In this episode, I address the devastating testimony on the Hill which dismantled the latest liberal anti-Trump hoax. I also address the fallout from the Democrats’ disastrous CNN debate. Finally, I address explosive new revelations in the witch-hunt against Michael Flynn. News Picks:This reliable election model is really good news for the Trump campaign team.
Republicans finally take action against sleazy Adam Schiff.
Sleazy Adam Schiff’s Ukraine conspiracy theory continues to fall apart.
The DOJ obtained cell phones of this key player in the Spygate probe.
This key witness in the fake Ukraine scandal is telling the story the Democrats want.
Is Michael Bloomberg about to jump on the presidential race?
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.
Hoaxes are collapsing everywhere.
Remember that Seinfeld episode with George?
Worlds are colliding!
Worlds are colliding!
Hoaxes are collapsing!
They should reconstitute the Seinfeld staff for a new episode called Hoaxes Are Collapsing.
Folks, I've got a stacked show for you today, as usual.
Hoaxes are collapsing everywhere.
Democrat debate hoaxes, Ukrainegate hoaxes, hoaxes designed to target Mike Flynn.
Just one quick question before we get started, we bring in producer Joe here.
Yeah.
To the Democrats listening, it's a serious question, I'm not messing around.
Why are you so susceptible To, like, hoaxes, lies, spooky fairy tales, Aesop's fables.
Why?
That's easy.
I mean, do you not have a basic lie detector, fact detector?
Yeah.
All right.
Stack Show for your day.
Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today, my friend?
Daniel, I'm doing well, and the answer is alien interference.
That's why.
Is it?
That's what it is!
Microwaves beaming into things like tinfoil caps or something?
I must be, because I tell you what, man, every single hoax they put out there, you'd think one of them would at least come true, right?
All right, let's get right to it.
Today's show brought to you by our buddies at Helix Sleep.
Helix Sleep!
Go to helixsleep.com slash Dan.
You will get the finest mattress of your life.
And here's the benefit to Helix Sleep and their mattress.
Listen, there's a lot of mattress companies out there.
Number one, there's not a better mattress for the price.
Number two, they will get a mattress fitted to you, customized for you.
Helix Sleep has a quiz.
It takes two minutes to complete.
That's it.
Matches your body type and sleep preferences to the perfect mattress for you.
Not for Joey Bag of Donuts.
For you!
You a side sleeper?
Hot sleeper?
You like a plush?
A firm bed?
With Helix, there's no more confusion, no more compromising, and no more mattresses made for the other guy or the other woman.
Helix Sleep is rated number one by GQ and Wired Magazine, the mattresses.
Just go to HelixSleep.com slash Dan, take their two-minute sleep quiz, and they'll match you to a customized mattress that'll give you the best sleep of your life.
We have two in this house, one for my daughter, one for me and my wife.
We love it.
Best sleep of my life, hands down.
For couples, Helix can even split the mattress down the middle, providing individual support needs and feel preferences for each side.
They have a 10-year warranty.
You get to try it out for 100 nights risk-free.
They'll even pick it up for you.
That's how confident they are.
It's the best mattress you'll ever sleep on if you don't love it.
But you will love it.
Don't even worry about it.
But that guarantee's there for you if you need it.
You will not need it.
It is that good of a mattress.
Helix is offering up to $125 off all mattress orders.
For our listeners, that's $125 off at helixsleep.com slash Dan.
That's helixsleep.com slash Dan.
Helixsleep.com slash Dan.
Joe, let's go!
Thank you.
So I want to just tease something quickly for tomorrow, too.
This is important.
I was going to get to it today, but Joe just played me.
I don't do calls on the show.
We may one day take a few calls here and there.
I'm not going to make a big deal like a caller segment or anything.
But Joe just played for me when I was filling in for Mark Levin on the radio, a segment where I took a caller about the tax the rich argument.
And I got to tell you, folks, self-praise stinks.
It does.
But it was pretty darn, for me and Paula were sitting here cracking up.
Nice job, producer Joe.
I'm going to play some of that for you tomorrow.
I promise you're going to love it on a Friday where the caller didn't even know basic.
I mean, I'm not going to say anymore.
Stay tuned tomorrow.
Joe was kind enough to cut that for us.
All right, let's get to story number one.
This is important.
So the U.S.
envoy to Ukraine was up on Capitol Hill testifying with this witch hunt.
I've got a lot of breaking news on this.
Kurt Volker, he was an envoy to Ukraine, obviously dealing in diplomacy for the Trump administration.
We all know the collusion hoax fell apart, it then was replaced by the Mueller witch hunt, it's now been replaced by Ukrainegate, and the Ukraine hoax, another big hoax.
Ukraine hoax is obvious, again repeating it for the thousandth time, but for those of you who just tuned in for the first time, The silly Democrats made up another hoax that Donald Trump, on a phone call with the Ukrainian president, suggested that if we didn't get information about Hunter Biden's shady dealings in Ukraine, that we would hold up military aid.
And Trump allegedly said that in a transcript.
He didn't.
Of course, we have the transcript.
We've now read it.
The story has been thoroughly, completely discredited, debunked.
It's another hoax.
Adam Schiff in his star chamber.
They're up there engaging in a fake impeachment.
It's not a real impeachment with no vote, trying to compare it to a criminal trial.
Well, they had Volker up there yesterday.
It's a piece by Byron York and the Washington Examiner.
I'm going to put up a snippet from it in a minute.
Title, Schiff pressed Volker to say Ukraine felt pressure from Trump.
Well, as I just said, to produce information about shady Hunter Biden, Joe Biden's a kid, or they weren't going to get military aid.
A story, again, that's been completely discredited.
So Schiff, who is honestly, I'm not kidding, one of the dumbest guys on Capitol Hill, this guy has promulgated so many fake news stories and hoaxes that how anybody takes this guy seriously, him and Swalwell, Our two IQ midgets up there, some of the dumbest guys up there, they can never ever get their story straight, and they're some of the worst political tacticians I've ever seen.
They promote hoaxes with no idea how the hoax is gonna end, and then when it ends and it blows up in their faces, they just move on to the next one.
So, they bring up Kurt Volker, who worked with Trump on this Ukraine thing, expecting Volker to, you know, advance their narrative.
