And I think it's not going to end up in
Speaker 3: a great place for the Biden administration or some of
Speaker 3: the staff here.
Speaker 2: Or some of the people who were pardoned.
Speaker 1: He might Oh yeah, well, Senator round Paul, if you're
Speaker 1: out there, tee it up. We want the answer to this,
Speaker 1: and we want it soon. And I know where we'll
Speaker 1: read about the answer, and that'll be at Breitbart dot com,
Speaker 1: where we're reading. Nick will be reporting on a Nick
Speaker 1: Gilbertson the White House correspondent at Breitbart. I really appreciate
Speaker 1: your time and that you follow this story. And again
Speaker 1: going back to your point, you've been following this mental
Speaker 1: declines from day one, and you've been accurate the entire
Speaker 1: time on it. You sure didn't get to read about
Speaker 1: that in the mainstream media of the legacy media, but
Speaker 1: that's why we love Breitbart. Nick, have a great day,
Speaker 1: and thanks for your time this morning.
Speaker 3: As always, Ryan, thanks for having me, have a great one.
Speaker 1: Thanks brother. It's eight eighteen right now, fifty five kc
Speaker 1: DE talk station. We're gonna get to Daniel Davis deep
Speaker 1: dive coming to the bottom of the air of Trump.
Speaker 1: I'm gonna give weapons to Ukraine this week as well
Speaker 1: as maybe sanctioned Russia, although we have fifty days to
Speaker 1: wait on that. We'll get his thoughts and comments on
Speaker 1: that coming out first