All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 2, 2018 - The Dan Bongino Show
47:37
Ep. 647 The Entire House of Cards is Coming Down
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.
All right, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
Man, I'm doing great, Dan.
I'm doing great.
All right, folks.
Yeah, this is going to be a busy day.
I even had to step on Joe to get ready to do this.
Hey, the memo's coming out any moment.
So here's what we're going to do.
This is the way I plan on doing the show today.
I am going to set you up with a great piece by Kim Strassel in the Wall Street Journal on how to read the memo and what to look for.
So regardless of what happens, this show is going to be important in advance.
Probably the right move, right, Joe?
Yeah, that's a good way to do it, yeah.
I'm going to give you a couple bullet points.
I think she did the best job of saying, here's how to read this thing and here's what to look for.
When the memo is then released, if it's released during the show, we're going to have to lift and shift.
If it is released after the show, Joe and I will immediately be back with a supplement to this show to give you the takeaways and what we think are, so you may get two for the price of one today, all right?
Please, please, please listen to both shows, folks, or if one, if it's released during the show, because I know exactly what to look for here.
Hey, quick note for you, administratively speaking, There's a lot of people on YouTube that are stealing our content.
Now, folks, I don't typically care if people distribute my information or my show notes, but, you know, this show is paid for by very generous sponsors who pay to be a part of it.
There are people on YouTube who are quite literally copying our audio and putting it on their own channels, and we're getting complaints from people saying, wow, this is a soupy-looking channel.
We have a YouTube channel, and the one you're probably listening to on YouTube is not ours.
Here is the channel on YouTube.
Please, I'm asking because this is very important.
It keeps the show free for all of you.
I mean, this is not, this is an expensive production we have here.
The channel.
Here's the official link.
It's YouTube.com backslash Bongino.
That is our channel.
So if you're listening anywhere else on YouTube, just understand that is not our channel.
It is YouTube.com slash Bongino.
So please go over and subscribe to our channel.
I'm imploring you just because it keeps the show free.
And that's what we, Joe and I have been intent from day one on making the content free.
YouTube.com slash Bongino is our channel, not the other one you're listening to on YouTube now.
That's not ours.
We get no benefit from that whatsoever.
It's not about the money.
It's about being able to sell the ad to sponsors and having the sponsors being able to pay for the show.
So I really appreciate you all doing that for us.
YouTube.com slash Bongino.
All right, I've got a lot to get through today, including some unbelievable soundbites by Jim Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence, refuting himself now, again, multiple times.
This guy is in a panic right now over what's coming out.
All right, before we get to that, today's show brought to you by our buddies at ManCrates.
I've got to tell you, this is one of my favorite sponsors.
I actually got a ManCrate recently, the Salami Bouquet.
Me too!
You got one too?
Yeah, I got the jerky Deal, yeah.
Did you?
You love it, right?
Yes.
Did you like opening it?
Like, opening it is like half the fun.
Yeah, it was tough on the teeth, though.
Get out of here, tough on the teeth.
You got tough teeth, they ain't that tough.
No, this is a great gift.
Yeah, listen, you having a tough time finding a Valentine's gift for your guy?
I know my wife and I go back and forth over this all the time.
My wife's like, I don't know what to get you.
This is the stuff to get you.
Man Crates has the answer for Valentine's Day.
Listen, Valentine's Day might be a cheesy Hallmark holiday, but that doesn't mean you have to get your guy a cheesy Hallmark gift, all right?
Giving your guy a box of chocolates for Valentine's Day is boring.
Boring.
Surprise him with a heart-shaped box of delicious beef jerky just like Armacost, the ultimate snack-phrodisiac.
Introducing ManCrates.com.
This is the best company.
The only place to find awesome gifts guys will love.
This isn't some cologne sampler or cheesy mug.
Man Crates offers curated gift collections for every type of guy from the sports fanatic to the home chef to the outdoorsman.
Check out the classics like the NFL Barware Crate and the Whiskey Appreciation Crate or fresh takes on traditional Valentine's gift like the Jerky Heart or The famous salami bouquet, which I absolutely adore.
Go to mancrates.com, pick the perfect gift, then wait for that magic moment.
He'll fall head over heels when his gift arrives and he gets to pry the wooden crate open with the crowbar included, which I had a blast doing.
That thing, I think I did it in seven minutes.
See if you can beat it.
They have thousands of five-star reviews and every gift comes with a complete satisfaction guarantee.
Go to mancrates.com slash Dan for 5% off.
That's a nice discount.
That's mancrates.com slash Dan.
They don't offer a discount anywhere else.
Get 5% off right now at mancrates.com slash Dan.
That's mancrates.com slash Dan.
Folks, this is a terrific company.
We love them to death.
Okay.
So, before we get into the how-to-read-the-memo portion, I want to do a couple of things here.
The Democrats are now, again, in a panic.