Well, according to Byron York, it's not exactly what happened.
Hmm.
Quote, in a secret interview, Representative Adam Schiff, hack leader of the House, I added the hack part in, leader of the House Democratic effort to impeach President Trump, pressed former United States Special Representative to Ukraine Kurt Volker to testify that Ukrainian officials, Joe, felt pressured to investigate former VP Joe Biden's son, Hunter, as a result of Trump withholding U.S.
military aid to Ukraine.
There's the hoax.
Well, what happened?
They thought Volker was their ace in the hole.
No, no, no!
According to Byron York, Volker denied that was the case, noting that Ukrainian leaders didn't even know aid was being withheld, and they believed their relationship with the U.S.
was moving along satisfactorily.
Without them having done anything, Trump mentioned in his notorious phone conversation with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is a scam.
I don't know how many different ways from Sunday I can tell you that Ukrainegate is just a follow-up.
And by Ukrainegate, I'm talking about Hunter Biden's scam.
There's no scam for Trump.
It's another hoax.
It is just a simple progression from the collusion hoax to the Mueller witch hunt to this.
They need something to constantly hit Trump on.
Now, the reason I bring this up, and not to overdo Ukraine, we talked about it last week.
Hammering this Ukraine story to death.
You've been listening to the show, you are thoroughly informed now.
There is no there there for that.
Just like there was no there there for the collusion hoax.
According to the actual investigators who investigated the collusion hoax.
Remember Peter Strokes' text?
Nah.
I bring this up for another reason.
Not just that nobody, nobody is accommodating sleazeball Adam Schiff and actually fortifying his ridiculous story about this deal.
Right.
Military aid for information.
Nobody's saying that.
No, just Adam Schiff.
Captain Hoaxer.
Captain Ahab of hoaxes.
He's hunting for the Moby Dick of hoaxes and he's found another one.
There he is!
There she blows!
There she blows!
Captain Schiff.
The Ahab of hoaxers.
Why am I bringing this up?
Not just because Volcker blew it for them.
Had to do that, dude.
Folks, they have been trying to manipulate the American public to make you believe that this is some kind of criminal trial.
It is not.
And impeachment is an entirely different thing.
It's a political trial.
Not a criminal trial.
I covered this the other day, but it's being done tactically for a reason, to impugn the character of Donald Trump and make it seem like he's under some kind of criminal investigation, because obviously that has negative overtones.
If I were to say, gosh, you know, me and Paul are under criminal investigation, you and the audience would be like, what?
What did they do?
They're trying to do this for a reason.
Impeachment is a political trial in the Senate, followed by an impeachment charge leveled in the House.
Clear?
It is not an indictment.
Right.
There's nothing.
But the Democrats are suggesting that their secret proceedings Because they're not letting Republicans into many of these meetings.
They're conducting all of this in secret, unlike what happened in the Bill Clinton impeachment, where everything was public, and the information came out in the Star Report.
Their suggestion is, well, we're doing it in secret because like a criminal trial, we're in the grand jury phase, and grand juries are always secret.
Joe, as we discussed the other day, it's kind of important following up into my next story at Bongino.com.
Yeah, bro.
Now, we discussed this, so I'm gonna let you cheat a little bit.
Now, Joe is not a federal agent.
He doesn't have to be.
He wasn't a cop, but Joe's a smart guy.
Joe, in grand juries, they generally take votes, right?
Even though they're in secret, grand juries take a vote, and they have to vote to indict someone.
You go into a grand jury as a prosecutor, as an agent, you tell the grand jurists, you tell them your story, and they come back and they issue a true bill.
Right.
And the subject of the grand jury proceeding gets indicted.
Right.
Everybody gets indicted in a grand jury, by the way, as I said, because there's no, it's not adversarial.
There is no defense allowed in.
Everybody gets indicted.
You can indict a ham sandwich in the grand jury.
No problem at all.
Hands down.
Twice on Sunday.
Easy.
I've never heard of someone not getting indicted.
But they take a vote.
Well, that's not what Pelosi's saying now.
Remember, the Democrats want you to believe this is like a grand jury, so it should be secret.
But grand juries vote.
Not the House.
From our Bongino.com piece, I'll include this in the show notes again.
This is from yesterday.
Breaking!
Pelosi will not hold a vote on impeachment.
Circles back to Putin.
Oh!
Oh!
Everybody time out.
Oh!
I don't have my red flag.
We're still unpacking props and everything.
We need a red flag on the field here.
Yes.
So let me get this straight.
Pelosi's suggesting to us that impeachment is happening.
It's not, because it's happening in secret, nobody knows what's going on, no vote has been taken, and the Constitution clearly delineates that the House of Representatives shall have the sole power to impeach.
Not the Speaker, not Adam Schiff.
In other words, House of Representatives, meeting by any plain-language reading of the Constitution, there must be a vote from the actual Joe.
Representatives.
Plural.
Plural, baby.
Plural.
This is clearly not an impeachment based on our Constitution.
They're just making this up.
There is no impeachment.
But to make you believe there's an impeachment, Nancy Pelosi is saying we're in an impeachment.
And it's so devastating.
And we're keeping it secret because we want it to be like a criminal trial.
Folks, you cannot have it both ways.
I don't want to beat this thing to death.
But it's important what's going on right here.
You can't have it both ways, liberal lunatics.
Either it's an impeachment with a vote, or it's not an impeachment and you're just making this up.
There's no impeachment.
Or, you take a vote, it's an impeachment, you hold the proceedings in public like every other impeachment in US history has, Or, again, you're violating precedent and making this stuff up as you go along.
Third, if you're going to insist this is just like a criminal trial, where hearings are conducted in secret, it's not.
There's no precedent for that.
No impeachment has ever been conducted that way.
Let me be crystal clear.
None.
Not Johnson, not Clinton, and not the... Well, as I said, Nixon wasn't impeached.
He resigned.
But not the impeachment hearings with Nixon.
All of it was public.
There's no precedent.
But third, if you're going to compare it to a criminal trial in a grand jury, they actually vote, Nance.
You should actually read the federal criminal rules on how things work if you're going to make such a stupid comparison.
No, we're not voting.
