The Dan Bongino Show - Ep. 642 The Swamp is Panicking

Episode Date: January 26, 2018

Stunning revelations about the former British spy who “produced” the fake Trump dossier. Swamp rat Democrats and DC insiders are in a panic over the Devin Nunes memo. Here’s a great piece about why.  As predicted, civil lawsuits are coming due to the malicious prosecution of the Trump team.   Copyright CRTV. All rights reserved. The economy continues to expand under the Trump administration. Out of touch Democrats continue to attack thousands of dollars in bonuses.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

From the kitchen to the laundry room, your home deserves the best. Give it the upgrade it deserves at Best Buy's Ultimate Appliance Event. Save up to $1,000 on two or more major appliances. Shop now, in-store, or online at BestBuy.ca. Exclusions apply. The Dan Bongino Show. Get ready to hear the truth about America with your host, Dan Bongino. All right, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.

Producer Joe, how are you today? Oh, Dan, I'm in a good mood despite all the crap that's going on around us. Doing well. Well, we had the best day ever yesterday. Yes, we did. Almost listened to day ever in the history of the Dan Bongino Show. Thank you. So thank you very much.

I got a lot to get to, some news of the day, some updates, as I told you, some predictions that came true. Not that I'm patting myself on the back. I'm really not interested in doing that. And like I said, I don't take credit for these predictions. People have been telling me stuff. But it has materialized again. Things I told you were going to happen. For instance, the leak, Joe, very convenient.

Yes. You know, Trump threatened to fire Bob Mueller wow New York Times that was convenient how that one came out it's amazing how that happened

breaking news Joe Trump threatened to fire Bob Mueller within the White House I'll call the thought police breaking news what's that I'll call the thought police

immediately get the thought police that's right get them out there the jackbooted thugs and also breaking news Bob Mueller is still the special counsel lead investigator. Yeah.

All right. Well, we're going to get to that because it's – ladies and gentlemen, that is not by accident. Something's happening here, and I want you to be clued in into what's going on. I'm going to explain it to you. Don't worry. I'm going to walk you through it. All right.

Today's show brought to you by our buddies at Brickhouse Nutrition. He's one of our original sponsors, one of the best nutrition supplement companies out there. Love these guys. Let me talk to you today quickly about a product I haven't mentioned in a while. They have that is terrific because it helps me get through the day, especially on days like today where I have to travel around a lot and get a lot of things done. It's called Dawn to Dusk. Joe loves this product. I love this product. We have busy days. Folks, the problem with these energy products out there today, whether it's the drinks or coffee or these energy pills people take, is one, a lot of them aren't even natural products. And secondly, you get these energy highs and then you get these lows and you bottom out

and you're more exhausted than you were before you took the product. Well, these guys develop the energy pill that lasts all day. It gives you about 10 hours of energy. It's a nice, smooth elevation in your mood, in your energy level. People love this product. I haven't mentioned it in a while because Field to Green's been doing so well, but this is one of their best-selling products. It's called Dawn to Dusk. It's available at BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.'s available at brickhousenutrition.com slash Dan. That's brickhousenutrition.com slash Dan. Give it a shot, Dawn to Dusk. You're a pilot. You're a, I bring that up because I got a lot of email feedback from a pilot, a friend of the shows, a police officer, military, working parents. You need that energy to get through the day? This is your product. Go give it a shot, Dawn to dusk, you're going to love it. The reviews on this product are absolutely spectacular.

Boost your energy, boost your mood. Give it a shot. Dawn to dusk. Brickhousenutrition.com slash Dan. Okay. Here's what's going on, folks. Before we get to the Mueller thing, because it's going to tie into the story I'm giving you now, because remember, all of this stuff is interrelated into this web they're trying to weave. The memo, the Devin Nunes memo, which I described yesterday on the show, which is going to lay out the scheme I described for you yesterday, where they used both foreign entities and accumulated data by the NSA, the Obama team, that is, to spy on the Trump team. Keep that in mind. I had this conversation. Last night, I'm sitting on the couch with my wife after a hit I spy on the Trump team keep that in mind I had this conversation

last night I'm sitting on the couch with my wife after a hit I did on the Hannity show and my wife said Dan what I like about what you're doing here is

keep it focused on the big picture because Joe as you know this is a very complicated case yes and I walk you into the weeds because understanding the weeds are necessary

to understanding the larger story, but understanding the larger story is only buttress by being in the weeds. You can still understand it. Obama spied on Trump. Everything we're doing is trying to prove that point, okay? So that's why I'm doing it the way I am. Constantly remember Obama spied on Trump.

