Was “Charlie” Spying on the Trump White House? (Ep 1100)
In this episode, I address the explosive new ties between the alleged “whistleblower” and key players in the plot to take down, and spy on, the Trump administration. I also address the latest in NY Times media bias.
News Picks:Is John Durham getting ready to unleash on Obama era officials?
The alleged “whistleblower” has some serious questions to answer.
Is the whistleblower tied to Alexandra Chalupa?
New poll shows the Democrats are in big trouble with their impeachment garbage.
Taxes aren’t the problem, spending is!
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.
Happy Halloween, folks!
Unfortunately, I have a frightening show for you today.
Ridiculous, horrible, pun intended, but not frightening in the Halloween kind of way.
Frightening in the deep state, you're losing your country, collapse of the Constitutional Republic kind of way, which is always worse than the wicked stepmother kind of Casper the Ghost kind of frightening.
You are not going to want to miss a second of today's show.
I think we may be closing in on a key question we asked a long time ago on one of our most listened to shows ever.
Who's Charlie?
Who's Chuck?
Yes, I have not queued in, Producer Joe.
Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show, by the way.
Producer Joe, let's bring you in.
How are you today?
Fine, sir.
Well, in the honor of Halloween, Daniel, I want to say I know this show will not suck.
So I'm so, I'm really glad to be here.
That was one of your most interesting openings ever.
We'll have to add that to the compendium of fascinating Joe Armacost.
In your worst Bram Stoker's Dracula voice ever.
Very nice.
Well done.
Of all your imitations, clearly the worst, but well done anyway.
In a campy kind of Sylvester Stallone over the top kind of way.
Good for you.
Yeah, folks, we are loaded today.
And Joe, I have not intentionally kept Joe and Paula a little bit in the dark about today's show.
You did.
Because it is that good.
We're going to cover the fake impeachment going on today that they're trying to turn into a real impeachment.
And again, who is Charlie?
Let's get right to it.
Today's show brought to you by buddies at Genucel!
Genucel, ladies and gentlemen.
If you are looking for better looking skin and you're looking to get rid of turkey necks and all those problems, then you need to try out our friends at Genucel.
Their skincare line is tremendous.
We use it in our house.
My mother-in-law loves it.
My wife loves it.
I use the immediate effects before I go on the air so I don't look terrible when I'm tired.
You want to hear an email we got about Gen Yourself?
Yeah.
This is from Juliana in Austin, Texas.
I can't get over how much and how quickly Gen Yourself's helped me.
The jawline creams made my jaw and neck two separate body parts for the first time in a decade.
My bags and puffiness are gone.
It is really the skin's fountain of youth.
Thank you, Gen Yourself, for making me look and feel young again.
Folks, it's your turn now to see the same results as Juliana from Austin, Texas.
Guaranteed and best of all, risk-free.
Risk-free.
It's the final week of Chamonix's inventory clearance sale.
Order now.
Order GenuCell's jawline treatment with MDL technology.
Packed!
Packed with natural peptides to target that annoying turkey neck!
And get the classic GenuCell for bags and puffy.
It is absolutely free.
Gratis.
Yes, free.
And for results in 12 hours, the GenuCell Immediate Effects is also yours free.
I use that.
This once in a year offer is backed by their 60-day 100% money back guarantee.
Go to GenuCell.com, enter DAN30 at checkout.
Order now for a surprise luxury gift with your order.
Go to Genucel.com, enter Dan 30 at checkout.
Again, that's Genucel, G-E-N-U-C-E-L.com, enter Dan 30 for your special offer there.
Go check it out.
All right, Joe, let's go.
Folks, before I get to who Chuck, who Charlie is, which if for those of you who are regular listeners to my show, I'll just leave you in a little bit of suspense here, right?
Cause I just want to open up quickly with this impeachment fiasco farce disaster.
One of the biggest open questions in the SpyGay thing, to distill it down to one simple bulleted talking point, is was the White House being spied on?
The Trump White House, not the campaign!
Was the Trump White House being spied on by our own intelligence and law enforcement entities in the United States, our federal law enforcement entities?
And if so, was there a point man on it?
And if there was a point man, Who's Charlie?
We'll get to that.
Alright.
Just quickly regarding this impeachment fiasco that's going on right now.
Folks, if you live in swing districts, I said this yesterday and I'll say it again, do not give these rhino Republicans or bad Democrats, I don't think they're going to get any Republicans, well they may get Amash but he's not a Republican anymore anyway, he's lost it so I don't really care.
Or these fake Democrats off the hook.
They are trying to tell you, as I said to you yesterday, Steny Hoyer, Nancy Pelosi, other lead Democrats, this is not a vote for impeachment.
Max Rose, so-called moderate Democrat in New York.
This guy's a liberal, a radical liberal like everyone else.
Do not give these fake moderates a pass.
What they are voting on today is an impeachment.
They can call it an investigation, an inquiry, whatever they want.
They're trying to have it both ways.
No, we're voting for impeachment, but we're telling America it's not an impeachment so we can save these fake moderate Democrats in Trump-leaning districts.
Nope.
Call their offices.
Do what we do best.
Activism.
We can leave all the nasty, aggressive, violent stuff for the left.
What we do best, and what we did in the Tea Party revolution, what we'll do again, is we do activism.
It is time to clean these people out and give them a one-way ticket out of D.C.
They vote for this today.
They are on the hook.
For the fakest impeachment in American history for a non-crime.
They are trying to overturn an election.
Do not, under any circumstances, let them off the hook.
It's important.
Max Rose, all these Utah Democrats that got elected in Republican districts, don't let them off the hook.
All right.
Moving on to what I think is going to be one of the more important shows we've done in quite a long time.