This is the Star Chamber.
Now, there's three things going on.
Well, I covered some of them already.
But just to kind of sum this up, with this lack of an impeachment vote, the obvious question you should be asking now is why?
Why is Nancy Pelosi bailing on taking an impeachment vote?
The short answer, ladies and gentlemen, because she's going to get smoked.
Smoked!
One of two ways.
She's either going to lose the vote on the floor, She needs to get to 218.
218 members, a majority, that'll vote for articles of impeachment.
House of Representatives in the Constitution.
Not representative, remember.
She needs a majority.
Folks, if she loses the vote, and she puts it on the floor, it will be the biggest political facepalm, I am not kidding.
The biggest political facepalm in 50, 60 years.
I can't even think of a bigger one.
She will lose.
What are you going to do?
Re-impeach him?
It would be humiliating.
Re-impeach him later?
Now we're really going to impeach him.
That would be the first way.
Face palm.
Big time.
The second way, I'd argue, would be even worse.
You may say, well, it gets worse.
Oh, yes it does.
What if she actually does get the votes?
You may say, well, they'd celebrate, right?
No, not so much.
Ladies and gents, as my mother used to say, believe you me, Daniel.
She used to call me Daniel because all my whole family's J's.
Jimmy, John, Judy, James.
So she'd be like, James, John, Daniel.
See, my mother used to say, believe you me, Daniel.
Believe you me.
I don't know what that meant.
Believe you me.
I'm really serious.
Believe you me.
If they win the vote, it's even worse.
Why?
Because you have approximately, what is it, 20, 30 members in Trump or Trump-leaning red districts or swingy districts, members of Congress, representatives that are up for election, obviously every two years, up in this presidential election cycle, with Trump back on the ballot.
You want to be running in a Trump district as one of these lunatics who said, yeah, yeah, I want to impeach the guy.
For what, a hoax?
Yeah, a hoax, that's right.
You want to be that guy?
Or that woman?
Folks, listen, I ran for office.
I know what it's like to take one on the chin.
It's tough.
And you do not want to be the guy to have to get up in front of a bunch of angry constituents whose health care costs are through the roof and tell them that you spent the last 18 months of your life trying to impeach a president on a hoax.
Yeah.
Believe you me, as my mom Judy would say.
Second reason it's even worse.
So again, first reason they lose the vote, facepalm.
Second, they win the vote and they lose all their members.
Bigger facepalm.
Even worse.
Ladies and gentlemen, if they win the vote, there's still a trial in the Senate.
That's not a majority.
You need 67 out of 100 in the Senate.
Not 51.
Let me just approximate that.
What are the chances, Joe?
I'm going to guess here.
And Joe, listen, because you are the audience on BuzzMedia.
If you need to correct me, you can.
I'm giving you permission to humiliate me on the air.
OK, then.
I'm going to guess, Joe, the chances of them winning a Senate trial with a majority Republican Senate led by Mitch McConnell and flipping 16 Republicans, Republicans, to vote against the president on a hoax.
I'm going to guess, Joe, the chances of that are exactly zero.
Am I wrong?
I think.
You think I'm wrong?
I think you're pretty close to right.
Yeah.
Pretty close.
I think I'm pretty right too.
Yeah.
I would say goose egg, donut, chocolate glaze, D&D.
Maybe a Krispy Kreme.
You have zero chance.
So why is option one a facepalm, but option two an apocalyptic Ellie?
Ellie, where's that from?
Remember that movie Deep Impact?
An extinction-level event?
Why is number two an extinction-level event for the Democrats?
Not only do they lose the members, who now have to go on the record to impeach for a hoax and run on it.
They're on the record.
Now they lose a Senate trial in the biggest facepalm in a hundred years!
Folks, that's why Pelosi doesn't want to vote on it.
She either doesn't have the votes, or she does.
Either way, she loses and Trump wins.
It's a hoax.
Listen, Watergate, love Nixon or hate him, it happened.
There was a break-in at the Watergate Hotel.
Yeah.
The Clinton, you get the story there, we'll keep it family friendly. That thing,
got a blue shirt on in honor of Clinton, actually happened.
Yeah. That happened.
We got it.
We got it.
You may not think it should be impeachable, but it happened.
Dude, you're killing me.
I don't even see you on camera and I can only, I'm just going to move on.
Sorry, Danny.
Did you crazy?
It's a hoax.
We have the transcript.
It's a hoax.
This can't possibly, cannot possibly work out for the Democrats.
Alright, I've got to get to this Mike Flynn thing.
I teased that yesterday.
Let me get to my second sponsor today.
I'm bouncing around because we've got a lot of important stuff.
But this is really, this Flynn case is just...
And I mean, really, I know I use the word a lot because I love it, explosive, but seriously, an explosive revelation.
Stay tuned, and I've got some more video and audio from the debate, too.
I didn't forget that.
There's a few more things.
I just didn't want to bombard you two days straight of Democrat disastrous debate coverage, but there was some important stuff.
All right, let's get to this.
Our second sponsor today is our buddies at Harry's.
Ladies and gentlemen, I kid you not, these are the finest right now.
The reason I don't have my Harry's razor with me, and I usually keep it, I'm not even kidding.
I use it and this new studio is like a little set up a little different and I can't keep running back.
I use it.
You see that nice little shave?
That's from Harry's.
Here's my problem.
Why I need Harry's razors.
I kid you not.
I work in the morning.
And I work at night.
So when I work at night, I have to be clean-shaven.
So I don't like to shave twice because I get razor burn.
Thankfully, I found our friends at Harry's.
These are the finest razors out there.
Listen, human beings have been shaving for thousands of years.
The secret to a great shave?
Well, it hasn't changed much.
The ancient Greeks didn't need flexi-balls or heated handles or time-travel machines, flux capacitors.
Neither do you.
Harry's doesn't overcharge you with gimmicky nonsense.
They have the best razors out there for the best price.
Clean, close shave.
And here's an important point about Harry's.
It's not in it, but I'll tell you this much.
The razors, right?
Joe, you use Harry's.
They last forever.
They do.
Yeah, they do.
The razors are great.
They last long.
They're durable.
It's not one of these like cheapo one-time shave, and then you're like, it's like a chainsaw.
