Hunter Biden FINALLY Admits Laptop is His

Today on Sekulow, Hunter Biden finally admits the laptop is his. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow.

We want to hear from you. Share and post your comments or call 1-800-684-3110. And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Welcome to Sekulow.

We are taking your phone calls to 1-800-684-3110. Now what's interesting here today is Hunter Biden, with these lawsuits that he's filed, has admitted in the lawsuits the whole time that this laptop is actually his laptop. He hasn't filed a lawsuit yet. Yeah, the threats of lawsuits.

The threats of legal action. And in those letters, they say it's his data. They say this is his computer. Let me read exactly.

I can give you the exact language. That they're talking about somebody, the repairman gaining access, right? And he says, has admitted to gaining access to our client's personal computer data. So there it is.

That is the first time that's ever happened. Just a flashback to a month before the Presidential election, October 19, 2020, and you have basically the entire intelligence, everybody, every CIA, DNI, of course, signing on saying this was Russian disinformation. The media, Facebook, we know, was told specifically not to allow this on Facebook, that this was Russian disinformation. And now we know that's all phony.

Now everybody kind of knew that already. Even most of the liberal media news outlets like New York Times were starting to confirm. But what is key here is that this was blocked from the public consumption about a month before, three weeks before, the Presidential election. Well, there's a number of things that are unbelievable here. One is that, as you said, the entire intelligence community took the position that this was Russian disinformation. They said that the computer and the access and what was in it, it was the biggest ones.

I mean, the biggest names in, like you said, kind of the cast of thousands. Former heads of CIA, former heads of DNI. And they said that this was Russian disinformation. Then his lawyers, wisely, I think, now said, hey, this is his computer.

So that whole, you know, is this his or not? Is it Russian disinformation? None of that was correct.

And as lawyers, which I think are taking an interesting approach here, said, well, wait a minute, what we're going to do is acknowledge this is, which they do in the letter, and then next thing they do is, as you said, they're threatening TV and radio shows hosts with defamation. That's a whole separate topic. But what's interesting to me is you had the entire intelligence apparatus of three previous administrations go on record saying about the Biden laptop, Hunter Biden laptop, that it was Russian disinformation. None of that was correct.

No. So, I mean, this is why words in Ukraine break out. Because if all these people actually believe this, our intelligence is horrible. And maybe that's because, as we've heard, that under the previous administration, under Obama, they didn't want to use words like spying anymore. And they became, again, somehow agencies for, like, humanitarian causes. And we need to go back to, again, the CIA should be doing the CIA's job.

And I think under the Trump administration they were. But this idea that you had every major intelligence agent come out, sign a letter, go to Facebook, say don't use it, and it's always right before an election, which brings up a whole other set of legal issues with election interference. So when we talk about election interference and election integrity, this falls under it.

Oh, sure. Because this impacts election integrity. How people, what information people have before they decide who to vote for or who not to vote for. And when you have the Facebook blanket ban this, Twitter, blanket ban this. At the request of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the FBI requests at Facebook don't cover this, this isn't right, and it ends up not being the case. And that this was a Russian, and that it was fake, too. Which now it says his data.

So not fake. Oh, no, I mean, the lawyers say it. I mean, this is, it says that they gained access to our client's personal computer data. They allege without Biden's consent. And the question is, this is like the Biden unraveling. The classified documents now admitting this after, how many, two years?

But are they doing this, I was going to ask you this the next time, are they doing this to get this all out before he announces? I'm sure there's part of that is kind of flood the zone, but I don't... Also, things must be heating up on the... On Hunter's investigation. Yes, on his investigation.

His has been going on much longer than the investigation. Yes, so I'm sure something's going on there. That's 8-4-31-10 if you want to weigh in.

That's 1-800-684-3110. We'll be right back. Take your calls and comments on Sekulow. You had the CIA, former stand director say they don't know if the emails are genuine or not, but it must be the Russians.

Yes. I mean, if you really believe that in these positions, then how dangerous is that to our national security that these guys are the people running the CIA and DNI? And thank God that there are the Rick Renells and Mike Pompeo's who came in after them.

But of course, unfortunately, we're back to these guys. Yes, so here's what you got to understand. So the lawyers... You got to give the lawyer credit. He puts out there finally that this was Hunter Bynes' laptop by threatening investigatory inquiries to the computer shop that had access to the computer. But he admits that... Or they state that our client's personal computer data. So it clearly shows what that is.

What you said, though, is very important, and we need to underscore it. We have a list of the... The whole of CIA... Jordan's counting them up right now to see how many former directors of national intelligence and central intelligence agency sign on to saying that their analysis of this, they did an analysis, and that analysis shows that this is, in fact, Russian disinformation, and they can't even confirm the emails.

Okay? That is the people that were running these agencies, and as you said, Jordan, they are running these agencies again. And this is the problem with all of this. So... And of course, it was three weeks before... Sixteen officials, 51 named, nine who said they were former IC officers, intelligence officers, who could not be named publicly, also support the arguments. And they took these arguments to private companies and said, censor this information because... And Mark Zuckerberg confirmed that, that it was Russian disinformation. And you tell a private company, something like that, they're going to be scared to have that. They don't want that on their website. Remember the whole interaction between the FBI and Facebook? Right.

