In this episode I address the stunning new developments that will destroy the entire case against President Trump. I also address a suspicious attack on the Trump tax cuts and the growing calls for “Medicare for all.”
News Picks:
Jim Comey humiliates himself again.
Was Christopher Steele paid by Hillary Clinton’s team to challenge the 2016 election results?
A stunning admission by a Clinton ally that will blow up the entire case against President Trump.
This Washington Post investigative reporter is dismissing the dossier as a hoax.
The FBI finally turns over the missing paperwork in the Mike Flynn case.
Here’s the Gen. Mike Flynn 302 for you to read.
Liberals completely blew it on net neutrality.
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.
Oh, what a bad day yesterday for the anti-Trump crowd.
Yes, yes, the conspiracy theorists, the media loons, the liberal attack dogs.
Not a good day for the entire cabal of lunatics yesterday.
Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
Good.
It was a bad day for the knuckleheads, wasn't it?
Yeah it was, but you'd never know by the media coverage who continues to pretend that their entire case against President Trump isn't falling apart.
The whole thing is collapsing by the second.
We had the 302 yesterday from Flynn, the original 302, the summary of his interview finally outed yesterday.
It's devastating.
The media wants you to believe, especially some of these loony tune anti-Trumpers, I want you to believe.
Oh, look at this.
Now it's out and it shows that Flynn's a liar.
No, that's it.
Actually, it destroys your case.
So I'll get into that today.
And some Comey falling apart yesterday, completely collapsing and what Jim Comey is really hiding.
All right.
Today's show brought to you by our buddies at Policy Genius.
Life insurance is a deeply unfun topic.
Most people just don't want to talk about dying and don't want to even think about it obviously and they definitely don't like thinking about insurance.
But actually having life insurance feels great and getting that peace of mind doesn't need to be complicated.
Policy genius is the easy way to get life insurance.
In minutes you can compare quotes from top insurers to find the coverage you need at a price you can afford.
From there, you can apply online and the unbiased advisors at PolicyGenius will handle all the red tape.
Don't you worry.
Leaving you free to do the things you actually enjoy.
And PolicyGenius doesn't just make life insurance easier.
Whether you're shopping for disability insurance to protect your income, homeowner's insurance, or auto insurance, they can help you get covered fast.
If you've been intimidated or frustrated by insurance in the past, give PolicyGenius a try.
Go check it out.
I'm a policy genius.
Just go to policygenius.com to get your quotes and apply in minutes.
You can do the whole thing in your phone right now.
Policygenius.com.
Policygenius, the easy way to compare and buy life insurance.
Check them out.
Policygenius.com.
All right.
So, we had a lot going on yesterday.
One of the big stories was Jim Comey, okay, losing his mind up on Capitol Hill yesterday, former FBI director.
It's now becoming crystal clear what Jim Comey is hiding.
So he goes up to Capitol Hill to testify again about all his malfeasance that he directed while he was the head of the FBI up on Capitol Hill.
He comes out and he engages in this absurd, outrageous outburst.
I'm going to tell you why.
Play this cut first and I'll tell you why he blew up like this.
The FBI's reputation has taken a big hit because the President of the United States, with his acolytes, has lied about it constantly.
And in the face of those lies, a whole lot of good people who watch your network believe that nonsense.
That's a tragedy.
That will be undone eventually, but that damage has nothing to do with me.
Jim Comey losing his mind, blaming Fox News and Katherine Harridge.
That was Katherine Harridge from Fox News asking him that question if his reputation, if he had anything to do with the reputation of the FBI taking a hit.
Comey cannot take the fact that he single-handedly was responsible for managing the FBI at the time of one of the worst scandals in law enforcement and intelligence gathering in modern U.S.
history.
Jim Comey is a joke.
Now, why is he a joke?
You've heard that clip everywhere, but some of the analysis has been lacking.
Some of it's been really good, but some of it's been lacking.
Why is Comey now desperate to change the narrative?
Because ladies and gentlemen, Jim Comey's entire case, his entire existence for being, has been hiding the fact that his case against Donald Trump to weaponize the FBI was based on one thing and one thing only.
That is the dossier.
And yesterday the dossier had one hell of a really bad day, folks.
Strap in and get ready.
You're a loser!
He is now.
Understand.
Please understand.
I was on Fox last night.
I was on the Sean Hannity show with Judge Jeanine filling in.
Oh, wait, by the way, one big announcement.
I will be filling in for Sean Hannity on both his radio and television show this coming Wednesday.
So not tonight, but Wednesday.
And I'll be filling in on the TV show again on Thursday.
So radio show Wednesday, TV show Wednesday night, and Fox TV show Wednesday night and Thursday night.
That's my big news.
I'm super stoked.
So a whole hour.
You're stuck with me at 9 p.m.
Eastern time.
Please, please tune in.
Let's blow it up.
Let's make sure we get the ratings, Grayson.
You're a busy boy, man.
You are busy.
I know.
Yeah, there's more going on too.
I got more good news for you later.
But with regard to that, so I was on last night, Judge Jeanine was filling in, who always does a wonderful job.
She's become a great friend.
And Judge Jeanine asked me to lay it out for the audience, simply what's going on with Comey.
I said, Judge, this is it.
It's this simple.
Jim Comey was the FBI director.
The FBI director initiated or signed off on an investigation into Donald Trump.
They based their investigation on a dossier that is now fake!
It's a hoax!
Now, I'm gonna go into the bad day the dossier had yesterday.
Three huge things happened.
Hat tip Daily Caller Chuck Ross for putting it together in a tweet yesterday.
But three things happened.
But before I get into the dossier's bad day, I want to talk about specifically why Jim Comey is in a panic about this.
And this is a part of the analysis that I brought out last night on Fox, but it's missing from a lot of folks.
They're not getting this.
Folks, there is an established procedure for verifying information like the dossier.
The dossier was information, right?
Brought to the FBI by a bunch of people paid by Hillary.
There is an established procedure, Joseph, we've talked about this repeatedly, for them to verify information.
Why?
Very simple.
Judges in the FISA court, and as a matter of integrity and fidelity to the Constitutional Republic and the integrity of the system, don't want fake information in their courts.
Joe was born on Mars, let's arrest him for treason and sedition.
