In this episode I address the coup attempt against Trump and the McCabe/Rosenstein plot to remove him from office. I also address the media’s complete facepalm on an immigration “fact-check.” News Picks:
Finally: Rod Rosenstein to leave the DOJ next month.
This Jeff Carlson piece shows conclusive evidence that Andrew McCabe is a liar.
One of the finest pieces you’ll read about the coup attempt on the Trump administration.
Jussie Smollett may have chosen the wrong surveillance camera to capture the “attack.”
CBS reporter unloads on the biased mainstream media in an incredible interview.
Yes, the border wall in El Paso worked.
The NY Times goes big on the “Republicans Pounce” routine.
Insane liberal protestors deface the pictures of fallen Border Patrol agents.
The media is following the same script against the MAGA movement that it used on the Tea Party.
Copyright Dan Bongino 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?
Good morning, Mr. Bongino, sir!
Andy McCabe, Joe, doubling down on stupid.
Yeah, this guy, he just keeps digging.
Digging and digging.
I just, I don't get it.
This is either one of the dumbest human beings to ever transcend the ranks of the FBI up until the top, or at this point it's just some nihilistic endeavor to destroy any remnant of a reputation he had left.
I don't get it.
So I got a lot on that.
Also some immigration talking points we have to debunk.
I've heard the liberals bring them up often.
I keep my ear to the television to make sure that I hear what talking points are going to throw out there so that you have the mental ammunition you need to debate with them.
So don't go anywhere.
It's going to be a good show.
Yesterday's show went bonkers.
So thanks a lot for all the listens on yesterday's show.
Today's show brought to you by our buddies at Bravo Company Manufacturing.
I have a couple of these rifles, actually a rifle and a pistol from Bravo Company Manufacturing, they sell some of the finest firearms out there.
The rifle that they sent me is simply an amazing, amazing piece of machinery.
Looks good, fires right on target.
Beautiful piece of machinery.
Well, they sent it to me and I sat there and just, I did a...
I hit a lot of paper with that thing downrange.
It's absolutely beautiful, well-constructed.
If you've heard of Bravo Company Manufacturing, you know how high quality the rifles are.
Listen, I'm a gun owner, and owning a rifle is an awesome responsibility, and building rifles is no different.
This company was started in a garage by a Marine veteran more than two decades ago.
Bravo Company Manufacturing, or BCM, builds a professional-grade product built to combat standards.
This is because BCM believes the same level of protection should be provided to every American, regardless if they're a private citizen or a professional.
This is not a sporting arms company, Bravo Company Manufacturing.
They design life-saving equipment.
They know when a rifle leaves their shop at BCM, This could be used in a life-saving situation by a law enforcement officer, someone in the military, or someone just interested in defending their home or their property.
BCM is one of the finest firearms makers out there.
When I went to pick this up at the local firearm shop, they said, I can't believe you're getting this.
This thing is, these things are great.
They loved it.
They were all checking it out.
They all came over to see it.
True story.
BCM always puts people before products.
They know it is their moral responsibility to provide tools that will not fail the user when it's not a paper target, but someone coming to do them harm.
To learn more about Bravo Company Manufacturing, head on over to bravocompanymfg.com.
That's bravocompanymfg.com, where you can discover more about their products, special offers, and upcoming news.
That's bravocompanymfg.com.
Or if you need more convincing, go to their YouTube channel, youtube.com slash bravocompanyusa.
These guys are great.
I can't say enough about their products.
Sometimes, you know, some products I get to use often, some I don't.
This one is just terrific.
Bravo Company Manufacturing.
BravoCompanyMFG.com.
Check them out.
Okay, so yesterday we discussed Andy McCabe and the coup against the president.
And Joe, the media is freaking out.
They are losing their minds.
The left-wing media, you know you've got them in a corner when they all speak with coordinated messaging.
We had that propagandist liberal activist masquerading as a journalist at the Washington Post fill a bump Uh, who, uh, right after I appeared on Fox and Friends and the president retweeted, uh, or tweeted what I said about the coup on the president, the coup attempt by Andy McCabe.
Of course, the Washington Post and Philip Bump, a full-time liberal activist now, um, had to run a piece at the Washington Post No, this was not a coup on the president.
This was simply using constitutional means.
Really?
It was?
Because the constitutional means of the 25th amendment mean that the president is physically or mentally incapacitated to govern.
If you have any evidence of that, Philip Bump, full-time propagandist, hack goon at the Washington Post, I'd love to see it.
But you don't, because you're a hack and a loser.
And I'm sorry to be so forward with this guy, but it's losers like Philip Bump And the Washington Post and others out there who are collectively leading to the downfall of our constitutional republic, because whereas I defend the free press and always will, even when they're unfair and stupid, it's their stupidity and propagandizing of the American people that is allowing police state tactics and bureaucratic coups to go largely unpunished at this point.
This guy's a disgrace to humankind, a disgrace to the country, a disgrace to journalism, a disgrace to the Washington Post, which is hard to do because they disgrace themselves every day, and an embarrassment to the free press everywhere.
The fact that they can't recognize that what happened there was an attempted bureaucratic coup on the president, despite the obvious evidence and the words of this lunatic Andy McCabe himself, is a complete, total disgrace.
The media is dead and buried, ladies and gentlemen.
Ignore them.
Ignore them.
You will get nothing from the Washington Post or New York Times that even approaches the realm of factual data you need to make an intelligent decision.
Ignore these idiots.
They are nothing but outright liberal Pravda-like propagandists.
I'm bothered by the whole thing because we have an opportunity right now to self-correct as a country.
To put a roadblock in front of any future president, whether Democrat or Republican, a tax on them by a police state bureaucracy to remove them from office and overturn an election despite zero evidence they have the information necessary to do so.
We have an opportunity right now to do that.
And the media is forfeiting that opportunity to carry water like the goons they are for the left.
And it's a disgrace to watch.
You can tell I'm probably a little upset.
I had to have an MRI yesterday.
I get back in my car, having some surgery on my left elbow, one of my many medical maladies here.
There's a medical malady over at Dan Bongino.
And I get back in my car and someone sends me this article by bump.
No, it was not a coup.
This guy's such a loser.