And for reference, hat tip, our audience archive is Judy, who sent me a note a while ago.
The Who Is Charlie episodes in the past, I believe were 1027, 1028, and 1060, where we referenced this conversation before.
What am I talking about?
Now, in light of the revelations yesterday, which I'll get to in a minute, that you've already heard somewhere?
Maybe on this show about who the whistleblower is.
There was big breaking news yesterday.
The whistleblower's been outed by Paul Sperry of Real Clear Investigations as Eric Charmella.
Oh!
We'll get to that in a second.
Well, if you listen to the show, of course, that's already old news.
You heard that two, three weeks ago, but that's okay.
I don't, as I said and I mean it, I'm not being coy here or silly.
I don't really care who takes credit for this stuff.
I mean it.
I'm not kidding.
I'm just kind of being, you know, I'm just kind of joking around a little bit.
If Paul Sperry wanted to print it first, that's fine.
But we got that information a long time ago.
Why does Eric Charmella, who is allegedly the whistleblower, according to Paul Sperry, why does that matter?
And why am I emphasizing the Charmella, hat tip, 279er, who has always come through in the clutch.
Well, let's go to this memo first by Senators Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson, written to the Attorney General.
They had some concerns a little while ago, these two Republican Senators, and they sent this memo To Attorney General Bill Barr.
Now, the memo in the memo is a text exchange between Peter Stroke, FBI investigator in charge of the Spygate scandal, excuse me, and FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who is also Stroke's girlfriend.
They're having an affair.
And Senator Grassley, who has a reputation for being concerned about federal law enforcement abuses, and Ron Johnson, who has been all over this case, they seem very concerned a while ago, this is back in April, about this specific exchange between Stroke and Page.
And I want you to pay very close attention.
You may say, what does this have to do with outing the name of the whistleblower?
Oh, don't go anywhere.
Audience Ombudsman Joe has his hat on.
We got it.
So in the memo, they say, hey, listen, Attorney General Barr, we're really concerned about this exchange.
Here's the exchange.
Peter Strohk texts Lisa Page, I'm talking with Bill.
Do we want Joe to go with Evanina instead of Charlie for a variety of reasons?
Page, hmm, I'm not sure.
Would it be unusual to have, and it's blacked out, show up again.
The name's blacked out.
Maybe another agent from the team.
Stroke.
Or he's the CI guy.
Some might think, blank, name redacted.
Makes sense.
He can assess if there's any other news or a different demeanor.
If Katie's husband is there, he can see if there are any people we can develop for potential relationships.
Really?
In the White House?
Lisa Page.
Should I ask Andy about it?
Or Bill?
Do you want to reach out to Andy?
I told him I'm sure we could ask you to make the swap if we thought it was smart.
If not, until Monday, the bill, we can always discuss with him tomorrow.
Let me translate that for you.
Please do.
Yeah.
The lead investigator for the FBI investigating Donald Trump on the fake collusion charges, Peter Stroh, is texting a lawyer at the FBI who works directly with the deputy director, Andy McCabe, who's been marshalling this case against Trump because he hates him.
He's texting him about developing sources inside the White House.
Sources?
So the FBI is talking about developing sources to spy on the White House?
Folks, this isn't a joke.
These are real texts.
Yeah, not good.
And they're talking about sending a CI guy, quote, and they're worried about Charlie, or the outing of Charlie, or sending Charlie back.
And I've asked repeatedly, who is Charlie?
Why are they so concerned about Charlie being outed?
Katie's husband, by the way, is what we believe to be a clear reference to Mike Pence's chief of staff at the time, whose wife Katie worked for Peter Strzok.
So just to be clear, they're talking about leveraging a relationship they have in the FBI with an employee, Katie, whose husband works in Pence's White House, to develop sources in the White House.
And they're also concerned about the potential outing of a source, the CI guy, who we believe is this infamous Charlie.
Now, I had always thought the CI guy was the counterintelligence guy.
I'm starting to wonder if the CI guy is a confidential informant.
In other words, not an FBI employee.
Okay.
We good?
Who's the spy in the White House?
Is Charlie the spy?
And what the hell is the FBI doing working on spying on an active White House?
Let's leave that one there for a moment.
Let's go to Paul Sperry's terrific Real Clear Investigations piece.
He does great work, by the way, and his piece will be in the show notes, dated yesterday.
Folks, listen, you know, we got bombshell, whatever, explosive.
Listen, adjectives are meaningless these days because everything's a bombshell.
It really is.
This was an explosive report.
It'll be in the show notes today.
Please sign up for my newsletter at Bongino.com and read this whole piece.
It is worth your time.
This thing blew up last night in the Hannity Show.
Paul Sperry, Real Clear Investigations.
Headline, The Beltway's Whistleblower Fuhrer Obsesses Over One Name.
This piece is essentially an outing of what Sperry believes to be the whistleblower.
Again, I'm not being a jerk.
I'm just saying you've heard this is probably old news.
Well, it's not old.
If you listen to my show, it is old news for you.
Yeah, it is.
We've got pretty good sources here.
Go read Spy Game, my first book.
You'll act like it was written yesterday.
You'll be like, gosh, you wrote this three years ago?
Yeah, we did.
Inside the piece, There's a fascinating exchange that one of my other sources, the 279er, found really interesting from the Paul Sperry piece.
Throw that up.
My wife was kind enough to highlight this for me after it was sent over by our buddy.
Quote from Paul Sperry's piece.
Further, Charimela, and he has it here clearly, let me just, for those on the audio file only, We highlighted the part where Paul Sperry literally puts in the piece, in parentheses, the pronunciation phonetically of Caramella's name, who he believes is the whistleblower.
