Summary:
In this episode I address the troubling opinion piece in the NY Times from an alleged “senior official” within the Trump administration. This person is a coward and should resign immediately. I also address the stunning revelations about Rod Rosenstein that were leveled last night on cable news.
News Picks:
The gutless coward who wrote the anonymous NY Times op-ed should resign immediately.
Byron York addresses some key takeaways from the anonymous NY Times op-ed.
John Solomon’s latest piece covers the troubling relationship between the FBI, the DOJ, and the media.
Sara Carter’s latest piece addresses the coming storm for Rod Rosenstein and the DOJ.
Why is Barack Obama’s staff hiding his speaking fee in Denmark?
Socialist Cynthia Nixon can’t figure out how to pay for her socialist nightmare.
This California Democrat’s “boycott” blew up in his face.
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.
Alright, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joseph Armacost, how are you today?
I'm just doing great, Dan.
We record, you know, about mid-morning.
The show is obviously a podcast, so it's recorded just a bit in advance.
It goes live about, I don't know, Joe, half an hour after we're done, so it's as close to live as you're gonna get.
And every time I come on the air in the morning now, I turn on the Fox News, and it's this hearing.
And this hearing with Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court nominee, this confirmation hearing, every day has become Just a couple it's it's like the peanut gallery it's a laughing stock it's like a joke the democrats go to new um just when you think we've hit a stupid floor like this is definitely the floor is stupid there is no way we're going to penetrate this floor of stupid we have reached a new low in stupid the stupid floor is burst through when you find yourself in the stupid basement and just when you think you've hit stupid bedrock they're like we have found a way to drill through the stupid bedrock
and get to the core of the stupid planet we live on and even then it's like you drill through the core and you wind up on the other side of stupid.
It is unbelievable how this thing has degenerated.
So this morning in case you're missing the latest scandal I'll fill you in here and I'm gonna get on to some other stuff because this is just so it's really an embarrassment.
The Democrats in the committee right now led by Cory Booker that are doing the confirmation hearing in the judicial committee here are now threatening to release classified emails.
Now, you can disagree or agree with the classification, fine.
I agree we over classify things in the government as well, documents in the government.
But Joe, just so we're clear on this, they are threatening to release classified emails in the hearing and Cory Booker's like, well, I'll accept the consequences.
This is an amazing act.
Joe, I think you know where I'm going to go with this, right?
This is a stunning act of hypocrisy.
So let me be clear on this.
Brett Kavanaugh, who was one of the secretaries in the White House.
Not a cabinet secretary.
A secretary who deals with actual administrative business inside the White House for George W. Bush.
They have classified emails that deal with classified information.
The Democrats, in order to, what they think they're going to do is damage Kavanaugh, are threatening to release one of these emails about some kind of racial profiling, which I'm sure has nothing to do with Kavanaugh or Kavanaugh's, you know, racial profile.
It's just an identity politics ploy by them.
But they're threatening to release classified emails.
These are the exact same Democrats, folks, keep in mind, who have now been hiding the entire Spygate scandal for months, saying, you can't release that, it's classified, despite the fact that the classification status may be hiding the biggest government abuse scandal and the weaponization of government that we've seen in our lifetimes.
These people are frauds.
Again, I wake up every morning saying to myself, how can we confront these frauds on some of their nonsense?
They are frauds.
They're total fakes.
So just to be clear, in a classified hearing, you want to release classified information to damage a judicial appointee.
You think you're going to damage him, at least.
But when it comes to actually exposing the weaponization of government, Fourth Amendment abuses, potentially Fifth Amendment abuses, all of this stuff, then all of a sudden you hide behind, well, classification matters, man.
We're not going to release that stuff.
It's classified.
Fakes.
Total frauds.
Totally, completely frustrated total frauds.
All right.
Welcome everyone who heard me on Mark Levin's show last night.
I appreciate everyone tuning in today.
All right.
Today's show, let's move on.
Brought to you by new sponsor, Joe.
Ding, ding, ding.
HairClub.com slash Bongino.
HairClub.com slash Bongino is the website.
HairClub.
Now listen, Joe does not have this issue.
Joe has an Elvis looking mane like you've never seen in your life.
But I have family members who do.
Losing your hair is tough, folks.
It takes a toll on your confidence.
It's like, well, men, you know, and this is a problem with women too, but it's like Samson.
You need your hair.
Your hair, you know, we love our hair.
So when you lose your hair, it's tough.
I mean, think about another reason too, practically why, right?
Your whole life you've grown up seeing yourself.
With hair, right?
Most of your life.
Unless you shaved your head intentionally.
That's right.
And then you start to lose it and it's tough.
It's tough to accept.
So it can take a toll.
Your confidence is important and sometimes one change can make all the difference.
HairClub knows this and they're inviting you to become part of the HairClub family to see how getting the most out of your hair can change your life.
They understand the emotions you're feeling right now and they know the questions you have.
HairClub is the leader.
The leader in total hair solutions with a legacy of success for over 40 years.
Whether you're looking to revitalize the growth of your own hair or to learn more about the latest proven methods for hair replacement or restoration, HairClub's professionally trained stylists, hair health experts, and consultants will craft a personalized solution to ensure you feel your best and get the most out of your hair.
See for yourself just how powerful great hair can be.
Yeah, like I said, I got a family member with this and he's gonna be all over this stat.
He's had some issues with it.
Go to HairClub.com slash Bongino today for a free hair analysis and a free take-home hair kit, all valued at over $300.
Wow, that's nice.
That's HairClub.com slash Bongino for a free hair analysis and a free hair kit.
Experience your hair and your life at its best, only with HairClub.
I'm certain you'll love the club.
HairClub.com slash Bongino.
Welcome on board, fellas.
Yeah!
Okay, by the way, Joe, we have... Did I just say it?
10-4.
All right.
10-4, Daddy-O.
So, yesterday, big breaking news.
Hold on one sec, Joel.
Yeah, man.
You can leave that in.
Sorry.
I'm getting a little hot in here, folks.
I've been working since yesterday, and my office, my studio gets super hot with all the equipment when it gets turned on.
