Joining me now to react former New Jersey Superior Court judge and host of Judging Freedom, judge Angelo Palitano. Look, should this thing I mean, obviously it shouldn’t have been in there in the first place, but now can we throw this thing out and get back to business? Well, you know, his lawyers moved it to throw it out, and the judge denied it. This is a very strange case, to say the least.

It’s a very strange statute. It’s rarely used. His lawyers have already challenged the use of the statute, and the appellate court has upheld it. There are deficiencies in the statute because it doesn’t provide for a jury. So everything’s going to be decided by this judge, a judge who admittedly does not like Donald Trump and has already ruled against him. So that’s where we were this morning. What happened in the courtroom is the following.

Michael Cohen, Donald Trump’s former lawyer and so called fixer, said he never told me directly to cook the books, but I understood that that’s what he wanted me to do. President Trump got very animated in the clip you just ran, and rightly so. Well, why am I here if he just told the judge, who’s also the jury, that I never directly told him to cook the books? There shouldn’t even be a case prior to that happening.

Somebody told the judge, oh, Donald Trump is talking about your clerk again, and you prohibited him from doing it. So the judge with no notice says, Mr. Trump, not Mr. President, mr. Trump, take the witness stand. What did you say? I said, that your prejudice against me, Judge, and so is the person sitting next to you. Were you talking about my clerk? No, I was talking about Michael Cohen.

I don’t believe you. You were talking about my clerk. I’m finding you $10,000, a minuscule amount for Donald Trump, but it’s profound. The trier of law, the trier of fact, saying he doesn’t believe the principal defendant and extracting money from him for something he said outside the courtroom. Doesn’t look good. Looks like there are more appealable issues. Yeah, and if I were Trump, I’d say pound sand, but I’m not paying it.

Throw me in jail, see what happens. I want to get your take on this judge real quick. The bombshell news about President Biden. This is an official letter from Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley to the DOJ, which reads in part, quote, I’ve been made aware that at one point in time, the FBI maintained over 40 confidential human sources that provided criminal information relating to Joe Biden, James Biden, and Hunter Biden.

An essential question that must be answered. Did the FBI investigate the information or shut it down? Indeed, if those sources were improperly shut down, it wouldn’t be out of the ordinary for the FBI, as this letter will address. This is huge. This is the bombshell that you called it. Now, we don’t know who these witnesses are. We don’t know what senator Grassley knows. He obviously learned this in some confidential environment because the rest of the letter does not state who these 40 people are and what they said.

But if the FBI failed even to investigate I can understand if they investigated and decided there’s no there there. Sure. But if they failed to investigate, it because all three of these people have the same last name, Biden, then we have an FBI that’s even more rogue and more out of control and more political than we thought it was before all this started. Yeah. And this is, as we know that the house has now obtained james Biden and Hunter Biden’s financials.

So we are going to get some here. Judge Angelo Palitano. Always a pleasure, sir. Likewise, Carl. Thank you. It’s. .