First up is Sara Carter talking about the explosive court filing by John Durham and what this could mean for certain figures in the Clinton campaign going forward. Next is Kash Patel about how he knew at the time this would all get traced back to the Democrats, and how he followed the money to find out. Then Dan talks with Gov. Kristi Noem about what's going right in South Dakota, and also discussed the trucker protest in Canada. Finally, we talked with Dr. Marty Makary about the latest study from Johns Hopkins about the effectiveness of natural immunity and why the government is ignoring this.
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.
Hey, thanks for tuning in to the podcast.
This is a special podcast we put together for you to enjoy on Sunday.
It features some of the best interviews we do on the radio show during the week.
We've got some great ones today.
You can hear these interviews live during the week in your local radio station.
To find out where, just go to bongino.com and click on the station finder.
We've got four great interviews today, but before we get to that and our first one here, get to one of my sponsors here.
We really appreciate your patience.
First up, today's an interview with Sarah Carter talking about the explosive cord filing by John Durham and what this could mean for certain figures in the Clinton campaign going forward.
Pay very special attention to the end of this interview, which he says about the healthcare company.
Check this out.
If you're in the market for a rifle, shotgun, or revolver, you want to go with the best in the business, and as far as I'm concerned, that's Henry Repeating Arms.
You'll be amazed by their quality craftsmanship and buttery smooth action that makes them a pleasure to shoot.
Mine were accurate right out of the box, and they've been reliable ever since.
The best way to learn about Henry Repeating Arms 200 models is to go to HenryUSA.com and order their free catalog.
The catalog is a great guide to showcasing their Made in America firearms, plus you'll get free decals, a list of dealers in your area, and a great newsletter.
Henry's are backed with a lifetime warranty for 100% satisfaction.
They're made in America or they won't be made at all.
And if you have questions, you can call the reward winning customer service department to speak with an expert who can help you.
Make sure you go to henryusa.com to order their free catalog and decals.
The best way to learn about Henry Repeating Arms 200 models is to go to henryusa.com and order their free catalog.
That's henryusa.com to order a free catalog and decals and to learn more about this great American company.
Let me welcome back to the show our good friend, one of the finest investigative reporters around, Sarah Carter.
Sarah, thanks for taking some time with us today.
Oh, it's great to be with you, Dan.
Thanks for having me on.
Just so much happening, huh?
Oh, my God.
Can't get enough of it.
No, no, I can't.
You know, I had Kash Patel on yesterday, who you're very familiar with.
And, you know, there's a small circle of us who followed this case very closely.
You, John Solomon, Greg Jarrett, you know, Jeff Carlson.
You know, I can think of, but Cash was one of the investigators, and forgive me if I'm leaving anyone out.
It's not intentional.
I mean, Mark Levin, who broke the story originally about the FISA warrant in many respects into the mainstream.
But, you know, this was new, Sarah.
This allegation here that the Clinton team gained access to DNS or web search data There are sources talking to Durham.
Trump residents and possibly the Trump White House.
We know the White House, but possibly the Trump White House.
Did you know anything about this? Because cash didn't. And I didn't,
which says to me, there's a source talking to Durham right now.
There, there are sources talking to Durham. I'm going to tell you what I,
what I've wanted to say for a long time. There is, there are sources that contended and I going way back to
2019, I had to go through all of my notes and all of the folks
that I talked with Dan, because as you know, we had so much information coming our
way, and you had to sift through it to make sure, well, is this
verified?
Is this accurate?
How do you know this?
I know you did that.
I know I did that.
Every time we came forward with something or every time we talked about something, we had to verify it through multiple sources.
Back in 2019, I had been told that there were people within our government, people within the NSA, and people that were connected to it, that had suspicions that there was traffic being monitored coming out of Trump Tower.
I didn't know about the White House, Trump Tower, and that when John and Solomon and I originally wrote the story in 2017 about Alpha Banks, And those pings that were going back and forth with this particular source said in 2019 is that they were monitoring like it if it was on a highway, right?
So if you're on like I-95 or one of our major highways, the people sitting on the outside, which I'm guessing would be Jaffe who's in the indictment.
...would be monitoring where that traffic was going.
If the traffic was leaving Trump Tower and it was moving to a secured location, if the traffic was being diverted, if the traffic, I'm assuming, was classified and leaving the White House, they would be watching that as well.
Now, I'm assuming, because I don't know this for a fact, I have not been able to verify this 100%, that those sources that spoke to me during that time are similar sources that have been talking To John Durham.
And that they had evidence of that, and had collected evidence of that, and there was extreme concern during 2017 about that.
And remember, remember, this is when Admiral Rogers, and there was a lot of talk, and President Trump came out and said, hey, I'm being spied on, and then, just like you, just like you said, you know, the media, instead of listening, instead of doing its job and investigating, especially media with enormous resources, like the New York Times, like the Washington Post, And others.
Instead of saying, man, maybe we should look into this, they instead took the bait, I call them the youthful idiots, they took the bait that was being fed to them by the Clinton campaign and all of the Clinton supporters within the CIA, within the DNI, within the FBI, and they wrote their stories.
Instead of investigating probably one of the biggest stories I would consider the biggest story and biggest modern political scandal in U.S.
history.
Sarah, because I don't want to waste any time from you, but without making it a love fest, I really just want the audience to hear you talk.
I have to applaud you.
I mean, I know you've been given huge stories that you've turned down.
I know because it's been very difficult for you to verify it.
So I'm telling you, audience, if Sarah is saying it, She has done yeoman's work in making sure that she's verified the data.
I know it.
I know you've been given stuff that later turned out to materialize that you were hesitant because you couldn't do due diligence in the appropriate way.
So the fact that you were given this stuff and didn't feel the need to be first but felt the need to be right speaks to your, you know, bona fides as a real investigative reporter.
And also I say that because You're right.
Like you, I was passed a lot of stuff early on, and it was difficult, and it was very hard to separate the wheat from the chaff, Sarah.
You didn't know, and I'll throw it to you here, I don't want to banter on, but the case was so incredible That, you know, it seemed almost like the more hysterical the allegations, the more, as Tucker Carlson said the other night, the more true they were.
And you didn't know, you're like, is this just crazy or what?
They were spying on Trump.
We have the name of the actual spy.
We have the Azra Turk name.
