Summary:
In this episode I address the suspicious package threat and possible explanations for the methodology. I also address an interesting connection in the Russia case that has received almost no media coverage. Finally, I address some positive news about the midterm elections and the economy.
News Picks:
Our latest piece covers the latest developments on the caravan.
This Washington Examiner piece address the suspicious package scare.
The person responsible for these suspicious packages will likely be caught relatively quickly.
This Politico piece by Ali Watkins addresses a forgotten figure in the Spygate scheme.
The media coverage of the suspicious packages has been horrible.
Repealing the tax cuts could cost Americans tens of thousands of dollars.
Here’s a convenient chart to refute “fair share” talking points.
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 Joe, how are you today?
What a day, what a day, what a day, what a day!
Yeah, I know.
Really stacked news day, so don't go anywhere.
Let me just get right to it, folks.
I don't want to waste your time.
Today's show brought to you by our buddies at Saucy, a new sponsor.
Check them out.
Super easy to use.
I love this site.
Everyone at some point has wished they could just have beer, wine, or liquor delivered.
Well, someone finally decided to do something about it.
My wife and I enjoy Saturday night date nights at home in our backyard.
Now it's easy to get your beer, wine, or liquor delivered right to you.
Introducing Saucy, the alcohol delivery app.
Saucy delivers your favorite beer, wine, and liquor right to your door on demand.
If you're in LA, the Bay Area, Chicago, San Diego, Sacramento, your Saucy order will arrive at your door in under 30 minutes.
Under 30 minutes, ready to drink.
For the rest of us, Saucy will deliver beer, wine, and liquor to your door in two days or less nationwide.
There are no order minimums, no delivery fees, no running to the store.
If you've got the Saucy app, you've got a fully stocked bar on your phone.
And for a limited time, you can get $15 off $15 off when you download the Saucy app and enter the promo code DAN, my first name, D-A-N.
This is really easy to use, very efficient.
That's the Saucy app, spelled S-A-U-C-E-Y, and enter promo code DAN for a nice $15 off.
Get the Saucy app today and use promo code DAN.
Don't forget.
All right, folks.
There we go.
Yesterday.
Yes.
Busy, busy news day.
I was on the air doing all kinds of interview and radio.
And let's get right to this suspicious package thing.
There are a number of things I want to point out to you in addition to some other stories out there.
I have some pretty good contacts, obviously, in the Secret Service and in other places in the federal government.
You know, just from having worked there.
I'm not patting myself on the back.
If you worked there, you'd have the same ones.
Uh, there's something not right here.
Now, I guess the best way to do this is to not bury the lead and put the lead in the front, as I've been doing lately.
There's only two possible explanations to this.
To this suspicious package threat we have out there.
Explanation number one is that this is a grotesquely rank amateur intending to inspire terror.
Now the terror part applies to both explanations because any idiot willing to do such a, I mean, this is something so stupid and traumatize people like this, you're a savage, right?
Right, right.
But explanation number one, Joe, this is an amateur.
I'll explain why in a second.
Or explanation number two.
It's not an amateur.
Matter of fact, it's someone who knows exactly what they're doing and is trying to look like an amateur.
Now.
Those two cannot possibly exist at the same time.
You either don't know what you're doing, or you do know what you're doing, and you're trying to look like someone who doesn't know what they're doing.
All right, Agent Bongino.
Where are you going from here?
Yes, I know, and I was gonna talk to Joe, but Joe and I are friends, so we chat before the show.
I said, let me save this one for the end, because I appreciate Joe's genuine reaction.
Okay.
So, in chatting with some of my buddies, one of the things that sticks out to me and to others Is the fact that these are unbelievably amateurish devices.
Let me just point out some things to indicate that these are not devices that someone who has experienced in these sinister dark arts would put together.
Number one, if you were intending to harm someone via a package bomb, God forbid, You do not want that package bomb to be suspicious.
Well, why would that be, Joe?
Because simply, you don't want it to be detected, right?
This is not complicated.
So there are things you do to minimize detection.
These are obvious ones that were not present on this.
I mean, you don't put a printer label on a package in font, 700 font.
You get what I'm saying?
You keep the font normal or you print in normal block letters so it would look like a standard package or envelope.
That is not the case with this thing.
Secondly, as I indicated on a Fox & Friends appearance this morning, and I'll put out to you there, and this is all out there, folks.
I wouldn't, you know, divulge any classified information.
This is all out there already.
I wish it weren't, but it is.
Printers leave a signature on printed documents.
I don't know if you all are aware of this, but they do.
It's like a fingerprint, isn't it?
More or less, yes.
Well said, my friend.
They leave a printer, and how it's done, I'm not at liberty to say, but it's a technique we used when investigating counterfeit money in the past.
When I first got on the Secret Service, what we called P-Notes, computer printed notes, were almost non-existent.
Everything was done via some form of a press, a printing press.
As printer technology got better, people started to pass what we call P-Notes.
One of the ways that's very easy to detect p-notes is by the pattern a printer leaves on a printed bill.
You can find out what printer it is, like Joe said, and I'll leave it at this, it leaves a fingerprint.
Those fingerprints, and literal fingerprints, are most likely on those packages and on those printer labels.
This is an amateur hour operation.
Combine that with the size 700 font on the front.
I think meant to draw attention to these packages, which makes no sense.
If your goal was to get these packages, God forbid, to detonate.
Says to me, again, this is either an amateur operation or someone trying to look amateur.
I will get to that point again in a moment.
Some other indicators that there's something seriously wrong and very suspicious about this case, outside of the obvious disturbing nature of it in general.
The packaging, folks, people who do this, and people like the Unabomber and others who have successfully, sadly, pulled off these horrible attacks.
The packaging, the excessive packaging is one of the indicators that there may be something wrong with the package at your location.
Excessive packaging and tape is put in for a reason, Joe.
The reason is quite obvious if you think about it.
If you don't want your device to be detected, you can't have the device inside somehow get wet on the packaging and then, say, one of the angles of it, if it's a pipe or whatever it may be, or some kind of explosive device in black powder, you don't want the angle to push through the envelope.
You get what I'm saying?
You don't want the envelope to open.
So it's not uncommon to see this excessive packaging and wrapping and taping and taping on top of more taping in these devices.