So, an anonymous op-ed was released yesterday in the New York Times by a gutless chump coward.
You're a fraud.
Fake.
Phony, phony patriot, a big loser, writes an anonymous op-ed in the New York Times.
If you missed the story, I have some summations of it in the show notes.
A piece by Byron York, which is excellent, and a piece by Conservative Review.
Which covers my appearance on The Levin Show last night where I shred this idiot.
Now, we're assuming it's a he because someone slipped and wrote he.
So, to this guy who released this anonymous op-ed, let me give you some of the takeaways about what was in it, why it's been such a controversy, and why it's blowing up all over the media.
So, did you guys talk about this on CBM this morning?
Yeah, man.
Yeah, it's a big deal.
So, the New York Times publishes this anonymous op-ed from an alleged inside, quote, senior official in the Trump administration.
There are some, you know, some people are trying to play this down.
I don't think we should.
It's a very serious op-ed because it addresses some very serious questions.
The person, this guy, alleges that he is an insider and that there are people working in the inside in this cabal to thwart Trump's agenda.
Ladies and gentlemen, think about what we're talking about here.
This is serious stuff.
To thwart the agenda, you have people who have, they're not forced to be there, Joe, just to be clear, right?
These are not people who are imprisoned in some government gulag, forced to work for the Trump team under some kind of, you know, indentured servitude type situation.
These are people who have voluntarily decided to stay in their jobs while actively thwarting the will of who?
I argued yesterday, not Donald Trump, Joe!
That's a convenient out.
It's actually your will because you elected Donald Trump.
He didn't elect himself.
It's not a monarchy.
Donald Trump wasn't handed a crown and a scepter.
Donald Trump ran for the office of the presidency in the United States and was elected in a fair and free process in a constitutional republic and was elected based on your will.
There are people who have either chosen to stay in government, or even worse Joe, maybe they didn't stay in government, this quote senior official who wrote this op-ed, but maybe even worse they accepted positions knowing they were going in there to thwart the agenda of people who elected Donald J. Trump.
Couple of other takeaways from this op-ed, because the media is all over this, Joe.
The media is all over this because they love chaos, and I believe this was planned with the Bob Woodard book, which alleges more chaos inside the White House, that there's, you know, nervous breakdowns happening and all this other nonsense.
I believe this was planned.
This was timed during the Kavanaugh hearings to contribute to a sense of chaos so that the Democrats can thwart this nominee for making it onto the Supreme Court because they know their agenda's in real trouble.
Folks, none of this is by accident.
So Byron York has a great piece, and there are some takeaways from this op-ed that I think we all need to understand because this is very serious stuff.
I have the piece up at the show notes today at Bongino.com.
Please read it to follow along with the show.
Again, if you subscribe to my email list, I'll send it to you.
Um, takeaway number one is actually from me.
You have an absolute duty.
Duty now to resign.
To the anonymous chump coward who wrote this op-ed, didn't even have the guts to put your name on it.
If you really believe what you allege in there, that the Trump White House is in chaos, that Donald Trump is unfit to lead, that he's some kind of megalomaniac, power-hungry guy, if you actually believe that, Joe, don't you believe this guy has an absolute duty to resign?
Yeah, sure.
Name yourself.
Name yourself, you chump.
You gutless, spineless jellyfish, name yourself!
Now, Joe, listen, not giving myself some pretentious pat on the back here, but if anybody can talk about this, it's me, okay?
That's right.
I had a government paid job, your taxpayer money paid me.
I don't want to pay this fool who's writing this anonymous op-ed from inside the Trump administration attacking him.
I don't want to pay this fool one-tenth of one cent of my tax dollars.
I want a refund immediately from this idiot.
I worked inside the Obama administration as a secret service agent.
It's not a mystery, nobody cares.
I'm not looking for anybody's pats on the back, let me be crystal clear.
I didn't agree with the direction the country was headed in either.
I resigned.
I did not retire.
I did not keep my benefits package.
I didn't keep my government-funded taxpayer health care plan.
I left.
I walked away.
I ran for office in a blue state as a Republican.
I lost.
But I can tell you and sit here proudly and say, you know what?
I earned the right to talk about this.
And I'm not going to back down on this one bit.
If this guy had a scintilla of cojones, he would go out there tomorrow, name himself, and say, that was me in the op-ed, I don't like the direction this president is taking the country, and I'm resigning.
You have a duty, you fake, phony fraud, to walk away and stand for something.
You chump.
Anonymous op-eds.
Maybe I should have done that, Joe, as an agent.
Here's what I saw in the Obama- You know what's- Joe, you know what really upsets me about this?
Yeah, what?
You know what?
Alright.
There are things I saw in the Obama administration I still don't talk about.
I'm not talking about deliberations and meetings and stuff like that.
I don't want to exaggerate that stuff.
That's Wikipedia for some bizarre reason.
I know who the guy is, by the way.
That's a whole other story.
I'll leave that out.
I saw things with people in the Obama administration.
I still, to this day, keep quiet.
And you may object to that.
That's fine.
I just believe that there's a greater cause and a certain omerta in the Secret Service to not exposing things unless they involve criminality or a clear and present danger to the country.
But I had no problem walking away and leaving my salary behind, leaving my benefits behind, running for office.
Folks, we almost went broke.
Joe's known me a long time.
You know, when I nearly missed a mortgage payment one time because we had to put braces on my kid's teeth.
It's not some kind of sob story either.
It's just a point that if you're really willing to take on this burden of fighting the good fight, then go fight it.
Don't write an anonymous op-ed.
Imagine if I would have written that.
Maybe I'll write an anonymous op-ed now.
Hey, here's what I saw in the above anonymous.
Maybe we'll write it in the Wall Street Journal or something.
So takeaway one, you have a duty to resign.
Gutless wonder.
Number two, the op-ed's crystal clear, Joe.
Astonishingly, it lays out in almost intricate detail at one point.
How Donald Trump has been very successful at the deregulatory push, corporate tax cuts, the appointment of justices not only on the Supreme Court, if Kavanaugh makes it that would be justices, but also judges on the federal bench.
