The Dan Bongino Show - An FBI Agent Blows The Cover Off The Mar a Lago Raid (Ep 1829)

Episode Date: August 12, 2022

In this episode, I conduct a shocking interview with a former FBI agent who blows the cover off of the outrageous Mar a Lago raid.  News Picks: FBI agents in Trump Mar-a-Lago raid claim they sought nuclear weapons documents. In another new low, the DOJ is now demanding the personal cell phones of the Secret Service.  Merrick Garland personally approved the warrant.  The real reasons they can’t let Trump back in office. 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. Folks, do I have a show for you today? I promise this interview won't disappoint. The interview I have, I don't usually interview people on the podcast, as you well know. Only in unprecedented moments do I do that, and they were doing it today with a former FBI agent. The interview is so powerful. I'm going to have this individual back on my Fox show on Saturday night too. There are two just mind-blowing nuggets in this coming up. Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.

I promise this interview will not disappoint. Gives us the inside scoop on some things he noticed as now a criminal defense attorney and formerly an FBI agent about the Trump raid that I promise you have not heard before. The interview will not disappoint. 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 Henry USA.com to order their free catalog and decals. That's Henry USA.com that order a free catalog and decals.

And to learn more about this great American company. All right, Joe, it's Friday. So it's Friday. Yeah. Thanks Friday. Yeah. Thanks, Joe. Okay.

So listen, I don't typically do interviews on the podcast. I do them on my radio show and TV show. You get it. But I need some specific expertise about the inner workings of the FBI, given the absolute abomination that happened at Mar-a-Lago with this raid. An abomination. absolute abomination that happened at Mar-a-Lago with this raid. An abomination. What the FBI and DOJ did down there, absolutely disgraceful, and has reset the country to a new dark place, which is really frightening. We don't need to be in that place. This is a constitutional

republic, ladies and gentlemen, if we can keep it. I have Stuart Kaplan on. Stuart Kaplan spent many years with the FBI. We know some of the same people. I had met him through a friend. I'm going to interview. This interview is about 25 minutes long. He makes a point in this interview about getting in and out quickly if you're the FBI. And why weren't they in and out quickly at the Trump location, the Mar-a-Lago? And why didn't they let Trump's lawyer in? He makes a point about that. And another point about the lock on the room and the secret services role in this that I have to tell you, I didn't even think of. Here's Stuart Kaplan. Check this out. All right. I want to welcome to the show for the first time a man who served the country in the FBI and is here to provide some expert commentary on the growing scandal about what happened in Mar-a-Lago. Former FBI agent Stuart Kaplan. Stuart, welcome to the show. Good to be with you. Thank you. You got it. So, Stuart, you worked at the FBI. You were an agent there. You're obviously familiar

with the processes. This raid at Mar-a-Lago for a former president, we've never seen anything like this in American history. In your experience, this isn't the kind of thing that just would have originated in the local Palm Beach field office, is it? No, absolutely not. I mean, as a matter of fact, Dan, just, you know, I worked special ops for a number of years when I first started my career in 26 Federal Plaza in New York City. We worked a lot of politicians. And I can tell you those high profile cases go from the director down maybe to the special agent in charge level. People are walled off because of the sensitive nature of those types of investigations.

So this certainly would not have been disseminated to, you know, outside the field offices. Stuart, I really, I can't get past what a genuinely awful idea this raid was. Listen, I remember my time as an agent. When you were new, they'd give you treasury check cases. Someone got their tax refund stolen or whatever. And, uh, there was one time this lady called a Congressman cause she didn't think we were working on our case fast enough. Congressman called our office up in New York.

And it was like, forget it was like the Messiah had called the whole office was like, how to go out and investigate this. It was like a $2,000 tax check. Right? So that's kind of strange. Like a Congressman about a constituent calls and sets a fire to a federal agency. And yet this is a case about a former president

and nobody sat around in headquarters and thought to themselves, gosh, there's going to be some really serious fallout here. We better bring the goods. Well, I think you hit the nail right on the head. Look, at FBI headquarters, and I will identify for what it is, it's the seventh floor mentality. And why do I identify as the seventh floor mentality?

That's where the director sits with all of his underlings, the deputy directors and thereafter. And, you know, look, you have to put this case in context. It's not just August of 2022. This goes back to May of 2017, when thenctor James Comey was there and was fired. They should have come into that building with a bulldozer and have cleared out that entire seventh floor. You have a culture that preexisted Christopher Wray. And by the way, he was there during the Comey years.

And so this is just born out of that kind of just where we can do it as we please. And we can have our arms twisted. We're not going to be neutral. We're not going to be detached. We're not going to be unbiased. If someone wants to utilize us and politicize an issue, we may be the people that you want to use. And this is exactly what you're seeing play out. This is a new culture, not a culture that existed when I was at the FBI. Yeah. You know, I've said that often. I remember working a financial fraud task force out in Long Island, New York with Lyra. They have the Long Island resident agency out there. You probably know a couple of the guys I work with. I mean, they were great guys. They were the former, you know, street cop type of

guys. They work bank robberies. You know, they went home to their kids at night. They were the former, you know, street cop type of guys. They work bank robberies. You know, they went home to their kids at night. They were good guys. And I, you know, I have no hesitation in saying that even now. They were not these types of guys. And I think the problem you have, a former FBI agent who shall remain nameless, but was an executive, called me once. And he told me the people running the FBI during Spygate and people like tonight, he called them briefers. They've never worked a bank robbery. They've never worked any kind of hard street crime. They're briefers. They give good briefings. They wear nice ties. They do a couple of headquarters rotations.