No, no. That's what he was... Confirmed. Zuckerberg confirmed. They caved him specifically. Here he is on Joe Rogan confirming it. Now we know this is the FBI interfering once again in our elections.

Bite 17. There was a lot of attention on Twitter during the election because of the Hunter Biden laptop story, the New York Post. Yeah, so you guys censored that as well? So we took a different path than Twitter. I mean, basically, the background here is the FBI, I think, basically came to us, some folks on our team and was like, hey, just so you know, like, you should be on high alert.

We thought that there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election. We have it on notice that basically there's about to be some kind of dump that's similar to that. So just be vigilant. Okay.

So it was banning posts, deflating posts. But let's go back a little bit further. Okay. That was that election. That's the 2020 Presidential election. They do this. Look what they do in 2022.

Okay. The midterms. They already knew. They put in a special counsel and conducted a search warrant, executed a search warrant on Donald Trump, former President of the United States home, while they already knew that the current President had classified documents, which ultimately led into the FBI now going to three of his locations and getting dozens of classified documents from his locations. And we know it's involving at least the initial ones were Ukraine, which is pretty fascinating considering the Biden history in Ukraine, Ukraine, UK, which I still am trying to figure out what that could be. I guess it was coming from intelligence data, and Iran, which was the deal they had negotiated to get into the Iran deal. So you ask yourself, and then Merrick Garland puts a special counsel place, says nothing about the facts of this case, of the Biden document case. So you got that whole overseeing kind of the overshadowing the entire election when they already knew that Biden had documents he wasn't supposed to have. I mean, think about all of that and then go back and look at these what these intelligence officers then you see what's happening here. Yeah, I think that there's part of this is also that timing game.

It's like they drag this on since 2020. They first tell you the Hunter Biden information is a lie. And again, there's a couple of sideshows to it. There's the salacious stuff in there.

That just gets people to click. The part that people really care about is peddling classified documents, information that the American people should know when making a decision about who to decide is President of the United States. You know, getting board seats on Ukrainian companies that, again, there's back and forth on that.

Some of the emails now that we know have been confirmed to be his that read very official, and then some, like you copy and paste it, and some that don't. And so, again, it just reeks of, I mean, it's why there's been a criminal investigation to Hunter Biden. It's not like we're calling for one.

There is one. And no one came in to that administration like Merrick Garland said that that was inappropriate. No, you don't get a special counsel without there being an underlying predicate that a criminal act has been committed. Now, that's not the definitive.

Obviously, that's what a jury trial is, but that gets you probable cause. So that's how that goes. We're taking your calls, and a lot of people are starting to call in 1-800-684-3110. That's 800-684-3110. So this is the first time that the laptop has been verified.

It only took two years that this was his. All right, let's go ahead and take a call. Yeah, Zeke at Florida Online One.

Hey, Zeke. I think this is a very strategic move by the defense because, basically, Hunter's laptop was never subpoenaed or never obtained appropriately by the law. No, the FBI got the laptop. The FBI did get it. Yes, but did they actually put a warrant out for it, or is this going to be all this information considered fruit of the poison vine because everything's been leaked out now? Is it tainted because of the way the laptop was obtained? That's an interesting question. I don't know if they served a search warrant on the, you know, if they did a subpoena or a warrant on the shop that did the computer fixing, that was going to do the computer repair. But I think the individual, I'm not sure about this, I think the individual contacted the FBI and then the FBI took the document, but I think he had a copy of it is my understanding. Yeah, we're talking about computers, and it's not actually the computer.

You copy a hard drive onto another file folder. So, you know, that's not hard to do. I think, again, they maybe tried to dirty this up. I think suing media personalities never works.

It doesn't look good. Well, they're trying to create a, they're going to say, oh, you said $50,000 payment for rent to the house, but it was really the rent of the office. And they criticize Donald Trump for this all the time.

The same actions. They say he's absurd because he sued Bob Woodward, he's out of control, he sues seated, and now they're doing it. Listen, the standard in a defamation, I've defended defamation cases, the standard is reckless disregard for the truth. You have to know the falsity of what you're saying when you say it.

That's a very difficult standard. Cases called New York Times versus Sullivan. And now, you know, when some of these lawsuits that are going on right now and the litigation that's going on between Dominion, the voting machines, and Fox News, people have seen that in the news, this is kind of the allegations going back and forth. But, you know, news agencies report newsworthy events.

And that's what the First Amendment protects. But anyways, we're taking your calls on all of this 1-800-684-3110. Yep. 1-800-684-3110 to talk to us on the air. Let's go to Dave in California, online3. Hey, Dave.

Hey, how are you guys doing this morning? Hey, I appreciate you guys. Thanks for taking my call.

Just wanted to, you know, you guys do a great job. But I think most of the people, most of the conservative right wing people, the people that listen to your show, the fix is in. We know the fix is in. And Jay, you said earlier, you know, how unbelievable this is. For most of us, it's not unbelievable anymore. We hear these stories over and over.

