Summary:
In this episode I address the real reasons liberals are losing their minds over Trump’s comments about a violent gang. I also discuss the panic breaking out among former Obama administration officials as the Spygate timeline comes together.
News Picks:
Today’s edition of liberal myth-busting.
Andy McCarthy’s terrific piece about the constantly changing origin story of Spygate.
Byron York also addresses the Spygate origin story.
Are FBI agents going to blow the whistle? Here’s what may be stopping them.
Denis Prager’s piece explains the real reasons liberals are enraged that Trump called violent gang members “animals.”
Big wins last night for anti-establishment candidates.
Support for “gun control” fades.
Copyright CRTV. All rights reserved.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Get ready to hear the truth about America with your host, Dan Bongino.
Alright, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
Doing pretty good for a Wednesday, Dan.
Yeah, biggest show ever yesterday.
Ever!
Ever!
Thank you.
Thanks to you.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
I deeply, deeply appreciate it from the bottom of my heart.
Biggest show ever.
We are now exploding into the stratosphere of downloads.
We're actually doing numbers and Joe can attest to this being in terrestrial radio as well for his morning job.
I don't even want to say day job because he gets up at like 2 a.m.
We are now beating most major market radio stations in listenership, which is insane.
So thank you so much, you all are the best.
Hey, I have an explosive show for you today.
Explosive!
I know sometimes you object to my constant use of the word, but I can't think of another adjective.
Libs are freaking out!
Remember I told you all I monitor very select, liberal accounts on Twitter.
I don't put it out on the show because I don't want them to block me.
That's why.
Some of you say, give us the accounts too.
I can't because they'll block me.
I watch some of these accounts on Twitter.
These liberals.
And I can tell what's going on within the liberal movement and the level of panic, Joe, based on the response from these select libs, let's say.
Some of them are like Media Matters type.
Some of them are Center for American Progress types.
But one guy who just, this one is not one specifically I monitor, but I was tipped off to by someone else, is freaking out on Twitter right now.
A guy named Max Bergman, known liberal, is panicking.
That, quote, Democrats are unbelievably losing the political fight over the Russia scandal.
Yeah!
Yeah, baby!
I told you the tide was turning because the truth is coming out.
And the truth, don't lie.
That may not be a Yogi Berra-ism, but we're gonna make it one.
Remember, you gotta go to people's funerals or else they won't go to yours.
We love Yogi Berra-isms, right?
The truth, don't lie.
Democrats are panicking.
Max Bergman, noted lib lackey, is freaking out because the truth is coming out.
Democrats are losing the narrative!
Oh my gosh!
Spygate is being exposed.
You know what it makes me think of, Joe?
Remember the movie Titanic?
Everybody's seen it.
You know, the Leonardo DiCaprio, Kate Winslet movie.
There's a scene at the end when the ship is sinking, everybody starts to panic, and everybody starts to jump on the few remaining lifeboats, and there's a ship, like an officer on the ship who has a pistol, and he shoots around in the air, and he goes, Order!
Order!
There will be order here!
There will be order here.
A reckoning is coming.
To quote Tombstone, he's not looking for revenge.
He's looking for a reckoning.
It's coming.
Smile a little bit.
Justice.
Justice is happening.
Albeit slowly.
But it's happening.
And that's why it's so important in these midterms, and we had some good non-establishment candidates winning primaries last night, including Chip Roy out in Texas.
Congratulations for Congress.
Order's coming, and that's why these midterms are important.
If we lose the House of Representatives, we're in a world of trouble because we're going to lose chairmanships and all this momentum is going to stop.
Order!
Order!
There will be order.
Order's coming.
And the left is freaking out.
Now, I've got some more Neutron bombs for you.
About three or four doozies.
I want a hat tip undercover Uber discount on Twitter, which has got some just... I don't know who this guy is.
I've never met a woman.
No idea.
But they've got some just juicy tidbits, a couple of which he put some links together.
I hadn't I missed, so hat tip to him and I'm going to get to that.
But I've got a couple other stories, too, I want to get to, too, including a tremendous appearance by Dennis Prager this morning on Fox & Friends.
All right.
Today's show brought to you by iTarget.
We love iTarget.
Anybody can own a pistol or a firearm, but you have to own it and you have to know how to use it and use it proficiently.
One of the best ways to practice with your firearm is in the safety and security of your own home by dry firing.
That is when you fire a safely unloaded weapon.
Check it, check it twice, check it three times.
You cannot afford to make that mistake.
Rack the slide to the rear, open the cylinder, make sure that is a safely unloaded weapon.
Look away, look back again.
Well, when you pull the trigger on a safely unloaded weapon, remembering the laser rule that anywhere that muzzle is pointed, you act like it's a loaded weapon regardless, that when you depress the trigger on a safely unloaded weapon, the problem is you have no idea where the round would have gone, because there's no round!
It's a safely unloaded weapon.
Well, iTarget solves that problem.
They will send you a laser round.
This thing is awesome.
People love it.
The reviews on my email account are staggeringly good.
And I got one complaint with it.
It was totally user error, by the way.
It had nothing to do with the privacy.
Only one, ever.
I'm not even kidding.
The people love this product.
The website is itargetpro.com.
And by the way, their customer service is amazing.
Amazing.
They will send you a laser round, itargetpro.com.
You drop it in a firearm you have now, and when you depress the trigger on that safely unloaded weapon, because it's a laser round, it's not an actual round, it will emit a laser onto a target they send you, and you will see exactly where that round would have gone.
Dramatically increasing your proficiency.
It allows you to fire off thousands of laser rounds per session if you'd like to do that.
People love this product.
The co-author of my book is mad at me because her husband won't put it down.
The website itargetpro.com That's itargetpro.com.
Promo code Dan for 10% off.
Itargetpro.com.
Folks, if you have a firearm, it's your responsibility to learn how to use it proficiently.
God forbid you're involved in a self-defense scenario.
You better hit what you're firing at.
Itargetpro.com.
Go check it out.
Promo code Dan.
Okay.
First, just quickly before I get to this other stuff, Dennis Prager on Fox and Friends this morning, he has a terrific piece, National Review, online, which will be in the show notes.
I'm strongly, strongly, again, encouraging you to read it.
The show notes are available at bongino.com, my website.
If you subscribe to my email list, which I, again, greatly appreciate it, I will email you these articles every day, along with other fantastic finds on the interweb.
It's a joke.
For liberals.
I know you're a little slow with that stuff.
Okay.
Prager has this piece talking about Trump and his MS-13 animals comment, and I could not agree more with the piece.
He's critiquing a Washington Post piece by the clueless E.J.
Dionne, who is just a train wreck.