What are you talking about?
You have to verify that stupidity.
There's a procedure.
It's called the Woods Procedure.
It is a documented, lined-out procedure that creates a paper trail.
The point I tried to make last night on the Hannity Show is that every stage of that, there is paperwork.
There's a trail generated of information.
How the heck did Jim Comey as the FBI director, as one of the final authorities to sign off on the dossier, and the Justice Department, who simultaneously have to verify the dossier, how did they verify a document that we now know is a hoax?
Folks, the answer is they didn't!
We know they didn't!
Because Bill Preistep, who was one of Jim Comey's deputies, who was in charge of the division investigating Donald Trump, has already acknowledged that they didn't verify it!
Are you getting what I'm saying?
Please tell me you're picking this up here!
Jim Comey was the FBI director when they ignored procedures for verifying information and walked it into a FISA court and swore to it!
There's a paper trail there where Jim Comey is going to have to, at some point, acknowledge either he's really dumb and got played by false information, which I don't believe, and you don't either, or... Yeah, you like the whispers?
Jim Comey is going to have to acknowledge his malfeasance that he knew the information was in fact garbage and that's why he's being so cryptic about the dossier.
Oh, I didn't really know.
I'm not really sure where the dossier came from.
That's not true.
He told George Stephanopoulos in an interview when asked why he didn't disclose the origins of the dossier to Trump.
He didn't say he didn't know the origins.
He responded back, I'm not really sure.
He didn't say I didn't know the origins of it.
He knew the dossier was fake.
And he ran with it anyway.
Are you getting that?
That is the problem Jim Comey is having right now.
It's an established procedure.
You have to authenticate and verify the information.
Jim Comey did not do it.
Now, double trouble and why I've been insistent from the start that Bob Mueller is not in fact a good guy, that Bob Mueller was brought in For one reason and one reason only.
To clean this mess up and salvage the reputation of the Department of Justice and the FBI who knowingly investigated a presidential candidate based on fake false information.
A hoax.
The Loch Ness Monster.
Bigfoot.
We don't know about Bigfoot.
Who knows?
Working on that one.
I'm messing with you folks.
I'm messing with you.
Staying easy as they say in a muscle deck in a police academy.
It was a hoax!
They're nailed down!
They have nowhere to go!
Now Bob Mueller's old chief of staff, ladies and gentlemen, this is why Mueller's the perfect guy for the cleanup operation.
His old chief of staff, John Carlin, was the head of the Department of Justice National Security Division.
He was one of the last guys.
He is a big-time higher-up while all this is going on in the DOJ.
John Carlin's one of the last guys to sign off that the information was verified according to the Woods procedure in the DOJ.
So think about this.
Jim Comey, desperate to turn this into a political thing.
It's about Fox News now.
Fox News, you Fox News people, all you crazy people out there attacking the FBI.
Comey signs off that the information is verified.
On the FBI side, it's a parallel path.
The DOJ has to sign off on the dossier too.
One of the last people to sign off on the DOJ side is who?
Bob Mueller's old chief of staff, John Carlin.
Who's got liability in this too?
Where's Mueller talking about him?
You hearing his name outside of this show where we brought it up frequently?
The answer is no, you're not.
They all had a prescribed procedure they ignored in order to politically go after Donald Trump.
Don't miss this point!
Now, the judge also asked me if I thought there was going to be some political penalty.
She doesn't believe so.
Or a legal penalty.
I hope so!
I can't predict the future.
I have very little faith in what the government's doing anymore.
But I hope that Bill Barr... I accidentally called him Bob Barr last night.
Bill.
I knew it was Bill.
I'm sorry.
I was thinking of that libertarian guy.
Bill Barr, the new AG.
I can only hope that Bill Barr, the new AG, and John Huber are looking into this.
I can't promise you anything, ladies and gentlemen.
I can't.
I'm not going to lie to you.
But I love the Constitutional Republic and it's worth fighting for.
What do you want me to do?
Give up?
I'll forget it.
Nothing's going to happen.
Let's leave it.
No, I'm not giving up.
I'll talk about it every day until something happens.
That's what we do here.
Okay, so point number one with this, Comey's lashing out because there's a paper trail.
He is in that paper trail having verified a dossier that is now exposed as a hoax and people who are intimately connected to Mueller were involved in verifying this hoax too as an excuse to spy on a presidential candidate.
Point number two, the dossier's a hoax and it had a really, really bad day yesterday.
What happened with the, we should call it the P dossier.
You know why.
The Pee dossier.
What happened with the dossier yesterday?
Why was it as if the dossier had any credibility before?
If you read my book, Spygate, if you haven't, by the way, read it, please read it.
We put so much work into it, and it is such an intense body of information.
This show will be so much more nutritious, let's say, to you once you have the background on it.
It's like vitamins and minerals for the soul.
Go check out my book, Spygate, please.
Yesterday, three things happened that just completely collapsed any potential hope that this dossier that attacked Donald Trump was going to be shown to be true.
It is a complete hoax.
Number one, a central component of the dossier, which we have debunked repeatedly, so I don't want to spend too much time on this one, but it's just fascinating to bring up again, a central component of this that now even the mainstream media is starting to acknowledge.
Is going to be, has been completely annihilated, destroyed, decimated.
Central component of the dossier, of course, is the Michael Cohen, Trump lawyer, the story that he went to Prague to arrange this whole thing with the Kremlin connected people.
In other words, Trump's lawyer went to Prague to connect with the Kremlin to work on hacking Hillary's emails.
Folks, that is a central component of the hoax dossier.
It's a big deal if it happened, right?
But?
A huge deal.
But Michael Cohen, as we have repeatedly said, has never been to Prague.
Michael Cohen is now a cooperator with the Mueller team and the Southern District of New York.
Those are two separate investigations going on.
And Cohen has still not admitted to going to Prague.
Not only is he not admitting to going to Prague, which you would think if he was a cooperator in a collusion case, that the collusion case based on a dossier would say, hey, Cohen, were you in Prague?
Apparently he wasn't.
How do we know that?
Here is Michael Cohen's spokesperson, a Clintonite, a Clintonista, Lanny Davis, an attorney himself, who is the spokesman for Cohen.
Here is him.