This thing, mine, I have pretty thick facial hair.
I'm not kidding.
I have not changed one time for two, three weeks.
It's a true story and it was still working fine.
Listen, Harry's is great.
They have returned to the essential.
Quality, durable blades, a fair price, just $2 a blade.
Cut out the middleman.
They manufactured their blades in a German blade factory that's been honing precision blades for a century.
Means you get incredibly high quality blades at factory direct prices.
Stop buying your razors from these other places.
You're wasting your money.
Harry's is super convenient.
Blade refills are delivered directly to your door and your schedule with or without a subscription.
There's no risk for you to try them out.
If you don't love your shave, let them know.
They'll give you a full refund.
I promise you will.
Listeners of my show can redeem their Harry's trial set at harrys.com.
slash Bongino, H-A-R-R-Y-S, harrys.com/bongino.
You'll get a weighted ergonomic handle for a firm grip, a five blade razor with a lubricating strip
and a trimmer blade, rich lathering shave gel with aloe to keep your skin hydrated,
and a travel blade cover to keep your razor dry and easy to grab on the go.
Go to harrys.com/bongino and start shaving better today at a great price.
Check them out, you'll love them.
All right, one more note before I move on to Flynn though.
I can't, I'm gonna request audience help.
I do this a lot.
Yesterday I had mentioned on our show that there was an interview with Al Sharpton where he's asked about what percentage of the federal tax load the rich should pay.
The interview is a 2004 interview with John Stossel.
If you can find this, I hunted for this, I kid you not, for hours.
I can't find it, but I did get a relative readout of what happened.
We were discussing yesterday Elizabeth Warren's lies about fair share and how much, you know, Bernie as well, about how much the rich actually pay.
And I used the example of the Al Sharpton interview to show you how foolish liberals are.
They don't even know the numbers themselves.
So what happened in the interview, and if we can get the audio, I'll play it for you tomorrow.
If someone has it, send it over.
It's info at Bongino.com if you can find it.
There's a segment of the interview where Stossel says to Al Sharpton, this is funny, he says, well, what percentage of the entire tax burden should the wealthiest, you know, i.e.
the 1% pay?
So Sharpton's like, well, I think the fair share would be at least 15%.
Or he says 15%, I don't even think he says at least.
Well, what was the problem?
Well, Joe, at the time of the interview.
They were shooting for what?
They were paying 34%, even Sharpton.
He had no idea.
He had no idea.
So Stossel's like, well, they paid 34%.
He's like, what?
He's got to show you.
Ladies and gentlemen, they're always making it up.
If we can get that, I'll play it tomorrow with Joe's great find from me on Levin.
That was really funny.
Where again, another lady.
It's taxation without representation.
You'll love that clip.
It's really, really good.
Okay.
Finally, the Mike Flynn story.
This is really important.
Hattip at TechnoFog on Twitter does a really, really good job.
Can't recommend the account enough.
They, I don't know the person personally, but the account does a great job of distilling down complex legal arguments made in these cases to easily digestible bits.
They found this little gem just to set this up quickly.
Mike Flynn, Lieutenant General Mike Flynn, who was subjected to his own witch hunt by Bob Mueller, you all know the backstory, called the Russian ambassador while he was in line to be the National Security Advisor during the transition, and the Democrats alleged there was some deal, and then he was arrested for some nonsense, lying to the FBI charge when the FBI themselves admitted that he didn't lie.
It's one of the worst, ugliest witch hunts against an American patriot in human history.
It really is.
It's gross.
It's just disgusting what happened to Mike Flynn.
Flynn gets rid of his old legal team.
Lieutenant General Flynn.
The honorifics matter.
Put that out there.
And he hires this bulldog of a lawyer, Sidney Powell, who is taking exactly zero.
You get it?
Fill in the blank.
So Sidney Powell filed a legal briefing the other day, which technophog circled this little gem in there.
In the legal briefing, they're looking for Brady material.
I know.
See, Joe gets to cheat.
He's watching the YouTube.
YouTube.com slash Bongino if you want to check it out.
So let me get this straight.
Mike Flynn's new lawyer is saying, we need Brady material, which means evidence the government is holding that may be exculpatory.
We clear on what Brady is, folks.
Brady is if the government prosecutes you and they have information that you may be innocent, they are obligated, obligated to turn that over.
If I'm accusing Joe of robbing a bank and I'm charging him and I have video of Joe somewhere else when the bank was robbed, if I don't turn that over, oh boy, am I in a lot of trouble.
That's right.
That is a very... Believe me, I'm not making that up.
I was a federal agent for 12 years.
That is a huge deal.
Sidney Powell's saying, hey, I think there's some Brady material out there.
There's some evidence indicating Flynn may be innocent.
And what is she asking for again?
Look at this little red line.
Again, hat tip, technofog.
Wait, the phones that were used by Mr. Joseph Massoud were... What?
Wait, the government has BlackBerry's phones?
Used by Joseph Mifsud.
Now, you may not have put two and two together there.
Some of you more advanced listeners who've followed my show for a while, you definitely, I know Joe did, definitely put two and two together.
Quick backgrounder.
Who is Joseph Mifsud?
Joseph Mifsud is the alleged Russian agent That contacts or has a meeting, forgive me, with George Papadopoulos from the Trump team back in 2016, and in that meeting is alleged to have told Papadopoulos from the Trump team about Hillary's emails.
Understand this.
Take this away.
I've said it a thousand times.
This is a thousand and one.
If Mifsud is not a Russian agent, The entire FBI reason for opening up an investigation into Trump and his team completely falls apart.
Why?
Because the FBI's on-the-record stated reason for investigating Donald Trump is that Papadopoulos allegedly later on tells an Australian that the Russians have Hillary's emails.
These are all false allegations, by the way.
So the Democrat story and the FBI story is, oh my gosh, Papadopoulos got it from this Russian guy and now he's passing it off.
They're trying to collude with the Trump team.
You dig?
It's very simple.
Yeah.
But Joe, if Mifsud is not a Russian agent, then we got a big, big problem.
It's kind of hard to collude with a Russian agent if you're George Papadopoulos, if he's not Russian nor an agent.
We haven't heard that in a while.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
We needed a Mutley.
