➡ The podcast guest, Representative James Comer, shares that his committee has evidence of a potentially illicit financial transaction involving Joe Biden and his brother, despite public dismissal of the claim. Furthermore, he discusses the new Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, and the anticipated support for ongoing investigations into corrupt practices.
➡ The speaker questions Hunter Biden’s numerous Secret Service-protected flights and discusses claiming to face media bias. There is skepticism over Joe Biden’s unknowledge of Hunter’s activities and frustration at financial involvement not covered by large media outlets. It mentions discussions towards restricting Department of Justice appropriations with disagreements evident within the Republican conference. It also mentions alleged weaponization of governmental departments and the push for spending cuts. Subpoenas and potential depositions of Biden family members center around questionable money transactions between China, Ukraine, and Russia. The speaker advises that serious committee questioning dealt by an investigative counsel, instead of individual committee members, would yield better results.
➡ The discussion focuses on the current investigation into the Biden family, with the suggestion to replace the 5-minute rounds of questions during inquiry hearings with a longer deposition format to make more progress. The speaker discusses the challenges faced by media bias and applauds the efforts of their team for acquiring significant banking records related to the Bidens. Furthermore, he assures that a clear plan to reveal evidence that allegedly implicates the Biden family in criminal activity is underway, despite resistance from various quarters including the DOJ, FBI, and the Treasury.

I’m Chris Farrell, and this is on watch. Welcome to On Watch, everybody, the Jewish Watch podcast, where we take a deep dive behind the headlines to cover news that the mainstream media would rather you not know about, where we try to recover some lost history and explain the we really appreciate you taking the time to join us today. Thank you so much. Please be sure to subscribe to this podcast.

Whether you’re watching the video version on YouTube or Rumble or you’re listening to us on one of your favorite podcast platforms, be sure to subscribe, leave us a rating, email us. Let us know what you want us to cover, who you want us to interview. We really appreciate your input and your dedication to this podcast. It’s a great pleasure to be able to bring this to you. And today in particular, we have a real treat for you.

We have Representative James Comer, the Republican member of Congress from Kentucky, who is the chairman of the House Oversight Committee. James Comer, of course, is leading an investigation into all sorts of Biden mischief, corruption, criminality. And we’re very pleased to have Mr. Comer join us today. Congressman Comer, thank you so much for joining us on Watch. Thank you. My pleasure. You’ve got some very big news. In the past couple of days, your committee and your office has released an image of a check from James Biden to Joe Biden for $200,000, what appears to be a direct payment.

The memo line on the check reads, loan repayment. Tell us about this check. What is the significance of this payment? The significance of the payment is this is the first hard evidence that Joe Biden benefited financially from his family’s shady influence peddling schemes. The White House is trying to say it’s a loan, which let’s say it was a loan, which it wasn’t. But the media is going to go along with whatever the White House says.

Let’s say it’s a loan. Jim Biden could have never paid that $200,000 back to Joe Biden had he not influence peddled. AmeriCorps Health. We have James Biden’s personal bank records. He never had more than $6,000 in his personal checking account for months and months and months. One day, he gets a $200,000 wire from AmeriCorps Health. That same day, he writes that $200,000 check to Joe Biden. So there’s no question where the source of the $200,000 came from.

It came from AmeriCorps Health. And what they were were a failing healthcare company that Jim Biden approached and said, because of my last name Biden, and because of my brother’s contacts in the Middle East, I can help you all get all the money you need to get you back on your feet, but it’s going to cost you $600,000. They paid him that in three increments. He never produced a thing.

And then the last increment, he turned around and gave to Joe Biden. So just a little more on the source of that money. You say AmeriCorps is a health services company. They were a healthcare company, but they filed bankruptcy. The last big check that went out of AmeriCorps Health was to Jim Biden, which ended up in Joe Biden’s back pocket. And what’s the connection to the Middle East? That’s obviously a big chunk of the earth.