It's a little bit of an older cut, but it's important we bring this up again.
Here is Lanny Davis on MSNBC when asked about Michael Cohen and his trip to Prague.
I also want to ask you about one kind of key fact in the Steele dossier, or perhaps not a fact, but one key assertion.
And they say that Cohen traveled to Prague to arrange secret payments to Russian hackers.
Did that trip ever happen?
No.
Everybody, America, we all love Casey's show.
No.
No Prague ever.
Never.
He posted it on the internet when his lawyers from McDermott, Will and Emery answered that question, and he's actually instructed me when I was serving as his lawyer, just don't answer it anymore because it's one of these silly things that constantly gets repeated.
So the answer is no, he's never been to Prague, or even a reporter asked me, what about the suburbs of Prague?
No.
Liberals, dear libs.
I start a lot of my tweets, dear liberals.
Are you brain dead?
Seriously, have you had some kind of a cerebral accident?
Is there some kind of thing going on with your melon, like it's not functioning correctly?
The whole dossier is contingent on Cohen going to Prague to set up this illusory hacking of the system that Trump was involved in, supposedly.
It never happened!
Exactly, Joe!
This never happened!
That's a Clintonista, Lanny Davis, who has every motivation in the world.
This guy is knee deep in the Clinton space.
Just Google Lanny Davis, Hillary Clinton, if you doubt anything I'm telling you.
This is a Clintonista representing Michael Cohen, who is now cooperating.
He doesn't even like Trump anymore.
He is cooperating against him, saying conclusively, in no uncertain terms, he has never, ever, never been to Prague.
This never happened.
It did not happen.
So that's point number one.
I'm sorry to repeat it, but it's critical.
The whole case is the dossier.
Comey knows it.
He signed off on it.
The dossier is entirely discredited and debunked, and they have nowhere to go.
Number two.
Greg Miller, investigative reporter for the Washington Post.
The Washington Post, not the Washington Times, not the Washington Examiner, not the Wall Street Journal, not Conservative Review.
Greg Miller, investigative reporter for the Washington Post, gave an interview that was recorded by C-SPAN too.
I have the article up at the show notes today.
It's a piece by, I believe Chuck Ross is the Daily Caller.
I'd play the whole interview, but in the interest of time, I'll just sum it up for you.
Miller himself Has said the Washington Post for two years, Joe, has been desperately trying to verify that Michael Cohen went to Prague and can find no information at all that that trip happened.
He says they spent two years, and he's relatively confident right now, based on sources as well within the CIA, Joe, and the FBI, that it didn't happen.
So now we have Michael Cohen saying the trip to Prague didn't happen.
We have Michael Cohen's Clintonista lawyer saying the trip never happened.
We have Greg Miller from the Washington Post saying for two years, the Washington Post, Joe, Miller even went through the steps that they took to try to verify this.
The Washington Post sent reporters, he sent to nearly every hotel in Prague in a desperate attempt to try to find Cohen, Cohen's name, anything.
Nothing.
Zippo.
It didn't happen.
They have zero information that it didn't happen.
Not only that, Miller doubles down.
Read the piece by Chuck Ross, and he says his contacts in the FBI and the CIA are saying it didn't happen either, that this claim is likely false.
Folks, this is a reporter for the Washington Post.
This is not a reporter for, you know, some right-leaning website.
So first, we have Prague now discredited.
Second, we have Greg Miller.
This is kind of 2B because it falls under left-leaning reporters debunking the dossier themselves.
Michael Isikoff.
Michael Isikoff, the Yahoo News reporter who has been knee-deep in this entire thing.
Working with Alexandra Chalupa to expose Manafort and work with Ukrainian people to kind of get narratives out there.
Isikoff, whose own work on the dossier is cited by the dossier.
Excuse me, the FBI.
Joe, there is no reporter more knee-deep and embedded in making the collusion scandal happen than Michael Isikoff.
None.
What I'm trying to tell you folks is Michael Isikoff even wrote a book on it.
Yeah.
About the collusion, you know, myth.
Isikoff needs collusion to happen.
To his credit though, I never thought I'd say this, even Isikoff is starting to acknowledge that this dossier is, quote, his words not mine, likely false.
Isikoff, this guy has been knee-deep in this whole collusion fairytale, to his own detriment, is now acknowledging that this dossier is likely false.
So you have the Washington Post that's been promoting this hoax for two years, the collusion hoax, acknowledging the bedrock of the whole case, the dossier, their investigative reporter saying it's BS.
You have Isikoff, it's likely false.
You have Lanny Davis, he's never been to Prague.
The dossier is entirely collapsing.
That's why Bob Mueller, instead of just admitting his entire case is based on a hoax, is now moving on to Middle Eastern collusion.
Go listen to last week's show and you'll figure that out.
That's his next step.
Using, by the way, as a source, George Nader, as an informant, Bob Mueller, using George Nader, Nader who's represented by Obama's former fixer, Catherine Rumbler, his White House lawyer.
Nothing to see there, folks, at all.
Mueller will not let this go, even though there's nothing to grab onto.
Here is the final and the most devastating, devastating piece of the dossier debunking puzzle.
Rowan Scarborough has a piece up at the Washington Times.
It's in the show notes today.
Please read it.
Go to Bongino.com.
We would deeply appreciate if you subscribe to our email list.
We will send you these articles every day in your inbox.
The Rowan Scarborough piece of the Washington Times is a must-read.
It is fantastic.
Scarborough got his hands on answers to some interrogative questions Christopher Steele answered at a lawsuit.
I'm not explaining as well.
Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS were sued by three Russian bankers whose company appears in the dossier, and the company, Alpha Bank, is alleged to have been somehow colluding with the Russians and the Trump team.
Alpha Bank, Joe, if I don't get this right, stop me, please.
I remember Alpha Bank.
We were in there before, yeah.
Exactly.
Alpha Bank is in the dossier and is a central player in the dossier for the scheme to coordinate with the Trump team and the Russians, right?
Alfa Bank sued Christopher Steele or sued Fusion GPS, where Christopher Steele worked, saying this is total BS.
The Alfa Bank story that there were servers in Russia communicating with Alfa Bank servers or something in Trump Tower has been entirely debunked.
It's been debunked by the FBI.