You know, we know about Halper, like we know all these names and they're still pretending this thing didn't happen.
One hundred percent.
One hundred percent, Dan.
And that's the thing.
We're looking at this indictment, but you're absolutely right.
Stefan Halper, the Office of Net Assessment, the Department of Defense, this office, we didn't even have a full investigation yet into this area of the spy operation.
What happened with General Michael Flynn?
Svetlana Lakova, the Russian, remember?
And all of these things that happened that they know are going to be buried away because it's so difficult for people to keep up with all of this information.
But what's not difficult is the essential truth.
And we know what that essential truth is.
No matter how much Teflon Hillary Clinton thinks she can put between her and the rest of the public, Or between her and the Department of Justice?
It all points directly to the Clintons.
It points directly to Hillary Clinton.
And this is what Durham is saying.
He's putting history into a report.
They may not be able to take her to court.
They may not be able to, you know, directly pinpoint the finger at her.
But everybody around her was involved in an operation to spy on President Trump.
And worse than that, it wasn't just about spying, Dan.
You and I both know this.
This was a disinformation campaign to destroy and target a president of these United States.
Yes.
And that's absolutely right.
I called it from the start an information laundering campaign.
You know, you have money laundering, you get illicit profits, you run them through a legitimate business to make it look legitimate.
Money laundering.
Everybody knows what it is.
That's what this was, which was an information laundering campaign with illicit, false, fake data run through legitimate channels, the FBI and the CIA and legal and lawyers to make it appear that it had a veneer of credibility.
Sarah, let me ask your opinion on this.
It's a story I'm going to focus on after we hang up with the audience here.
Jim Sciutto, Pamela Brown, and Eric Bradner at CNN in April of 2017 wrote a piece that's still on CNN's website.
It's yet to be retracted.
It says, British intelligence passed Trump associates communications with Russians on to US counterparts.
I have stated in my three books, through numerous sources here, that it's clear to me That U.S.
intelligence officials were involved in this operation to launder this information.
We now, based on Durham's legal filings in the Sussman case, know that Sussman met with the CIA, too.
Do you have any color to add to that about U.S.
intelligence agencies' potential involvement with spying on an American citizen, Donald Trump?
Well, it would be the worst of worst crimes, right?
Because that's not the role of the CIA.
Right.
The role of the CIA is to spy on foreign enemies and not touch anything within the inside.
But what we saw here was a concerted effort by people within the Central Intelligence Agency, and I say, I point right at John Brennan, who was an open hater of President Trump and willing to launder, and James Clapper, The Director of National Intelligence, who was also directly involved, and James Comey.
And it's pretty... I'm not making this stuff up.
You know it was out there.
It's public.
What happened in January when they briefed President Trump on the dodgy dossier that was given to them by a foreign spy that was paid for by Hillary Clinton?
They went ahead and they leaked that information.
First, they briefed President Trump.
With the intention of getting that information out to the public.
So you're 100% right, Dan.
They laundered information.
It is far worse, in my opinion.
It wasn't just about spying.
They couldn't find anything on President Trump.
Had they found something on him, they would have put it out there publicly.
What they did was, they made up a lie.
They used the same techniques they use on the enemy against the President of these United States.
So basically, everything they were trained for at the farm, At the CIA, everything that our intelligence agencies here in the United States are trained to do, they use it against a sitting U.S.
President.
I think that's pretty egregious.
I don't know how they're ever going to be able to hold them accountable for that, but that's what we're seeing right now, and that's the evidence that Durham has.
Yeah, I don't either.
That's why I've, you know, I argued for one of my books.
We need an additional branch of the federal bureaucracy that it acts like a, uh, an internal affairs.
So the OIG is clearly not getting it done.
I mean, if this is true, that the CIA was involved in the biggest spy scandal in us history on a presidential candidate and president of the United States.
I mean, I can't imagine.
It's the kind of thing.
If you tried to sell it to a book publisher, they go, ah, that's stupid.
That's that plot's been done.
And you know, crazy in crazy books where no one's going to believe that.
Let me ask you this before we have to run.
You know, in the latest legal filing by Durham, there's a line in there, Sarah, I think you and I both found interesting.
He doesn't say that the DNS data that was, you know, diverted to the Clinton campaign, it wasn't illegally obtained.
I want to be clear with the audience.
Apparently it was a legitimate government contract.
But, you know, there are legitimate government contracts with researchers, too, but you can't give the research to the Chinese Communist Party, okay?
It's where it was diverted.
Later, that's the scandal.
But it says in there, in the opening line, Durham says that the DNS data, Sarah, is among the Internet data exploited.
Which, again, to English speakers like you and I, with a reading comprehension better than Jim Acosta's, means Durham probably has more, right?
That there may be other Internet data there, wink at a nod, or why else would he write that?
Exactly.
Exactly.
He wrote that as part of... I always call those like magic beans.
Those are the little magic beans within writing that they're warning.
They're warning people within the Clinton campaign.
They're warning Michael Sussman.
They're warning Perkins Coie.
Look, we got more where this came from.
And we're going to let that out one of these days.
I think what's important also in that, and what we have to comprehend is that,
remember, internet data and traffic flow and are protected in many different ways.
It would not surprise me, it would not surprise me that John Durham is not just looking at
what's the obvious internet traffic, but maybe traffic that was also hidden among files,
maybe HIPAA files, maybe other files that are traveling along the internet
that are supposed to be protected, that are supposed to remain private,
but maybe they were carrying other information.
It just wouldn't surprise me if that was the case.
Folks, let me tell you something.
I've known Sarah a very long time.
Sarah is great at like tickling your fancy and being like, Hey, let me drop a little nugget here.
There's nothing Sarah says it's by accident.
So I'm going to assume and I'll leave it at that.
Sarah knows something and she'll probably have some great expose coming soon.
And we'll probably have Rebecca, but she doesn't say anything by accident.
That is a, I think I'm picking up exactly what you're putting down right there.
Having read the entire, One last thing, I only got about 15 seconds left, but don't you find it kind of hilarious that Sussman's lawyers were calling out Durham, like, you better show us what you got.
This looks like a bunch of crap.
And then Durham does the filing on Friday.
Don't show us that.
Don't show us that.
Take it back.
Take it back.
Be careful what you ask for, right?