And next thing you know, they're the deputy director of the FBI. He said, that's the problem with the Bureau. There's not enough cops and there's too many lawyers. Dan, let me, Dan, let me even put it in better context. And you did a great job. When you're miserable in a field office, such as when a guy from Kalamazoo, somewhere out in Podunk, is getting assigned to New York City field office coming out of the academy, he can be there for less than two years, raise his hand, and go to headquarters on a transfer, and then get a supervisory card punch, stay at headquarters and become a supervisor with less than five years experience, go back out into the field office and now attempt to supervise guys that would have 15 and 20 and 25 years of experience.

You know how that plays out? That doesn't work very well. And so that is the bureau mentality in modern day. And it just is not working. And so you hit the nail right on the head. You've got these guys back at headquarters who have zero common sense, zero field experience, zero investigative experience. And now you have a different culture out there.

That's what it is. You know, Stuart, not to compare the two because it's ridiculous. The Secret Service has its own problems. But I worked there. One thing I can say they did right was the promotion thing. You, in order to get to the president's detail, you had to spend eight to 10 years in the field,

eight to 10 years. Then you'd have to do three to five on the detail, the presidency before you were even eligible for promotion. So by the time a guy got back to the field, he'd worked cases. He'd been on protective details. I mean, this creates a real culture rod problem. And that's why you get guys like McCabe, who's more concerned about

his suits and his new car and his wife running for office than he is about actually following this thing called the constitution. And I saw that when I left and it only got worse. And so the culture of, if you're disgruntled, you're unhappy, you just don't like where you are. You go to headquarters, you get your card punched and then you go back out and you infect the other guys that are coming out of the academy. And this is just a repeat of, you know, wash and rinse and repeat. And that's what you're seeing, you know, the culture of the bureau. That's what it is. We're talking to Stuart Kaplan, spent many years with the FBI. Let's get into the specifics of this case. So some breaking news yesterday from Newsweek. Newsweek put out a report indicating

that they may have had a CHS, a confidential human source involved in this operation that indicated that there may have been some documents there at Mar-a-Lago. A couple of questions for you. I'll hit the first one first. These confidential human sources, Stuart, this is not the first time we've had a confidential human source embedded in the Trump campaign. We actually know the names of the people the FBI has paid and one of the FBI's employees and her pseudonym that were embedded during the Spygate thing. thing. I mean, in your experience, there's got to be some extra layer of kind of oversight when you're talking about people essentially spying inside a president or former president's campaign in post-presidency. How does this keep happening? These spies keep magically turning up. Well, look, you have the attorney general guidelines where those are the rules and regulations and procedures that are supposed to be followed, not only from the FBI's perspective, but all through the United States Attorney's Office.

the exploitation of trying to target someone who certainly had a hands-off, meaning the policy said that only, quote, unquote, under extraordinary circumstances in matters of national security, and it must have been well-documented, and not only well-documented, you know, not hearsay, not rumor, not conjecture, but actual corroboration with respect to securing that information to know that it was trustworthy, it was reliable, and also, and I'm sure you would remember a routing slip that would have to be checked off by 10 Indian chiefs to include in that political type of case, the director himself. Again, this is what's happening. This is a culture issue that needs to be broken within the FBI. Yeah, I mean, it just seems to me, you know, perplexing that these these these these CH. Yeah, they do. These these human sources just keep appearing.

I mean, if the if the liberal media would hear tomorrow that the FBI was developing and cultivating confidential human sources in the White House on the Joe Biden case are being uproar. But it seems like he's a protected class right now. Let me let me get on to a different question. Let's process wise. You know, the audience, many of them weren't federal agents. They have, you know, like I said, they have jobs. They work for a living. They're doing really hard stuff. But it helps to provide that behind the curtain when you're swearing out a warrant in front of a magistrate judge like happened in this case at Mar-a-Lago, you have to put down specifically what you believe is evidence of a crime and why you believe that evidence is right there. And you have to describe exactly the premises you're looking to search. You know, in this case, it seems really strange because the third, it appears according to new information on June 3rd, the FBI and DOJ were already at Mar-a-Lago and former President Trump was already cooperating, according to multiple reports.

So it appears this was just a dispute over what he should give back and whatnot. Does that sound to you like probable cause of a crime, willful destruction of records? No, absolutely not. In fact, it's to the contrary. I mean, the affidavit would have to be specific and the words are particularity. And not only does the information contained in the warrant have to address with specifics and particularity, the information has to be trustworthy. It has to be credible. You have to have done a litmus test for its reliability. Look, Dan, this is a fishing expedition. They came in under the auspice of utilizing this national security issue with respect that he's in possession of archived documents.

This has less to do with archived documents than more to do to say, listen, let's get through the front door or really the back door and let's see if we find anything else. And then if we find anything else, at least we have our cover because it'll pass the smell test. If anybody looks at the warrant, they'll say, well, he did have national security documents. And so that's our cover. But the reality is if they find something else that may be related to something else that they knew they didn't have the evidence to corroborate or to prove, then they'll make a case. And that's not the way the Bureau was set up to conduct criminal investigations.