So devoid of any reason or common sense that I can't believe they put this stuff down on paper.
Now, getting back to, you know, real facts and real information.
First, Jeff Carlson has a piece up at the Epoch Times that's a must-read.
It's in the show notes today.
I had a few questions about the show notes.
Ladies and gentlemen, if you go to the website, Bongino.com, and you click the drop-down menu, it's very simple, it's up in the corner.
It'll say podcasts.
The show notes are on the podcast.
Just click on the podcast for the day and all the articles are linked right below it.
I'm sorry if that was confusing.
It used to be titled show notes.
Now it's under podcast.
But I have an article by Jeff Carlson.
Also, if you want to get it, you can subscribe to my email list.
Click the subscribe button on my website in the menu and I'll email these articles right to your email box.
There you go.
Paula put up the link on a video.
But this is really, really a must-read piece because he addresses a lot of what's going on with Andy McCabe.
And there's two central tenets I want to talk about today with regards to the coup attempt.
And do not backtrack on your language at all because of the propagandist media left.
They're the conspiracy theorists, not you.
Still promoting this collusion hoax.
Number one, their line of attack here is going to be that Andy McCabe is saying that Trump obstructed their investigation into Russia, and it is that obstruction that is the grounds for the case itself.
Now, Joe, as we discussed yesterday, I'm going to hammer again today.
That makes no sense.
If Donald Trump believes he was being investigated for collusion on no evidence at all and then calls out the investigators for doing it, he can't possibly be obstructing justice where justice wasn't done.
So I want to hit the obstruction and the fact that still no one has produced a predicate crime.
Now, before we get to the sound bites from Andy McCabe this morning with Savannah Guthrie on one of the three-letter morning shows, I want to talk about the Carlson piece because the Carlson piece is damning.
So number one, Andy McCabe keeps talking about how the president's efforts after the investigation was open to talk down the investigation, that he's using that as his reason to keep the investigation into Russia going despite the fact he had no reason.
Joe, is this making sense?
He had no reason to open it up in the first place.
Now, here's what's fascinating.
Let's walk through a timeline.
Again, from the Epoch Times piece.
And Carlson has this all lined out.
May 9, 2017.
5-9-2017.
James Comey, former FBI director, is fired by Donald Trump pursuant to a letter written by Rod Rosenstein documenting all of the malfeasance and misfeasance by Jim Comey when he was the FBI director.
May 9, 2017.
May 11th, 2017.
This is important, Joe.
Andrew McCabe appears on Capitol Hill, under oath, in front of a committee up on the Hill.
Now, keep in mind, McCabe's premise the entire time now to sell his book, this looney tune, lunatic, is that the obstruction efforts by Trump to stop this illicit investigation are grounds in and of itself to keep the investigation going.
So Joe, for obstruction efforts to be real, you would think there would be some tangible effort to obstruct the investigation by Trump, right?
In other words, McCabe's saying Trump tried to obstruct the investigation.
Is he really?
From the Carlson piece, Marco Rubio asks McCabe while he's under oath.
Mr. McCabe, can you, without going into the specifics of any individual investigation, you know, I think the American people just want to know, has the dismissal of Mr. Comey in any way impeded, interrupted, stopped, or negatively impacted any of the work, any investigation, or any ongoing projects at the Federal Bureau of Investigation?
In other words, Senator Marco Rubio asks Andy McCabe, under oath, two days after Jim Comey's been fired.
That's why we're walking through the timeline, Joe.
Yes, yes.
Because McCabe is suggesting in all these recent interviews that the firing of Comey and Trump's negative comments about the investigation led to an obstruction of his investigation.
Two days later, he's under oath.
Now, Rubio puts him on the spot on May 11th of 2017 and says, tell me, were there any efforts to obstruct your investigation?
So clearly, McCabe must have said yes, Joe, right?
Because that's what he's saying now.
No, you would think wrong.
Yes.
Here's McCabe's answer.
As you know, Senator, the work of the men and women of the FBI continues despite any changes in circumstance or any decisions.
So there has been no effort to impede our investigation today.
Quite simply, you cannot stop the men and women of the FBI from doing the right thing, protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution.
So let me read that middle part again, Joe.
Andy McCabe's answer to Rubio about if Donald Trump has obstructed the investigation or any investigation.
Yes.
McCabe, so there has been no effort to impede our investigation today.
Why is nobody talking about this?
No effort to impede our investigation today.
None!
I know what that means.
I understand that.
There we go.
Joe, let's go back to Neanderthal caveman Joe.
Joe, yes or no?
If you were to answer a question about an obstruction of an investigation, you said there was no effort to obstruct.
Does that mean that the investigation was obstructed or it wasn't obstructed?
No obstruct!
No!
Even Caveman Joe can figure it out!
No obstruction!
What did Neanderthals have of an IQ?
I'm not sure.
65?
70?
I never got to measure one.
But even Joe can figure this out!
No obstruction!
This is McCabe, on the record, saying there's no obstruction.
Now, five days later, On the 16th of May, 2017, him and Rod Rosenstein meet and talk about removing Trump from office because of obstruction that he just acknowledged didn't happen.
Now, in case you think I'm making this up, that McCabe is a complete hack, discredited liar, a fraud, a phony, and a fake, cue up this first video audio clip here.
This is McCabe.
This morning, I had a poll.
Producer Joe and Paula worked hard, so I sent them this at like 9.40, right before we start recording the show.
I said in caps, I need this.
Well, it wasn't in caps, but there was like an exclamation point at the end.
I need this cut.
Here is McCabe this morning.
On with Savannah Guthrie, again doubling down on the ridiculous allegation that Trump obstructed his investigation, therefore that's the reason they started the investigation they shouldn't have started.
Play that cut.
Was it your suspicion and the reason that you opened this investigation that you thought the president might actually be working on behalf of Russia?
We had a number of very concerning things that we were considering at the time.
One of them was the fact that the president, in our view, had gone to extreme measures to potentially impact, negatively impact, possibly turn off our investigation of Russian meddling into the election and Russian coordination with his campaign.
So that goes to his potential motive, but when you're opening this particular kind of investigation, counterintelligence, Did you suspect the president might actually be working for Russia?
We thought that might be possible.