Yeah, be careful what you ask for, and Durham's pretty awesome.
I mean, look, Durham understands the intelligence community from all accounts.
He's a straight-up, very straightforward shooter.
He's not going to put up with any of this, and I think he's smarter than them.
And I think, you know, you're seeing the rats on the sinking ship, you know, pointing the finger at one another and getting ready to jump off, so.
We'll see who's the last one.
Sarah Carter, you're the best.
Thank you so much for your time.
No better voice on this topic than you.
Thanks for spending some time with us.
We appreciate it.
Anytime, Dan.
Thank you.
You got it.
Folks, that was Sarah Carter, one of the best reporters in the business.
More on that incredible interview.
I think I know where she's going with this.
That was Sarah Carter, who was on the radio show with some incredible insight in this growing story and this scandal about the Clinton campaign.
That thing about the health care company.
Again, pay close attention where that's going to go.
Up next is Kash Patel.
We talked with Kash about how he knew, he was the lead investigator, he knew this was all going to go back to the Clintons and the Democrats and how he followed the money to find out.
If you're looking for a firearm, I wholeheartedly recommend Henry Repeating Arms.
They make 200 models of rifles, shotguns, and revolvers in a wide variety of calibers and finishes.
Plus they have new releases throughout the year.
And trust me, folks, you just can't beat their quality.
The best way to learn about Henry firearms is to order their free catalog to check out their line at home.
Plus, you'll get two free decals, a list of dealers in your area, and a great newsletter.
Just go to HenryUSA.com and click on the free catalog button in the top right corner.
Henry Repeating Arms uses old-world craftsmanship combined with cutting-edge technology to deliver reliability and accuracy you can trust.
They're easy to use and maintain, making them an excellent choice for personal and property defense, hunting and the shooting sports, and beginners.
And they're made in America, or they won't be made at all.
Remember to order their free catalog and decals at HenryUSA.com.
Just go to HenryUSA.com and click on the free catalog button in the top right corner.
That's HenryUSA.com and click on the free catalog button in the top right corner.
You're going to love this company.
All right, welcome back.
Got a great guest for you.
Probably no one better out there to discuss the Explosive new information in the spying scandal against the Trump administration and Trump campaign.
Then the former chief investigator for this under Congressman Nunes and former Trump administration official as well, Kash Patel.
Kash, thanks for joining the show.
We appreciate it.
Dan, thanks so much for having me.
Looking forward to the conversation.
Yeah, me as well, me as well.
So Cash, just before we get to Spygate, I just saw kind of a big bird's eye view question here.
You know, it's fascinating how, you know, the media folks warned us about this pending authoritarianism under Donald Trump, how, you know, civil liberties were going to disappear, press freedoms were going to go away.
He was a pseudo-monarch in the making, and yet between the Spygate case and the Truckers, and Justin Trudeau's rapid descent into fascism here, it's weird how all that stuff happened under liberals and not under Donald Trump.
Kind of strange, right?
Yeah, who would have thought, right?
You know, the complete hypocrisy has been exposed, as you said, and you know, the media, and I'm sure we'll talk about it, is equally responsible for the criminal cover-up of the criminal conduct of the Clinton campaign, and spygate, and steal dossier, and now the White House being spied on.
They won't report on it.
Thank God you are, and you're educating your audience for years, because that took some courage, man.
That was not easy to do, so I love being here to talk about it.
Thank you.
I mean, we're on the right side of history, but the wrong side of the media, because as you said, the media were co-conspirators in this scandal.
Now, really, no one knows more about this than you do.
Can you explain to us yesterday, after your reading of the Durham filing, some high-level takeaways?
I mean, just a couple of things I thought, and I'll turn it over to you.
They can't, they clearly can't control the narrative anymore.
It's based on lawyer, the legal filing yesterday by Sussman's campaign, who was like, hey, don't put this out there.
You're going to prejudice the jury, whatever.
Clearly they can't control the narrative.
And I think you would Hillary potentially positioning another run.
Uh, this was hugely damaging information about the servers and the DNS data.
Oh, I couldn't agree with you more.
And two of the things that stuck out with me, Dan, and I know, I know you know this and your audience does, but let's just hit pause for a second.
The Hillary Clinton campaign paid to spy on the White House compound of a sitting president, an opponent that defeated her and was duly elected.
Not just the Oval Office, the National Security Council, the National Economic Council, the Trade Council, and the Office of the Vice President, and the entire 17-acre military compound that is the White House.
Dan, you cannot make up that kind of fiction.
And the second point that I think is as pressing is how they did it.
You would think they would have to have some sort of covert hacking scheme in place.
No.
Per Durham's pleading, quote-unquote, they have reached a sensitive agreement to gain access to the servers.
That means someone in the intelligence community, the NSA, gave them a contract to have this access.
That means someone in the Trump administration's NSA gave the Clinton campaign the contract, paid them to get this access.
That's criminal.
Yeah, that's the stunning part of it.
And, you know, the media people who are choosing to, you know, nail their credibility to this wall, I think are making an enormous mistake among the many they've already made.
Durham's filing was pretty clear on this, the use of this server data for illicit purposes, that this was, quote, among the internet data exploited cache, meaning that the DNS data, in other words, just the websites that were visited, May just be the beginning.
I mean, down the road, we don't know.
I mean, could it be, could it be emails?
Could it be other sensitive data that came data that came out of the white house?
And then that begs the additional question, you know, where people who are not authorized to be viewing potentially classified information, you know, doing so this is, I mean, this is really an enormous scandal.
No, you're right.
It's the biggest one in us history.
And those questions are exactly what I think John Durham has the answers to, but hasn't relayed yet.
He is cultivating the internet data and just put a little bit of it out there in his pleading.
I believe he already has the communication, the emails, and every other piece of information that they bought and paid for while spying on President Trump.
And we're going to start seeing that in the next few weeks in more pleadings.
I think the bigger problem for the media and of course Hillary Clinton campaign is, remember this, Sussman, the guy who's indicted, ...is the same person that got paid through the Hillary Clinton campaign to conjure up the Alpha Bank story that the current National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, helped push, and I believe lied to me in Congress when I interrogated him under oath, when he said, I had no idea what our lawyers were getting paid tens of millions of dollars to.
This man is now advising the President of the United States, and I hope John Durham's focus is on Jake Sullivan.