That was present here.
Having said that, the excessive packaging is usually an indicator and this person made a point to really overdo it with the packaging on this one.
Another point indicating the amateur nature of this, the stamps, six forever stamps, the same stamps put on these devices, the same kind of stamps, the same, obviously the placement, that's pretty standard on, I mean, that's obvious, but the six stamps in that same layout on the package, the overuse of postage, putting all that postage is another indicator that this was an amateur hour operation.
This was done Often in the past in these incidents, the excessive postage to make sure the device, let's say, gets to its intended location.
But this one, again, seemed to be obvious.
Combine that with the fact, Joe, that the stamps did not have the black parallel lines over the stamps, which the post office does after it is processed through the facility.
Why?
So that the stamp can't be reused.
There are no stamps on the stamp.
Meaning, these were not processed through a post office facility.
Meaning, why would you put the stamps on there?
It was either a courier or they were hand delivered and meant to look like U.S.
mail.
They were not.
Another indicator this is an amateur hour operation or meant to look like one.
Ladies and gentlemen, if you were so driven by hatred that you felt the need to mail an explosive device To a person you could not stand and had such vitriol in your heart for.
Let's use John Brennan as an example.
You would probably figure out where he actually worked and understand what the spelling of his name was.
That's not what happened in this case.
The printer label not only mailed a package for John Brennan to CNN, but it spelt John Brennan's name wrong.
It spelt a number of names wrong.
It spelt Debbie Wasserman Schultz's name wrong as well on the return label.
Folks, John Brennan's name is spelled with two N's, not one.
John Brennan does not work for CNN.
John Brennan works for NBC.
If you are deranged enough to do this and send a package to John Brennan, you would have thought putting all that work air quotes here into developing your deadly device or your suspicious package in general, you would think you would do basic research to figure out what John Brennan's name is actually spelled like and where he works.
This all reeks.
There's something not right about this case, folks.
Something is not right.
Now, here's the kicker.
Again, we're dealing with the headline here.
This is either a rank amateur or a hardcore professional designed to look like a rank amateur.
Now, I've given you no evidence so far that this is a professional, Joe.
All I've said so far is the print, the packaging, the stamps, the misspellings, the names, the way the devices were delivered.
This sounds like an amateur.
Does it really?
Let me bring up an interesting point you brought up to me.
Okay, Agent Bongino.
Yeah.
Joe, if you were, God forbid, an amateur bomb maker, putting together these devices, and you were so bad at doing it, you couldn't even figure out the initiator, how it works right, but you're dealing with highly explosive toxic compounds.
One of the things we'd seen in the past, and there's numerous examples of this, are these guys missing fingers.
Sometimes they turn up dead, or typically we get a call from a police department saying, wow, we heard a loud explosion in apartment 6C.
Why does that happen?
Because they're so stupid, a lot of these rookies at this, they can't figure out how to not blow themselves up.
Ladies and gentlemen, even professional bomb makers, a lot of them are missing numerous digits on their fingers.
All the evidence I gave you just now is that this person has no idea what they're doing, thankfully, in the construction of an explosive device inserted into the mail system or the courier system.
If that were the case, it would be highly likely, highly likely that this person would have either killed himself by now, Or we would have some hospital records of someone showing up in a hospital with a missing digit or an arm because they have no idea how to construct these things.
How do we know they have no idea?
Because none of them actually exploded, thank the Lord.
None of them.
That says to me, ladies and gentlemen, that this was not an amateur.
This was not an amateur.
This was probably someone with some experience who designed these things to intentionally not go off.
Some of the other indicators, one of the, according to media reports, one of the other devices was constructed using PVC pipe.
You know, ladies and gentlemen, that's obviously a very stupid way to do this.
You have to constrain, what creates the pressure in the blast is constraining the actual explosive power within the steel encasement.
Right, right.
It's what creates that force.
If you just light up a bunch of black powder on a field, you just get a poof.
You constrain those gases in a steel tube, you create a lot of problems.
This is clearly, in my mind at this point, somebody who knew what they were doing and wanted these devices to be detected.
Wanted these devices to be detected.
Now, what worries me about this now, Joseph, is the potential for a tactical shift going forward.
If what I told you is true, and I believe it is, and I believe this person will be caught expeditiously, I'm expecting... I mean, listen, the predictions game is irresponsible here, but let's just say in the coming days I believe someone's going to be caught, I believe who it is, and Let me just not say too much.
I think it's going to surprise you.
Yeah, I think it's going to surprise a lot of people what's going on here behind the scenes with this.
But what worries me now is a tactical shift from this person.
If this person, as I believe, has some kind of experience with explosive devices, How to detonate them.
And most importantly, Joe, how to not detonate them.
How to get these kind of black powder or potential explosive devices through the mail without them going off.
And I believe that was the intention at this point.
It defies credulity at this point that this person mailed nine devices and none of them went off.
What worries me is a potential tactical shift to devices that will go off.
That will go off.
That shouldn't be on everybody's mind right now.
Would not be unheard of for things like this to happen.
Now, one more point on this, because I do have a lot of news to cover today.
You know, the example, it's brought up a lot, I know, because it was brought up to me on the news and a couple of radio interviews about the Unabomber and things like that, that it took a long time for the Unabomber to be found.
In other words, that this person may take a long time to catch this person.
Well, it may.
I don't think it will.
I believe the fact that all these packages were left behind leaves behind a body of evidence.
There's a lot of tape on some of these devices, folks.
Tape is the way we get fingerprints.
The chances of avoiding a fingerprint on nine unexploded devices are slim to none.
But I believe this person will probably be caught in the coming days and I just You have a question?
Yeah, I do have a question.
I can't remember who said it, but I want to know if it's correct, if you think it's correct.
There's more detonations of bombs being built than there are of bombs being used in execution.
Is that?
Yeah, that's exactly right.
That's one of the reasons I mentioned that to you, one of the points I've been discussing with a pal.
That's a lot of bombs to build and not blow up.
Yeah, it's an awful- and it speaks to a person's ability to professionally handle- I'm glad you brought this up- explosive devices.
These are obviously toxic compounds.
Yeah.
Obviously.