You got to refresh me once, at least once a week.
That was almost, that's a single Mutley, but it's definitely a Mutley.
Yeah.
Now, I'm going to make the case, Mifsud is definitely not Russian, he's Maltese, but I have made the case to you now for over two years in both of my books about this too, Exonerated and Spy Game.
Mifsud may have been an agent, but he most certainly wasn't an agent of Russia.
Let's put up this epic Times piece, which is a dandy.
This one is terrific.
Be up in the show notes today.
Please read it.
The Epic Times by Peter Svob.
Sorry, I'm from saying your name wrong, Peter.
It's not intentional.
Headline, DOJ obtained cell phones of central figure at origin of Russia probe.
This is about cell phones for Mifsud being requested.
Michael Flynn's legal counsel says phones that belong to Joseph Mifsud likely contain exculpatory evidence.
Now, before we get to this snippet from the piece, Joe, I'm going to ask you again to put on your fake investigator hat to pretend for a moment you're a federal agent, just for a moment, because you're a smart guy.
Got it right here, Dan.
Thank you very much.
All set.
Now, Joe, if Mifsud was a Russian agent, like the Democrats claim, who was trying to work with the Trump team, pass off Hillary's email.
Devastating.
You think that Russian agent would turn over cell phones to the DOJ?
Dumb.
Hey, you guys, just check these out.
Probably not, Dan.
No.
Thank you, Joe.
That is a very sophisticated, detailed analysis.
Very good.
Joe's one of the best federal agents I ever met.
He is the James Bond of producers on these shows.
He figured it out in a jiff.
Of course I'm being sarcastic, and so is Joe, because you don't need to be a federal agent to figure out, if Mifsud was a Russian agent, he probably wouldn't hand over two cell phones to the Department of Justice.
I'm just gonna throw that out there.
Of course, liberals who have to wear a dunce cap around full time won't get any of that.
No, no, of course he handed them over.
He just wanted to be a nice guy.
Yeah.
Okay.
All right.
Great.
Great.
Very detailed.
Fantastic analysis.
My gosh, people are morons.
Now from the epic timespeed.
Oh, it gets better.
It gets better.
So the DOJ has Mifsud's phones.
Hasn't turned them over to Mike Flynn's team, by the way.
From the Epoch Times piece.
Excuse me.
Mifsud's lawyers, Stephen Rowe, confirmed to the Epoch Times that the DOJ obtained the cell phones and said he was informed that Mifsud used them to communicate with quote, listen to this.
Whoa.
He used the phones to communicate with at least one person in the US.
Wait, wait, how's that?
He's a, You may say, okay, so what?
Maybe he was talking to an Uber driver or something in the U.S.
Okay.
Fair enough.
It wasn't a Russian Uber driver, I hope.
Back to the piece.
From the lawyer again, Mrs. Laird.
I was told that it was possible to retrieve a lot more data and information from the phones, he said.
Neither Roe, Hitz's lawyer, nor Powell, Flynn's lawyer, would say how they learned about the phones or who gave them to the DOJ.
Listen to the kicker.
The kicker.
It isn't clear how Mifsud obtained the phones, although Powell wrote in an October 15 tweet that the phones had been given to Mifsud to use.
Oh, oh, oh.
So somebody gave Mr.
Who exactly gave him while he's communicating with this U.S.
person?
I thought he was a Russian agent.
Yeah.
So someone he's communicating with in the U S somebody gives him these phones to handle.
Ladies and gentlemen, listen to me again, if you're a regular viewer, listener of this show, sorry, I'm like getting, I'm like getting tired.
Cause I think I find, I'm sorry, but I find this stuff tragically comical and I do mean tragically comical, bittersweet.
I do.
Yeah.
Because you have to be an idiot to not see what's going on here.
But I almost have to laugh or I'll cry, or in my case now, laughing and crying at the same time.
Because you have to be, I mean, a dunce of historic proportions to not understand this was a setup.
The Russia hoax was a setup from the start.
All the facts appear to be pointing to the fact that George Papadopoulos was set up by people who used Mifsud To advance a collusion hoax.
And it wasn't the Russians.
It was someone looking to target Trump.
I can't wait to see what's on these phones.
The one thing, if there's one thing, if I may take a moment of personal privilege, it is the Dan Bongino show, if you'll allow me.
If there's one thing I've been attacked on by media hacks, liberal morons and others, and the folks, I'm getting, I'm sorry, you know, people like, oh, don't call them Martin.
Listen, the show may not be forever.
It's not for everyone.
I have no patience for these idiots anymore.
If you do great.
I'm not talking about all Democrats, the radical left, the Antifa crowd and the hoaxers.
These guys have IQs of 26.
I'm not interested anymore.
But if there's one thing I've been relentlessly attacked on for two years, Paula knows is Joe knows it.
Cause I've spoken about it.
It's my theory from eons ago, based on a solid source I had and information I accumulated, that Mifsud was not a Russian agent and was, in fact, a Western intel tool to set up the Trump team.
I have been relentlessly attacked for that.
It's a conspiracy theory.
Oh, it's a conspiracy, all right.
But it ain't no theory.
And ain't is a word in this case.
I cannot wait to see what's on those phones.
You may be asking, by the way, well, what's the connection to Flynn?
If Mifsud, you believe, was part of a plot to set up Papadopoulos, what's the connection to Flynn?
Eh.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, who else was set up back in 2014 and 2015?
With the exact same, he colluded with the Russian hoax.
Oh, Mike Flynn!
Yeah!
Mike Flynn, that's right.
You don't remember that story I discussed at about six months ago?
Judy, you'll have to look that up for us, audience archivist.
Where I discussed the whole plot in 2015 to set up Mike Flynn.
They invite him to a dinner over in the UK.
Who shows up?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Right.
This woman who has some tie professionally to Russia.
Yeah.
She's not a Russian agent at all, Svetlana Lukhova.
Svetlana, yeah.
Nothing to do with Russia.
All of a sudden, a whisper campaign starts against Mike Flynn.
He was with this Russian woman at a dinner.
Oh, who invited him to the dinner?
The same players who were involved in the Spygate case against Trump.
Halper, the spy.
What does Papadopoulos call Halper?