We're talking to Kash Patel, former chief investigator for Russiagate, also Trump administration official as well.
You know that I haven't even been so busy with this story, Kash.
I haven't even discussed the Jake Sullivan angle and I covered it before in the past, but this guy is the national security advisor right now.
During a, you know, potential what could be Russian invasion.
Who is a known purveyor of disinformation?
I mean, that's just a fact.
I mean, that's just so disturbing.
But I wanted to ask you something else, because the media is really, like I said, you know, they're tying their boat to this pier here.
And it's just going to get ugly in the future.
They keep insisting there was no spying.
Now, Cash, we know that this new DNS data, yes, granted, it was an authorized contract.
We understand that.
But because I have an authorized contract with you to, say, put a server in the Dambongino Inc.
business, doesn't mean you can sell it to my competitor.
That would be illicit activity, right?
But that's not the only way they were spying.
You know, we already know, we know the names of the spies that the FBI was using.
We know they unmasked people.
It's not just one way they spied.
You understand?
You get where I'm going with this?
I totally get it.
And look, line of effort one for the Hillary Clinton campaign was a steel dossier, which we've covered to no end, totally discredited and caught the FBI intentionally lying to a federal court.
On a simultaneous track, line of effort two, Was this whole alpha bank and this whole infiltration into the Trump White House campaign and the same people were quarterbacking this entire operation.
And I think had they even hacked the system, that would have been less criminal culpability.
What they did here was try to get above board and convince someone in the intelligence community to give them an outside contract.
to gain access so they can do exactly what they're doing out come back and play all we had a legal uh... contract to go in and infiltrate the white house i think that the bigger scandal could they're covering up the fact that they avoided hacking it and they're saying the government gave it to us that is even more criminal in my opinion that Yeah, I mean, I'm going to go over when we're done here.
I'm going to play a cut of you.
There's a great piece of audio that was given to us of you talking about how early on you had said to Devin Nunes, like, hey man, I think the Hillary Clinton campaign paid the spy on Trump.
I'm going to play that afterwards.
But I'm also going to go into afterwards the media coverage of this, how it's just really borderline ridiculous.
I mean, Charlie Savage and Philip Bump are two known misinformation specialists.
But where they're going with this now, And I really, it's like, you guys gonna die on this hill?
Like, it's incredible.
As they're saying, well, you know, this may not be the big scandal you're making it out to be.
I mean, it was a legal contract, but that's not the point.
There are, I mean, think about it, right?
I mean, there are a ton of research institutions in the United States that have legal contracts with the U.S.
government.
But Cash, you can't take the data and then give it over to the Chinese Communist Party and be like, hey, it's not our fault.
It was legally obtained information.
That's not how any of this works, Cash.
We literally prosecute spies all the time for that exact behavior.
Spies by the CCP are put into lawful government contracts in America, then they take that and hawk that information back to the CCP.
As a former national security prosecutor, we put those guys in prison.
They had a legal contract, but their conduct was criminal, just like it is here, Dan.
And I'm so glad you're pointing it out.
Yeah, yeah.
I wanted to get you on this one too, because you kind of hinted at it before that this spying scandal by Hillary Clinton, which you were all over, we're talking to Kash Patel here, former chief investigator on this case.
This was a flood the zone strategy, wasn't it?
I mean, if the Steele dossier and the PP hoax didn't work, they had the Sid Blumenthal backup dossier.
If that didn't work, they had the, you know, the DNC lawyers working with Jim Baker at the FBI.
You know, if that didn't work, you know, they had contacts overseas in London, you know, working and passing intel over into our intel agencies and the FBI over there.
You know, if that didn't work, you know, Sussman was going to go on to the CIA and the FBI.
So what I try to tell people is, You know, you have to, they were not kidding around.
Like, this was a very serious strategic operation to create a fake story and make sure it flooded the zone so that the FBI was hearing it from multiple sources and thought, oh my gosh, we're hearing from all these people.
It's got to be true, right?
No, you're absolutely right.
And they spent tens of millions of dollars.
And look, Dan, you know this, as the chief investigator for Devin Nunes, Devin and I didn't even know about this White House thing.
We had not even in a classified sense.
It's not something we knew and couldn't tell anyone.
It didn't even come across us.
That's how well they kept it hidden.
They being also probably the FBI and the IC.
And so the fact that you've revealed the layered steps that they took, the Hillary Clinton campaign, the DNC, Sussman, Fusion GPS, and the like, to take down a president and a presidential candidate, is insane and the fact that they spent tens of millions of
dollars on it proves your point dad it is coordinated it was coordinated
by the hillary clinton campaign by the head to advisor jake sullivan and by the
head lawyers sussman and alias one of which is now sitting under an
indictment and the other one's probably going to get invited soon
so when they say it wasn't coordinated or was made up or it was
you know one guy going rogue That is a total lie, a total cover-up.
And you know what the media is going to do next, Dan?
They're going to start the personal attacks again.
They're going to start them on you, on me.
Yeah, we're used to that.
So you and I are so used to it.
I mean, really, my skin has gotten really thick.
I'm serious, Kesha.
There's really nothing at this point they can say.
Really, I've heard it all.
You've heard it all.
Conspiracy theory, whatever.
We get it.
We've been there.
Thank you.
Bought the t-shirt.
Thanks a lot.
Last question.
We're talking to Kash Patel.
Your thoughts on this.
You just said something that kind of, you know, kind of sparked my interest a little bit.
I did not know about this DNS data and the technical company hired for the servers in the White House either.
And I wrote three books on this thing and had some really, really good sources in the beginning.
If you and I haven't heard of it, that says to me They got to have a source.
That Durham has to have someone who flipped, who gave this all up.
Because this isn't the kind of thing that just randomly gets out there.
I mean, it's the kind of thing where someone had to have given it up, maybe a low level guy and said, Hey, I was told to do this by X. Your thoughts on that?
Yeah, you're totally right.
Either he has a source or he's got someone who's flipped, which is just as good.
But that leads me to believe what you and I have been saying the whole time that John Durham is On it.
He is doing this thing methodically and people are like, why is he moving so slowly?
Because it takes time to find these sources or, or defendants and flip them.
So you can get the actual culprits involved above them in the DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.
So I think John Durham is unraveling the most complex criminal conspiracy in us history to infiltrate a sitting president's white house and spy on him.