And the fact that none of these devices have exploded, or we have no indication yet that they've exploded while they were in construction, says to me that this is someone who knows what they're doing.
That's what I meant.
Yeah, thanks man.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, of course.
I saw you, like, you were, Joe was doing this thing where he, like, touches his chin, and when Joe touches his chin, that means he's got some kind of a question he's waiting for me to, he's waiting for me to answer.
But on the Unabomber front, I just wanted to tie that part up too.
The Unabomber operated over years and years and years, and he was tactically, uh, very strategically, uh, putting those, those, those units, those explosive devices in the mail at different locations over extended periods of time.
The reason he took so long to get caught is it was no clear pattern at the start.
Well, what's happening and what's different in this case is there is a clear pattern.
We have the stamps, we have the packaging, the unexploded devices, the fact that he may have used a courier.
We're going to have video.
There's a video dragnet all over Manhattan where this device this morning that was left at De Niro's place in Tribeca.
This is at the Triangle Below Canal in downtown Manhattan.
These people, whoever did this, or was organizing this, did it in such a short period of time that they had to.
Just by default, having these unexploded devices in the video left a body of evidence behind, and given the full assets of the United States government dedicated to this, I believe this person will be caught soon.
Very soon.
One final note on this.
I have an article up in the show notes today.
I encourage you to read.
I was furious, furious yesterday at the media coverage of this.
Ladies and gentlemen, it has been disgusting.
It has been horrifying.
You know, I said to you, Joe, I should have asked you to do this.
And you know, we've been busy lately and I don't want to bog you down with work.
Right.
But I thought of this last night and then I just got so busy I forgot it.
But I did a show, ladies and gentlemen, a long time ago after the There was a horrendous baseball field incident in Alexandria where Steve Scalise was shot and a number of other members of Congress were shot at by a Bernie Sanders supporter.
And Joe, I know you remember the show, and I don't like playing old clips of myself, it's kind of dopey, but I can summarize what I said because I remember the show like it was yesterday.
And this just goes to show you the abhorrent, disgusting, horrifying coverage of the liberal media.
Horrendous people out there.
I mean, unbelievable what they're doing here, trying to pin this on Donald Trump.
I had said to you back then, I'll say it again and I will say it anytime this happens.
After the Bernie Sanders supporter nearly killed Steve Scalise, I made a point, acutely, in that moment.
That we have to temper this and understand that this was not Bernie Sanders' fault.
It's not.
Now, you call it whatever you want.
Listen to me.
I don't care.
Because I know where my heart and my head were at the time.
Right.
It is a dangerous, slippery slope to start blaming other people, Donald Trump, Bernie Sanders, or Sarah Palin, or anybody else for the deranged action of lunatics.
Joe, neither you nor I have any control Of what people decide to do out there if they have such darkness in their hearts that they want to physically harm others.
We have made a point on this show repeatedly.
Call it your virtue signaling.
I don't care what you call it.
I know I have made a point with this show repeatedly because I know what's in my heart.
I know what's in Joe's heart.
That violence, proactive violence, is never, ever, ever, ever the answer.
Period.
Full stop.
Thank you.
I'm not telling anybody not to defend themselves if they're attacked.
I have said this over and over, and I made a point after that dreadful episode with Steve Scalise where he almost died, that that was not Bernie Sanders' fault.
And the minute we go down that road, that, well, you know, the guy was a Bernie supporter, so Bernie did this, we open ourselves up to a society of really mob-like behavior where anyone and everyone can be attacked at any time.
Anyone can be tied to anything.
They can say, oh my gosh, Joe Armacost tweeted a year ago, you know, that he didn't like the politics of Maxine Waters.
So Joe's response, get him!
What do you get?
You get a witch hunt.
Yeah.
A legitimate witch hunt.
Remember the witch trials?
If they float, they were witches, and if they drown, they were witches.
It was like you were a witch either way, you know?
Your life was a loose loop, whatever.
I probably didn't explain that well, so I'll get a thousand emails.
But you get the point.
The whole purpose of a witch hunt is you always find a witch.
And many of you, thankfully, agreed with me.
I got a lot of feedback on that.
A couple of you didn't.
You said, well, listen, the Democrats are out there calling for aggressive confrontation.
Folks, yes, the ones who are calling for aggressive confrontation of public officials out there I'm not going to tell you, have not played a role at least in creating an environment, a really nasty toxic environment.
I've always gone after these people for doing that.
But we cannot put the behavior of individuals on others.
It leads us down a dangerous path.
Now, I only say that because the media, their abhorrent, horrendous coverage of this event.
Joe, they have zero clues.
Zero.
None.
They have absolutely no idea who did this.
They don't know the motive of all of the W's out there.
The how, the who, the why, the when.
Of all the W's out there, Joe, what's the most important?
The who.
Who did this is the most important.
That's how you determine a motive.
They have no idea, folks.
They have no idea who did this.
And you've got people like Brian Stelter making these slight insinuations that these are Trump targets.
You've got CNN running chyrons, target Trump targets under attack as if Trump somehow was responsible for this.
I said to you on that episode, I'll wrap it up with this.
I said to you, wait, you watch.
When something happens to a Democrat, I was saying this during the Scalise incident when a Republican was under attack, the media will pay you back no favors.
And the point I was making at the time was, I was not doing it.
Because I was expecting the media to be honest later.
These people are not honest.
They're not.
Remember the show, Joe?
I said to you, I'm doing this because it's the right thing.
It is not Bernie Sanders' fault that some looney tune tried to kill Steve Scalise on a baseball field.
It's just not.
You know, I got some criticism yesterday for owning the libs.
Owning the libs is about the exercise of political power, you idiots!
Do you even listen to the show?
To these morons?
Did you miss the whole episode?
We have purposefully, me being a former Secret Service agent and having experience with this, openly, vigorously spoken out against these kind of aggressive confrontational tactics.
But make no mistake, Joe, from the corrupted Horrible media, I expect no courtesy in return.
None!
I knew you would do this, I knew you would do it when it happened, I knew you would do it immediately without any evidence, I knew you would not practice journalism, I knew you would practice liberal narrative advocacy, and sadly, tragically, you proved me right.
And you know what?
Even though you continue to do this, God forbid another incident happens with a Democrat.
