Suspiciously, the recent indictment of multiple Russians by the special counsel was missing something.
Why are leading Democrats now turning on Obama?
Here’s the full transcript of the December 2016 press conference in which former President Obama downplayed Russian meddling in the 2016 election.
Are you absolutely sure the Russians hacked the DNC? This is an older piece that challenges that premise.
Can President Trump be charged with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional authority?
A Facebook manager is acknowledging that parts of the media’s Russian narrative are not true.
This piece debunks the growing liberal attacks on the NRA.
Copyright CRTV. All rights reserved.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.
Hi, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
Strap yourself in.
It's going to be a bumpy ride.
Yeah, I know.
We've got a lot to talk about today, folks.
There's been some just incredible breaking news over the weekend.
For those of you who listen to my special addendum show...
On Friday, which was about a 10-minute add-on to the normal show content, there were some indictments against Russians on Friday.
I'm going to go into more of it today, because folks...
Something's rotten in Denmark!
Yeah, yeah.
I had some time to digest these indictments over the weekend, and something's up about these indictments.
I think they're hiding something significant, and we're gonna scramble your eggs a bit in this show.
And as always, I don't rehearse any of this with Joe, so I want a genuine reaction.
But today's show brought to you by our buddies at WaxRx.
Hey, when your ears aren't clean, they can get really uncomfortable.
They itch, they're painful, you can get plugged up, making it harder to hear.
Many people use cotton swabs, candling, or drugstore remedies to clean their ears, but they don't really do the job.
They can be dangerous.
You're not supposed to stick those cotton swabs in your ears.
Now you can get a real solution for stubborn earwax, the WaxRx Ear Wash System.
Joe loves this, by the way, because Joe has a... Joe, right?
Because you... Joe, this is an issue for you all the time.
My ears are horrible.
I do mine too. The WaxRx earwash system is doctor developed and works safely when other products fail.
The WaxRx system is the method physicians trust the most and it's just like the system they use
in their own offices. WaxRx comes with everything you need to safely clean out your wax and
condition your ears conveniently at home for less than the cost of a doctor's visit. You don't have
to go to the doctor. The doctor developed WaxRx system uses special wax softening drops and it
breaks down the earwax inside your ear.
It has a specially engineered pump fitted with a unique tip to gently deliver the perfect amount of cleansing pressure to flush wax away.
Finally, the pH condition formula rinses and soothes your ears making for the ultimate, most complete earwax removal system available.
Thanks for supporting our sponsors.
It's a great company.
Love these guys.
Visit GoWaxRx.com.
That's gowaxrx.com.
Order your reusable earwash system today.
Give you a promo code.
We always love those.
Dan, my first name, D-A-N.
Have it shipped free right to your front door.
gowaxrx.com.
Thanks to WaxRx.
Okay.
Fascinating piece I read over the weekend.
So this indictment comes out and of course, Liberals are now, they're telling you they're not panicking, but they are panicking, folks.
And why are they panicking?
Because, you know, we've been told from early on in the transition to the Trump presidency throughout that there is a big conspiracy with the Russians and the Trump team to collude, you know, air quotes collude, to overturn the results of the election and influence the election.
Yet we had more indictments.
We had 13 more indictments.
We've had indictments and prosecutions and pleas from Mike Flynn, which is becoming more and more suspicious by the day, by the way.
Paul Manafort.
We've had George Papadopoulos.
And we still, folks, have not seen any evidence of collusion.
Boom.
Nothing.
Now, here is what's unbelievably suspicious about this indictment, the Manafort indictment, and other ones.
There is still no conspiracy To collude to overthrow an election in any of these indictments.
Now you may say, but Dan, there were 18 USC 371.
Manafort got charged with conspiracy.
The Russians here got charged with conspiracy.
But folks, you know, I have to take this show slowly today because you can probably tell I'm getting really frustrated here.
Yeah.
I have to deal with, this is my job, I have to deal with liberals all day.
So I'm not whining, I love what I do, but I have to deal with them all day on social media, on emails I get to my email because I give out my email.
They just won't let it go.
There is the conspiracy charge, 18 U.S.C.
371, both in the indictment on Friday of the 13 Russians for meddling in the election, and the conspiracy charge leveled against Paul Manafort, make absolutely no mention of a conspiracy, criminal conspiracy, with any knowing participants of the Trump campaign.
Folks, as I've said now repeatedly, How can you conspire and not know you're conspiring?
How can you unwittingly collude?
Rosenstein, I'm repeating this for a reason, it's going to make sense in a second.
Rosenstein was crystal clear, the Deputy Attorney General at his press conference on Friday, Joe, was crystal clear that no Americans were knowingly involved in this effort by the Russians to buy Facebook ads and to cause chaos.
How can you unwittingly and unknowingly conspire?
You can't!
But you have to understand we are living in a fantasy land with liberals.
They are so deranged.
Not all of them.
I'm talking about the ones committed to this collusion thing.
There's no collusion.
They will not let it go.
Now, there's a great piece, I think, if I'm saying his name wrong and you're listening, John, I'm sorry.
John Hindraker?
Hindraker?
I'm not really sure if that's how you say his name.
Bottom line is there's a piece he has on Powerline blog that's a really good one.
It'll be in the show notes today.
Read it, because it talks about something very suspiciously missing, Joseph, from this indictment in Russia.
Now, just to be clear, What I'm talking about here, liberals keep telling you that there's a collusion, collusion, the Russians colluded with Trump to win the election.
There is no evidence of that anywhere!
None!
There is no evidence of that.
They say, oh, well, Don Trump Jr.
met with that Russian lawyer.
At Trump Tower.
Right, what happened at the meeting?
Oh, nothing.
Okay, so you're saying it was a bad idea to meet with Russians?
Alright, agreed.
Point stipulated.
How can you collude if nothing exchanges hands?
There's no collusion.
There is nothing.
There's no evidence.
The Manafort indictment was a conspiracy charge for money laundering and tax evasion.
It was not a conspiracy to collude to win an election.