That just can't happen overnight.
It can't even happen over a few months.
It takes years.
And you're right.
He's got a source or a defendant that's flipped.
And I think that's just the beginning and you're going to see four or five, six more indictments this summer.
One last quick thing, Cash, because I think it's just hilarious.
I started the show about it.
You know, you, you have expertise in legal and national security matters.
The former investigator myself read a ton of legal documents.
It's just hilarious if you followed Sussman's lawyers throughout the case.
Pushing Dorham to say, this is BS, show us what you got.
And then Dorham shows him what they have and they're like, don't show us that!
Don't show us that!
We were just kidding.
It's like a, like a flasher on the subway.
You're showing too much.
Put that stuff away.
So just, right.
You, you see, you know what I mean, right?
Sussman's lawyers the whole time been like, this is crap.
Dorham better produce or shut his mouth.
And then Dorham produces like, no, no, stop producing immediately.
So his final thoughts on that.
No, they totally made the mistake defense attorney think they bid for too much, and Durham said, okay, I haven't told the world yet that I put 24 witnesses in the grand jury, but I'm now going to tell you I put assistant directors of the FBI, CIA officers, law enforcement officials, tech company officials, and I have all their grand jury testimony, and here you go, America.
You can't see that testimony just yet, but I'm handing it over to the defense.
He went too far.
Durham's got it locked in.
It's hard to bluff with a pair of twos, you know?
I mean, the guy doesn't have it.
He's only pocket rifles.
Right, right.
I mean, this is hilarious how stupid of a move that was.
Kash Patel, thanks so much for your time and to play that cut of you after the break.
It's really a good one.
Thanks for coming on.
We appreciate it.
Thanks, Dan.
Appreciate it, brother.
Talk soon.
You got it.
Folks, nobody knows more than Kash Patel, but nobody.
Chief investigator in this case and just a really good and decent guy who, again, was attacked by the left.
All these buffoons.
Real eye opener with Kash Patel there, as I said.
This is an incredible insight into this case.
Up next, we'll talk with Governor Kristi Noem.
And here's Kristi Noem.
We talked to her about the current state of South Dakota and Republican politics nationwide.
Don't miss this.
All right, really excited.
Welcome to the show for the first time.
One of the most popular governors in America right now.
Republican governor of South Dakota, Kristi Noem.
Governor, thanks for taking the time.
We appreciate you joining us.
Absolutely.
Great to visit with you, Dan.
So, Governor, one quick thing I'd like to get out of the way.
I'm always looking for other places to buy a house or, you know, a second house.
You know, I'm a capitalist and all, and yeah, yeah, you know where I'm going with this.
And I know a lot of people are rushing to your state, and I think I've narrowed it down, and I just want your opinion.
What are you, T, T South Dakota.
Oh my goodness.
I'm hearing great things.
Yeah, yeah.
We have a brand in South Dakota with a racetrack in it.
Yeah, you like that?
There you go.
Well, let me, hold on.
Let me put that down on my list.
I've got a list here.
Let's go.
Yeah, let's go.
Yeah, let's go, Brent.
That's absolutely right.
But I'm hearing great things about South Dakota, Governor.
There are tons of people moving into your state.
I mean, we know why.
You know, low taxes, light regulatory load, freedom and that kind of thing.
But is it really kind of altering the makeup of your state a little bit?
Is there a side of you that's kind of a little...
You know, maybe scared about the ramifications of some people moving in who may try to bring the state in more of a kind of leftist totalitarian direction?
You know, I think people were worried about that right away just because we saw such an influx of people that literally in the middle of COVID just picked up their families and came to our state.
But we've been tracking it a bit.
We've been tracking their voter registrations, and people don't really move to South Dakota for our beaches.
You know, they'll come because of the weather.
They don't!
No, they don't.
So they're coming because they want to be like us.
And that's kind of remarkable.
I think there are conservatives that are just tired of living in states where their kids can't go to school.
They're tired of living somewhere where the government Dictates to their life and they're literally just picking up everything and showing up and, you know, renting a house till they can find something to buy.
And it's been remarkable.
Even our smallest towns of a couple hundred people are gaining new families in the schools and it's revitalizing main streets all across the state.
That's great news.
I mean, we're seeing the same thing in Florida, where a lot of people were worried about that, too.
And yeah, most of them coming down are actually people who believe in liberty and freedom.
And you're seeing the voter rolls in Florida tilt to Republicans for the first time.
So you're doing a lot of things in South Dakota.
A lot to talk about here.
First, school choice.
Obviously, an enormous issue of importance that I think you'd agree has grown in importance since the COVID shutdowns.
Didn't happen in your state, but happened nationwide.
What are you guys doing with School Choice over there to give people, you know, the schools they pay for?
It's their money.
Oh, absolutely.
Yeah, we've always had public schools.
We don't have a large charter school presence, but we are increasing The opportunity for private schools and then kids can open enroll into which public school they would like to go to their families have the option to if they want to choose a different public school they can register their kids outside of their school district and we're seeing that quite a bit although I'd say in South Dakota we haven't had the challenges in our school districts with our school boards that a lot of other states have seen.
We've got pretty strong guidance in our K-12 system and you know our school boards know that they Represent the parents and we've got, I'm also bringing a bill that's going to be the strongest in the country bill that will ban critical race theory in our classrooms and make sure that our kids in the K-12 system and college level get an honest and true history.
And so we've been pretty proactive just in making sure that education stays education and our kids appreciate living in America.
Well, I appreciate what you're doing on both of those fronts.
School choice is an extremely sensitive topic to me.
I'm a de facto product of it.
My parents did not have a lot of money.
A local Catholic school let us attend.
We paid most of the time, but sometimes we didn't.
And they gave my parents a lot of leeway.
And candidly, Governor, it's the only reason I'm talking to you in coherent English sentences right now because of a really fantastic school.
So thank you for doing that.
But on the CRT front, I want to get to girl sports and other things that are going on over there as well.
Listen, we saw it for what it was, and the great writer on our side and the conservative side, Michael Anton, who I adore, he has this thing, this phenomenon on the left, where they always say, that's not happening, but it's great that it is.
And they tried this with CRT, where first it was a great thing, and then we saw what it was, and then they said, well, it's only in law schools.