The FBI, the DOJ, you know, our government, they're corrupt. Well, I think what you have to do, what we have to do, Dave, is we got to win more than one election cycle. So we had a President willing to go in and clean house. He got taken down by those individuals.

Let's just be honest. They made his life a living hell, which is true because they had two impeachments, special counsels, all while he's trying to run the country. And all he did was get rid of Jim Comey, who Hillary Clinton blamed for her election loss. And I don't think she caused the election loss, but she was right to blame him. There was wide agreement that he was no good. Well, he shouldn't have been interfering with the election, and he did. Violated DOJ policy.

He sees that. He has Adam Schiff on there saying he's got evidence that he's a Russian agent, which he never had evidence of. Then there was evidence of collusion.

No, there's no evidence of that. So you've got to elect someone like that, whether you think it's Trump or someone else, who is willing to go in, and you've got to have more than four years. You cannot get that done in four years.

That is a long-term plan to change the direction. I'll bring it up like this. The case we're talking about with these pro-life students, there's an issue there, obviously, in the side of the Smithsonian security. Obviously. There's no way these people just decided that day, five different incidents, to target, to go after them just because they didn't like it.

Probably Christian students from a Catholic school. Yeah. Right.

So now they're being supposedly retrained. Whatever that means. But the idea here is, what made them think that was okay? And yet the person with the pride hat next to him is no problem. No one should be a problem. What if you went to an Islamic school and you had that on your shirt?

It should be a problem. I'll tell you, if it was an Islamic school, you think they would have stopped him? No. Not for one moment. No, there were people with their gay rights shirts on. They didn't stop. No, sure they did. It's not disruptive speech. They weren't protesting inside a museum.

They were just going to it. Like every other school group in Washington. You're going to be talking a lot about that today. You've got a lot of interviews on that. But there are cultural problems within these agencies.

No question about it. And within the federal government. We saw it at the IRS years ago. Now we're seeing it in the intelligence community and even security at the Smithsonian. And that's why we've got FOIA's in on the FBI, FOIA's in on the National Archives. Back with more in a moment.

Welcome back to Second Hill, 1-800-684-3110. If you have your thoughts and comments. Again, the big part of the story is, we were lied to again by a bunch of the lead intelligence officials of the country. Head of the CIA, former heads of DNI, all of their deputies.

Nine who wouldn't be named. 60 people signed onto a letter saying they don't know if it's real or not, but it's definitely from the Russians and it could all be fake. Now Hunter Biden sent these letters out through his attorneys confirming that the data is his. That this is his data. These are his emails. Of course they're his pictures, they're him.

These weren't some deep fakes that were made. I know his lawyers, you know. He's a good lawyer. And a lot of this I think they want to draw our attention to the salacious, and I think he would even, they're even okay with that.

Talk about the drug addiction because you could play it out and say okay he had problems and this is someone with issues. What they don't want you talking about is business deals. No. But what's interesting to me is, and I think this was a good move by his lawyer, who I know very well, who said in the letter that they're sending to these like assistant attorney generals for national security, the state attorney generals in Delaware and New York. They say they gained access to our client's personal computer data. So this is the first admission that this in fact, but they needed to get that out.

Because if their defense, I can already figure out where the defense is going to go, and make no mistake about it, Hunter Biden is going to put up a defense. Okay? You know that. But the shocking thing here is that the, what did you count? How many? 51?

60. 60 national security experts all said they've reviewed it, they've reviewed what's come out, this is Russia disinformation, this is the Russians interfering with an election. None of that was correct. The Russia hoax phase two was not correct either. So that tells you the nature of this. What's your reaction to this folks? We want to get your calls 1-800-684-3110.

That's 800-684-3110. Listen to, let's play this Radcliffe, excuse me, John Brennenbite talks about Radcliffe. Take a listen to it. I scratched my head at whatever John Radcliffe says on these matters and just asserting something without providing any type of, you know, information that is going to support that assertion, I think, again, just raises questions. So I think there are a lot of issues related to this New York Post story that reportedly referenced the Hunter Biden emails. And as I and several of my former colleagues have pointed out publicly that it does bear the hallmarks of Russian disinformation. Now, we don't know whether or not that is the case, but there's just a lot of things that are cropping up now that may not be what they appear at first blush.

Well, we know now it's not the case. So you had 60 former intelligence officials say, and he said this, I'm going to just read what he said, as several of my former colleagues, and there were 60 of them, have pointed out publicly it does bear the hallmarks of Russian disinformation, but it wasn't. And they finally admitted it, which is part of their legal strategy now, but it's very interesting while they're threatening lawsuits against other lawyers or threatening lawsuits against TV show hosts that are covering this.

I think they're getting a taste of their own medicine of what they did to Donald Trump. Because like we've said, they've got their own special counsels, you got your son under criminal investigation, you were under criminal investigation as President of the United States, and you brought this all on yourself. Joe Biden decided to reenter public life and run for President at an older age, knowing his son had these issues, knowing the business that his son was on the board of foreign companies, if he had not run for President again, not an issue. He knew that a President of another party was impeached over a phone call bringing it up. Just discussing it. Discussing it with Zelensky, which again, now that we know all these things are real, why would you not bring it up? Well, this is because it is real.