It had nothing to do with the Trump team at all.
It had to do with some money, Joe, that Manafort made from his dealings with the Ukraine government that they allege he laundered and that they allege he didn't pay taxes on.
Do you understand that?
Yeah, yeah.
That has nothing to do at all with a Trump team effort to collude with Russians to win the election.
Now, the Dems are panicking here.
Because the Mueller—and folks, I'm sorry, but I have no faith in Bob Mueller anymore.
I get it.
A lot of Republicans, swamp rats, they feel like, oh, if we insult Bob Mueller, you don't have to insult him.
This is a farce.
The special counsel's a farce.
Mueller's team is a joke.
The whole thing is a farce.
It was established on this whole premise that Trump colluded, and they were going to find evidence of it, and they can't, and they keep going down and down and down and down the rat hole.
So this Powerline blog piece, to get to the point, sorry, pulling this up.
mentions that it's fascinating that in the opening paragraph of the piece of the, excuse me, of the prosecuting document show by Mueller against the Russians, it talks about how it's against the law for foreign nationals to spend money to influence U.S.
elections, I'm reading from the piece here, or for agents of foreign countries to engage in political activities without registering.
But no one in the indictments actually charged with any of that.
As a matter of fact, Joe, interestingly enough, what is it, 18 U.S.C.
30121, which says here, it is prohibited and unlawful for a foreign national, directly or indirectly, let me just go to C, because this is where it obviously happened, to make an expenditure, independent expenditure or disbursement for an electioneering communication.
It's also illegal for them to make a contribution or donation of anything of value or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution in connection with a federal state or local election.
In other words, foreign nationals cannot spend money to electioneer in the United States.
That is against the law.
Right.
But Joe, despite the fact that the Mueller charging document opens by laying all that out, it never charges them with it.
Folks, what are they hiding?
I am starting to seriously question the motives of Bob Mueller.
I get it.
The man had a distinguished career in government.
That does not absolve him of due criticism when I think something is absolutely, transparently wrong here.
Now, Joe, the question you should be asking, and you're probably doing so as the ombudsman for the audience, is, so what the hell were they charged with?
That's exactly what I've been asking.
They were charged with conspiracy.
371.
But not a conspiracy to collude with the Trump team.
They were charged with bank fraud and wire fraud, and they were charged with identity theft for basically setting up fake Facebook accounts in false names.
But why weren't they charged with trying to influence an election?
Well, the theory, uh, Hendraker... Yeah, you can see, you see where I'm going with this?
The theory that this guy Hendraker has in this Is that because if Mueller's team charges these Russians with this crime of influencing a U.S.
election that it opens up the Hillary Clinton team and Christopher Steele to
all kinds of charges later on. Now in the Hinricher piece there is a, I'll give him
some credit, he presents another viewpoint from a legal scholar who says
well that's not necessarily true because Christopher Steele didn't in effect
provide a contribution or a donation.
He was paid fair value for his services.
But my question is then, if that's the case and this payments to Christopher Steele, folks, I promise I'll sum this up.
Don't lose me.
This is important because it speaks to a larger narrative that I'm going to get to in a minute.
About how the entire Democrat House of Cards is falling down in front of our very eyes.
If the payments to Steele, Joe, were entirely legitimate through Fusion GPS and Hillary, then why didn't Hillary pay Fusion GPS directly?
Why did they go through a law firm first and launder it as legal services?
Why?
What I'm telling you folks here, and let me be fair here, I am speculating a bit.
I am giving you a bit of opinion.
I've got some quality sources, but I haven't been led completely down this path where I'm absolutely confident what I'm saying.
I'm just going to be, because I don't like that, but I'm telling you based on a collection of evidence, things I've seen based on the Manafort indictment, the failure at any point for anyone to plead guilty to a conspiracy to collude to overthrow an election or to engage and influence a foreign election, nobody has pled guilty to that!
There is no evidence of that.
I'm starting to believe that the Mueller probe is hiding something.
And what I think they're hiding There is a more detailed and layered arrangement between Hillary, Fusion GPS, and Russian sources of information than we're being led on to believe.
Now, let me wrap this up.
That may be the reason That they did not indict these Russians for influencing a U.S.
election, just to be clear.
Because, Joe, it opens up Pandora's box for Hillary and her team, then, to be indicted as well for basically paying a foreign national to gather information from the Russians to, in fact, influence a U.S.
election.
Listeners, we all got that.
We're with you, Dano.
And by the way, I like this piece because I always like when they give you point-counterpoint.
He says, hey, listen, I was contacted by another legal scholar, like I said, who disagrees and here's why.
And he lays it out.
But folks, that is a fascinating premise.
What else are they hiding here?
Now, I'm going to take you further down the rabbit hole.
So just to be clear.
And again, I beg your forgiveness for walking through this stuff slowly, but I do not want you to leave this episode in any way confused about where I'm going or what I'm saying.
I'm going to tell you what I'm going to tell you, I'm going to tell you, and then I'm going to tell you what I told you.
Who?
The indictments in this case so far.
Liberals are always celebrating these indictments.
Look, we got Manafort, we got Papadopoulos, we got Flynn, we got 13 Russians.
Ladies and gentlemen, the entire liberal credo here, their life ethos, is that Trump colluded with the Russians to win the election.
None of these indictments say that.
Ladies and gentlemen, just read them.
It doesn't say that anywhere.
It says Russians meddled in our election.
By the way, on behalf of Hillary in many cases, just read line 53 in the indictment on Friday.
Just read it.
It's in the show notes on Friday.
Just read it.
Line 53 where they talk about support Hillary, support American Muslims.
That was one of the groups that the Russians paid for to knock Trump.
So the Russians were paying to hurt Trump and to help Trump, to hurt Hillary and to help Hillary.
Because as I've said repeatedly, the Russians engage in mutually assured information destruction.
They want chaos.
Now what I'm telling you is this Friday indictment, as I've gone through it on the weekend and read multiple pieces on it, I think this Hinraker guy is onto something.