And in this Washington Post piece by Dionne, he says, we shouldn't call anybody animals.
Oh my gosh.
Well, we should when they act like animals act.
And it really is an insult to animals because even animals don't gang tattoo themselves and torture other animals.
So it's really kind of an insult to animals.
But Prager calls out Dion and writes this just terrific piece at National Review about why it is absolutely necessary to use adjectives like that to describe inhuman behavior.
Because it defines what humanity is and puts a perimeter around the fence of acceptable behavior.
Right.
Of which, Joe, surprisingly to E.J.
Dionne, outside of the fence of human behavior is torture, control, and rape, which is the motto of MS-13.
That's not what we define as human, okay?
Outside of that, we define that as outside of human, therefore animalistic behavior.
Get it, E.J.? ?
Clueless liberal nutbag writing for the Washington Post.
Nut job.
But Prager went on Fox & Friends this morning, and I'm watching it as I'm prepping for the show, and I was actually going to start with something else, but his appearance was so good.
He's so good.
He's so talented, Dennis, and his ability to distill difficult concepts into easy talking parts.
I was like, man, I gotta cover this on the show.
He said something today, and I was like, Yes!
Dennis!
Nice!
And it's something, Joe, you and I... I'm not trying to take credit for Dennis' idea.
Don't take this the wrong way.
It's just something you and I have been trying to explain for a long time that, candidly, I think he just explained better.
He said, talking about E.J.
Dionne, the Washington Post liberal nutjob, objecting to MS-13 gang members being called animals, he said, the left hates people who fight evil.
And I thought, yeah, there you go!
Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!
Winner, winner, chicken dinner!
We got someone!
I've tried to explain this using various thought leaders' explanations of why liberals align with malevolent, malignant, malicious, evil groups.
You know, I get the question a lot, well, I don't get it, like, the liberals align with LGBT groups, but then align with Iran and the Iran deal that throw people who are gay off buildings.
Right, Joe?
And I'm like, I get this question all the time on my... Joe sees some of the emails and you're like...
They're like, I don't get it.
It doesn't make sense.
I thought liberals are for gay rights.
No, no, no, no, no.
You're missing the point.
I've tried to explain it using David Horowitz's paradigm of the anti-anti-communist.
That liberals believe in police state tyranny.
We believe in freedom and individual rights.
In order for liberals to advance their police state, big government, tyrannical agenda, they have to combat individual liberty and individual thought at any moment.
So David Horowitz has the anti-anti-communist approach, that liberals will align with anyone, no matter how evil, as long as they combat individual liberty.
And there's certain components of Islamic radicalism, of anti-United States fervor in Iran and the United States as a symbol of individual liberty that appeals to people on the left because we're the anti-communists and the Iranians and others are the anti-anti-communists.
They're against us.
So they're a natural ally.
I get it how that's a little bit of a complicated, convoluted explanation, but it's a genius one nonetheless.
Prager just said it best this morning and simplified it even more.
The left hates people who fight evil.
Why?
And I thought about it.
That's great.
Hat tip, Dennis.
The left, and I'm not talking about all Democrats here.
I'm going to be crystal clear.
I'm not even talking about all liberals here.
I'm talking about the radical far left, Joe.
Comprende?
The radical far left that knows exactly what they're doing.
It's actually a relatively small sliver of the Democrat Party.
Unfortunately, that sliver is increasing in size.
The left hates people who fight evil, to quote Dennis Prager, because the left needs evil.
The radical left, Joe, needs evil, but it needs evil to be redefined as anything other than evil.
Think about what I'm telling you.
It's very important.
The far left's radical agenda is to wipe out any individual rights in favor of rights granted to you by the state, and only rights granted to you by the state.
In other words, your money is not yours, it's the state's.
They'll give you what they choose.
10%, 20%.
They'll keep 80, 90.
But in order for them to convince you that your money is their money, they have to convince you you have no individual big R right to the fruits of your own labor.
Make sense, Joe?
Yep.
Your health care.
In order to implement government-run health care, the left has to convince you that you have no individual right to your own well-being.
That your healthcare is a collective responsibility, that you're a burden on the state when you get older, and the state will impose upon you a healthcare system that folds you into the collective agenda, not your individual agenda.
Which is to live!
Education.
Your education of your kids is not your job.
It's the state's job.
Sex education, liberal education, indoctrination.
This is the state's job.
The public school system is a vehicle for them to do that.
Your education of your kids and yourself is not your responsibility.
It's the state.
In order to do that, the state has to do things that are evil.
That are just plain evil.
What are those things?
But you can't call them evil.
You get it, Joe?
Yeah.
The left needs to redefine evil and they don't want you to recognize evil because if you recognize evil as a bad thing and you talk about it by calling people animals, the left doesn't want to recognize evil at all.
They just want to talk about it as if it's some means to a greater end.
It's just part of being human, Dan.
Just part of being human.
Exactly.
It's the dumbing down of morality.
So the left hates people who fight evil because, and I have in caps here, because they recognize evil, number one.
People who fight evil recognize it as bad.
But the left needs evil and it needs to redefine it on its terms.
Right.
Therefore they don't want it called out and defined by conservatives.
Now, if you read the work of Friedrich Hayek in The Road to Serfdom, You know, he talks about how economic freedom and political freedom are always married together.
Does it really matter who you vote for if everybody you vote for controls the fruits of your labor and everything about your life?
It doesn't matter!
Oh, I vote for Joe or I vote for Bob, but they're both communist tyrants who control everything about my life.
My economic freedom is there.
It doesn't matter who you vote for.
Political freedom and economic freedom are married.
But you also are married together and always will be.
But he also talks about, in the book, How the idea that a government can treat people fairly, notice how evils redefine this fairness, requires people to be treated unequally.
In other words, if Joe and I And forgive me Joe, I'm not disparaging your work in this, but I need you for this example, so roll with the punches here.
We're rolling.
If Joe and I, by a communist overseer, who we live in his little island, there's just three of us, determines that Joe and I are to be treated fairly and make the same amount of money, Although our skills, as they're transmitted off the island, whatever they may be, Joe produces, you know, coconut milk.
I produce an airborne podcast product that makes it out over a satellite to the main island.
And those skills are valued differently by people.
My skills, say, are worth $100,000, Joe's $50,000.
But the communist overseer of the island says, no, no, you must be treated fairly.
It requires that communist overseer to take money from me that I had earned and give it to Joe to level out our salaries.
That is inherently evil.
That's right.
It is the very idea of the taking of what you didn't earn.
And by the way, he takes a cut for himself too, the communists.
And if you don't comply, they kill you.
That's the essence of communism.
A hundred million plus deaths because people don't want to give up the fruits of their own labor.