If you read the op-ed it's amazing and it's almost like there's like a cognitive dissonance.
The guy who writes the thing says, oh we've had all these successes but I really don't like Donald Trump's leadership style and how he can be unpredictable in meetings and other stuff.
And you're scratching your head, Joe.
You're like, wait, come again?
Yeah, that's what I took away too, Dan.
I mean, it's funny that you hit that angle.
I thought it was a little weird, but that's what I heard.
That's Byron York's first takeaway.
And I phrased it this way.
Apparently to this guy, who is clearly a swamp creature, the game is more important than the results.
It's the game.
The game, the swamp game, the pats on the back, the cocktail meetings, the lobbyist meetings, the butt kissing, the boot licking.
Yeah, exactly.
Let me bring my glasses and my shoes.
It's this almost obsequious bootlicking DC game nonsense and the fact that Trump doesn't do it that bothers this guy.
It is a truly astonishing piece.
I hate, I'm not putting it in the show notes because I'm not giving the New York Times clicks.
If you want to look it up, look it up.
I suggest you read Byron York's piece in my show notes instead.
It covers it without you having to give the New York Times any clicks on this idiot's piece.
But it is just stunning that Donald Trump ran his campaign against the deep state, against the swamp, People from the swamp, these phonies, sign up for the Trump administration to collect your taxpayer money, sabotage the administration from the inside, write anonymous op-eds about it while still collecting your taxpayer money, and in these anonymous op-eds, shockingly acknowledge that the swamp and the deep state are real because the person's a part of it.
They call it the steady state.
It's really the swamp state.
They acknowledge it's real, and then they acknowledge at the same time that the results in the Trump administration are very real, but they just don't agree with the management style because Trump refuses to surgically attack his lips to the ass of American politics.
I'm sorry folks, but that's it.
Read the highlights of the piece, you will see exactly what I'm telling you is true.
The guy who wrote the piece objects only to Trump's style.
So that's takeaway number two.
All they care about is the game.
Because as I said to you yesterday, the game is everything.
Jobs, jobs for their kids, jobs for life, lobbyist jobs, big homes in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia.
Joe lives in the heart of this in Maryland.
I live there too.
It is all government workers.
You can't swing a Coke can on a string without hitting a government worker if you live somewhere in Maryland.
Nothing wrong with that.
I was one of them.
A lot of good people out there doing good work.
I don't believe people go to work are the problem.
I believe the organization of government is, however, and I believe a lot of these people, sadly, have to understand that this is a public service position.
It's not a get-rich-quick scheme.
And this idiot who wrote this op-ed clearly is offended that the game is going and the game is going out the window quick under Trump because he's not having it.
At one point, the PC complains about, in the meetings, he has a short attention span.
Yeah, I did too at meetings.
Because you know what?
We had a line in the Secret Service, DBM, death by meeting.
You'd go into a meeting, Joe, and after like, say I'm the lead advance agent and the counter sniper guy's up there talking about the counter sniper plan.
It's not uncommon at all to be like, Time out.
Wrap it up.
Dude, we've got an hour here.
Okay?
Give us the highlights of the plan and what we need to know.
The fact that Trump is impatient at meetings, I'm not surprised at all.
He's a Queens guy who builds buildings.
You go in there and the builder's like, okay, chapter one.
No, no, no, no, no.
Where are we in the building process, sir?
It doesn't surprise me at all.
So secondly, the gripes are about style.
I just acknowledge that.
Another takeaway, this is also included in York's piece, although I'm editorializing a bit.
The author basically admits that there's some kind of a deep state coup going on.
Oh, that's a conspiracy theory.
Read the guy's piece!
Don't listen to me!
The guy's inside the Trump administration.
He's a quote senior official acknowledging in the New York Times own pages, Joe, that there is a concerted effort amongst numerous people in the Trump administration to thwart his agenda.
His words, not mine.
Folks, if this was an article, You go, what about-ism?
Oh, you're darn right what about-ism.
I live on what about-ism.
Because what about-ism is about the rules.
What about the rules?
If the rules are that this is now okay, Joe, you know darn well.
If this was an op-ed piece written about Barack Obama, oh my gosh, there'd be people being charged with treason right now.
If someone wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal saying, we are a bunch of patriots and the government actively thwarting the agenda of Barack Obama, the newspapers would be on a 24-7 operation to do what, Joe?
Hunt this guy down, get his name, expose him and have him charged with treason.
It's ridiculous.
Finally, this is clearly an effort during the Kavanaugh hearings to instill a sense of chaos within the government, chaos to shut these hearings down because they have no votes to do it.
It's probably a, if not coordinated, at least timed release with the Woodward book coming out soon, that it basically makes the same claims, that there's a bunch of chaos going on in the White House, that there's some insides we have to look at.
Now we're back to the 25th amendment again, which gives the cabinet under certain conditions the power to have the president removed for some mental instability.
We're back to this nonsense again.
I thought we had forfeited that a while ago.
Apparently not.
All right.
I got a lot to get to.
I got about six, seven stories.
A lot of news going on today.
All right.
Today's show also brought to you by our buddies at BrickHouse Nutrition.
Big, big fan of BrickHouse Nutrition.
I use their products.
I use them every day.
One of my favorite products is Foundation.
Foundation is a creatine ATP blend.
It is the single best supplement, in my opinion, out there for not only performance, but for looks too.
Listen, looks matter.
It's the phenotypes and genotypes, right?
We're phenotypical people.
We look, we look.
We have eyes.
We have eyes on our head.
We look.
We want to look better.
We want to look better for other people.
It's just the way we go.
We want to perform better too.
This creatine ATP blend product called Foundation.
This is the best product out there.
Try it.
You will not be disappointed.
If you don't believe me, do the mirror test.
I am so sure this product will work for you because I use it myself.
That if you take the mirror test, in other words, take a little mental snapshot of what you look like right now in the mirror.
Try the product.
Again, it's called Foundation.
It's available at BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
That's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Go there, try Foundation.
Take that mental snapshot in the mirror.
Come back seven days later, look at yourself again.
Not only your performance in the gym, your energy level go through the roof, this stuff works.