That the reason they did not charge these guys with the crime they talk about, opening up their own legal charging document, they did not charge them with trying to influence an election as foreign nationals.
30121.
30121.
Which is...
Sorry, folks.
I'm just... It's just... I'm wondering, after listening to this, how you can't charge them with that.
I'm glad you said that, because that leads us to point number two here.
Point number two, I was just reading through a piece, folks.
I'm sorry, I don't mean to sound distracted.
I'm glad you said that, Joe.
But because I believe they're covering something, folks.
The 30,000 missing emails, the entire premise of the story to begin with, that the DNC was hacked, Trump colluded with the Russians to get the information out, I think this is all falling apart at the exact same time.
I think there is some more information out there on Hillary's relationship to Perkins Coie, the law firm, and the Russians that they're hiding, Joe.
And if they charge someone with that crime, foreign influence in an election, they're going to be asked, the Mueller team, why they didn't charge Hillary.
And they need some plausible deniability right now.
Dig it.
I got you.
Now, what could they be hiding?
All right.
I'm going to get to that.
Just bear with me, folks.
Today's show also brought to you by our friends at iTarget.
Thank you to iTarget for supporting the show, keeping it free for our listeners.
iTarget's the best home system for dry-firing your firearm and training how to use your firearm.
Anybody can fire a firearm.
The question is, can you fire it accurately?
Self-defense advocates, Second Amendment supporters, You're a hunter, police officers, military folks, or you look, you know, you're just looking to buy a firearm, learn how to use it effectively.
This is a great system.
Folks, competitive shooters try fire 10 times more than they live fire.
Now, what is this system?
The iTargetPro system.
It's the letter I, by the way.
iTargetPro.com.
That's iTargetPro.com.
It is a laser bullet.
My father loves this thing, by the way.
He can't put it down.
A laser bullet they will send to you.
It goes in the firearm you have now.
You don't have to make any special manipulations.
You have a nine millimeter weapon, they'll send you a nine millimeter round, right?
It also comes with a target and a phone app.
When you drop that round into a safely unloaded gun, check it, check it twice, check it three times, you're gonna drop that laser bullet and when you depress the trigger of your firearm and you aim at the target, it's gonna show you exactly where that round went.
You can practice.
My father can't put this thing down.
He can practice with it all day.
I mean, see, I'm not messing with you, Joe.
You know, listen, sometimes with, this is legit.
My dad can't, he called me today.
Man, I love this thing.
This thing's great.
I'm telling you, I love my father to death, but man, this thing's great, man.
You know, I just sent him another one.
So he loves it.
It's at itargetpro.com.
That's itargetpro.com.
You drop this laser bullet in.
You don't have to make any special manipulations to your gun.
You can work on your grip.
You can work on your sight alignment.
You can work on your trigger control.
All in the safety and security of your own home.
Go pick it up.
It's available at itargetpro.com.
That's itargetpro.com.
Promo code Dan for 10% off.
Dan.
Okay, getting back to this.
So what are they hiding?
Does Mueller know, Joe?
So we ended up, again, if I'm losing anyone, stop me.
Does Mueller know something about Hillary's relationship with the Russians, that they're afraid when it comes out, if they charge these Russians on Friday with trying to influence a U.S.
election as foreign nationals, that it would expose them to charges?
Why aren't you charging Hillary too?
I think they may.
And here's why I'm starting to think something's up.
Adam Schiff made some very, very interesting comments this week.
Now, who's Adam Schiff?
Adam Schiff is the Democratic ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee there.
And Schiff, after the Friday revelations about Russians interfering in our election, there was an interesting revelation, if you listen to the special commentary we did afterwards, there was an interesting revelation in there, Joe, that the Russian meddling started in 2014.
Now, Donald Trump's candidacy did not start for president, obviously, in 2014.
So one of the, even among some of the liberal media folks, some of the commentary has been, well, I mean, when are we going to start pointing out that Obama may have dropped the ball here as well?
That he, I mean, he, listen, folks, if it started in 2014 and Trump's campaign for president didn't start till way after that, Then we have a serious problem here because, think about it, if Russians were meddling in the election all the way back to 2014, Trump wasn't even running at the time, then how is it that they can possibly have gotten involved in the election exclusively for the purpose of electing Trump?
It doesn't make sense.
Ladies and gentlemen, Democrats are starting to recognize this, that they've got a problem.
We got a problem!
What is the one I always mess up, Joe?
I'm coming for you!
Elizabeth!
Yeah, Elizabeth, that's it.
I always mess that up.
Elizabeth, that's right.
Elizabeth, I'm coming for you.
They got a problem.
They know they've got a problem.
Adam Schiff has said as much.
Listen to this.
A piece on the Washington Examiner.
Be at the show notes today.
Bongino.com, along with the Powerline blog piece.
Please read it.
If you join my email list, I'll email it right to your email box.
Great piece, The Washington Examiner, talking about these comments Schiff made that, you know, he's like, hey, listen, this is, you know, this is kind of screwed up.
This is Schiff, the Democrat.
He says, this here's from The Washington Examiner piece.
The comment comes after Schiff said the Obama administration's lax response to the 2014 hack of Sony helped encourage the Russians to pull off their influence campaign in the 2016 election.
I think that others around the world watch that and determine that cyber is a cost-free intervention, Schiff told NBC's Andrea Mitchell, as Rush would say, at an event Saturday.
He added the Obama administration should have done more to alert the American public there was interference in the 2016 election.
Whoa!
Whoa, whoa, whoa!
This is one of the biggest hack sellout Democrats up on the hill.
Adam Schiff, who for two years now has been telling us that the Russians colluded with Trump to win the election.
He's now coming around and Obama bears some blame too.
What is going on here, folks?
Say what?
Say what is right.
I'm telling you what's going on.
I alluded to point one here.
There is information, I believe, that's out there.
That is coming in the IG report.
Remember the Inspector General report, Michael Horowitz's report on Hillary and the handling of her email case that's due to drop in March?
I'm absolutely convinced that there is going to be information in that report about Hillary and contacts with foreign governments that are unsavory at best.
