Speaker 1: And we are back with another edition of the Federalist
Radio Hour. I'm Matt Kittle's senior elections correspondent at The
Federalist and your experience Shirpa on today's quest for Knowledge.
As always, you can email the show at radio at
the Federalist dot com, follow us on exit fdr LST.
Make sure to subscribe wherever you download your podcast, and
of course to the premium version of our website as well.
Our guest today is Mike Howell, President of the Oversight Project.
Mike is a key player has been in uncovering the
Biden auto pen scandal. Trump administration has confirmed it has
opened up a bombshew investigation into President Joe Biden's final
days in office and his prolific use of auto pen.
The Daily Mail reported on Tuesday. Mike, thank you so
much for joining us on this edition of the Federalist
Radio Hour.
Speaker 2: I appreciate you having me on this.
Speaker 1: I would assume, based on what you have been looking
into low these many months, comes as no surprise that
the Trump administration has indeed opened up an investigation into
the closing days. Ultimately, maybe this can extend to all
of the Biden administration. This was an individual who you know,
we saw it with our own eyes, no matter what
Jake Tapper and CNN and the rest of the accomplished
media wanted to tell us for four years, this was
a president who was cognitively challenged from the get go.
But I would assume you're not surprised by this investigation today.
Speaker 2: No, no, I'm not. I'm very grateful obviously.
Speaker 3: But President Trump has called out the autopend usage, you know,
going back months and from when we initially you know,
dropped our bombshell investigation and several updates to it, and
so he has consistently spoken.
Speaker 2: About it over and over again.
Speaker 3: He's you know, truthed about it, brought it up in interviews,
applied it in different contacts, and US.
Speaker 2: Is acting on it. And don't forget that.
Speaker 3: Also, both the House and the Senate have open investigations
into it as well. So it's getting hit from from
all angles, and we're thrilled to see it because we
do think it's the probably biggest question out there is
who actually was the president of the last four years
that did so much damage to this country that.
Speaker 1: He is a critical question and that's what a lot
of us have been asking for some time who is
actually running this country? From what you've learned you have
reported that it certainly doesn't seem like it was the
so called duly elected president in Joe Biden running the
country for those last four years.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: No, I think that's pretty much stipulated to and agreed
to by everyone right now. I mean, I mean Democrats
are even coming out of the woodwork and either saying yeah,
we knew he was pretty out of it, or some
variation of the Taper and Thompson line that they were
lied to. But I don't think anyone's out there saying
that Joe Biden was with fully in command of his
faculties and of the White House anymore. And so it's
not a question of whether Joe Biden was president, it's
a question of who was asserting the presidential authority, which
then leads to, Okay, what actually happens to the things
that were done with that old Gottson authority?
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's the question ultimately is if it wasn't Joe
Biden signing these pardons, signing these directives in charge of
his mental faculties, who ultimately was and what happens to that?
Mike constitutionally speaking, those kinds of decisions. Because we keep
hearing over and over from the New York Times and
the usual suspects who keep doubling down on this whole
Joe Biden was sharp enough to be president narrative, even
though there's a deal of evidence to show that it
was not the case. But they have constantly said, well, hey,
all presidents use auto pen. Donald Trump uses auto pen.
I know what the difference is here and what we've
seen and the actions that sprung from it. But if
you could what is the failing argument from those who say, hey,
autopen is just part of the gig.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they're wrong on multiple fronts. First, the president.
Speaker 3: There can only be one president and only one person
that asserts presidential authority.
Speaker 2: So when it comes to things.
Speaker 3: That only the president can do, guess what only the
president can do them, which means you can't delegate away
that authority. Things like pardons and executive orders and signing legislation.
Of course, like ceremonial letters to you know, the Girl
Scouts of America and stuff for a different category. Those
aren't outlined in the constitution. The things the Constitution says
the president can do must be done by the president,
and so no, you can't just autopend away your entire presidency,
and the comparisons made to previous administrations do not account
for those differences and the types of documents that are
apply to and certainly not for this scale. This was
an administration by auto pen Second, even if you were
to disagree with us there and some will and continue
to do so, the question is did he have the
capacity to delegate that authority and did he at all
times even have awareness of what was being.