Yes, we thought it might be possible.
Now remember, Savannah, we're at the beginning of an investigation.
We don't draw conclusions.
We simply look at the facts and the information we have and begin investigations that we think are appropriate.
But as you point out in your book, the FBI does not start any investigation willy-nilly.
What were the predicate facts?
Lay them out here.
What were the facts that suggested the president may be a national security threat and may in fact be working on behalf of a foreign adversary, Russia?
Okay, so Savannah, we have to go back to the investigation of potential collusion between the campaign and Russia, right?
So through the fall, these are topics we've been looking at.
During that time, the president has been publicly undermining the investigative efforts.
He's talking about it as a witch hunt.
He's talking about it as a hoax.
So it's clear to us that he's not happy with what we're doing.
Also during that time, the president approaches the director of the FBI and asks him to stop
investigating Michael Flynn, a part of our investigation into Russian interference.
He asks him to turn off that investigation.
Why isn't that just the normal obstruction of justice criminal inquiry, which is substantial
enough on its own?
And what takes it to this next level where there's a suspicion that he's working for
I mean, this is extraordinary.
Because you have to ask yourself, Savannah, if you believe that the president might have obstructed justice for the purpose of ending our investigation into Russia, you have to ask yourself why.
Why would any president of the United States not want the FBI to get to the bottom of Russian interference in our election?
Ladies and gentlemen, Joe, you just heard what I heard, right?
Yeah, I did.
Is this guy the biggest fake, lying, phony, fraud, disgrace to humankind we've ever seen?
Yeah, pretty doggone close, Tano.
He's on the record.
I just read this to you, Joe.
On the record, telling under oath Marco Rubio, there has been no effort to impede our investigation today.
He's asked by Savannah Guthrie, who actually does some decent journalism here, Joe.
Maybe, you know, I'm not kidding, but maybe someone listened to our show yesterday where I keep bringing up the key word here, predicate.
Yeah, I noticed.
What was paragraph one?
What was the predicate reason for investigating Trump?
Andy McCabe, if you listen to that entire, we don't usually run cuts that long, but it's important.
Listen to what this fool does again.
Instead of addressing Savannah Guthrie's very good question, what was the reason you were investigating Trump for potential collusion?
What does he do again, Joe?
He goes back to after they opened the case, Donald Trump objecting to the case being opened.
And then he claims again, quote, he tried to turn off the investigation.
Let me read to you now, for the fourth time, McCabe's words to Rubio on their own.
So there has been no effort to impede our investigation today.
No effort.
Do you understand the investigation's still going on?
So he's acknowledging under oath that there's been no effort to impede it.
The Mueller investigation's still going on.
He then doubles down.
And says, well, President Trump wasn't happy with the investigation.
So that's the reason you started the investigation into Trump under false pretenses.
The dossier.
The fake dossier.
Political information.
We now know that.
McCabe won't admit it.
He avoids using the word dossier.
But then as a reason to initiate the investigation, McCabe has the cojones right here, Joe, to say one of the reasons they started the investigation was, quote, because Trump was not happy with it.
Ah!
Does this even logically make sense?
Look, folks, did you ever take a logic class in college?
Remember that?
Modus tollens and modus ponens and if this, then that?
I actually enjoyed that class.
I don't know how useful it was, but I enjoyed that class.
Does this even logically make sense?
Savannah Guthrie, let me, let me, um...
Let's stop the euphemisms and just rephrase their questions.
Savannah Guthrie to McCabe, why were you investigating Trump?
Do you have any evidence?
McCabe, we were investigating him because we didn't have any evidence, but after we started the investigation without evidence, he wasn't happy with the investigation, so that's why we were investigating him.
Does that even logically make sense on a timeline?
Joe, this guy was the deputy director of the FBI!
Either he is one of the biggest idiots we've ever seen in our lives, or he is just desperately lying to sell enough books to keep himself out of jail to pay his legal fees.
That's the only explanation.
She asks him what the predicate was, not Trump's reaction to it.
And he keeps going back to the reaction Trump had to being falsely investigated.
Joe, what is he hiding?
It's clear as day he's hiding the fact that the dossier was the only reason for the investigation, and this sucker bought in hook, line, and sinker.
McCabe got snookered and he doesn't want to admit it.
Take that back.
He didn't get snookered because I don't want to give him an ethical path.
It's clear to me now, based on his political inclinations and his comments about Trump later on, that he was willingly snookered.
In other words, they took the dossier and highly suspicious that any of it was credible as a predicate to investigate Trump because they hated Trump.
And now he knows that.
He said that on the record.
Remember, McCabe has unique liability in this case, Joe.
Right.
Because McCabe is one of the few guys who's already admitted that the warrant to spy on the Trump team wouldn't have existed without the dirty dossier from Hillary.
So McCabe has unique culpability in this.
That's why whenever he's asked, why did you start investigating Trump?
He always goes to stuff that happened after the investigation was started, which logically makes no sense.
You investigated Trump and you started it because of the reaction Trump had after you started the investigation?
And then he goes back again, as you just heard in that cut, to the Flynn thing.
Again, ladies and gentlemen, the Flynn thing.
Donald Trump did not ask Jim Comey to stop investigating him.
He said, I hope you can make this go away.
He gave him no such order.
How do we know that?
Because Flynn was prosecuted still!
Disingenuously and unethically, I believe, based on the FBI's own comments.
But how can you suggest that Trump told them to stop investigating Flynn when he didn't?
It just didn't happen!
But don't rely on people like Philip Bump or the Washington Post to actually put this kind of stuff out there.
Because they're not bright enough to figure out.
He's a propagandist.
That's what they do.
You were investigating Trump because he was not happy with your investigation?
Oh my gosh, this doesn't make any sense.
None of this.
And the media is just sucking this up.
All right, I want to get to a second sound cut.
I got a lot more on this because it never, ever stops.
If the media would just do some basic homework on this.
You have, as Victor Davis Hanson points out, a piece I have in the show notes today, which is one of the best pieces I have ever read about the coup attempt.
This is the biggest political scandal in American history.
And the media is part of it, Joe.
Because when all is said and done, as VDH acknowledges in the piece, when all is said and done and the dust clears...
I think you'd agree, Joe.