It'll make you look better too.
I love it.
I enjoy it.
The first time I tried it, I was so impressed.
I said, Miles, we got to get you on as a sponsor.
They've been here for two years now.
Go to BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
That's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Pick up a bottle of foundation today.
You will not be disappointed.
Send me your reviews.
I love to read your emails about it.
They are always, always not only positive, but glowing.
Go pick it up today.
Okay.
Um, So the tech industry folks were up on the hill yesterday, two of three.
They had Sheryl Sandberg from Facebook, Jack Dorsey from Twitter, and Google was a no-show.
But I want to warn you again folks, I'm going to move on, this is kind of a quick story, but I want to highlight this because it's on a lot of people's minds.
I know, I get it, I hear, I read your emails, there's a reason we make our email public, my wife and I, we'd love to read your feedback on the show.
But a lot of the feedback I'm getting is people demanding government intervention into Twitter, into Facebook, into Google, and into YouTube because of the known discrimination against conservatives.
Folks, I get it.
I am with you.
I have been a victim of this myself.
Granted, as someone said to me, you know, comparing what happened to me to people who've been entirely deplatformed, I'm not trying to do that.
I'm just trying to tell you that I've been hit by Twitter and I haven't even told you about the YouTube issues.
Here's what happened on Twitter.
I've been banned from running ads on Twitter.
They've never told me why.
They've never made any specific reason.
It's never made clear any specific reason.
That's just what Twitter does.
So that happened to me, and I haven't really talked about this, but in addition, My Facebook stuff has been spammed by Facebook at times.
A lot of you know that because the way I know that, Joe, is people email me.
They go, hey, I tried to share your stuff and it's been spammed.
Also on YouTube, one of the things I haven't shared is we have a YouTube channel.
Um, it's, uh, gosh, I don't even know what it is right now.
YouTube.com.
Oh, it's YouTube.com slash Dan Bob Bongino.
And if you go there on the YouTube channel, you can listen to our show.
And if the way YouTube works is if you allow them to run ads on your stuff, which we do.
You have to have a green light in order for your show to generate any revenue from those ads.
Our shows get yellow lights almost every day, meaning they're under some kind of review.
No one gives you a reason, no one tells you why.
I have some liberal friends that don't have this problem ever.
Folks, it's a scam.
Now, again, just setting up the fact that I've been a victim of this too.
I'm not complaining.
It happens.
It's a free market.
These companies can do what they want.
Well, I am complaining about it, but listen, I'm not suggesting any government intervention.
I'm warning you that one of the proposals coming down the pipeline that they are begging conservatives to get on board with, and you're being suckered if you believe this is going to be some kind of panacea and cure-all, Joe, Is they're suggesting government monitoring now of some of these Twitter, Facebook, YouTube type entities when they decide to get rid of or censor certain material.
Now, I know that sounds great now with Donald Trump in office to some of you.
Like, yeah, we should get some government regulator in there determining who Twitter can get.
I know Joe's shaking his head almost violently back and forth because this is a horrible, horrible idea with a capital H.
What happens when government monitors your phone calls?
Aren't we dealing with that right now?
I mean, we're dealing with that with Spygate.
The government has a monopoly on force, it has a monopoly on the ability to take away your money, to take away your freedom.
Turning over the power to them to monitor social media's decisions.
Folks, do you understand the Pandora's box we'd be opening?
Understand what I'm getting at here.
There is an actual proposal filtering its way around through the back channels to have government monitors sit in on these Twitter, Facebook, YouTube boards that determine who should be demonetized, de-platformed.
Folks, again, I know that sounds good now with Donald Trump in office.
Can you imagine if Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren, or like an Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, people who believe in the centralized power of a big-ass state government, to take away your rights.
Can you imagine if their monitors were sitting in there?
Folks, this could happen.
They are begging you to get on board with this plan.
I am begging you, as a friend, as a content producer, as someone who deeply and sincerely appreciates every moment you spend with us, and I put a lot of work into this show, please, please do not fall prey to this.
The solution here is not the intervention of government because it will be turned and weaponized on us immediately.
And I can guarantee you the minute a Democrat gets an office, the deplatforming is going to be on testosterone and you name it.
It is going to be juiced up beyond belief.
And they're going to have a government excuse to do it.
Please don't fall prey to this.
This is a huge, huge scam.
Okay, man.
All right, moving on.
So last night, again on Hannity's show, Sean Hannity's TV show 9pm on Fox has become, I'll be on tonight, I'm usually on Tuesdays and Thursdays, sometimes they cancel, sometimes they don't, but It has become just an incredible platform for information on the Spygate scandal.
People go on the show and break stuff.
And one of the things, Joe, you know, we still have this shirt up in our chump store, the Take It East thing, where I told you, I get it, I get it, I get it.
It's time for Sessions, I think, to move on at this point.
I think we understand that.
The relationship's broken.
He's recused himself from the Russia case.
The Mueller probe has gotten out of control.
But I've said to you repeatedly that there are some things going on within the federal government right now within the Justice Department.
I'm very disappointed in justice.
I just want to be clear.
I'm not trying to play both sides.
I'm just telling you my honest feelings, being candid with you.
But there are things going on.
I've told you, everybody needs to just, for a second, let's just, let's see what happens on this case and what's going on.
There are some things happening right now.
Last night, Joe DiGenova, to show you that I'm not crazy, Joe DiGenova goes on Hannity at nine o'clock last night, well, maybe a little after, and just drops a nuclear bomb on Hannity last night.
What does he say?
TheGeneva, who I appeared on Marc LaVincia with, says, uh, I've got some sources, and he does.
Joe was an assistant United States attorney.
Joe TheGeneva says, I have sources who have revealed to me that Rod Rosenstein is in fact under investigation right now and is not allowed to conduct proceedings before the FISA court.
Folks, everybody on the panel, I think Sarah Carter had already been notified of that by her sources, but everybody on the panel, including Hannity, was like, wait, what?
Now, I wasn't surprised by the information, but I was surprised it had gotten out there so fast.