He says further, Caramella, pronounced Char-uh-mel-uh, left his National Security Council posting in the White House West Wing in mid-2017.
Again, he believes this is the whistleblower.
I mean, concerns about negative leaks to the media.
He has since returned to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.
Leave that up for a sec, if you don't mind.
Why would Paul Sperry, who has impeccable sources, has been all over Spygate from day one, has broke some tremendous news?
Joe, have you seen this often?
I said to Paula this morning when I kind of hinted at her where we may go with this.
You haven't seen this yet.
Why would Paul Sperry, who never does this?
Matter of fact, I haven't seen this in the media outside of really ridiculously complicated names.
Why would he put the phonetic breakdown of Char Amela's name in there?
I don't know.
He wants to... Paul Sperry knows something?
Yeah.
Maybe emphasize something there, dude.
You know?
There you go, Joe.
Very well done.
Joe, always the consciousness of the audience right here.
Maybe he's trying to... Folks, listen, I read, I consume media all day.
Conservative media, liberal media, to see where they're going with stuff.
It's not unheard of, I don't want to be dramatic, but it's very rare To put a phonetic breakdown of someone's name and the pronunciation of it in an article if it has no relevance.
Yeah.
Now, this is something I'm, again, this is not a pat myself on the back moment.
Please don't take it that way.
I just don't like to run with things.
I prefer when I get stuff to not break it and let other people verify it first.
It's not important for me to do that.
My income doesn't center on clicks or my website.
It's not.
My income revolves around me being right and you tuning in so that you're not wasting your time.
We were cued into this a while ago by another person.
That there may be a relationship between Char-a-mella and Charlie.
Charlie, Char-a-mella, Charlie, Char-a-mella.
We need a little show tune for that.
Charlie, kinda now, kinda wow.
Okay.
Always fillin' in the gaps, Producer Joe.
Now, what's also fascinating, so I'm just asking, as we always do, because we never I'm not going to put a nail in that until I'm ready to put a nail, but is it okay to ask questions?
Remember the liberal media asked questions about a fake dossier forever.
Was Trump involved in Russian collusion despite the fact that it was an obvious hoax?
Evidence is mounting that there may have been a concerted effort by the FBI and law enforcement community to spy on the Trump White House.
And it's kind of interesting that a guy named Jaramella, Jaramella, Charimela is the whistleblower, according to Paul Sperry, on a case to get Trump impeached precisely when the Inspector General and Attorney General Barr, Senator Chuck Grassley, Ron Johnson, and others are asking why the White House was being spied on by a guy they refer to as Charlie, the CI guy.
Weird!
Oh boy.
Weird.
Crazy.
Head scratcher, Joe.
So the walls start closing in on Charlie Charimela and others involved in the massive, illicit, atrocious spying operation on a sitting U.S.
president.
And all of a sudden, Charimela emerges a whistleblower and yet another hoax to impeach the president before all of this stuff comes out.
Weird.
Wow.
Weird.
Now, it turns out Charimela, Charimela, who I had pronounced his name wrong, too.
I had said Seamerella.
Yeah, I remember.
Charimela.
That's right.
Yeah.
Me, too.
Me, too.
What?
October 11th?
Was that what that was when I did the show?
Oh, cool.
Paula.
Yeah, thank you.
Clarifying that.
Now, you know, we can save audience archivist Judy Skinner the work.
October 11th.
Check that show out.
I want to point out another piece from Paul Sperry's Real Clear Investigation, another portion of the piece, excuse me, article.
One of my listeners doesn't like it when I say piece.
This is interesting.
From Paul Sperry's article.
Quote, and Ciaramella worked with the Democratic National Committee operative who dug up dirt on the Trump campaign during the 2016 election.
Wow!
Inviting her into the White House for meetings, former White House colleague said.
Isn't this crazy?
The operative, Alexandra Chalupa, who is a central figure in both of my books, Spygate and Exonerated, a Ukrainian-American who supported Hillary Clinton, led an effort to link the Republican campaign to the Russian government.
Here's a quote from an insider.
"Charamella knows her. He had her in the White House," said one former co-worker who requested anonymity to discuss the
sensitive matter.
Charamella.
Charumela is connected to Chalupa, who we know Alexandra Chalupa worked at the DNC, left the DNC to go collude with the Ukrainian government.
We know this.
Why?
Because WikiLeaks already leaked Chalupa's emails.
And in Chalupa's emails, she talks about colluding with the Ukrainians.
You know, in some limited circles, Joe.
Small circles, we call that a clue.
We call that evidence.
But you media idiots don't do clues because you have the IQs of a trickle-toed, seven-legged sloth.
I don't think there is such a thing, but there's no such thing as investigative journalists anymore in the liberal ecosystem either, so it's a perfect analogy.
Chalupa's own emails show she was colluding with Ukrainians to destroy the Trump campaign.
Did you miss that?
No one's disputing the authenticity of Chalupa's emails.
Who knows Charumela, who is obviously a friend of the woman marshalling a collusion effort with the Ukrainians, and now Charumela is suspected to be the whistleblower, accusing who?
The Democrats of colluding with Ukraine?
No, Trump of an illicit deal with the Ukrainians that doesn't exist!
Let me see, what's Ciaramella thinking?
I've really got to get this guy impeached before they find out who Charlie is.
Oh, boy.
And they find out that I'm friendly with Chalupa, who was colluding with the Ukrainians to help Hillary and destroy Trump.
So I got an idea!
Let's make a whistleblower complaint!
Brilliant!
Absolutely.
Yeah, right.
Listen, Eric, I...
Charumela, I think you have an obligation right now.
If you are not, in fact, the whistleblower, and you have nothing to do with any of these leaks, then I believe you have an obligation right now to come out publicly and state so.