That's what this information I'm presenting to you on the show. We're building that house, okay? Now, the memo describes the scheme. The scheme is this. The scheme was Obama used the NSA and the FBI to tap into the database they have of emails and phone records. They did not have probable cause, as I laid out yesterday, of a crime or of a violation worthy of the FISA courts,

probable cause that they were acting on behalf of a foreign agent, any of these Trump team people. So what did they do? They did reverse targeting where they targeted people on foreign soil, not having constitutional protections, knowing they were talking to Trump people. In other words, they reverse targeted. They really didn't target the foreign the foreign folks.

They were targeting the Trump people. The Obama team then unmasked these people. The Obama team on Matt used their powers to unmask, you know, quote, U.S. persons, right, or U.S. officials and put names to them so they could spread the information to the media and their congressional allies to go after Trump during the election and set up these nonsensical Logan Act violations. Yesterday's show walks you through this in detail. OK, now that we're there. The memo, the Nunez memo describes this. So the swamp is in a full panic. And when I say the swamp, I'm not just talking about Democrats, folks. There are Republicans who are freaking out about this, too.

One specific United States senator who is intimately involved in the dossier. Senator John McCain and his staff. They don't want any of this out there either. One of his staffers who has been requested his presence up on the Hill to discuss his role in meeting with Christopher Steele, the British spy who is involved with the dossier. And I'll get to that in a little bit, too. Now, they've developed, remember, we're talking about Obama spying on Trump,

a memo that's about to be released by Devin Nunes, the head of the House Intelligence Committee here, that describes what happened. It is going to devastate the Democrats. It is going to destroy the Democrats because they are now going to be the party of the police state, knowing that Obama used the police state to spy on Trump. And the Democrats are now inventing various narratives to stop the release of the memo. This is important. We have seen in the last few days a series of disingenuous false narratives released to stop the release of the memo that are not

working. So as one flounders, they move on to the next. This is going to tie into the Fire Mueller story in a minute. Narrative number one, which we discussed in the show two days ago was the adam schiff who is the the swampiest of slimiest swamp rats this guy is disgusting he is a filthy human being he is the ranking democrat at house intel he is a police state tyrant make no mistake he is the lead scoundrel fighting the release of scoundrel is that even a word anymore scoundrel you scoundrel he's the lead scoundrel fighting the release of this memo because he's protecting the police state and the image of barack obama as a good guy which is about to be annihilated so his first theory out there that he threw out there to try and distract everyone which of course the media jumped on was to the release the memo hashtag on Twitter, Joe,

was all Russian bots. We're all Russians, but like the modern day McCarthyism. Joe, if you tweeted release the memo, you're a Russian bot. Well, that was debunked almost immediately, even by left-wing outlets that showed that, of course, it's very easy to do Twitter and social media backend analytics.

Twitter and Facebook figured out Joe, unsurprisingly to anyone that it was actually Americans who were tweeting, release the memo, who want government transparency. Oh my gosh. Shocking to Democrats that, uh, you know, Republicans and rank and file working class American citizens want some government transparency. I know Adam Schiff wants to protect the police state and all, but that now keep in mind, Joe, is it?

You have to understand this folks. Remember Obama spied on Trump. The Democrats need to cover it up. The memo is going to expose them for what they are. Police state tyrants who spied on Trump. Schiff is the lead protector right now of are police state tyrants who spied on trump schiff is the lead protector right now of the police state he has to lie publicly to make this memo disappear so first was released the memo is a russian bot thing he knows it's a lie by the way because schiffer as the big of a

scoundrel as he is he is he is not stupid do not the man. He is tactically trying to be very smart here. He then moved on to, we are going to release a counter memo that is going to show that this is a partisan document and in fact, not true and it's designed to mislead you. Now, Andy McCarthy has a terrific piece as he always does at National Review. And Andy's a straight shooter. Andy does not, you know, I'm a little more emotional than Andy is. Andy's a straight shooter. Andy does not. Yes. You know, I'm a little more emotional than Andy is. Andy's a lawyer. He was a DOJ lawyer. He's been involved in some significant terrorism cases. He's a brilliant guy. I know Andy personally. He's a wonderful guy personally as well. Andy has a great piece at National Review

where he says, listen, facts aren't partisan. If you release the memo, Joe, it's either true or not. In other words, did this stuff in the memo happen or didn't it? You know, a partisan opinion would be something like, you know, saying, well, this is a neoconservative approach to foreign policy. And here's why I feel the way I do. And, you know, there may be another way to say that. Well, here's a liberal approach to foreign policy. Here's an isolationist approach. And you're all going to bring a certain series of facts to the table that'll buttress your argument. The memo, that's not what this is, folks. Yes, it will be released by Republicans. Nobody's

disputing that. But the stuff either happened or it didn't either we accessed the metadata and spied on trump's emails and his team's phone conversations or we didn't do you really think devin nunez is going to put his professional reputation on the line by saying things happen that didn't happen again obama spied on trump the memo is going to show that. The Democrats and their media buddies and some swamp rat Republicans are absolutely committed to making this memo go away. Story number one, Russian bots that disappeared. Story number two. Oh, this is nothing but a partisan document. There are no such things as partisan facts.