And then they said, it's a Republican fairy tale, you made it up.
But yet, weird, if we made it up, why would you be concerned about us banning it, right?
I mean, isn't that kind of strange?
That's exactly it.
That's exactly the discussion we've had, and we do have instances in every state.
You can see instances where there's curriculum and content that's in our classrooms that is critical race theory.
It's just permeated the education, you know, textbook companies enough that it concerns people, and I'm glad parents are showing up.
Most people get when they see parents showing up at school board meetings.
I think it's phenomenal.
Three years ago, one of the first bills I brought as governor was putting more history into our classrooms
and Republicans killed that bill.
So I've been talking about it for years here.
I'm glad to see that we're overwhelmingly addressing these issues across the country now.
We're talking to Governor Kristi Noem from South Dakota.
Governor, you know, it's sad we have to do this and clear up media nonsense and propaganda, but can you just put this to bed for the country here?
None of these, well, you can speak for your state, but having done research on other states' bills too, none of these bills prohibit in any way the teaching of honest American history, good, bad, and ugly.
That is, none of the bills I have seen do any of that.
These are bills designed to protect kids To be taught to judge other kids based on skin color, which is the definition of racism.
None of these bills ban an honest teaching of American history.
Can you just put that nonsense to bed?
Absolutely.
That's absolutely true.
What our bill does here in the K-12 system and in college is says that you can't teach anything that says someone's better than someone else based on their sex, their color, or their race.
And it says that you can't teach our kids to go out there and think that they are responsible for past mistakes
that their ancestors made as well.
Yes, they have to know the history.
Yes, they have to recognize the flaws and then do better.
But you can't have an agenda in the classroom because that is indoctrination.
It's not an education.
Yeah, it's really stunning that we're even having this conversation.
It is.
Right?
I mean, this is 2022 and we're having a conversation about don't judge each other by skin color.
Yeah, it's puzzling.
We're talking to Governor Kristi Noem.
Sorry, go ahead.
We've got Native American tribes in South Dakota too, so this has been something that You know, they're concerned, well, are you going to teach our history, too?
Absolutely, and we're going to teach the terrible atrocities that happened in the past and how our tribes were treated.
We're also going to do better, and we're going to make sure the kids know that and that we do better in the future.
As we should.
A hundred percent.
A hundred percent.
Governor, we talked last time on my podcast about girls' sports.
Obviously, you've been involved in this fight, too.
This is, again, another conversation I'm really stunned we're having.
You know, biological males competing in women's sports.
It's a conversation, you know, 10, 20 years ago you would have been stunned was even happening.
The unfairness of it is transparent by the basic biology and the asymmetry there.
What's going on with that in South Dakota?
Well, I've had an executive order in place in South Dakota for over a year to make sure that only girls could play in girls sports.
It's a fairness issue and it's just a level playing field for our girls to compete and be successful.
And so what we did this session is I brought The strongest bill in the country, um, to my legislature and ask them to pass it, which they did overwhelmingly.
And it's now.
Law in South Dakota.
It was the first bill I signed as legislative session that ensures that our girls have a chance to compete and succeed.
And this bill is, is very unique in the fact that it is going to withstand any kind of a court challenge.
Um, you know, we had a flawed bill last year that would have immediately been enjoined in court and I wouldn't have been able to enforce anything.
And so that was why we went the executive order route until we could get this bill passed.
But now I know I can enforce this in my public schools.
I can enforce this in my colleges and in the state of South Dakota, that we will continue to make sure that only girls play in girls sports.
And it's based on their biological sex that's on their birth certificate.
And then if they, if a girl doesn't get the opportunity to compete, they can use litigation to get the opportunity to play.
So it's not a trial lawyer's dream and it's not a, It just gives them the opportunity to challenge in court that that male is on that team and prevented them from being able to be a part of the team and give them a chance to play again.
Yeah, again, a really shocking conversation that we have to have.
It just speaks to how far the left has gone.
Let me get your thoughts on a couple other things, Governor.
These freedom rallies, these freedom envoys, these brave truckers.
I mean, I don't think anyone respects, dirt under the fingernails, American workers who put food on the table more than you do.
I mean, South Dakota, It's not a port city, Governor.
Yeah, exactly.
It's not a port city, South Dakota.
Without truckers, you'd starve to death in South Dakota like most of us would.
So your thoughts on, don't you find it incredible that these truckers seemingly have done more than a lot of these, you know, political talkers.
After all this time, they've done more to change the national and international global dynamic than Trudeau or any of these other so-called leaders around the globe.
I really applaud what they're up to.
Well, and they're, you know, it's just common sense and that's what I love about it.
My dad taught me to drive a semi when I was like 12 years old and these are our people.
And that's how I knew president Trump was going to win in 2016 is when I would drive across the state and the country, every trucker had a make America great again hat on.
And that's how you knew that the country was ready for a leader that respected them.
And, and that's what I think is happening again is, you know, nobody really wakes up and gets more actively involved when times are good.
Um, so people get discouraged by what they see going on in our country, but we've got people engaged that typically didn't care about politics.
Um, normal, everyday people that said enough is enough.
And that's a good thing.
I'm so proud of these truckers and proud of people that are just saying, this is not the kind of country I want to live in.
And I'm going to fight to get back the Liberty that we had two, three years ago.
Yeah, I'm with you, Governor.
I'm really, I'm in awe of everything they're risking to fight for freedom and body sovereignty.
A couple more quick questions.
We've been generous with your time.
We're talking to Governor Kristi Noem.
Build back better, which they call build back worse for obvious reasons.
You know, you're even seeing moderate Democrats like Joe Manchin saying, listen, we're in a dangerous, you know, inflation downward spiral cascade here that's not getting any better because more money is chasing fewer goods and now you want to print more money to pay for these suspicious Green New Deal type programs and build back better?
This state isn't going to build back your state any better, Governor, this bill, if it were to pass, would it?
No.
In fact, we've got the strongest economy in the country in South Dakota right now.
We are doing better than any other state as far as growth and people are being... Wait, Governor, I don't mean to interrupt you, but your economy's motoring and people are moving in and your tax rates aren't high and government spending's low.
That's not possible, Governor.
They told us that's impossible.
So correct the record, please.
You're exactly right.
All I've got is a four and a half cent sales tax in South Dakota.