That's what I said about the Ukraine call, it was ridiculous. And then his son gets this sweet board appointment, doesn't even speak the language to communicate, has no background in oil and gas, and again, if he was just a former vice President and hadn't run again, this doesn't happen. But it happens now because he's President, or else it would have been more like a Mike Pence situation with his documents. It's a lot quieter.

It's not nearly as big of a deal, because we have one former President who's declared to run again, and a current President who is likely about to announce he's running for a second term. Right. They treated the Trump family like almost what they're actually getting investigated over. No, that's the truth.

You know what I mean? They were colluding with Russia to get to the White House, and Donald Trump was the former head of Celebrity Apprentice, and a real estate developer was a Russian asset controlled by Putin. That's what they said. They publicly said that, and that was positioned with Adam Schiff. We have that bite of Adam Schiff where he says multiple times, information in plain sight.

Take a listen. So there's clear evidence on the issue of collusion, and this adds to that body of evidence. There's ample evidence of collusion in plain sight, and that is true. Have Democrats found any evidence of collusion?

Yes, we have. You can see evidence in plain sight on the issue of collusion, pretty compelling evidence. And there is significant evidence of collusion. There is ample evidence, and indeed there is, of collusion of people in the Trump campaign with the Russians. I think there's plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy. All of this is evidence of collusion. There is significant evidence of collusion between the campaign and Russia. So that was the chair of the Intel Committee. There was no evidence of collusion, and it took $40 million and two years for Robert Mueller to conclude that, which he knew after about two months, by the way.

Okay, that's number one. Number two, then I have 60 intelligence officials saying the Hunter Bine laptop is nothing but Russian disinformation, except now his lawyers wisely, I think, have admitted it was his document. By the way, at the same time breaking right now as we're on the air is the FBI is now going to search the home of former Vice President Mike Pence. Yeah, I mean, we were speculating here that that could have already happened even, because it would have followed the pattern of the former President, the current President, so if you're going to do that to them, you would have to do that to Pence after he found it.

But again, I just want to remind people what this looks like in your neighborhood if this happened to your neighbor. Yeah, you would think what's going on is, I mean, there's only like a few things that usually would involve this level of law enforcement, high-level fraud or high-level, like, real criminal conduct, trafficking, drug trafficking. I mean, that's when the FBI shows up to your home. That's even different than, like, going to a business to look for documents of somehow, like, you know, this is some illegal business activity.

This is all individual. This is your private residence being ramished through by the FBI. Alright, we're taking your calls at 1-800-68-431. Do we have time for one more?

We have time for what they did to Trump's office, throwing all the paper all over the floor. We can take a call. Let's take Rebecca.

You're right. Rebecca, Texas. Go ahead, Rebecca. Rebecca, you're on the air.

Rebecca Dunaway, thank you for taking my call. I was just curious about, okay, the laptop, how long had the laptop been in the repair shop? It was there for months. Yeah, no one came back to pick it up.

Right. Cleaners, if they didn't come pick up their clothes in 30 days, the clothes were mine, I would sell them. Well, there's different law in different states about that. Yeah, it's kind of like, I think about, like, the, if you have a storage facility, you see those shows on TV all the time, where they bet on... How long if you're going to come back? Well, no, they actually bet on who is going to get what's inside.

They don't get to look first. They open up the storage facility after it's been left after so many days, so people have it paid, and then bidders bid on it before they get to go through it. So I think that's what people are thinking of, is that if you leave something that usually it says, if you leave this, it becomes ours. Yeah, and sometimes you have to go to court proceedings to enforce that.

Every state is different. But listen, what the lawyers are doing now, it's a very different strategy. Understand that. It is a goofy situation, though.

It is. Leaving a laptop with a local repair guy as the former, as the vice President's son is a weird thing. You have no staff checking on that. I mean, why, just question, like, this is what gets them in trouble. There's no person in between Hunter and talking to Ukrainians. There's no one in between Hunter and his laptop.

But they thought they could impeach a President over a phone call to a Ukrainian government leader because of corruption, which was for real. All right, we're going to come back, take your call, support the work of the ACLJ at ACLJ.org. We'll get another 30 minutes ahead. Stay tuned. Keeping you informed and engaged, now more than ever, this is Sekulow.

And now your host, Jordan Sekulow. Yeah, so it was interesting because the laptop issue. Let's recap it for everybody.

So it starts in April of 2019 and it just gets left. This is the Vine laptop. Eventually the FBI learns about it and seizes the actual laptop. And it only goes up to about 2018-ish information and then there was supposedly some water damage to it. As the person reported, he said the guy who came in said he was Hunter Biden and this is his laptop.

And made a copy of the data. There might be, and again, now that we know it's real, there could always be issues with the first person that takes the data. But usually the media reported it?

No. Media reporting it, it's a newsworthy event. It's like a leaked document. An investigation case would be difficult.

So, I mean, you know, intentional misstatements are one. It's a reckless disregard for the truth is the New York Times standard. But what is important to understand, and I think this is the key takeaway from all of this that has transpired in the last 24 hours. For the first time, Hunter Biden's legal team has admitted that this was his laptop. Because in the letter that they sent to these government officials, the lawyers, and I think I get the strategy of what they're doing. They said that the individual that gained access to our client's personal computer data without Mr. Biden's consent. So, obviously, if it was not his computer, he wouldn't have the authority to consent.