There are only partisan people who want to say facts are partisan. Either we spied on the guy using the database. By the way, the document, just so you understand, folks, the reason the memo has the Democrats freaked out is because it actually names names as well. Oh. Now, Joe. Yeah.

You and I are not litigators. We're not lawyers. But I think it's incredibly obvious that if the document names names, number one, are not litigators, we're not lawyers, but I think it's incredibly obvious that if the document names, number one, and procedures and methods here, that number one, Nunes is not going to risk his reputation by lying about what's easily provable as happening or not happening. But secondly, you think for a second this guy's going to name names knowing his butt could be sued if this stuff didn't happen?

I mean, come on, folks. I mean, let's be realistic here. I know there are a lot of liberal hacks out there who don't want to believe anything that would reflect poorly on Obama, but just accept the fact that your goose is cooked. It's cooked. You're caught. This is your Watergate. Matter of fact,

my humble opinion, I think it's a measure worse. This is your watergate. Folks, listen, libs, take the Ipecac. You know Ipecac, right? Remember when you, you know what that is, right Joe? If you swallowed a poison, they'd give you Ipecac syrup, which is gross and make you throw up. Just take the Ipecac. Take the Ipecac. It's coming. Folks, have no fear. Everybody emails me and says, oh, why are you not so worried about people coming out in handcuffs? That's not what I'm saying. They may very well be arrested. I'm just telling you folks,

justice is coming in some form. There is no way to hide what happened. There are records of it. There are names. There are texts. There's an ongoing OIG investigation, Office of Inspector General Investigation, by Michael Horowitz.

That is going to be damning for the Democrats. Take it. Take the tussin. Ever see that Chris Rock skit about Robitussin? Remember, Joe, when we were kids, they gave you Robitussin for everything, right? Chris Rock is a great skit. You break your leg, take a little tussin. Yeah.

Having an ear infection, a little tussin. That's true. When I was a kid, Robitussin for everything, right? Take the tussin. Take it. It's over folks i'm telling you justice is our country has very significant problems yeah but even the hack police state media their hack police state democrat allies on the hill and the hack police state liberal activists who are trying to enforce a new era of rogue government surveillance are not going to be

able to succeed you can't hide this stuff anymore walter cronkite tom brokaw peter jennings that david brinkley that era is over when they controlled the narrative you now have drudge report you now have conservative review you have breitbart. You have Fox News. You have areas out there where people who, some are partisan, some are, and I do a lot of work with Fox. I know they make a very concerted effort to get both sides of the story out there. But they are not going to cover for you anymore. I'm sorry to drone on about this, folks. I have a lot to get to. But it's important you understand this.

Justice is coming. I'm telling you. Do not fret. They will not be able to hide from this. Okay, getting back to my point. Obama spied on Trump. The memo lays it out. The Democrats are now spinning. Russian bots didn't work.

Partisan document didn't work. Here now is option three for them. Option one and two. The price is wrong, Bob. It's like the showcase showdown. I'll take behind what's door number three, right? Here's door number three. Great, great, great, great piece

in the Wall Street Journal today by Kim Strassel, who's doing amazing work. I don't know her, never met her, but her pieces are just incredible. I will link to it today in the show notes at Bongino.com. Please, please, please subscribe to my show notes, folks. It'll make it so much easier for you to source this case. I put it together five, six, seven stories a day that are not necessarily from today, but stories you need to read to follow this case and what's going on. Please subscribe to my show notes. Bongino.com.

There's a big link there. Subscribe to the email list. The email list, by the way, Joe, I didn't even tell you, is absolutely exploding. Oh, yeah. And I think it's because we're providing really relevant material. I will provide the latest Potomac Watch article by Kim Strassel at the Wall Street Journal, which describes option number three.

And option number three, Joe, is going to be interference by Trump here. Shaggy! Here's option number three. So here's what they're doing now. And Strassel lays this out brilliantly. A lot of you have emailed me and said, why is the Department of Justice led by Jeff Sessions, a Trump appointee

and a good man, why is the Department of Justice now sending a memo to Nunes and the committee saying, do not release the memo until we see it? Have you seen this story, Joe?