Another incident happens today.
God forbid one of these devices is functional and actually goes off.
I will still, no matter what, if something were to happen to a Republican today, I will insist because it's the right thing to do that the individual is responsible for their behavior.
This is not some collective thing where Democrats are responsible for what some loony tune does.
But again, ladies and gentlemen, expect no courtesy and no civility and no morally or ethically upstanding behavior from the media who will turn around on a dime and blame you for this.
Ignoring the fact that white powder was sent to Don Jr.' 's house, that there was some suspected ricin attack on Susan Collins' house.
Expect none of that.
Jim Mattis got a package.
Those stories have all disappeared already, Joe.
And can I say one more thing, folks?
You know, the treatment of Fox.
You may say, well, you're on Fox.
I don't care.
I'm sorry.
I'd have to put this out there.
The treatment of Fox by other left-wing media nuts out there has been disgusting.
Fox has been running 24 hour, nearly 24 hour, sometimes commercial free coverage of the attack on CNN and Democrats.
You know why, Joe?
Because it's an important story.
Right.
And yet these other stories...
Trump being called a Nazi, treasonous, stories about ricin attacks on them, white powder.
They get coverage by the other networks, but they go away quickly.
But when it comes down to a real story, Fox provides 24-hour coverage, and yet they'll attack Fox.
Gross.
Gross.
Absolutely grotesque.
All right.
I got a lot more to get to today, folks.
Today's show also brought to you by our buddies at Quip.
You ever need that pristine, clean kind of feeling in your mouth and you just can't get it from a regular toothbrush?
It's because you're using it.
That's because you're using it.
By the way, somebody picked up something you said about Elizabeth Warren on a thing that I totally missed.
I didn't get that one either.
I missed that!
I didn't get that!
I totally missed that one!
Joe is all full of these things.
By the way, I did get the Beto thing, folks.
Joe Wright, please tell him.
Before the show, we did that, the Beto.
I knew it was a joke.
The Jedi thing was a setup, folks.
We get it.
I promise you, when Joe gets me, like the Howl thing, I miss it.
But the Beto thing, I got.
So we were just joking around.
All right, Quip, when it comes to your health, brushing your teeth is one of the most important parts of your day.
I love Quip.
I have a Quip.
I have one for my kids.
It's the greatest toothbrush you'll ever see.
Quip knows that.
They've combined dentistry and design to make a better electric toothbrush.
It's the new electric toothbrush, Quip, that packs just the right amount of vibrations into a slimmer design at a fraction of the cost of those bulkier traditional electric toothbrushes that look like caterpillar trucks built in a factory.
You have to get a separate piece of luggage for your old traditional electric toothbrush.
Not this one.
Guiding pulses alert you when to switch sides, making brushing the right amount of time effortless.
Matter of fact, my quip is smaller than my old manual toothbrush.
Quip also comes with a mount that suctions right to your mirror and unsticks to use as a cover for hygienic travel anywhere, whether it's going in your gym bag or carry-on.
And because the thing that cleans your mouth should also be clean, Quip's subscription plan refreshes your brush on a dentist-recommended schedule, delivering new brush heads every three months for just $5, including free shipping worldwide.
Quip is backed by a network of over 10,000 dental professionals, including dentists, hygienists, and dental students.
Most toothbrushes don't get named one of Time Magazine's Best Inventions of the Year, but Quip did.
Find out for yourself why you're going to love this.
A really, really good toothbrush.
Quip starts at just $25, and if you go to getquip.com slash dan, getquip.com slash dan, getquip, getquip.com slash dan, right now you'll get your first refill pack free.
That's your first refill pack free at getquip.com slash dan.
Go check that out.
Alright, more breaking news here.
I've been working on something for a while on the Spygate case in the book.
Some of it's in the book.
We kind of hint at it, but at the time of printing, I didn't have the body of material I do now to point to an assertion I'd like to make.
But there's something very interesting.
Someone who emails me regularly emailed me yesterday.
I was hesitant to bring it up yesterday, but I've been holding on to something for a while with the Papadopoulos angle of the Spygate case, Joe.
I haven't discussed this for No, you haven't.
But it is fascinating.
Folks, there's an article...
From November 9th of 2017, by Ali Watkins.
Oh, remember the names!
Some of you are picking that up right now, some of you may not be.
There's an article in Politico, I'm going to put up in the show notes.
And again, it's from November 9th of 2017.
It's going to be the second or third article down in the show notes.
If you subscribe to my email list, I'll email them right to you.
And it is a fascinating piece, not only because of the content of it, but who wrote it.
Allie Watkins.
Allie Watkins, the author.
Who is Allie Watkins?
Why does that name sound familiar?
Allie Watkins was the love interest, girlfriend of the Senate staffer on the Senate Intel Committee that was handling the collusion investigation, Joe.
The girlfriend of the Senate staffer on that committee who was alleged to be the recipient of many leaks from that committee.
You remember Wolf, the guy on the committee who was arrested and is being prosecuted for allegedly leaking the FISA warrant?
Yes.
This is his girlfriend, Allie Watkins, who was supposed to be the recipient of the text messages about the FISA warrant.
Now, remember, we had discussed this before.
Interestingly enough, when the FISA warrant is delivered to the Senate Intel Committee, it is likely delivered in unredacted form.
Intel committee, it is likely delivered in unredacted form.
The FISA warrant is 82 pages.
He texts Wolf, his girlfriend at the time, Allie Watkins, according to the charging documents,
he texts his girlfriend 82 times.
Most likely screenshots of each individual page of the FISA warrant.
Now, if you're a closet investigator out there, you're probably figuring out where I'm going with this.
If not, I'll explain it to you.
There were whole pages of the FISA warrant blacked out, meaning they were like black dots.
They got, the Senate Intel Committee, most likely, the unredacted portion of the FISA.
If it was 82 pages and he texts his girlfriend 82 times, he most likely, Joe, would not text his girlfriend a fully redacted page.
Hey, Joe, check this out.
Here's a big black dot on a page.
They're not going to do that.
He would only, why would you text pages and pages and pages of blank documents?
You wouldn't do that.
It's absurd.
It's ridiculous.
What am I suggesting?