Speaker 2: Signed in his name? And I think the answer to that.
Speaker 3: Question is no, just frankly, no, no, no, no, And
I think to argue otherwise is laughable. You have people
believe that on January nineteenth, in the dying days of
his administration, the dying day Joe Biden was sitting there
basically mediating who should get which parted and for what
term and for how long. It just doesn't pass the
laugh test. You see the lobbying activity that surrounded a
lot of those partons. People are going on TV and
begging for them.
Speaker 2: You know, they were.
Speaker 3: Working their lobbyists in every connection. And I don't think
it was Joe Biden on the other end of the
line at all times. I think it was a court
quarterye of like staffers and outside influences that were basically
managing the White House and signing those parties.
Speaker 1: I want to talk about those pardons in a moment,
but back to your point on auto pen. I have
in my possession something that has for a long time
been a treasure. It is a letter from President Ronald Reagan.
Back in the early nineteen eighties. I wrote the President
expressing my concerns after what happened in Beirut to the
Marines there, the terrorist attack on the base. My brother
was serving in the army, and I remember writing as
a third grader President Reagan a sincere letter about you
know my brother and how proud of him. I'm serving
in the military overseas and I hope that he's safe.
The President wrote me back a nice letter. At least
someone in the administration did. There's a signature that's Ronald Reagan.
I know it's not his, but knowing that, you know,
somebody in the administration took the time to respond to
a nine year old kid with concerns with something. Ronald
Reagan certainly is not bound by anything in that letter,
even signed with necessarily with the technology at the time
it's signed by somebody else or printed or whatever. These
are serious matters that we're talking about. The pardons, Yes,
but what about the policy issues? What about the executive order?
And we certainly saw a lot of executive orders during
the Biden administration. What do you say of all of
those if this is a man who is not in
charge of his faculties.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I've been saying very loudly for long time that
we think the pardons are no good. We don't think
they're legitimate pardons for a variety of reasons, chief amongst
them that Biden did not sign them, and I don't
think he was capable of consenting to him or even
on the capacity to in any event. So the people
like who received those last minute pardons, think, you know,
Adam Schiff at the January sixth Committee, Mark Melly, et cetera,
they could be charged with the crimes for which they
were allegedly pardoned for. Executive orders are a much easier
category because President Trump can just undo Biden's executive orders.
The pardons, you know, are going to be contested. The
people who receive them certainly are going to fight and
say no, we have perfectly good pardons and so. And
then on the separate category legislation, you know, they get
Biden out of bed and all juiced uff for the
big signing ceremonies, and so the legislation is a little
bit of a different category. But all those things I
just mentioned are just like the written instruments of which
we have a universe of history. For what is going
to be more difficult to account for in these investigations
are some of the other decisions that may not always
be accompanied by official signature type documents. Think about people asserting, hey,
President Biden's together, that's done, go do it.
Speaker 2: Calls with foreign leaders that.
Speaker 3: May have been had by other people, or any other
assertion of presidential power, whether actual or perceived, is how
I think the White House was basically working for four years.
Speaker 2: It's very messy, indeed, it is.
Speaker 1: I will note though, you talk about executive orders, and
you're right, President Trump can undo them. He's undone many
of them. But we have this little resistance movement going
on in the judiciary now that is making doing what
the president has the constitutional authority to do, undo previous
president's executive orders, making it a little bit more difficult.
Does that raise the urgency of looking at those executive orders,
particularly the ones that the courts have weighed in on
rogue courts have weighed in on and tried to stop
those executive orders from President Trump.
Speaker 2: Well, it's certainly.
Speaker 3: Relevant, but in no real world should it be necessary,
because right now, what's happening with this unconstitutional judicial supremacy
that what we're seeing is they're trying to not allow
Trump the present powers of the presidency, and so he
shouldn't have to undo an executive order prove that Biden,
you know, didn't have the capacity to sign the one
of you over road.