It's been debunked by the New York Times.
It was spam emails.
And they don't know how it got to Trump Tower.
They think it was maybe an Alfa Bank employee that was staying there.
The story's been debunked by everyone.
There was no secret back channel of communication between Trump Tower and the Russians through Alfa Bank servers.
Are we clear on that?
That story has been entirely discredited.
It's been so discredited that Alphabank again sued Fusion GPS, of which Christopher Steele had to show up in court and give answers to very specific questions.
We tracking?
Steele shows up in court, Rowan Scarborough gets his hands on some of Steele's answers.
One of the answers to a question is absolutely devastating for Steele, the dossier, the Democrats, Jim Comey, and every other Obama administration sucker who tried to play us all for fools.
Now, he's asked about Orbis, Christopher Steele's company, and the Fusion GPS client, them needing this information contained in the dossier.
Steele's answer to what the purpose of his dossier was is unbelievable.
He says, quote, That the Hillary for America was considering steps that they would legally be entitled to take to challenge the validity of the outcome of that election?
What?
Let me get this straight.
So now in a sworn, sworn answers in a legal lawsuit, Christopher Steele is now acknowledging that Hillary wanted the dossier in case they lost to challenge the election.
Ladies and gentlemen, please tell me how this isn't front page news everywhere.
I know, right?
Joe's giving me the look right now.
I haven't told him this before the show.
How is this not on the front page of every major newspaper in America?
That not only now is the Washington Post, Michael Isikoff, Lanny Davis, Michael Cohen, and everybody else starting to acknowledge that Jim Comey's case based on the dossier was based on a total hoax, but now we have in a sworn answer to a question in a lawsuit, Christopher Steele acknowledging that the Clinton team wanted the dossier to challenge the results of the election in case they lost.
Folks, you know, I don't even know where to go with this stuff anymore.
I don't know how much I can, like, beat people over the head with this before you understand how we are going through right now what is the biggest scandal of the century.
The guy who put together the dossier is now acknowledging in court, just to be crystal clear on what he said, He's acknowledging they used foreign information from Kremlin-connected sources.
His words in prior interviews, not mine, that Christopher Steele used foreign information as a way for Hillary Clinton, in the events she lost, to engage in a disinformation campaign on a fake dossier to challenge an election.
Who's guilty of collusion and election interference again?
Explain that again.
Steele is acknowledging he used Russian disinformation.
It's false.
It's fake.
We know it's fake.
Steele is acknowledging he used it and fed it to Hillary because Hillary wanted to use the information to challenge the election if she lost.
You're not going to hear that anywhere else.
On the mainstream media.
Folks, I just read it to you.
That's Christopher Steele himself.
It's really just hard to believe what's going on right now.
It's really, I'm serious, I'm having a hard time getting around, my arms around, how bad this really is and how the mainstream media is not showing an ounce of entrepreneurial integrity.
Where is Greg Miller and Michael Isikoff?
Where are their stories now acknowledging, hey, we screwed up.
This is a bigger scandal than we thought.
The FBI targeted a presidential candidate using foreign hoax information.
Because the losing candidate wanted to overthrow the results of the election.
Where's the media on?
Where are you guys?
Where are any of you going to stand up and grow a pair?
Yeah, I know, Joe.
Yesterday, this is one of those shows I humbly request you share.
Please.
Share with people who are non-believers, because all of this stuff is documented.
Lanny Davis, we played for you the soundbite.
Prague didn't happen.
Greg Miller, their story's in the show notes.
You can watch the video yourself.
The Washington Post's own reporter debunking the dossier.
Isikoff, the dossier's likely false.
Christopher Steele's own words.
The guy who produced the dossier.
Either he's lying or he's not.
Oh, Christopher Steele, he said that it was, uh, he produced the dossier to challenge the election using foreign information.
Oh, he's a liar.
If he's a liar, then the dossier's a lie.
He produced the dossier.
You can't have it both ways.
How are you, where are you media people?
Where's David Ignatius?
Where's Issachar?
Where are they exposing this?
When is this scandal going to go mainstream?
You know, I want to hat tip Chuck Ross and Lee Smith and Jeff Carlson and all the people out there on the internet and working through the Daily Caller and other places, Jeff at the Epoch Times, exposing this because the mainstream media is in complete hibernation mode.
It is a disgrace.
It is an intergalactic cosmic embarrassment that the biggest scandal of our time is still being ignored by mainstream media loons.
It's disgusting.
All right, move on.
I got a lot more to get to, including I haven't even touched the Flynn 302 yet, which is another nightmare, although you never guess it by the liberals who are celebrating the release of the 302 as if they have something there.
All right, today's show also brought to you by our buddies at BrickHouse Nutrition.
BrickHouse makes one of the finest nutrition supplements out there.
It's called Foundation.
It's one of my favorite products.
Foundation is a creatine ATP blend, and it does something you want every supplement to do, but it does it better than any other supplement I've tried.
You'll look better and you'll perform better.
You'll feel better too, so it's kind of the trifecta.
It is a creatine ATP blend.
Creatine is one of the body's ways of generating the anaerobic mechanism work and enables you to do more work.
But the nice benefit with creatine is you get this intracellular volumization effect.
I don't want to get too wonky with you, but it makes your muscles look harder and more defined.
It's fantastic.
If you don't believe me, take the mirror test, right?
Go look in the mirror.
See what you look like.
Take a mental snapshot.
Give foundation seven days to work.
Male, female.
It doesn't matter.
Some people say, oh, you know, I'm a woman.
I'm a guy.
Is this right for me?
It's right for all of you.
Creatine is a perfectly natural, safe product.
It's president meats.
You're just getting a nice concentrated dose of this.
It is terrific.
After you give it about seven days to work, look in the mirror again, you're going to be like, whoa, check this out.
It is that good.
The product is called Foundation.
Use it as prescribed on the back.
You can't beat it.
It is terrific.
Go give it a shot.
You will perform better in the gym as well.
It's available at BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
That's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Go check it out.
It is a terrific product.
You're going to love it.
It's called Foundation.
BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Okay.
Now, onto the Flynn documents that came out last night.
I spent last night reading it.
It's not very long.
You all can read it, too.
For your convenience, I request you read it if you get a second.