I say again because they've been in a panic now for months.
Matter of fact, they've been in a panic since Trump won the election in an effort to cover what, again, for the umpteenth time I'm trying to tell you.
The Obama team spied on the Trump team.
When Trump got elected, they panicked and now they have to go back and reverse engineer a crime to cover their tracks.
Now, they have tried everything to try to justify this investigation, which had no business being open in the first place.
Folks, as I explained to you on yesterday's show, in order to swear to a warrant in court to spy on people, What you have to do is you have to prove one of two things.
That there is probable cause of a crime, meaning you have to produce elements that there's probable cause that a crime was committed and this is the investigative tactic, a wiretap, you're going to use to uncover that crime.
Or, in a FISA warrant, to tap phones or read into communications, you have to produce evidence, probable cause, that that person is acting on behalf of a foreign agent in violation of U.S.
law.
This is important.
It's important because they don't have that.
They don't have any evidence of a crime, folks.
They don't have it.
The Manafort stuff, the Papadopoulos stuff, the Flynn stuff, that's all either process related or related to things that happened way before anybody was involved with the Trump team.
None of the Manafort crimes make any mention whatsoever of his involvement with the Trump team.
Are we clear on that?
Now that's important.
I'm not trying to rewind the tape just to bore you.
I'm rewinding the tape to explain to you the Obama team spied on the Trump team and had no evidence to do it.
Now, why is that critical?
It's critical because now that the Democrats, Joe, have acknowledged that they have absolutely no evidence, to support this massive counterintelligence investigation into Trump.
They are desperately trying to rescue the dossier.
The dossier, and what's gonna, I'm absolutely convinced will come out in this memo today, which we'll be discussing shortly, you are going to find out that the dossier was used in part As information in a court where someone in the FBI swore to this information as a reason to start this counterintelligence investigation to Trump and to spy on his communications.
In order to do that, they now have to rescue the dossier and make it somewhat credible.
You see where I'm going with this, Joe?
Sure!
They had no evidence.
The memo is going to be exposing that the evidence they used was the dossier.
Now that they're running for the hills, They have to say something!
They can't just say, okay, the dossier was garbage the whole time, we knew it, we swore to it in open court, and by the way it was paid for by the Clinton campaign.
They can't do that.
Because it's going to open them up to massive civil liability.
If not criminal liability.
So they are on a rescue mission from the dossier.
Now, to prove to you that they were caught, okay?
This is going to get a little complicated, so follow me.
The chronology of events with former Director of National Intelligence Jim Clapper and his constantly changing story in the media is indicative of the panic I'm telling you about.
I want to play for you first a cut, which you've heard before on the show, but we've shortened it up.
We've tightened it up a bit because this is going to be good.
This is going to be a clip of Jim Clapper talking to Chuck Todd.
This is earlier in last year talking to Chuck Todd of NBC News and being questioned about the existence of a warrant against Trump.
Now keep in mind right around this time.
They're in a bit of a panic about the FISA warrant because it's right around the time where it's starting to leak out that this FISA warrant was paid, that the dossier was paid for by the Clinton campaign.
So they think they can maybe make this thing go away and squash it.
So listen to Clapper trying to cover his own butt when asked about the existence of a FISA warrant.
Against Trump at all.
Play the cut.
Would that be information you would know or not know?
Yes.
You would be told this?
I would know that.
If there was a FISA court order on something like this?
Something like this, absolutely.
And at this point you can't confirm or deny whether that exists?
I can deny it.
No!
Interesting.
Now remember when this is happening.
This conversation is right after the, it's right around the time Trump tweets out that he believes he was wiretapped.
So now the Obama team is in a bit of a panic.
They don't know what to do because they know, the Obama team, that the FISA warrant they did have, don't believe Comey.
Comey knows there was a warrant.
That's all nonsense, okay?
What he just said.
But now they know and they're starting to panic because Trump knows and they know the Pfizer warrants based on crap.
So the first thing to do is to lie about it.
Just say it didn't exist.
You see where I'm going with this show?
Let's try.
First, if we just say it didn't exist, maybe the media will be compliant and the story will go away.
Maybe it'll go away.
Maybe it'll go away.
So let's just be clear.
Clapper, who knows the entire story, he knows about the setup of Donald Trump, which I described on The Trump on The Levin Show last night where I filled in.
All of these people approaching the Trump team, reporting back to Fusion GPS, getting back to Hillary and the information getting to the FBI.
He knows about this whole thing.
He knows about the FISA warrant.
He's now denying it.
Deny, deny, deny, make pretend it's going to go away.
Here is a recent interview with Jim Clapper, with Jake Tapper on CNN, where again, Clapper's asking him about the FISA warrant he told Chuck Todd in that clip I just played for you didn't exist.
Joe, play that cut.
It was too much reliant upon that and was not disclosed and that the FISA warrant was obtained in a shady and less honest way than it should have been.