That's it.
And everybody wants to live under that kind of a business environment.
And it is the fastest growing economy in the country, the strongest one as well.
So it's a testimony that conservative principles work.
But the one problem, Dan, is that we are a heavily energy dependent state.
It's cold in the winter and it's hot in the summer.
It's a long ways to drive anywhere.
So when you see this kind of inflation and spending at the federal level and it catches up to us, it's going to hurt my people more than Virtually any other state.
So that's the challenge with this inflation.
We see interest rates are going to go up.
Supply chain issues are a struggle.
And even as much as I protect my state and keep the environment here good, the damage that Biden is doing is going to be long term and it's going to affect everybody.
Last question, Governor.
I got about 30 seconds.
I always put out to my audience, what do you want to hear from Governor Noem?
And this was the question I got most of all.
Any national ambitions going forward?
Not necessarily the next cycle, but I told him I'd ask, so I'm asking.
I'm just throwing it out there.
No, I'm running for re-election.
Beyond that, I think I'm going to run my mom for president.
I think she'd be great.
She loves President Trump and she wants to support him.
Christy Noem's mom!
We love it!
There we go!
Christy, 2024!
Mrs. Noem!
Yep.
I love it.
We'll sell the bumper stickers on our website.
We'll donate it to the truckers.
Governor Noem, thanks a lot for your time.
We really appreciate it.
Learned something new about you all the time.
Didn't know you knew how to drive a semi.
So that's great.
Thanks for your time, Governor.
We appreciate it.
Thanks, Dan.
Have a great day.
Bye.
You got it.
You too.
Governor Kristi Noem, folks.
There you go.
That was South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem from the radio show last week.
Finally, we talk with Dr. Marty Makary about the latest study from Johns Hopkins about the effectiveness of natural immunity and the ineffectiveness of lockdowns and why the government's ignoring it.
You know, I am a big believer, as I believe most sane and rational people, reasonable people are, in the scientific process.
And science is a process.
It rarely comes to definitive answers.
But it is a process, a process of discovery.
And one of the guys I look to when I'm looking to discover new data, new facts that emerge, new science that emerges, is a great doctor, very skilled guy, a good man, Dr. Marty Makary.
Doc, thanks for joining us.
We appreciate the time.
Great to be with you, Dan.
You got it.
Honored to have you here.
So, Doctor, you have been out.
I've seen you on Fox a lot recently.
You were discussing some of the recent research.
And as I said, science is a process.
It's an ongoing process of new data, analyzing it, trying to draw conclusions, defend prior conclusions, defend data.
And we're starting to learn some evidence about natural immunity and lockdowns.
And this is one of those things I've heard you speaking about for a long time.
I just wish people would have listened to you.
Natural immunity, Doc, is not a new thing.
It's a biological process that's been going on, you know, throughout our history.
But there's some new data.
If you could describe what that means for all of us out there.
And if you want to just jump on the lockdown study, too, that'd be great, too.
Great, Dan.
Well, we finally answered the question that public health officials have sort of dangled as an unknown for the last two years.
And that is, does natural immunity stand up to the test of time?
And so my research colleagues at Johns Hopkins and I did a large study where we invited 800 people who were not vaccinated.
And those who had a positive COVID test in the past, They had circulating antibodies, 99.3% of them.
And those antibodies were present up to 20 months, almost two years after, because that's as long as we had people around who had the infection.
So natural immunity is present.
It's there, it's durable, it works.
And the NIH should have been doing this study, not us.
They got $42 billion.
My colleague, Steve Hanke, who's an outstanding senior researcher at Johns Hopkins, head of the Applied Economics Institute, also looked at the effectiveness of lockdowns and found, as you know, there was no significant benefit on mortality.
It was two-tenths of one percent in terms of reduction versus a massive increase in non-COVID excess mortality, almost a quarter million people who died just from all the restrictions and everything we did.
Some people think He shouldn't have done that study.
I think we should not have evaluated whether or not lockdowns work.
I would argue this is the biggest intervention in human history in public health.
We pulled for the biggest lever we have in public health and we used it.
We use the rule of law to keep people in their homes and close businesses, shut kids out of school.
We did it for almost two years.
And I think this is our number one research priority.
The fact that no one covered it except for Fox and the New York Post, I think, speaks to how we now have curated science in addition to curated news.
That's really sad, doctor.
We're talking to Dr. Marty Makary.
Really sad.
I mean, I went up for my cancer surgery in New York when I went to Sloan-Kettering to have a tumor removed, and it was during the peak of the lockdowns, and I was in the Trump Hotel in Upper Manhattan, and I'll never forget looking out the window and sitting there for 15 minutes, and I think I saw two cars go by and a guy on a bicycle, and I thought exactly what you just said.
My gosh, what did we do?
And to suggest that, you know, the ramifications of that massive intervention in our economy and our lives is not worth studying.
I mean, you might as well just send this back to the dark ages at that point.
But on the natural immunity study, which I find amazing, I want to be clear, the 22 months of circulating antibodies you discovered doesn't mean it's limited to 22 months.
What you're saying is we only know about 22 months because that's all the virus has been circulating around.
It could be three years, could be five years, could be two years.
That's what you're saying, right?
That's right.
And we've known this all along.
Our study out of Hopkins, which was published in the top medical journal, it was published in JAMA, it's the number one medical journal out there, even though LinkedIn took down my post when I posted my JAMA study on LinkedIn.
We contacted the CEO and then they magically reappeared in 15 minutes.
This is the fulmination.
This is affirming all the other studies of which there have been a hundred throughout the pandemic showing that, hey, natural immunity works For at least a month, a month into the pandemic, then two, then four, then six, Cleveland Clinic, Washington University, all these big studies kept rolling in and the public health officials kept dangling.
Well, we don't know how long it's going to last.
Yes, we do.
Because your hypothesis was wrong.
The hypothesis at the beginning should have always been that it works until proven otherwise, because it works for the other coronaviruses, SARS and MERS.
Those are the only two other coronaviruses that cause severe illness in humans.
They work long-term, that's been studied, that's a settled science, and we don't see people getting reinfected at the bedside going on a ventilator or dying.
Healthy people do not get reinfected and go on a ventilator and die.
That has always been our observation, but they are not seeing patients, they're living in an ivory tower, we have too centralized of a sort of decision-making oligarchy, and they're not listening to bedside doctors.