And they are going to have a lot of splainin' to do!
So all of a sudden, the Democrats, after Friday's indictment, which by the way, contained again for the thousandth time, no evidence of collusion with the Trump team at all, they're starting to panic.
We're like, oh my gosh, we don't have anything.
We have spent two years talking about this.
By the way, not a coincidence.
The Republicans are breaking even in the congressional generic poll balloting.
So think about what's going on behind the scenes, Joe.
The Democrat hacks.
For two years, and I'm not talking about you voters out there, I'm talking about the hacks on the hill.
For two years I've been fully invested in Trump is Satan, Trump colluded with the Russians to win, and the entire thing is falling apart as the tax cuts kick in and people like him and the Republicans are recovering.
They even took the lead in the generic congressional ballot and they're like, holy mmm, We just spent two years on this, we have not a scintilla of evidence, we're never gonna get Trump because there's no there there, and all of a sudden the Republicans are creepin'!
They're creepin'!
They're creepin' up!
What do we do?
Even the hacks are getting worried now.
Now they know the IG report's gonna drop soon.
The Inspector General report.
Looking into the Hillary email investigation.
By the way, that's been the source of all of these negative stories about the FBI mishandling of the case.
All of this stuff's getting ready to drop, and they are panicking.
And I guarantee you, in that IG report, there's going to be some campaign contacts with foreign nationals that are unsavory.
And that is a damn good theory by Hindraker as to why Mueller did not charge them with foreign influence.
The Russians, foreign influence in an election.
Because if he did, the public is going to say, hey, what about the Hillary folks?
We got some stuff there, too.
I don't trust Bob Mueller as far as I can throw him, folks.
One more thing I brought up in the past.
I think Schiff and the Democrats, and I think to some respect Mueller, who at this point seems to be clearly just vindictive towards Trump.
It doesn't seem like this guy has, his sole purpose, Joe, was to determine if Trump colluded with the Russians to win the election.
He can't find any evidence and he keeps going and going and going.
I think also those Hillary Obama emails I keep telling you about, we know they exist, we just haven't seen them.
I've told you over and over that if those emails in any way talk about the coordinated use of money, Through Perkins Coie, the law firm they paid, Hillary that is, to pay Fusion GPS to get information from the Russians.
If Obama was aware of that, and aware of payments made that made their way to foreigners, foreign Russians, to give information that made it into these charging documents, they are in a world of pain.
We haven't seen those emails.
But, folks, we know the emails exist.
We also know that Obama for America, his campaign arm that, excuse me, Organizing for America, it was a Freudian slip, it was Obama for America.
After he couldn't run for office anymore, his campaign operation became like an outside spending effort, Organizing for America.
But it was still all of the Obama people.
Those same people made hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to the same law firm that paid foreign nationals to gather information on Trump.
Do you see how this ties into what I said about the first thing here?
That one of... and if I'm confusing you folks... No, you're not.
I'm with you.
Anyway, yeah, I see what you're saying.
My sincere apologies.
I'm really trying.
The counter to the argument that, oh, Mueller didn't charge these foreign nationals were trying to influence an election directly because they're trying to protect Hillary's nonsense, because Hillary's payments to Christopher Steele were on the up and up even though he was a foreign national.
Right, right, right.
Hillary didn't pay Christopher Steele.
Hillary's campaign paid to a law firm for legal services.
That's why I'm telling you I think they're hiding something!
Obama's OFA, Organizing for America, made payments to the same law firm!
What I'm trying to tell you is that theory to me would hold water, and I don't know the guy who wrote the counter-opinion.
He sounds like a very reasonable guy in the Powerline piece.
He doesn't sound like he's got an agenda at all.
I mean it.
But I think what he's leaving out here is if that were the case, and Hillary wasn't worried at all, and the Mueller team wasn't worried at all about the Hillary people, then why did Hillary launder the money, or at least give, I shouldn't say launder the money, why did they give the money to Perkins Coie to pay Fusion GPS if it was all on the up and up?
Folks, this doesn't make sense.
This thing stinks.
They know something.
I'm telling you, the entangled web between the Hillary team, Fusion GPS, Steele, and the Russians is deeper than I think has been revealed yet.
And this is why the Mueller team has to be very delicate in everything they charge.
They have yet to charge anyone with actual collusion to overthrow the election in conjunction with the Trump team.
It's only been, Joe, almost a year now.
This is the coup de grace.
All right?
Over the weekend, I did an appearance on Fox & Friends, and I mentioned this to them, and they pulled up the sound later.
I have the sound for you.
Get this cut ready, Joe.
This is why... Now, I've told you a couple reasons why I think Hillary... And just to be clear, to rewind a little bit, and again, I'm sorry, I'm trying to insult you.
I just want to rewind just a little bit before we get to the sound, because it's important.
The premise of what I'm telling you is the Mueller team's panicking because they got nothing.
They had nothing.
They've got nothing.
The Mueller team is just charging people with stuff totally tangential to their mission.
Collusion with Russia to win an election.
They have none of that.
They have Russians for Facebook ads, by the way, most, not most, some of which support Hillary, some of which support Trump.
That is not in any way collusion with Trump.
The Manafort thing had to do with his business dealings in the Ukraine.
There's no conspiracy to collude here that anybody's pled guilty to and there's no charges coming forward.
It's not happening.
They're panicking.
The Mueller team's panicking.
The Democrats are panicking, too, because with each passing indictment for everything other than collusion, They look like a bunch of, the sky is falling!
The sky is falling!
The sky is falling!
They got nothing!
Now, what was the entire Russian collusion story premised on?
This is important.
Go back to 628 and listen.
Episode 628, if you missed any of this.
The entire Russian collusion story in a sentence or two was the Democrats hacked the DNC, excuse me, the Russians hacked the DNC.
Russians hacked the DNC, had the information.
They colluded with the Trump team to get that information out there to alter the results of a presidential election.
That is the entire premise of the collusion narrative.
But what if the Russians didn't hack the DNC?