Oh, isn't that turning the whole process on its head?
What do you mean?
You mean the process where Max Rose Fake moderate Democrat from New York, the Staten Island area.
He said yesterday, hey, I'm not voting for an impeachment.
I'm just voting for an investigation.
If President Trump is innocent, he should prove it.
Works for me, too.
I'm cool with that, fine.
You want to throw the Constitutional Republic, flush it down the toilet bowl, out the window in the presumption of innocence?
Sure.
Charamelis needs to come out, too, and say he's not the whistleblower.
He wasn't working with Alexander Chalupa on this Ukrainian collusion we now know about.
He needs to come out and say that.
Joe, fair enough, right?
Fair enough.
He needs to prove his innocence, right?
Fair enough.
New rules, pal.
New rules.
Oh, there's another suspicious little connection.
And forgive me for redoing some of this, because now that we have some suspicions about who Charlie might be, forgive me for redoing Charimela and showing you his connections, but it's important.
Hat tip by the way, this is Seamus Bruner, who I had a hat tip last time when I showed this the first time on Twitter.
This is a fascinating little invite to a Victor Pinchuk event.
Who's Victor Pinchuk?
Oh yeah, that's right.
It's a $25 million donor to the Clinton Foundation.
Oh yeah, Ukrainian Pinchuk.
And he had this event he paid for.
And at that event, this again, hat tip Seamus Bruner here.
For all the highlights.
This is an interesting invitation from a Ukrainian donor who donates $25 million to the Clinton Foundation, has very heavy ties to the Clinton Foundation, and at this meeting he sponsors.
It's funny, because this lady shows up, this Ukrainian parliamentarian, Olga Bilkova, who really can't stand Trump, and who's she meeting with?
Oh, Eric Charamella!
That's crazy!
And she's also meeting with who?
Oh, that's right.
David Kramer of the McCain Institute, who passed the dossier to the FBI and leaked it to the media.
That's the John McCain Institute, not the Joe McCain Institute.
Wow, isn't that crazy?
Crazy!
Weird!
Yeah.
It's weird how every time the Inspector General and Attorney General Barr, Horowitz and others close in on the biggest political spying scandal of our time in conjunction with the Ukrainians and Russians.
Working with Democrats and, and, and rhinos who hated Trump.
Every time we close in, a magical whistleblower or a dossier appears accusing Trump of doing the same thing!
Falsely!
Of course, if you're listening to this show again, this is all, this kind of old news we're tying up for you.
Folks, share this, because you will not get any of this in the mainstream media.
They are fundamentally uncurious, intentionally, about ever getting to the bottom of what happened.
That's what this impeachment farce is about today.
Look, Squirrel!
So, Charimela, Charimela, trying to figure out who Charlie is, spying on the White House.
We got this guy, Charimela, who's now allegedly the whistleblower, according to Paul Sperry, Who is a CIA employee, leaking sensitive information apparently, if he is the whistleblower, that matches up with the Ukrainian embassies, excuse me, matches up with people from our Ukrainian embassies, exact language, Bill Taylor and others.
Right as we're starting to get to the bottom of this deep conspiracy, it's not a theory, it happened.
We have Chalupa's emails.
To work with Ukrainians to take out Trump, they accused Trump of an illicit deal with the Ukrainians that never happened.
And these suckers, these pathetic jokes of human beings, these media people, are missing the greatest spy story for idiots in human history.
Now, just in case you think Chalupa, working with the Ukrainians after leaving the DNC, to go attack Paul Manafort in the Trump campaign, just in case you think that was some, like, run-of-the-mill, no-big-deal kind of thing, I want you to check out this Fox News piece and a little snippet from there to show you just how serious what Chalupa did, working and colluding with the Ukrainians to destroy Trump.
And knowing the alleged whistleblower, here's a piece by Fox News pro-Trump super PAC false FEC complaint against DNC over Ukraine outreach.
Andrew Kelper, Fox News.
Let's dig into the body of that piece where there's a fascinating little snippet there.
Quote, the Democratic National Committee has been hit with an FEC, Federal Election Commission, complaint that accuses a former DNC contractor of acting improperly to gather information on Paul Manafort and Donald Trump in the 2016 election.
Gee, who could that be?
The complaint, filed by the pro-Trump committee to defend the president, hinges on the work of Alexandra Chalupa!
Oh!
A contractor hired by the DNC during the 2016 election.
The DNC, the complaint alleges, tasked Chalupa with obtaining incriminating or derogatory information about Donald Trump and Paul Manafort.
Is that the same Chalupa who White House insiders say is buddies with Charamella, who's now alleged to be the whistleblower, who also met with Ukrainian parliamentarians at a Clinton Foundation donor-sponsored event?
Is that the same Ciaramella at the event where the same Ukrainian parliamentarian exchanging negative information about the Trump team met with David Cramer from the McCain Institute who we now know leaked the dossier to the media and also had McCain push it to the FBI?
Is that the same Charumella who suspiciously was invited to a White House event with key
Italian politicians right around the time a key figure in the Spygate case,
Joseph Massoud, is alleged to have disappeared in Italy?
I'm just asking questions, folks.
There's nobody else on the liberal side.
Sarah Carter, John Solomon, Paul Sperry, Jeff Carlson, Chuck Ross, Lee Smith, and others are asking the real questions.
And I deeply feel sorry for you to the liberals out there if you missed it.
You only missed the biggest political scandal in American history.
While you're focusing on a fake impeachment, based on a fake whistleblower, who clearly... And let me tie this up here, and don't forget the takeaway here.
Who is Charlie?
Is Charimela Charlie?