The media's cover-up of this scandal is going to be as big of a scandal as the Spygate and FBI investigation scandal itself.
Absolutely.
I have no doubt.
Darn right, brother.
All right, today's show also brought to you by our buddies at BrickHouse Nutrition.
They make the finest nutrition supplements on the market.
It's one of my favorite companies.
They've been with me from the beginning.
The website's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan for great offers.
I want to talk about Fielder Greens.
Fielder Greens, As a fruit and vegetable supplement.
It's a powder.
But it's not some cheap pill, some crappy old extract.
This is real food.
It's real food.
In other words, they take the finest fruits and vegetables and get their hands on fresh, high-quality, macronutrient, micronutrient-laden fruits and vegetables that'll help your brain, your immune system, your immunity.
Everybody knows fruits and vegetables.
Voluminous consumption of fruits and vegetables is the key to a long, healthy life.
But we don't do it.
Why?
They're tough to prepare.
You have to go shopping.
I get it.
You know, perishable at times.
And some of us don't have time to cook.
BrickHouse Nutrition has this problem solved.
Pick up a jar of Fielder Greens today.
I love the taste of the powder.
It tastes a little bit like blueberry.
It has a little fruity tinge to it.
Put it in water, put it in juice, put it in your protein shake.
There you go.
It's your fruit and vegetable insurance, knocked out right there.
You'll feel better, look better.
It's great for your skin, my hair, nails, everything.
I love the product.
We take it every day in my house.
My wife takes it.
It's called Field of Greens.
It's available at BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
That's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Listen, we insure everything in our lives that matter, right?
Our health, our cars, our homes, sometimes life insurance too.
How can you not have some insurance for your diet?
Your diet's what keeps you alive.
It's your fuel.
Get the high quality fuel you need.
Field of Greens available at BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Best product out there.
Love it.
Okay.
So let's go on to the second soundbite.
You know what?
I'm sorry, Joe.
I don't mean, I'm just really, I'm sorry to sound scatterbrained today, folks.
I promise you, I'm not, it's not that I do to any lack of sleep of anything.
I'm just, you know, I'm always candid.
I'm just very passionate about this.
And it, it gets me upset, Joe.
You probably hear a different tone in the show today.
I just astounded.
I can't believe that in this country I love, I know Joe loves, I know my wife does, And I know a lot of Democrats do, too.
I mean, not everyone's a radical far leftist.
Republicans and conservatives have always been passionate about this country.
But do you understand, like, we're watching right now the dissolution of our republic as we know it, in conjunction with a media operation purposely obfuscating your view into the really sordid, horrid truth?
It's sad, folks.
This is, you know, there's no political victories here.
There's no, like, we won.
Oh, look, we won the debate.
We showed that they conspired.
No, no, these are our people.
This is us.
This is the United States of America.
We're watching the whole thing dissolve like an Alka-Seltzer tablet in front of us into some pseudo-police state where a coup attempt against the President of the United States is accepted by the media simply because they want a political victory.
There is no going forward unless we can all collectively agree what happened here is an abomination to the principles of liberty, freedom, justice, and our republic.
Folks, I'm ashamed of the left.
Ashamed.
I look at them in disgust.
I do.
I look at them in absolute disgust.
And I take no pride in telling you that.
I look at them in disgust what they've done.
And nobody's calling them out on it.
Let me get to this one more snippet from Jeff Carlson's excellent piece in The Epic Times.
Again, in the show notes today.
Please check it out.
So, in case you're under the impression here...
That there really is predicate information.
So let me be clear what I'm saying.
I've played to you now sound yesterday and today of Deputy Director Andrew McCabe of the FBI, at one point acting director, refusing to answer a simple question about why they were investigating Trump.
The reason's clear.
It's because they were doing it based on a political tip from the Hillary campaign.
They had been fully weaponized, the FBI, to act as a political hit squad for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
So he can't answer the question.
So that's why McCabe keeps going back and pointing to ex post facto stuff.
Well, Trump said he wasn't happy with the investigation.
That doesn't answer why you started it!
But in case you're under the mistaken belief, and you're a liberal listening to the show, that there is some body of information hidden out there that, for some reason, the liberals, Slimy Adam Schiff, Sleazy Eric Swalwell, Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Mark Warner, Peter Stroke, and McCabe, and the FBI, and Comey are holding onto, and Mueller, and they haven't released his bombshell yet, let me read to you another piece from Carlson's excellent piece here.
At the same time that Andrew McCabe was attempting to open an obstruction investigation, Peter Stroke, he's the lead investigator on the case, folks.
Peter Stroke.
At the FBI.
And Page, Lisa Page, were texting about the lack of evidence of collusion.
In a text, Stroke sent to Page, Stroke noted, keep in mind, this guy's the lead investigator on the case.
This is his text.
You and I both know the odds are nothing.
If I thought it was likely, I'd be there, no question.
I hesitate, in part, because of my gut sense and concern that there's no big there there.
Here's Paige!
Stroke the lead investigator's girlfriend at the time.
Paige, who's an FBI lawyer at the highest levels of the FBI bureaucracy.
Here's Paige answering a question posed by Representative John Ratcliffe, a good guy, about that specific text.
In other words, Andy McCabe is claiming there's an obstruction of justice thing going on, they should open up an investigation.
Peter Stroke is lead investigator at the same time saying there's nothing here, there's nothing to investigate.
Ratcliffe asked Paige about that text.
Here's how she responds.
She initially answered, quote, So I think this represents that even as far as May of 2017, we still couldn't answer the question.
After a brief consultation with our legal counsel, Page continued, I think it's a reflection of us still not knowing.
I guess that's as good as I can answer.
I really can't.
I've been at this with you for a very long time.
Yeah.
A long time.
Man, we have done shows, Joe and I, you know, I don't, I don't, I don't say this in a, in a, in a overly pretentious way, but I don't think we've ever done a bad show.
Cause we prepare, you know, some shows are better than others.
Some shows, you know, we're like, all right, this is satisfactory.
We've never ever, we, I can tell you with all my heart, I have never dialed it in.
Not one day for a show.
I get up early.
I put this thing together and it means the world to me.
But I got to tell you, this is one of the most, Heart-wrenching shows I've ever... I mean it.