That's a critical point to the audience. I'm going to re-ask this again because you made a really important point there. You have to understand with federal agents and search warrants, if you're there searching for evidence of this particular crime and say you open a drawer and you find a firearm and you find out later that firearm was used in a crime, you're not obligated to say, oh, I didn't see that. I was looking for a CD on a check fraud case. If you find evidence of another crime, you can use that evidence and then run with that as well. Can you just explain that again so they understand what a pretext could mean here? You don't go in with blinders on and say, we're authorized to seize X, but if I see Y, if X is a gun and I see Y, which is kilos of cocaine,

it doesn't mean I keep my blinders on and just go take the gun. I'm going to also now take the kilos of cocaine and open up a trafficking case against that individual. But Dan, let me even go one step further. If there is some truth, and I can tell you this unwavering and without hesitation, because I've been on both sides, not only in the bureau side, but in my criminal defense side, when I would execute a search warrant in my professional life as being an FBI agent, I always welcomed to have an attorney show up on set because it kind of gave us a layer of protection because then I didn't have to deal with the accusations that maybe we were

disruptive or we damaged some property or we did something that was improper. We always liked the fact that lawyers were there. And I can also tell you in my professional life as being a criminal defense attorney, that when I show up on set, when a search warrant is being executed, the first thing I do is I introduce myself to the case agent and I say, hey, Mr. Case Agent, what are you looking for? Because maybe I can make it easier for you. And let me just take you or get what you're looking for. And here you go and have a nice day because FBI agents really don't want to stay on set any longer than they have to stay on set. And so this is the real world. to the fact that they stonewalled these lawyers to keep them on the outside, that's concerning because if they knew they were only looking for documents, the lawyers would have said,

hey, go to this room. Here are 15 boxes of documents. Here they are. Take a hand truck and see you later. But it's such a good point. There you go. And so that's the ruse. See, that's the ruse.

Nobody has said that yet. Again, you know- See, because I have a real life experience as a lawyer. Listen, Dan, if you're my client, I'm going to say, hey, Dan, they're looking for a gun. Listen, they're going to tear your place apart. Is the gun here? If you say, Stuart, the gun is here. I'll say, listen, Dan, go get the freaking gun.

Let's get them the gun and get them the hell out because we don't want them tearing your place apart. Listen, but just like you and get them the hell out because we don't want them tearing your place apart for listen, for just like you and I discussed, maybe they'll find something else that they didn't even know about. Here's the gun. Have a good day. Right? So,

you know, looking for documents, here are the documents. Bye bye. I just got done on my show yesterday saying how, when you're in cable news and something hot, a story like this, which is wall to wall on TV, you hear the same talking points over and over again. You just do. When I hear something

valuable like that, that's why you're such a valuable guest. Folks, understand what he just said. They're there strictly for Presidential Records Act alleged violations and a couple of classified napkins Kim Jong-un wrote on. It's of no interest whatsoever to Trump or the FBI, if they're acting ethically, to dig through whatever, 50,000 square feet of Mar-a-Lago. Get the hell out of here. You got people outside complaining. The lawyer shows up. Here it is. Thanks, guys. Have a nice day. Well, you made a great point. The fact that they didn't let Trump's lawyers in there, kept them outside, and apparently were very arrogant and told them, hey, we have a premise for the whole location, says to me, this was just a pretext to get in

there and look for other stuff the entire time. And look anywhere and everywhere. And by the way, just so your viewers even understand that further, when you're looking at the warrant describes something that necessarily couldn't fit within, you know, a small closet or something, you can't necessarily justify looking for that object because, you know, a car can't be in a dresser drawer, right? I mean, so there's so many issues here that just smell. And Dan, listen, I'm just telling you, no agent I've ever worked with wants to stay on set longer than they have to be. They want to get in and they want to get out. Why? Because they either want to go to the gym, they want to go back to the office, or in this case, and I'll tell you the way it was. These agents were flown in from Washington, D.C. off in Mar-a-Lago. They did their business. They went back to the airport, got on a Bureau plane and flew right back to Washington. So listen, if I was Trump's lawyer, I would have said, listen, guys, what are you looking for? You're looking for the box of documents. Here,

here's the closet. Here's the 15 boxes of documents. Do me a favor. Leave me the inventory sheet, photograph it and take it out. Letting them just go through the entire property. Come on. That's ridiculous. It never happens. It shouldn't happen. And it's not consistent with the Bureau operates under normal circumstances. It's so bizarre. And there was another thing I'd like to get your professional opinion on. And it's an open question.

It's one of those questions I already have the answer to. And I'm asking to be a wise guy. I really don't understand this part either. So some recent reporting by John Solomon, who's always been good with me. He's always had reliable sources, is that subsequent to this June 3rd meeting a while ago when DOJ and FBI a couple months ago show up for these documents, they meet Trump, apparently meets him personally. According to all reports, it ended cordially.

After that, the FBI and DOJ get in contact with the Secret Service. They say, listen, there are these documents in this room. We don't like the locking mechanism there. Doesn't seem secure enough to us. Can the Secret Service go in and put on a new lock? It seems really strange now. That was a setup, Dan. That was a setup because that's your confidential human source.