But it is his computer, so they're saying he didn't have the appropriate, that the repairman didn't have the appropriate consent. I think it's all interesting, but I'll tell you what it does show. It does show this, that you see the legal strategy that's starting to develop here. But all of this has got to be put in light of the fact that 60 intelligence officials said this was all Russia disinformation. And that was not correct. And they said Russia was interfering with, had Trump on the payroll basically, not correct. There was collusion in the campaign, not correct. An impeachment over Ukraine because they said it was undue influence, not correct. And boy, have we seen the problems with the situation in Ukraine. And Hunter Biden was on the payroll of a Ukrainian gas company. And being investigated, the whole reason the FBI sees this was of a grand jury. Correct. In Delaware.

Right. Investigating Hunter Biden. I would imagine we're seeing this flurry of activity because something's going on with Hunter Biden. There's got to be, he thinks he's changing the story here.

I think one of the, the miscalculation is they just made it a front page story again. Why do you want Hunter to be a focus again? And now it's a legitimate focus because we know the data, as they say, the data was his.

So every email now you can go through and look for criminal activity. I want to, do we have, and maybe it'd take a segment to get it. Do we have the sound where Joe Biden says in a debate, I believe or a debate or an interview, that he went to the Ukraine and demanded a prosecutor who was investigating Burisma by the way, his son's company.

Do we have that sound? I mean, folks, this is what you got under, that's why we're laying out the evidence for you. Take a listen. And I had gotten a commitment from Poroshenko and from Yatsenyuk that they would take action against a state prosecutor and they didn't. So they said they had, they were walking out to press conference and I said, nah, I said, I'm not going to, we're not going to give you the billion dollars. They said, you have no authority. You're not the President. The President said, I said, call him. I said, I'm telling you, you're not getting a billion dollars.

I said, you're not getting a billion. I'm going to be leaving here. And I think it was about six hours.

I looked at it and I said, I'm leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor's not fired, you're not getting the money. Oh, son of a bitch. Got fired. That was the prosecutor that was investigating the whole Burisma issue. Yeah, I mean, it seemed like he's holding up a billion dollars a day. He was the vice President of the United States.

His son is on the board of Burisma. In a country that has got lots of corruption. And you and I had to do, for three weeks, a trial in the United States Senate on impeachment on a phone call. Of a President who asked about the situation.

Right. Because it was widely being reported in the news that some people were saying it was fake and some people were saying it's true. What was never fake was that Hunter Biden was on the board of Burisma. And that his dad had his prosecutor fired. And now that this was his laptop.

And now we know. How do you react to all this, folks? We're taking your calls. 800-684-3110. 1-800-684-3110.

We'll be right back on Sekulow. Again, take your phone calls. 1-800-684-3110. As always, you go to ACLJ.org. Stay updated on all the work we are doing.

That's ACLJ.org. Right back on Sekulow. So we do have breaking news out of the House of Representatives.

I don't have the final vote tally, but Ilhan Omar has been kicked off. She has. Of the Foreign Affairs Committee. Okay. Well, let's recap. We're going to take your calls on all this.

1-800-684-3110. Let's recast what that was about. Does she get the appeal to the House Ethics Committee now?

Yes, she can. So now she gets the appeal to the House Ethics Committee, which is controlled by Republicans. So I expect the same result. But remember, we went to work on this because there were four Republicans that were waffling that they were not going to do it. Yeah, we don't have the final outcome yet. I don't know if three... One of them, though, we sent our petition, which had, I think, 340,000-plus signatures, to these congressional offices through, was that through ACLJ Action? Yeah.

Yeah. Through ACLJ Action. And one of the members changed their vote, for sure. We're looking to see the final, we're working on the final vote right now.

So we're working on getting the final vote right now. But she has been removed. She can appeal it to the Ethics Committee. Yeah, I don't even appeal that. I don't know if that's a hundred percent you get even a hearing. No, I think they have a discretion whether they want to review it. Right, so I mean, just because you can appeal it doesn't mean they hear you.

It just puts the process in place. Yeah. But I mean, for all it is, she's been removed. I don't imagine that changing. And I think this is Republicans showing backbone.

I think it's great. Finally. When you're going to say all these things about people, if you really believe that the comments that they use, which, listen, the House voted twice to condemn anti-Semitism, instead of censuring her, but because of her statements. Right. And of all the committees, you know, this was the one they said this is not right to be on. Because if you're so immature as to go on TV like she did and say, well, I just didn't know that Jews and money was a thing.

I didn't know that a trope was all about the Benjamins. Well, I mean, then you shouldn't serve on the Foreign Affairs Committee. You're not yet prepared. Doesn't mean you can't get elected to Congress, but that's not the right committee for you. Well, I just think, look, this I think is a win for the American people. It's also pro-U.S. adversaries and against U.S. allies.