I'm suggesting that the unredacted FISA, in other words, this entire basis for this case, the garbage case that's in there, all the information that we're supposed to see soon if Trump follows through on this declassification request, that the media may already have this.
May already have the unredacted FISA with all the devastating information in there.
Now, the author of this piece, Watkins, in this Politico piece, according to the reports, is the girlfriend and is the recipient of these texts.
So she may have a boatload of information about the genesis of this case.
Folks, please understand what I'm telling you because the rest of this story, that part's old.
But if you don't understand that part, the rest of this will make no sense.
The author of this Politico piece I'm about to dig into and some of the very very suspicious components of it is the girlfriend of the guy leaking sensitive information from the Senate Intel Committee and one of the pieces of that sensitive intel information is, I believe, the unredacted FISA based on the pattern of texting.
Meaning she knows almost the whole story that Nunes and others know because she's most likely read Portions of the unredacted Faison understands how bad this case is and some really suspicious stuff.
Now!
Now when you read this Politico article, a whole lot of things are going to start to make sense.
The Politico article is about Mifsud and Papadopoulos.
Remember Mifsud's the Maltese professor who starts this whole thing by confronting Papadopoulos in March of 2016 by a meeting with Papadopoulos and alleging that the Russians have dirt.
But, but, but Mifsudjo, Introduces Papadopoulos at one point to a woman he calls, and I say he calls because nobody's really sure what this woman's name is.
Some of this is a good portion of this is in the book, by the way.
It's my Spygate book, but introduces, Ms.
Sood introduces Papadopoulos, the Trump team member, To a woman by the name of Olga Vinogradova, or Polanskaya, depending on what last name you choose.
And he introduces her, Joe, as Putin's niece.
Let me read from the piece.
I promise you, this is going to be fascinating.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
This is gonna get good.
So again, the woman writing this likely knows the entire story about FBI malfeasance because her boyfriend is on the Senate Intel Committee and we know is texting her.
This is from her Politico piece.
Mesud introduced Vinogradova to Papadopoulos as someone with high-profile ties to the Russian government, which was then seeking better relations with the U.S.
and an end to Western economic sanctions imposed over Russian aggression in Ukraine.
One Papadopoulos email to Trump campaign officials said the woman had offered to Oh, this is too perfect.
To arrange a meeting between us and the Russian leadership to discuss U.S.-Russia ties under President Trump.
Wow.
How convenient.
So the Maltese professor, Joseph Mifsud, is alleged to have started this whole thing, right?
And in the Democrat narrative as a Russian agent, despite the fact that all the evidence indicates he has significant ties to Western intelligence, not as significant to his ties to Russian agents, all of a sudden finds this woman, Joe, out of nowhere, who claims to be Putin's niece, who claims to have these high-level ties to Russia and can set up meetings.
Whoa!
Isn't that convenient?
How about that?
Well, what's interesting, none of this is news, that's in the book.
Well, we've been holding on to something for a while and an email I got yesterday leads me to believe that it's probably time to put it out there.
Folks, what's fascinating about one of the documents used to prosecute Papadopoulos is if you read about his interactions with Mifsud, And hat tip to you-know-who-you-are.
They're spoken about in a third-person format, Joe.
How would that happen?
Now let me... I'm not explaining that well.
So Mifsud, the Maltese professor who starts this whole thing, right?
By allegedly saying that the Russians have dirt on Hillary, tells Papadopoulos.
Starts this whole thing!
This collusion nonsense, right?
Those interactions are documented in prosecutorial documents used against Papadopoulos, but they're spoken about from a third person's perspective.
Now, I know it doesn't make sense to see the look on your face.
If you and I, Joe, are having an interaction and we're talking about robbing a bank and in the charging document it says, Well, Joe Armacost initially didn't take it seriously, but then he decided to take it seriously based on the look on his face.
Who could that information come from if only you and I are at the table?
One of us.
Yes!
You're looking at me like I'm crazy!
One of us!
Yeah.
But I don't think it was Mifsud.
Unless, Joe, they had a recording of it.
Now, if they had a recording of it, Who the hell was Mifsud working for?
How did they get the recording?
In other words, if this is a collusion operation with the Russians, and Mifsud is a Russian agent, how the heck did they get the recording?
The Russians aren't going to give it to him!
Joe, is this making sound confusing?
No, no, no, I'm with you.
Yeah, I got you.
If Mifsud's working for the Russians to collude to overthrow an election, and the charging document talks about it from a third-person perspective, like a bird's-eye view over their meeting, there's only two possible scenarios.
Either Papadopoulos said it, Mifsud said it, or there's someone recording the darn thing.
Now, a great point pointed out by this person, which I'm not trying to take credit for his stuff.
We've been looking at this for a while.
And his email, it's time to get it out there.
Talks about a part of the charging document.
Maybe using the language of the charging document will make this make more sense.
Here's what's written in there, Joe.
Initially, the professor seemed uninterested in the defendant.
Talking about Papadopoulos.
It then goes on to say, the professor appeared to take great interest in defendant Papadopoulos.
Talk about later on.
How would they know that?
Were they there?
It's not Mifsud saying it.
That I'm confident of.
Because he's not cooperating.
Joe, how do they know that?
How do they know that?
Was this recorded?
If this was recorded, how was it recorded?
Now, there's another possibility there.
There seems to be some intimate knowledge of these details between the meeting between Mifsud and Papadopoulos.
Detailed knowledge, whether they were recorded.
Now, was it recorded by Mifsud?
I don't know that yet.
I don't want to speculate where I don't know.
But what I'm telling you is there's a bird's eye view of this that was, I don't believe, passed on, I don't believe was passed on by Ms.
Suh.
Unless, unless he was cooperating.
This is killing me because I know a lot about it and I think I'm not getting it right.
If Sood's a Russian agent and he's recording this thing, he's not going to give the information to the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States.
He would implicate himself as a Russian agent.
Yes.
You get what I'm saying?
Yes.
If Joe was really going to rob a bank at a meeting with me and he's recording a conversation, he's not going to give the recording to the cops.
No, no, exactly.
Which you can pretty much eliminate Mifsud at this point being a Russian agent.
They somehow have some bird's eye view of this.
There's only two explanations.