Because that's what I said. I said, listen, the Secret Service guys are there 24-7. This was a complete setup. That was a complete ruse. They needed a reliable source, someone who has credibility and who's trustworthy. And listen, Dan, you know it. Who's more trustworthy than a sworn Secret Service agent who can testify or raise his right hand or swear, yes, the safe is this safe. And yes, it would not comport with what would be

necessary to maintain or safeguard national security type of documents. And so boom, there's your affidavit. There's your confidential human source. Now you go before a magistrate and you pass all the litmus tests, all the smell tests, and he signs the warrant. Brilliant point. So what you're suggesting, just to recap and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Secret Service, their motto is worthy of trust and confidence. No one's going to doubt their bona fides that they go to them and go, hey, guys, listen, this obviously isn't a satisfactory locking mechanism for these documents, right? Doesn't meet government standards. That'd be a SCIF. A SCIF, right. A sensitive compartmentalized information facility, folks. We're talking federal jargon here. But they say, listen, this isn't secure enough. If you Secret Service guys who do this for a living, you know what you're doing. Why don't you come in and input on an official lock, making this officially secure? And then we get you to testify later that the lock before it wasn't secure. Am I summing that up right? 100%. You did it. You did it perfectly. You did it perfectly.

But you see, it's such a setup because the argument is both ways because it's number one, that he wasn't rightfully within his right to keep them or be in possession of them because he's no longer the president of the United States. And then the fallback argument is if he has them, he's not retaining them or safeguarding them properly. I mean, which one do you want to pick? Right? Yeah.

Either he shouldn't have them or he has them, but he's not keeping them safely. I mean, which one do you want to pick, right? Either he shouldn't have them or he has them, but he's not keeping them safely. Yeah. Incredible insight. Stuart, a couple, just a couple more things. I appreciate your time. We're talking to Stuart Kaplan, spent many years with the FBI, is a lawyer now, seen both sides of this. You know, the FBI, I remember on our side, we had a very small congressional operation. You know, the Bureau and all these federal agencies have detailees up on the Hill for obvious reasons. They want to make sure they get their funding. They kiss their asses. You know how that whole thing works. The secret service was not good at this. We had like three guys up there. They were all nice guys, but no one knew how to play the system. It was just a mess, right?

I remember one of the guys who shall remain nameless, but I'm sitting up within the jock one night with him, the joint operations center around a midnight. We're chatting about his time up on Capitol Hill. And he's like, man, I got to tell you, these Bureau guys got it down. He goes, they got like a 15, 20 man unit full time up there. He goes, it's like K Street lobbyists. He goes, these guys really know what they're doing. I bring that up because the Bureau,

whether they say it or not, cares about public relations. They do. Their image matters to them as it should. You can't tell me with a straight face that they really thought that the fallout from this was going to be, I mean, this has been a tsunami of negative press. And I'm just wondering when during your time there, what do you think's going on behind the scenes here? Are they like running around with chickens, like with their heads cut off? I think that they're obstinate. I think that they

truly are believing that what they're doing is that the reward is worthy of the risk. Look, Dan, this was like taking a hand grenade, pulling the pin, throwing it into a crowded room, walking away, understanding and appreciating exactly what was going to happen, appreciating and knowing what the collateral damage was. And they're and I'm going to be honest with you, they're high fiving themselves right now on the seventh floor because this is exactly what they wanted to happen. But I'm not so sure they really properly calculated that this may even affect those people that are on the other side to maybe say, you know what, even if I don't

like this guy, Donald Trump, even if I didn't go along with, you know, the former president's agenda and who he is, this is not what I signed up for as being an American living here in the United States of America. And they may have made a fatal miscalculation of how the fallout really was going to play out. Hold that thought. We're going to take a quick break and I'll be back with a final question about that with Stuart Kaplan. We're back with Stuart Kaplan, former FBI agent. Stuart, last question for you. You made the point before the break that they may not have appropriately calculated the fallout from this. And I agree with you. What do you think the fallout could be here? Let's say the Republicans take back Congress in

the house. They're obviously furious. A litany of disasters, the Hunter Biden thing, the Spygate thing, the collusion hoax. Um, now this, the raid at Mar-a-Lago. I mean, do you see a, you've been there, you know, on the inside, the lobbying power of the FBI, do you see a, a, a, just a house cleaning and headquarters or just maybe they fire the director and status quo, nothing changes? Like I said, I think in May of 2017, there should have been a full house cleaning from the top down. And I think that the Bureau

has always been very careful with respect to the optics. Listen, I worked under Louis Free and Bob Mueller, and I will tell you, I have the highest regard and the highest respect, certainly for Louis Freeh. I think he's an absolute gentleman. I think he was very concerned about the men and women in the field office. I think he was very conscious and

aware of the reputation that we all wanted to have and how the public perceived us. This is not the case. And so to me, the only remedy is you're going to have to fire the public perceived us. This is not the case. And so to me, the only remedy is you're going to have to fire the director. You're going to have to fire all his underlings. You got to clean house and build it back up. Because Dan, at the end of the day, listen, back in May of 2017, the integrity was front and center. I mean, people were questioning whether or not we could trust the FBI. I'm going to be honest with you. Never in my lifetime would I say this, and I'm going to say it again. The legitimacy of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is front and center now. I'm not so sure that I would even object to maybe OIG, the Office of Inspector General,

coming in and taking control of the FBI, because I'm not so sure it can operate without oversight. That's how bad things are presently in August of 2022. Wow. That's saying a lot. I don't disagree with you. I've said repeatedly that we need a very powerful internal affairs, kind of a supercharged inspector general to get a hold of this, to get the reins in. I mean, they're just really supervising.

The IG's office is weak. Everybody knows it. Stuart Kaplan, really appreciate your time. Thanks for joining the show. It's my pleasure. Hope you enjoyed that interview with Stuart Kaplan. I told you. Did I not say it? That point about the Secret Service and the lock being a setup and how them being on the scene and not letting the lawyers in says that they weren't really there looking for what they say they were looking for. They just wanted to look around in kind of a general warrant way is incredible.