Folks, I have absolutely no doubt there is a pretty exhaustive investigation going on right now as to Rod Rosenstein, who's now effectively the Attorney General, at least on the Spygate case, because Jeff Sessions, the actual Attorney General, has recused himself, I think mistakenly.
But Rosenstein is apparently, according to DeGeneva, under investigation now.
And it's not allowed to conduct or be involved in proceedings in front of the FISA court.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, why is this important?
What does this mean to you?
Especially given what I told you in yesterday's show, which did bonkers numbers.
Please, if you missed show 800 yesterday, it is, along with 628, a must listen to.
It's where I tie together the whole scandal.
Plan A, the effort to use government systems and foreign intelligence to spy on Trump, that falls apart.
They go to Plan B, which is the setup, the Trump Tower meeting, the spies trying to set the Trump team up, that falls apart.
They go to Plan C, which is the Mueller cover-up.
Now, Rosenstein's role in this is at all levels of this, but it's a clear and very easily explainable role in Plan B. Why?
Because Rod Rosenstein himself signed the fourth FISA warrant to spy on Carter Page and the team.
This is the big debate right now over the classification.
There are 20 pages from that warrant show.
The fourth FISA, so we're clear.
Right.
The fourth FISA warrant, which Rod Rosenstein signed himself.
There is a big debate right now in Congress and amongst the President and his staff over should they declassify 20 pages of that.
There are Republicans who've seen it.
Who have insisted that the warrant Rod Rosenstein signed to continue the spying on Carter Page and the Trump team.
Remember the two hop rule, right?
They can hop from Page to others to others, effectively spying on the whole Trump team.
There is apparently information in that fourth FISA that Rosenstein signed that is absolutely devastating.
Now, I'm going to get to in a second here what I think that is and why I think Rosenstein's in real trouble.
I think he's being investigated for two things.
Rosenstein was the number two in the Justice Department.
Rosenstein failed to verify or failed to oversee properly the verification of this information.
Now, none of this is new news to you, but folks, here's the problem Rosenstein's going to have.
There is a formal procedure called the Woods Procedure.
The Woods Procedure is a formal, delineated procedure for verifying information that's supposed to make its way into the FISA court because it's a court that doesn't have the same rules as a criminal court.
The FISA Court, you don't know you're being spied on.
You're not entitled to any adversarial proceedings at all.
The FISA Court is a secret court.
It's effectively the Star Chamber, right?
So because of that, there is a very specific procedure for that court called the Woods Procedure.
This is important.
The procedure delineates step-by-step how the information that gets into that court is to be verified to ensure that the information is in fact correct.
It wasn't.
It wasn't.
It wasn't!
It was fake!
My guess, and it's a good one, is those 20 pages they're going to declassify are going to include information, are going to show information within that dossier that if it were subjected to that Woods procedure would have been easily debunked as false.
Remember, it's a formal procedure.
It's not like, oh, verify it.
Hey, Joe, is this real?
Yeah, it's real.
Okay, the Armacost procedure, it's good.
No, no, it's not the Armacost procedure.
It's the Woods procedure.
It has to go to this person and this person in the FBI.
Then it goes over to DOJ.
Then it passes up the chain.
This is the last person to see it.
This person has to do this.
It's a very specific procedure.
So number one, I think Rosenstein's in a world of trouble because his fourth FISA, the fourth one, folks, meaning by now, Let me ask you a question rather than make a statement.
Joe, why do you think the fourth one, the fourth Pfizer, it would be more significant some of the information in that when it comes to verification than the first Pfizer?
Do you think, Joe, that some time may have passed between the first one and the fourth one?
You would think so, because that's just chronological common sense, right?
If the first FISA is filed in October, and the last one is until after April, right?
Time has passed.
So by that point, do you think they want the... Joe, if I'm being unclear, please stop me.
The reason people want to see the fourth FISA, and they want it declassified, unredacted, they want the information out to the public, Is because if information in the fourth FISA that appeared in the first, second, and third but had already been debunked appears again, somebody swore something out they shouldn't have.
Ruh-roh!
Shaggy!
Somebody's in a lot of trouble.
Why do you think Nunes and the others are pushing for the declassification of the fourth FISA?
Because by the time the information had made it from the first, to the second renewal, to the third, to the fourth, there's probably a pretty darn good chance that not only was it not verified the first time, but by the fourth time, it was shown to be categorically bull... You get it?
Oh yeah!
That makes sense, buddy?
Absolutely.
That old chronology thing gets him every time.
It gets you every time, doesn't it?
And the fact that Rosenstein's John Hancock is on this thing, he signed it, and the fact that he was in justice as the number two at the time, is fully aware of the Woods procedure, and time has already passed indicating that this is garbage, creates a very, very serious problem for our buddy Rod.
That's problem number one.
I like that.
Problem number two, the deuce.
Apparently there's some information that was exculpatory.
This is actually, you know what, it's actually not the deuce.
It's probably the same issue framed a different way.
First problem for Rosenstein, this investigation again, failure to verify.
Second one is the information was, there was probably exculpatory information that had Revealed itself by the time the fourth FISA, that chronology thing Joe gets you again, by the time the fourth FISA had been signed they had information leading them to believe that the information they were using in the dossier gathered by Steele was probably bulmalark.
Now what is that?
It's the information they had from Bruce Ohr.
Bruce Ohr is dealing with Steele after he's fired by the FBI and he's still funneling information to the FBI but he says to them some things that are deeply disturbing that were exculpatory that may not have been presented to the FISA court by the time the fourth FISA renewal happens.
Number one, he questions the veracity of Steele's information himself.
Bruce Ohr says at one point to Congress, yeah I wasn't sure this stuff was legit.
I mean in essence.
He questions the veracity of it.
Bruce Ohr is told by Steele about how much personal animus he has towards Donald Trump and he just doesn't want to get him elected.
He just wants to make sure he's not elected.
Joe, do you think that may have been important to a FISA judge to evaluate in the context of the information he's getting?
You think?
You think?
Yeah.
Folks, you have a duty as a federal agent and as a federal prosecutor.
Anyone who's a police officer or federal agent knows this.
