This Is Just The Beginning of the Spying Scandal (Ep 1250)
In this episode I address the disturbing new evidence that emerged showing that the spying scandal on Mike Flynn and the Trump team was more widespread than previously believed.
News Picks:
Brennan, Clapper & Comey are on the scandalous unmasking list.
New jobless claims continue to explode.
“Judge” Sullivan goes all-in on tyranny and appoints another judge because he failed.
The Supreme Court has already ruled on Amicus Briefs, and it isn’t good for “Judge” Sullivan.
A powerful piece by Andrew McCarthy about the atrocious behavior of the judge in the Mike Flynn.
Copyright Bongino Inc 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.
You know, it's hard to rest.
Yesterday, after the show, it's Wednesdays.
I usually don't work out on Wednesdays.
I was kind of taking a little bit of a break.
Was sitting down, was actually going to read something outside of politics for a second, and boom!
There it is!
As if a genie was unleashed out of the bottle, we get the list.
What was the list?
It was a list of corrupt politicians, bureaucrats, and some intel officials who had requested the name of Mike Flynn to be unmasked.
It popped yesterday.
And man, is it explosive.
There are nuggets on there.
Here's what I'm going to go through today.
I'm going to go through what unmasking is, why it matters.
Paula requests this morning.
How they get ahold of people's phone calls, why this is so bad, and why hacks in the media, sadly all across the media spectrum, are gaslighting you again.
All right, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
Fine, sir?
Hey man, I'm doing good.
Y'all ready to roll, I take it?
Yeah, yes, we got a lot going.
Yes, Joe can obviously sense my eagerness to get this show going because there's a lot of info to put out there.
Today's show brought to you by our friends at Rock Auto.
Joe, one of Joe's favorites, by the way.
Chain stores have different price tiers for professional mechanics and do-it-yourselfers.
Did you know that?
Rockauto.com's prices are the same for everyone, and they're reliably low.
Just ask Joe Armacost, who's a little mechanic himself there.
Rockauto.com always offers the lowest prices possible rather than changing prices based on what the market will bear, like airlines do.
Rockauto.com is for everyone.
It doesn't require membership or an account login, none of that stuff.
Rockauto.com's a family business.
They've been serving their customers for 20 years.
Go to rockauto.com.
Shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of different manufacturers.
They have everything from engine control modules and brake parts to tail lamps, motor oil, and even new carpet.
Whether it's for your classic, your daily driver, get everything you need in a few easy clicks delivered directly to your door.
The rockauto.com catalog is unique and it's remarkably easy to navigate.
Right, Joe?
You been there?
Yeah, man.
He loves it.
He uses it himself.
Quickly see all the parts available for your vehicle and choose the brand, specs, and prices you prefer.
Best of all, the prices at rockauto.com are always reliably low and the same for the pros and do-it-yourselfers.
Why spend twice as much for the same parts?
Makes no sense.
Go to rockauto.com right now and see all the parts available for your car or truck.
Write Bongino, my last name, B-O-N-G-I-N-O, in.
How did you hear about us?
So they'll know we sent you and to go see their amazing selection and reliably low prices.
All the parts your car will ever need.
Rockauto.com.
No singing today, but all the parts your car will ever need.
Rockauto.com.
All right, let's go.
So the list came out yesterday, the list of hack Obama administration, politicians, law enforcement people, and intelligence folks who demanded the unmasking of Mike Flynn.
Now, what does that mean?
Paula said to me this morning, can you just explain to people what unmasking is quickly before we get this whole thing started and why this matters?
Folks, in order for a law enforcement officer Or some people in the intel community, some, to listen to someone's phone call.
In other words, General Mike Flynn, who is a U.S.
citizen.
Forget the Trump National Security Advisor three-star general thing.
Forget that for a moment.
He's an American citizen.
For a U.S.
entity, CIA, the FBI, politicians or whatever, to listen in or even get a transcript of the phone call.
Because remember, whether I listen to Joe's call with Little Joe, or I get a transcript of it, I have the information.
It doesn't really matter.
I mean, outside of maybe if you're listening, hearing the tone and some tone changes, the transcript is essentially the same thing.
Everybody got that?
Pretty simple stuff, right?
For me to do that, for me to listen as a law enforcement officer, there are only a few ways generally to do it.
I can get a traditional warrant, you know, the criminal warrant, you know, wiretap what we call, just speaking, you know, in regular everyday parlance.
You'd say, hey, we're going to get a wiretap.
To get a wiretap, to spy on someone's phone calls, listen in, get a transcript or listen live time, I have to go to a judge.
I have to show this is important for a criminal one.
All other measures have been exhausted.
This is important.
You can't just walk in front of a judge in a criminal case and demand a wiretap.
You have to show, in a Title III wiretap, you have to show that you've exhausted all investigative avenues first.
Because we're a country that tries, we used to before Obama, to protect civil liberties.
We don't do that anymore.
That's gone.
Forget that.
I'm really sorry.
Obama destroyed all that and the media's all in on it.
So you'll have to show you tried surveillance, you tried pen registers, you tried, you know, muds and luds subpoenas, you tried everything, confidential sources, whatever it may be, and you're not getting what you need, so now you need a wiretap.
Everybody clear?
So that's the traditional criminal warrant, probably what you've seen in a lot of detective shows and things you've watched on TV, a lot of the fiction, nonfiction stuff.
Get it?
There's another way.
You could go in front of a FISA court, where you don't have to show all of those investigative means.
A Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which is still a- they're US judges, but it's a different court.
It's non-adversarial.
Meaning it's secret.
Meaning your lawyers can't go in there and demand information if you're the subject of it.
You're out of luck.
S-O-L.
Out of luck.
You get what the S stands for, okay?
Now, to go to a FISA court, you have to show outside of the criminal, forget the criminal, that's a different one.
In the FISA court, you have to show that the person you're trying to spy on, the U.S.
citizen, is an agent of a foreign power working on behalf of a foreign power.
One.
And two, in violation of U.S.
law.
It's not illegal to work on behalf of a foreign power.
Lobbyists do it all the time.
It is to do it in violation of U.S.
law.
Everybody get that?
The third way Which is what we're going to talk about now.
Is to reverse target someone, which you are not supposed to do is against the law.
That's what happened to Mike Flynn.
What does that mean?
All three involve listening in on a phone call and getting a transcript.
That doesn't change.
Is everybody clear on that?
That doesn't change at all.
Whether it's FISA, a criminal warrant, or an unmasking request based on reverse target, you're getting a transcript or a call, or you're listening live time.
Now, in an unmasking request, what would happen is, our intelligence entities, some in law enforcement, can listen in on the conversations of foreign powers.
They don't need a warrant.
These foreign powers don't have constitutional protections.
Russians in Russia, we can listen in on all we want.
They have no constitutional protections whatsoever.
They're not U.S.
citizens, they're not on U.S.
soil.
Tracking?
The problem is, if those foreign entities on U.S.
soil we're listening to start talking to U.S.
citizens who do have constitutional protections, we are supposed to mask the name.
Hide it.
Redact it.
In other words, leave it as, Nikolai Volkov in Russia is talking to U.S.