We're going to have more with him on my Fox show tomorrow night, Saturday at 9 p.m. Please don't miss it. So I hope you enjoyed that interview with Stuart Kaplan. As you can see, the studio looks a little different. We had to pre-record some component of the show because I had a very special meeting last night. I'll get to that in a second, but I just want you to remember the two takeaways from that interview. Stewart's an FBI, was an FBI agent, is now a criminal defense attorney. So he's seen this from both sides. That point he made, I can't emphasize this enough, about the lawyers being

kept out of there for a reason. Trump's lawyers who could have assisted in the search means they didn't want help because they didn't want to know where what they were looking for was, if you get what I mean. Oh, we don't know. Yeah, but we can tell you where it is. Yeah, but you're not allowed in. So then they can search everything. And then that point about the Secret Service was brilliant. What better way than to get them on the record saying that the lock was unsatisfactory and use them, a credible source, as part of your search warrant. I mean, it's just the setup here is just staggering. I hope you enjoyed that. Now, the reason everything looks a little different, I had a prerecord.

I had a meeting last night. You'll see in this picture up on the screen. Paul and I had dinner with President Trump last night for about two hours or so. I was always honored to have dinner with the former president. And a couple of things, obviously I keep my conversations private. You understand that, I'm sure. But let me just give you a couple of generalities from the meeting. Folks, he's ready to fight. And let me tell you something, you have grossly, grossly miscalculated on the left. If you think you're going to weaponize government

to try to keep this guy from running for office and you think he's just going to roll over and play dead you have grotesquely miscalculated i put out a picture of the meeting last night you just saw it on the screen if you're watching on rumble if you're listening on the podcast you can check it out on rumble or on locals or instagram on facebook i put up the picture thing. He is ready for a fight here. He knows exactly, exactly what he's dealing with. Make no mistake. Now, there've been some updates since I spoke to you last on this case.

Let's go over this nuclear thing first. You'll see this Washington Examiner story. FBI agents in Trump Mar-a-Lago raid sought nuclear weapons documents report first the leaks are ridiculous merrick garland has told us repeatedly right has he not this this disgraceful sniveling coward of a human being has told us repeatedly we're not going to speak through the media we're going to speak through charging documents yeah well that's not what happened that's not what happened. That's not what happened here. Again, we see these leaks meant to discredit Trump. Why do the leaks work?

Because you get a leaker from the FBI, right? When the media has this patina of authenticity. Oh, it's an FBI leak. Stewart just went over that. The FBI agent in the interview. And yet the great part about the leak is you can leak it to the Washington Post, to all their insiders who love big government now, the Washington Post, and Trump never gets to defend himself. And what would be, think about it, outside of finding like child pornography, what would be the worst thing you could leak to say out, to throw out there? Oh my gosh, national security. Trump's giving away our secrets to foreign enemies. Nuclear. You have no idea what that means. Here's what I mean by that.

And I base this on no conversation. I'm telling you just from my experience with these FBI guys in Spygate, the collusion hoax, the Hunter Biden Russia laptop disinformation hoax. Do not trust anything they tell you. Anything they tell you on first glance. Anything. I'm sorry to have they tell you, anything they tell you on first glance, anything. I'm sorry to have to tell you that, but you are an imbecile to trust the FBI and DOJ on the first pass that they found some kind of hidden cryptic nuclear codes that were like being given to the foreign enemies.

That is the worst thing they could say. They knew that. That was done deliberately. You understand they leaked the term nuclear so everybody would panic oh my gosh nuclear code trump was that nuclear weapons documents in there i don't know what it is i don't know what it is but i know it's grossly unfair to leak that and what if it's something you know he had uh the meeting with kim jong-un and some kind of notes they had that wrote back and forth that where it was mentioned, oh, we'll downgrade your nuclear load or whatever it is. The point is you

have no idea either. They leaked this for a reason, folks. You'll see in this court, sources tell the Washington Post such classified information was among the items agents looked for in the search, but declined to speak about any other materials that may have been sought. It remains unclear whether they found any nuclear documents, but experts cited in the report say this adds credence to fears by government officials they could be obtained by bad actors. Folks, Mar-a-Lago is guarded by the Secret Service. He's a former president. They just asked him on June 3rd, the DO and fbi to put a secret service lock in a facility

nobody was gonna get that stuff what kind of what kind of bs is this foreign actors what the chinese communist party was gonna send a bunch of their agents down to a locker room at mar-a-lago Are you falling for this again? They knew the N-word, the nuclear word there. If they dropped that in there, they knew that that would create all kinds of headaches and it doesn't even give the Trump team a chance to respond. That's even after they left their lawyers out of there.

It is such a scam. I can't believe people are falling for this. Again and again and again, always getting worked over. You cannot trust these guys when it deals with Trump. It pains me to say it. I got a couple other things I want to get to. I should have kind of teed up the rest of the show. Please, please go to my newsletter today.

It's free. It doesn't cost you anything. There's an article in there I'm going to get to in. It's free. It doesn't cost you anything. There's an article in there I'm going to get to in a minute after this. It's by Michael Anton, who you know we love on the show. It explains in clear language. It's a nice piece. It's about 2,000 words. It'll take you about 10 minutes to read. It is a elegantly written piece about why they cannot. They will burn this government to the ground because they cannot let Trump get back in office. It's called Why They Can't Let Him Back In. It's in the newsletter today.