No, I haven't. The DOJ, guy named Boyd at DOJ, sent a memo a few days ago and there's a story in the show notes about this, the Strassel story, read it. And the memo says, guys, ladies on House Intel,

whatever, do not release this memo. We need to see it first. Now, a lot of people have emailed me and said, Dan, I don't get it. If the DOJ is led by Sessions, what is going on here? Why is the Department of Justice telling Nunes not to release a memo, which you're telling us is going to clearly lay out this entire Obama spied on Trump scandal and the corruption that went on. Folks, you have to remember a couple things here. Jeff Sessions, the Attorney General, the head of the Department of Justice, is formally recused

from this. He's not recused from Uranium One in contrast to what a Republican congressman disingenuously put out there a while ago, but he's recused from this. Sessions is not involved with the special investigation. Rod Rosenstein is. Rod Rosenstein is knee deep in all of this. Rod Rosenstein has fought from the beginning to make this all go away. Why do you think they appointed their buddy Bob Mueller? I told you if you listened to the show last week or the week before, there's been so many of them about Rosenstein's role in Uranium One and making that go away. A lot of the stuff that went on in the Obama era, and to be fair, some of it in the Bush era, especially with regard to spying, a lot of this stuff, the swamp rats do not want exposed,

Rosenstein being one of them rosenstein doesn't want this information out there so there's nothing sessions can do to stop it so don't associate the doj letter with sessions he's recused that was a mistake the recusal but it exists now nonetheless joe and there's nothing he can do about it right does that make sense did i that i clear that part up you're cool now getting back to option three for them man russian bots didn't work it's a partisan document the memo that didn't work either that's gaining no traction now with strassel's that now i'm going to walk you through this slow because this is a very very devious little plot but it's critical you get it good pickup by strassel she says the DOJ is not really writing

this memo to Nunez. They could just call Nunez up and ask, Joe. This memo was written for the press. Now, why would it be written for the press? Because remember what I told you during yesterday's show. The whole purpose to the unmasking of U.S.

persons, air quotes, that were being spied on using reverse targeting by the Trump team? Because, Joe, a legitimate question, as I said during yesterday's show, is who cares if they were reverse targeting? In other words, targeting foreign officials, but really only targeting them so they could listen in on the U.S. people

they were talking to? Why need the names? You already know they're reverse targeting. If I know Joe's talking to a Russian and names you already know the the reverse targeting if i know joe's talking to a russian and i listen in on russian no one he's talking to joe because i'm really interested in joe not the russian who cares if i have the name i know it's joe yeah and i said to you during yesterday's show the whole purpose of the unmasking was to attach a name for the purpose of a narrative in the media the media needs needs the names, not the people listening. You get what I'm saying, Joe?

Yeah. The media, in other words, all of what happened, the Obama spying scandal, Obamagate, was all done to feed information

to the media to drive a narrative that Trump was corrupt and colluded with the Russians. They used the Logan Act and the collusion narrative to drive this narrative in the event Trump was elected so that they could impeach him. Because I've told you, impeachment is not... Folks, listen, I know what the Constitution says,

but make no mistake. Impeachment is a political, not a criminal process. Everybody's committed a crime at some point. Impeachment is a political process to drive down political capital, to wound a president so much that they can have him impeached based on his lack of political capital to fight back. The effort to drive the collusion Logan Act narrative through the media by attaching names to it was an effort to drive down Trump's political capital and approval so low that in the incredibly unlikely event that he got elected, which he did, it would be quick removal no matter what. And Pence would be in fear of doing anything. I like the way you explain that. Yes. Does it make sense? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay, good. Because Joe, you are the formal audience on Bud's. Yeah, that was good. Now,

this memo, that's getting back to the memo here, the DOJ memo, the reason the DOJ memo was written and they didn't just pay a visitor a call, well, the baby has to be some formal, but the reason the press got a hold of this thing right away is they're trying to send a, hey, Joe, I'm going to give you a, you see the wink and a nod I'm giving you? Oh, yeah, Dad. Hey, Joe.

I'm giving Joe a goofy wink and a nod. joe a goofy wink and a nod it was a goofy wink and a nod to the media that here is our third line of attack to stop the memo the third line of attack is we're going to release this memo saying to you know to nunez hey there's some stuff in here that could be damaging to national security and wink wink, wink, nod, nod. The president's reading this too. And if the president doesn't fail, refuses to stop this, Joe. In other words, if the president signs off on releasing this memo, Joe,

what's going to be? What are they going to move right on to? Obstruction of justice. The president's interfering in the Trump-Russia investigation by letting this information get out thousands of americans would die and thousands of americans will die as always play that again give us an encore thousands of americans would die oh man i love that one yeah you see where i'm going with this folks i said to you on a show gosh six months ago maybe i've been following this case for a very very long time as i said