Citizen One.
No name.
Certain government entities, in the interests of national security, are allowed to request for a limited time to understand those conversations, that those names be unmasked, the U.S.
Citizen 1 label lifted off, and the actual name put in there.
That's what they did to a three-star general.
Or did they?
You understand, I just described to you three ways.
A criminal warrant, a FISA warrant, or a reverse targeting operation.
In other words, you pretend you're listening in on the foreigner, but you really know you're listening in on a U.S.
citizen.
And you're just pretending to listen in on the foreigner.
No, no, I don't know how.
It's incidental.
It's routine.
We just caught this guy on the internet.
Meanwhile, he was the target the whole time.
Reverse targeting, it's called, because you pretend you're targeting the foreigner, but you're really not.
You're targeting the U.S.
citizen one on the other side of the phone, and then you unmask him later.
Joe, as audience referee, does that make sense?
Yeah, absolutely, yeah.
We have these three buckets, criminal, FISA, and unmasking.
The question about Mike Flynn, which everybody's enjoying, especially the grotesque, disgusting media, actually, this is all routine!
Morons.
More IQs in the single digits.
The multi-million dollar question nobody's asking outside of this show and a few others out there are, well, was Mike Flynn really unmasked?
Keep that in mind.
Let's get to this.
Let's go to who did the unmasking first.
Now, for me, as a law enforcement or FBI official or a politician or a bureaucrat, you know, Obama's a politician.
In fact, he's the president of the United States.
He's still a politician and others.
For me to unmask someone's name, I have to make a request, and it leaves a paper trail, and that's created a big problem, because you gotta put your John Hancock on there.
So Rick Grinnell declassified the list of people who, after the election of Donald Trump, but before he takes office, that critical November to January period, 2016-2017, Rick Grinnell, our terrific Acting Director of National Intelligence, has now put out the list of the people Sorry, just trying to follow.
The news is breaking by the minute.
A list of the people, what?
What are you laughing at?
They put out a list of the people who requested the declassification of the unmasking of Mike Flynn.
Let's go to the list, because there are some really fascinating names on it.
It's gonna be in three screenshots.
Big hat tip to Katherine Harridge, who broke this yesterday.
These are screenshots of the documents.
So, page number one on the list.
Keep in mind, these are people we already, nobody's disputing these names are on the list.
Page number one, we got Samantha Power.
Samantha Power.
Now, last time I checked, Samantha Power was the ambassador to the United Nations.
What the hell is Samantha Power's name doing on this?
Samantha Power is not a law enforcement or intelligence official.
She's a diplomat.
Why is she submitting multiple requests to unmask Mike Flynn's name and essentially read or listen to his phone calls?
James Clapper?
The DNI's on there?
John Brennan?
Wow, not surprised by that.
A whole bunch of other names, too.
Treasury individuals?
People from the Treasury?
What the heck?
What are they doing on there?
Let's go to page two.
Gets even better.
Oh, there were a whole boatload of people took an interest in Mike Flynn.
Here's the Deuce!
Got other names on there.
Adams, Snubbull in there, Robert Bell.
We have all these NATO folks in there.
We have more Chief of Mission to NATO.
The Deputy Secretary of Energy?
Elizabeth Sherwood?
What the hell is the Deputy Secretary of Energy interested in wiretapping basically a call from Mike Flynn getting his name unmasked?
What do they have to do with it?
But this was it.
Here's the real McCoy.
Let's go to page three.
Some of you probably heard about this yesterday.
Look at this list.
There are two absolute gems on this one.
Oh, Dennis McDonough.
Barack Obama's chief of staff.
Nothing to do with intelligence or law enforcement whatsoever.
The chief of staff to Obama, Dennis McDonough.
Key date on that, by the way.
And also at the bottom, there it is, ladies and gentlemen, the bombshell of all bombshells, Joseph Biden right there at the bottom on January 12th.
Now, now that we have the list of the deep state snakes, Who listened in or viewed the transcripts of Mike Flynn's phone call, potentially in violation of U.S.
law if they were doing it outside of national security reasons, which is crystal clear they were.
How do I know that?
Because what you won't hear on a lot of cable news channels amongst really stupid talking heads who don't know any better is the FBI on January 4th had already, in their case closing document, was trying to close the case against Mike Flynn because they had, quote, no derogatory information and no other investigative methods were warranted.
Their words, not mine.
So why was Joe Biden on January 12th after the FBI tried to close the case against Flynn on January 4th?
What legitimate investigative purpose would Joe Biden have if the FBI didn't have one?
Simple question.
Please chew on that one for a moment.
Uh, does anyone have an answer?
So just to be clear, January 4th, 2016, the FBI is trying to close the case.
They don't close it, quote, their quote, not mine, because of their own incompetence.
I'm not kidding.
The FBI administratively screwed up and failed to close it.
That's the only reason the case against Flynn is not closed.
That's their records, not mine.
They screwed up administratively because Peter Stroke's a moron.
He says in his own communications, gosh, thanks to our own incompetence, the thing is still open.
They've uncovered at this point nothing on Flynn.
They have an exact quote.
No derogatory information on Flynn and no further investigative techniques are warranted.
So what is Joe Biden doing seven days later on requesting the name of Mike Flynn and requesting to look at transcripts of his calls?
Of course you won't, nobody in the media will question this because they're Soviets.
These are Pravda-like Soviets.
You understand that.
They're all in on tyranny now.
All in.
A total joke and embarrassment and a disgrace to humankind.
So the key takeaways from this, especially about Biden, what I just said, who seven days after the FBI closes a case with no information whatsoever indicating an investigation against Flynn is warranted, Biden seems to think so.
Now, the media's talking point in this is, well, it was maybe Biden's office, maybe not Joe Biden direct.
No, let me get this straight.
Let me get this straight.
Your defense here, just to be clear, is Biden is so incompetent that his office spies on innocent American citizens for no good law enforcement reason whatsoever, according to the FBI, and Biden's so incompetent he doesn't even know what's happening in his name.
It's his name on there.
That's your defense?
And you want this guy to be president?
You want this guy to be president whose office, even if it wasn't, which I don't believe, of course Biden knew.
But your defense is, no, no, Biden, no, he's so stupid, his office spies on people without him knowing.
That's great, that's great.
We should definitely make this guy president.
What numbnuts you people are if you believe this.
Are you serious?
That's your defense.
Well, it may have just been his office.
Here's a tweet from the Washington Examiner.
Here's why Biden's in a little bit of trouble.
Despite, again, the Pravda media's desperate efforts to cover up for this absolute buffoon.
Tweet, Washington Examiner.
Here's a quote by Biden.
A quote.
That means quotation marks for the lips.
Meaning Biden said this.
I know nothing about those moves to investigate Michael Flynn.
I was aware that there was, that they had asked for an investigation.
So Biden's saying he knows, quote, nothing about those moves to investigate Mike Flynn.
Let's go to the second tweet by The Washington Examiner, why Joe Biden's in just a little bit of trouble here if you're a sane person.
Sane, meaning you're not in the media.
So here's another one by The Washington Examiner.
Joey B, breaking!
Joe Biden and other officials in the Obama administration received unmasking information on General Flynn.