I don't know any other word to say it.
I'm like... I'm devastated by this.
Because I cannot believe that the media is still running interference for this obvious coup attempt against the President of the United States, despite the evidence being right in front of him.
Think about what I just read to you.
So not only can McCabe not articulate a reason they opened the case door in the campaign... Donald Trump's campaign, Joe, in 2016.
He can't!
He knows the reason, again for the umpteenth time, it's political information from Hillary.
But he can't say that.
So now, he's going back and televised interviews because he's an idiot, he's like indicting himself on national television.
He keeps going back to stuff that happened in 2017, where he believes Donald Trump tried to obstruct an illicit investigation into Donald Trump.
Not only is that debunked by McCabe's own words we read before, But you have McCabe's, essentially the FBI lawyer working directly with McCabe, Lisa Page.
And the lead investigator, Peter Stroke, working directly and answering to McCabe himself.
Acknowledging in text that there's nothing there.
There's no evidence.
And you have Page acknowledging as far as May of 2017.
Now you understand the timeline, the beginning, why I read it that way?
The same time McCabe is alleging that Rosenstein and him were having this 25th Amendment conversation, they needed to wire up Trump, wire up Rosenstein to get Trump on tape because it was so much obstruction going on, it was so dangerous, Trump had to be removed.
At the exact same time, Lisa Page answers under oath that, I think it's a reflection of us still not knowing.
In other words, they had nothing!
There was a coup attempt on the President to disingenuously, illicitly use the 25th Amendment in no way designed to take a President you politically disagree with out of office.
There was a discussion of weaponizing the FBI and using investigative assets like recording devices on people who work for the President to go into the White House.
Because McCabe's telling you they had all of this devastating evidence of obstruction that McCabe himself said doesn't exist under oath, his lead lawyer said didn't exist, and his lead investigator said didn't exist.
And yet you have complete zero lunatics like Philip Bump at the Washington Post still insisting that this was all legit on the up and up and this was not a coup.
Really, it rips the heart out of any American who just... I mean, this is incredible.
This is absolutely incredible and hard to believe what's happening right now.
McCabe's a liar, folks.
He's a liar.
He is a documented liar.
He lied three times.
Three times when asked about leaks to Devlin Barrett of the Wall Street Journal about leaks, critical leaks in the Hillary Clinton investigation.
He was the source.
He lied to the FBI's own investigators about being the source.
Lisa Page had the texts showing McCabe was the source.
He is a liar.
And he is a fraud.
And this man is a disgrace to the country.
The media, right?
Oh, we should celebrate.
Bull!
Celebrate nothing!
This guy's a traitor!
Simple as that.
It's a Benedict Arnold of our generation.
This guy is a traitor.
Alright, cue up that second cut.
This is... I mean, you want to talk about the... Rip your heart out again.
Now what does he do?
Now to run cover, McCabe is trying to bring down everybody else with him.
And good, I don't care.
Let the rats rat themselves.
There is no one with clean hands in this, Joe.
Almost no one.
Ironically, outside of Trump and his inner circle.
They're the only ones with clean hands in this.
Mueller doesn't have clean hands.
Rosenstein, nobody.
But McCabe, understand what he's doing in this next cut.
Because he knows he's in deep trouble, and he's a liar, and a fraud.
What does he do?
He's now trying to rope in everybody.
Rosenstein was talking about the 25th Amendment, and I'm starting to believe that may be true now.
I've had a little bit of change of heart on this.
But now, listen to him, Joe.
Try to rope in Congress, too, as being part of this.
Which, again, I have no issue with.
But what he does here is slightly disingenuous.
If you're a regular listener to the show, you'll hear right away the problem with this.
Play the cut, we'll talk about it afterwards.
You and other members of your team briefed the so-called Gang of Eight, these are the leaders of Congress in the days after Comey was fired, about the Russia investigation.
So it would have been the Majority Leader of the Senate, Mitch McConnell, Speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, and Democratic counterparts.
Did you tell them that you had opened a counterintelligence investigation into President Trump?
The purpose of the briefing was to let our congressional leadership know exactly what we've been doing.
Opening a case of this nature, not something that an FBI director, not something that an acting FBI director would do by yourself, right?
This was a recommendation that came to me from my team.
I reviewed it with our lawyers.
I discussed it at length with the Deputy Attorney General.
Did you tell Congress?
And I told Congress what we had done.
Did anyone object?
That's the important part here, Savannah.
No one objected.
Not on legal grounds, not on constitutional grounds, and not based on the facts.
Notice a couple things there, folks.
He never answers the question directly.
You caught it, right, Joe?
Listen, I knock the media a lot because a lot of them are complete lunatics and acts.
But Guthrie actually does a decent job.
Did you tell Congress you were investigating Trump?
Not the team, not Carter Page, not Papadopoulos, not the campaign.
You notice he never answers the question?
But secondly, Andy McCabe, in an effort to rope everybody in, says, oh, we briefed them, and nobody objected.
Really, Joe?
You briefed them in May, right?
Now, regular listeners already see where I'm going with this, so does Joe.
The case, Crossfire Hurricane, into the Trump team.
The Spygate, disgusting, illicit case investigating the Trump team was started in late, in fall of 2016.
They are required, by practice, to brief congressional committees every three months on the existence, the FBI that is, of sensitive investigations.
Joe, we just have to keep this cut on.
We use it so much.
I don't have it today.
Yeah, I know what you're talking about.
What does Comey do?
You know what I'm talking about.
In May of 2017, Eight months.
Eight months after they start the case.
Not three months, for liberals having a tough time with math, that would be quarterly.
He waits eight months to notify Congress.
He tells Congressional Representative Elise Stefanik when asked why he refused to notify Congress quarterly about the existence of this case to Trump.
He looks her in the face and says, uh, because I was advised not to.
And he indicates it was Bill Price's step based on what he says using the title of the person who told him not to do it.
And he says because the case was sensitive.
Ladies and gentlemen, that's the precise exact reason Congress is required by this, it's not legal, it's not a legal doctrinal thing, but the practices every three months to keep Congress in the loop so we don't have a renegade FBI conducting all kinds of sensitive political investigations without any kind of oversight.