Well, my experience with FISA, requests for FISA authorizations, is this is not a casual process.
There's great rigor put into this, and the basis for the request must be corroborated evidence.
And by the way, the FISA court is not a pushover.
They're not a rubber stamp.
They are, my characterization of their demeanor and the way they comport themselves is one of respectful skepticism.
Um... Come again, please?
Joe, you have Natalie Portman.
Are you like a crazy person?
Are you like a crazy person?
You just told us two minutes ago in our show that you were absolutely sure there was no Pfizer war.
Now Jake Tapper asks you about the FISA warrant, and you go through this lengthy process describing, you know, he doesn't deny it, Joe.
So Tapper asks him about the FISA warrant, instead of him saying, listen, Jake, there was no FISA warrant, he goes into this lengthy description of how the FISA warrant and the FISA process is robust and vibrant and don't worry, there'd be nothing untoward here.
Folks, this is Obama's Director of National Intelligence.
This is one of the few people in the federal government who is aware of all of the compartmented information, all of the intel streams, who collectively understands the entire scheme to set up Trump.
Now you're probably asking, why is he changing his story?
He's changing his story because now the memo's coming out and it's obvious that their efforts to lie about the existence of the FISA warrant, I just played it for you!
I just played it for you.
Those are Jim Clapper's own words.
They're not Dan Bongino's interpretation of Jim Clapper's own words.
Jim Clapper categorically denies the existence of a FISA warrant.
He is now explaining away months later.
Strategy number one for the Democrats was deny the existence of this thing altogether.
We did not tap the Trump team.
Why?
Because they knew what they were doing was not based in criminal rules of procedure or FISA warrant rules of procedure.
They had no evidence.
They spied on an innocent American citizen with no evidence.
They had Zippo.
Nothing.
First, deny.
Deny, deny, counter-accuse.
What was the counter-accusation, Joe?
Collusion!
Look, Trump colluded with the Russians.
Pay no attention to the spying scandal.
Only the biggest spying scandal in American history.
Now, Clapper, who's realizing he's liable in this as well.
He is in a panic.
He does this interview with Tapper just recently.
Now he realizes they're going to have to acknowledge the FISA warrant exists.
Why, Joe?
Because the memo is coming out.
There's going to be no denying it.
Facts are not partisan, folks.
Either the FISA warrant exists or it doesn't.
You understand, folks, this is easy to prove.
We can have legitimate political arguments about abortion, about firearms, the Bill of Rights, whatever it may be.
There are a lot of opinions here and there.
But facts are facts.
Whether you're a Democrat or Republican, Joseph, that FISA warrant exists to spy on the Trump team or it does not.
And now Jim Clapper knows that his lies that he told to Chuck Todd are not going to stand when the memo is released.
So now the effort... Listen to that cut again.
Rewind the tape a little bit.
Now the effort is on to rescue the dossier they previously denied existed at all.
Because if they cannot rescue the dossier as a semi-credible document, Joe, what does it prove?
What I've told you from episode 628 on.
The Obama team spied on the Trump team with absolutely no evidence at all.
You only have the biggest scandal in American history, folks.
You think I made all this up?
I'm using their own words.
Now, I have another portion of this.
One final cut of Jim Clapper.
Keep in mind, the Obama team spied on the Trump team.
They had no evidence.
Clapper knows all of this.
Clapper first tries to deny and counter-accuse.
Oh, there's no FISA, Warren.
Russian collusion.
Look, Trump did it.
He now knows he's going to have to acknowledge the existence of it.
So what does he do first?
This guy is a savvy dog.
First he tries to rescue the FISA process saying oh no no um here's how the FISA warrant really went through the process trying to rescue the process giving it credibility because now he knows it exists and he better because Joe if he doesn't rescue its credibility the Obama administration's credibility goes down the tubes because they not knowingly use false evidence so he's got to somehow rescue the process So step one was the process.
The Pfizer process is very complicated, Jake.
This is how it works.
In other words, look, we weren't dumb.
Um, maybe somebody tricked us, but we tried and we, we, the process was legitimate.
It wasn't.
But part two of this, the sound cut we have here is even more fascinating.
First, he tries to rescue the FISA process.
Now, Clapper's trying to rescue the dossier, knowing that now they can't run from it.
That this memo is going to show conclusively that they used the dossier in the process.
So folks, just to be crystal clear, Clapper needs to rescue the process first so he can blame the process.
You know what I'm saying, Joe?
He could say in other words, you know what?
It wasn't our fault.
We went through a rigorous process and we just got screwed in the end.
They did not go through a rigorous process.
They had no evidence.
He's trying to lose you in the mechanics and complexity of it.
Oh, it's very rigorous.
Look what happened.
We went through all this stuff.
There had to be something there, Joe.
The process was strong.