So ladies and gentlemen, we now know either Joe Biden is so delirious out of it and has no cognitive abilities whatsoever to control his own office from spying on innocent American citizens, or Joe Biden is involved in the most profound spying scandal in U.S.
history.
Again, how do we know that?
Because I have to, sadly, correct a lot of mass misinformation that's being put out there by talking heads who are so ignorant or so malicious, they're to be ignored immediately.
Either Biden's too dumb and his office is spying on people without his knowledge, or Biden's in on it.
Right.
Or, Joe, there's option three, which I've heard the gaslighting's profound today, because they know Obama and Biden were the most corrupt administration in American history, and they are desperately, desperately spinning now.
What I've heard today is this is routine.
Even Trump makes a lot of unmasking requests.
He made like 15,000.
That has nothing to do with any of this.
You may say, Dan, this is all about unmasking.
It's not about unmasking!
Unmasking stinks.
It shouldn't be happening.
Get a warrant.
Period.
Full stop.
Having said that, it is legal.
It shouldn't be, but it is.
Nobody's arguing it's illegal to unmask a name.
To get a transcript and ask to see the name of who the foreigner's talking to.
Clear?
Period.
Full stop.
Suggesting it's legal and routine does not mean this was done in the interest of national security.
How do we know that?
Because the FBI had already tried to close the case saying this guy was not a national security threat.
Do you understand the difference?
Or are you so dopey, if you're a liberal, that you're unwilling to accept the truth?
The FBI had already said there was no national security interest in Flynn and had tried to close the case and failed to do so because Stroke is an administrative idiot!
There was nothing!
There is no reason for any of these people to have unmasked Mike Flynn!
None!
And then his name and the conversation is illegally leaked to David Ignatius and some believe Adam Antios, two reporters, which is a felony!
Do you see the distraction?
Unmasking is routine.
That's correct.
It shouldn't be, but they're not lying to you.
That's not the point!
Criminal investigations into burglary are routine, too.
Sadly, burglaries happen all over the United States.
Yet if I go set up and frame Joe Armacost, and put burglar's tools in his house, and get his fingerprints on him, and Joe didn't commit a burglary, the defense to me framing him isn't, don't worry, burglary investigations happen all the time.
Do you get it?
Joe, does that make sense?
I mean, sometimes we need analogies because Democrats and media people, their gaslighting is so obvious that if you're a plain thinker, you'll see right through it.
The minute your liberal friends say this is routine, it happens every day, Trump's do it, period, full stop.
You are absolutely correct.
Do you have any evidence that this particular unmasking and spying on a Flynn was done with a legitimate national security purpose?
And what is that evidence?
He was talking to the Russians.
The FBI had already investigated that and already determined before Joe Biden's request that there was no information.
Do you have anything else?
No, I have nothing.
Of course you don't.
You're a liberal.
You never have anything.
Now, outside of Biden, this gets worse.
Can we go back to page 3 of the unmasking request, please?
Because who else is on there?
Oh, Dennis McDonough, Barack Obama's chief of staff.
What the hell is Dennis McDonough?
Chief of staff.
An appointed deep state bureaucrat.
What is he doing requesting an unmasking?
What is he doing?
He is the Chief of Staff to the President.
He's not an intelligence official.
He's not a law enforcement official.
He has no intelligence authority or law enforcement authority whatsoever.
He is a glorified scheduler for Barack Obama.
What the hell is he doing requesting the unmasking of Mike Flynn on January 5th?
Oh, what else happened on January 5th?
By the way, I didn't miss the January 12th thing with Biden either.
I'm just trying to get to a lot.
I'll tell you why in a moment that Biden is involved in January 12th.
But for now, what else happens on January 5th?
The infamous meeting in Obama's White House, Oval Office, with Jim Comey, Clapper, Brennan, Susan Rice, Joe Biden, and others, where Obama tells Sally Yates about Mike Flynn's call.
How did Obama know?
And Comey suggests the Logan Act thing.
In other words, the setup is hatched on January 5th, the exact same day Obama's Chief of Staff, this insider deep state hack, is requesting Flynn's name be unmasked.
Oh, the takeaways here, ladies and gentlemen.
Now, we're assuming in my intro to the show, assuming that Mike Flynn was unmasked.
The government's saying they have a transcript of the phone call.
We're being told by the media, no, it's because they were listening to this Russian.
There was a name on it that was suspicious.
We pulled the label off the name.
We saw Flynn's name and that's how we got the phone call.
Was Flynn really unmasked?
Oh, this is gonna get good in a minute.
I'm gonna make the case for you now that there's a strong possibility Flynn was not unmasked.
That something else happened.
Remember the three buckets?
Criminal case, FISA, unmasking.
Was it one of those other buckets?
Is that what they're really hiding?
All right, before I get to that, let me get to my second sponsor of the day.
Genucel, always happy to have Genucel on board.
I have to use it before I go on TV, because I get bags under my eyes.
On television, because I'm always tired.
Our friends at Chamonix have extended their amazing Mother's Day sale one more week for all those special people in our world.
Right now, you get the classic Gen Yourself for bags and puffiness and the jawline treatment at a discount never before offered.
Gen Yourself will double your order, free, only for a limited time.
Whether you're staying home, you're going back to work, or you're simply connecting remotely with your loved ones and coworkers, now's the time to say goodbye to puffiness, dark spots, crow's feet, and even firm up the delicate skin around the jawline and neck area.
Your next Zoom or FaceTime, you'll feel better, guaranteed.
Paula loves it.
Big fan of GenuCell in the house.
She's giving me the face, which is always nice, right?
You get compliments or you simply get 100% of your money back.
Order GenuCell's now on their extended Mother's Day special and get double your order free.
That's right.
Go to GenuCell, G-E-N-U-C-E-L.com.
Enter my code DAN30, that's DAN30, DAN30 at checkout.
And for results in minutes, the GenuCell Immediate FX is also free plus free shipping.
Limited time only.
Get double your order.
Double your order free right now.
Go to GenuCell.com.
That's GenuCell.com.
Use my code DAN30 at checkout.
Okay.
Thanks, GenuCell.
So as I said, folks, We're assuming this whole time that Mike Flynn's name was unmasked as part of just routine, incidental collection of foreigners talking to people in the United States, of which Mike Flynn happened to be one.
Well, Mike Flynn is actually in the Dominican Republic, but he's a U.S.
citizen, so his constitutional protections are valid no matter where he is.
Everybody tracking?
We've been told that.
Now I just told you, even if that is the story, and try to follow because this show is going to be a primer on it all, even assuming that that's how they got a hold of Mike Flynn's conversation with the Russian ambassador Kislyak in December 2016, which they're alleging he lied about, even assuming that's true, I've already told you it's not for any valid national security reason.
The unmasking, the pulling off of the label on his name.
Because the FBI had already determined there was no legitimate investigative techniques warranted going forward.
It's their writing, not mine.
They'd already determined that.
The day before the Obama meeting, January 5th in the Oval Office.
They found no derogatory information on Flynn.
There is no reason to be spying on Flynn, even if that's true.
But let's say for a moment that it wasn't unmasking.