You have a duty, if you are investigating Joe Armacost for a crime and you have information that Joe did not commit the crime, you have an alibi, you have Joe on video somewhere else, you are obligated, this is not an option, you are obligated to give that information over to his defense or not proceed if the probable cause isn't there for an arrest.
You are obligated, this is not optional.
No.
You are obligated to present, it's called exculpatory information.
Folks, I cannot be clearer on this.
This is not inside baseball for a lot of you, but for some of you it may be.
If you are present now, just to be clear on this, you can lie to people as a federal agent.
You can?
Yeah, of course.
That happens all the time.
If I don't have a full picture of Joe's crimes, I can walk in and go, Joe, I have you in, you know, I can place you in Queens on the night of the robbery.
You know, usual suspects.
I live in Queens.
You think of that yourself?
You got a team of monkeys working around the clock.
Remember that?
Kevin Pollak line.
But I can lie to you.
I can say I can place you in Queens even if I can't.
What I cannot do is I cannot lie to a court.
And I cannot lie about exculpatory evidence.
In other words, I can even lie to you in the interview, Joe.
Sure.
But still, if I have information that you weren't in Queens, I have to pass that off to the prosecutor, has to give that to the defense attorney.
It is not an option.
That didn't happen, folks.
Bruce Orr, who's in the Justice Department, who works for Rosenstein, works for him, has information.
That the information he's giving to the FBI used to spy on Trump and the FISA court, one is crap and number two is being provided by a guy who personally hates Donald Trump.
Kind of important folks, kind of important.
So just to sum this up, Rosenstein has two big issues and DeGeneva says he's under investigation and is not allowed to be involved in FISA proceedings.
This is big news last night, this was not small.
Number one, and if you're missing Hannity's show tonight, you're missing all his, by the way, because he seems to be the only one nailing this thing to the wall.
Yeah.
Number one, they failed to verify it.
The information did not follow the Woods procedure.
By FISA number four, which is months later, they already knew a lot of this was crap and they still ignored it.
Secondly, they had exculpatory evidence indicating this entire case was a steaming pile of garbage.
And they proceeded with it anyway.
My mother-in-law would say, you're in trouble big time!
Big time!
You are in trouble big time!
Big time!
Yeah, there's a big-ass rubber stamp, dude.
Obviously, that's the whole essence of the investigation.
So, I have another piece in the show notes.
By the way, I have a piece in SarahCarter.com in the show notes today that lays a lot of this out as well.
It's very, very good.
Please read it.
Again, follow along with the show.
I've been adding to the show notes.
I started at like four or five.
We're now up to like seven or eight articles, but I just want to give you a good flavor of the news of the day.
And I really, I put a lot of work into the show notes, so please check them out on my website.
Another piece by John Solomon at The Hill, which is just damning!
Talking about the press corruption in this whole case.
Now, Lee Smith over at Tablet Mag and Real Clear Investigations.
Lee Smith has been covering this for months too.
How, ladies and gentlemen, the Spygate scam is really a media scandal too.
The media was used at strategic points in the investigation to to propagandize you.
To make you to believe the investigation was a place it wasn't.
And then the FBI in turn turned around and used the reporting some of them had leaked.
They actually used it in citations in court documents as evidence that their case was real.
Think about what I'm telling you here for a minute because there's another angle on this about Weisman it's going to just blow your socks off.
The Bureau and the DOJ are leaking information to the press.
The press is subsequently printing stories about the Spygate scandal, about Mike Flynn, about Trump's alleged ties to Russia, which were garbage.
The FBI is then using those leaked stories in some of their court documents.
Now, the citations aren't as deep as some were alleged early on, but they're definitely there.
David Corn from Mother Jones actually walked one of the documents over to the FBI.
He's a reporter.
The media corruption in this is deep.
Now we find out another just unbelievably explosive angle on this story that left me shaking my head like, is this ever going to stop?
We now find out, according to Solomon, it's an older story but there's the angle on it's new.
That in April of 2017, Andrew Weissman, who's now the lead investigator on the Mueller witch hunt.
This guy's investigating Trump right now, Andrew Weissman, unbelievably.
I told you yesterday about his connections to Rumler, Obama's fixer, and Lisa Monaco.
Listen to yesterday's show.
It is a thorough evisceration of this Mueller probe, right?
But Weissman's the lead bulldog for Mueller.
This guy's had problems in the past with horrible prosecutions, the Enron case, whatever.
We now find out, as I told you yesterday, that Weissman Weissman was also being briefed by Orr.
Now, why does that matter?
Let me drop a little hint bomb to you here.
If Joe DeGeneva's right, Joe, giving you the old winking a lot here, if Joe DeGeneva's right, That Rod Rosenstein is under investigation while he was in the Department of Justice for failure to verify the information he signed off on on the FISA and the failure to include exculpatory information to the judge that indicated the Trump team was innocent.
We find out yesterday that Andy Weissman was also Also being briefed by Bruce Ohr from the Justice Department as well.
Remember this is before the Mueller probe even started.
That Andy Weissman was being kept quote in the loop on all of this fake dossier stuff that Bruce Ohr was collecting.
Is it possible, Joe, that maybe Andrew Weissman may be under investigation too?
Shazam!
Darn right!
I'm just asking!
I'm just gonna put that out there, let you all stew on that one for a little bit.
Is it possible old Andy's in a little bit of trouble?
Now, Even worse, in John Solomon's piece, there's a detailed account of an April 2017 meeting Weissman has with the Associated Press!
Yes!
Weissman is meeting with the press!
This is... It never ends!
Just when you think like, again, we have hit the bedrock of stupid, we crack the bedrock and go right to the stupid core.
April 2017, Weissman meets with the Associated Press about the Manafort case.
The Manafort case shockingly appears in the Associated Press, the detailed allegations against Manafort, just days after that meeting.
Now, the meeting was apparently so repulsive That when the FBI got wind of it, there are apparently FBI complaints about this meeting about how Weissman revealed too much in the meeting to the press.
Folks, I've told you from the start, Lee Smith has said it, Solomon says it in his piece today, it is the incestuous relationship between these leakers and the press and the court system and the use of all of this circuitous reporting to spy on Trump that is part of the scandal.