But he also has to engage in part two, which is rescuing the information involved in the process, which is the dossier that we all know is fake.
He now has to give it even the slightest air of credibility.
Listen very closely to how he talks you.
Play the cut.
There's a pretty high bar that you have to pass to get a FISA authorization request approved
in the first place.
As I understand it, this was simply an extension of the original FISA request, meaning that,
or implying that, apparently there was information that was considered valuable that was being
obtained via the initial FISA request.
FISAs have finite dates.
In other words, they have deadlines.
They aren't indefinite.
So when the time was up for the initial FISA request, then it was time to get an extension.
So, on its face, I don't know that the dossier played in this very much at all.
It could be considered corroborating.
And by the way, although we did not include the dossier in our original intelligence community assessment that we published last January.
You included a summary as an annex.
But it was separate from it because we couldn't validate the sources in it.
However, some of what was in the dossier was corroborated in our Intelligence Community Assessment, which was derived from other sources of information in which we had high confidence.
So, you know, you shouldn't completely dismiss totally what's in the dossier.
Christopher Steele is regarded as a credible and a former, a retired professional intelligence officer in the UK intelligence service.
Oh boy.
Okay, folks.
This is what I'm here for, for you.
I'm here to translate.
What was just, what was that, Joe?
A minute and 14 seconds of Jim Clapper gobbledygook.
He does a few things there.
This guy is a savvy cat.
This dude knows exactly what to say to do the Kabuki dance here.
Okay.
First he starts out and he says, well, listen, there's this process here.
And this was just an extension of another FISA application.
Why does he say that?
This is what we're here for to translate Obama language.
The extension part he puts in there because the effort now, folks, is going to be to shift the story onto blaming Carter Page.
Carter Page, according to the original New York Times reporting, was a Trump foreign policy advisor who had traveled to Moscow.
Carter Page features prominently, follow me here, folks, in the dossier.
The information on Carter Page in the dossier is false.
The only piece that was verified as being authentic is in fact that Carter Page did take a trip to Moscow.
Now, it was a business trip that was open source information.
It was a speech.
I don't know Carter Page.
I'm not defending Carter Page.
I've never met the man.
I'm just telling you that the allegations in the dossier that he met with Russian business executives and it was a trade-off, they are categorically false.
They are not true.
These meetings never happen.
Please understand what I'm telling you.
So Joe, you tracking me here?
I mean, this is gonna make sense in a second.
He uses the word clapper That this FISA warrant that he said previously didn't exist, then he defends the process, now he's got to rescue the dossier.
He says, oh, don't worry, it was just an extension.
Why is he doing that?
Because the dossier features prominently Carter Page.
If the information about Carter Page in the dossier is false, Clapper is setting himself up in the FBI for very serious problems because they went and testified in front of a FISA court about targeting a guy named Carter Page based on information in the dossier that was categorically false.
Where does the extension part come in?
Extension, that word he uses, is important.
Because Carter Page was previously under investigation, years earlier, was part of an investigation involving Russian contacts.
Some Russian contacts apparently tried to recruit Carter Page earlier, before he joins the Trump team.
This is very important, folks, because the Democrats are now relying on this to salvage both the dossier and their reputations.
You will see, if you... Here's a little test for you.
If you're on Twitter or the internet, just put Carter Page in a search engine or in the search bar on Twitter.
Watch all the Democrats now trying to throw Carter Page under the bus.
Here's why.
Their new theory is, well, the investigation was legitimate, Joe, because Carter Page was already under investigation by the FBI prior to joining the Trump team.
So when he joined the Trump team, clearly it was evidence of Russian collusion.
But here's the problem.
Why isn't Carter Page under arrest?
Yeah!
If Carter Page was a Russian spy, folks, and the FBI had been working him in some complex investigation for years, why isn't Carter Page under arrest?
Why is Carter Page out there on cable news doing all kinds of appearances?
Why is the FBI not engaged in any legal proceedings against him outside of spying on him?
The answer is because he wasn't a Russian spy.
Apparently, the Russians thought he was an idiot.
No, folks, that's an actual quote.
I don't know Carter Page.
I don't know anything about his IQ or anything.
The Russians did approach Carter Page, but thought he was an idiot.
He was not a Russian spy.
That's the problem.
If a Russian spy approaches Joe in the local bagel store, and Joe doesn't have any idea what's going on, and it never, by the way, Carter Page cooperated, this is of significant interest in this.
Carter Page cooperated with the FBI when they asked to interview him.
This was not a guy who was in any way worried or concerned about the FBI investigation.
He cooperated.
But folks, this is all on the record.
The point is, he was not a Russian spy.
But the Democrats see and sense an opening because they know the Russians attempted to recruit him.
So they're lying now, Joe.
And if I'm losing anybody, you got to stop me here.
You're good.
The Democrats need to rescue the dossier now because the memo is going to show it existed and was used in court.