The walrus or something?
It's hysterical, by the way.
The same players, folks.
The, he colluded with the Russian, fill in the blank.
It's used before, it's the whole topic of my second book, Exonerated.
How they tried this on McCain and his presidential campaign.
The exact same plan, it's all documented in the book.
Then they tried Flynn, and then they tried Papadopoulos.
The big question is, was Mifsud, and we have some reason to believe he may have been in attendance at some of these things, old Joey M., was Mifsud at some of these events where Mike Flynn was being set up?
Who was he talking to?
Did someone give him a phone to have a little chat-ski?
It certainly wasn't Russians.
This thing is going to blow up.
We have not even scratched the surface.
Scratched the surface of Spy Game.
Alright.
What do I got to get to?
Oh, okay.
I got some more stuff from the debates, but let's get to this.
Uh, our final sponsor and a great sponsor.
We love a zip recruiter.
They're absolutely terrific.
Uh, when I get to this and then I want to cover, don't go anywhere.
I've got some just stunning video from the debate.
And there's been a follow-up on one of them that you're not going to want to miss.
I promise you.
All right, today's show is also sponsored by ZipRecruiter.
Folks, listen, hiring can be a slow process.
Believe me, we know.
Cafe Altura's COO, Dylan Miskewitz, he needed to hire a director of coffee for his organic coffee shop in his company, but he was having trouble finding qualified applicants.
So he switched to ZipRecruiter.
ZipRecruiter doesn't depend on candidates finding you.
It finds them for you.
Its technology identifies people with the right experience.
And invites them to apply to your job.
So you get qualified candidates fast.
Folks don't waste a lot of time sifting through resumes, people who are unqualified, overqualified, applied for the wrong job.
You don't need any of that.
Just use ZipRecruiter.
Dylan posted his job on ZipRecruiter, said he was impressed by how quickly he had graded candidates apply.
He also used ZipRecruiter's candidates rating feature to filter applicants so he could focus on the most relevant ones and not waste any time.
That's how Dylan found his new director of coffee.
In just a few days.
With results like that, it's no wonder 4 out of 5 employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day.
See why ZipRecruiter is effective for businesses of all sizes.
Try ZipRecruiter for free at our web address ziprecruiter.com.
That's Zip.
Z-I-P-R-E-C-R-U-I-T-E-R.
Ziprecruiter.com slash Bongino.
B-O-N-G-I-N-O.
Ziprecruiter.com slash Bongino.
Folks, the smartest way to hire is Ziprecruiter.
Hands down.
Stop wasting your time.
Let Ziprecruiter do the legwork for you.
Ziprecruiter.
The smartest way to hire.
Go check them out.
All right.
So getting back to yesterday excuse me uh what is it the Tuesdays debate debacle what a mess there was so much stupidity there that in yesterday's show I had to like distill it down to the Like at a 10 out of 10 scale, like the level 10 stupidity.
Now we're down to the eight or nine, but still important nonetheless, because this is a presidential election.
I'm going to call this the tyranny block of the show, showing you how liberals, the word liberal, which used to be associated with the respect for liberty in general, before it was hijacked by progressives and Democrats, is now synonymous with tyranny.
No, I mean it.
Oh my gosh, that's a... No, it's true.
Liberals want to take away your big R God-given rights to protect yourself, to speak.
You have Antifa, the most violent anti-First Amendment group.
I wanted to play a video, but honestly, it's so violent.
I don't even... Antifa at the Trump rally.
I'm not even going to... I can't because I don't want... And there's not a lot of sound, so the audio listeners wouldn't get much out of it.
But the tyranny streak on the left is serious, ladies and gentlemen.
It's not a joke.
This is a real problem.
Exhibit one.
Our friend Robert Francis Bateau, as Tucker Carlson calls him, O'Rourke.
Here is him, he's at the debate, talking about confiscating your firearms, and when asked about, well, what are you going to do if people don't turn over the firearms?
Other consequences.
And when we're done with this, I got a follow up because he followed up yesterday with Allison Camerata from CNN and it got a lot worse.
But check this out first.
Here's Beto at the debate.
Exactly.
How are you going to take away weapons from people who do not want to give them up and you don't know where they are?
If someone does not turn in an AR-15 or an AK-47, one of these weapons of war, or brings it out in public and brandishes it in an attempt to intimidate, as we saw when we were at Kent State recently, then that weapon will be taken from them.
If they persist, there will be other consequences from law enforcement.
Really?
Alright.
Folks, contrary to my generally gruff-looking appearance, I get that.
No one's going to accuse me of being like a Backstreet Boy.
I've never been a pretty boy, ever.
I'm never going to be.
I really am, and I mean this.
I'm a peace-loving guy.
I am.
It's not a joke.
I'm not being funny about it.
I know this.
I am.
I practice violence.
I do.
I practice mixed martial arts.
You know why?
So I never, ever in my life, Have to engage in it and never have to negotiate from a point of weakness.
I'm not kidding.
That's why I do it.
I never want to be.
Fighting is brutal.
It is.
And anyone who does mixed martial arts and watches the show knows it.
It's savage.
But folks, people who understand violence are terrified of it.
Fake, snuggie-wearing, tough-guy social justice warriors aren't afraid of violence because they have no idea what it feels like.
The fear.
The fatigue.
It's awful.
Try having a dude mounted on top of you, beating the snot out of you while you can't breathe.
It's pretty much the worst experience on the planet.
Then you do gi, and his gi's all sweaty, and his sweaty, nasty gi's clogging up your nose, and he can't breathe even worse.
You want to die.
But you don't want to tap out because people are watching.
You ever fight in front of people?
It sucks.
Why do I say that?
Does Beto O'Rourke really believe that hundreds of millions of Americans are going to just answer the door for law enforcement and just surrender their firearms?
Even better, does Beto O'Rourke really believe That local sheriffs and deputies and city and municipal cops in red areas are just going to start knocking on doors because Beto said so and confiscating weapons?
Folks, this is a recipe for absolute disaster.
I fear violence.
You should too.
You are going to put the nation's law enforcement, if you, if this guy, he's got no chance, but if he were elected president, in an untenably dangerous situation repeatedly, solely for the purpose of advancing your sick anti-liberty agenda.