Right, right.
He didn't do that, Joe!
Comey refused!
And the only reason he notified Congress was because it was probably pretty obvious at this point.
They had nothing.
Trump's the president.
It's May of 2017.
And Jim Comey realizes he is in a world of trouble, his FBI.
He's about to- he gets dismissed.
All of this stuff is coming to a head.
McCabe is not telling the truth.
He may say he briefed the oversight committee.
They were required to do it five months prior!
He is, and listen, I have no faith in McConnell or Ryan, either any of these people.
They're never going to get to the bottom of this.
So I am not defending them.
But understand what McCabe's doing.
He's now trying to reverse engineer the chronology and the timeline of events to make it appear that the whole time everybody knew about this illicit investigation when that is not the case.
Comey and his FBI withheld notification from Congress.
They were supposed to do quarterly.
They didn't do it for eight months.
And it's because they knew they were going to get caught.
McCabe is a liar.
He is trying to bring everybody down with him.
Now, on Rosenstein, I threw out kind of a comment.
I didn't mean to make it flippantly.
This is important.
Rosenstein now, if you again read the show notes, have a piece about Bongino.com.
Rosenstein's saying he's going to leave the DOJ next month.
Oh my gosh.
Really?
This is like two years too late.
Good riddance, Rod Rosenstein.
Now, I've been skeptical of McCabe's version of events where he indicates on May 16th of 2017.
Remember, in May, all this stuff is happening.
Comey's fired May 9th.
May 11th, McCabe goes in front of Congress, says there was no effort to obstruct the case.
On the 16th, Rosenstein meets to discuss this 25th Amendment thing with McCabe.
This is when Comey goes back up on the Hill and indicates that they were investigating Trump.
All this stuff is happening in May.
But I'm starting to become skeptical of Rosenstein's version of events too.
It's now pretty clear based on his statements that this conversation about using the 25th amendment, which would get the majority of the cabinet and the vice president to basically remove the president of office for a physical or mental incapacitation, which doesn't exist.
They were making it up.
We would make the whole thing up.
This conversation happened.
I don't think there's any question.
I've been leaning on the side of McCabe Talking about it hyperbolically.
I'm now starting to wonder.
It's clear now Rosenstein's announcement yesterday, or the leaks that he's going to leave next month.
Rosenstein knows he's in trouble.
Now, this says to me a couple things.
We've had this conversation before in prior shows.
When you're a federal agent, like I was, or you're an officer in the federal government, there are administrative rules and constitutional protections, okay?
This is important.
Please pay attention here.
This is really critical.
Those are not the same thing.
When you're a Secret Service agent or an FBI agent, you have administrative rules where you can be forced to testify about things under oath, under the administrative rules.
Right.
Now, the penalty is not jail, because that would violate your constitutional protections.
But the penalty is you will lose your job.
In other words, Joe, Joe always has Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination.
But if Joe's an FBI agent, and I suspect Joe of a crime, as the FBI director, I can tell Joe, you are going to talk to our administrative people about this.
If you don't, you're fired.
That is an administrative cudgel they have over Rosenstein.
That they had over McCabe while he was employed as the FBI, too.
Obviously, if Joe quits, or if Joe's fired, there's no administrative cudgel.
The cudgel is, Joe, talk or we're gonna fire you from the FBI.
If he leaves or he's fired, that weapon isn't there anymore.
Pretty simple to understand, right?
Now that Rosenstein's been accused of having this conversation about a coup attempt using the 25th amendment and recording devices on the president for an obstruction case that shouldn't have existed according to McCabe's own words, right?
McCabe knows he's in trouble.
Why is he in trouble?
I mean Rosenstein, excuse me.
Because now Lindsey Graham and others up on the Hill are calling for McCabe and Rosenstein, Joe, to be brought under oath up on the Hill to testify about this.
McCabe knows he cannot lie under oath here or he will be looking at a very serious charge and potential jail time.
Rosenstein too.
Rosenstein's now panicking.
Rosenstein, administratively, as the Deputy Attorney General of the DOJ, under administrative rules, could likely be forced, Joe, to now by Bill Barr, follow me, now that Bill Barr has been confirmed as the Attorney General.
Rosenstein can be forced to go up to the Hill to answer those questions, and the answers to those questions will be devastating.
Did you engage in conversations about removing the President for office, using the 25th Amendment, and put out there that you were willing to wire yourself up in conversations with the President on an obstruction charge that they admitted didn't even exist?
The only answer appears at this point, Joe.
Yes, I did.
It would be some of the most devastating congressional testimony we've seen since Watergate.
Rosenstein can't do it, Joe.
He can't do it.
So he has to wipe clean the administrative cudgel.
I believe that's what's behind him leaving next month.
He knows Bill Barr, the newly confirmed Attorney General, will make him do it with that administrative weapon.
That administrative weapon fails to exist if Rosenstein leaves.
That's why you heard him depart so quickly yesterday, or the leaks came out, oh, he's gonna leave in the middle of next month.
I'm sure of it.
Because now, Joe, what can he do?
He can go up to the Hill as Joe civilian, Rod Rosenstein, no, he's not a member of the DOJ, and what he can say, what?
I'm gonna take the Fifth.
Right.
Or, You know, administratively, he's not subjected to the same strictures he would have been before.
He can fudge it a little bit up on the hill now.
That's why he's leaving.
This guy's a snake, too.
This is a battle of the snakes.
Remember Battle of the Network Stars?
This is a battle of the network snakes.
Rod Rosenstein versus Andy McCabe.
Two sleazeballs battling to see who can, you know, who can break through the sleaze floor quicker.
Gross.
Gross what's happening!
All right, I got more.
Last read today, another great company here.
Life Insurance, one of those topics that everyone knows a little bit about.
But hey, do you understand it well enough to comfortably buy it?
I mean, really, it's a complicated topic sometimes, but don't worry.
PolicyGenius makes it easy.
Whether you're an insurance expert or a newbie, PolicyGenius created a website that makes it easy for you to compare quotes, get advice, and get covered.
This is super easy to use.
I know this can be a complicated topic.
PolicyGenius has this down.
You don't have to have any prior experience with life insurance to understand.
Go to the website.