Who were they tied to? What kind of business were they doing in the Middle East? They weren’t doing any business in the Middle East. They were an American healthcare company that was on the verge of bankruptcy when that check was written. Now they are bankrupt. We know all this from bankruptcy court documents. They have sued Jim Biden for fraud because Jim Biden did what the Bidens do. They influenced pedal.

They went to this company and said, we can do whatever you need because our last name is Biden and our brother has contacts all over the world. So what James Biden pitched to AmeriCorps Health was that they needed money. The Middle East has plenty of money because I’m Joe Biden’s brother, because we will use Joe Biden to help you get millions and millions of dollars to help you get back on your feet.

That is in a nutshell what the Biden business is. They influence pedal. We’ve seen the text messages from Hunter to the Chinese where he’s shaking them down for money. They use the worst countries in the world and the Biden last name as a reason to profit. And again, that’s called influence peddling. And we’ve seen it and now have evidence that Joe Biden benefited from that. It is literally a racket.

And I mean that in the sense of racketeering. It is really a racket operation. Running. I want to just kind of go sideways for a second and ask you about your impression, your feelings, your viewpoint on our new Speaker, Mike Johnson. Yeah, Mike’s a good guy. He and I came in together, very smart guy, man of faith, certainly an honest guy. And I think that after four or five ballots, it was obvious there were a lot of people in the conference.

They didn’t want someone from leadership for whatever reason. They didn’t want a high profile member. They wanted just an honest guy. So we’ll see how that works out. I can tell you Mike Johnson’s a good, solid guy. Obviously, he’s going to have to quickly assemble a staff. There are a lot of moving parts to being speaker of the House. So certainly Mike Johnson has the mental capacity to do it.

He has the ethics and morality to do. You know, hopefully he’ll be a great speaker. But he’s certainly very supportive of our work on oversight. And I think that that’s a good sign for this investigation moving forward. I was going to say, just imagine that, an honest, regular guy as the speaker of the House. That’s pretty extraordinary. That’s not in my living memory and I’m pretty old. Well, that’s the book on Mike Johnson.

He’s a great shooter. And, look, I think what the American people saw over the past three weeks was there’s a high level of distrust in the which, you know, that coincides with America. There’s a high level of distrust of Congress in America, but there had been a lot of promises made that could never have been kept by the previous speaker. To be honest with you, and I like the previous speaker, but we’re going to have a clean slate and start all over, and we’ve got to focus on our core principles and the issues of this Congress.

And certainly we need to secure the border, and we need to reduce wasteful spending because we believe that’s what’s led to inflation. So those are the two core principles of our conference. And I think that Mike Jonathan will build his legislative agenda around those two core principles moving forward. I’d like to hear that you believe he’ll be supportive of your investigations and your efforts. It’s been my experience over more than a couple of days that nothing happens on that Hill without the speaker either explicitly or implicitly approving that it goes on.

Did McCarthy blunt or constrain or in some way set limits on your efforts and your committee? No, he didn’t. And I think Jim Jordan would say the same thing. So Jim Jordan’s obviously reading the Judiciary Committee. I’m leading the oversight committee. Jordan’s investigating the fact that all along the way, the evidence that we’re producing is overwhelming, that the Bidens have committed many crimes. What Jim’s investigating is where the government was.

Where was the FBI, where was the DOJ. That’s what he’s investigating. So we’ve had a good working relationship with McCarthy. And I think one thing that a lot of people don’t realize, when we issue a subpoena, the Speaker’s office and their general counsel has to sign off on that subpoena, because if it goes to court, they’re the ones that represent the House of Representatives on the subpoena. Just to interject.

We know that all too well because Speaker McCarthy went out of his way to attempt to block Judicial Watch from getting all the January 6 videotapes that we’re suing in federal court. Over. We found that, astounding we could understand, pelosi trying to block all the January 6 videotapes, but we found it quite disturbing that Speaker McCarthy jumped on board with her and said, yeah, don’t release them to the public.