Speaker 2: He should be able to just do it.
Speaker 3: That's the powers at a company the presidency that the
people under a constitutional system give to the president. But
the way the judicial branch, their rogue elements, which seem
mull too powerful, operates as I understand it is. Their
thinking is pretty simple. For the Biden years, the argument
is you don't need a president to do anything. For
the Trump years, it's the president's not allowed to do anything.
It's just whatever needs the ends of what they want.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's a very good point. Let's talk about those
pardons you wrote on your ex account recently. I'll read
a part of it. You say, there's a ton to
be said on the Hunter Biden pardon, but for now,
the real worrisome part about the undeniable fact that the
first family, not just Hunter, was so flamboyantly corrupt, was
that the entirety of the government legal and intelligence apparatus
worked over time to let it go. And they did
it for a very long time and turn themselves into
pretzels to keep doing it again. In many ways they
are still doing it that kind of resistance movement to
protect the absentee landlord of Joe Biden goes on, how
much of that will be playing out? Do you believe
as the members the committee is in Congress and the
Trump administration go through these investigations.
Speaker 3: First off, you just made my day going back and
reading my tweets. I'm glad somebody's reading them out there.
Speaker 2: I do.
Speaker 3: I remember that one because it goes to a key
point I've been making over the years, and that is
weaponization of government hasn't always been by acts of comission
or actions. It is often by acts of o mission
or failure to apps. To put it simply, it is
throwing the book and going after Trump butter every looney
theory you can for the last decade versus clear patterns
of criminal misconduct that we're playing out as related to
the Bidens and others that the FBI chose not too
open on despite having the evidence put right in front
of their face. I also think about the act of
omission by not telling the country that the Hunter Biden
laptop was authentic because they wanted to swing an election.
And so like the vast array of the misconduct we
need to fix is, you know, by nature of the
omissions of the things they chose not to do, which
I think makes Director of Patel and Deputy Director Bongino's
job so much more difficult. It's easy to look at
the bad things that the government and FBI did. It's
harder to go back and figure out why they decided
to lay down and let this, you know, let these
guys get away with just very serious crimes for a
long period of time. And I think that is when
you think of it that way, you can't help it
arrive at the conclusion that things with our federal government
have gone really, really, really bad. The Bidens were nakedly corrupt,
playing buoyantly, so millions and millions of dollars through you know,
thirty plus shell companies to from foreign payments from people
with direct interests in business and for the United States
or enemies thereof Think of China, think of Ukraine. And
the saddest part is they didn't even have to pay
a lot of money to do it. They you know,
tens of millions of dollars to the Bidens was enough
to purchase the First family. And then we saw a
foreign policy that worked the benefit of both those countries
and against the American interest in dramatic ways. And so
when we think about reform, I think we have to
accept that the problem really revolves not only around the
bad things they did, but then also all the good
things they could have done, but chows not to do.
Speaker 4: Do you think you can afford your own car payment?
The watch Doot on Wall Street podcast with Chris Markowski
every day Chris helps unpack the connection between politics and
the economy and how it affects your wallet. Autodelinquency rates
are at their highest level ever recorded. People are stretched
as auto prices aren't coming down. Make sure you can
afford or you get repode, whether it's happening in DC
or down on Wall Street. It's affecting you financially.
Speaker 2: Be informed.
Speaker 4: Check out the Watchdot on Wall Street podcast with Chris
Markowski on Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.
Speaker 1: You can do that in government. But I do believe
that the sins of omission obviously extend into the acco
compless media, corporate media, the provdpress, however you want to
define it. But look at all of the many times
that not only were they working over time to write
stories bogus stories about bogus Russian collusion and you name
the you know, the controversy du jour, but they also
have omitted so much very important information, which is interesting
when you think about the Washington Post, you know, haughty
mission statement that democracy dies in darkness. They turned out
the lights, did they not? In the accomplist media and
all of this stuff.
Speaker 3: Oh one hundred percent, And they worked over time to
discredit anyone who was pointing it out. And this is
what really grinds my gears about Tapper and Thompson from.