Please read it. We're going to go through their plan coming up here step by step. Their plan A, B, C, D, E, and F. We're going to go through all of it. Or five par, whatever it is. We're going to go through all of it. Or five par, whatever it is. We're going to go through all of it. The plan to stop Trump and why they can't let him back in. He is a threat to everything.

He's a threat to everything. He's a threat to their open borders policies, which empower them. He's a threat to their grift. He's a threat to their lobbying industry. He's a threat to everything. They cannot let him back in. And they are afraid of you. They don't want the great unwashed, the rednecks, the deplorables, the hayseeds.

They don't want you, the real Americans who built this place, by the way. That's how they insult you every day. They don't want you back in charge. We've had Michael Anton on the radio show. We're trying to get him for the radio show later today. He's fantastic. He put together this piece talking about why they can't let Trump back in. And the premise, it's a multi-part plan. It's five or six parts. I'm not sure,

but you can read the piece yourself. I took screenshots from quite a few of them. But he talks about how Trump is a threat to everything. The Democrats have assumed that the swampy Republicans, follow me here, and along with the Democrats and the radical left, sometimes the same, sometimes not, right? That they would all work together for open borders policies in the future. They've done it. Even Reagan through Simpson Mazzoli basically gave amnesty to millions of people who came into the country illegally.

The Democrats have relied on open borders policies for decades. They've relied on that as their power base. The Democrats have relied on attacking the national security infrastructure. They've relied on attacking the police, all this stuff. These are all things Donald Trump fought against. The lobbying, the grift, he fought against all of it. He is an existential threat. The actual meaning of the word to the swamp.

So Anton covers this multi-part plan they have to take trump out he talks about uh plan a he says since the long goodbye has about as much chance as kamala harris completing a sentence without cackling plan a here's the first part plan a to get rid of trump because they can't let him back in is to use the January 6th show trials to make it impossible for Trump to run again or barring that to win again. But it isn't working, at least not well enough. They may have dented Trump a little, but not nearly enough to prevent him from getting the GOP nomination.

What have I told? I've told you this over and over again. How many times I say this? Guy, Joe, how many times I tell you this? The January 6th hearings has absolute nothing to do nothing at all to do with getting to the bottom of what happened on january 6th nothing zero we know what happened we wish it wouldn't have happened we know exactly what happened there are a lot of open questions about what happened, but they're not trying to

answer those open questions. Notice the FBI doesn't answer a bunch of questions about it. Everybody's quiet about it. Why there were open doors. There were other stuff that shouldn't have happened as well. But those questions have been answered. The real questions that are the open questions that the FBI won't answer and others, they don't want to deal with that. That are the open questions. That the FBI won't answer. And others. They don't want to deal with that. All they want to do.

Is hold these. Star chamber like show trial hearings. To make sure he doesn't run again. That's plan A. But Anton notes in the piece. They can't let him back in. Is the name of the piece again. That that's not working.

Maybe they made a small dent. Candidly. After. After last night. I don't believe they made any dent at all. Folks, their fundraising is through the roof. He seems energized. He really does.

You can toss it off to whatever, oh, Dan, you're a Trump supporter. Listen, you know I'm objective with you when it comes to these kind of things. He seems energized, more energized than I've ever seen him and very focused very focused i think he knows exactly what he's up against here's plan b say that doesn't work remember it's a multi-part plan the democrats cannot let him get back into office under any circumstances plan b they want the january 6th committee lay the groundwork for an indictment of Trump. You know, ladies and gentlemen, I can tell you 10 years ago, I would have said that indictment of a former president, that is the most insane, the country would burn to the ground. That's the craziest thing I've ever heard.

That is insane. And by the way, one quick note on that, to that guy, what is it? Peter Werner or whatever his name is at at The Atlantic, who despite my repeated, repeated on digital video and audio, begging and pleading not to get baited into violence on this, tried to imply that we want violence. I just want you to know you're disgusting and I'm ashamed that your parents spawned you. You degenerate loser. How dare you say that? All you had to do is go back and listen to my show where I'll say again, don't under any circumstances get baited into violence. Period. Disgusting filth these people are. And you wonder why people hate the media.

What's his name? Werner? Disgusting. Embarrassed for you and your entire family having spawned a loser like you. Violence. Me. Joe, how many times, how many times on this show, how many times do we have to speak out and say that is the red line? There's no turning back. Sorry, I didn't mean to get distracted distracted plan b is an indictment i would have never in a million years thought we'd be talking about an indictment of a former president on some trumped up no pun intended nonsense garbage charges they keep making up so a january 6 committee plan b the indictment plan c if none of this works anton notes it's to have trump declared ineligible under the insurrection clause of the 14th amendment oh my gosh good luck with that one folks you think um

you put stolen election claims bother you now how bad that second again if not only did you steal the election but you stole the ballot in advance by keeping trump off and how you think this is going to end well politically for you is just stunning. It's probably the same idiots who thought raiding Trump's Mar-a-Lago compound was going to politically benefit them. You basically gave a $100 million campaign donation to Donald Trump. Plan D, just beat him at the ballot box, Anton notes. But he notes that's also risky. The country's in

desperate shape. Biden's enormously unpopular. Harris is spectacularly unpopular. And getting rid of one of them will be hard. But getting rid of both? Question mark. That's probably the option the Democrats are least likely to engage in, is a free and fair election. You know they don't love that stuff. Anton notes plan E. Plan E is to cheat. Let me read this because this is great. He says, I know what you're thinking. He says, but I'm not talking about Dominion voting machines. He says, I mean, the kind of pre-cheating, pre-cheating that the regime boasts about is, quote, election fortification. What he's talking about is changes in the rules in advance in ways that favor Democrats and hurt Republicans, especially in swing states.