It was recorded, given to them by Mifsud, meaning he's not a Russian agent.
He was working with them.
Working with friendlies to set up Trump or there's a third party there.
Now you see where I'm going with the Politico article?
This Allie Watkins seems to know an awful lot about the whole case an awful long time ago.
This piece was written November 9th, 2017.
She does a piece focusing specifically on this Russian woman.
Olga Vinogradova or Polanskaya or whatever you want to call her.
No one really knows her name.
Joe, just like Mifsud, did you notice we haven't heard a darn thing about Ms.
Olga since?
Yeah.
So suspiciously, this woman who speaks with a heavy Russian accent, who introduces herself as Putin's niece, so convenient.
Putin's, she's not Putin's niece, by the way, says, I have these high level Russian contacts, just randomly shows up at a meeting between a Trump advisor, Papadopoulos, and a Maltese professor with Western intelligence.
How perfect, only Joe, to never be heard from again.
Now, she's in my book.
But I ask you this, Joe, you follow this as almost intensely as I have, being a part of this show.
Yeah.
I tell you, remember the names often.
Have you even heard that name before?
No.
No, you haven't.
The only Russian woman I've heard is Veselnitskaya or whatever.
Veselnitskaya, yeah.
See, you remember that name.
Close enough.
You haven't heard Vinodegrova, Polanskaya?
Because nobody's talking about her.
Folks, just like I said to you about Mifsud, where it's absolutely impossible to disappear the way Mifsud did, and to avoid any... No one's seen Mifsud since his February interview with the FBI from last year.
Nobody's seen him.
Nobody's seen or heard of Olga Vinogradova.
Nobody's heard from her since.
Folks, this was so obviously a setup that, again, you have to intentionally have blinders on at this point to believe this bag of horse shit, because that's what it is.
This is nonsense.
You see how I'm wrapping this up, Joe?
This was the perfect setup!
Yeah.
Do you really think the Russians are... Guys, ladies, listen.
I'm no fan of Putin or the Russians.
Let me be crystal clear about this.
I have been, you know, intimately involved.
What got me into politics was Reagan's fight against communism.
But do you really think... I spent time in Moscow, three weeks as a matter of fact, doing investigative work with their FSB when I was a secret service agent.
These people aren't stupid, okay?
No.
They are not dumb, the Russians.
Do you really believe That they're gonna send this Maltese professor there, right?
As their cutout.
And they're gonna send a woman who is Putin's niece, who openly talks about her connections to the Russian government to try to set up a meeting with a low-level member of the Trump team?
You believe this is actually gonna- this is the way it's gonna go down.
So let me get this straight, Joe.
The Russian government has a plan to overthrow the results of the US election or influence them heavily, right?
Okay.
So they send in a professor from Malta with connections to Western intelligence who knows UK intelligence officials and is intimately familiar with the Western intelligence apparatus.
So they call in a guy connected to us, who by the way could rat on them at any moment.
And they send in a woman, and she doesn't do it cryptically, she goes, yeah, I'm Putin's niece, I can set up a meeting.
Does this sound even remotely logical to you?
Are you like a crazy person?
We haven't heard that in a while, play it again!
Are you like a crazy person?
Yes, you must be!
I missed that one.
I do too.
No!
I'm not crazy!
This is the worst setup in human history!
Oh, look!
I've got this one!
It's Putin's niece!
She's gonna set up a meeting!
Really?
Wow, that sounds great!
All of a sudden, we don't hear from the woman ever again.
You're telling me nobody can locate this woman?
Is it possible, Joe, also, that bird's-eye view, third-party perspective, talking about, oh, and Mifsud didn't seem interested, but then he seemed interested?
It's not Mifsud saying that.
Who's saying that?
Folks, you have not heard the last Now, Joe, what would you say?
We're about a month ahead of the news cycle on this.
Oh, yeah, at least.
Mark it down.
Get your notebooks out, folks.
Olga Polanskaya.
Check it out in the book.
Olga Vinogradova.
You have not heard the last of that name.
This is the worst setup in human history by a bunch of incompetent loons.
Read the Politico piece.
It's in there today.
And remember who wrote it.
There's a reason that name appears in her writing.
Around the time she's dealing with her boyfriend on the intel committee who knows the whole story according to the FISA, the debunked dossier, and feeds it to her.
There's a reason she writes that.
Now remember, she knows the whole story according to the dossier and the Democrats because that's what appeared in the FISA application.
She doesn't know the real story.
She just knows what she's been told.
Hence the focus in her political piece about this shady Russian woman.
Olga Vilga Vinogradova.
Was she Russian?
We sure about that?
Just how Russian was she?
What is she doing?
I never know what she's doing.
What is she doing back there?
Folks, this is going to get hairy.
This story, I know a lot of you think this thing's dying down.
Oh, no, no, no, no.
There's a lot more to come.
Write that name in your name notebook.
More to come on that later.
All right.
Final lady here.
And I got a few more stories to get through that are really important.
A lot of news this week.
Today's show also brought to you by our buddies at We The People Holsters.
Best holsters out there.
Love them.
They sent me a sample a little while ago.
Loved them so much, I said, hey, can I get a few more of those bad boys?
They are great.
The problem with a lot of these in the pants holsters and holster designs, they're super uncomfortable.
They're hard to adjust.
Not with We The People holsters.
You will never, ever find a better priced, more high quality holster than you will at We The People.
They custom make their holsters right here in the United States.
They do not use third party molds.
They design them themselves in Las Vegas, right here in the United States, putting Americans to work.
These are measured right down to every nook and cranny of the firearm you own.
They update their designs all the time.
They have camo, the thin red line, thin blue line, the constitution.
They have all kinds of really cool designs in there.
Check them out.
They update their designs all the time, every month.
And it allows them also to keep the date on updated models of firearms that come out.
They mean it when they say they build their own molds.
They have a 3D design team that measures every nook and cranny of the firearm for the perfect fit.
You can adjust the cant.
You can adjust the ride for maximum comfort.
It's super easy to do.
It's a couple screws right on the front.
You can't miss it.
They designed their own clip.
It has four holes on the clip that match up with the four on the holster, so you can adjust the cant and the ride for maximum comfort.
You can adjust the tension.