Because if Charimela is Charlie, I'm open to a discussion either way.
But if the alleged whistleblower, who now works with the CIA, worked with them in the past, and was on the National Security Council, Was spying on the White House, and the FBI knew about it.
Ladies and gentlemen, the biggest scandal in American history just turned into a hydrogen bomb of scandals.
None of those questions will be answered by the media.
None.
But they'll be answered here.
And it would be fascinating how a key figure, apparently Charmella and this whole thing, Was the foundational guy allegedly behind a whistleblower campaign about a fake transcript.
Because the real transcript says nothing that the whistleblower says it says.
in an effort to impeach the president on a vote they're taking now,
an impeachment resolution, to make this all go away.
Unbelievable.
I mean...
All right.
I want to get to some other stuff because I could really, I could do a whole show on that.
How, how you are the wall being pulled over your eyes by the fake news media people while we're living through this.
Is there anyone out there with even a mild sense of dignity?
Is there anyone out there with a skeletal structure and a spine to go up to their editor and say, hey, you know, I thought this guy Bongino and Lee Smith and Carlson and Chuck Ross and Carter and Solomon, I thought they were all crazy, but I've got to tell you, this sounds a little weird.
This Charimela guy, a relatively low-level National Security Council guy, is getting invited to White House dinners with key Italians.
He's working with Ukrainian people working with Ukrainians to impact Trump.
He shows up as the alleged whistleblower.
They're talking about a guy named Charlie spying on the White House.
The FBI is concerned he may get outed.
I don't know, man.
This is a little weird.
Nah.
You won't get outed.
All right, folks.
Today's show also brought to you by our buddies at Harry's.
Harry's razors.
Thank God for Harry's.
I love Harry's razors because I used to have to shave twice with some of those old cheapo razors.
And candidly, even some of those flexi-ball 62 blade razors that you overspend on, that folks, they did everything but actually shave your face.
Listen, humans have been shaving for thousands of years.
What's the secret to a great shave?
Well, it hasn't changed.
Good quality blades.
The ancient Greeks didn't use flexi balls or heated handles and neither do you.
Harry's doesn't overcharge you by adding gimmicky nonsense like time travel machines to their razors.
They focus on delivering what matters.
A sharp, quality, durable blade at a terrific price.
I love it because I only have to shave once a day, not twice.
I shave in the morning before this show and I go on the air at night, no problem at all.
You ever see me on the air looking scruffy?
Not while I was using Harry's, you didn't.
It's a close shave at the best price.
Joe, you love Harry's too, right?
Big fan of Joe.
I'm gonna have to answer for Joe, sorry.
Harry's is a return to the essential quality durable blades at a fair price.
Just $2 per blade.
They cut out the middleman, manufacturing blades in their German blade factory.
It's been honing precision blades for a century.
You get the highest quality blades at a factory direct price.
Harry's is super convenient.
Blade refills are delivered directly to your door on your schedule with or without a subscription.
There's no risk for trying them out.
You don't love them?
Send them back for a full refund.
You will love them.
Listeners of my show can redeem their Harry's trial set at Harry's, H-A-R-R-Y-S.com slash Bongino.
Here's what 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, keep your skin hydrated, and a travel blade cover to keep those dings off your high-quality blade.
Keep your razor dry, easy to grab on the go.
Go to harrys.com slash Bongino.
Start shaving better today.
All right, back to the show.
You're gonna love Harry's.
Joe, how much do you love Harry's?
Man, I do.
I like Harry's a lot.
Been using them for years.
Yeah.
When I told Joe I'd be taking Harry's on as a sponsor, he's like, really?
Yeah, man.
Got a few blades for me?
Getting back to the serious content of the show here.
So folks, listen, we've been told all week, because just expect a line, a cornucopia, a litany of new anti-Trump fake whistleblowers.
To come forward with information that doesn't comport with the call with Ukraine.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have the transcript I explained to you on yesterday's show.
I used sources, how the whistleblower, fake whistleblower, had already indicated in their own report.
That the transcript is word for word.
Bottom line, the call with the Ukrainian president had nothing what the Democrats are saying they're impeaching the president for.
There was no illicit deal.
None of it's in there.
It's not in the transcript.
And the whistleblower himself has already indicated that it is word for word standard practice to produce that.
We have the transcript.
Case is closed.
Now it's not closed by the anti-Trump media or the Democrats who need to get this guy out of office before Caramella and their deep state buddies are exposed for their horrible activities involving the targeting of the Trump campaign and the Trump presidency.
Having said that, they produced this military colonel.
And again, I'm not knocking the man's service.
I thank him for his service to the country, and I sincerely mean that.
It's not a personal gripe against this Colonel Vindman.
But I find it interesting how, you know, we're getting ready to nullify 63 million American voters who voted for President Trump.
The Democrats are getting ready to try to remove him from office because they don't like your electoral outcome.
And their new line, Joe, is that you can't criticize or even call out Colonel Vindman on what apparently are discrepancies in what he's saying to Congress and reality.
You can't.
So, hat tip to a listener who sent this to me.
Here is a clip.
A couple years ago, Adam Schiff, the sleazeball lying U.S.
congressman without an ounce of integrity, talking about a decorated U.S.
military officer.
Remember, we're not allowed to... Joe, according to Democrats, you can't criticize Colonel Vindman.
He's in the military.
That's right, yeah.
Under any circumstance, despite what he's saying, having very little evidence of being true.
Right.
You can't criticize him at all.
Well that's interesting because Adam Schiff had a different take when it came to discussing Lieutenant General Mike Flynn, a known American patriot and a military officer.
Here's sleazeball Adam Schiff absolutely violating the Schiff rule that you can't criticize military people.
Check this out.