He says there's no question they'll do this. Why wouldn't they? It worked last time. And the more overt cheating they can avoid, the better. Always leave cheating on the option list, right? They will not let him get back in. But that requires us to acquiesce and let this all happen.

And we're not going to do that. Which leaves plan F, he notes, which they've already sketched and brought outlines. He says, I don't know exactly what form it'll take, but they've made clear, this is Anton talking about the Democrats, that quote, under no circumstances can Trump be allowed to take office again. He says, amongst the circumstances, among the circumstances covered by the word no would seem to be an electoral college majority or a tie followed by a House vote in Trump's favor. Anton notes, pay close attention to this because I've covered this repeatedly.

He goes, what happens then? He says, well, in the words of the Transition Integrity Project, you've heard about them on my show before. It's a Soros Network link collection of regime hacks who in 2020 gamed out their strategy for preventing a Trump second term. The Transition Integrity Project notes that the contest would become, quote, these are their words, report these exactly as this Soros group has, the Transition Integrity Project. Pay very close attention. They called for a street fight, not a legal battle. Anton notes, again, those are their words, not his. But allow Anton to translate, the 2020 summer riots, but orders of magnitude larger, not to be called off until their people are secure in the White House. That's plan F, and the scariest one of all.

Folks, they're not going to stop. They're not going to stop. Let me throw one more headline in there for you. That is, I can't believe this happened either. You know, obviously I worked in the Secret Service before. Why do I bring that up? Look at this headline from Fox News. DOJ requesting the personal cell phone numbers of Secret Service employees in the January 6th probe. Folks, I can't get over it. They are going to burn this freaking place to the ground, man. They are going to burn it to the ground. Think about this. Think of the ramifications of this.

I've got former Secret Service agents reaching out to me left and right. They can't believe this is happening. Personal cell phone numbers, guys texting their wives. They may not be married. Maybe their girlfriends, significant others, boyfriends, whatever. I don't know. Texting their kids. Photos they may have of their family on there.

You got the January 6th committee threatening agents on a protective assignment to take their personal cell phones away because what is that, plan G? You're going to subpoena everyone who is at any contact with government along with their personal cell phones. Folks, now some of you at home who are lefties might be thinking, oh my gosh, what's the big deal? Well, let me tell you what the big deal is because you're a moron on the left if you don't understand this.

Folks, I spent five years, four and a half from Precision Matters and protective assignments on President Bush's detail and President Obama. It's hard. Paul and I struggled. The kids struggled. You're away from home 250, 300 days of the year when it gets hot, sometimes more. My daughter used to cry every time I come out. I mean,

little things you don't even think about. You're on the road so much. You're in different time zones every night. I'm not whining. I'm not a snowflake. I'm just trying to express to you why it's difficult to get people to go to the details now. You're not eating right. You get bugs from foreign countries all the time, bugs in the water, everything. It's not that they're dirty. It's just the bacterial content's different. You're always sick. Nobody leaves the detail, the protective assignments in better shape when they came in. No one. You're never sleeping right. Again, your family's alone all the time. It's just brutal. Now you're going to tell me going forward that the precedent's been set, that if you're on a protective detail,

these January 6th, Liz Cheney, Adam Kinzinger goons, I'm playing, the Democrats are losers. We expected that from Schiff and Benny Thompson. We totally get that. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger are going to destroy and decimate the Secret Service now. They are never going to be able to get people on the details because no one's going to want to have their personal stuff dug through because they're on a protective assignment. Of course, Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger didn't think about that because they're garbage. They're garbage people. They're garbage people. I don't mean sanitation workers. I respect them. I mean garbage people. They're the garbage sanitation people put in a garbage truck. That's who they are. And Liz Cheney, whose dad has benefited from the life and death decisions made by secret

service agents. I protected her dad in a marry out in Long Island back in what, 2000, 2001? You can probably go look it up. We protected your dad, not you. And now you're destroying the Secret Service because what, you give him the double-barreled, non-family-friendly middle finger? Garbage. You haven't thought of any of that, have you? Who the hell is going to want to be a Secret Service agent now, knowing you're just trying to do your job and protect these people? I protected Obama and Bush. I did my job just like these guys are doing it now. Now you're going to make them partisans too? Morons. People are so stupid. I can't believe they fell for all this. All right. On a lighter note, today is Friday. So we've got the paper version today. It's time for

questions for Dan. I didn't actually hear that because I'm remote, but I'll pretend I did. He throws that in there afterwards. All right. Questions for Dan, my favorite segment of the week. At broamus, the FBI is desperate not to come up empty after the raid. What makes you think they won't just plant evidence? That's the kind of question I kid you not. Again, 10 years ago, I would have been like, bro-ams, that's the craziest thing I've ever heard. Don't say that. Come on. We got the FBI, man. Standards. Now, I mean, it's clear they fabricated a case and essentially planted evidence against Trump in the collusion hoax, planted evidence by making Carter Page a target, even though they knew Carter Page was an asset of the CIA. I'm not going to stop my monologue on my show tomorrow night and filter it on Fox. I'm not stopping at all,

going after the folks who did this. They're the ones sowing discord. I did nothing wrong. I served my country honorably. These people haven't. And by the way, I saw a congressman this morning who I respect on TV talking about, oh, it's not the rank and file. You know what? It's not all the rank and file. I told you, I work with a couple of guys over there who are really terrific. And I'm sure there are a lot of patriots there, but no, no, no. This isn't a all the rank and file or good either. The rank and file involved in that Mar-a-Lago raid should be fired too. Everyone, everyone. Don't start backing down now, getting cute. You know exactly what happened. If there's some allegation of wrongdoing that turns out to be substantiated, there was a different way to handle it than to burn the Constitution to the ground

that if you took part in it, I'm ashamed for you. All right. This is at Jackson 11. Growing up in New York, did you listen to the great Bob Grant? Of course. Who didn't? It was hard to avoid. It is everywhere.

