Not waiting for the question, giving the answer that she doesn't want. Now, journalists should be holding Democrats responsible for this is hypocrisy. Wouldn't don't you think? They should be asking how and why the president of the United States should be allowed to prosecute his cheap political rival in the big picture. Instead, journalists are carrying the water for the administration in many cases. President candidate, presidential candidate himself, the fake Ramaswamy, he was in a long time ago and is still fighting hard, made that point yesterday on CNN. There's absolutely no evidence. Unless you can show me some that President Biden has had anything to do with this prosecution. That's why he put two layers in between with the government. With due respect, I think it is shameful that I as a competitor to President Trump in this race have to ask questions that the media isn't asking. The job of the political media, if it has one job, is to hold the US government accountable. We know that. Instead, we're doing the bidding, you're saying the media doing the bidding of the US government. Now, ask the question, get to the bottom of what Biden told Garland and what Garland told Jack Smith. If the same shoe fit the other foot, you would not take their word at face value. Do not take their word now. And Vivek Ramaswamy is not taking anybody's word. He's taking action. He is filing a freedom of information request to expose the Biden communication. If there is any between all these factors, all these factions that he just described. Vivek, what are you, exactly what exactly are you doing? So earlier today, Brian, my campaign filed a freedom of information act request. I consider it a demand of both the Biden White House, as well as the Biden Department of Justice, to figure out what direct or indirect communications there were between Biden, Garland, and Jack Smith. And the reason why, as I read that indictment, Brian, it reeks of political politicization all the way down. There are selective omissions of the Presidential Records Act, the most relevant statute to the actual alleged crimes. Executive orders, not binding, a necessary U.S. President. That's how the classification schemes are defined. So this reeks of politicization, and in my disappointment, you saw that exchange on CNN over the weekend that I had. I said, if the media isn't going to do it, you know what, if the other political candidates aren't going to do it, then I'm going to lead the way starting now. And make no mistake, it would be easier for me if Donald Trump were eliminated from competition in this race. But that's not the way I want to win. I want to win this election by convincing the voters that I'm the best person to govern. That's the way we do things in America, not by having the federal administrative police state eliminate the competition. And Brian, I stand on the side of principle. All right, so there is a new development we want to share with you that you might have heard about. It happened on the Senate floor today, Grassley, Chuck Grassley, on the floor, just a few hours ago, sharing some shocking information about Joe Biden, about Hunter Biden, and their business dealings with Perisma. Listen, the 1023 produced to the House committees redacted reference that the foreign national who allegedly bribed Joe and Hunter Biden allegedly has audio recordings of his conversation with them. 17 such recordings. According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses 15 audio recordings of phone calls between him and Hunter Biden. According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses two audio recordings of phone calls between him and then vice president Joe Biden. These recordings were allegedly kept as a sort of insurance policy for the foreign national in case that he got into a tight spot. Pretty stunning, right? Grassley also said the information was redacted from the version of the document presented to the House Republicans and Democrats too on the committee, presented to them last week. Why was it so heavily redacted? And was that the part that was redacted about the 17 recordings? Vivek, your take? Well, first of all, why are we only hearing about this now? You have a corrupt federal police state that has gone for years after some made up Russia collusion narrative. When, in fact, apparently, it seems that there's evidence staring in the face of a different kind of foreign interference and corruption. And I also just want to make an obvious observation, Brian. They said they wanted to keep it as an insurance policy, those recordings. Well, let's just observe where we are right now. The US president happens to be that same then vice president Joe Biden that's sending literally hundreds of billions of dollars of US taxpayer aid to Ukraine, the very country where you have an enterprise whose owner is on national security councils and boards in Ukraine. So I think that I'm shocked that no one has actually drawn that obvious analogy as well, that that insurance policy that he's talking about with those audio tapes sure well may be playing out at the expense of the American taxpayer. But this is why we should not want a corrupt government. Transparency is the only way forward. And we're going to need a new honest government, Brian, and that's a big part of why I'm in this race and what I'm hoping to lead is a revolution of transparency in the administrative state itself. It would be a nice change. Also, how many times is Joe Biden going to lie before we start to actually label him that way? I know nothing about my son's overseas business deal. He's clearly that's wrong. The firing of Victor Shokin had nothing to do with business. It looks like that's a direct lie. And then we find out everything that he says he did know from his background at Syracuse in college, all the things to the 51 intel agencies who said this is classic Russian disinformation when he knew damn well. That was his family's laptop with all their secrets on it. He had no problem staring into this camera and saying that very same thing. How do we still label him as honest? Well, Brian, I will stare into this camera and say that this is grounds for impeachment if this is true. If these facts are substantiated in the facts of lying about it, especially if it's on grounds of then taking steps as US president to make good on that old promise that was previously unsealed, I think that's grounds for impeachment. And I think that we need to deliver accountability to leaders who betray their oaths of office. And I think we need to see that apply to even handling our country. And you'll be in Miami tomorrow, right? I'll be there tomorrow morning at 10.30 AM with the press conference and some additional announcements on the information we're demanding. All right, no one's going to outwork. Vivek Ramaswamy, thank you Vivek, appreciate it. Meanwhile, President Trump's indictment will shape the GOP nomination race big time, but it doesn't change