The chances he has nothing to add.
Well, I think the bigger risk that he has nothing to add, because he clearly could add in terms of what he knows, is can he be believed?
Can he be trusted?
And he's done enough, said enough, where he's impeached a lot of his own credibility.
So you would need, I think, as a special counsel to be able to corroborate anything he might say as a cooperative witness.
Or he might need to produce documentation or something that corroborates Pete?
Wait, Pete's just created a bit- Mike Flynn?
I thought we're not allowed to do that?
That's what we were told, were we not?
Sleazeball Adam Schiff, known, documented liar and human sleaze.
A liar who has insisted for, what, three years now?
He has evidence of the collusion hoax being real, who's never produced it?
You mean that guy?
Yeah.
Who's telling us now, you can't criticize Colonel Vindman.
Criticizing military personnel is completely out of bounds.
He just did it!
By the way, I could play those all day.
Criticisms of Mike Flynn.
Yeah.
Criticisms of Tulsi Gabbard, another military officer who they criticize.
Hillary Clinton actually accused her of being a Russian asset.
So let's just throw that rule out the window, please.
You can respect them.
You can hold two simultaneous thoughts at the same time.
Absolutely.
You can respect a man's service to the country, which I do.
It's not some virtue signaling, I mean it.
Takes a lot to go into combat.
A lot.
Takes a lot out of a man.
And you can simultaneously say, well, does the man's information comport with reality?
It doesn't!
We have the transcript.
Now, a couple other pieces of information on Colonel Vindman's testimony about the Ukraine call, we've already seen.
He says he was concerned about it.
Okay, good.
Resign and run for office.
You're allowed to be concerned.
Doesn't mean there's a crime, no less an impeachable crime.
Apparently, some leaks I'm getting, because remember, the only leaks we're getting from Vindman's testimony up on Capitol Hill are from the Democrats.
Well, there's some new stuff coming out, Joe.
And one of the things I'm hearing is that Colonel Vindman Testified up on Capitol Hill.
And we'll see because Adam Schiff doesn't have the nerve to release the actual transcript of what Vindman said.
But I'm hearing Vindman testified that the transcript was accurate.
Wait, wait, wait.
I thought we heard a few days ago that Vindman was going to testify that the transcript of the call was inaccurate.
And Joe, there's a super secret transcript with an illicit deal between Trump and the Ukrainian president.
Get ready for it.
Here it comes.
That's not what I'm hearing.
I'm hearing Vindman said the opposite.
I'm also hearing they gave him minutes, not seconds, but a couple minutes to scour the transcript, he claimed it was accurate from what I'm hearing, to find the illicit deal between Trump and the Ukrainians about Hunter Biden and military aid.
Remember that?
And from what I'm hearing from my sources, Joe, He couldn't find it in the transcript.
I thought he memorized the transcript!
Wait, wait.
Wait, hold on.
Hold on.
We were just told by media lunatics and democrat activists and full-time anti-constitutional republic liberals and anti-free speech tyrannical spying liberals that Colonel Vindman had this photographic memory where he remembered the transcript and it was different than the transcript we've all seen.
So why would he need to scour the transcript for upwards of five minutes to find the alleged deal Trump made with the Ukrainians if it was all up in his head?
Why would he need to scour the transcript?
I thought it was up here.
Frontal cortex.
Yeah.
Maybe the medulla oblongata.
Well, no.
Maybe even the decussation of the pyramids for you.
Biology majors who focus on human anatomy.
Going back to my neuropsychology.
The decusation pyramid.
That always sounded like the coolest term ever.
You really know what you're talking about.
I have no clue what you're talking about.
Nobody else does either, but I do.
I thought he knew!
I thought he knew.
The colonel had this photographic memory of a transcript that was different from the transcript the media said isn't real.
But now we find out Vindman says it's real, that the whistleblower says it's the real transcript, and that Vindman was given five minutes or more to scour the transcript they said was real for a deal he said existed and Trump should be impeached over, and he couldn't find it.
Oh, wow.
Oh, wow.
Don't question the military ever.
Ever!
Except if you think you can hammer Donald Trump.
Then question the military.
By the way, votes going on right now for the impeachment.
Give you some updates on that when it happens.
I'm also hearing some other key things about Colonel Vindman.
Can't question military, guys.
I'm hearing he missed the briefing in May.
Before the call with Zelensky that, by the way, it was the National Security Council's idea to do.
Fascinating how they're alleging in this impeachment fiasco that Trump tried to extort the Ukrainians, and he wanted to make this call to get information on Hunter Biden, and yet the call wasn't even his idea?
The National Security Council, where Charum Ela worked, wanted him to make that call to Ukraine?
Where Charumela had suspicious contacts with Chalupa who was working with Ukrainians to collude to impact the Trump campaign and destroy him?
Wow.
Why would the National Security Council push him?
Hey, you really need to make this call to Ukraine, which we're going to be listening in on.
Hm.
Stinks like kind of a setup, right?
Weird how that keeps happening.
Yeah, this is weird.
So I'm hearing Vindman Skipped out on a briefing in May about Ukraine where they were setting up the parameters for a potential call with Zelensky.
Wow, that's kind of interesting.
Maybe him not being there, he might have missed the whole thing where no deal was discussed?
Kind of doesn't fit the narrative, right?
You'd think you'd want to attend that meeting if you were aware of some extortion plot, right?
Why just skip it?
Can't question the military.
God forbid.
Finally, there's still no deal has surfaced anywhere, credibly, amongst any source.
All of these people keep coming forward to talk about, well, like Vindman said, I believe President Trump hinted at a deal because he's the President of the United States and there's a power asymmetry.
Um, okay.
Okay.