Folks, I know I've kind of hit on this a little bit in some of my past shows, but do you understand that if the Russians themselves, as an organized intelligence entity, the Russian intelligence services, did not hack the DNC, that their entire – you understand, right, that their entire story – the whole story falls apart.
You following, Joe?
Absolutely.
The entire premise of the story.
Yeah.
Was the Russians hacked the DNC, the Trump team colluded with them to get the information on WikiLeaks to alter the results of the election.
If the Russians didn't hack the DNC, how could you collude to get the information out if the Russians didn't hack it?
Now, you may say, Dan, 17 intelligence agencies agreed that the Russians hacked the DNC.
No, they didn't.
I'm going to include in the show notes, again, another piece by Zero Hedge.
It's a pretty good one.
It's an older piece, but it is absolutely applicable right now into the sound I'm about to play for you.
It goes over thoroughly how the FBI... I wrote this in capital letters, Joe.
The FBI, ladies and gentlemen, never forget this, ever.
Never has looked at the DNC servers.
Matter of fact, Joe, quoting Jim Comey, there were multiple requests made to look at those DNC servers that, Joe, were hacked by the Russians.
That were denied!
Now BuzzFeed is suing them, as I told you on last week's show, for evidence that the DNC servers were hacked because BuzzFeed's being sued about the dossier and needs evidence that the DNC was in fact hacked by the Russians!
Denied.
Why?
Why is it denied?
If the DNC is so sure they were hacked by the Russians, and that Trump then colluded with the Russians to get this information out there, if they're so sure of it, why not just let us look?
Why not let the FBI do a forensic analysis?
Let me suggest to you that this cut by Barack Obama, this is his last press conference.
After Hillary loses the election.
This is in December.
Election day was in November.
He's still the president, obviously, but he's as lame a lame duck as you're gonna get.
He's about to lose the presidency in a month.
He gives a press conference, and here is the genesis of the entire collusion fairy tale.
This was not some elaborate, complicated espionage scheme.
They hacked into Some Democratic Party emails that contained pretty routine stuff.
Some of it embarrassing or uncomfortable because I suspect that if any of us got our emails hacked into, there might be some things that we wouldn't want suddenly appearing on the front page of a newspaper or a telecast, even if there wasn't anything particularly illegal or controversial about it.
And then it just took off.
What?
Come again?
Did you see what he did there?
Just took off.
Just took off?
It just took magically, Joe.
He doesn't mention, by the way, that the entire story was then fed to liberal media hacks who ran with it.
And printed it, and printed it over and over again.
Ladies and gentlemen, that is the genesis.
That is the most important soundbite I've ever played on this show.
Ever.
And forgive me, I've been looking for it for a long time, and I'm not going to tell you how I came around to it again, but you know who sent it.
But they were right.
That is the genesis of the entire Collusion fairy tale.
Obama up there that day, and notice what he does!
Because, folks, this goes to show you how these... Obama's lying!
Now, I know it's considered a bad manners show in political commentary to call people liars.
Folks, I'm sorry.
Obama's a liar.
He is lying here.
He says two things that are outright lies.
First thing he says Is this is not some elaborate, sophisticated scheme?
Well, what is it?
Obama?
Now I say he's lying because one, I agree with him that it was not necessarily an elaborate, sophisticated scheme, but that's not why he's saying it.
He's saying it because Obama understands that in his last press conference where he was expected to be handing the reins to Hillary to wipe clean the whole spying operation on Trump to never be seen again.
As Ren and Stimpy say, where they go, nobody knows.
It was going to disappear to the land of the left socks.
You ever watch Ren and Stimpy?
Oh yeah.
Greatest show ever.
It was never ever going to appear again.
Now he doesn't know what to do.
It's a month later.
He can't come out and talk about the elaborate, sophisticated scheme that, believe me, was sophisticated.
Hillary was paying a law firm to pay Fusion GPS to pay the Russians to get money.
Oh, it was sophisticated, but he's lying about it because he can't talk about it.
Now, to be clear, he's addressing the Russian scheme there, but he has to minimize it.
But why?
Why?
I mean, you should be saying, but Dan, I don't get it.
For the last two years now, or, you know, year plus, we've been told by the Democrats that this was a scheme with Trump to overthrow an election.
They got involved in Purple State, they switched, they changed votes in people's minds.
Isn't it in Obama's interest, then, to go up if this is where it all starts?
This press conference is where the whole thing starts.
Isn't it in his interest to say, what an elaborate, sophisticated scheme the Russians had?
Gosh!
We got duped!
Why wouldn't he say that?
Because he's Barack Obama.
I worked with him.
I'm not patting myself on the back.
I'm not trying to impress you.
I did.
This is a fact of life.
I've been around this guy a long time.
He's a proud dude.
You think he's going to leave off it?
He doesn't even like Hillary, by the way.
You think... I'm not kidding.
You think for a second he's gonna leave office and talk about what a numbskull his administration was?
That they sat back and watched the Russians destroy our entire electoral process?
Do you think for a second he's gonna do that?
But... But... Hillary's got him by the... She's grabbing... Why?
Because he can't throw her under the bus.
Because the spying scandal needs to be covered up.
He needs Hillary's cooperation in that.
And also, as I said to you now once, twice, a hundred times, Hillary was tactically brilliant.
Hillary emailed Obama from her private email account, roping him into the whole scheme.
Obama can't throw Hillary under the bus because he goes down with her.
He's on her private email scheme.
He's in public statement saying he knew nothing about her private email system while he was emailing her!
Gosh, Hillary, I gotta tell you, for someone as ideologically dangerous, you are tactically brilliant.
I mean it.
Her team is smart.
They roped his butt right in.
He can't throw her under the bus.
So he has to do two things in this presser.
And go back and rewind it if you'd like.
That's what's great about podcasts.
He does two things.
First, he has to save his own ass.
And he has to minimize it while still acknowledging it happened.
So the first thing he says is, well, this wasn't some elaborate scheme here.
This wasn't like James Bond stuff.
But he can't say it didn't happen.