It provides that nice little click, so you know that that firearm is secure in there.
If you like it a little loose, a little, uh, if you like the holster or the grip to be a little tighter on the firearm, it's just one simple turn of a screw.
Really simple.
Their holsters are priced at just $34, but not only do they come with a lifetime guarantee, which you won't need because they're great, they also ship free.
And if you use promo code Dan, you'll get $10 off.
That makes it just $24.
If it's not a perfect fit, send it back for a refund.
Here's the website.
Check this out.
wethepeopleholsters.com slash Dan.
WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Dan.
WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Dan.
My listeners can get $10 off using promo code Dan.
That's just $24 with free shipping.
You will not find a better product out there for the money.
Lovely the people.
All right.
A couple more stories.
I had the, um, The Democrats and the media and the media allies, their messaging on this caravan, in addition to their messaging on this dreadful, suspicious package spree we're having here over these last few days, has been absolutely horrifying.
Watching the media, I covered this on my NRE TV show last night, address this caravan has been just They're not even media anymore, Joe.
It's not journalism.
It's strictly liberal narrative baiting.
One of their talking points on this has been, and I addressed this yesterday as well, and I want to just double down on it because there's been a subsequent tweet put out Liberals are giving us an easy messaging opportunity and sadly a lot of Republicans are missing it.
They're asking Republicans for evidence that this caravan contains in fact criminals and gang members when the real question is how can you prove it doesn't?
Because these are not citizens of the United States.
They have no right to enter the country illegally.
None.
The real question here is not asking me for proof that there are gang members.
It's asking you proof that you know they're not.
Have you vetted all 4,000 of these immigrants coming up to the country and threatening to enter illegally?
Have you?
It's a simple question.
The answer is obviously no, you have not.
So if you haven't, you can't prove to me that people entering our country and breaking the law, they have no right to do this, should be here and that some of them, granted maybe a small portion, but some of them may be dangerous.
Making the situation even worse, not to redo yesterday's show, but there's been some new news on this.
The DHS, Department of Homeland Security, put out a tweet.
I'm thoroughly refuting the media coverage on this, which has been, Donald Trump needs to prove there are gang members and criminals.
Donald Trump doesn't need to prove anything.
They're threatening to enter the country illegally.
You have to prove that these folks are going to enter legally, number one, and should be here.
You have to prove, not us.
Here's the tweet, Joe.
DHS can confirm, can, not can't, can, C-A-N, can confirm that there are individuals within the caravan who are gang members or who have serious criminal histories.
That is a tweet from DHS.
I worked at DHS, ladies and gentlemen.
They are not politicians.
They're not going to humiliate themselves in a tweet for any political agenda.
DHS clearly has significant intelligence, Joseph, that there are people in this caravan with significant criminal histories or who may be gang members.
This is their tweet.
They're not going to embarrass themselves on their Twitter feed.
Telling you what?
The media is just making this story up.
There's no evidence that there's criminals.
Do you even read?
Seriously, I said this yesterday.
Someone suggested that we put it on a t-shirt.
Liberals, do you even read?
Seriously, do you even, do you pay attention to even basic facts and information?
This is outrageous.
The DHS put out a tweet themselves.
They can confirm, can, no T at the end, can confirm that there are gang members and people with significant criminal histories within the caravan.
Joe, there are also investigative reporters on the ground talking to people in the caravan who have already acknowledged that there were criminals in the caravan.
Stop falling for this sucker argument, Republicans.
You need to prove that there are... One, we don't have to prove it.
DHS already put out a tweet, so you're already down on the information front.
Sorry.
You know, information one, liberal media zero.
But on the second front, even if that weren't, we don't have to prove anything.
They're not saying they're going to enter the country legally, two points of it.
They're threatening to break the law.
But there's nothing we have to... that in and of itself is enough to say, "No thanks, we're good."
The fact that DHS is now confirming there are criminals and gang members in there
is just an additional piece of information which should incentivize any sane, rational person to say, "This is
crazy."
This is an invasion.
4,000 people threatening to walk across the border illegally.
This is nuts.
Alright, couple more things I want to get to because it's important.
Quick midterm election update.
Ladies and gentlemen, we're seeing two things.
Two things here to put a little bit of a smile on your face.
Again, this is not incentivizing anyone to, you know, to rest on their laurels.
This could be, you know, what happened in these last two days and these news cycles is, you know, troubling and there could always be another surprise here.
But It's starting to look like, it's not going to be a red wave, let me be clear on this, but it's starting to look like the blue wave may in fact be dead.
That they may, may, may hold the House.
I think we're going to add to the Senate, I told you that in my prediction last week, but there's two data points I want to put out there.
Number one, early polling in critical statewide Senate races.
Early voting.
Early voting is up dramatically for the Republicans.
They are winning big time in some of these states in early voting.
Now, having said that, That is not always the best indicator of what happens on election day.
Um, I know that Joe for, as you know, from personal experience, where I won on election day, a congressional seat overwhelmingly by 5,000 votes.
I was like, this is great.
I was measuring the drapes in my congressional office in Maryland district six.
And they were like, wait, hold on.
We still got to count the early voting in the absentee.
And I got crushed.
I wound up losing the race by, by a sliver by one point, because he made up all 5,000 of those votes and then some.
Um, so it is not always, in other words, the early voting, if I would have just went by the early voting, I should have lost that race by 30 points.
I lost by one, one point.
That's it.
So early voting is not always the best indicator.
So get out, take 10 friends.
But secondly, some of the polling, if you listen to the shows I did earlier in the week about how they were, where we're really having trouble folks, We're having trouble in these suburban districts.
Some of the areas dominated by minority voters who would vote for Hillary, whether it's Florida 27 or Texas 23, where we should be getting crushed according to the liberal media narrative.
Oh, Hispanic voters don't like Trump.
Ah, it's actually not happening.
We'll heard in the Elvira Salazar race in Florida, dominated by Hispanic voters.
In Southern Florida and in the border in Texas, the Republicans are doing quite well in those polls.
Where we're having real problems is in the suburban districts.
One of them, I've been using as a bellwether district, is the Barbara Comstock race right outside of D.C.
in the Virginia suburbs.