Well, what makes you think that, Dan?
What makes you think Flynn wasn't unmasked?
Maybe they're hiding a more nefarious, nefarious problem, let's say, where someone may have sworn something out in court that wasn't true.
See, hiding behind unmasking, they can just say, oh, well, you know, we thought national security, my bad.
But if you actually went in front of a judge and swore out a warrant to spy on Mike Flynn, or, or, oh, this is where it gets juicy, get ready!
Juicy fruit here!
It's coming, babe!
Check this out!
What if Mike Flynn's call was being spied on by foreign governments that then sent the call transcript or recording of it back to the United States through a back channel, creating kind of a rogue intelligence operation?
Wouldn't that be crazy?
I thought we were unmasking.
Oh, now you're telling me the Obama administration intel officials may have been working with foreign governments.
I thought that was called collusion.
To record and spy on U.S.
citizens in violation of U.S.
law and then created a rogue back channel to get that communication to the United States.
That would be nuts, wouldn't it?
Dan, there's no evidence of that.
You're a conspiracy theorist.
Okay, let's produce some evidence because the liberal media won't do any of this for you.
Let's go to this screencap number one.
This is, by the way, I have to give out massive hat tips.
Walk of Fire, Rosie Memos, Techno Fog, Undercover Huber.
A lot of these screencaps are from Twitter accounts I follow, you should too, that are really, really good and dig into the details.
And their screencaps and highlights are terrific.
So big hat tip to them all.
I never take information or even screenshots publicly available from people without hat tipping them.
But let's go first again.
What are we talking about here?
The potential that maybe Mike Flynn and his call with the Russians wasn't unmasked at all.
And there's a more nefarious explanation.
Let's go to ScreenCraft1.
This is a document from the court case against Mike Flynn, where Sidney Powell put in a motion, Sidney Powell's Mike Flynn's lawyer saying, hey, listen, if you're going to charge Mike Flynn with lying about his call with the Russians, and you're claiming to have the transcript or a recording of the call, can we see that?
And here we go, ladies and gentlemen.
The government responds by saying, highlight here, the government further represents that it is not relying on any other recordings of any person for purposes of establishing the defendant's guilt or determining his sentence.
Nor, whoa, wait, am I reading this correct?
Paula, Joe, pay attention.
Am I reading this correctly?
Nor are there any other recordings that are part of the sentencing record?
record. Oh, yeah. That I, Joe, I'm not quite. Are you read that? Are you read?
You can see if you're watching the YouTube, everybody can read ahead.
I didn't read that wrong, right?
There were no other recordings.
So just to be clear, the government is charging, has now dropped the case, but it's charging Mike Flynn with lying about the contents of a December 2016 call with the Russian ambassador.
And yet the government has no recordings?
Hmm.
Why would that be?
Well, I mean, I'm kind of curious.
I've worked a lot of federal cases as a federal agent.
I think that's my competitive advantage in this podcast space.
And there's chains of evidence.
When you have recordings, you have originals.
Then you have to label recordings from recordings.
You have to sign an evidence log when you take it out of the evidence vault.
The assistant United States attorney, if they take custody, has to sign it and date it to make sure the recordings aren't manipulated.
You're charging him with lying about a recorded call you've never actually produced a copy of?
Claiming you don't even have it?
Or you're not making it part of the cake?
That's really interesting, isn't it?
I thought the call was unmasked.
And it's routine.
Joe, they said that, right?
It's routine?
This is the liberal talking point?
Absolutely.
So if it's routine, then why not just do the routine and go get the call?
Oh, you don't have it?
That's me scratching the remnants of my facial hair there.
What are you looking at over there?
I see you out of the corner of my eye.
What's going on?
You're giving me a look.
Oh, let's produce more.
This is getting fun, isn't it?
Mike Flynn was unmasked.
Was he really?
Can't seem to produce that recording.
Strange.
Let's go to Andy McCabe's testimony.
Again, mega hat tips to everyone out there.
Rosy memos.
Oh, Climate Audit, Stephen McIntyre, another one.
I like to celebrate good people who do actual investigating, unlike the multi-billion dollar mainstream media who can't seem to find any of this stuff.
Joe, here is a screenshot of Andrew McCabe's testimony when he was asked specifically about this intelligence product, this transcript, this recording that, you know, recording of the phone call Mike Flynn allegedly lied about.
I mean, we're only threatening to send them to jail because he didn't say what was in this recording.
What recording?
The recording we don't have!
Come on, that one!
Huh?
So they ask McCabe about this, and McCabe's under oath here.
And they ask him, they say, well, there was never any intelligence product?
So no transcript or summary of Flint's conversation with Kislyak that were ever masked and therefore there were no unmasking requests that could have been made for these non-existent reports?
McCabe responds, I think your description is accurate.
Oh, it's probably a misnomer to refer to it as a product.
It wasn't an intelligence product as we use that term.
Jeez.
Can you put that up again for a minute?
McCabe's under oath.
They're asking him, where is this transcript and the unmasking requests?
They're saying, listen, if it was ever masked, therefore there were no unmasking requests that could have been made because these reports don't exist.
And Andrew McCabe, I think your description is accurate.
I'm out of here.
Show's over.
Thank you.
What?
The government has no recordings.
McCabe says no such intelligent product exists.
And when asked about the fact that how can there be unmasking requests on no intelligence product, nobody has.
He says, yeah, your description is probably accurate.
Wait, I thought he was unmasked and it's routine.
I'm just going by the media.
This is CNN.
This is an Apple.
The commercial should read, this is CNN.
This is a moron and show CNN.
You're not curious about why the government can't produce the recording?
They say they have, and they're charging Flynn with purge, excuse me, with lying to a federal agent, 1001, precision matters.
We want to be Obama.
But you don't even have the recording?
And McCabe's like, no such intelligence to product exists?
your description's accurate?
[inhales]
[exhales]
[thud]
So if the US...
law enforcement community, the Department of Justice, and no one in the I.C.
can seem to produce this recording of this call, you have to ask yourself, do they actually have a recording of this call or were they told about it by someone else?
Oh, oh, that's the question, ladies and gents, isn't it?
You may say, all right, Dan, that's kind of suspicious, but Clearly, that's not enough.
Okay, let's produce more.
So, Bob Mueller, here's from the Mueller report himself, you know, the golden calf on the left, Bob Mueller.
Previously, the FBI had opened an investigation of Flynn based on his relationship with the Russian government.
Okay, so now we know, according to the Mueller report, that the FBI actually had an open case on Mike Flynn.
So now we say to ourselves again, we know they opened up the case on August 16th of 2016 against Mike Flynn. 2016.
So now we know the three buckets, right?
How you can spy on an American's phone call.
Criminal warrant, FISA warrant, or an unmasking request if they're talking to a foreigner.
Nobody seems to be able to find these unmasking requests on the date of those actual calls.
Paula, can you pull up page one, two, and three of the unmasking request?
And ladies and gentlemen, I want you to pay very close attention here.
Very close.
Pull up page one first.
What's the date of the phone call?
The phone call where Flynn is on the phone with the Russian ambassador.
The alleged phone call.