Now keep in mind, what he said there contradicts entirely what the Democrats have been telling us for well over a year now.
They've said the exact opposite, actually.
That it was just an elaborate scheme to overthrow an election.
There's Obama on the record trying to protect his legacy.
He doesn't want to be the president known for Russian infiltration into the election system.
He doesn't.
He's a proud guy.
Yeah, I've been around him.
You may not like him.
I certainly don't like his politics.
But I'm telling you, he's a proud guy.
You see, I've been around the guy for three years of my life.
He has to minimize the scandal.
But minimize the scandal's impact on him.
But he also, Joe, has to sow the seeds for a bigger narrative to come later.
And he sows the Chia Pet seeds and he waters the Chia Pet seeds for this big, hairy, scandaled Chia Pet by saying something he knows is absolutely false.
And trust me, he knows what he's saying is false here.
He says, and you know, they hacked the DNC, and the Russians got in there, and you know, it wasn't boring stuff, it wasn't like anything illegal, the emails, but they hacked the DNC.
He knows this isn't true!
He knows it's not true!
It is false!
There was no evidence at that point that the Russians hacked the DNC!
Folks, please read the Zero Hedge piece.
I'll leave you with one of the key pieces of evidence.
That CrowdStrike, which is the firm that analyzed the DNC computers, by the way, paid for by Perkins Coie, who paid Fusion GPS, who paid Chris Steele, who paid Russians for information.
Also, Perkins Coie made hundreds of thousands of dollars for organizing for America, Obama's former campaign arm.
Okay, so they pay CrowdStrike conveniently to come in there and look at the DNC computers and CrowdStrike says, ah, the Russians did it!
And they point to, here's one piece of information that should make you laugh hysterically.
One piece of evidence that they used to determine, Joe, that the Russians did it is one of the pieces of software they're saying was also involved in the hacking into of a Ukrainian military artillery app.
And that the hacking into of this artillery app, Joe, caused massive battlefield casualties.
So in other words, you get what I'm saying?
They're saying, look, the similar type of thing that happened with the Ukrainians happened at the DNC, therefore the Russians did it.
Here's the problem, folks.
Okay!
Both the maker of the app and the Ukrainians, who by the way were very pro-Hillary, are like, uh, hey, uh, daddy-o?
That didn't happen!
Folks, there's more.
Could the Russians have hacked the DNC?
Yes.
What I'm telling you is 17 intelligence agencies at no point came to a conclusion that the Russians hacked the DNC.
What they came to with the conclusion was, was that there was similar patterns involved because the intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies involved in the report never looked at the servers, the computers, never.
They're relying on a now, I don't want to say thoroughly discredited, but largely discredited report put together by CrowdStrike that uses information that even the other parties the information's about are saying, no, that's not true.
That's not what happened.
The Ukrainians were pro-Hillary.
They're saying, no, no, that's not, we didn't suffer battlefield losses because they hacked into the app.
The app maker, by the way, Joe, is saying, that's not what happened either.
Folks, what am I telling you?
I'm telling you that Obama knew this was made up.
Obama knew that the DNC being hacked by the Russians was entirely made up.
Obama went out and gave this press conference, laying the groundwork for the Democrats to destroy the Trump presidency later.
I'm telling you also that that narrative is now falling apart and falling apart quickly.
There is no mention in the indictment of Russians hacking the DNC computers.
There's no evidence of that.
The Democrats know this.
The Democrats also know if that is not true, then Trump colluding to get the information from the Russians that they hacked can't be true either because the Russians may not have done it.
I'm not absolving the Russians.
If you've been following my show, by the way, they are clearly a geopolitical foe that needs to be dealt with harshly.
Listen to the show and you'll see.
But that's a different show.
I'm dealing with evidence now of collusion that doesn't exist.
The Democrats are panicking, folks.
Their entire story is falling apart.
I think the Mueller team is panicking, because that story's falling apart, too, and their sole reason for being was to determine that there was collusion between the Russians, but they have nothing.
And that is why, to sum this up.
I believe Mueller's team did not charge these Russians with influencing the election with that specific charge, even though they describe what they're talking about in the charging document.
Because Hillary's team, I think, later on is going to have been shown to have tried to make stuff go away here, along with the Obama team, by creating false narratives about hacking that didn't exist.
I also believe that's why Adam Schiff now is starting to throw Obama under the bus.
I think the Democrats absolutely know that Obama's team right now is in deep, deep, mmm.
You know what I mean?
With the spying scandal?
Heavy shift going on, man.
Heavy shift going on.
We gotta put that one on.
This is heavy shift.
Heavy shift everywhere.
They realize Obama was the genesis of a lot of this.
Obama propagated the myth that the Russians hacked the DNC.
The Obama team was responsible for the spying and the unmasking and the work with the British intelligence services and other foreign services to spy on Trump.
And they're realizing that pretty darn soon, they're going to have to come clean.
And as I've said to you in multiple episodes in the past, they are going to have to take a bath at some point soon.
All right, I got a couple other things to get to here.
One, which was mind-blowing this week, and that has not made the mainstream media coverage the way it should, because it's a mind-blowing statement by Facebook.
And if you missed it, you need to hear about it.
All right, get to that in a second.
Alright, Filterby, folks.
Dallas, 11 degrees.
New York, super cold.
I went up there for a Christmas party.
It was freezing.
Minneapolis, it's minus 5 for the Super Bowl.
Winter's in full swing.
Your HVAC system's working.
OT!
Overtime, baby!
If you aren't properly maintaining your filters, you're not only breathing unhealthy air, you might find yourself with no heat and thousands in repairs.
Thumbs down for that.
Now there's a better way with Filterby.com.
America's leading provider of HVAC filters for homes and small businesses.
You got a factory with a thousand filters?
These are your guys.
You got a house with four or five filters?
These are your guys too.
They make their products right here in America.
Filterbuy.com carries over 600 different filter sizes, including custom options, all shipped free within 24 hours.
Manufactured, as I said, right here in the great old U.S.
of A.