to you about derrick for real yesterday and blow one of these days i'll give you it'll all make sense one of these days when they allow me i'll'll give up my search. It all makes sense. Who's your search? Derek, for real. All right. I've been following this for a long time. When the collusion narrative fell apart, which it really started to fall apart six months ago. You know why, Joe? Because there's no collusion. You can't make two plus two equal 10. Once the political capital of Trump started to rebound, it's now up to about 45 percent his approval ratings due to the tax cuts the democrats needed a new story so the new story is going to be it's not new it's old i told you this six months ago but the backup story was always going to be trump obstructed justice by firing comey keep in mind comey's been corrupted the

entire time nothing trump did is in any way a violation of any of his responsibilities. Trump is perfectly within his purview to fire whoever he wants in the executive branch. But I told you in the show six months ago, for you regular listeners, but for those of you just joining, you can go back and listen to the library. I'm not making this up. That once collusion failed, they were going to move to obstruction of justice this memo doj memo to nunez which sessions can't stop keep that in mind is the doj laying the groundwork through the press through the wink and a nod i'm giving joe right now that if trump lets this memo out that this could be interference which would further

buttress an obstruction of justice case that doesn't exist. Whoa. Folks, the swamp never, ever, ever stops. And believe me, when this fails, which it's going to because public pressure to release this memo is unbelievably high right now. And be patient with the man it's coming out too i don't i'm not lecturing anybody i'm not trying to be like uh you know some kind of preacher here but seriously i'm just i'm just telling you based

on what i'm hearing from very good people who are on our side believe me just be patient with sessions and this memo it's coming there is a procedure here but they are in a panic russian bots did it it's a partisan document trump's gonna interfere obstruction of justice now i love how we weave this in i i do i i know that you should self-praise things i get it but i joe and i put a lot of work into this folks I'm really I'm up like all day and night with this story even with my travel schedule and the book and everything I love this story because it so exposes how liberals are complete frauds they worship antifa violence they love the police state this is what they do and this

story is going to expose them for all they are and all they've ever been police state tyrants the leak is tied into the story i just told you so i have it labeled out story number one joe was memo obstruction the democrats cannot release the memo because it's going to expose that obama spied on trump keep it simple. Kiss, right? Keep it simple, stupid. Occam's razor. 10-4. Given all explanations except the one that's the most parsimonious and requires the least amount of explanation. This is by far the simplest.

Obama spied on Trump. The Democrats are trying to hide it. They moved on to their third narrative now through a DOJ memo that if Trump signs off on the release of this, this is going to be interference. Obstruction of justice. Get him. Release the hounds.

Now, that third narrative ties directly into the leak, which again, we predicted on what? Monday's show? That you will now see a series of Bob Mueller

special counsel leaks to distract from the memo because this is what Bob Mueller's team does now all of a sudden keep in mind we're talking about something that allegedly happened seven months ago that inside White House sources say never happened and Trump adamantly denies now all of a sudden you have a leak for Maggie Haberman at the New York Times, who is a known partisan hack. I would not trust Maggie Haberman if she told me the sky's blue. I would double check it. The New York Times, just to be clear, the same New York Times, which reported that Trump was being wiretapped in Trump Tower, and then when Trump tweeted he

was being wiretappedpped wrote pieces about how Trump was crazy I folks this actually happened the same New York Times that reported to their credible source that Carter Page's visit to Moscow started the Trump special uh the Trump investigation by the FBI and then reported just a few months ago that all that was garbage that it was George Papadopoulos's meeting with Alexander Downer in a London bar. Both stories can't be true. But the New York Times sees no irony at all that their sources are telling him two different stories

and they're reporting on it. Are you like a crazy person? Yes, you are like a crazy person. This is the same New York Times that is now telling us a story yesterday. Joe, bombshell. Seven months ago, Trump threatened to fire Bob Mueller. Elizabeth, I'm coming for you.

This is it. The breaking news is that, by the way, Trump threatened to fire Mueller? Anonymous sources have said this Joe breaking news here Mueller's not fired yeah so the story here is what that Trump

it is internal by the way Trump's denying all of this and so are inside White House sources that any of this conversation even happened but even if it did happen what's the problem muller is involved in a special counsel investigation into trump for a crime that never happened and all of a sudden the new york times bombshell is that seven months ago someone

said hey you know what we may need to fire this guy you know i gotta tell you i believe the Trump team because of the sourcing on his Maggie Haberman, which says to me it didn't happen. But even if it did, I'm being serious. What's the I don't get it. What's the me and you have said on this show that Mueller should have been fired? Yeah. The Trump team would be insane. Insane. Insane to not discuss the expanding Mueller investigation into things entirely unrelated to his assignment.