Speaker 2: CNN and Axios.
Speaker 3: You basically have everyone knows Tapper was outrageously a stooge
for the Bidens and no one's buying as acts. But
some people are giving Axios and Thompson a little bit
more credit saying that, well, Thompson had an article here
and there that was critical of Joe Biden.
Speaker 2: But no Axios.
Speaker 3: You go back and you look, they didn't report anything
on the CCP connection.
Speaker 2: To the Bidens, which is terrifying.
Speaker 3: That the intelligence community could basically be aware of yet
do nothing about the elite capture of the First family.
And I mean it's plain in his day and what
they did with Hunter. And then also if you look
at Axios reporting on Special counsel Her, they were terrible
in the advent.
Speaker 2: Of that too.
Speaker 3: And here's what gets me doubly upset is that even
Republicans think that Robert.
Speaker 2: Hurr is some sort of hero in this timeline and story.
He is not.
Speaker 3: He went to investigates quote unquote, you know, I'm put
scare quotes around investigat there Joe Biden's handling of classified information.
What he came up with was a reporter that basically said,
I found some things in a box there, something in
the dridge there. Oh, by the way, Biden's old not
charging him case. What her did not do and he
should absolutely have done was investigate what Biden and his
family was doing with the classified information over that period
of time, how they were monetizing and trading that information.
And I knew her was not going to do that,
so I wrote him made letter during his investigation and said,
here are the burner email addresses, the pseudonym emails that
Biden was using. Here are the Burner's cell phone numbers.
Go and pull those records and see what he was
doing with the classified information. Her did not do that.
He just wanted to open and close the book. And
this country is suffering greatly from it because we deserve
to know how much damage this family actually did in
trading away our greatest treasures.
Speaker 1: Well, that's important to note because you said and wrote
this back well last month, but you had pointed that out.
In fact, the Oversight Project pointed out an emergency court filing.
In an emergency court filing on May seventeenth, that the
alle audio clips of President Biden that exhibit his dramatic
cognitive decline posted by Axios were edited and did not
match the official transcript previously released to the Oversight Project
in the lawsuit. This just one area involving the her tapes,
the difficulty to get that information, finally get that information,
and then once again the mismatch. It sounds like sixty
minutes all over again. I mean, we just this has
got to be an area of investigation too, does it not.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it was very amateurish and messy. And how Axios
handled the role out of the tape as a threshold matter,
the White House should not have given the tape to Axios.
Speaker 2: The White House.
Speaker 3: Gave the tape that had been in litigation in otos
for well over a year. We'd been negotiating with you OJ.
Speaker 1: Now why did they Why did they give the tape
to Axios? I mean, is it is beyond me that
this is This is a president who fully understands just
how complicit these accomplished media players are. That's why we
call them the accomplished media. Why do they continue to
reward some of these players for their bad acting.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's a great question that should be asked at
the White House. I haven't gotten a, you know, a
satisfactory answer. It helped them to sell their book, the
demonetization of the cover up, which is what it is.
And then not only that, you had us and others
that the oversight project have been litigated and keeping this
thing alive for a year. We spend a lot of
money and a lot of time keeping this in court,
negotiating with the Trump Department of Justice in good faith,
only to have the rug pulled on us that Friday evening.
Speaker 2: But it hurts the White House.
Speaker 3: It hurt the Trump administration too, because Axios released it
at the dead you know, the worst time you can
release something, Friday nights. Yeah, at like six pm this
thing came out. I was in the food court of
the mall with my kids when the phone came out.
I couldn't believe it. I said some words a and
have said that counter getting our happy meals. I was
so upset, But suffice it to say, you know, Axious
release limited kind of controlled demolition, so it's late, it
won't get as much media play. And then they give
the Biden administration a talking point because they chopped up
the audio to make Biden sound worse and they didn't
need to do that. He sounded bad enough already. And
that was all the Biden camp was saying all weekend.
Is acxious, you know the bath Fate actors, and had
we gotten the tape, we would have presented it neutraally,
we wouldn't have needed to embellish it or.