If it is shown to be categorically false and people in the Obama administration, including the FBI, testified to it, they are all going down.
So now Clapper, who previously categorically stated the FISA warrant didn't exist, lie, lie, counter-accuse, that didn't work.
Too bad, so sad.
Now he has to rescue the process and he has to rescue the dossier.
And the way they're going to rescue the dossier, Joe, is they're going to say, the dossier wasn't that critical.
It was just an extension of an investigation that had been already ongoing, Joe, into Carter Page.
Republicans, you really want to die on that hill for Carter Page?
Look, the Russians tried to recruit him.
Whoa!
Well, did they recruit him?
No, they didn't recruit him.
Matter of fact, he spoke with the FBI, but that doesn't matter.
Don't let those little inconvenient facts get in the way.
Now, that's part one of the Clapper Statement, okay?
This is critical.
Yeah.
He mentions the word extension because if he doesn't mention extension as if this wasn't part of an ongoing Carter Page process, they have less than zero.
They know they have, understand folks, they know they have nothing.
The question is how do we create and reverse engineer evidence that doesn't exist?
I got an idea.
Carter Page was part of a Russian intel investigation earlier that bore no fruit.
Carter Page is not under arrest.
He has never been accused of being a Russian spy.
But let's go back and say the Russians tried to contact him and then we just extended that information into the dossier later so it doesn't look like the dossier was the only thing we had.
Does that make sense?
Yeah.
You like that?
Yeah.
How do you like them apples?
As that lady says, cash me outside if you watch Dr. Phil's show, right?
Folks, they are in a world of pain right now.
All right, there's more on this.
At the end of that clip, and you can rewind the podcast and listen to it again if you'd like.
So part one of the clip, I know it was a minute 14 seconds, but there was a ton in there because he gives up the Democrats entire bag of donuts.
First, it's going to be, this was all about Carter Page.
It was an extension of an earlier investigation because they need something.
They've got nothing.
Carter Page did it.
Remember Beavis and Butthead?
When Mr. Anderson used to catch them?
Ugh, I think other kids did it.
They need other kids.
Who's the other kids?
Oh, it's Carter Page.
Republicans, you want to die on that hill?
Carter Page was approached by a Russian agent once.
You guys really want to back that up?
We're not backing up anything.
We're just asking you to produce a scintilla of evidence that the spying scandal you started was based on evidence and not political means.
Or political goals, I should say.
Secondly, He does say at one point that the dossier was, he uses the word separate and was used to corroborate what was already ongoing.
Remember Carter Page.
So his line of attack is going to be, no, no, Carter Page did it.
This, this, this FISA warrant we got in October was just an extension of an already ongoing investigation into this shady cat.
Why does he say that?
Because the memo is going to absolutely conclusively show that the dossier was used.
Ladies and gentlemen, whether the dossier was used in part or in whole to justify a FISA warrant is absolutely entirely irrelevant.
When you go, I was a federal agent, I did this.
When you swear in court to the facts of a case, you are swearing that they're all true, not part of them.
If I go into court, To get a warrant for Joe for felonious mopery on the open seas.
I heard.
And the one piece of evidence that's the most damning in that warrant turns out to be categorically false, but I swear it's true.
You got a serious problem.
Whether the dossier, listen to me folks, because this is important, because this is going to be tactic number two.
So tactic number one.
Oh, this was an extension of an earlier investigation.
Carter Page did it.
Tactic number two is gonna be, yeah, the dossier may have been used in that extension of spying, Joe, but that's simply due to the fact that it was just in part, it wasn't in whole.
It doesn't, folks, listen to me, it doesn't matter.
It is entirely irrelevant.
The fact that it was used at all and sworn to is all that matters.
Now, this is important too, because in their effort then to rescue The dossier.
At the end, because remember, first he downplays it.
He goes, oh, no, no, this was an extension of an earlier investigation.
But I don't know if you notice, again, you can listen back.
At the end, Joe, even though he says, oh, no, it was just an extension of an earlier thing, the dossier wasn't that important.
At the end, what does he do?
He proceeds to rescue the dossier.
What does he say?
He says, well, folks, Christopher Steele was a reputable guy.
And by the way, yeah, you saw that?
He goes, there are parts of the dossier which were corroborated.
Oh, oh, he's right, folks.
Parts of the dossier were corroborated.
Two lines of it.
Two lines.
Not two pages.
Two lines.
You know what those two lines were?
The two lines, outside of the Carter Page trip to Moscow, were that Putin had animus towards Hillary Clinton.
If you're saying to yourself right now, wait, come again?
No, I'm not kidding.
Those are the two lines of the dossier he's claiming were corroborated.
That Putin didn't like Hillary Clinton.
If you're scratching your head right now, let me get this straight.
Someone went in court and swore to the contents of a dossier because they corroborated two lines of it that said that Hillary Clinton was not liked by Vladimir Putin?