I would be disappointed in the Trump team if they didn't discuss getting rid of Mueller. Sure. Yeah. What? I don't get it. That's your bombshell? Now, keep in mind, I'm going to tie this together here.

I told you these leaks were coming. The first leak was at the interviewed sessions, which is a non-story. Okay? I don't even know why that was a story. Me either. The second leak, this is going to be the fire Mueller leak. He was going to fire Mueller. This is a leak strategically timed to rescue the third release the memo obstruction story,

which is going to be Trump interference due to the DOJ memo. The DOJ memo is a warning to Trump that if you sign off on this, we're going to move with obstruction of justice, buttressed by the leak, Joe, that he was going to fire Mueller. Look, now it's definitely obstruction of justice. He released a memo and he was going to fire Mueller seven months ago. We got him. Folks, these are devious, devious people.

These are devious, devious people. These media hacks like Haberman, all of these Ignatius, all these insiders are being, you know, let me, against my better judgment here, I'm going to try to do what they will never do, these media hacks, is I'm going to try to be fair for a second because there's two possible explanations the first is that Haberman Ignatius and all these people that have been working with deep state bureaucrats to undermine Trump and advance false narratives first collusion when that didn't work now they're going to advance the obstruction of justice narrative at all costs the first is that they're really, really stupid, and they are being played by deep state operatives here, swamp rats, swamp rodents, that desperately need to cover their butts

and are using journalists to do it. In other words, the obstruction of the memo. They're using journalists to obstruct the memo by having them parrot talking points in this DOJ memo, right? Mm-hmm. The second narrative is disturbing. Very disturbing. The second, I should say, theory on this is that these media people, and I've got a pretty reliable source on this that has been sending me stuff.

This person believes that the media they're not dumb joe that they are actively involved in a swamp rat media collaboration to decimate trump lie about trump and really enforce the powers of the liberal police state now that's i mean that that that's unbelievably disturbing. In other words, we have a modern day Pravda. Yeah. Russian propaganda media outlet. That's disturbing stuff.

Folks, let me just tie up what I told you because I want to move on to something else here, but this is important. Obama spied on Trump. The memo will lay some of this out. The memo will be deeply disturbing. It is going to destroy the reputation of Barack Obama as some benevolent father figure. It is going to show him to be the vengeful, narcissistic person he was, or at a minimum, his administration where he was in charge.

The memo does not reflect well on the deep state, okay? Which I think we can all agree absolutely exists right now. The swamp is very real. The Democrats have invented now multiple false narratives to stop this because they have to. Russian bots fell apart, partisan document, that fell apart. They're now moving on to a DOJ memo saying, well, here's a hint to Trump, wink and a nod. This will be interference. Interference could lead to obstruction of justice.

Oh, and by the way, what a conveniently timed link. Trump threatened to fire Bob Mueller. That could be obstruction of justice, too. Convenient how that happens. Is Maggie Haberman getting played? I don't think so. I think she's playing us. They're all playing us.

Now, another prediction I made yesterday, before I move on, on yesterday's show or the day before, was that I'm just trying to show you like the sources are good. Okay, their quality. If they lead me astray and we say something that doesn't come true, I will absolutely tell you. I need a drink here. My mouth's a little drive. I told you you were going to see a stream river tsunami of civil lawsuits coming based on malicious prosecution of the Trump team and their associates. That's starting. I'll put an article today in the show notes by Kerry Pickett at the Daily Caller. It does great

work. Read the article. It's about a bunch of lawsuits that are coming out by Trump team people who feel like they were targeted by these swamp rat folks looking to take them out because they were associated with Trump, who are now having trouble with legal fees and things like that, who are now suing for damage to their reputations. I told you. You remember the show, Joe. I told you what happened. Read the piece. It's a really good one. You're going to start to see a lot of that. All right. I've got a couple more points I want to get to, but today's show also brought to your buddies at MyPatriotSupply, folks, preparedness preparedness it is a big deal i was a former secret service agent that is all we did we prepared for eventualities that would likely never happen but i used to tell the staff this is funny joe on the

these presidential trips when we would do uh in dangerous countries we would put together contingency scenarios for the most unlikely things like what if a nuclear bomb goes off across the world and you have i mean seriously you'd have to think about the craziest things and they would say to me all the time the staffers they'd say why are you wasting your time thinking about stuff like that and i would always respond so you don't have to that's why so you can sleep peacefully at night in your little room in the shangri-la right and not have to worry about nuclear explosions on the other side of the world. Got it? That's what we did.

Preparedness matters. I just ordered, I know my buddies at Patriot Supply, listen, they can vouch for me on this. I order their emergency food. I pay for it. I don't even ask them for freebies because I love the product so much. Folks, we ensure everything in our lives that matters.