I know some of you are busy.
It's not long.
It's about 11 pages, but a lot of it's repetitive because there were two, which is a little bit suspicious.
Two of them filed.
And you can read the reason why in the opening, where Mueller says there was some kind of a drafting error in the title of the report.
You know, a lot of people are questioning that.
In other words, why was the 302 edited?
So, You know, until I get a definitive answer, I'm not going to, you know, I'm not going to give you information that's potentially inaccurate.
So I'm going to hold on that, but you can read it.
I provided the link to the PDF in the show notes today.
Now to be clear, what we're talking about, there was a summary called the 302 of the Flynn interview on January 24th.
Now, it suspiciously was drafted February, I believe, 15th, which is obviously weeks after the interview.
Now, this is not standard operating procedure.
For instance, in the Hillary Clinton case, when they interviewed Hillary Clinton, the summary of that interview was drafted right away, immediately.
Apparently, when they interviewed Mike Flynn, obviously, Joe, there was some sort of deliberative process afterwards because it took them over two weeks to draft this 302 or the summary of the interview.
What were they deliberating about?
Now, there have been whistleblowers who are out there who are claiming that there have been video conferences where people in the FBI are talking about ways to nail Mike Flynn to the wall after the interview.
Now, that's not been confirmed yet because the guy's saying we got to get the video on this VTC if they have it.
I'm simply suggesting to you that that claim is out there.
So just to be clear what we're talking about, Flynn's interviewed at the end of January.
The summary of that interview is not filed for over two weeks later.
Not SOP, that's not standard operating procedure.
They didn't do the same thing with Hillary Clinton, especially in a case of this magnitude, you would think they would have filed the report right away.
Also, the original report was edited.
According to Mueller's filings, because of some kind of drafting error, which has a lot of people very suspicious.
But there are a number of extremely damaging pieces of information in this 302, and now it's obvious why the FBI did not want this out there.
Now, there are some redactions in it, to be clear.
I'm gonna hammer what it is.
What the problems with this 302 are.
Now to be clear so you understand what Flynn was charged with.
Flynn was charged with lying to the FBI about a conversation he had with the Russian ambassador Kislyak over primarily two things.
There were sanctions against Israel based on Israeli settlements and a UN vote.
Flynn was asked if he discussed those with the Russian ambassador, the sanctions.
And Flynn responded, no, and he had because they had the transcripts.
I'm gonna get into that.
I'm talking about the FBI's charges.
I'm not talking about reality and what happened.
I'm gonna get to that in a second based on the 302.
But the second part of it, the second part about the alleged lies, and I say alleged even though he pled because I still don't believe he lied.
I think he had to take the plea based on a potential, you know, them going after his family and the fact that they bankrupted him.
The second thing was when Obama suspiciously expels these diplomats right as Flynn's over in the Dominican Republic, these Russian diplomats.
The Russians call Flynn right away as the incoming National Security Advisor, and when asked about the response to that and the Russians' part, if they should moderate the response, which according to the transcript, Flynn says that, you know, basically Be careful with the response here because we're coming into office soon.
Apparently he lied to the FBI about that too.
Now, here's what the 302 actually says and why they're in a world of trouble.
Does that make sense, Joe?
Flynn was asked about, hey, did you talk about sanctions?
Flynn said no.
This is the FBI's allegations, and they did.
And then on the expulsion, did you tell the Russians to basically take it easy after we expelled their diplomats?
Flynn said no, but apparently he did.
You may say, what's the problem, Dan?
He's busted.
Eh, not so much.
Let me read to you what it actually says in the 302.
Number one, they ask Flynn, this is from the 302 himself, what Peter Stroke and Joe Pianca wrote after the interview two weeks later, after the quote, the liberation.
It says, the interviewing agents asked Flynn if he recalled any conversations with Kislyak, the Russian ambassador, about a UN vote surrounding the issue of Israeli settlements.
Flynn quickly responded, yes!
Good reminder.
What happened, Joe?
I thought he responded no.
Didn't that, wait, isn't that what they told us?
Joe, weren't we told when the issue of the Israeli sanctions and the Israeli settlements issue came up, weren't we told in the lying to the FBI report that Flynn lied about this whole thing?
Yeah, I believe we were.
So Flynn, when asked about this exact question, he says, yes, good reminder.
Don't forget the reminder word.
Joe, why would someone say yes, good reminder?
Let me ask you something.
Joe, you and I had a lot of conversations yesterday.
If I asked you the specific words of every conversation, would you remember them?
No.
But if I clued you in and said, hey Joe, remember when we talked about the video thing coming up, right?
They like that little promo.
Remember when we talked about that?
If you say, yes, good reminder, what does that suggest to me?
That you forgot, right?
Yeah.
And then you're saying, yes, good reminder because I cued you and now you remember.
Ah, yes.
I remember.
Yeah.
Not complicated.
Yeah.
See, you did it just now.
Now you remember what I'm remembering.
Yeah.
So Flynn, apparently, this is where, this is how they screwed him.
It's so obvious and I'm laughing at all the liberal goofballs who think this exonerates them.
He says yes, good reminder.
Here we go.
This is where it gets interesting.
On the 22nd of December, Flynn called a litany of countries to include Israel.
The UK goes down a list.
Part of the reason for Flynn's calls was to conduct an exercise to see how fast the incoming administration could get someone on the line.
Folks, this is critical.
This is critical.
Is Mike Flynn confusing his calls?
You get where I'm going with this, Joe?
Sure.
He's human.
Let me read to you something else.
A couple paragraphs later, I'm going to tie this together.
Don't go anywhere because this, the liberals are totally missing this.
So are a lot of other people, which is upsetting.
At the end of this conversation about the, the conversation about the settlements, Flynn, this is the FBI agents saying this, who don't think he lied, by the way.
We know that because they said that.
Flynn again stated that he appreciated the interviewing agents reminding him that he had another conversation with Kislyak.
Folks, now it makes complete sense.
Now it makes complete sense.
When asked about it, asked about his conversations, With the Russian ambassador over these sanctions, these Israeli settlements, and his UN vote.
Which Flynn clearly doesn't tell the whole story on in the transcript.
There's no doubt about that.
If you read the 302, it's clear as day.