PolicyGenius is the easiest 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, just apply online and the advisors at PolicyGenius will handle all the red tape.
They'll even negotiate your rate with the insurance company.
No extra fees, no commissioned sales agents, just helpful advice and personalized service.
And PolicyGenius doesn't just make life insurance easy, Whether you're shopping for disability insurance to protect your income, homeowners insurance, or auto insurance, they can help you get covered fast.
So no matter how much or how little you know about life insurance, you can find the right policy in minutes at PolicyGenius.com!
PolicyGenius.com!
That's PolicyGenius.com, the easy way to compare and buy life insurance.
Go check it out, PolicyGenius.com.
Okay, one final note on this.
So Victor Davis Hanson, who you've probably seen on Tucker Carlson's show, he's been on Hannity's show lately, is one of the finest political commentators out there in the field.
Just an amazing guy.
Really, his insights are keen.
He has a piece up at this American Greatness website, which is up in the show notes.
Again, if you click on the menu on the website, go to podcast, the show notes are attached to the show each day.
Talking about the media's role, and this coup attempt, and how the media cover-up is a national disgrace and a shame.
I encourage you to read the piece.
Folks, I would debate to you strongly, in no uncertain terms, that the spying scandal on the Trump team, the weaponized investigation into the Trump team, the fake obstruction investigation into the Trump team, by McCabe's own words, The then-coup attempt using both the 25th Amendment and the obstruction investigation, which Philip Bump leaves out the obstruction part, by the way, the fake obstruction investigation.
That those scandals are going to be as big or equal to the media scandal to cover this up and make it all go away.
It is absolutely shameful what's going on.
Read the piece.
It is a damning indictment, layer by layer, of everything that was done to take out the Trump administration and how history will not be kind to the lunatics who tried to pull this thing off.
Folks, I just want to put a little smile on your face because these are dire times.
You can probably tell by The dour tone in the show today.
History's always forced to reckon with the facts.
It is.
Eventually some entrepreneurial person, when the political penalty for outing the Democrats and the liberals and the rhinos that pulled this off on Trump, when the political penalty is gone, someone's going to want to make money on clicks and someone's going to want to write a book.
And it'll be from left-wing sources who will crack the floodgates.
This happens.
And the example I used to give often, I haven't given in a while, is I always use the David Dinkins-Rudy Giuliani example.
When David Dinkins was running for re-election for mayor of New York City, when New York, I lived there, and the only reason I remember this is because it was really my First foray into deep diving into politics, where I really found fascinating what was going on.
New York City hadn't had a Republican mayor in a long time.
We had Ed Koch, you know, David Dinkins, and the city was in complete chaos, Joe.
Crime was out of control, you know, the bond market left.
I mean, the economy was struggling.
It was really, you had the Crown Heights riots.
New York City was struggling.
It was a rough time.
But the media, the left-wing New York City media, defended Dinkins to the death.
They defended him as if it wasn't his fault, it was just these Republicans pouncing and all that other stuff.
And they'd go after Giuliani.
Giuliani comes in, runs on this reformist record, law and order, let's get the taxes down, the economy back.
And he routes David Dinkins.
And Dinkins doesn't get re-elected.
And what, at the time, was probably a bit of an upset.
I only bring up that story because it took a lot of time.
And it took the renaissance in New York City, Giuliani's combating the crime in Times Square, the crime around the city, and getting the economy going again, where he really focused on dumping a lot of regulations, where the media was finally forced to acknowledge, Joe, years after the facts, that the Dinkins administration was a complete disaster.
They had to.
Because of two things.
One, people wanted to make money on the clicks.
And secondly, Joe, they tried to maintain some semblance of credibility, but only after the political penalty of bashing Dinkins during a campaign was over.
Right.
I tell you that, I hope that makes some kind of sense.
Because when Donald Trump is out of office, and years have passed, just like you see the rewriting of history now about the Reagan administration, George H.W.
Bush, and even some liberals who now, oh, we miss George Bush.
George W. Bush.
Eventually they'll try to get their credibility back, but they won't do it when there's a political penalty of hurting the Democrats because they're liberal activists first.
When this is all written, ladies and gentlemen, the story really comes out.
It is going to be absolutely devastating the stain on our country brought about by the Obama administration, the FBI, the CIA, Brennan, and other people who were involved in this massive spying operation, weaponization operation against the Trump team.
It's a disgrace.
And the media role in it will become clear.
Okay.
A couple things.
I haven't really hit on this Smollett story because, folks, listen, I don't want to waste your time.
I have an hour.
Joe and I respect your time.
And I haven't hit on it because the Jussie Smollett, the Empire actor who now it appears was involved in an elaborate hoax to impugn the reputation of Donald Trump and his supporters.
He claims he was attacked in the middle of the night by two People who scream, this is MAGA country, who put a noose around his neck.
All the indications now by the reports is this was a hoax.
I haven't touched on it because I don't really feel like I have anything to add.
I mean, these hoaxes are so common now.
I've told you what the Bongino rule is.
Wait 24 hours.
I've now revised the Bongino rule, Joe.
Now wait 72 hours before you discuss on social media any negative Trump story brought about by the media because they're probably lying.
I mean, do we have to go through the litany of hoaxes?
The Deutsche Bank story.
Oh, they got Deutsche Bank.
They're looking at Trump's records.
False.
You know, the Wikipedia story.
They were communicating with Donald Trump Jr.
False.
Mike Flynn was ordered when Trump was a candidate to contact the Russians.
False.
Michael Cohen has information that Trump told him to lie.
False.
Listen, folks, I can't say shit.
The media's not credible.
They're not even tabloidish.
At least the National Enquirer gets stories right sometimes.
The media's a joke.
It's a farce.
They jumped and pounced all over, pun intended, they pounced all over this Jussie Smollett story because it looked bad on Trump, and I can't tell you enough, the Bongino rule.
Wait 72 hours, the story will likely be debunked as a hoax.
But there is one angle to this story that I think you may not have heard that I do find interesting.
I have an article from Breitbart up at the show notes today that's fascinating.
So Smollett, apparently, according to this report, Joe, he was looking to get this attack on tape.
Who tells her?
So apparently there was some kind of rehearsal done for this what appears to be a hoax attack right now.