Speaker 2: Selectively edited it. And that's that's how it all ended up.
And it's unfortunate.
Speaker 1: By the way, the words that you uttered at that
food court have been uttered many times in the food
courts I have been to.
Speaker 2: Yes, I mague, you should be.
Speaker 1: I have heard those expressions on many occasions in multiple
food courts around this country, that's for sure. But I
can imagine that. I mean, I've I won't go into
the details, but you know, an open records request into
the Department of Justice working on a story that was
covered up by the Biden administration, and they end up
releasing the full details of that information, even though we've
been fighting in court for the last two years. You know,
to a source that you know may or may not
have the best interest of getting out the full information.
This unfortunately has happened too often in this administration, and
you're right, somebody needs to tell someone, Hey, this doesn't
do you and it doesn't do the American public any good.
Our guest today is Mike Howell, president of the Oversight Project,
a key player and uncovering the Biden auto pen scandal
on the point of the auto pen and these many, many,
record number of pardons back to Hunter Biden. Were you
surprised at all, Mike, to find that Hunter Biden, who
has been pardoned for crimes that he may have committed
and crimes that he certainly did commit. Are you surprised
that his favorite prostitute is now facing manslaughter charges in
Las Vegas?
Speaker 2: No.
Speaker 3: I saw that, you know, flash across the X feed
earlier today, and I had to laugh a little bit.
Speaker 2: No, I'm not surprised.
Speaker 3: That's the cast of characters he threw in with for
for quite a long time. I think, you know, the
Biden family really was one of the unclassiest, if that's
even a word. I should should should know that families
that we've ever seen, and it's not just Hunter. I
think Hunter gets a lot of the bad rap because
he deserves it. But it's kind of the pattern in practice.
If you look at the Biden family and the origins
of you know, Jill and Joe's marriage, Joe was a
campaign aid for Joe, she was married, Joe broke up
her marriage, YEP. I mean this is kind of the
way they've acted for for just decades. And no, I'm
not surprised. Nothing they could do could could surprise me.
And so it's not only their kind of moral crime,
they're real sleazy behavior. Yeah, regard for you know, the
American interest over sustained period of time, with how their
power for personal profit and the deep embarrassment. Think of
the embarrassment they've done to the United States historically. The
entire world knows that, you know, we hold ourselves out
to be this advanced democracy or constitutional republic, whatever you
want to call it. We'll call it what it is,
a constitutional republic. But they just prove to the world
that it doesn't even operate how we says it should
in the text of our found documents. You can have
the United States of America without a president and that
that is deeply damaging to our reputation.
Speaker 1: Yes, indeed, and you know, I it's a bit just
noting the unsavory characters that Hunter Biden, and let's face it,
the Biden family have surrounded themselves with over many many years.
But you know, whatever this this prostitute in Las Vegas
is facing. The point is is that Hunter Biden is
a is a character who has obviously all kinds of
moral flaws, but he's also a criminal. He also committed crimes,
and now he can never be held accountable for those
crimes that we know that he committed. There are a
lot of other crimes that you've been talking about, and
the Federalist has been reporting on for a long time
that Hunter Biden looks like he has some serious culpability
and he can't based on the last minute pardon, the
last days of the Biden administration, he can't be held
accountable for that. The other Biden family members can't be
held accountable. Adam Schiff can't be held accountable. If all
of this stands, the issue is did Joe Biden really
have the wherewithal to put together those partners?
Speaker 3: That's one hundred scent right. It is a question of
political will, and the country wants accountability. They want to
know that wrongs can be righted and people who abuse
their powers and break the laws will be treated like
everybody else. And I'm here to say and the point
of this investigation is we think they can.
Speaker 2: We know they can.
Speaker 3: That's why we're putting it out so publicly, and not
only the investigative of it all in the facts and
the findings, but also the legal theories on us to
exactly how to go about prosecuting these things and all
the associated constitutional arguments and even the historical importance of it.
Speaker 2: So it can be done.