Flynn has repeatedly spoken to this Russian ambassador in 30 other countries.
I told you he was in the Dominican Republic.
He was on vacation.
His communications were poor.
What do people do on vacation?
Have a couple adult sodas maybe?
Maybe you get a call?
You're not so, you know, you're taking a bit of a break?
Flynn's been, he just says in the report, he's spoken to 30 countries.
The agents indicated Flynn was appreciative of the reminder of another call with Kislyak.
It's clear as day, folks, what happened and why the agents themselves think Flynn didn't lie.
Please tell me you're following me here.
Flynn's confusing the phone calls.
Why is he thanking the FBI agents for reminding him about the other call?
Because he's probably confusing the phone calls and doesn't remember the conversation.
Listen, folks.
I'd have no business ties or no pre-existing personal relationship with Mike Flynn.
None.
I have no dog in this fight at all other than justice.
I'm telling you as a former federal agent.
This case is an abomination.
They should not have been at the White House anyway, the FBI, interviewing Mike Flynn.
They had no reason to be.
The Washington Post themselves received a leak the day before the FBI agents showed up to interview Flynn that the FBI found, quote, nothing illicit about his calls.
There was no reason for them to be there.
Now they go there, they have a transcript of his call, they know his exact words, which he clearly doesn't remember.
He thanks them for reminding him he's had numerous calls with Kislyak.
It's clear as day to me that Flynn's confusing the phone calls.
He doesn't remember the precise words on the sanctions?
Gee, why would he not remember that?
Maybe because, quote, he talked with up to 30 countries?
Where is it?
He spoke with 30 countries about it.
And they go down the list.
Flynn was confusing the calls.
Oh, that can't be true, Dan.
Then why did the FBI agents themselves say he wasn't being deceptive and wasn't lying?
Because he wasn't.
It makes perfect sense.
He's thanking them.
Oh, yeah, I had a number of calls.
Right.
If I say to Joe, hey, you know, did we talk yesterday, uh, you know, about the new Joey Baggett donut shirt in the Chum store?
Um, uh, it depends.
Which call, Dan?
Because we had a couple calls.
Yeah.
Oh, the second one.
Oh, Dan, thanks for the reminder.
Um, I think so.
Yes.
Good reminder.
No, I don't think we talked about it on that call.
Maybe he just forgot.
He spoke to 30 countries.
Not in the same day.
He's on vacation.
Put two and two together.
The FBI themselves has acknowledged the agents that interviewed him that he wasn't lying.
Does this make sense?
Why is he thanking them?
Why is he thanking them, folks?
So just to tie this up on the sanctions topic.
Yes, he clearly didn't tell the whole story.
The conversation, we have the transcript, which was illegally leaked to David Ignatius of the Washington Post and a felony.
We know, according to the transcript, that he clearly discussed sanctions with Kislyak.
So if he did, why would he say he didn't?
But why would he then thank the FBI for reminding him he had multiple conversations with Kislyak?
Because, like I said, he was on vacation.
He probably just didn't remember.
That's why he thanked him.
He didn't understand this was an adversarial interview.
That is a key line.
Flynn appreciated the agents reminding him he had another conversation with Kislyak.
And you think this is good for you, you police state tyrants?
How is this good for your case?
He didn't even remember he had another conversation, but you expect... So, you know what?
Here's the easiest way to sum this up before we move on.
He didn't even remember he had another conversation, but you want him to remember the details of it.
And that makes sense to you?
Oh my gosh, knuckleheads!
Secondly, on the expulsion of the Russian diplomats.
Which yes, according to the transcript, they did discuss.
But Flynn did not recall.
How do we know?
Because let me read to you his answer.
Again, the FBI's alleging, and Bob Mueller's alleging, oh he lied.
He knowingly lied about having this conversation about the Russian diplomats being expelled, and he said he didn't talk about it.
That's not what he said, folks!
Let me give you the answer.
From the 302 itself.
The interviewing agents asked Flynn if he recalled any conversation with Kislyak in which the expulsions were discussed, where Flynn might have encouraged Kislyak not to escalate the situation to keep the Russian response reciprocal or not to engage in a tit-for-tat.
Flynn responded, not really, I don't remember.
It wasn't don't do anything.
Folks, if Flynn told them not to do anything, why is he saying, I don't remember?
Because he doesn't remember!
He's saying it wasn't don't do anything, he did tell them to moderate their response.
But he clearly says here, not really, I don't remember, and the FBI agents are sitting there saying he's not, he doesn't look like he's lying to us.
Is it just possible?
Possible.
That Flynn actually doesn't remember the conversation?
Hence why he thanked the FBI for reminding him about multiple conversations?
He's talking to 30 different countries!
He's the incoming National Security Advisor.
He doesn't even remember the call!
You want him to remember the details?
The first part of this is critical!
Not really!
I don't remember!
This is your open and shut case against the decorated American hero?
Now do you see why they wanted to hide this?
It's real, by the way, it's embarrassing.
Straight up embarrassing.
That the liberals actually believe this adds to, in any way buttresses their, it makes you look like fools.
He doesn't remember the call.
He thanks them for reminding him about the call.
When asked about the details of the call, and the second part he says, I don't even remember.
He's on vacation.
He says his communications are poor.
This is a joke.
This is a setup.
The FBI agent shouldn't have even been there in the first place.
There was no crime to investigate.
You're supposed to investigate crimes.
You're not supposed to investigate people and produce crimes.
That's what they did with Mike Flynn.
This is a disgrace.
An absolute disgrace.
All right.
I want to get a couple more stories out because there's something going on with Rubio.
I don't get, man.
I just don't get Rubio down here in Florida.
I don't know what happened.
This guy had so much promise and has turned into like the biggest rhino out there.
It's so disappointing.
Really.
Yeah, something else.
It's amazing.
You know, and I shouldn't say he votes good on a lot of issues, but some of this stuff with the tax, I don't get it.
So a quick story on that and a couple more things.
Finally, though, today, Hey, when you think of the perfect gift, you probably don't think of an electric toothbrush, right?
But you should.
I love this product, Quip.
But the Quip electric toothbrush is one of the most gifted, gift-guided gifts of the season.
And here's why.
It's perfect for everyone with a mouth.
You all got one of those?