And he had kind of mapped out in his head where the surveillance cameras were.
And the Breitbart piece covers this, so if I lose you any details you can read it, it'll make a lot of sense.
So it appears, and he alludes to this in his interview with Robin Roberts as well, It appears he thought the surveillance camera at the scene was pointed in the direction he was at.
But given the cover of the surveillance camera, he couldn't see the camera angle.
And the angle was in fact in the wrong direction.
It was north.
So according to the Breitbart report, I guess the hope was he would get this attack, I'm using the air quote, show on tape, of him being brutalized by these Trump supporters, who he's alleged now to have paid to attack him, these two Nigerian brothers.
And he was hoping this viral video would go around the world of him being beaten up by these two MAGA supporters.
But the camera was pointed in the wrong direction.
Ruh-roh.
Yeah, ruh-roh.
There was no tape.
There was no nothing because he wasn't bright enough apparently to figure out that because there's a ball camera doesn't mean the lens is pointed in your direction.
Right, right.
You know what I'm saying?
It's not a fish eye like a 360 or a tarantula eye with like 6,000 lenses or whatever.
It's a camera that was pointed in the wrong direction.
Yeah.
One other piece of this too that I hadn't heard before.
Again, multiple reports out now that one of the reasons he's involved in this hoax now that appears to be all the facts are coming out.
Is he, again, according to reports, because we do things deliberately here and slow for real, I don't need to be first and I don't apologize to anyone.
We need to be right.
I'm not Philip Bump of the Washington Post.
We actually do facts here.
But the reports are starting to seep out now, Joe, that he may have sent himself a death threat on the set of Empire, I guess to gain some sort of victim status.
This is small ad.
And apparently he was offended that the letter did not generate fiery media rage towards Trump supporters and give him the victim status he so wanted.
So again, according to reports, apparently this attack hoax was a way to double down on that, get this on video and garner some attention for victim status that he apparently wanted because victim status is craved on the left.
That's what they want.
They want to be a member of an aggrieved group.
That's what being a liberal, that's the very essence of what being a liberal is.
So those were just two ways.
That's the only reason I haven't talked because I don't really feel like I have anything to add on it.
I had heard a little while ago, like many others, that this was probably a hoax.
But folks, again, on my show, I'm not in any way eager to jump the gun on any story.
And if that bothers you, I understand.
I know it bothers some.
But I want to be right here.
I don't want you to ever refer to my podcast when talking to a liberal friend, and then days later have to recant.
I don't want to have to do that.
I'm sorry.
We've made a couple mistakes on this show, and it's always bothered me.
And that's why I've withheld comment until I feel we have a good repository of facts to give you a solid picture of what I think happened.
It appears now that obviously this was an elaborate hoax.
Okay, one other story.
I have a great piece in the show notes at Pongito.com from Matt Palumbo.
I discussed it.
Actually, I take that back.
I didn't get to it yesterday.
But it is in yesterday's show notes.
About another talking point being bandied about by the liberals about the El Paso, the city of El Paso, and the crime drop after border security measures.
Folks, I never bring up stuff just haphazardly.
Watch the cable news networks and you will see the liberals' new talking point because Trump brought up that El Paso is now safe because of border security.
So let's be clear, let's get the lead out first.
Trump has said, hey, El Paso is safe because they engaged in border security mechanisms, and this is what worked.
The liberal media pounced on it, of course, and said, that's not true, and wrote a bunch of stories how El Paso, the crime rate in El Paso was decreasing long before they built this border wall structure or completed it in 2009.
Now my resident fact checker, Matt Palumbo, who's got a really exciting book coming up, by the way, which I'll be teasing on this show.
You're all going to want to go pick this up.
You heard it here first.
If you like debunking this and fact checks, you're going to love this book.
Matt wrote a piece showing how the Democrats conveniently leave out of the narrative, Joe, that in 1993, what was instituted?
Operation Hold the Line.
A massive increase at that section of the border in El Paso of agents and a fence-fixing operation where they upgraded the fence in El Paso.
And when you look at the media's own chart, Joe, that Matt has in the piece, here's what you see.
1993, border security mechanisms, the fence enhanced.
What do you see happen in El Paso, Joe?
Crime goes down.
This is their own chart.
They're using it to debunk Trump.
Here's Trump.
Border security measures on the wall implemented in El Paso.
Crime goes down.
The media shows a chart where border security measures are implemented in 93.
Crime going down and uses the chart as evidence that Trump is wrong.
You may be saying that doesn't make any sense.
Of course it doesn't!
The chart shows it!
Matt has a little line, a little arrow.
Operation Hold the Line Implemented, 1993.
Crime Joe, down!
For those watching the video, even Caveman Joe gets it!
1993, border security.
Crime in a border town in Texas, down!
You, you get, good, good.
Right, then, then, this is, they, K-Man Joe, the Washington Post puts this in as they're trying to debug Trump.
Now, even worse, yes, even worse.
Border apprehensions after Operation Hold the Line was initiated in 93 were down 66,000 to 54,000.
Most of that was attributed to the very section in El Paso, a drop in 10,000 apprehensions.
In this section, they implemented the border security and fence upgrades.
Now, one more!
Tripling down on media stupidity.
If you look at their own chart, even though after the fence was enhanced and border agents were hired in El Paso to stop the crime and crime went down, in 2009, when the border wall section in El Paso was finished, you see another dip in crime.
In other words, tripling down on the fact that Trump was right the whole time.
The media does a fact check on Trump, tries to debunk Trump, and in fact debunks themselves in their own debunking.
Passione Passo!
Read the piece!
Matt has little charts and you can't miss them.
There's arrows pointing, there's dates, you can't screw it up.
But if you're the Washington Post, you can.
Alright folks, that was a stacked show today.
Thanks again for tuning in.
I really appreciate it.
As I always respectfully request, please subscribe to our show.
If you have an iPhone, go to your podcast app.
can look up our show.
It'll say subscribe.
It is completely free, but the subscriptions help us move up the charts, help other people find the show.
You can also, if you have an Android or other non-iPhone device, you can follow.
Click the follow button on iHeartRadio.
Again, free.
You can also follow us on SoundCloud and other platforms as well.