They want to feed their own families first.
They can't recognize that.
The left can't recognize that as evil.
The left can't recognize MS-13 as animals or evil because they want evil redefined and dumbed down.
Once there's a recognition of evil, there's a recognition that human beings can be evil, that human beings who run government can be evil, and that the inherent rule over other people by people in the government who have a propensity towards evil themselves is evil.
This was a critical, critical point.
The illusion that the government can treat people fairly means that people have to be treated unfairly.
Because somebody has to work extra to support somebody else who either doesn't want to work or didn't put in the work to produce skills valuable enough to earn that money.
For me to level out the playing field between Bobby and Henry, when Bobby and Henry don't work the same amount and don't have the same skills, means I have to steal from Bobby to give from Henry.
Which if it's defined as evil, people won't vote for it.
Therefore, the left hates any recognition of evil at all, and any recognition of individual human differences, sloth, gluttony, whatever it may be.
They can't stand it.
They don't want people who fight evil, and I thought it was an absolutely brilliant Outstanding point by Dennis Prager, and when you combine that, that the recognition of evil means that people in government can be evil, therefore the government can do evil deeds in its lust to treat people equally, which really means you have to treat people unfairly.
When you recognize that, it causes people to question everything.
They don't want that.
Well put, man.
Yeah, it makes sense, right?
Combine that with David Horowitz's anti-anti-communist theory, which he's right about, that we're the anti-communists.
We believe in individual liberty and freedom.
The anti-anti-communists will align with anyone, evil or not, to fight against individual liberty in their quest to squash it, to empower and grow the state, which has to come at your expense.
Then it all makes sense.
It's a really, really wonderful piece of National Review.
It's short, it's not very long, but Prager always has a way of doing that.
I heard about it this morning and I just thought it was great.
And I just want to also, on the animals line while we're on this topic, I want to again applaud and send a big hat tip to the Trump administration for Joe, again, Giving the double-barreled middle finger to the liberal media, liberal hacks up on the hill, establishment swamp rat GOP cowards with no guts and spines made of balsa wood.
I want to applaud the Trump—you think I was dramatic enough there?
Yeah!
Applaud the Trump administration.
Trump called these gang members animals.
They are animals.
They're savages.
They're the pigs of pigs.
These beasts.
Trump calls them out for who they are.
And the liberal media flips out.
Again, you know the whole story.
I just explained it with Prager.
Liberal media freaks out because they don't want to recognize evil anywhere, because that's who they are, including E.J.
Dionne.
And what does Trump do, Joe?
I don't know.
Did you see this?
I put a story in the show notes about it today.
Check this out.
The White House... This is great.
It's classic stuff, dude.
The Trump administration puts out a press release.
I think it was yesterday.
Yeah.
Puts out a press release titled, Uh, MS-13 Animals.
Like, why they're animals.
I'm like, yeah, baby!
Yeah, I knew that one.
Nice job, Trump.
Instead of coward, Republican, balsa wood spine, uh, uh, chumps, who in the past would be like, hey man, we're really sorry.
We're so sorry.
Oh my gosh.
We called them animals.
That's not what we really meant.
That's not what we... Trump's like, uh, put out a press release, fellas.
MS-13 Animals.
Why they're animals.
I love this guy.
Yeah.
And, and let me tell you something.
A little bit of advice for you out there if you're going to get in this arena.
If you are going to be an activist, if you are going to run for office as a conservative, if you are going to get into the content space, writing, podcasting, radio, television, talking head work, let me give you a warning.
Don't ever forget this.
If you are not wrong, don't ever apologize.
Now granted, there are things you're going to say sometimes that you wish you could have worded better and you'll, you know, there's nothing wrong with that.
It's part of being human.
But if you are not wrong, like Trump wasn't, Don't ever, ever apologize.
That was a question to Trump, I believe, in one of the debates about him never being sorry for something.
Yeah, and he was like, basically, no.
Remember?
And you know, I'm not, I don't disagree with this guy's strategy.
Right.
If you haven't done anything wrong, like this animal's coming, don't ever, and I'll tell you why.
The minute these liberal goons in the media and these establishment GOP swamp rats sniff a scent, a mild wafting of weakness, you will become a perpetual target.
And let me tell you something, I know this from my Twitter.
I double down on liberal goonery all the time.
You come after me you are getting mauled all day relentlessly non-stop and it's asymmetric warfare because I have more followers than most of you.
It will never stop.
Aiden McLaughlin from Media Eye that uh what's it the I forget the other guy from Media Matters he's another goofball I forget his name but when they come after I relentlessly fillet these people.
All day I expose their silliness.
Don't ever, ever give... And again, if you're wrong, you're wrong.
But if you're not, like Trump, don't ever apologize.
Double, triple, quadruple down.
And I'm telling you, these liberals have no heart.
They are not ready for the fight.
I know it.
They don't know what to do.
Joe, they have no heart.
I mean it.
I'm not talking about Democrats.
I want to be clear.
Liberals have no heart.
Guys, ladies, they have no fight.
They have been neutered.
They have been trained to be weak.
They have grown up in academic institutions, in many cases around liberal friends, in some cases around liberal families, that have taught them to be perpetual victims.
What is the motto of conservative tough guys and tough women out there?
Don't be a victim.
Be a sheepdog.
Be a sheepdog against the wolves, to quote Dave Grossman from his book On Killing, which is an amazing book.
Be a sheepdog!
Be a sheepdog and fight the wolves.
That's our motto.
This is why I encourage you, don't ever be dissuaded from getting in this fight.
Don't ever sit there in depression mode, in one flew over the cuckoo's nest.
Don't ever get into that.
It's a psychologically disturbed mode.
You're not losing.
We're winning.
They are not ready for this fight.
They have been taught to be victims and you have been taught to be sheepdogs every time.
You have been taught to fight back.
You have been skilled in the facts.
You've been skilled in the data.
You've been learned in the data.
You've educated yourself.
You've read the books.
You understand what's going on.
Liberals have taught themselves to retreat into crying rooms with color forms every time there's a fight.
When they attack you and you flip them the double bird and go on a full frontal 30-front assault against them, they don't know what to do.
I know it.
I see it on Twitter.
The cry crowd.
The whiny crowd.
They're not ready.
They're snowflakes.
You're sheepdogs.
Have no fear!
This fight is not in any way over!
They are, in this war of ideological attrition, they are entirely not ready!
They're playing tiddlywinks while you're involved in trench warfare!
And you're worried, oh my gosh, they're winning.
They are?
They're winning what?
The ticket receipts for Hollywood are down 20%.
Colleges that take this liberal goofball approach are losing students like crazy.
Did you read that article in the Wall Street Journal today about Evergreen College?