Well.
Yeah, Joe got one.
I got one.
It's a big one.
Oh, yeah.
And it's something they'll use twice every day.
I use mine actually three, four times every day.
It's Quip.
Quip.
Q-U-I-P.
We love Quip.
Quip is the best electric toothbrush out there.
It has sensitive sonic vibrations, gentle enough to use in your sensitive gums, and a built-in timer with guiding pulses to remind you when to switch sides.
No guesswork.
Quip makes holiday travel clean and easy.
It has a multi-use cover, mounts to your mirror, and unmounts to slide over the bristles for on-the-go brushing.
It doesn't require a clunky charger.
This thing is sleek, and it runs for three months on one charge.
It is sleek.
It is a good-looking electric toothbrush, man.
It is, and it works like a, it's like a power cleaning for your mouth.
You'll be like, who didn't know?
You'll be like, I didn't know my teeth could be this clean.
It's because you don't have a quip.
Quip is the gift that keeps refreshing with brush heads automatically delivered on a dentist-recommended schedule every three months for just $5, and you can even gift prepaid refills for a year to make sure they're never using old, worn-out, or ineffective bristles.
Quip is one of the first electric toothbrushes accepted by the American Dental Association as thousands of verified five-star reviews.
Listen, you will never have a cleaner mouth than Quip.
I'm telling you right now.
It is awesome.
Quip looks like a big ticket tech gift with a stocking, stuffer price starting at just $25.
And if you go to get Quip, why are you laughing?
Remember when we first started doing reads?
I get it.
You know what it is?
They send me the products and they're, they're damn good.
We don't use, I don't advertise products.
I'm enjoying the delivery here, man.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
And if you go to getquip.com slash Dan, That's GetQuip, Q-U-I-P.
Getquip.com slash Dan.
Right now, you get your first refill pack for free with a Quip electric toothbrush.
That's your first refill pack free at getquip.com slash Dan.
Getquip.com slash Dan.
Go pick up one for your family members, for everyone.
Put them in their stockings.
Getquip.com slash Dan.
All right.
So just quick on this Rubio story, I'm reading the Wall Street Journal tomorrow and they just filet Marco Rubio again, who I don't get it.
I don't understand what's happening with him.
Apparently he has some kind of a beef with the Trump tax cuts on the corporate side.
So he's putting out some disinformation about how these tax cuts work in an effort to get a piece of legislation passed that would tax corporate stock buybacks.
I was astounded reading this.
I had to read it twice because I don't want to get the story wrong.
And if anyone on the Rubio team thinks I'm mischaracterizing it, I mean it.
Send me an email and I'll read your statement on the air.
I'm not looking for any, you know, Republican on Republican violence here.
Political violence.
I'm not.
If I'm mischaracterizing this, please explain it to me.
But according to the Wall Street Journal today, Rubio is pushing this plan To tax corporate stock buybacks.
In other words, suggesting, Joe, that when corporations got a tax cut under the Trump tax cut plan...
That they should be using that corporate tax cut, not for buybacks, but for investment.
Now, that's such a great talking point.
It sounds wonderful.
But it's economic ignorance at its worst.
And I don't know why Rubio would be pushing this.
Ladies and gentlemen, if businesses get a tax cut, one, businesses understand are just tax collectors for the government.
You get that, right?
Businesses, what they do is they just incorporate taxes into their prices and pass the money on to the government.
Businesses are simply tax collectors for the government.
They incorporate it into their price, economy-wide, and they pass the money on to the government.
Why we would be interested in creating bigger tax hikes throughout the economy at higher prices so they can pass more money on to the government, I have no idea.
Now, Rubio seems to be suggesting here that when companies buy back their stock, the company could better use that money to invest in their own company.
Okay, great!
But what if the company doesn't have any good ideas?
So let me get this straight, Senator Rubio.
You want a bill to disincentivize stock buybacks by taxing them, right?
So you want to stop them or you want to slow them down because you want companies to invest in non-productive enterprises in their own company?
Joe, listen, I did an MBA.
I don't throw my education out there a lot at Penn State.
I loved it.
I did learn a lot.
I run a business now with my wife.
It's getting very complicated, as Joe knows, managing all this stuff.
But I'm not claiming to be some tycoon.
But I'm pretty confident that when a business sees an investment opportunity and has the cash and invests in it, and when it doesn't, it does something else with the cash.
It can invest it in other companies.
It can invest it in their employees.
It can invest it in buybacks, which returns the cash to investors in their company who can then use their money to invest in another company that has an actual business opportunity.
This is, ladies and gentlemen, this is Econ 101.
This isn't complicated stuff here.
If business A produces widgets, they don't have any great ideas.
They get this money from a tax cut.
It's their own money, by the way.
Money they would have sent to the government that they now have.
No one's giving them anything.
It's their money.
Now they get this, they're like, okay, great.
We've got some extra money due to a tax cut.
What do we do?
Well, let's give our employees raises, but we don't really have any new product lines.
So let's do this.
Let's buy back our stock and the stockholders in our company will now be a little wealthier.
They can take that money through the buyback and invest in another company that has a good idea.
We don't have anything right now.
It happens all the time.
Rubio's acting like somehow that's a bad thing.
Stock buybacks.
Stock buybacks.
Oh my gosh.
Stock buybacks are so bad.
So Rubio wants them to do what?
It wants a company that makes the widgets to take their own money, which they're not giving to the government now for a tax cut, to do what?
To go spend it on ridiculous, dopey things that aren't going to make the company any money so that the product line goes out of business and the employees lose their jobs?
Does this make any sense?
Let me read to you from the Wall Street Journal piece.
It doesn't have to work this way, Rubio's piece said.
Supply-side theory that increased investment benefits workers in the long run only works if investment actually increases.
Okay, but the Wall Street Journal responds, investment has actually increased.
After two years of nearly zero growth ending in 2016, private non-residential investment has since risen smartly despite tightening monetary policy.
In other words, despite interest rates going up and money getting more expensive, investment is increasing due to the Trump tax cuts.
Did he miss this?
In other words, businesses see more opportunities to invest and they are doing so.
And in cases where firms, this is important, And in cases where firms don't see a good opportunity to expand, they are buying back their shares, allowing investors to use the cash to invest in other businesses with better opportunities.