Don't let it break down like me!
Cost me a fortune.
What a headache that was.
the way up to hospital grade so you'll be removing dangerous pollen, mold, dust, and
other allergy-aggravating pollution while maximizing the efficiency of your HVAC system.
Don't let it break down like me.
It cost me a fortune.
What a headache that was.
Right now you can save 5% when you set up auto delivery so you never need to think about
air filters again.
Save money.
Save time.
Breathe better with Filterby.com.
That's filterbuy.com, filterbuy.com.
Thanks for supporting them, by the way.
By the way, there's no promo code for them, but trust me, folks, they know.
Thank you to everyone who emails me.
It's filterbuy.com, but they know it's coming from our audience.
Believe me, they are very happy, so we appreciate you supporting them, filterbuy.com.
Story and IJ review, I will put up at the show notes today.
If you missed it, you got to read it.
It's a great one about the Facebook, their vice president of advertising.
I don't know this guy's politics.
I personally don't care what his politics are, but it's a pretty amazing story.
Sorry, getting text or in the show as always.
The Facebook VP of advertising, this guy's admitted And you can read his exact quote that most of the advertising, Joe, that the Russians paid for was done, listen to this folks, after the election.
This is their VP of advertising.
This is not some local backbencher in Facebook.
Now, he puts up a pretty dispositive statement that, listen, I get that this doesn't correspond with the media Trump narrative.
This is him saying this kind of stuff.
But the fact of the matter is a lot of the Facebook ads, so basically we have Russian Facebook trolls, paid for advertisings after the election.
Folks, how can you collude to win an election with the Russians to get information hacked into the DNC if the DNC, number one, wasn't hacked by the Russians, and number two, the Facebook advertising you paid for, supposedly to advance the Trump cause, was done after the election?
Yeah, it's kind of tough.
It's kind of tough to... Joe's like shaking his head, like, yeah, yeah, I don't... This does not require even an audience ombudsman.
This is the VP of advertising, folks.
I'm going to put the article up at IJ because it's really damning.
And I don't think this, and by the way, of course, liberals are going after him because as I opened up the show, liberals are insane.
Not all of you, but the liberals absolutely committed to this collusion fairytale.
You're nuts.
You've been driven mad.
There's no amount of evidence that can be produced to get you off this laser site that you believe Trump colluded with the Russians to win the election, despite the fact that you have absolutely no evidence, not a scintilla of evidence is going to be produced because it didn't happen.
You will continue to go, and by the way, you may very well lose the midterm elections because of it.
Because as the tax cuts are rolling in, and other legislative priorities are moving forward on the GOP side, you guys are obsessed with this dead narrative.
Facebook, VP himself, oh most of the spending was after the election.
Well how did you win an election if the spending was after the election due to the spending?
I hadn't heard that, by the way.
I hadn't heard that.
Yeah, yeah.
A lot of people haven't because, of course, the media should be covering this on the front page.
Facebook VP of Advertising admits most of the Trump spending, anti-and-pro, by the way, yes, anti-and-pro Trump, was done after the election.
It's alleged the spending was done to alter the results of the same election.
It doesn't make sense.
Those two things can't be true.
All right.
One more just quick wrap-up.
I'm sorry.
I know I spent a lot of time in this today, folks, but it's a really important story.
And I just feel like, you know, I kind of lost it a little bit on Fox & Friends this weekend.
I mean, lost it.
I lost my mind or anything.
But, you know, I just feel like we're losing the whole country, folks.
I feel like the Republic is under very sincere grave attacks by police staters on the left and right.
And by Russians who are absolutely using these police staters on the left and right and these hyper-partisans to cover up their tracks and nobody wants to tell the truth.
I tweeted out a tweet.
Can we all agree?
All right, the Russians attacked us and have been attacking our democracy.
They have been forever.
They did it to cause chaos.
Right.
But do you understand, Joe, that the chaos they caused is now being advanced by partisans, not the Russians?
Yeah, they're taking advantage of it.
Sure.
They're taking advantage of it.
The Russians love this.
Finally, they're moving on to the obstruction of justice narrative.
I'm not going to spend too much time, but Andy McCarthy has another great piece I'll put up at the show notes talking about how this obstruction of justice narrative is a dead end, folks.
It's a dead end.
You can't obstruct justice for things he did legally.
They're going to say, oh, he obstructed justice because he fired the FBI director.
He fired the FBI director because the FBI director wouldn't admit that the FBI director told him he wasn't under investigation.
This may be the first time in human history a guy's charged with obstructing justice into an investigation that the distributors of justice supposedly told him wasn't his.
Does that make sense?
That Comey wouldn't say publicly that Trump wasn't under investigation despite the fact that he told Trump that?
It annoyed Trump.
Yeah.
Trump is perfectly within his constitutional authority to get rid of him.
And by the way, the Flynn thing is a dead end because nothing stopped him from prosecuting Flynn.
How you can obstruct justice in some kind of corrupt way when he just said, hey, you know, can we let this Flynn thing go when the Flynn thing wasn't let go is bizarre.
Besides, he has prosecutorial discretion anyway.
All right.
Final thing I want to spend a few minutes on folks.
Listen, I work at NRA TV.
I don't work for the NRA.
I work for NRA TV and a production company.
I'm just telling you that as disclosures so you understand.
It's not I wrote on my Twitter and I say it everywhere else.
My opinions are mine.
I'm not under contract anywhere to lobby or advance anyone else's opinions.
I want to be absolutely crystal clear with you.
I do not work for them because they pay me to say something.
They don't.
They pay me for my opinions.
We clear?
I'm not paid for their opinions.
But what's been happening with the NRA and with these I'm going to be delicate here.
People out there who are trying to advance an agenda is frankly disgusting.
There's an interesting piece up with the Daily Wire, you know, that after a tragic incident, there are some agenda folks who want to move stuff forward that has very little to do with the safety and security of our kids, our homes, our families, and has everything to do with their agenda.
And they want to paint the NRA as some kind of a horrible accomplices in murder organization, which I think is frankly pretty disgusting.