A liberal college that decided to go even farther left?
Let me just give you a quick synopsis.
Man, I didn't see it.
Evergreen College, Joe, they decided a while ago that they were going to do this no white people allowed on campus thing.
Ew!
Yeah, it wasn't like sanctioned by the college, but it was sanctioned by a group, and the college did nothing to stop this.
Yeah.
So this professor, Brett Weinstein, said, BS, I'm going on campus and teaching my class.
Well, he almost got assaulted on campus.
This has exploded in their face.
Look at the article today.
People are leaving the school.
Their applications are down dramatically.
Folks, we're not losing.
The NFL, oh, they decided to get in with the cry room people and the color forms.
What happened?
Nobody's watching.
They're not going to go out of business, but they ain't doing the business they were doing.
Oh, another story today.
Show you were winning.
Sean Hannity.
Big hat tip to him.
Sean Hannity is now the number one radio show host in the country.
Talker's show, which you're familiar with.
Believe it or not, has him overtaken.
This is crazy.
Rush has been number one.
Rush Limbaugh, who's great too.
Forever.
Article today, Hannity's now number one.
Hannity, who routinely flips the double bird to color form liberals in cry rooms who aren't ready for the fight!
Nice job, Sean!
He's number one!
His show at night, number one!
As he has routinely flipped these idiots off.
The goons at Media Matters.
That Angelo kid, I don't even know, was he Media Matters?
I don't even remember.
That other goofball always goes after him.
You lose, we win!
We're the sheepdogs.
They're sitting in a crime room.
We're out there with the kettlebells, reading the books, fighting the fight, training ourselves.
For a perpetual now ideological fight in the long run.
You're hardened.
You're battle-scarred.
You've been insulted in college.
You've been ripped by your neighbors.
You've been portrayed as a bunch of Neanderthals on TV.
You've been told by sophisticated academics how stupid you are while they tell you 2 plus 2 equals 5.
You've been told all this.
You've been laughed at.
You've been mocked.
You've been insulted on Twitter.
Your skin is six inches thick!
Why they sit in the color forms, playing with them, paint by numbers in the cry rooms.
You win.
They lose.
They're not ready for this.
They're not ready.
Don't ever forget that.
All right.
That took a lot longer than I thought.
I was going to spend a minute on that.
We're 25 minutes into the show, but it's important.
I need you to understand that because I get a lot of depressed emails.
What are we going to do?
Just remember, they are panicking.
Our relentless efforts, me, Chuck Ross, Lee Smith, Molly Hemingway, the Federalist staff, Sean Davis, Sarah Carter, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin.
Relentless efforts to expose Spygate, despite Joe.
Ruthless, you see him, you know, I talk to Joe all the time.
Ruthless attacks on us.
Conspiracy theorist nutbag, despite the fact that we quote, left-leaning sites.
And we source everything we talk about on the show.
Bungie knows a conspiracy theorist.
They are finally realizing they have lost the narrative.
It's lost.
Spygate is now the story.
Russian collusion is dead because of a long, protracted, thick-skinned fight.
You tough guys and tough women out there were willing to fight while the color form crying room crowd sat in there going, conspiracy theory!
Conspiracy!
Not so much anymore, is it?
As it all comes out in a wash, you chumps.
Chumps.
Chumps.
You lose.
We win.
All right.
I want to move on to some of the stuff because I got some more incredible breaking news.
You like that, huh, Joe?
I see yours.
I can tell.
Yeah.
Watch Joe's response to it.
We need it sometimes.
All right.
Today's show also brought to you by our buddies at BrickHouse Nutrition and one of my original sponsors, Still, in my opinion, the best, hungriest, most entrepreneurial, inventive nutrition supplement company out there.
If you're not getting your nutrition supplements from BrickHouse, you're making a big mistake.
BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
That's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
They're big supporters of the show and they're big supporters of quality supplements.
One of their best supplements out there is Field of Greens.
We all All know we should be eating as many fruits and vegetables as we can.
Now, I'm lucky, folks.
I'll be candid with you.
I get to eat from, you know, from home.
I work from home.
My studio is from home.
And I get to eat a lot of fruits and vegetables.
I still take Field of Greens.
It is a fruit and vegetable powder.
But here's the catch here.
It's real food.
A lot of these other fruit and vegetable pills and powder, it's extract.
This is real, ground-up, high-quality, healthy, micronutrient-packed fruits and vegetables from stuff you're never gonna see anywhere else.
You're not gonna see a blend like this.
Kale, licorice, cherry, blueberries.
This is the kind of stuff you need in your diet every day, and who has the time?
If the stuff goes bad in your refrigerator, you're gonna get this, you're gonna get a container of field degrees.
I think it tastes great.
I do.
That's not spin.
I love it.
I take it two, three times a day.
And my kids love it too.
And my daughter won't eat anything.
My youngest.
It's called Field of Greens.
We all know fruits and vegetables are the key to a long, healthy, productive life.
Fruits and vegetables.
We got to eat them.
This is your fruit and vegetable insurance.
Go to BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
That's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Do yourself a favor and pick up Field of Greens today.
It's absolutely wonderful.
All right.
Oh, man.
Gosh, where do I start?
Oh, hey, one more quick note.
Joe, we have finally enabled the Alexa skill.
So if you have an Alexa at home.
Oh, okay.
Good.
Yeah, folks, let me just quick instructions for you.
If you want to listen to our show on Alexa, I got this from Gaston at CRTV History.
All right.
You just have to say, Alexa, enable the Dan Bongino Show skill.
So just say to Alexa, Alexa, enable the Dan Bongino Show skill.
And then just say after that, once you've enabled it, Alexa, play the Dan Bongino Show.
Simple as that, folks.
Alexa, enable the Dan Bongino Show skill.
And then Alexa, play the Dan Bongino show, and you'll be able to listen on your Alexa.
I'll give you instructions for the Google Home tomorrow, but they're very similar, but I don't want to pack you full of promotional stuff.
I don't like to wear you guys out.
Okay, ladies and gentlemen, Andy McCarthy has a piece so good, I know I quote his work a lot, use his work a lot, but this one is just, I mean, it's at the pinnacle.
McCarthy has a piece in National Review yesterday.
It's a little shorter, comparable to some of his other work, but it's a piece about the constantly changing narrative about how this investigation started.
The investing, the spying operation into Trump.
It is amazing.
I can't encourage you enough to read it.
There are multiple tidbits and gems in this thing.
I'm going to distill it down to some of the main points, but I can encourage you strongly enough to read it.
It's available at my show notes at Bongino.com.
Couple points.
Why does the timeline keep changing in this case?