And now the press is being completely exposed.
So Weissman, who's Mueller's bulldog, was apparently being briefed in on the Spygate scandal as he's briefing in the press on components of it, the Manafort surveillance that went on.
The press is running stories on it.
Then Weissman goes out later and he's on Mueller's special counsel, as he's part of the special counsel at the time actually.
And he gets to investigate the very same thing he's leaking to the press about, Manafort.
This is absolutely incredible.
Alright, moving on because I've got a lot to get to.
Listen, just moving quickly to some economic points.
The Obama jobs lie continues and it's really starting to aggravate me, folks.
Andy Puzder has a great piece in the Wall Street Journal today, it's subscription only, but the Obama jobs lie.
I just want to put out a quick data point for you so you have, you know, the mental ammunition you need to battle your liberal friends who are constantly putting out this new talking point.
The new talking point is this, for the left, that well in the last year of the Obama administration more jobs were created than Donald Trump has created in that equivalent time period during his tenure.
Folks, The reason I'm bringing this up in light of Puzder's op-ed today is because they're not wrong.
What they're wrong about is the quality of the jobs.
Folks, it's not hard to create jobs like staring at paint all day.
Creating jobs in engineering, in high-tech assembly lines, creating a growing economy with productive jobs that create an income stream where people can support themselves is entirely different.
Now, it's ironic that Donna Brazile herself, the DNC chair, in exposed emails, you can read it yourself, I've already talked about this in the past, acknowledged that the jobs the Obama economy created were low-wage jobs and they were largely part-time.
They were not enough for the economy to support themselves.
So Puzder writes in the piece today, you know the fascinating part of that statistic, Joe, is that Puzder writes 700,000 people who were employed in part-time jobs That didn't want to be, that were looking for full-time jobs.
Those people have disappeared while simultaneously millions of new full-time jobs were created.
In other words, yes, Obama may have created more jobs.
He didn't create anything, the Obama administration, but you get the point.
More jobs may have been created during the last year of the Obama administration, but they were crap jobs to support a staggering and stagnant economy, excuse me.
Donna Brazile mentions this in her own emails, how they're going to have a problem because people don't feel like the economy is growing because it isn't, because they're working jobs that aren't commensurate with their skill levels.
Trump comes in and the mess cleans itself up, folks.
Hundreds of thousands of these part-time jobs disappear.
You may be saying, Dan, we're celebrating the disappearance of jobs.
Yes!
Yes!
We're celebrating the disappearance of crappy jobs with the replacement of millions more full-time jobs.
Now, you need a number just to clarify to your liberal friends why they're, well, Obama created more jobs in the last year.
It's not, it's not, they're crap jobs.
Trump's had to come out and clean these part-time jobs out to replace them with full-time jobs.
Here's the real number.
The last 19 months of the Obama administration, 3.3 million full-time jobs were created.
The first 19 months of the Trump administration, even under conditions where the economy is recovering over that time from, uh, you know, from, uh, almost full employment levels, the Trump administration creates 4.1 million.
So folks, when it comes to quality jobs, full-time equivalent jobs, uh, Obama last 19 months, 3.3 million, Donald Trump, 4.1 million.
The reason I use 19 months is because that's where we are.
That comes from a Lewis Woodhill piece I had in the show notes a while ago.
Either way, we win.
The Trump economy has been far better.
4.1 million is clearly bigger than 3.3 million.
Trump has had to come in and clean up the mess.
The problem under the Obama administration wasn't job creation, just to sum this up.
The problem was the jobs that were being created were not corresponding to a growing and flourishing economy.
They were part-time jobs.
Part-time jobs commensurate with his stagnant recovery.
Those jobs are disappearing.
And yes, that's a good thing.
Because they're being replaced by full-time equivalent jobs you can support your family on.
Okay.
In one of the most ironic stories I've heard in a long time, this is up at the Daily Caller, it's in the show notes today.
I read this, it's a quick one, but I admit yesterday's show took up so much time I missed some of the news.
Joe, Obama's giving a speech in Denmark soon, you know, fake socialist Denmark.
Liberals love to call Denmark socialist.
It's not socialist!
Denmark is a market economy.
If you call Denmark a socialist economy, you are a knucklehead.
It is not democratic socialism.
It's not socialism.
Denmark is a market economy by some measures of economic freedom, even by right-leaning think tanks.
It is measured as a freer economy than even the United States.
Now, They do have high levels of taxation.
I don't agree with it.
I think some people in Denmark are even starting to rebel against that.
They do have a nanny state, but they are not a socialist government.
What's fascinating about this story is Obama is going to give a speech over there, Joe.
Apparently the speech is for hundreds of thousands of dollars.
And listen.
Brother, I'm a capitalist.
Great.
Barack, knock yourself out, buddy.
Collect whatever you can.
The market gauges your speeches worth a hundred, couple hundred thousand dollars, three hundred, four hundred.
Take a million.
I don't care.
I'm not paying it.
I wouldn't pay it.
I wouldn't pay 20 cents for your speeches.
I don't care.
But what's fascinating about the story is the Obama team, and I need you to post this article for your liberal friends and ask them for an explanation.
The Obama team, Joe, has apparently told this group in Denmark that if the amount Obama's getting paid goes public, that they're going to cancel the speech.
Why?
So, I was trying to find a way to label this story, right?
I'm thinking of like, how do I, the hypocrisy here is so stunning.
I'm like, how do I sum this up in a sentence?
I'm thinking, okay, so Obama uses capitalism and capitalism principles to make money in a fake socialist country that liberals think is socialist but isn't socialist.
I could not think of a way to sum up the rife hypocrisy here.
They cite Denmark as being a socialist country, which they love.
It's not.
It's a market economy.
That market economy chooses to pay Barack Obama hundreds of thousands of dollars to go give a speech over there in that free market economy that liberals foolishly think is socialist.
Barack Obama, apparently his team embarrassed by capitalism and the amount they're profiting off capitalism and the free market, demands that this fake socialist country, which is actually a free market economy, not publish the details of his capitalist deal Or else he'll cancel the speech in the fake socialist country.