Yeah, that's me scratching my head on that one going, uh, come again please?
Folks, I'm not kidding.
That is what Clapper is talking about.
Because now, even though he denied the existence of the FISA warrant earlier, he now has to acknowledge it existed and he now has to protect the dossier.
And he's protecting the dossier to a sadly compliant Jay Tapper.
I've met Jay Tapper multiple times.
He's a very nice guy.
But I got to tell you, I'm very disappointed here.
This was a horrible interview.
The first question should have been, Joe, you corroborated parts of the dossier?
What do you think the question?
Well, which which part exactly?
Which part?
What line?
How did you do it?
And then a follow up question.
Why was that part that Putin didn't like Hillary, which is basically open source nonsense, that was used to corroborate all other portions of it as well?
Folks, this makes absolutely no sense.
Keep in mind, here's what's going to happen going forward after this memo is released today.
They're going to blame it on Carter Page.
They're going to say this was an extension of an ongoing investigation, although there's no evidence Page was a Russian asset at all.
None.
He's not under arrest.
As far as we know, he's not currently under investigation.
He hasn't been prosecuted.
He hasn't been charged.
And he cooperated with the FBI.
I don't know the guy.
I only know the facts.
So part one, blame it on Page.
Part two, it's going to be we can now no longer deny the existence of the FISA warrant because the memo's out there, so we damn well better protect that dossier.
And we're going to say parts of it have been corroborated.
Your first question to your liberal friends should be, which parts?
Oh, you mean the part about the Russians not liking Hillary?
Because let me tell you, if you're going to pay me the millions of dollars that Fusion GPS was paid for oppo research, send me a check.
I'll write you two lines too.
The Russians don't like Hillary.
There you go.
Great works, Christopher Steele.
Man, you really knocked it out of the park on that one.
Oh boy.
This is total chaos, folks.
The Democrats are in a total panic.
All right.
Today's show also brought to you by our buddies at BrickHouse Nutrition.
This is one of my original sponsors.
You know I love these guys.
I'm big into planning, personal safety, protection, health, and fitness.
One of the things we do is we have a lot of sponsors like Patriot Supply where I say, hey, go insure your food supply.
But folks, you should insure your health too.
And I don't mean health insurance in the traditional way.
Yeah, that's good to have.
But, you know, one of the things you should be doing is eating a lot of fruits and vegetables.
I don't think anybody disputes this.
You know, it's funny.
How many things have changed over time, right?
Eat this, don't eat that.
Eat a lot of fat, don't eat a lot of fat.
Eat sugar, don't eat sugar.
Eat high carbs, eat low carbs.
One of the things that's never changed is eat a lot of fruits and vegetables.
There is no doctor on the planet that's not going to tell you to do that.
You know, I specifically remember when I was younger reading a bodybuilding book.
And I forget who they quoted, but it was a pretty prominent bodybuilder at the time.
This was before the massive steroids generation.
These were the old Reg Park type.
Well, I don't know what they were doing, but whatever.
And he was talking about healthy eating, someone.
And the guy quoted says, listen, it's not what's in fruits and vegetables, Joe.
It's what you don't know what's in fruits and vegetables.
In other words, people who eat fruits and vegetables live longer, healthier lives.
We don't even know probably 90% of the beneficial contents of these products.
God gave us these things.
But it's very difficult to eat 8 to 10 to 12 fruits and vegetables servings a day, folks.
So my buddies at BrickHouse Nutrition, don't worry.
They did it for you.
These guys are great.
This is real food.
They ground up some of the finest fruits and vegetables on the planet that you're just not going to be able to get.
Everything from, I mean, a ginger, like a spice, licorice, cherries, blueberries.
They have kale in there.
I mean, the list goes on and on.
You go to the website, look at the label of what's in there.
They ground it up into a powder that tastes terrific.
I like it.
I really enjoy it.
I think it tastes like a little bit of cherry.
There's a little hint of licorice in there.
I throw it in green tea.
Sometimes I throw it in V8.
I add a little collagen in there as well.
It's my super drink.
Folks, have your fruit and vegetable insurance.
You will be a better person for it.
No one disputes fruits and vegetables' contribution to a long, healthy life.
Go pick it up today.
The product is called Field of Greens.
It's available at BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
That's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Pick up your bottle of fruits of, excuse me, Field of Greens today.
Again, it's called Field of Greens available at BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
You're going to love it.
Get those fruits and vegetables in there, folks.
It's the best thing you can do.
I give it to my kids too.
I would not put a product in my kid's mouth if I didn't think it was healthy for them.
I give it to them as often as I can.
They love it.
I give them that.
I give them some fish oil too.
They love it.
Feel the greens available at BrickHouseNutrition.com.
Go check it out.
Okay.
Let's get back to this Kim Strassel piece in the Wall Street Journal today, which is excellent.