So let me get this straight.
It's an extortion plot with the Ukrainians that wasn't even President Trump's idea.
The National Security Council, where Caramella and Vindman worked, it was their idea.
Yeah.
Where he's trying to extort the Ukrainians, but the Ukrainians don't know they're being extorted because they've already said there was no pressure to do anything.
Where there is no evidence of the extortion in the transcript of the call, no information has since surfaced about this extortion plot.
And the colonel, you can't question him, is saying, no, no, he didn't really have to extort him.
Just the idea that the president, who's very powerful, calls you, that's evidence of extortion in and of itself.
Oh, man.
Joe, let me ask you a question.
I'm not messing with you.
I know you're a step ahead of me, but play dumb for a minute.
Try to be a liberal.
I know it's hard because you've got a brain that, you know, played dumb for a second, right?
Uh-huh. Yeah.
If...
If...
If you're going to extort somebody...
Yeah, yeah.
Don't you think you should tell them about the extortion?
I'm just asking.
I'm just putting that out there.
Maybe?
One other question.
Question two.
Listen, I know I've got you puzzled and frazzled.
Question two.
Question two.
When the President of the United States talks to someone, because now, Vindman's evidence is there's a power asymmetry, is there anyone, if you were to gauge power politically, anyone in the world more powerful than the U.S.
President?
Just check.
Uh, no, Dan.
Uh, no.
Okay, no, thank you.
Okay, take the dunce cap off and you can go back to thinking like, I don't want you to lose any more IQ points.
So Joe, pretty much common sense, right?
Yeah.
So the president of the United States can never talk to a foreign leader again because everything's extortion because the president's more powerful than him?
Folks, they're impeaching the president over this!
Oh good heavens, man.
You get what I'm saying, right, Joe?
Sure, sure.
That's his evidence?
The president's really powerful, Joe.
Yeah.
And any time, any time he talks to a foreign leader, it's implied extortion, despite the fact that nobody knows they're being extorted.
Yeah, I'm right.
Yeah.
Nice work.
Whatever you guys say.
Yeah.
Oh, my gosh.
All right.
This is it.
I've had it.
Here we go.
It didn't work.
Weird a little bit.
I mean, I think everyone listening to my show is.
Yeah.
All right, let me get to this last read because I've got, wait, I do have great work by the media coming up at the New York Times.
I know you're like, what?
The New York, yes.
I know you know.
The New York Times, get the Pulitzer Committee ready.
You're going to be stunned.
This is some crack investigative work coming up.
All right, today's show brought to you by Bravo Company.
As I said, Bravo Company.
If you are in the market for one of the finest, the finest rifles and pistols out there, go to Bravo Company Manufacturing.
Ladies and gentlemen, listen, if you're in the market right now for sporting arms or a sporting rifle, that's great.
We love those, but that's not Bravo Company Manufacturing.
Why are you telling us what they're not?
Because it's more important what they are.
Bravo Company Manufacturing designs, engineers, and manufactures life-saving equipment.
The finest, most precision rifles on the market that will function when it matters.
Bravo Company Manufacturing assumes that when a rifle leaves their shop, it will be used in a life-or-death situation by a responsible citizen, our terrific law enforcement, or our soldiers overseas.
Quality is all that matters to them.
All that matters.
Every component of a BCM rifle is hand-assembled and tested by Americans in Heartland, Wisconsin to a life-saving standard.
If you're in the market for a rifle, you are doing yourself a huge disservice.
If you do not check out our friends at Bravo Company Manufacturing, they put people before their products.
They are absolutely sure when their rifle leaves the shop, it will function properly and accurately when it matters, and it will not fail the end user when it's not, God forbid, just a paper target.
Someone is trying to do you harm.
You need a BCM rifle.
BCM makes reliable, life-saving tools.
Folks, to learn more about Bravo Company Manufacturing, I have two of these.
They are the finest rifles I have ever owned.
To learn more about Bravo Company Manufacturing, head on over to bravocompanymfg.com.
Where you can discover more about their products, special offers, and upcoming news.
That's BravoCompanyMFG.com.
You need more convincing?
Check out their YouTube channel, YouTube.com slash BravoCompanyUSA.
Ladies and gentlemen, if you're in the market for a piece of life-saving equipment, the finest life-saving rifles out there, go to BravoCompanyMFG.com.
You'll be doing yourself a huge favor.
Go check them out today.
Love Bravo Company.
And thanks for the great shirts, by the way.
They're pretty awesome.
You can see I wear them a lot.
So, shockingly, We have evidence now of the New York Times doing some fine investigative journalism.
Staggeringly good investigative journalism, folks.
Pick me up.
Get the Pulitzer Prize ready.
Pulitzer?
I don't know.
I don't really care.
So yesterday, a photo surfaced that the White House had taken from the Daily Wire and put out on their Twitter feed that Trump put out.
Here it is, folks.
It's a photo of President Trump, of course the Daily Wire put this photo up, putting a medal around the neck of the dog, Conan the dog, that famously tracked down cockroach Baghdadi in a cave.
Joe the crack journalist.
Yeah.
The crack journalists at the New York Times.
Two of them!
Cracks.
Journalists, yeah.
Get ready, buddy.
Joe, get ready.
Are you sitting down?
Yeah, you bet I am.
Grab the side of the chair so you don't fall off.
The crack journalists at the New York Times, we can see by this piece.
Figure it out, Joe, that it's a fake.
It's photoshopped.
That was a tough one there.
Neeraj Choksi and Karen Drake, two New York Times journalists.
Headline, Trump tweets faked photo of hero dog getting a medal.
I could see it.
Yeah.
Unbelievable.
Crack job.
Crack job.
So very you.