Not the alleged, the phone call happened, we know that.
But the phone call where Flynn allegedly lied about the contents.
What's the date of the call, folks?
December 29th of 2016.
Now, if you're watching on YouTube right now, youtube.com slash Bongino, you'll notice looking at page one of the people who requested this alleged unmasking, Paula, do you see any on December 29th?
December 29th, page one.
No, no, that's weird.
Joe, I thought Flynn's phone call on December 29th was unmasked.
Yeah.
Paula, I'm not crazy, right?
There's absolutely none on December 28th.
Joe can't see it either.
So we got three sets of eyes.
We have six eyeballs looking at this and page one, clearly it's on page two.
Flynn's calls on December 29th.
The call was allegedly unmasked.
Let's look down that list again.
The 14th, the 15th, the 14th, the 15th, the 14th, the 15th, the 16th, the 16th, the 15th, the 16th.
I don't see it.
I don't see December 29th.
I don't even see December 30th.
Matter of fact, I don't even see January 1st.
I thought, come back to me for a second, we gotta go to page three in a minute, but just, I thought we were, I'm just, I thought we were told it was unmasked.
I don't, the call's December, D-E-C-2-9-T-H-2-0-1-6 for the liberals.
I know you have a problem with that.
I thought it was, the media told us the call was unmasked and that it's routine.
Where's the request?
I see a whole lot of December 15th, 16th, and 14th.
Now, again, for liberals who don't do chronology and calendars and stuff, December 14th, 15th, and 16th is before the December 29th phone call.
So how you can put an unmasking request in for a call that hasn't happened?
I haven't figured that out yet, but I'm sure you have.
In your heads, this makes perfect sense.
But what about masking?
Definitely it's on page three.
That's where we're hiding it.
It's all a joke.
I'm just setting you all up for failure, right?
I don't see it again.
Amazing.
Now we have one the day before the call, December 28th.
Amazing.
They unmasked a call that hasn't even happened yet.
That's, that's incredible.
But there again, we have nothing.
Matter of fact, we don't have a request until January 4th.
So I'm just, just a question.
I'm just throwing this out there for my brilliant audience.
And I'm not kidding.
You guys and ladies send the best emails ever.
That's how I came across the 279er.
How the hell did they unmask a call on December 29th without an unmasking request and without a recording nobody can seem to find and with an unmasking request that according to Andy McCabe doesn't even exist on an intelligence product he's not even aware of?
How did that happen?
It didn't!
That's the story!
There's no unmasking request on Flynn's phone call, which means either it was a criminal warrant for a crime that never happened, either it was a FISA warrant, possibility, we just saw the Mueller report, the FBI had an open case on Flynn, counterintelligence case, or Someone overseas in a massive intelligence black-op was feeding the Obama administration wiretap phone calls of American citizens in absolute violation of intelligence rules to back-channel it.
There is no unmasking request on the 29th.
You may say, well, there was one on the 4th.
Was that it?
I thought you just told me this guy was such a dramatic threat to national intelligence, that they thought he was colluding with the Russians, that they had to unmask his name.
So if they knew about the call on December 29, the threat was so bad, they waited five days?
They didn't seem to be that concerned about waiting in early December when they're unmasking Flynn like mad dogs.
Now he's on the phone with the Russians, your own case, and you forget, Joe, they were on a lunch break.
It just took five days.
They were eating Slim Jims, beef jerky, and quarter drinks, purple drinks, and maybe an onion roll from Tommy's Deli in Glendale.
Remember?
That's where I grew up.
Onion rolls on Saturday with butter.
It was great.
A Slim Jim.
That was my Saturday.
Maybe a Yoo-Hoo if I was lucky.
Oh my gosh.
Why?
Why do we have to live with 20% of the population that's so dumb they can't see the obvious?
Flameless unmasked!
Where's the unmasking request?
Well, it doesn't exist.
But there's a recording.
Where is it?
The DOJ doesn't have it.
I don't know.
It's somewhere.
Somewhere.
How come the FBI doesn't know about it either?
Now you may say to yourself, You will, because you're smart.
Not the dunces who watch the show.
The liberals, of course.
They'll say, well, what evidence do you have that maybe foreigners were running a massive black op in coordination with some of the Obama intelligence heads to spy on our people?
What evidence do you have of that?
The answer is, all I gotta do is tell you about the media's own reporting.
The media's already reported on it.
Oh, ho, ho, ho.
Oh.
Oh, this is gonna get good.
Alright.
Last sponsor of the day, because I want to roll through this.
Because this is gonna get just plain old juicy fruit.
Maybe the white spearmint.
Remember that?
What was the green one?
Do you remember?
Peppermint!
Peppermint, of course.
Come on, screw that up.
Wrigley's.
Gosh, can they make gum.
It only lasted ten seconds, but that was the best ten seconds of your life.
Ladies and gentlemen, Omaha Steaks!
Right now Omaha Steaks is a limited time stock up sale.
And it's available for my listeners to help your family stock up on the food you love.
We love it here.
We eat it two, three nights a week.
The Omaha Steaks burgers are unquestionably the best in the business.
You'll never eat a burger anywhere else again.
Their steaks, their chicken, their premium poultry and beef is just top of the line.
We love it.
The only reason I don't like to say it is my mouth waters doing it because I love this stuff so much.
Not kidding.
Go to omahasteaks.com, enter promo code Bongino in the search bar and unlock savings unique to my listeners.
And the savings are substantial.
There's a variety of ready-to-ship stock-up boxes available now.
Enter code BONGINO, B-O-N-G-I-N-O, in the search bar.
B-O-N-G-I-N-O.
And you can save more than 50% on your order gift.
Free shipping on orders of $69 or more.
These packages are perfect for families, and they're ready to head straight to your door with free shipping.
Here's what they include.
World famous Omaha steaks.
Absolutely delicious.
Aged to tenderness.
Trimmed to perfection.
Premium poultry and pork.
Tasty, easy to make.
Side dishes.
See my mouse?
I can't, I can't, I can't even do this.
No work.
Family meals for your slow cooker or oven.
Are you a chicken fried steak fan?
Cause they're chicken fried steaks.
You'll, you'll just go batty over them.
They're absolutely insane.
You won't be, you'll eat the whole box yourself.
Skillet meals also ready in 15 minutes or less.
Artisan desserts.
They have much more.
My kids love the desserts.
Their tartlets are fantastic.
Right now, stock-up boxes are ready to ship and say big, plus shipments of $69 or more.
You get free shipping.
Omaha Steaks delivers guaranteed quality and safety with every order.
As you're stocking up on things you need, don't forget the food you love.
Type Bongino in the search bar today.
Go now.
Stock up.
So, you know, with the meat situation, stock up now.
Save more than 50% of your order.
Get free shipping and orders of $69 or more.
Get their world famous steaks, delicious side dishes, their desserts, and so much more delivered safely right to your door.
Go to omahasteaks.com, omahasteaks.com, enter Bongino in the search bar and unlock massive savings for absolutely delicious food.
Stock up today.
Okay.
So, uh, I think, self-praised things, but I think we've made a decent case so far that this wasn't an unmasking request.
This is a bigger scandal than that.