Oh, oh, oh, by the way, I'm sorry.
Please, please join my email list today, because one quick, you know what?
Forgive me, folks.
There's so much going on.
There's an, I neglected to miss this.
There's an article out today at The Hill by John Solomon.
It'll be at the show notes at bongino.com.
Please, please subscribe to my email list.
I will send you these in your inbox.
Bongino.com, there's a big link there.
Subscribe to the email list, okay?
There's a terrific, it's a must-read piece in The Hill by John Solomon.
And let me just read you a quick snippet of it, again, to just discredit the dossier and what happened.
Quickly, this is from The Hill piece, but read the piece.
It's at my website.
From Solomon, he says, as the investigation was unfolding, Steele forwarded the FBI a new piece of information with substantially similar information as that contained in his dossier.
This is what makes this even worse, folks.
So Steele gives the FBI his fake dossier, which we were talking about.
Remember, that Clapper's trying to rescue now.
This is where the information gets even worse about what the FBI may have sworn to in court.
Listen to this one.
The FBI learned that that information came from a private investigator.
This is the additional information Steele's sending in addition to his dossier, folks.
The FBI learned that that information came from a private investigator with longtime ties to the Clinton inner circle, according to sources familiar with the evidence.
Your sources declined to provide the private investigator's name, though British papers have suggested a Clinton supporter named Cody Shearer may have offered Steele information about Trump and Russia.
Do you see what is going on here?
Aw, crap!
That is... you're darn right!
So now, wait, let me get this straight.
Now the Bureau may have sworn in court to not only ban information from a former British spy... Damn!
...but the only thing they could verify in his information was that Russia doesn't like us.
But now they may have sworn in court to information given to them by a known Clinton ally?
Read this piece in the hill, it's gonna blow you away.
It'll be in the show notes today.
Email it right to your inbox if you subscribe to my list there.
Okay, getting back to this.
Sorry folks, there's just so much going on right now.
All right, wait.
I can't put more stories.
I know I'm driving you crazy.
But we're not patting ourselves on the back by doing this.
I'm just trying to establish some kind of a chain of events.
Of episodes ago, while we've been covering the Obamagate chronology here, I said to you that the next big shoe to drop, let's say, is going to be the discovering, hopefully, and the release of the Obama emails.
Joe, remember me telling you that Obama and Hillary emailed each other.
That's not a dispute on Hillary's private account.
That that happened is not in dispute.
What's in the emails is.
We don't know yet.
I had said to you that those emails exist.
Don't believe it that the 30,000 emails Hillary about, you know, well, we deleted 30,000 emails.
The emails aren't gone.
Why am I bringing this up?
I have another article today in the show notes.
Don't miss it.
It's a great one.
Senator Ron Johnson, I don't know, maybe he was listening to our show.
Who knows?
Senator Ron Johnson now, he's been poking around about that.
So here's a quote from this piece today.
It's an American majority, but it's in the show notes, this piece.
Read this one, it's short and sweet.
They say, well, Johnson may get the last laugh.
He is now widening the search of communications from top FBI officials, including former director James Comey.
Remember on yesterday's show, folks, where I told you Andy McCabe's emails and texts may be the most fascinating of all?
As well as demanding emails sent between President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton when the then Secretary of State was in Russia.
Oh boy!
Somebody's listening to our show!
Or somebody's listening to our show and passing that on.
What did I tell you?
I told you that was going to be the next DEF CON 6472 explosion.
When the Barack... Sometimes people say, that's not the way the DEF CON... I know!
It's a joke!
I get it.
I get it, but it's still funny, I think.
It is.
That is going to be the next explosive development in this case, so somebody's listening.
All right, finally, moving on.
Sorry about that, folks, but this is really important stuff and I have a lot of information to get to you.
How to read the memo today.
Cause we'll be back in a little while.
Kim Strassel's piece is excellent.
I can't put it in the show notes because it's subscriber only and people just go crazy.
They send me emails, stop sending me stuff.
I have to subscribe to it.
All right.
I'll just read through it then.
We'll make it real.
They do.
They go nuts about it.
I don't blame you.
Okay.
First she says, listen, look for the rationale.
This is a critical point.
This is the great synopsis.
Joe, The great point she makes here is, if the memo describes the rationale for opening this investigation into Trump as simply being this drunk conversation in a bar between Papadopoulos and Alexander Downer about the Russians having dirt on Clinton, we got a serious problem.
Yeah.
Drunken conversations in bars happen all the time, folks.
The question is, do they all lead to significant counterintelligence investigations against presidential candidates?
In other words, what was the rationale for spying on Trump?
That's all you got?
That a backbencher third-rate foreign policy team guy was in a bar drunk in London and said the Russians may have dirt on Hillary?
That's just so you start a counterintelligence investigation at the Trump?
If that's the best rationale you've got, we're in trouble.