Speaker 3: It's a question of whether there's a political will for
it to be done. I don't doubt President Trump wants
it to be done. He brings it up nearly every
single day. So let's get it done. And Ed Martin
and part of an attorney there's no better single human
to being at that spot than him. And then you
also have the House and Senate they could ship into.
But I think really the balls in the court of
the administration.
Speaker 1: What do you think this investigation is ultimately going to
find some of the details that you've looked into, that
you've been fighting for, some of the information you have obtained.
What do you think the Trump administration investigation and the
congressional investigations will ultimately find.
Speaker 3: Yeah, they're going to find out who was running the
White House and who was the president. But moreover, I
think they're going to really open American's eyes to how
politics really works in terms of, you know, the principal
elected officials not always the one holding the power. There's
a lot of money in politics. There are a lot
of influences that weigh on people, and basically the individual
that we elect is more so an entity. And I
think it's going to shake kind of people's understanding of
how our system.
Speaker 2: Of guard it actually works.
Speaker 3: And I hope that that starts to a national conversation
to get back to what should be as a country.
The problem is definitely the most profound with Joe Biden
being complete and capacitated presidents. It's a matter of degree
to to a certain extent that this exists in other
parts of the governmental apparatus. It's been taken over by
so much in special interest and you know, foreign corruption
and pay to play schemes and insider trading and so
what I want and is the same thing which I
think everyone in this country wants, is just a fundamental reform.
I mean, you look at the trust in these governmental
institutions that we have. It's in the tank for a reason.
So let's admit the problem we haven't and fix it.
Speaker 1: We certainly lived through some very dire days in the
Biden years. We want to talk about economically, our security,
our border security, our national security, our image with the world,
a lot of things, things that happened over the course
of that time we all dealt with, we all felt,
we all experienced. How much more do you believe will
be coming out in the months ahead through some of
these investigations and just hopefully some good reporting from some
good journalists out there? I know a few, by the way,
But how much more are we going to learn? How
much more damage we didn't know about and some of
the causes of the damage that we did so put.
Speaker 2: It to you this way.
Speaker 3: Us, as a bootique investigative in litigation operation in the
nonprofit space, took it pretty dang far. We figured out
pretty much every everything you could hope to figure out
without the use.
Speaker 2: Of legal process.
Speaker 3: We're cooperating with all awful investigations the people who have
the legal process to take it to the next level.
We have mapped out exactly what questions should be asked
with stone, should be turned over, and who should be
brought in, and so I have no doubt that the
roadmaps there. I have no doubt that the people at
the roadmap right now will take it there and so
a lot more can come out.
Speaker 1: The battle has been raging for for some time Now
we did have a you know, Republican controlled House. They
have been stonewalled repeatedly on the Oversight Committee, Judiciary Committee,
and elsewhere. How much longer can these Biden staffers, these
Biden administration officials be able to hold out? And do
you see a prolonged court battle over subpoenas and the like.
Speaker 3: Oh, they're absolutely Well, that's why it's important that people
act with urgency within the government. Now there will be
assertions of executive privilege, which the Trump White House can wait.
There'll be other ways to drag certain subpoenas into court.
So inherently this system we'll delay some of this, which
is why you got to get the ball moving, you
know yesterday. It needs to go and needs to go
very very fast. Ultimately, though, I think like what could
craftis open is politically like people don't have a reason
to lie for Joe Biden anymore. You certainly see that
a must elected Democrats who are trying to get as
far away from Biden as possible and admit, yeah, we
kind of knew something was wrong, but we were mostly
lied to. You're gonna have staffers that might you know,
potentially drawn or pulled in front of a grand jury.
They might not have occasion or reason or want to
lie to cover for Joe Biden or whoever else, And
so I'd encourage them come clean. Like the only one
who's gonna be mad at you is going to be
Joe Biden and his hanger on, and they're pretty much
political kryptonite even in the history books right now. So
like the country would appreciate some honesty.