I'm and I thought after I read it I'm like, how do I explain this to my audience and take it out to an easily digestible?
30,000 foot view Joe right and I sent this to my co-author on the book yesterday.
I said I got it.
Here it is.
All right When you understand That the hiring of Carter Page and George Papadopoulos by the Trump team as foreign policy advisors were viewed by the Obama-Clinton axis as an opportunity and not a legitimate threat from Russia.
The whole thing makes sense.
Think about what I just told you.
It explains everything.
We have been told repeatedly, it explains also why the timeline keeps shifting, Joe.
If this doesn't make sense, please, as the audience ombudsman, stop me.
Will do.
We have been told, and McCarthy goes through this in the piece first, that, oh, it was Carter Page who started the FBI investigation.
Because why, folks?
Why does the FBI need to explain this away?
Because they spied on a presidential candidate.
You damn well better have a good reason.
Why does the reason keep changing?
Because there isn't one.
I'm going to get to that in a second.
The first explanation was Carter Page took a trip to Moscow and the FBI found that suspicious, therefore the operation to spy on Trump.
Yeah, exactly, Joe.
Yeah, it started.
Why did that explanation fall apart?
That explanation fell apart because the information about Carter Page's trip to Moscow and why it was so dangerous Was all in the dossier, which turned out later to be fake.
So the FBI was like, Ro Ro, what do we do now?
We can't tell the American people we spied on a presidential candidate because of a summary piece of paperwork that's fake.
So then we learn from the compliant hacks at the New York Times who are nothing more than Pravda.
You take the New York Times seriously, really, shame on you.
History is going to embarrass these people.
They're nothing more than a Russian propaganda outlet now.
They're a joke, right?
Yeah.
The New York Times people, the FBI, managers of the FBI, and political hacks who realize that the Carter Page story is now bunk, they need a better reason.
Keep in mind, none of these are the real reason.
I'm going to get to that in a second.
I'm telling you what we were told.
Carter Page, he did it.
Debunked.
They moved on then to, oh, oh, another Trump foreign policy advisor, George Papadopoulos.
Oh, OK.
Yeah.
Yes, that guy, Joe.
He met with this Australian in a bar and mentioned something about Hillary's emails.
That's what started the whole thing.
That meeting in May.
Oh, OK.
All right.
George Papadopoulos did it.
Now we find out that that narrative is changing as well, because the George Papadopoulos story has entirely collapsed.
If George Papadopoulos had access to the DNC emails that were hacked, then why is it that Papadopoulos, when he was contacted by Joseph Mifsud, and I'll get to this in a minute, don't worry, He wasn't told about DNC emails.
He was told about Hillary's emails.
In other words, if the FBI, right?
Yeah.
Follow me, Joseph.
This is important.
If the FBI story about Papadopoulos is true, that the Russians hacked the DNC and tried to work with Trump to get those hacked emails out there to embarrass them and tilt the election, And you're saying that the Papadopoulos meeting with Alexander Downer is the one that started this investigation into Russians hacking the DNC.
Now we find out that Papadopoulos was told by Joseph Mifsud, another questionable character I'll get to in a second, that the emails, that the Russians had dirt on Hillary.
And Papadopoulos said, I assumed he meant the 30,000 emails that Hillary claims are missing still.
Joe, are you following me here?
They're talking about apples and oranges.
The Papadopoulos story fell apart.
How could Papadopoulos be some Russian colluder on DNC hacked emails if the FBI's whole story is about a conversation Papadopoulos didn't even have about the DNC emails?
It was about Hillary's emails!
And by the way, someone told Papadopoulos that.
He didn't make it up.
Okay.
Yeah.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Folks, the Bureau's saying this is about hacked DNC emails.
Therefore, we started an investigation based on Papadopoulos.
He wasn't talking about hacked DNC emails.
He was talking about Hillary's emails.
They're two separate things.
Hillary's server was in her house because it was illegal.
The DNC server was in the DNC.
These were not connected.
They are different cases altogether.
Right, right, right.
Hillary's server was probably hacked by the Russians because it was a private server in her bathroom.
The DNC server hack is an entirely different case.
That story fell apart.
So the Papadopoulos story, the New York Times and their, you know, the Pravda, New York Times and their other people had to change stories again.
Now they're backing away from that story.
Why else are they backing away from that story?
Because now, in the neutron bomb of all neutron bomb explosive revelations, we find out, if you were listening to the show, you found out in March, but if you read the mainstream media, you just found out this week, that there was a spy!
Stefan Halper, a spy, working for the FBI, making contact with the Trump orbit.
Why did this further the collapse of the Papadopoulos narrative?
Because if the case started on July 31st when the FBI opened the case, remember they're saying the second story was we started this case on July 31st because that's when we were notified about this May meeting between Papadopoulos and Downer.
Follow me, this is important.
We opened this case about the DNC hacked emails and Russian collusion on July 31st.
This is FBI story number two.
Because we were notified by the Australians about a meeting between Papadopoulos and Downer where Papadopoulos said he had dirt on Hillary.
Well, if that happened, then how is it that the spy that was working for you, Halper, made contact with Carter Page two weeks earlier?
Oh.
Oh.
Oh, he did?
Yes.
In mid-July.
The case opened July 31st.
How is it that you recruited Or used an already recruited FBI intelligence spy asset.
You got him on your payroll.
You vetted him for this case.
And you had him going in the middle of July if your case was open July 31st.
Joe, how's that happen?
Twilight Zone.
You have to be a sucker!
To believe this.
The timeline doesn't work.
McCarthy walks through this as pieces of gem.
And he says, well, let me give you a proposal on what I think the real story is.
Now, let me go back to my 30,000 foot.
Let me pull it out for a minute.
When you understand that the hiring of Carter Page and George Papadopoulos in March By the Trump team, as foreign policy advisors, was viewed as an opportunity, not a Russian threat.
Everything makes sense.
Now, keep in mind, I don't want to repeat yesterday's show, but this is important.
The Trump team could not hire a lot of known foreign policy people who were familiar with the workings of politics because they'd been scooped up by the 75,000 people running for president from Lindsey Graham to Marco Rubio.
A few foreign policy people thought Trump would win, so they all jumped on other campaigns.
Candidly, they'll tell you this now, they probably had to scoop the bottom of the barrel to get credible people.
Trump shows up to an editorial board meeting.
They question him.
Hey, man, nobody wants to join you.
This actually happened.
Nobody wants to join your campaign on the foreign policy side.
Trump whips out a piece of paper.
This meeting goes, no, I've got these guys.
Whose names are on there?
Carter Page and Georgie Papadie.
The names are out there.
The names make it back somehow to the Obama administration.