What I find even more fascinating is some of the same people who say that willingly send money to Planned Parenthood, an organization who is absolutely committed to keeping the termination of human life a big business for themselves.
Kind of amazing how that happens.
But there's a daily wire piece about some of the disparities in financing, because you're hearing this a lot now, Joe.
The NRA, they bought off the Republican Party.
Ladies and gentlemen, they've averaged 2.2 million dollars in spending since 1998, the NRA.
2.2 million in spending.
So the facts matter.
I'm just asking you guys, you listeners out there and ladies, the facts matter.
I know they matter to you.
That's why you're here.
Let's go over some other numbers.
Michael Bloomberg, one year of spending, 23 million dollars.
One year.
Again, the NRA has averaged 2.2 million a year since 1998.
The SEIU, Service Employees International Union, 28 million.
In 2008, to elect Barack Obama.
$70 million in 2012.
Folks, the NRA was 6% of spending, electioneering spending, in the last election cycle with Trump.
6%.
You really think they bought off the Republican Party?
You know, holding them to a standard you don't hold others to is understandable for the left.
But I know what the organization stands for, and if you are going to call them, or anybody associated with them, me included, accomplices to murder, that's pretty disgusting and filthy, and you should be ashamed of yourself.
Also, one other thing.
You're going to start hearing these renewed calls for gun control, and you're going to hear some talk about Australia.
Now, it's compliments of my friend Matt Palumbo and his friend Cody, some of the research they did.
Here are some numbers.
Australia.
Australia engaged in a buyback program for guns.
You had to turn in your guns and they gave you money.
So you'll hear the liberals, Joe, often, you know, tout Australia.
Oh, Australia, what a success it was.
Really?
Let me read to you.
A 2011 study published in Justice Policy Journal compared the trends, this is important, compared the trends in mass shootings before and after 1996 when gun control was enacted in Australia It compared Australia and New Zealand.
New Zealand is Australia's neighbor and is very similar socio-economically, but unlike Australia, Joe, it retained the legal availability of guns that were banned and confiscated in Australia in 1996.
Just to be clear, 1996, Australia's gun ban goes into effect.
New Zealand has a similar societal makeup.
New Zealand does not have the gun ban.
So this journal, this justice policy journal, did a study.
Now if what liberals are saying that Australian gun confiscation is such a success, you would think that Australia would see some significant difference in their gun violence in conjunction with New Zealand, that they're not of the gun ban, right?
Yeah, that's correct, Dan.
You'd be wrong, Joe.
Of course, because I set you up and I wanted you to say that, of course.
So it says, it thus served as a useful control group to observe whatever effects gun control had on mass shootings.
The authors of the study found that, after taking into account difference in population size, Australia and New Zealand did not have statistically different trends in mass shootings before or after 1996.
Indeed, New Zealand has not had a mass shooting since 1997, despite the availability in that country of firearms banned in Australia.
Here's another one.
Sorry to read this to you, folks, but this is important, because you're going to hear about what is success.
By the way, Australia has more guns now than they did before the 1996 gun control.
Did you know that?
Liberals won't tell you any of this.
Here's another one.
By the American Medical Association, Joe, a far-right group.
I mean, let's be realistic, folks.
The American Medical Association does not have a partisan leaning to the right.
It says, what about firearm homicide rates?
A 2016 AMA study, American Medical Association, examined trends in firearm homicides and suicides before and after the adoption of gun control in Australia in 1996.
Folks, you interested in data or what?
The authors found no evidence of a statistically existing downward trend of the firearm homicide rate.
The AMA study did find a decline in firearm suicides following gun control, but noted there was a larger decline in non-firearm suicides, so the decline in firearm suicides could be part of a larger trend.
Folks, let me read this one sentence again.
The authors found no evidence of a statistically significant effect of gun control on the pre-existing downward trend of the firearm homicide rate.
Now, why am I telling you this?
Because folks, the liberals who keep suggesting we follow this Australian gun confiscation pathway, what they seem to casually leave out of the argument here is that there is a very real penalty for others here.
You will have a large majority of Americans who will be precluded from defending themselves with the firearm of their choice, legal firearm of their choice.
Do you understand that?
This is what... I don't know if I'm being clear on this show.
Yeah, you are.
The data does not support the fact that these gun bans or confiscation routines work at all.
Right.
You act as if doing it is, quote, doing something, but doing something is doing something malicious to someone else, which is taking away their right to defend themselves with no evidence that you're doing anything to make anyone else any safer.
Do you understand now why, and I discussed this a little bit in last week's show too, why people like us are so upset at the left?
Because you keep talking about doing something, but when you talk about doing, you have no evidence to show actually works to do what you say it's going to do, and at the same time, you are stopping me from defending myself, how I choose to do it.
That's why this argument never goes... By the way, as you call us accomplices to murder, murdering thugs, and you basically hammer us on social media.
Folks, does the data matter or not?
It's pretty clear that criminals will access weapons when and where they see fit.
They get them through black market channels.
I was a cop.
I told you when I used to work the cells as a police officer, I would ask criminals arrested for CPW, criminal possession of a weapon, how'd you get the gun?
They'd be like, how'd I get the gun?
What are you, an idiot?
You just buy it on the street.
How'd you get the gun?
They're like, what are you, a dope?
Folks, I'm not kidding.
I would ask them because I was genuinely curious.
Criminals don't care.
They have no problem at all.
The black market for the hundreds of millions of guns that exist in the world is a vibrant one.
Banning guns will do nothing but keeping legal gun owners away from accessing the firearm of their choice, legal firearm of their choice, to defend themselves.
It will do nothing.
Criminals have no problem at all getting guns.
Until you accept that premise, the argument will never go forward.
All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in.
I really appreciate it.
Please go to the show notes today at bongino.com and check us out and join my email list.
I'll send you these articles, some really good ones today, so be sure you read them.
Thanks a lot.
I really appreciate it, and I will see you all tomorrow.
You just heard the Dan Bongino Show.
Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com.