I can't get over it!
The hypocrisy is legendary!
I may talk about this on my NRA TV show tonight too because this story is so juicy.
I just couldn't get over it.
This is what happens with liberals.
I wake up every morning astounded at their hypocrisy.
The guy's using capitalism to make hundreds of thousands in a fake socialist country and is ashamed of the capitalism.
And tells them if you expose the details of it, we're out of here.
We're outtie.
Oh, that's just great, isn't it?
That's just absolutely peachy.
Okay, let's see.
Oh, last story here.
So, it's on a good note, too.
Folks, I know things seem gloomy sometimes.
They do.
We've seen this just absolute charade at the Kavanaugh hearing.
He looks tired, by the way.
Imagine two days of listening to Democrats up on the Hill.
My gosh, you'd lose your mind.
But he's been filleting them and making them look pretty silly.
But here's some good news.
I did a show a while ago, it was one of our most listened to shows ever, about how it's not the first person to get up and dance, it's the second that gets up and dances with the first person that matters.
And I cited this video that Some folks in law enforcement, even intelligence agencies and others have cited.
It's a video.
It's a real video.
It's on YouTube.
And it's this guy at a festival and he gets up and he starts dancing.
It's pretty crazy looking dance.
I don't know.
Certainly not the Macarena or anything like that.
And, you know, at first people are kind of laughing at him and it's taken from a bit of a distance.
And then you see the second guy gets up and starts emulating this guy's kind of crazy dance moves.
And the second guy gets up and dances and all of a sudden people start saying, oh, that looks fun.
And the third person all of a sudden within, I don't know, two minutes into the video, the whole park at this festival is up and copying this guy's crazy dance.
It's really a fantastic video.
And what I've argued about and what a lot of people have told me who showed me the video and their insights on it are key is this is not a, it's not a small thing.
It's not the first person who gets up and does something that matters.
You know, a lot of people are going to stand up and stand up for a cause, whatever it may be, and speak out on Twitter and they're going to get shut down.
It's the first brave person that backs that person up that typically is going to be the game changer.
It's the second person that dances and doesn't allow the first person to be mocked.
People have to start to stand up and we have to start to fight back.
We gotta dance, folks.
The dance matters.
Action matters.
Talk is cheap.
It's the do that matters.
You have to do things.
You have to get out and be willing to take it on the chin.
You have to be willing to sacrifice, unlike this anonymous coward in the New York Times who's not even willing to sacrifice the taxpayer money we work for and are paying this idiot.
You have to be willing to walk away.
And when you walk away and inspire that second person and he inspires a third, that's how you start a movement.
I bring this up because there's a story I have in the show notes today from the Fresno Bee.
And it may seem like a small story, but I'm telling you it's not.
In-N-Out Burger, which a cowardly Democrat committee person or chairperson, a guy by the name of Eric Bauman from California, called for a boycott on his Twitter feed of In-N-Out Burger because they had made a donation to the California Republican Party.
Not unusual for a business, which by the way, they supported Democrats, pro-business Democrats as well, it is not unusual for a business to make Political donations to parties they think support business.
That's only unusual for dopey liberals who don't understand how business actually works.
Well, he called for this boycott.
The boycott blew up spectacularly in his face.
In-N-Out Burger was packed.
Stories were written about it.
People ran away from this guy.
They made him look like an utter fool.
And he now acknowledges Joe, and I'm quoting, OK, there is no boycott.
Gee, thanks, Eric.
It was a boycott, actually.
You made a complete, utter fool of yourself.
Because that's what Democrats, sadly, in elected positions typically do.
But what's important about this is In-N-Out Burger never backed down.
Not for a second.
They understood that they had done what they believed.
Again, I'm not asking you to agree, but they never backed down.
Other companies have.
They have caved to the social media mob.
We've seen it with Nike, who thinks that making the face of their new campaign.
A guy, Colin Kaepernick, who wears socks with cops depicted as pigs, who celebrates the murderous Castro regime and some of their literacy accomplishments and healthcare accomplishments.
They kill people.
They caved to the social media mob.
They caved to the social media mob because they think they're getting up and dancing, but they're not.
The dance has actually been going on amongst a bunch of idiots for a long time, this social media dance, but this is the crowd you don't want to be dancing with.
This is the one you want to be avoiding and walking away from.
These people have organized themselves on social media to give them a more...
They're not as powerful as they seem.
They've used social media to amplify a voice that isn't there.
When these companies start standing up, like In-N-Out, and say, no, not today.
We're going to do our dance.
And other companies start dancing with them.
You're going to see a movement in the United States that says, you know what?
Enough of this.
We've had enough.
We are going to stand up.
We are going to do what we are going to do.
This is our business, and we are willing to take the slings and arrows from it.
Folks, we've been willing to do it here.
There are some relationships you've had to cancel on the show.
Joe and I, Joe knows what I'm talking about.
There are jobs I've walked away from.
I don't speak with forked tongue here.
Show's not perfect.
I'm not putting myself on any pedestal.
You all work very hard out there too.
But you have to stand up.
And if you are a member listening to the show of some corporate board somewhere, I'm telling you, That what you think is focus group tested public opinion on social media is not.
The heartland of America loves this country, they love its values, they love freedom, and they just want to be left alone and they don't want to be subjected to intimidation mobs.
Stand up, say no, and what happened in an outburger and their boycott and the eventual back down of the social media mob will happen to you as well if you can just weather the storm initially, I promise.
All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in.
I really appreciate it.
Please subscribe to the show.
It is free.
I know a lot of you download it.
You can listen at Bongino.com.
You can subscribe at iTunes.
It's free.
It's also free on iHeartRadio.
You can click the follow button, but it helps drive us up the charts.
We're also available at Spotify.
You can enable the skill on Amazon Alexa and the Google Podcasts app, so I really appreciate it.
Thanks a lot.
I will see you all tomorrow, where it'll be Friday!
Nice!
See you all manana.
You just heard the Dan Bongino Show.
Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com.
You can also get Dan's podcasts on iTunes or SoundCloud.