The American public doesn’t need to know that, doesn’t need to see those videos. We hope that the new speaker will take a different approach on that, because it’s our position that every single 2 January 6th video, the American public has a right to. And we don’t want to hear all the reasons supposedly why they can’t see that. No, I agree completely. I think we should release the tapes.

I think Mike Johnson has said he would do good. And let me say this about Judicial watch. As chairman of the House Oversight Committee, I appreciate everything you all do. I follow you on Twitter. We read everything you do. You all have been more successful in getting a lot of documents through your FOIA lawsuits than we have, which shouldn’t be that way. That’s how bad the administration is blocking us.

We’ll try to help you. Yeah, well, you have helped us a lot, and we appreciate the great work that you all do. It’s been very beneficial to us. That’s great. One of the things that always disturbed me was the listing of Hunter Biden flights that he took that had Secret Service protection. It isn’t even a complete list, but the bulk that we got was 411 flights to 26 different foreign countries.

And of those 26 different foreign countries, five of those flights were to China. So you have to ask yourself, what in the world is Hunter Biden doing with Secret Service protection on five flights to China? But his dad knows nothing about his business, of course. Yeah. I mean, Joe Biden’s lied so many times to the American people into the media. You would think that at some point they would pay attention to our investigation.

The media the American people are but the media won’t. The media has not covered that $200,000 check. CBS, NBC, ABC, the Washington Post and New York Times have never written the first story about that check. We had the actual check. Now they’re trying to fact check me as we speak. Once they write us, they’re only going to write a story if they can prove I somehow lied or misled the public about the check.

So the President has gotten away with all of this, quite frankly, because the media hasn’t tried to hold him accountable. Used to the media played a role in holding politicians accountable. Now they only focus on Republican politicians. Correct. You’ve got twelve funding bills you got to knock out between now and November 15. In those funding bills, is there going to be any effort to restrict or constrain the Department of justice from and monies allocated to them for this jihad they’re on against President Trump or their efforts to undermine your activity? You guys hold the purse strings.

If you wanted to, if there was sufficient political will, you could put language in there that constrains DOJ appropriations and what they can and can’t spend money on. Is that going to happen? I hope so. And that was, in all honesty, what led to McCarthy’s downfall. I’ve been going on TV for nine months saying that in September Republicans will be able to write the budget. We have the power of the purse.

We’re going to hold the Justice Cabinet accountable. September rolls around here. The budget doesn’t even make a cut to the Justice Cabinet. Right. That irritated me because I really believe that that’s what we were going to do. The problem with the miscommunication in the conference you’ve got a lot of members that are conservative that want to get them back to the taxpayers. They want to hold this Justice Department accountable.

They know it’s been weaponized. Then you have members, and most of them are on the Appropriations Committee and good people, but they’re not real interested in cutting a lot of things. So that’s where the argument was. We’ve got that appropriations bill that’s being written as we speak, rewritten as we speak. And I think Mac Johnson knows that there are a significant percentage of the Republicans in the conference that want to cut the budget of the DOJ.

I mean, can we not agree to at least take away the FBI, that brand new building? They’re wanting to somewhat the FBI has to be held accountable. Merrick Garland has to be held accountable. So this is our opportunity to send a message to the Senate in our preparation bill that we’re going to hold them accountable. Yeah, and defunding Jack Smith’s operation would go a long way to restoring some trust and faith because he is out of control.

This is the same guy who got a nine zip ruling in his outrageous conduct, trying to destroy the Governor of Virginia, where he just went off and just did this leveling the earth, right, knocking down everything and everyone in its way. He’s got a pattern, an established pattern in practice of operating unethically and funding Jack Smith makes about as much sense as sending money to. I mean, these are people.