So while reading the memo, look for the rationale and the reason they started this investigation.
Secondly, tools and evidence.
Now I kind of hinted at this before when they say tools and evidence look for the tools and evidence used to gather the tools used to gather evidence in the investigation.
In other words was the dossier a tool?
Or was it evidence?
And was the dossier used in part?
Did they acknowledge it was used in part?
Or was it the entire basis for the FISA warrant?
I told you before, and I mean it sound, it doesn't matter.
The bottom line is they swore that it was true.
But look at the tools.
Was FISA warrants used?
And in that FISA warrant, was the dossier part of that?
And was it in part or in whole?
You see where I'm going with this Joe?
Yeah, I sure do.
Third, Look for material omissions.
In other words, did the FBI swear in open court to information that they knew was being provided by someone working for Hillary Clinton, i.e.
Christopher Steele and Cody Shearer, who I just told you about before, a longtime Clinton operative.
Were they feeding information to the FBI?
If they were, this is important, this is the omissions part.
Look for the omissions.
Did they not tell that to a FISA court judge?
Holy Moses, if they didn't tell that FISA court judge, or that FISA court series of judges, I would be really pissed off.
Let me get this straight.
If I'm the judge, you walk in my court, you give me a basket full of information paid for by Democrat operatives, and you don't tell me that that's where it came from?
Now you see why people are panicking?
You think there may be some civil liability here?
Some jobs lost?
Potential criminal prosecutions?
Don't know!
You don't have Macho Man, do you?
We haven't heard him in a while.
Gosh, we gotta get him back, Joe.
We gotta rescue him.
Oh yeah!
This is gonna be one of those moments.
I mean, look for material omissions.
Another part.
Look for duration of surveillance.
This is where it relates to Carter Page.
If the memo includes the duration of the surveillance, how long did this go on?
Folks, I just told you, I don't know Carter Page.
I've never met Carter Page.
But if Carter Page is now the impetus for this, because remember, Joe, the Democrats are trying to rescue this process.
Oh, no, no, Carter Page did it.
There was an investigation before.
What did the investigation turn up?
Oh, nothing.
Well, now this is where Strassel, in a brilliant piece, says, well, what was the duration of the surveillance then?
In other words, if the extension, Joe, is your key argument, this was an extension of a prior investigation, well, how did you keep extending it?
What was the duration of the surveillance if you didn't find anything?
Why isn't Carter Page in jail?
In other words, if you had this, you see where I'm going with this, Joe?
If the surveillance continued on and on, and you kept asking for an extension, where was the evidence that you actually had something you were investigating?
Folks, that's not the way the criminal or FISA process works.
It has to be extended in time blocks because if you don't find any evidence, the person gets their civil liberties back.
They don't have to be spied on anymore.
What was the duration of the surveillance?
How long were you spying on Page?
And if you didn't find anything, why did you keep going back to the court?
Is it possible you weren't looking for Page at all?
You were just using Page to get into the Trump team?
Hmm.
Finally, this is my addition to this, but she alludes to it too, I don't want to take credit for it, but this is, I want to be very specific about this part.
Who verified the asset?
Christopher Steele was an asset to the FBI.
That's jargon inside baseball talk for basically someone, a source for the FBI.
There is a unit within the FBI, a unit that verifies assets, Joe.
This is very important.
You can't walk into the FBI with terrorism information and start a counterintelligence investigation.
Why?
Because the FBI be chasing its tail all the time.
There are a lot of people who go in and go, Oh, my neighbor Joey Bagadona is a terrorist.
Well, how do you know?
I don't know.
I saw him one day walk outside with a copy of the Koran.
Uh, nah, that's not good.
We don't do that here.
Okay, folks, this is a constitutional republic.
That's not a terrorism investigation.
That's stereotypically nonsensical behavior, okay?
On your part.
No, I'm serious.
I mean, you just don't do that.
It's a free country.
Free to practice, thankfully, whatever religion you want.
There is a process.
There is an asset verification unit.
They do this.
Who verified the asset?
Who verified Steele?
Did John Brennan and the CIA have something to do with this?
Wink and a nod, folks.
Look for Brennan's name.
Look for Brennan's name in the memo.
See where it comes up.
Brennan, a known political player his entire life.
Brennan, the CIA director under Obama.
Very close to Obama.
Yeah.
Look for Brennan's name in that.
See who verified that asset.
See if Brennan knew anything about it.
It's important.
All right, folks.
We're not done for today.
I got a busy day, but when this memo comes out, whatever time, give us about, I don't know, Joe, 45 minutes afterwards?
Let me read it.
Let me pick out what I think is critical in there, the bombshells in it, which I'm sure there will be, and we'll be talking again real quick.
But please, go to my website, Bongino.com, subscribe to my email list.
I will get you these articles today.
They're really good.
We'll be back.
▲
Export Selection