Yeah.
Joe.
The Daily Wire, Ben Shapiro's operation over there, put the... You didn't know this was Photoshop?
You think the president put a metal... Folks, by the way, look at the photo again when you see it on Twitter or elsewhere.
The photo has a paw print where the metal is.
You needed two journalists?
You can't see it on this, but you see it on the Daily Wire photo.
You needed two journalists to figure out this was a fake?
It was a joke!
So just to be clear, the New York Times, the last group of lunatics in the entire cosmos to still be holding on to the collusion hoax, Who are uncurious about Charimela, Charlie, spying on the White House, working with Ukrainians and Chalupa to spy on Trump, and the fact that Charimela may be the whistleblower trying to do the look squirrel thing?
None of that matters!
Let's investigate if a photo of a dog that was an obvious joke was photoshopped.
This is real, folks, and I'm proud to tell you That social media absolutely annihilated every moron on the left.
Annihilated!
I mean, the ratios on Twitter where people comment rather than retweet it, meaning your tweet was that bad that people are just piling on you, the ratios were like from the Phantom Zone.
They were that bad.
Okay.
Oh, my goodness.
Really?
It's just the kind of stuff you could just this is the state of journalism.
You have to use the dreaded air quotes every time because there is no more journalism.
All right, moving on, because there's a lot of stuff I need to get to.
You know, there's something going on behind the scenes with Twitter on a very serious note, the Trump team put out a statement yesterday.
About it.
This is from Brad Parscale, Trump's digital manager operation.
It's, quote, Trump campaign statement on Twitter's decision to ban political ads.
Twitter, which banned me a long time ago from running ads, never explained why, but whatever.
Cost themselves a lot of money, by the way.
Trump team put out this statement.
Again, Twitter banned political ads.
I want to tell you what's going on here behind the scenes and why Trump put out this statement.
He's always a step ahead of these people.
Quote, Twitter just walked away from hundreds of millions of dollars of potential revenue, a very dumb decision for their stockholders.
Will Twitter also be stopping ads from biased liberal media outlets who will now run unchecked
as they buy obvious political content meant to attack Republicans? This is yet another attempt
to silence conservatives since Twitter knows President Trump is the most sophisticated
online program ever known. What's really going on here?
Why is the Trump team and Brad Parscale upset about Twitter banning political ads?
Folks, here's what I'm getting from people. This really isn't about Twitter.
Yeah, they're not happy they banned political ads.
Why?
Trump has raised a fortune.
Historic amounts of money for early re-election campaign.
They could probably run ads from now until election day and not even make a dent in their finances.
That's how much money the Trump re-election campaign has.
Brad Parscale has shown himself to be a fine digital operator in that space and targeting voters.
Twitter probably would have helped him a little bit, but I don't really think this was about Twitter.
What was it about?
Twitter's the one banning political ads.
Folks, have you noticed AOC and others up at that Mark Zuckerberg?
Mark Zuckerberg, he don't work for Twitter, he works for Facebook.
Oh yeah, he does.
Did you notice when he appeared up on Capitol Hill?
What was it, last week?
AOC and the other radical leftist communists?
Yeah.
Melted down on him.
Ayanna Pressley and others.
Yeah.
Why are you not fact-checking political ads?
You're going to let the lies keep running?
Joey, are you putting two and two together here?
Folks, Jack Dorsey and Twitter are all about putting the squeeze now on Facebook.
Hey, look at what we did.
We banned political ads.
Because ladies and gentlemen, although Twitter is probably not going to change a lot of minds in the election, Facebook has far more viewers than Twitter.
And Facebook has more sophisticated targeting.
The Democrats are furious that Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook have refused to do anything about political ads.
Oh, right.
Which I think is the right move.
Let the voters decide who's more honest.
I thought we believed in free speech.
No, no, we do, not the liberals.
They don't believe in free speech.
AOC and them, these are political tyrants.
They don't believe in free speech at all.
This move by Twitter, Joe, is a wink and a nod to the Congress that they have their backs when they push Facebook to ban political ads too, which will assuredly, okay, hurt the Trump campaign big time.
They have the most sophisticated digital operation in American political history, and they are planning on using Facebook to do what every other politician is fully capable of doing, targeting voters to get out to vote.
Perfectly appropriate use of digital tools to electioneer.
The Democrats are terrified of the Trump digital operation.
And Twitter is virtue signaling to Congress that, look, we're not with them.
Matter of fact, you should probably stop them from getting money being there at our competitors, too.
Maybe you should ban political ads on social media.
That's what my sources are telling me.
That's what this is really about.
And that's why the Trump team is furious.
The anti-free speech, radical, liberal, communist tyrants don't want Trump to be able to talk on social media at all.
Especially Facebook, where the Trump team has the best operation going.
Alright folks, I've got some more video for you tomorrow.
Don't miss tomorrow's show.
I'm gonna have tomorrow, Joe's gonna be our This week in your racist segment.
Yes, of course, Democrats, when they are devoid of arguments, which is pretty much every waking moment of their lives, call you a racist.
Hat tip our good friend Tom Marr, who has since passed.
So we're going to have an interesting segment tomorrow of prominent Democrat figures again, making up charges of white supremacy and Michelle Obama, who Thinks white people are running away from her.
Not my experience in the Secret Service where white, Hispanic, black, Asian people and anyone else was running towards Michelle Obama because they loved her so much.
I don't know where she got that from, but whatever.
We'll got that tomorrow and a lot more.
Don't miss the show.
Thanks a lot, folks.
Please subscribe to my YouTube channel.
YouTube.com slash Bongino.
It's very important to me.
We are working on a lot of things coming up in the video and audio space, and we'd really appreciate it.