Now, Beto appeared with Alison Camerota, who shockingly, she's lost it, but she started at least asking him from CNN some hard questions about how this was going to go down.
Now, Beto said, well, there'll be other consequences from law enforcement.
He didn't hold back in this interview.
But Alison Camerota, it's a little bit longer.
We have one piece from it.
But I want you to check this out because I want to discuss the logical fallacy here where Beto goes wrong yet again.
Check this out.
I fully expect my fellow Americans to follow the law.
You expect mass shooters to follow the law?
Our fellow Americans will follow the law, yes.
Congressman, mass shooters don't follow the law by definition.
The mass shooters in Parkland, in El Paso, I could go on for 10 minutes, they don't follow the law by definition.
There are so many instances where the proposals that we've made, whether it is a universal background check, or a red flag law, or ending the sale of weapons of war, or buying those that are out there back, would have stopped many of the shootings that we see in a country that loses 40,000 people a year to gun violence.
Did it stop every single shooting?
No.
But that should be no excuse for not taking action now while we have the opportunity to do the right thing.
Yeah.
And we also shouldn't be limited by the politics or the conventional political wisdom or the polling or the consultant class or the NRA on finally taking decisive action.
Folks, that interview goes on for a while.
I just want to give you a little sliver because Allison Camerata brings up an excellent point.
Bad tip to her on that one.
Why?
Believe you me, as Mama Judy would say, believe you me, criminals don't give a about gun law.
Why would you think they care about gun laws?
The only people, by definition, as Camerata says, who are going to follow the law are law-following, law-abiding people.
What part of that is hard to understand?
You think criminals, if Beto, Beto.
Edict from Beto.
We are gonna go out and seize all the weapons, all you cops.
You know, Captain Beto speaks.
You really believe that, you know, criminals are gonna be like, Beto, President Beto said it's time to turn in my guns.
Are you that dumb?
Of course he's not that dumb.
He's just saying this for political advantage.
It's ridiculous.
This whole thing is absurd.
Absurd.
The interview goes on, though, but there's another point he brings up later I want to thoroughly debunk.
Beto says at one point, he hints to it, this was long, so I'm in the interest of brevity on the show.
He says, well, we don't write laws like murder laws or anything like that and write them, you know, because bad guys won't follow them.
We write them because it's, you know, that's how laws work with bad things.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Now I've explained this before, but again, I know Joe, I know.
I'm sorry.
I have to like, I know, but take a B12 shot because I know you're losing dendrites, you know, as we speak.
If I feel bad.
Believe me, neither me nor Joe have any despair at this point of our lives.
Too many punches in the face.
That's where my nose is.
You see that?
My profile?
My nose has been busted so many times.
Beautiful.
My brother did it.
Sparring in an MMA thing.
Busted my nose.
Remember that, Paula?
Blood coming out of my nose.
My nose was like this.
Sideways.
Ladies and gentlemen, we write laws with the specific intent Of putting a perimeter, a fence, a restriction around the activities of bad people looking to do bad things.
We don't write laws with the intent of restricting the activities of good people and restricting their constitutional rights.
What do I mean by that?
If you write a law, remember for the Pareto principle we discovered, we talked about yesterday during the show?
Parado.
The Parado Principle.
How any law should help at least one person while not negatively impacting anyone?
That's the measure of a decent law?
Folks, if your law only, only negatively impacts law-abiding people, i.e.
seizing their weapons, While not only not negatively impacting criminals, but helping them.
Why would it help them, Joe?
I'll ask you quick.
Let me frame this question even easier for you, Joe.
Okay, Dan.
Not only is it not hurting criminals, because they will not turn in their firearms under any circumstances.
Heck no, Dan.
Nope.
Do you think those criminals want to prey on an armed populace or an unarmed populace?
Well, that's kind of the point, Dan.
You know, there's going to be less guns out there and whammo.
Them criminals going to be all over everybody's butt.
You know what I mean?
It's just like that, Dan.
Sounds like Rasco P. Coltrane.
See, he gets it.
Of course there's going to be a... Folks, there's a reason criminals don't like breaking into homes, when the homeowner's home in second amendment respecting state.
Dang right, Danny.
Because they don't want to leave in a body bag.
That's why.
It's not hard to figure out.
So, Beto's analysis of why a society enacts and writes laws is backwards.
We write laws to restrict the actions of bad guys, not to restrict the behavior of good people.
I mean, think about a legitimate law against, say, burglary, right?
I use that example all the time.
I promise you this.
The burglary laws will not affect me, Joe, or Paula one bit.
No!
Now, we may need them if someone breaks into our house, God forbid.
But, I have never burglarized, and nor do I intend, I don't care!
Great, burglary laws, they're terrific, we love them!
They restrict and put a fence around the activity, and penalize the activities of really bad people, i.e.
burglars.
But they don't at all affect the activities of good people.
Matter of fact, they help them because if their houses are burglarized, they have a penalty for the animals that did it.
Pareto.
Help one person, don't harm anyone.
Gun laws do the opposite.
They screw over the good guys, who are now helpless, against the bad guys, who are now armed against unarmed victims.
Beto's analysis is completely bass-ackwards.
Alright, I said this was the tyranny block of the show, and we couldn't get this yesterday because we just annihilated Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders' stupid economic arguments.
Here's video number two of Kamala Harris.
Folks, I gotta tell ya, I'm very rarely shocked anymore by some of the rampant stupidity I hear at these debates, but I gotta tell ya, this one takes the cake, seriously, for the dumbest thing I've heard so far.
This is Kamala Harris in a back and forth with Elizabeth Warren, I'm not kidding, about her push to take away Trump, the President of the United States, to take his, deactivate his Twitter account.
This is real.
Check out this stupidity here.
Of what should be the rules around corporate responsibility for these big tech companies,
when I called on Twitter to suspend Donald Trump's account that you did not agree.
And I would urge you to join me because here we have Donald Trump,
who has 65 million Twitter followers, and is using that platform as the President of the United
States to openly intimidate witnesses, to threaten witnesses, to obstruct justice.
And he and his account should be taken down.
We saw in El Paso.
That that shooter in his manifesto was informed by how Donald Trump uses that platform.