Growing up in New York, I listened to a lot of things. I listened to Howard Stern before he became a lunatic. I listened to 1010 Winds. It was a news station. You give us 10 minutes, we'll give you the world. And like every good New Yorker. I didn't listen to Bob Grant a lot, but I listened to the fan, WFAN. Remember Mike and the Mad Dog?

Mike and the Mad Dog, Sports Radio 66. I know I'm a terrible singer, especially when it comes to jingles, but I listened to Mike and the Mad Dog. I used to have a small radio and when I was working over the summer in the cemetery cleaning mausoleums, I'd have them on all day

talking about the Knicks and the Bulls and stuff i remember that uh okay at jack tron just jack tron you get a lot of questions in there he must really like you have you ever thought about doing a gna live stream just for your local subscribers a live stream yeah um yeah i don't want to say too much i have a lot of plans for the future of the show uh live streams are one of them i mean i essentially do a three-hour live stream on fox nation now with the the radio show i don't know if you guys know this if you subscribe to fox nation the radio show is on fox nation on a live stream on video you can watch it you actually stays on during the breaks to the camera, which I'd say I'm not responsible for. Okay. At Mortar, a joke,

of course. At Mortar 73, hey, Dan, how should the Secret Service handle a search warrant on protected individuals? This is a good question. I'm getting this a lot. There's like five, six different iterations of this question or versions of this question I've seen. Folks, the Secret Service are federal agents first. They're federal agents first with a protective mission. They're not protective agents first with a federal agent mission. Do you get the distinction? What I'm trying to tell you is the same rules that apply to the FBI, the DEA, IRS agents

apply to the Secret Service. FBI, the DEA, IRS agents apply to the Secret Service. If you are given a lawful order and a search warrant on a protectee and told to step aside, as long as there's not a security situation, which you need to remedy immediately, you have to step aside. They have no choice in that matter. They could be arrested for obstructing justice. So they have to just comply like anyone else. I know it creates a

weird situation, but it does. At IC Sheeple, how was Trump's demeanor last night? Amazing. Came in the room, everybody started clapping. Dinner was just me and Paul and him, which was very nice. We didn't have a whole crowd of people around, kind of a little bit of a secluded table, but we talked about a lot of stuff. Obviously, out of respect, I keep that private. But demeanor-wise, there were other people who can acknowledge this. He's been public about it. I'm telling you, chalk it up to hyperbole all you want.

I'm telling you as objectively as I possibly can. The man is 1,000% ready for a fight. And if you think otherwise, you have severely, grotesquely miscalculated the situation. You take, you do with that what you want. If I thought this guy was ready to tuck and run, I'd tell you, he's not. All right, let's do one more.

Waldo, let's go to this one, Rick Ebel. A little bit of a lighter note. We'll end on the week on. What type of music do you listen to when you work out? Country music's my go-to when training. Love the show. It's the best part of my day. Just keep on doing what you were born to do.

Thanks, Rick. I don't listen to music when I work out. It drives Paula crazy because Paula cannot work out without music on. Now, Paula listens to anything that you can dance to. A lot of, who's her, like, like any kind of Spanish-themed music.

She loves it. And she'll start dancing in between the workout sometimes you know i'm like but that's for another show that's the non-family friendly show so but yeah she i don't listen to music and it drives her nuts sometimes i do listen to music because sometimes i work out with paula so i put a picture up on my local she took a snap of me working out that one got a lot of attention. That time I was listening to music. But when I am listening to music, I like Kid Rock, Jody Messina, Brad Paisley,

John Rich. I love country. I like old school 1980s rap music. Sorry, I do. You couldn't, you were just bathed in New York 80s, 90s. So that kind of stuff I still have on there. Yeah, wait till the cancel culture people get ahold of that stuff, by the way. But I don't listen to music when I work out. So that's the dirty little secret. I like to focus hard. I focused a little too hard the other day, not to beat this point up, but I think I hurt my shoulder. I was doing that Bulgarian 10 by 10 sets for bench presses and oh, my shoulder's killing me. All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in. I really appreciate it. Just a couple of small requests. If you'd subscribe to

my podcast, I'd really appreciate it. The numbers on Rumble this week have been bananas. Rumble.com slash Bongino. It is free to follow, free to subscribe. And then secondly, check out my Fox show tomorrow night. I got Tim Pool on, which I'm excited about. I'll be live in studio tomorrow night, Saturday, 9 PM. Tim Pool is a guest. I've got Pete Hagseth and I've got a stinging monologue where I'm going to challenge the FBI's ongoing credibility. And I think you're going to walk away from this convinced I made a pretty strong case that if change doesn't happen, we're not going to have a country at the FBI soon with them like they're acting now. I'll see you all on Monday. Good day, sir.

You just heard Dan Bongino.