Folks!
It's that hard to figure out!
Why is Rubio... I don't get it.
And again, I want to be fair to the guy.
I know I've been tough on him in the past, especially with this SpyGate stuff.
Not that he really cares or anything.
Because I think he's... I don't know what's going on with that.
I have theories, but I don't want to put him out there.
Not yet.
But I'm comfortable.
But this is economic ignorance.
You want to tax buybacks now to give money businesses earned in the free market that they can invest in their employees, invest in their shareholders who can invest it elsewhere?
You want to instead tax it to give it to the government?
This makes absolutely zero sense.
Okay, final story.
By the way, just breaking news, Martha McSally, who lost her United States Senate race to Kyrsten Sinema in Arizona, the Democrat.
Martha McSally was the Republican.
Breaking news, is going to be appointed to the seat vacated by Jeff Flake that was occupied by Excuse me, not Flake.
That was McCain's seat.
Forgive me.
It was the election for Flake.
I'm confusing it too.
McCain's seat.
So just to follow, McSally lost the Republican.
So she's now obviously a free citizen out there to do her thing.
She's a congresswoman now.
She is now going to be appointed to McCain's seat that was occupied by John Kyle, the former senator, who now says, I'm not serving after January.
You following?
So that's just breaking news now.
So interesting to put that out there.
Kind of always fascinated by the internal political flows, how people move in and out of these seats.
So it's up for you to decide.
Some people thought McSally ran a rather lukewarm campaign in Arizona where she lost to the Democrats.
So I am assuming a lot of people are not going to be happy about that.
But, you know, we'll see what happens.
OK.
Another story today.
You know, Scott Atlas has a decent piece in the Wall Street Journal about this push for it.
Well, he's talking about how statistics are used to misrepresent single payer government run health care.
This is an important story, though.
I want to talk about it from a different lens.
I'm sensing this growing tide amongst the Democrats, especially now after the Obamacare decision where it was deemed unconstitutional by Judge Reed O'Connor in Texas.
This case is going to make its way to the Supreme Court and the Democrats, ladies and gentlemen, are starting to panic that Obamacare is going to lose in court and be expunged from the history of books forever, which will only be remembered as a historical stain on our healthcare legislative front.
The Democrats are panicking.
So I'm seeing a doubling down now on the push for Medicare for All, because when Democrats screw up by introducing government into healthcare, instead of dialing back, they introduce more of the poison to solve the poison, which is the government in healthcare.
So this Medicare for All push is going to be going out there.
You're going to hear a lot of it.
Now, some of the statistics they're using to push for what is essentially going to be a government-run healthcare system in the United States, under the guise of Medicare for All, it's really Medicaid for All.
Which is a broken, non-functioning, ill-working healthcare system for America's lower-income population.
That's what it's going to be for you, too.
The Democrats are going to start throwing out their numbers to justify the implementation of more government in single-payer health care.
So you're tracking what I'm talking about.
I think Atlas senses this, and this is why he put in his journal piece today.
You know, here are some statistics used to, you know, advocate for single-payer for all.
And he debunks them and he does a good job.
Here's one of them.
And I've talked about this on the show before.
These single-payer government-run health care advocates who constantly bash the U.S.
health care system, Joe, will say, well, infant mortality rates here are some of the worst in the industrialized world.
in the United States. And look at where we have single-payer health care. They're so much better.
Again, ladies and gentlemen, liberals are wrong on just about everything. We covered net neutrality
yesterday where they blew it. They just make this stuff up, okay? You understand that. Liberals
love to make stuff up. Making stuff up is their side hustle.
The reason infant mortality rates are worse in the United States than they are overseas,
according to the statistics in socialized medicine countries, is because the measurement
is different.
The United States measures almost every live birth.
If an infant takes one breath and tragically doesn't make it, that is measured as a live birth in those statistics of infant mortality.
Tell me you get this, because it's important, right?
This is how it works.
The United States measures it according to the standard definition.
If a child is born alive and takes a breath, that is a live birth.
That's not how Europe measures live births.
They only measure live births after a child, an infant, has survived for a period of time.
Do you see the difference?
Of course infant mortality is going to be higher in the United States when we measure every live birth, and your socialized medicine countries do not!
They don't measure every live birth.
You have to survive for a period of time.
Of course that's going to skew the statistics.
Atlas also talks about how we have more premature births in the United States due to lifestyle factors, not the healthcare system.
So you can throw that statistic out.
It's meaningless.
It's an apples-to-oranges statistic.
We don't measure them the same way.
Secondly, and I'll leave you with this.
You'll hear the liberals arguing for government health care.
Well, life expectancy here is worse.
Ladies and gentlemen, life expectancy is worse in the United States because of obesity and other health or lifestyle factors.
It has nothing to do with the healthcare system.
Matter of fact, our illness outcomes and survival rates from cancer and heart disease in our healthcare system are far better than socialized medicine.
We are so wealthy that the United States has a large portion of people who happen to be obese, which leads to worse health outcomes.
It's got absolutely nothing to do with anything else.
It's ridiculous.
They're just making this stuff up.
I wanted you to have that ammunition because I'm telling you, you heard it here first, that fight is coming.
I had a guy tell me the other day, I went back and listened to your entire library and your show.
Joe, he applauded us.
He was, it's odd how much stuff you said was going to happen.
It actually happened later on.
Go back and listen, check it out.
I know I follow the Democrats and their, their, uh, their email groups and everything.
I know exactly what they're thinking.
Now you have the mental ammunition to fight back.
All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in.
Please do not forget to watch the Sean Hannity Show on Fox.
Watch it every night, but watch it Wednesday night.
This Wednesday and Thursday, I will be guest hosting.
Should be fun.
I will also be guest hosting his radio program on Wednesday.
I'm headed up, running up to New York today.
So don't forget to watch.
It's gonna be a lot of fun.
I appreciate your support.
Don't forget to subscribe to the show.
Subscribe to the Dan Bongino Show on iHeart.
You can follow on iTunes, on the podcast app, on Spotify.
It helps us move up the charts.
Thanks a lot, folks.
I appreciate it.
I will see you all tomorrow.
You just heard the Dan Bongino Show.
Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com.