Okay. So we've got now these two stories that are breaking. So we've got the confirmation finally that the laptop was in fact Hunter Biden's. His lawyers have acknowledged that they gained access to, quote, our client's personal computer data without Mr. Biden's consent. So there's no doubt that that computer that went there was Biden's computer because without our client's consent is the way the document, the letters worded. So that's very, very critical. The second aspect of this is then all this information that came from the former intelligence officials that this was Russia, this information was all incorrect.

So I think we need to put that in perspective. We're taking your calls on all of these topics. 1-800-684-3110, 800-684-3110. Let's take another call. Yeah. Joseph's called in from South Carolina online too. Hey, Joseph. Hey, Joseph. Hey, buddy. I just want to start off with saying I appreciate everything that y'all do over there, man. Thanks. And my question is, okay, now that they have confirmation on the laptop, will Hunter Biden be held accountable for all the criminalization stuff that is on that laptop?

Because y'all know he was good as well as I do. If it was Eric Trump or one of Donald Trump's sons, they would put him up under the jailhouse. Well, let's talk about what this means. So there is a criminal investigation going on for Hunter Biden from the U.S. Attorney. A few months ago, there were a lot more reports saying that it was imminent. It was imminent, and now it seems... Oh, no, I think it is imminent. I think all of this...

It might be a little slap on the wrist, but still actually chart, you know, melodies. Yeah, I think all... Listen, there is an ongoing, Joseph, criminal investigation of Hunter Biden, and that was... It could be covering everything from taxes to foreign agent registration to foreign corrupt practices.

We don't know. Let me tell you this. You put Paul Manafort in solitary confinement. This better be a real investigation going on, because if it is a slap on the wrist, but it's a slap on the wrist on tax fraud and FARA violations, that they put people, again, in solitary, which could kill you in its own way, cause a lot of health problems. You do for the worst of the worst, and that's how they treated people who didn't sign the right form.

Yeah, because that FARA is... Under a law that wasn't being enforced for a decade. Well, and then they tried it again, and they lost. And they lost. And they're not doing very well with foreign agent registration issues. But the treatment of these individuals, what they had to go through.

Terrible. I mean, it's like, you could use the word persecution. That's persecution.

If you throw it into solitary, and you destroy people's lives and resources, there's something going on. Yeah, there's some reason why his attorneys decide we're okay being a front page news story right now. Yeah, I think because that's damaging for a while.

Yes, for today. Especially if your dad is about to announce he's running for President next week. Which may be the reason why they're getting all this out.

But you do need to get it out before that. So it may be that the President's going to announce his re-election efforts. Or he's going to announce he's not.

Or not. There was talk on CNN today about that. Cause your son is doing all this, does the Democrat party go to you and say, you're not the right person to represent our party, just let it be your open primary. They'll definitely not invite Harris's to take 100%.

I think that's correct. So here's what's interesting with all of this as this plays out. You know there's an ongoing investigation of Hunter Biden now, right? He's got new lawyers.

And really good ones. Let me be clear. Which means something happened. You don't usually get rid of your lawyers unless things escalated. Yeah, and they're taking a totally different strategy.

Which probably is the right strategy actually. Own up to the fact that this was your computer, then deal with the fact that they're arguing that people had access to it that shouldn't have. So you have to acknowledge your computer to say that they didn't have consent. They're also saying that obviously it was Hunter's and Hunter brought it in because he didn't consent to it.

And so they're not alleging he didn't consent to it if it wasn't his. So this is all on purpose. So what the next move is, I don't know. Maybe they think the U.S. attorneys are coming down with an indictment. Could be. I mean I don't know the scope of it and obviously we're piecing this together.

We are taking your calls at 800-684-3110. Well sure, because you have to be really, listen, in these situations, and I tell this to our clients, you've got to be careful and you've got to be precise as you can be. But newsmakers, news agencies have to report news. And talk show hosts that cover these topics have to report things that are in the news. These are newsmaker moments and you can't ignore the fact that Hunter Bynes' lawyers have said this was his laptop.

Yeah, no. I mean that's the issue is that it's, to me, I mean I think Joe Biden's in a very difficult situation right now because of what he did to Donald Trump. He brought it on himself.

He already decided to put himself back in the spotlight knowing that his son was having these issues. And I'm not talking about his drug issues or the pictures with prostitutes. That is the salacious stuff that they want you to focus in on. The truth is that's not where the crime, I mean some of that's criminal activity, but that's not where the big federal crimes are. The big federal crimes are if you are doing financial crimes. International financial crimes, tax fraud crimes.

And now the new issue, which what are they going to try to say? You can't speculate that possibly Hunter Bynes was peddling classified information? I mean he had access to it. Doesn't mean he did. We don't know if he did. But you can certainly speculate that he could have. Because it was just sitting there in places he had the key to. So it wasn't like a storage facility he didn't have a key to.

It was a house he had the key to. So you could speculate that it's possible. And now we've got all these evas and you've got a Russian, you've got a Ukrainian board seat. So it doesn't look quite right.

It looks terrible. But they indicted, they impeached a former President over that and we know firsthand because we handled it. All right. Let's go to Arthur who's calling from Ohio on Line 1. Arthur, go ahead. You're on the air. And we are taking your calls at 800-684-3110. Thank you, Mr. Sekulows.