I think it's Virginia 10, forgive me if I get that wrong, but I'm pretty sure it's Virginia 10.
Barbara Comstock, who I've interviewed before when I used to host radio, terrestrial radio, Barbara Comstock was getting just crushed in the polls.
She was not doing, she's the incumbent Republican.
Barbara Comstock has closed the gap significantly.
Some polls have her running neck and neck with her Democrat opponent in one of those suburban districts.
So again, is this a bellwether?
I think so.
But I think between chaos, the caravans and Kavanaugh, you know, the two C's and the one K, I think the Democrats have created a really, really untenable situation for themselves.
And I think even in suburban districts, a lot of Moderate Republican, moderate Democrat, female soccer mom voters are starting to say, you know what, this chaos thing isn't for me.
We'll see.
We'll see.
My prediction stays.
I think we hold the House by two to four seats.
I think we pick up two to three seats in the Senate.
But those two factors.
Early voting, we're doing very well.
And that Comstock race, which I believe is indicative of this suburban problem we've been having lately, is starting to close in too, and Comstock's starting to pick up some more numbers in the polls.
Get out and vote, ladies and gentlemen.
Like I said, I get the beef with early voting.
I understand it.
I think, you know, seven month long early voting, obviously hyperbolic, is ridiculous.
But this is not the time for that fight.
Something, God forbid, could happen to you.
You could get in a car accident the day of voting.
Again, God forbid.
But you need to get out and early vote.
Put your numbers in early.
Get that thing on the record.
Please.
I did.
I already voted.
My wife and I both.
In Florida.
Please do it.
Okay.
Oh, here, one cautionary tale here on this, and I want to get to a fair share argument too.
You know, fair share, fair share, you're not liberal, the rich are not paying their fair share.
I have a really good article up at Zero Hedge today, the show notes, showing just in a very simple graph, how absurd and outrageous the liberals' fair share argument is that, you know, the wealthy aren't paying their fair share.
But before I get to that, just one note on the stock market that's been very volatile, it's been up and down, lost 600 points yesterday.
Folks, Take it easy on everybody.
You know, the liberals want to instill a sense of panic before the election with the stock market.
They love to highlight these stories.
Oh, the stock market, the economy is all erratic, folks.
This is natural.
There was always going to be a correction in the stock market.
There may be an even bigger correction.
Don't forget, for the eight years of Fed policy, Where we printed a bunch of monopoly money and drove interest rates low.
They call it the search for yield.
Seeking out, right?
You have to search for yield on your money.
Yield, the return.
If I have money sitting in a bank account, I want an interest rate.
I want to make money on it.
Making money on money.
That search for yield was impossible when we printed a lot of money because the federal government drove interest rates into the ground and the economy was slow, meaning there wasn't a lot of demand for money, so people couldn't charge a lot of yield.
If you can't get three, four, five percent for your money, you have to search for yield somewhere else.
So what were people doing, Joe?
Pouring money in equities in the stock market.
Interest rates are now going up.
We're seeing it in the mortgage market.
We're seeing it with Fed policy.
People have safer choices now where they can get some return on their money.
You were always going to see some of that money come back out of equities and into fixed investments like bonds, real estate, and other things where they can get some kind of a fixed return or what they believe to be a fixed return over time.
Bottom line is this, don't panic.
These are natural, cyclical, I wish they weren't, I wish we weren't printing money, creating these cycles, but don't panic.
I'm not telling you what to do with your money.
You want to pull them out of equities, do whatever.
I'm not a financial advisor.
I'm simply telling you on the economy, it's okay.
And if we can get a hold of our debt situation, our government spending situation, I think we'll be in a lot better shape.
Okay, here's my final story, and this is what I was getting to, the zero hedge piece.
There's a terrific graph at the top, and the data's from 2014, so you may say it's old.
Well, the reason it's old is it's the last year from the CBO that we have the entire data set to look at.
But on this fair share argument, there's this fascinating chart, Joe.
It breaks down income categories into quintiles, right?
The upper wealthy 20%, the lowest 20%, and quintiles, five separate categories of income.
These are fascinating numbers for all you liberals out there arguing that wealthy people don't pay their fair share.
The highest earners in the country, Joe.
And this is a measure of how much they received in transfers versus how much they paid in federal taxes.
Very simply, how much people gave to the government and how much they got back.
Please stop emailing.
Like, gosh, my email is going wild this way.
I'm not talking to you.
Sorry.
There's this group.
They're emailing me.
It's driving me nuts.
It's like the 50th email I've gotten in the middle of the show.
It keeps blocking my screen.
The highest income earners paid $75,100 in federal income tax and got back, Joe, in the form of government transfers, $11,700.
Big difference.
Really?
That seems like a big difference to me.
The second number down, so wealthy folks but not as wealthy, obviously, is the top group.
The second 20% down from the top.
percent down from the top. Paid $18,600 in taxes, got $14,000 back in transfers.
Now, the middle, the second, and the lowest quintiles here of earners is where it gets interesting.
The middle paid $9,600 in taxes and got back $15,400.
We haven't used Jay's abacus in a while.
$15,400.
9,000, we haven't used Jays Abacus in a while.
$9,600 in tax payments, and they got back $15,400.
So you got the wealthy paying $75,000 getting back $11,000, and you got people who are middle
income paying $9,600 getting back $15,000.
You're fair share art.
You understand your nonsense?
You're immune to facts and data.
It gets even better.
the second lowest to the bottom, paid in $3,800 in taxes, got $17,700 back in transfers.
And the poorest individuals...
Folks, I'm just trying to tell you a fair share argument is total garbage.
They paid $400 in federal income taxes, got $16,600 back.
Excuse me.
Folks, hard pass on the nonsense fair share argument, please.
Facts and data matter.
Read the piece, look at the chart, print it, give it to your liberal friends and say, how much more of the fair share should be ours exactly?
Because we're already paying all of it.
Thank you.
Have a nice day.
All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in.
Please subscribe to the show, especially on iTunes.
We're having some issues here.
I don't know why, but go to iTunes in your podcast app.
Please subscribe.
It's free.
You can also subscribe on iHeart.
You can listen up on gino.com and please subscribe to my email list.
We will send you the best articles of the day right to your mailbox.