But it is absolutely crazy that I bet you the overwhelming majority of people don't have more than a two or three day supply of food in their house in the event of an emergency. Folks, that's crazy. We live in really, in some ways, troubling times. You got the North Koreans, you got the Iranians, the threat of EMP attacks, natural disasters. We've seen what can happen. Folks, ensure your food supply. I have now, I think, seven or eight boxes of MyPatriot supply emergency food, and it's not enough.

If I had more space and a bigger house, I'd order more right now. Go to preparewithdan.com. That's preparewithdan.com. Pick up your one-month supply of emergency food today for just $99. Now, folks, that's just for you. I have four people in my household. So I basically now have about two months of emergency food.

I don't even think that's enough. I'm looking to order five or six more boxes. I pay for it myself. They sent me a freebie in the beginning, but I have ordered three, four, five more sets of stuff myself. Go to preparewithdan.com. Pick up your one-month supply of emergency food today. This is like food insurance.

Folks, it lasts 25 years, but you could need it tomorrow. Wouldn't it be nice, moms, dads out there, just to know that if you're, God forbid, in an emergency, you had food for your kids if they needed it, go pick it up today. Preparewithdan.com. Just $99. Small price to pay for putting your mind at ease.

Ensure your food supply. Okay. Another point on this I wanted to bring up. Breaking yesterday. The release of these new Peter Stroke, Lisa Page text messages. Stroke is the number two in counterintel under Bill Price step at the FBI. Peter Stroke is intimately involved in the critical investigation of Hillary's email. He is also involved in the interview of Mike Flynn. Matter

of fact, Peter Stroke is there for the interview of General Flynn. And third, he's also involved in the Bob Mueller special counsel. This is a big time inside baseball player with the FBI on the Trump spying scandal. He knows exactly what's going on. He's having an affair with a lawyer named Lisa Page, works within the FBI, who was also involved in this. And these two buffoons sent text messages on open phones back and forth over the period of a year, which have been uncovered. And I told you they'd be uncovered. And now the text messages are leaking out in droves pursuant to the OIG, Office of Inspector General, investigation of what happened. The messages are damning. There were two specific messages that jumped out to me yesterday,

Joe, that absolutely have to be addressed because of the troubling nature of what was in them. At one point, February 25th of 2016, Stroke and Page are texting back and forth. And in those texts, Stroke and Page are worried. They're talking about Hillary's email investigation and how they're going to have to interview Hillary. And they're talking about how dangerous it would be to go in, quote, loaded for bear.

In other words, if we go in there really hard on Hillary Clinton, what are the consequences going to be? Now, what's interesting is at the end of one of these series of tweets, they worry if she's going to if she's going to know it's more DOJ than FBI. Now, this has been interpreted two different ways. And I absolutely believe in the Trey Gowdy interpretation I heard last night on Fox and others are saying this too. The first interpretation of that, is she going to think it's more DOJ than FBI, Joe, is if we go in there hard on Hillary in this interview about her emails, go in there hard on Hillary in this interview about her emails, is she going to think the DOJ was asking us to do it or the FBI? And therefore, if she gets elected president, is she going to punish us?

Right. Do you see what I'm saying? You see where I'm going with this? More DOJ than FBI could be a punishment thing. I don't buy that. Gowdy, who's seen this and is an experienced federal prosecutor. Gowdy put out last night on Fox, and I agree with him, Joe. Theory number two, the deuce.

Just like ate my mic there, as Joe saw. Which is pretty gross, by the way. Theory number two on the more DOJ than FBI. Is it Stroke, who is now the number two in counterintel, who's unquestionably a climber, in other words, aggressively looking to promote himself and his career, that this may have been the exact opposite. their quote loaded for pair right joe and we go easy on her who's gonna get the credit me fbi or doj in other words i want her to know i did this yeah i see what yeah that i folks why do i believe that one gowdy is not stupid i've had some beefs with gowdy on stuff but i he's not dumb he understands the prosecution of legal cases and the accumulation of evidence in the furtherance of a criminal case.

I've worked these cases too for over a decade of my life. Very complicated federal cases as a special agent. I've also worked within the government bureaucracy. Folks, this may be one of the most important things I ever relayed to you. It may not be a surprise, but to some most important things I ever relay to you. It may not be a surprise, but to some of you, I need you to understand, having been an insider,

how critical what I'm about to tell you is. 99% of the federal bureaucracy, I can't speak for the state, I can only tell you where I worked, 99% of what happens in the federal bureaucracy is for advancement of individual careers, advancement of a political connection, or helping someone remain in office and retain some position of power. About 1% is the United States government doing work for the American citizen. You may say, God, Dan, come on. That's ridiculous.