And this is a matter of corporate responsibility.
Twitter should be held accountable and shut down that site.
It is a matter of safety and corporate accountability.
Thank you.
Senator Warren, you can respond.
So look, I don't just want to push Donald Trump off Twitter.
I want to push him out of the White House.
That's our job.
Join me in saying that his Twitter account should be shut down.
Let's figure out why it is that we have had laws on the books for antitrust.
I mean, really, I'm not kidding.
I was actually laying in bed watching that.
It was after an appearance on Fox and I was really tired.
We've had a long couple of weeks, ma'am.
A long couple weeks.
Endless days.
It's okay.
Work is good.
Purifies the soul.
Hey, come on over.
You want to say hello?
Hop on in.
Hey, look who just came in.
My daughter.
Want to say hello?
Say hi.
Hi.
My daughter, Amelia.
Does she look like me?
Wave to the audience.
Give them a little wave.
Hey.
Now we got a, you know, remodeled office.
She can maneuver around a little different.
So cute, right?
I love my daughter.
Where was I going with that?
Oh, Kamala Harris.
Folks, remember the argument debate I had with many of you?
I have my emails out there.
It's on the website.
I read all your emails when you send them in, Paul and I.
Remember the back and forth?
I got some of the most vicious emails.
I mean, people are lawyer listeners and they were like, listen, Dan, I totally agree with you.
We had this back and forth show.
Remember this about net neutrality?
Oh yeah.
And about government regulations for the internet.
And I said to you guys, ladies, I get it.
Twitter stinks.
So does Facebook.
You think the government regulating this is going to make this better?
There are no good solutions to the Twitter Facebook problem and their censoring of conservatives.
None.
There are only bad ones.
The question is not what's a good solution.
It's what's a less bad solution.
And the least bad solution is to let the market sort this out.
Man, I got emails for weeks.
This is too much.
I can't take it.
I get it.
I'm with you.
I am not vouching for Twitter and Facebook.
They screwed me over.
Twitter doesn't even let me run ads.
They banned us from running ads.
Facebook did this crazy thing with us a little while ago.
I get it!
You win!
I'm just telling you, you want the government now to have monopolistic use of force powers to regulate these platforms, knowing people like Kamala Harris are out there, who wants to literally, not figuratively, shut down the Twitter account of the President of the United States.
You think that's a good idea.
Folks, I'm sorry.
I'm not poking fun at you.
I am not diminishing your comments.
They were well-written.
They were thought out.
Some of them were a little vicious.
That's okay.
I mean, I'd rather them not be, but I got a thick skin.
I actually don't, but whatever.
I'm supposed to say that.
But introducing that camel's nose under the tent of government regulations, you are begging for trouble.
Alright, just quick, I want to sum up a few things.
I want to put up a couple tweets out there.
Again, from the debate, Biden lied again.
I'm not going to play the cut because we covered it the other day on the show, but Biden again.
Joe Biden.
I didn't talk to my son about his Ukraine scam.
Even CNN.
Even CNN.
Fake news CNN.
Fact check.
Joe Biden claims he never discussed Ukraine dealings with his son.
But his son indicated otherwise.
What did they say?
When we lost Walter Cronkite, Johnson said, when you lost CNN, Joe Biden, stop.
You talk to your son about his shady Ukraine deals.
Just stop the insanity.
Like Susie Powder used to say, stop the insanity.
Stop.
Stop.
You're busted.
Just admit it.
Another tweet.
I mean, there's a bit of more humiliating tweet.
Whoa, what's the tweet?
I'm just trying to set this up.
If you're watching on YouTube, you get that.
The most, I know even Paul is laughing.
This is the most humiliating tweet I've ever seen.
At Barack Obama.
This is real accounts, not a parody.
I was proud to work with Justin Trudeau as president.
Obama's endorsing Trudeau?
He's a hard- This is the blackface guy, right?
Multiple blackface guy, right?
He's a hard-working, effective leader who takes charge on big issues.
The world needs this progressive leadership right now, and I hope our neighbors to the north support him for another term.
Let me get this straight.
The blackface guy in Canada?
He's endorsing Trudeau?
Folks, um...
Yeah, I know.
A lot of you are probably nodding.
He hasn't even endorsed Biden!
Right!
And he's endorsing a blackface guy!
I mean, Joe!
Talk about a facepalm!
Joe, it's time to get out of the race!
Yeah.
One quick note on that too.
Joe Biden is one positive for Biden.
So two big facepalms.
He's lying about his kid and his Ukraine dealings.
And Obama facepalms him big time by endorsing a blackface guy up north.
One piece of good news for Biden.
AOC endorsed Bernie Sanders.
You may say, Dan, how does that work for Biden?
No, no, no, no.
Think this through.
Bernie Sanders' campaign was flailing.
Elizabeth Warren's was surging.
Biden needs the two of them to split the progressive vote he's going to run as the fake moderate.
You want to run against one or two?
You want them to split the vote.
A lot of these primaries are plurality races, not majority.
Biden can slide through with 25%.
He wants those voters split up.
Bernie was dying in the polls.
Now he's got the champion of false news, AOC, endorsing him, giving him a little CPR.
This is great news for Biden.
But Biden really needs to get out.
His campaign is over.
Finally, one last tweet from this guy, Jay Rosen, who claims to teach journalism or something.
He's journalism guy.
This is, again, hilarious.
I mean, so stupid.
This guy, Jay Rosen, apparently is offended that we're asking Elizabeth Warren, like we did on my show yesterday, about if our plan is actually going to raise taxes.
This is this clown at Jay Rosen NYU.
To make Elizabeth Warren say she would raise taxes on the middle class question should be a credibility killer for the journalists who keep asking it.
This, folks, again, this is one of those, like, don't, yeah, it's a totally legitimate, are your taxes going to go up or not?
Jay Rosen doesn't want you to ask that question, because he knows the answer is yes.
He's trying to frighten other journalists.
Whatever, dude.
We're not buying this nonsense.
All right, folks.
Thanks again for tuning in.
I really appreciate it.
Please subscribe to my show.
YouTube.com slash Bongino.
We're trying to get to 300,000 subscribers.
You're helping us get there real fast.
Also, subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts.