You go right ahead. I think that if the U.S. intelligence agencies are saying that the information on Hunter Biden's computer was foreign Russian misinformation, maybe Hunter Biden must be investigated as a Russian foreign agent. I don't think you could say Russian foreign agent because he was working for the Ukrainian oil and gas company. And so that's a whole different, I don't think there's anything to that at all. Here's what they're saying. So we've got to be clear on what they're saying. These intelligence officials said based on what they've seen, they think this was Russian disinformation. In other words, this wasn't Hunter Biden's laptop, which his lawyers have now wisely said it is his laptop.

And by the way, he didn't give consent for the individual repairing it to share this data with other people. That's what they're saying in these letters that they've sent out. So it changes the nature of that discussion. The question is the political ramifications of all of this. Is it so early in the process and two years from now this is meaningless? Honestly, probably.

Right? Well, not if he gets indicted. He gets indicted with federal crimes, Hunter.

It's not meaningless. If your dad is running for President again. If you're not running for President again and you get rid of Harris, you get rid of this whole group. Ron Klain, this Biden group was in three years. Well, I thought Ron Klain was going to run the campaign.

Is that clear? They all just kind of disappear back into the background and the Biden people go away. You bring up all these new Democrats who are much younger and have a lot less baggage. There's a lot of governors out there and people like that who just don't have this D.C. baggage of being an elected official since 1972.

I know. There's weird calculations going on. I don't think it's all politics. I think some of this is real potential of jail. And so you might do things that make you look bad in the press, like admitting that this is real, because you're facing something bigger than just media accusations. Also, you try to buddy it up by suing media actors. They laughed at Donald Trump when he did it.

This is ridiculous. There's no question there's a different and a concerted legal strategy that's going on for Hunter Biden's defense, which may mean something's coming or it may mean both. That he also decided to change legal teams because he didn't like the way it was going. He hired really good lawyers. I know these lawyers are the best in the business.

I mean, some of the top criminal defense lawyers, but they are criminal defense lawyers, but some of the top criminal defense lawyers in the country. We're taking everybody's call in the next segment, so if you're on the line, hang on. 800-684-3110. Mike Pence's house, did they say it wasn't today, but it will be, or is it going on right now? That was the report. That report could change to it already happened, it's going to happen today. The FBI is going into Mike Pence's house looking for documents too, which is a whole other problem, and we talked about that on yesterday's broadcast. Support the work of the ACLJ so we can keep this broadcast on the air, ACLJ.org. There's a lot going on. Gilad Omar got voted off the committee, and so it's making news. Kevin McCarthy's talking about it. Can we take a listen to that? Omar is a backdrop against this, with the acrimony between Republicans and Democrats.

That's not it. Alright, so we'll get that in a moment. So they ousted Omar from the committee, and that's done. Now she can appeal to the ethics committee, so we'll see what happens there, but they did remove her. We at the ACLJ and ACLJ action went to work on that because there were four Republicans saying they weren't going to support that. At least one of them switched, and again, we sent them a petition with 345,000 signatures on it.

Let me tell you, that certainly didn't hurt any. So three of the four did switch. Three of the four did switch. So we don't know about Matt Gaetz yet, but we do know that. That's a huge win for ACLJ action. Nancy May switch, Victoria Sparks, and Kid Buck all voted yes to throw her off. So the only question would be is Matt Gaetz at this point. We'll find out that, but we got to say...

Either way, with him as Kevin Ally. Yeah, but the fact is, we went to each of those offices and got information to them that said, listen, 345,000 American people, including people in your district, are saying don't do this. Don't let her be on that committee. And the good news is, we were successful in it. And then it looks like we moved over. Yeah, I have a feeling those people heard from their constituents pretty fast. Well, we know they did because they contacted us. They went out publicly saying they questioned it, and they all changed their vote. And how effective do you think it is when we take something like that to one of these committees?

That's the kind of stuff, when you have 340,000 and you start talking about it and you name them. You say, hey, these four people are threatening to sink this boat and give Ilhan Omar a lifeline to stay on the Foreign Affairs Committee. And we were able to make sure that that was not the case at the end of the day. And the more unity there is with Republicans, the better the case is.

Sometimes they said they were worried they didn't want this to happen to them. So they just wanted a little bit more procedural clarity, and they got that through her. She could appeal it. And again, I don't know if it works like court when you appeal, because these are not usual situations, but courts don't have to take your appeals. So imagine House Ethics. Is it bound to take her appeals?

No, I feel like it's just a proceeding that they can issue. And of course the majority of the votes on that committee are Republican. So that's the Ilhan Omar news of the day. Who already voted to knock her off the committee. She's off the committee. That's a good decision. We went to work on that.

Thank you to our ACLJ members for helping us. That's number one. Number two, it's been confirmed now that the FBI is going into Mike Pence's house to look for documents that he might have. So that is now a President, a former President, and the former vice President all having FBI searches at their home. And as Jordan said, let me tell you something about an FBI search at your house. It's a newsworthy moment, Jordan. Oh, it's a huge news. It is, again, you have to imagine, it's a dozen agents spending 13 hours, 8 hours, entire day, rubbaging through all of your paperwork.