And that's the next shoe to drop.
The only question now is, was Mike Flynn the subject of a FISA warrant?
To spy on him?
Remember what you need for a FISA warrant?
Acting as an agent of a foreign power.
And in violation of U.S.
law.
Here's the problem.
If they were spying on Mike Flynn and that's how they got the call?
With a FISA warrant?
Was that FISA warrant?
Relying on a dossier, too?
Oh!
Oh, wouldn't that be bad?
Not only did you spy on Carter Page using a dossier-based FISA warrant that they lied about.
This is true.
Did you verify it?
Absolutely none of it.
Did they use a dossier to spy on Mike Flynn at Three Star General, too?
Ooh, ooh, that could be touchy.
That could be really bad.
So they're only out now as to, of course, claim it was unmasking, despite very little evidence that anything was unmasked around Flynn's call.
There are no requests.
Bizarre, isn't it?
Well, what evidence do you have, Dan, that, okay, it may have been a Pfizer one, but it may have been an Intel one?
Let's go to this CNN article.
Don't take my word for it, it's CNN.
You know, CNN, remember, this is an apple.
Remember their dopey head?
CNN, those bastions of truth.
It's hilarious.
This is their own article.
Still up there, by the way.
Anyone can, Joe, Paula, anyone can Google this article right now.
It's never been retracted.
Use this article often.
This is from April of 2017.
By Jim Sciutto, Pam Brown, and Eric Bradner.
British intelligence passed Trump associates' communications with Russians on to U.S.
counterparts.
They did!
Let's go to the peace and see what they have to say about that.
Aren't there rules about that stuff?
It says British and other European intelligence agencies intercepted communications between associates of Donald Trump.
Was one of those guys Mike Flynn?
Gosh, who knows?
And Russian officials and other Russian individuals during the campaign and passed those communications on to their U.S.
counterparts.
Sources told CNN.
Here we go.
The communications were captured.
Dorian quote, routine surveillance of Russian officials and other Russians known to Western intelligence.
Wait, so just to be clear now, so there's no official formal intelligence product from our five eyes intelligence partners, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, United Kingdom.
There's the five eyes part.
There's no official intelligence, the UK, We have an intelligence-sharing agreement with those five partners.
There is a channel for them to share intelligence.
It's a formal channel.
As Congressman Devin Nunes, who has actually seen the documents, has stated repeatedly, there is no formal intelligence coming from any of them.
In other words, that channel was never activated.
But that's not what that CNN piece says, folks!
That's not what it says.
That CNN piece, clear as day, says the United Kingdom was passing intelligence as part of this routine channel to the United States and it was just incidental collection.
Well, where is that intelligence on the formal channel?
Nobody can find it.
Was one of those people they were spying on?
Those foreign partners, Mike Flynn?
And if they were, as CNN said, where is it?
And the answer is nobody can find it.
Was this a black op?
Was this a rogue operation being run by the upper echelon of the CIA led by John Brennan?
To use foreign intelligence to spy on U.S.
citizens and run it through a back channel in the United States?
Is that how they got the transcript?
I'm just asking questions.
Questions CNN, you would think, given that they wrote the article, would ask themselves.
Questions like, well, so we know the UK was passing information to the United States.
Where's the documents?
Oh, we don't have any.
Oh, they were?
What do you mean?
It was like a back channel?
Isn't that illegal?
Yeah, kind of.
And who exactly are the Trump associates the UK was spying on?
We're not allowed to ask that question either, apparently.
Now, if they were...
If they were passing this on to Central Intelligence Agency officials, led, of course, by a hack, grotesque human being, John Brennan, and Brennan was running an intelligence black op, how else would we know it was a black op?
Well, one of the ways we know, again, is Nunes would have no record of it.
We have, folks, there is a Five Eyes Intelligence Channel.
There are records of all the information they pass on.
That's not in there.
Nobody can find it.
CNN can't find it apparently either.
They're not interested.
But what's interesting is, among that Five Eyes intelligence channel, where if they're spying on Mike Flynn for John Brennan, which is what I'm hinting at here, in case you're not picking up what I'm putting down, and it's not in that formal Five Eyes intelligence channel file, then the FBI wouldn't have seen it either.
Because it's being hidden.
It's what black ops do.
It's what rogue operations do.
They try and keep the paper trail to a minimum.
Well, then Lisa Page from the FBI's testimony here, which I've used a thousand times, would make a whole lot of sense, wouldn't it?
So, Lisa Page is asked by Mark Meadows about, hey, do you guys got any information from, like, basically the CIA on this and this information channel they seem to have?
And Page says, well, if Director Brennan got the information from our source, right, the FBI got the information from our source, well, if the CIA had another source of that information, I am neither aware of that, nor did the CIA provide it to us, because if they did, because the first time we, and then Meadows cuts her off, Meadows says, we do know there are multiple sources Page says, yeah, I do know that.
I do know that the information found its way to a lot of different places in October of 2016.
But if the CIA, as early as August, in fact, had those same reports, I'm not aware of that, and nor do I believe they provided them to us.
And that would be unusual.
Seem to be a lot of unusualities about this Flynn-Trump campaign targeting case, no?
They're charging him with lying about a call.
They claim to have the transcript, though, but nobody can seem to locate.
Nobody has a recording.
The DOJ won't attest to using the recording.
The DOJ won't produce the recording, to Flynn's lawyer.
When Andy McCabe is asked about the recording of the call that was unmasked where they found Mike Flynn's name as being on that call, McCabe seems to have no idea what they're talking about.
Page seems to be unaware of how the CIA's getting its information, while CNN's reporting that the Brits are giving information to the Obama administration about Trump team associates, but nobody can find any formal record of it.
Man, isn't that strange?
Oh, it gets better.
It always does.
Here's a letter by Senator Ron Johnson and Senator Chuck Grassley, two Republican senators who have taken an active interest, and I have to hat tip them, have done a very good job of trying to nail the intelligence bureaucracy at the top that was engaged in this rogue operation to the wall.
So Johnson writes a letter to the Intelligence Community Inspector General, effectively the Internal Affairs for the Intelligence Community, saying, We used to be Michael Atkinson, who has his own issues.
He's gone now, thankfully, but that's a whole other issue.
Here's what they write in this letter.
Oh, this is fascinating.
Johnson, Grassley.
Quote, we write to you today to highlight other information regarding the FBI's apparent
awareness of leaks by other agencies or entities to the media.
Specifically in a December 2016 text message between FBI agent Stroke and FBI lawyer Lisa
Page.
Stroke tells Page, listen to this in this text message.
This is at the beginning of December.
Stroke, quote, think our sisters have begun leaking like mad, scorned and worried and political.
They're kicking it into overdrive.
Come back.
So we know this is in the first half of December, 2016, where Stroke sends this page about their sisters, obviously talking about an intel agency, most likely the CIA, have begun leaking to the media like mad because they feel scorned.
Scorned by what?
Scorned that their efforts to destroy Trump didn't work.
This is just, what, a month after the election?
Trump is the president-elect.
They're all terrified.
Strokes suspects, based on media stories, that someone in the intelligence community is leaking like mad.