Carter Page had already worked with the FBI as an informant for the FBI to nail a Russian spy.
To nail a Russian spy, not the other way around.
George Papadopoulos.
Somebody probably said, George Papadopoulos, this guy's never done anything in the past.
We can hammer this guy.
When you understand the hiring was viewed as an opportunity because the narrative we've been told the whole time was that Page and Papadopoulos were unique threats to the country because they could be infiltrated by the Russians looking to collude to win the election.
That this threat was so grave that we had a spy on the Trump team.
That is not what happened.
Nobody seriously believed that.
Carter Page's only role with the Russians was to get a Russian spy locked up with the FBI.
What reasonable person sits in a room at the White House at a meeting, finds out that Carter Page and George Papadopoulos are now working with the Trump team as foreign policy advisors because they can't get anybody else, and goes, oh my gosh, these are definitely Russian spies.
How?
Does that even make sense?
Papadopoulos had, his resume was as light as it can get.
He had to fabricate components of it.
Carter Page's only role with the Russians was they tried to recruit him and the FBI used him to arrest the Russians!
So let me get this straight, he's a Russian spy working to lock up Russians?
That makes sense to you idiots.
Look up the case, you have Genny Buryakov, Carter Page.
He's person one, Carter Page.
By the way, who the Russians referred to, and McCarthy points this out, as an idiot in the indictment.
I'm not kidding!
So he's a Russian spy helping the FBI lock up Russian spies, who the Russians call an idiot, and this is so pressing that you think he's a Russian spy so you have to spy on the Trump campaign.
My gosh, how stupid are you if you believe this?
Go back to my 30,000 foot.
When you understand at that meeting, and I'll get to that in a second, because this is where McCarthy really just drops it, the hammer, big time.
He drops that V12 hammer like I've never seen.
Dodge Vipers.
Love those.
When you understand at the meeting that when the names Carter Page and George Papadopoulos came up, this was viewed as an opportunity to insert assets into the Trump orbit and not a legitimate Russian threat, the entire case makes sense.
And that's why the timeline never works out and why nobody will agree on the genesis of this case, because nobody wants to say what is categorically true right now.
That there was no threat from the Russians.
The threat was Hillary Clinton was going to lose the election.
That's why the timeline keeps changing.
Now, McCarthy proposes what actually happened.
So remember, Carter Page was the original story?
Debunked.
Couldn't have been the story.
The FBI was using it based on the dossier.
The dossier was fake.
So they ran from that story.
New York Times helps provides.
Oh, no, it was Papadopoulos talking to Downer.
Interesting, because he wasn't even talking about the DNC emails and the information he got, he got from some other shady cat named Mifsud, who was talking about Hillary's emails.
Also, the Papadopoulos story makes no sense because how could Papadopoulos, the case of started on July 31st, if the FBI spy contacted a member of the Trump team two weeks earlier than July 31st?
That doesn't make sense.
The timeline keeps changing because there was a meeting of this National Security Coalition Council group of national security leaders, Joe.
The date of this meeting, this is going to be the critical Rosetta Stone of the case.
The date of this national security meeting is going to be key.
What's the problem, Joe?
Nobody will give the date.
Everybody was involved in this meeting, and we don't know who was there.
We're guessing it was Comey, Clapper, based on who would attend these things traditionally.
Comey, Clapper, Brennan, the major puppet masters of this case.
Everyone keeps talking about a national security meeting.
Joe, In late spring, where the topic of Carter Page came up.
Remember, the hiring of Page is viewed as an opportunity.
It happens in March.
People in the White House and other people in the Clinton campaign, Brennan, these others, Carter Page.
Trump hired him?
Hey, didn't he work with us on a Russia case once?
We got our anti-Trump story, Russian collusion.
Get it?
Get it?
It's important.
This happens in March.
Okay, what do we do?
Well, we can't spy on Paige, we don't have any evidence.
Well, we can fabricate evidence if the Clinton team pays a British spy to go get fake evidence.
Let's do that!
Brilliant!
By the way, thank you for that, that was a Guinness commercial, right?
Brilliant!
Guinness, yeah, I gotta, you know, our audience is great.
You ask a question, you get 7,000 emails like, brilliant!
Let's do this!
Let's just make up the evidence!
Let's have Hillary's team To pay a law firm, Perkins Coie.
To pay Fusion GPS.
To pay a British spy.
To go get fake information from the Russians.
And then we'll spy on Carter Page based on that.
And then we'll leak the information to reporters and we'll use the reports they write about the dossier to buttress the fact that the information in the dossier is correct in court filings.
Wait, what?
Come again?
I don't want to lose you though here.
No, you're good.
This clearly gets hatched at this meeting.
The meeting, the meeting, the meeting, where according to multiple accounts, the Carter Page issue comes up.
This national security meeting, where all the major co-conspirators are there.
Joe, why doesn't anybody remember the date of that meeting?
Joe, let me ask you something.
Joe and I are trying to put together like a Obamagate show with pieces and stuff.
But if I asked you to go back and pull a show, you know, if I said, Joe, remember that show we did about Stefan Halper?
How long do you think it would take you to find it?
An hour or two maybe?
Probably, yeah.
Maybe even less, right?
Yeah, probably less.
You think if a major national security meeting happened between Comey, Clapper, Brennan, Obama team officials, you think if this meeting happened and all of them were there, you think there might be an email, Excel spreadsheet, Google calendar amongst just one of the many people who attended about when and where that meeting actually occurred?
You think, Joe?
Yeah, sure.
Yeah, yeah, you think that would probably happen, right?
I mean, I can tell you when I did the advance for President Obama in Indonesia.
I can give you the exact dates and who was there.
Right.
I remember going to Prague for the START Treaty.
You think a National Security Council meeting Where all the major players are present, and they're going to talk about Trump hiring Carter Page, how this was such a, quote, devastating threat to the country, that someone would remember the date, but mysteriously, Joe, nobody can remember it.
Nobody.
Nobody can remember the date.
Wow.
Wow.
I think I could tell you the date my daughter put her braces on when I was living in Severna Park, Maryland.
But nobody can remember the date of this critical meeting where this entire plot was hatched.
Why is that?
Why does everybody keep saying, again, hat tip Andy McCarthy who pointed this out, oh it was late spring.
Late spring.
Because they don't want the date to correspond with the hiring of Carter Page.
Because when it comes out that this meeting occurred after Trump hired Carter Page and Papadopoulos with zero evidence that either one of them at any point had been corrupted by anything, it'll become clear this was a political hit job, not an intelligence and law enforcement one.
Are you tracking what I'm saying?
Yes, sir, I am.
The dossier on Carter Page wasn't available!
to them until the summer.
They didn't have the fake information to spy on him yet.