And maybe also your electronics. We don't know all of the parameters to what has been agreed to. But what we do know is that the reason why a Pence would agree to it or Biden did agree to it is they didn't want a Mar-a-Lago situation. Which still isn't clear because they were agreeing to it.

So at some point there's some kind of communication broke down and they went to a local magistrate judge. Which, again, I think that example alone, they brought this all to themselves. I don't know if it would be a huge issue for Mike Pence. The bigger issue for Mike Pence was that he came out and said he didn't have it before. He just should have been quiet about it. It's better just not to talk about it.

Because if you know they're going to become it and you know you've got to search for it. And then the big news of the day. The biggest is on the Hunter Biden situation is that his lawyers, and he's got new lawyers, and they are good lawyers. His lawyers have said that the individual at the repair shop gained access to our client's personal computer without Mr. Biden's consent. That confirms two things. Number one, it is in fact his computer. And that's doubled down when they said without Mr. Biden's consent because Mr. Biden would not be consenting, Hunter Biden would not be consenting if it wasn't his computer.

So now that is out. And I think that was intentional and that was the move of the lawyers to get it out there. And then they're saying that these people that were involved in getting access to the data may have committed violations of criminal law. That's going on right now at the same time that all this is going on. Having said all of that, I'm just trying to put that in perspective.

You've got to understand what's going on here. There were 60 intelligence officials that said that computer was a Russian disinformation campaign. That was incorrect. All 60 of them were wrong.

What else is new? So not only were they intelligence officials, they were highly political. And these are the types that say, Rick O'Neill is too involved in politics. These guys were coming out and saying Trump was a Russian asset, this is Russian disinformation. Three weeks before an election, go into Facebook. The FBI, not former FBI, current FBI, and say don't run this. Twitter, take it down to your account if you post it. Remember they banned the New York Post?

They banned the New York Post. All right, let's take Thomas' call out of California. Thomas, you're on the air. He's the third biggest newspaper in the country.

Thomas? Yes, thank you. Thank you for the work that you guys do and the information. It's of interest that Hunter Biden walked into the repair shop on his own. Hunter requested the data be recovered. Hunter granted permission to work on the computer to recover the data. Hunter chose to walk in, he requested, he authorized, and he failed to pick up his property.

He abandoned his property. Well, the question is, and this is a legal question, that doesn't authorize someone to copy your data, okay, which is what allegedly happened here. If you were a computer repair person, you saw activity you thought was criminal. Well, then you called the FBI. And he did.

Yes, but you don't copy it because of the possession. Oh yeah, I think that part's questionable. You can question that.

And that's what these letters are addressing. The Hunter part is about the second part though, it's the reporting of it. And typically, the way this works, and Washington without any kind of information, is that a public figure, if it comes out about him, you can report on it.

You weren't the one responsible for why it came out. It's like if a document leaks from the DOJ or FBI and the news reports it, they're not responsible for the leak or the leaker. The media's not.

That's correct. Then we did see the Obama administration try to do that. Yeah, go after the reporters. James Rosen, former Fox News reporter. Remember, he's now with Sinclair Broadcasting. I mean, they went after James Rosen.

I mean, this is the Obama administration. We have seen a couple of figures win against the media lately. We saw Nick, the Catholic school student. Yep. We saw Hulk Hogan.

Yep. That was a huge case. Charles Harder, very good defamation lawyer. So there's a little bit, but it's rare.

It is rare. That's why you can name the two, because that's about it. A lot of people sue, and Trump does it too. They don't like what the media says about it, they don't like what the media does, but they don't usually go very far. Well, because the defamation standard, as I said, is under New York Times versus Sullivan. Especially your public official. Well, when you're a public official, it's reckless disregard for the truth. Knowing the falsity laid at your feet is what the legal standard is. And none of this is, I mean, when you already have pictures of him engaging in criminal conduct on there, and again, that's not really the highest prosecutable conduct, but he is with prostitutes and doing drugs. Yep. So once you've got that, it's fine to talk about that, because now we know that's him.

So it's not a fake picture of him. Well, it goes to the question I was going to ask you the last time. But the real crimes are the financial crimes.

Yes, that's where it's going to be coming down. What does this do politically? Because he's not yet, Joe Biden is still not announced. I don't think it fully seeks Joe Biden unless Hunter is charged with serious crimes that lead back to him too. And whether or not Joe Biden is really shielded from it. I think before it seemed like Joe Biden was going to be shielded from it. But now that everybody's going through his documents, like I was saying in the beginning, when you start having these searches, just because the scope of the search is supposed to be for classified documents, if they come across other criminal activity, they don't ignore that. Folks. Which was interesting to me, like in the pin situation, how much you can sit to. It's not just about something like trying.

If I was their lawyer, I would say you could look for these documents in these locations. You can't go through my computer. You can't go through my phone. Exactly. I mean, listen, that's what a good lawyer does. We're not blaming the lawyers. We're not blaming the lawyers for doing their job here, including Hunter Biden's lawyers. He made the call on this. Ultimately, he has to make the call. So he decided to make himself a big story again. There's got to be a reason. Support the work of the ACLJ. That's how this broadcast comes to you. ACLJ.org. More tomorrow.