But how are these people in the intelligence community now getting this information to leak to the media?
Can you go back to page one?
What else happened in early December?
Oh, look at that!
Mike Flynn's name appears on unmasking requests, December 14th, December 15th, December 14th, December 15th, December 14th.
If we go to page two, page two, this is amazing.
You have all these Intel officials' names redacted, assuming they're operatives, whose names have to be redacted because they're Intel.
December 14th, December 15th, December 16th, December 14th.
So there are massive unmasking requests for Flynn.
Gosh, what does that tell you?
What does that tell you?
Tells you the back channel, Brennan, the black op he's running with foreign intel to spy on Flynn isn't working.
How do we know?
Because Trump won the election, you dunce!
Brennan freaks out.
What happened after the election?
You may say, Dan, you're arguing that before the election, and at certain points, things were unmasked.
Yes, I'm arguing they threw every single tool in the toolbox at Flynn.
They did unmask his name.
I'm just suggesting, regarding the Kislyak call, that I don't believe that one was unmasked.
I believe that was the subject of something different.
A Black Ops channel.
I believe there may have been a FISA on Mike Flynn.
They threw the entire kitchen sink at Mike Flynn.
So what happens?
Why not just continue to use this intelligence back channel with the United Kingdom after the election?
Oh, oh, think this through, think this through!
I have on very good authority, ladies and gentlemen, very good authority, that after the election, our foreign intel partners freaked the mm out.
Drop a little F-bomb in there, if you know what I mean.
And we're like, holy shnikes!
We just spied on the now-incoming President of the United States.
What do we do now?
So your intelligence backchannel that CNN reported on, the UK is passing intelligence to the Obama administration through a backchannel, because we can't seem to find it on official channels.
It all dried up.
Dried up like that Slim Jim beep jerky we were talking about.
But Brennan wasn't going to give up, nor were his intel people.
So what do they do?
Put up page two of them.
In early December, they start unmasking Flynn's name, in reverse, listening in on every foreign phone call they have, picking up Mike Flynn, pretending they're targeting foreigners, and unmasking his name like crazy, to basically wiretap him, knowing they can't get a warrant on him now, because they found nothing, and knowing their foreign partners won't feed them information.
Look at the dates!
Right around the time Stroke figures out that this is what they're doing, and they're getting the information, and they're leaking it to the media.
You know what's also convenient?
Pointed out by the great at John W. Huber on Twitter.
Put up undercover Huber's tweet.
That you know what's really fascinating?
That the Flynn unmasking requests in early December ramp up right around the time that the stroke page text start to go missing.
If the IG hadn't forensically retrieved some of those texts, the gap in text would have been from then until the day
Mueller was appointed as a special counsel.
[Laughter]
Wait, what?
Remember that?
You forgot that story, didn't you?
This is why you got to go.
Listen, if you research in this case and you're not on Twitter, you're making a huge mistake because the mainstream media is seriously three, four years behind this.
Remember the Stroke page text that went missing?
We still haven't found all of them.
Don't you find it awfully weird that the dates they're missing are right around the time Stroke starts texting Page about how the CIA may be leaking like mad?
That's who he's talking about?
What else were they texting about from December to May that's now missing?
Did they find out it was the CIA and text about it and nobody wants you to see that?
That the CIA has been shut down by their foreign intelligence partners from spying on the Trump team because Trump won, and our foreign intel partners are freaking out, knowing they'll have to tell the Trump administration about it?
So what do they do?
They start unmasking Flynn's name, peeling the name off, reverse targeting Flynn, in total violation of the unmasking procedures, and then taking the stories and giving them to the media?
I'm going to go a little over today, forgive me, but this is important.
You may say, well, I don't know about that.
Okay.
I'm going to produce some evidence in a moment.
Media stories.
This is hat tip fool Nelson, by the way, it was another good account.
I don't know what these people are.
I just know they have really good stuff.
I'm going to get to that in a second, but I want to get to a couple of videos here just to show you.
How they bounced around the intel community from using foreign intel, to potentially a FISA warrant on Flynn, to when none of that worked out, to just unmasking his name by listening in on foreign phone calls and pretending they were targeting the foreigners while they were targeting Flynn.
Jim Clapper was asked last night on CNN, hey why did you, you know, you're on that unmasking, Jim.
He's on that January 4th request, Jim Clapper, to unmask Flynn's name.
Why'd you do that?
Listen to Clapper's answer.
I mean, he's very, he gets right to the point and gives details because surely you would remember why you unmasked the three-star general who was the incoming national security, right?
You would think common sense?
Clapper gets to the bottom of it right here.
Check this out.
I don't recall what prompted a request that was made on my behalf for unmasking.
I don't remember the specifics or what it was in the SIGINT report.
That was suggestive enough that I was concerned and felt that I should know who was actually involved.
Don't worry, folks.
The acting, excuse me, the former director of national intelligence, Jim Clapper, has no idea.
Joe, is that, was it the Sergeant Shulz saying, I don't know nothing about, nothing about, what is it?
I know nothing.
Was that, am I right?
Nothing.
Yeah.
Nothing.
He knows nothing.
He knows that.
Jim Clapper doesn't remember.
Yeah.
You would think you'd remember that while you were wiretapping, essentially, the phone calls of the incoming National Security Advisor.
Jim, don't worry, folks.
Jim Clapper just doesn't remember.
He has no recollection of that at all.
What a dunce this moron is.
You think we believe you that you don't remember that?
Now, this is where it gets good.
Hat tip to Conservative Treehouse, by the way.
Pointed me to this clip a while ago.
I've been meaning to use it.
I've been holding it.
But here's Clapper up on Capitol Hill with Sally Yates a while ago, and here's both of them asking questions about the unmasking of Flynn and that phone call, and Lindsey Graham says to him... I'm running out of patience with Lindsey Graham, by the way, but this is a good question.
Was this really unmasking or was this a FISA warrant?
Because this just seems kind of weird.
And watch Sally Yates and Clapper like, are you talking to me?
They look like they're constipated.
Like they need some like Dolcolax or something.
Check out this little gem.
So there's two situations that we would have found out what General Flynn said to the Russian ambassador.
If there was a FISA warrant focused on him, was there?
Was there?
Yes, either one of you.
Again, I think you know I'm not going to answer whether there was a FISA warrant, nor am I even going to talk about whether General Flynn was talking to the Russians.
Okay.
Well, I have to, obviously, I'm going to go along with... Well, if he wasn't talking to the Russians, we've had a hearing for no good reason.
So clearly he's talking to the Russians, and we know about it.
So if there is no FISA warrant, I'm going to find out about this, by the way.
The other way that we know what he was talking about the Russians, if he was incidentally surveilled.
So those are the two options.
Do we know who unmasked the conversation between the Russian ambassador and General Flynn?
Was there unmasking in this situation?
Are you looking at me?
Yes, sir.
Uh, I don't know.
Do you, Ms.
Yates?
I can't speak to this specific situation, but can I try to clarify one point on this unmasking thing?
Very quickly.
Okay, I'll try to do it quickly.
As a consumer of intelligence, I would, for example, I would receive intelligence reports from various agencies.
I get that, no.