The meeting between George Papadopoulos and Downer doesn't happen until May.
The meeting between Papadopoulos and Mifsud, where Mifsud tells them about dirt on Hillary, doesn't happen until April 26th.
If this National Security Coalition Council meeting of principles, Joe, happened right after the announcement of Carter Page and Papadopoulos with no information at all that they were involved in any nefarious activities, all of these clowns are going to go down!
Because it's going to become obvious this was a political hit job based on no information that they were Russian colluders because none of that information was available!
That's why nobody will give you the date.
Oh, late spring, Joe.
Happened in late spring.
Late spring?
What does that mean?
Folks, this is the biggest political hatchet job I have ever seen.
And I'm telling you, you are a colossal sucker if you are a liberal and you believe that this thing is legit.
So, I mean, I'm not a shout-and-fraud guy, but gosh, watching the collapse of liberals in their cry rooms as they realize they have completely lost control of this thing is one of the finer moments in my life.
Up there with the night of the Trump victory, walking out of that conservative review TV headquarters there, right outside of the Hilton in D.C., and watching the just complete panic on the streets in Washington, D.C.
Ah, the sky is for chicken little everywhere.
It was just a beautiful thing.
Then watching the hotel switch over from CNN to Fox News as I walked into the lobby as I knew Trump was going to win.
Oh, was it great.
Oh, was it great.
What a night.
Are you tracking what I'm telling you?
Because I got a couple more things I want to get to here.
Yes, I am.
I think that was well done.
I followed it.
Thank you.
The timeline keeps changing.
I'll cover this on my NRA TV show tonight, 5.30 p.m.
Eastern Time, live, NRATV.com.
It's free.
But the timeline keeps changing.
Because they don't want to admit how the case really started.
The case started when Carter Page and Papadopoulos were hired because they saw it as an opportunity to spy, not a legitimate threat.
Because when they were hired, they had no information at all that these guys were threats, Russian colluders, anything.
You understand this?
They started an investigation based on nothing.
Nothing.
Into these two people and inserted a spy and had no information whatsoever that these guys were Russian colluders.
None.
That's why, oh late spring, late spring, they will never give you the date and you know they have that date.
You know it.
Hashtag give us the date.
All right, today's show also brought to you by Filter Buy.
It's spring cleaning time, and like Trump is cleaning out corrupt officials, you can clean up the air you breathe and make your HVAC system great again.
And folks, don't procrastinate.
Otherwise, dust, mold, and pollutants will clog up your HVAC system, it'll become inefficient, and it'll end up costing you a lot of money.
Sounds like the federal government.
Clean up your system with my friends at FilterPi.
This is a great company.
America's leading provider of HVAC filters for homes and small businesses.
They carry over 600 different filter sizes.
We all need air filters.
This is your company.
Including custom options all ship free within 24 hours.
Plus they're manufactured right here in America.
FilterBuy offers a multitude of Merv options all the way up to hospital grade.
That's some clean air there, folks!
So you'll be removing dangerous pollen, dust, mold, and other allergy aggravating junk out of the air while maximizing the efficiency of your system and your own lungs.
Right now you can save 5% when you set up auto delivery, so you'll never need to think about air filters again.
Save money, save time.
Breathe better with filterbuy.com.
That's filter, B-U-Y.com, filterbuy.com.
You got a business, you got a house, then you have air filters.
Go check them out, filterbuy.com.
Where'd you go, Joe?
I missed you.
I needed a sip.
Yeah.
Is that it?
You had to wet the whistle a little bit there?
Yeah.
All right.
All right.
Let's see.
Where do I want to go next?
Okay.
I covered Mifsud.
Oh, another great piece by Kerry Pickett today in the Daily Caller.
I'd like you to read as well.
It's in the show notes.
Kerry Pickett has a piece up about some inside sources in the FBI who are ready to talk.
Now, I just want to explain to you as a former federal agent what's going on here, because I do get this email a lot and it's a legitimate question.
People say to me, Dan, I don't get it.
If you saw corruption in the Secret Service, would you speak out?
And the answer is yes, of course.
Fairly enough, some have said to me, well, where are all these FBI guys and women?
Clearly people know about this Spygate abomination, what happened, where are all the whistleblowers?
Folks, read the Kerry Pickett piece, it all makes sense.
I know, I know how this works.
Whistleblowers are afraid.
They're afraid to come forward.
I'm not making excuses for anybody.
Don't mistake what I'm saying.
I'm just telling you these are people with jobs and families who are terrified.
The picket piece seems to, and I can tell you what happens in the federal government, by the way, when they want to expose whistleblowers, sometimes for not so terrific reasons.
In other words, Joe, you run the ABC Federal Agency of Law Enforcement.
There's misconduct going on.
It's not in your best interest to have your misconduct exposed.
So what do they do?
They try to prevent whistleblowers, and they call them all leaks.
And what do they do?
They start polygraphing everyone.
And I'm telling you, someone who's been through a polygraph, twice, It's hard to beat, folks.
It is.
It is really, really difficult.
If you're polygraphed and you're leaking information, even if it is to the benefit of the general public and exposing corruption, you're going to be caught.
You'll probably be fired and then have to sue later to get your job back and claim Whistleblower Protection and all that other stuff.
You tracking me, Joe?
Yep.
That's one of the reasons.
People, why not just call the media?
Because they're going to polygraph everybody.
The minute a leak comes out, you're going to be the one going down.
That's why.
It's important.
The picket piece says, though, that if congressional subpoenas were to start to flow, Joe, to people involved in this thing, I know one specific person who could probably use one right now, that all of a sudden these FBI agents would be more willing to talk because they would have protections from Congress and they would also have most of their legal avenues covered by, in fact, that congressional subpoena.
I'm not going to get too deep into the story.
I'd like you to read it, but there's a little hint to people in Congress who are listening that there are people involved in this who, if you were to drop a few subpoenas, maybe would be willing to talk.
Get what I'm saying?
The polygraphs are flowing fast and furious, and people don't want to lose their jobs and have to sue to get them back.
Okay.
Now, we have that clip, Joe.
This is important.
This is my hat tip to that undercover Huber account on Twitter, which has just been doing some really terrific.
I have no idea who this man or woman is, but it's really good stuff.
I saw a gem on there yesterday.
Let me just read it to you, and I'm going to tell you why this is so important and why you need to know it.
And most importantly, why the swamp is freaking out.
Why the panic level.
Now, the swamp, I'm not talking about the same liberal media hacks I was talking about before.
The liberal media hacks on Twitter, like that guy I opened up the show with, what is his name?
Bergman.
They're freaking out because they're interested in the maintenance of power, maintaining power, the advancement of the deep state, the big state, the big S government, and the diminishment of individual rights.