So doctor, we're talking to Dr. Marty Makary.
On the reinfection front, because I was reinfected despite being vaccinated myself, was reinfected twice.
Now, granted, doc, the second round was so mild, you know, candidly, I didn't, I thought I had laryngitis.
I didn't think I had, I didn't even think to test.
My wife was the one who said, you know, you better just test for, you know, for other people's purposes and just take a test.
And I did, and I tested positive.
I'm assuming it was Omicron.
I don't know.
I didn't have it broken down genetically, obviously.
But is what you're saying here that if you've had an infection, that it's not impossible, obviously, for you to get reinfected, but the likelihood of you getting seriously ill, which is obviously one of the reasons they're telling you to take the vaccine, you won't get seriously ill, that the likelihood of you getting seriously ill after a prior infection Is very small and lasts for a prolonged period of time, at least to your research, up to 22 months.
Am I reading that right?
That's exactly right.
And that's because when God designed the immune system, he did it beautifully.
The immune system works.
And then somebody who's healthy, barring someone with an immune condition, like immunosuppression, that immune system works beautifully.
So that's why we don't see people get reinfected with severe illness.
The virus can, if you're immune, the virus can still land in your nose.
If you're vaccinated or you have natural immunity, it's still going to land in your nose.
It's not a, immunity is not a buzz zapper.
It's not, you know, a force field around you.
And that's where the messaging was way off.
We created this impression that you're somehow resilient.
It's still going to land in your nose.
You can get a test positive.
We've got to stop the mass asymptomatic testing and the death, daily death numbers.
have a serious math problem and it's hurting public policy because the Kaiser Southern California study showed one in 52,000 people with Omicron died and yet we're seeing everyone get tested and almost every death and somebody with a positive test is getting chalked up to COVID deaths and it's just not true.
It's a major inflated number right now and it's hurting public policy.
Well, Doc, this is why we always turn to you.
A couple more questions if you got the time.
Dr. Marty Makary was speaking with right here.
Doc, can you kind of parse through what's going on with this Israel data?
It's one of the most vaccinated, boosted countries, if not the most on earth.
And yet they're setting records for infections every day.
Does that, how are we supposed to view that?
What does it mean?
Does it just mean the infections may be mild and like you said, it doesn't prevent You from testing positive or I just a lot that data goes around from Israel all the time and you got a thousand different people commenting on it.
What's your professional analysis?
What's going on over there?
Well, I think there is this misnomer that vaccines were going to stop the spread.
That was never the case.
You get kind of a sugar high from the antibodies for a couple months where with the previous variants, you were less likely to test positive.
But now with Omicron, It's very sticky.
So it's in the air.
It's everywhere.
You can't avoid it.
A cloth mask is not going to do squat and it's going to, the sticky virus is going to land in the nose.
You'll test positive.
It doesn't mean you're sick.
It doesn't mean we have to do anything.
10% of the population at any time test positive in their nose for meningococcus.
It doesn't mean they're going to get meningitis.
These are what we call colonized viruses.
The Israeli data tells us, That in older people, the booster reduces the risk of severe illness and slightly does reduce the risk of death.
And so that's why I recommend a booster for older people who have not had the infection.
But if you have natural immunity, you've got a great combination of hybrid vaccinated and natural immunity.
That's probably the best form.
Boosters do nothing for young people, by the way, Dan, that was always the case.
That's why two FDA officials left the agency because of pressure from the White House to push boosters in young people.
The New England Journal study out of Israel that you're describing showed that the risk of a non-boosted person under 30 dying of COVID After a primary vaccine series was zero.
You can't lower the number zero with the booster.
Wow.
Well, it took a long time to discover the concept of zero.
Sadly, we've had to rediscover it again.
Doc, last question.
I know you're busy.
We're talking to Dr. Marty Makary.
The mask data, Doc.
Listen, I don't get it here.
You know, the Hippocratic Oath, do no harm, seems to have gone out the window.
The data on masks, there is no randomly controlled trial out there showing any significant You've got a few here in that Arizona study, which is already been discredited.
You have the Bangladesh study.
I think it was a difference of 30 people and self-reported nonsense.
But there's really no hard data.
The Hippocratic Oath says do no harm.
But now we're starting to see data that there may be some developmental cues being missed with these kids walking around in face masks all day.
I mean, your thoughts on masks.
Should this just disappear with kids altogether now and should this be a personal choice?
Yeah, look, I think, my personal opinion, the public wants honesty.
They want the data straight.
They don't want it sugar-coated and hide the data and then public officials tell you just do this and don't ask questions.
And the data are very clear on cloth masks.
Now you're seeing a bunch of people, doctors on TV and politicians, come out and say, Well, the science has changed on masks.
Look, the, the poor size of a cloth mask was always one to five angstroms.
Uh, the size of the aerosolized virus and the poor size was always 20 to 50 times bigger.
It's porous.
Okay.
That was always the case.
The science has not changed.
What's changed is people are finally pushing back and saying there are downsides to the masks, especially in kids and they're documented and we're playing with fire.
We have no idea what we're doing.
in uncharted territory covering people's faces for nearly two years.
Yeah, I agree.
Dr. Marty Makary, thanks so much for your sound, reasonable analysis.
We appreciate your time.
We know you're busy.
Thanks, Doc.
Great to be with you, Dan.
Thank you.
You got it.
That was Dr. Marty Makary, folks.
You know, real truth teller there.
Speaking about the value of natural immunity from the beginning.
Didn't just appear out of nowhere, folks.
As he said, it's always kind of been a thing.
That whole biology class.
I remember reading Charlie Brown's encyclopedia sitting in our apartment above the bar at 64th Place in Merlin.
Hey, there's this thing called the immune system.
This is a long time ago.
I was seven.
That was 40 years ago.
Immune system, Jim.
You heard of it?
This new thing?
A little bit, Jim.
Mike, what about you?
Immune system?
You ever heard of that thing?
Mike, give me a minute.
I need to think about this.
Hold on.
Let me get online.
Let me put in a search engine.
He's the best, folks.
Dr. Macari.
That was our interview with Dr. Marty Macari from the radio.
You can hear me every weekday across the country on a local radio station near you.
Just go to bongino.com and click on Station Finder.