They are legal terrorists. They engage in criminality and abuse the process and system. Why in the world would you send them another dime? And anyway, I just think it’s incumbent upon Judicial Watch supporters to call your congressman and say, hey, I understand you got to pass bills to make the money flow, to not have a government shutdown. But you can also put language in there that restricts and constrains the Justice Department from throwing money at witch hunts and other crazy things, just like he can say, why in the world will we be sending money to Hamas or Iran, for that matter? There’s really got to be some kind of control place because the American public is getting very frustrated.

And I know that you hear that. I know that you get that message. We hear the message. And that’s why we spent three weeks trying to disrupt the entire makeup of the House Republican Conference. And I think the remaining leadership gets the message. I hope the Appropriations Committee gets the message. So as Mac Johnson served on the Judiciary Committee right under Jim Jordan, he’s seen up close and personal the weaponization of this federal government.

He’s talked about it, so hopefully he’ll take action. And look, we’ve got members in our conference. We’ve got more than three. We can only live true. We’ve got a couple of dozen members in conference that they don’t want to make very many. You know, it’s unfortunate. I don’t know if they’re doing it because they don’t want to get the media after them or what. But look, we’ve got a cut spending and I can’t think of a better place to start than the Weaponized Government, than Merrick Garland’s.

Weaponized, Department of justice. Ray’s. Weaponized. FBI. So, look, there’s not a number too steep for me on cutting the Department of justice. It’s the matter of finding a number that has significant, meaningful cuts that can get 217 votes. And that’s the job that Mike Johnson has. Now when are we going to see some Biden family members giving live testimony in front of your committee? Very soon. Jordan’s doing the depositions.

He had the deposition of Brady this week. He’s going to be hopefully bringing Weiss in for a deposition. We would like to do the same with the Bidens. Now look what we found in the last three weeks. In the last three weeks, we found a wire from China to Hunter Biden that listed Joe Biden’s address as the beneficiary. We found the $200,000 check that you referenced at the beginning of this interview.

We found another check that we’re trying to trace. We’re getting bank records in every day from the subpoena I issued almost a month ago. Once all these bank records are in, which hopefully be in the next week or so, we’re going to trace every source of revenue that the Biden family had. And then we’re going to bring them in and say, how did you get this $3 million from China? How did you get this $1 million from Ukraine? What did you do to get the three and a half million dollars from Russia? We could have brought them in and asked them a bunch of questions and they would have said, I don’t know.

I don’t know. More than likely we’re going to get one crack at them. Sure. And I want it to be 100. You know how it is. You all do this all the time. We will have actual bank documents, financial records that no one knew existed. Nobody knew Joe Biden got a $200,000 check from Jim Biden and they sure as heck didn’t know that the $200,000 came from that healthcare company that filed bankruptcy that’s suing Jim Biden for fraud because he misrepresented that the Biden family could get him money from Saudi Arabia.

So we put together a pretty good case and I think we’re going to have some exceptional questions for the Biden family to answer. Mr. Kerma, you’re doing great stuff and I congratulate you and I encourage you. I’m going to do a flashback to when I was much younger, in the days of the Watergate hearings. And I’m going to give you some unsolicited advice, a recommendation. And my recommendation to you and to your other committee members is to let an investigative counsel run the questioning.

In watergate days. You didn’t hear from Sam irvin. He sat up there and he banged the gavel open and close. And some very sharp prosecutors ran the questioning from A to Z. And they controlled the mic and they controlled the floor and they controlled the questioning. They did not do the everybody gets their five minutes of fame routine, which every committee of Congress now does because everybody wants to get their sound bite for their fundraising gig.

And it is disastrous because you can never draw a conclusion. So my advice is and who knows, maybe you’ll take it. You get a very sharp investigative counsel. He does the committee questioning. He runs the line of questions from A to Z. And when he gets done, then the peanut gallery, the other members, they can chime in with a question here or there, but let the facts get developed.

Let a prosecutor lay the foundation and drill through the questions. Then the politicians can jump in and ask a couple of stray questions because you get nowhere when everybody gets their five minutes and you jump back and forth, dem Republican, Dem Republican, it turns into a distraction. You don’t make any headway. So there’s my two cent of advice. I agree with you 1000%, and believe me, I made that pitch in the first impeachment inquiry hearing.