And to do that, they need to some point win elections and win the presidency.
When they lose the narrative, they're afraid that politically they're losing the advantage here.
That's why they're panicking.
John Brennan and Jim Clapper and the Obama hacks out there, Johnny Favs and the rest of them, are freaking out because some of them have severe criminal liability in this, folks.
Criminal.
This isn't about politics to them.
It's about politics to the radical left and power.
To them, it's about some of them are going to go to jail.
Why?
Because there were felony leaks of information.
Now, I want you first to play this cut.
We played it before, but it's an important cut.
This is Jim Comey testifying on the Hill.
I want you to pay particular attention.
He's talking to Rep Elise Stefanik, hat tip to the conservative treehouse guys who pointed this out a while ago.
And Representative Elise Stefanik, a Republican, is asking Jim Comey about, hey, when there's an existence of a CI investigation, in other words, the investigation into Trump, what's the procedure for notifying Congress?
And then in the second cut, watch Jim Comey stammer as to why he didn't notify Congress.
And then I'll get into the leak.
It'll be important.
Play the cut.
Thank you, Mr. Crawford.
Ms.
Stefanik is recognized.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Director Comey and Admiral Rogers, for your testimony today.
My first set of questions are directed at Director Comey.
Broadly, when the FBI has any open counterintelligence investigation, what are the typical protocols or procedures for notifying the DNI, the White House, and senior congressional leadership?
There is a practice of a quarterly briefing on sensitive cases to the chair and ranking of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees.
And the reason I hesitate is, thanks to feedback we've gotten, we're trying to make it better.
And that involves a briefing of the Department of Justice, I believe the DNI, and some portion of the National Security Council at the White House.
So if that's quarterly... To brief them before Congress is briefed.
So it's quarterly for all three, then senior congressional leadership, the White House, and the DNI?
I think that's right.
Now that's by practice, not by rule or by written policy, which is why, thanks to the Chair and Rankin giving us feedback, we're trying to tweak it in certain ways.
Got it?
Three major takeaways.
Elise Stefanik, when do you brief Congress and others about any, any OpenCI investigation?
Well, we brief them quarterly.
For liberals out there, that means every three months.
I know you have a tough time with this.
About sensitive cases.
So the FBI is supposed to brief Congressional oversight quarterly, every three months, on sensitive cases.
He says something killer there, though, that I haven't seen anybody pick up.
He says, oh, but we briefed the National Security Council typically before Congress.
He makes sure to put that in there.
Why?
Oh, was that the same National Security Council in the late spring briefing?
Wow.
He makes sure to put that in there, Joe.
No, but we notify the NSC first.
And then maybe Congress.
Oh, so you notified Congress quarterly.
Ah, not so much.
So, since in your opening statement you confirmed that there is a counterintelligence investigation currently open, and you also referenced that it started in July, when did you notify the DNI, the White House, or senior congressional leadership?
Good question.
Congressional leadership, Sometime recently, they were briefed on the nature of the investigation in some detail, as I said.
Obviously, the Department of Justice has been aware of it all along.
The DNI, I don't know what the DNI's knowledge of it was because we didn't have a DNI until Mr. Coates took office, and I briefed him his first morning in office.
So just to drill down on this, if the open investigation began in July and the briefing of congressional leadership only occurred recently, why was there no notification prior to the recent, the past month?
I think our decision was it was a matter of such sensitivity that we wouldn't include it in the quarterly briefings.
So when you state our decision, is that your decision?
Is that usually your decision what gets briefed in those quarterly updates?
No, it's usually the decision of the head of our counterintelligence division.
And just again, to get the detailed on the record, why was the decision made not to brief senior congressional leadership until recently when the investigation had been open since July?
A very serious investigation.
Why was that decision made to wait months?
Because of the sensitivity of the matter?
Oh!
There we go!
This is great!
So in clip number one, rewind it if you missed it, click the 15 second back button.
Hey Jim!
How do you brief Congress about investigations, counterintelligence investigations?
We brief them quarterly on, quote, sensitive cases.
Hey, why didn't you brief Congress for eight months?
Liberals, eight months.
That's greater than three months.
Three months is quarterly.
We have 12 months in a year.
Just doing the math for you.
I know this is tough.
So, hey, Jimbo, why didn't you brief Congress for eight months after you briefed the National Security Council that had a Late spring briefing, nobody seems to remember the date for.
Why didn't you brief them for eight months later?
Five months after when you were supposed to brief them, right?
Well, it depends on when it would have happened, right?
Could have been more, could have been a little less, right?
Why did you wait eight months?
He goes, uh, that's a good question!
No, no, it's THE question, you knucklehead!
Why didn't you brief them for eight months when you were supposed to brief them quarterly?
Because of the sensitivity of the matter after he just got done telling her that they brief quarterly on sensitive cases.
Those are Jim Comey's own words.
This guy's a fraud.
He's a total liar.
Now, what does this have to do with anything?
Why is Comey panicking right now with Clapper and Brennan and these other deep staters?
It isn't the politics.
They know they have the Pravda media to cover their butts.
Somebody leaked this to the New York Times.
Somebody committed a felony.
How do I know this?
Hat tip the undercover Hoover guy?
Screenshot from the latest New York Times piece, Joe.
Keep in mind the timeline.
The cases opened in July of 2016.
July 31st of 2016.
Interesting, because spies have reached out to the Trump team sooner than that.
Fascinating how that happened.
Case is open in July.
They're supposed to brief Congress of oversight quarterly.
They don't brief them until March.
Way, way past the deadline.
But they've told the National Security Council in a meeting that nobody can seem to remember the date, Joe.
Late spring-ishy.
Kinda.
Sorta.
But what's awfully interesting is in that July to March period of March of the next year, July 2016 to March of 2017, where Jim Comey doesn't brief Congress on sensitive cases because the case is sensitive.
No, I didn't say that wrong.
That's his words, not mine, right?
It's so silly.
Incredibly, the New York Times gets a scoop from the latest New York Times piece, and I quote, In response to questions from the Times.
Law enforcement officials acknowledged the investigation but urged restraint.
They said they had scrutinized some of Mr. Trump's advisors but had found no proof of any involvement with Russian hacking.
The resulting article on October 31st reflected that caution and said that agents had uncovered no conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government.
Oh, isn't that incredible?
So congressional oversight, no, no, no.
We're not going to notify them about a sensitive case when they get notified about sensitive cases because it's sensitive.
But according to the New York Times, when they called, Joe, in response to questions from the Times, in response to a question from the New York Times, law enforcement officials, FBI, We're A-OK with telling them about the existence of the investigation.