Speaker 1: Do you think it is a matter of shining a
light and some dark places on some rats and once
the first couple of rats start screwing, the rest will
and you will get the swamp talking. Or does the
swamp double down not to save Joe Biden necessarily, but
to save the swamp?
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think what we tend to see in these
I prefer the term controlled demolition, which is what they
basically tried doing with Biden and the audio tape and
the cancer, you know, And now it's about just like
doing as little damage to the entire possible by letting
Joe Biden ball. And so I think that control demolition
of Biden failed because this isn't going away. So some
people may try to limit the spread of you know,
the destruction here or exposure, but not if you know
the lights shines bright and stays on.
Speaker 1: All right, And I'm gonna ask you the ultimate question
that our readers have been asking for a long time.
This is arguably the biggest question they've been asking for
a long time, certainly over the last four plus years
or the previous four plus years. Will anybody ever be
held accountable? Will anybody go to jail for the I
think if you don't even have to say, arguably the
greatest political presidential political cover up of in our history.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I can't promise something that I myself can't can't deliver,
but I'll tell you this, we wouldn't have taken We
wouldn't have built the oversight project from scratch with the
support of the Heritage Foundation.
Speaker 2: We're now a new independent and city.
Speaker 3: We wouldn't have hired the type of people we've hired
to go away from other walks of life, built the
thing we built and focus it on this if we
didn't think that.
Speaker 2: That would happen.
Speaker 3: And so that's a long len saying I can't promise it,
but I'm building my entire professional life, in my team's
life around doing everything we possibly can to make sure
it does happen.
Speaker 1: And out of the food court too, you know, nothing
but trouble happens there. Final go Yeah, no, I know it.
I can't resist the Teriaki dre, that's for sure. Just
final question for you about the Oversight Project. As you mentioned,
it's something that you had been with the Heritage for
quite some time. What is the over project? The Oversight Project?
How was it built in?
Speaker 2: Where?
Speaker 1: Where do you go from here?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 3: So i'd six great years at Heritage. They incubated the
Oversight Project. Let me let me start this thing up.
It grew immensely, and it grew so fast, frankly, that
we had to kind of restructure the bones and spin
it off as its own new independent entity with the
support Roberts and the Heritage Fan Foundation, which we're super
grateful for because we have a lot of places to go,
people to sue, and so it needs to have the
right legal kind of structure to be able to do that.
And so what we plan on doing is the same
kind of thing we've been doing before. We're going to
see through these scandals of previous years in DC, and
then we're going to start suing Blue States for things
we think they need to.
Speaker 2: Be sued for.
Speaker 3: We have a large legal appetite, and so we will
be in the legal version of the food courts here
pretty soon, core rooms across the country.
Speaker 1: I love that the legal version of the food courts.
I was just going to ask you, we have seen
so much lawfare from the left is turn about fair play?
Speaker 3: Yes, although I don't like that expression. It's just justice, right,
it's non retribution. It's they broke the law and they
should be held accountable. That's pretty much the end to it.
Point A to point B, I agree.
Speaker 1: I agree. Lawfair has been used by the left for
all manner of things, and we've seen it over the
last the better part of the last decade in unprecedented ways.
We certainly saw it long before Joe Biden got there.
We saw it with the Obama administration, and a lot
of us believe that the Biden years were simply, you know,
the third term of Barack Obama and his acolytes. It
is interesting to see, though, the good work that folks
like the Oversight Project are doing, and I hope that
it continues to bear fruits. Thanks so much for joining us.
Speaker 3: I appreciate this all on with this, they do lawfair.
What we do I call lawed cair We're making it right.
Speaker 1: That's exactly right. Thanks to my guest today for joining
us on this edition of the Federalist Radio Radio Hour,
Mike Howell, who is president of the Oversight Project, a
key player in uncovering the Biden auto pen scandal. They
continue to do great work on that front. You've been
listening to another edition of the Federalist Radio Hour. I'm
Matt Kittle's senior elections correspondent at the Federalist. We'll be
back soon with more. Until then, stay lovers of freedom
and anxious for the first I heard the fame voice
the Reason, and then it faded away. H