And obviously the members want their five minutes, right? One thing that the Democrats change is they started filming depositions. They did that in the January 6 hearing. That would essentially accomplish what you just said there. And I think that what will probably happen with the Biden family. More than likely we haven’t decided upon this yet, but more than likely, they will either be given the opportunity to come in front of the committee or they can come in for a deposition.

The deposition does what you just said. We have an excellent former DOJ employee in the Trump administration who’s a tremendous deposer. Jim Jordan has some tremendous deposers that we’ve seen in the impeachment hearings in the past that we can work together and the deposition can be filmed. So what you just suggested would be accomplished in a deposition. Instead of going five minutes back and forth, the deposition you got 1 hour, then the Democrats get 1 hour.

So I like that we’ll give them the opportunity. I don’t think any Biden would want to come in front of our committee because you know who I was on our committee. And the last thing I’ll say, one difference between Watergate and today and this was pointed out to me by Bob Woodward, who I had dinner with not long ago, and we talked a long time about my investigation and the Watergate investigation.

He said, the difference that Howard Baker had versus what I have is that Howard Baker was blessed with a curious, aggressive press corps. There you go. And he said, you don’t have that. Exactly. And I said, Amen. They attacked me when we got the $200,000 check. Newsweek wrote an article attacking me for the 200, not Joe Biden so this mainstream media is a disaster. But at the end of the day, the American people are keeping up with this investigation because the polling shows the majority of Americans believe Joe Biden did something illegal.

They didn’t get that from CBS, ABC, or NBC. They’re getting it from podcasts. They’re getting it from social media. And thank God for that. Yeah, I agree with you 100%. The importance of getting that down with a real prosecutorial line of questioning because I flash back to Trey Gowdy putting Hillary Clinton under oath for 11 hours. They didn’t lay a glove on her. They turned her into a saint.

Thank goodness Judicial Watch uncovered her dirty email server. Mr. Comer, I just encourage you, regardless of what the press says, regardless of some of your colleagues are terrified of having a mean article written about them, or suddenly having the IRS show up at their doorstep, and you may have had a parking ticket from 1989 that you didn’t pay, or some other attempt to distract you or generate some phony crisis.

Keep doing what you’re doing. And before we close out here, I’m going to give you the last word. What does the American public need to know that they don’t know and that you want them to pay attention to? Well, I hope the American people know that we’ve built a case that has helped us obtain financial records that no one thought we would ever obtain. We now have the personal banking records, in addition to their so called businesses of the Bidens.

We’re able to now trace the money as we speak. My staff, I just left them to come in here. We’re tracing all the wires. Hopefully, in a few weeks, we’re going to be able to have a chart to show where all the money the Biden’s got came from and where it ended up. And I think that that the result of having a focused plan from day one and not know.

We could have brought the Bidens in on the first day and had a hearing, like you said, with Hillary on Benghazi and all that, and really not accomplished anything but what we’ve laid out. Now we have found criminal activity by multiple Bidens. Now we have found where Joe Biden has benefited financially. No one knew there was a check directly to Joe Biden. How about that $2. 75 million house? You show up shoebox full of cash, and you just buy a house.

Hopefully, we’ll find some gold bars from he and his old buddy Menendez. But the American people like this has taken a long time. I think, by congressional standards. We’ve moved as quickly as possible. The DOJ spot us. The FBI’s fought us, treasury Cabinet’s fought us. And he’s got the most expensive legal team in America, led by Abby Lowell, that’s fought us. Yet we’ve still been able to accumulate all this evidence and the moment everybody’s been waiting for, for the Bidens to come in and have to answer these questions is rapidly approaching.

Congressman James Comer of Kentucky, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, thank you so much for joining us us. I’m Chris Farrell on watch. .