Now, oftentimes the names are already unmasked by the intelligence agency itself.
The bottom line here is I want to know how it got to the Washington Post.
Sally's like, hey, I don't know about unmasking.
I don't know nothing about nothing.
Sometimes I get them and the names were already unmasked.
How did that happen?
I thought that you... What?
Nobody seems to know anything about anything about this unmasking.
And did you hear her freak out when asked about the FISA warrant?
One, she stumbles through it, because she looks back at him, hoping you're not asking me that question.
And then she responds back, well, I'm not going to talk about that here.
Of course you're not.
God forbid.
Was there a FISA warrant on Flynn?
Why did you unmask Flynn after the FISA warrant you may have had on Flynn didn't work out?
And if the Pfizer warrant didn't work out, were you working with foreign intelligence to spy on Flynn in violation of U.S.
law?
Why'd you freak out about Flynn in early December?
Paula, can you queue up the Powell memo for me?
This is important.
I know I'm going out of order, but it's important.
Give me a thumbs up when you're ready.
Why the increase?
The Sidney Powell one.
Why the increase in early December in massive unmasking requests?
around Mike Flynn's name in early December of 2016.
Why did he become such a massive threat?
Well, let's go to Sidney Powell, Mike Flynn's lawyer, who delivered this little memo here to the court and said, hey, A letter delivered by the British Embassy to the incoming national security team after Donald Trump's election, that was in November for the Liberals, and to outgoing National Security Advisor Susan Rice, big on Masker herself, the letter apparently disavows former British Secret Service agent Christopher Steele calling his credibility into question and declares him untrustworthy.
When did Flynn get that letter?
Was it in early December when these Obama officials on this unmasking list start feverishly foaming at the mouth and spying on him by unmasking his name and getting transcripts of his calls?
Is it because Flynn knows?
Flynn knows steals full of crap?
You know, we know from the IG report, we know that Flynn starts asking Comey questions on January 6th at a briefing.
Comey briefs Flynn and Trump about the dossier on January 6th.
We know from the IG report, because Comey's dumb enough to email his FBI counterparts the next day, he emails them that a national security representative for Trump started asking a bunch of questions about Steele.
Who was that person?
That's Mike Flynn.
In December, they know Mike Flynn knows about the dossier.
Mike Flynn probably knows about the intelligence channel overseas.
Mike Flynn probably has an idea about a FISA warrant on him as well.
Or has some inklings of it.
And they're in a panic.
So in early December, they start unmasking his name.
Don't let the name confuse you.
They're listening in on his calls.
That's it.
The unmasking thing is a procedural thing the left is using to distract you.
They're using one of those three mechanisms, unmasking, to listen in on his calls.
Why so feverishly in early December?
Because Flynn knows.
So what do they do?
They listen in on his calls and they leak the contents and the information in there and other stuff to the media.
Look at the unmasking requests and how they marry up almost perfectly.
On December 2nd, Samantha Power and Jim Clapper, Jim Clapper, the former DNI under Obama, make an unmasking request.
Look at this New York Times article.
Check this out.
This is right around December 2nd.
You got it?
There we go.
Don't edit, because I don't want any delays.
Just send it right over.
Drew will figure, the audience will figure it out.
Because if we have to edit that, folks, I don't want it to show out there.
Kushner and Flynn met with Russian envoy in December, White House says.
Well, what?
December 2nd?
Clapper's got an unmasking request to listen on his calls?
Well, what day was that?
What December?
Can I go to the screenshot from that New York Times piece?
What happened on December 2nd?
So we know that Jared Kushner from the Trump orbit met with the Trump team?
Oh, they were meeting with the Russian ambassador!
The meeting in December came at a crucial time, just as the Obama White House was preparing to sanction Russia and publicly make its case that Moscow would interfere with the 2016 election.
Oh, perfect.
So right around the time the Trump team, which is perfectly appropriate, is meeting with a foreign government about, you know, things like nuclear war and stuff like that the president might be involved in.
All of a sudden, right around that same time frame, Obama's people are making requests to basically wiretap Flynn's phone calls.
Weird, isn't it?
Let's go to this CNN piece.
We have a whole boatload, as you saw on December 14, of requests to listen in on or read Mike Flynn's phone calls through unmasking.
December 14th.
We have this CNN article here by Manu Raju.
Exclusive.
Susan Rice told House investigators why she unmasked senior Trump officials.
Let's see some dates in that one.
Let's go to the screenshot from that because this could be another doozy here.
December 14th.
There's all these requests.
So who are they meeting with on December 14th?
Oh, the UAE!
The Trump Tower meeting came shortly before the UAE brokered a meeting to open lines of communication with the U.S.
and Russia, according to reports.
A senior Middle East official told CNN the UAE did not mislead the Obama administration.
Ladies and gentlemen, this happens right around the same time in these massive unmasking requests.
You understand the Trump administration is meeting with foreign governments in a perfectly appropriate role for an incoming president and national security advisor, and the Obama administration is listening to the whole thing?
Now, as I told you, here's the coup de grande, this thing.
I had mentioned January 12th.
Bizarrely, Joe Biden himself, the now de facto Democrat nominee for the presidency, Joe Biden himself, suspiciously, seven days after the FBI tries to close the case against Mike Flynn because they have nothing on him, no derogatory information, seven days later, Joe Biden himself appears on an unmasking request.
I really need to see Mike Flynn's phone calls.
And more.
On January 12th.
What else happens on January 12th?
Look at this Washington Post article.
Oh, January 12th!
2017, David Ignatius.
Why did Obama dawdle on Russian hacking?
Look what's buried inside the article.
Who leaked this?
Was this someone from Joe Biden's office?
Buried inside the article.
Question three.
What discussions has the Trump team had with Russian officials about future relations?
Trump said Wednesday this relationship with Putin is an asset, not a liability.
What was in the next paragraph?
Retired General Mike Flynn.
Trump's choice for national security advisor cultivates close Russian contacts.
He's appeared on Russia Today and received a speaking fee from a cable network.
Ooh.
Interesting.
How the same day the Washington Post starts writing about Mike Flynn and a speech he gave in Russia, which was approved by the way, by his former employer.
It's the same day Joe Biden's name appears on an unmasking request.
Isn't that convenient?
All right, folks, I've gone way over.
I haven't even touched Judge Sullivan's new tyranny.
He's now appointed a outside entity.
Judge Sullivan, who is judging Mike Flynn, has now determined he's not competent enough to rule on the case himself.
So he appoints John Gleeson, a Clinton acolyte, who wrote an op-ed trying to wreck Mike Flynn's life a week ago.
I'm going to get to that tomorrow, the jobs report, but this today is just damning.
And I hope you understand what I'm getting at.
Sum up the whole show?
There's only one of three things.
They either had a criminal warrant on Flynn, they either had a FISA warrant on Flynn, or these unmaskings were done for the sole purpose of leaking to the press.
Or, option number three, sub B, they were doing it by getting it from foreign intelligence partners as an end-around around official channels.
Devastating.
All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in.
I really appreciate it.
Please share the show.
I'd appreciate it.
And subscribe to my YouTube channel, youtube.com slash Bongino.