That is, um, no, it's not. I'm giving them the 1% to be generous. It may actually be 001%. My experience in the federal government is, and I'm not saying there's not a component of, in other words, in the Secret Service, of course, people want to keep the president alive, and there are a lot of good people there.

But a lot of what people do is done to advance their own careers. Not because they really care about anything that's going on with the American citizen. Now, I say one percent because there are a lot of good rank and file fbi agents and secret service agents and border patrol officers and i believe a lot of these people find public service because they genuinely want to you know they as a kid they grew up with a good sense of right and wrong and they want to be on the

right side of it but they are the minority in the federal government you understand what i'm saying about this joe they are vastly outnumbered by bureaucrats and administrative hacks and climbers, even within the ranks of law enforcement, like the FBI, who may do good things, Joe, but they're not doing them because they're good. They're doing them because they're good for their careers. Does that make sense? Oh, yeah. Folks, I lived it it i saw it every

single day of my life i mean i don't even want let me just leave it at that because i don't want to but i've i've seen it people leverage their connections for them i bring that up because i i am absolutely convinced that that more doj than fbi FBI line, who's going to get the credit, that they're doing it because they are trying to, they want into that Hillary Clinton interview, these bureau agents, they want in there not to get information on Hillary and the crimes she may have committed, Joe, but to make the connection in case she was president so that these guys would be in consideration for the next FBI director or some political promotion. Take it to the bank. I'm with door number two.

Yeah. You're darn right you are. Because I've told you about a lot of how this works behind the scenes. Secondly, hat tip to Nick Short here on Twitter, who put this one out this morning. Let me read this, actually. Let me pull it up on my phone. I got the face ID now, so it's great. I can just look at my phone.

There's another text, September 10th, 2016, by Peter Stroke, which, folks, I just saw this this morning, literally 10 minutes before we started recording. And I was like, I can't. I can't believe this was actually put in a text by a guy whose expertise is supposed to be in spy tradecraft. My wife says, yes, these are the two dumbest spy catchers we've ever seen in American history. Stroke on September 10, 2016.

Before I read the text, when he references 302s, Joe, 302s are FBI memos written about interviews. So if I interview you about a bank robbery, I'd write a 302 about what you said, okay? So you have to understand what 302s are. You got it? Okay. This is from Stroke, September 10, 2016.

There are very inflammatory things in the 302s we didn't turn over to Congress because they weren't relevant to understanding the focus of the investigation. They're going to come out and FOIA and absolutely inflame Congress. I'm sure Jim and Tricia and Dave and Mike are all considering how things like that play out as they talk amongst themselves. What the hell? Are you serious? You have a guy on a text. Who's supposed to be one of the lead spy catchers in the United States.

On an open text. On an open network. Discussing suppressing information in formal FBI written documents. That are. By the way folks. He has it in caps and bold. That are very inflammatory. Guys, ladies, it is clear as day this guy Stroke is an anti-Trump maniac

who is leveraging his privileged position as an investigator into both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump to butter and kiss the boot, butter up to and kiss the boot of Hillary Clinton to get a position when she's elected president and to destroy Donald Trump at the same time. It could not be more obvious at this point. And you blinding yourself to that is really a testament to your low IQ. Amazing. Alright, one more point here. I'm going to include a great, great, great article in the show notes. Please read it, folks. I'm just asking you to take 10 minutes. It will

not take you more than 10 minutes to read the pieces I put in the show notes. Maybe 20. But there's a great piece in the New York Post by Paul Sperry about which is leading me down an interesting path here. The gist of the piece is that the Fusion GPS dossier may not have in fact been controlled by Fusion GPS. This is important, and it's a pretty mind-blowing...

The piece was sent to me by someone, let's say. He said, take a look at this. This is interesting. Here's what's in it. Christopher Simpson... Oh, excuse me, Glenn Simpson. Glenn Simpson, who is running Fusion GPS, who is working for Hillary and the dnc this is not

in dispute to produce negative opposition research on trump has this dossier the story the entire time joe which you and i are familiar with at this point is that the dossier was put together by an ex-british spy who had Joe contacts in Russia. Now, what would that do if you're a media person? Remember, this isn't... Go back to the story number one. All of this is being driven through leaks to the media to drive anti-Trump narratives,

to drive his political capital down, to get him out of office, right? The media needs to put an air of credibility on this dossier joe they can't just say oh hillary paid for fake information on trump and then report on it as journalists they'd be laughed at but the journalists want to take out trump you see where i'm going with this so they need an air of respectability to all this fake information about trump and the dossier now what a lot of folks have been playing with, the running theory has been,

well, okay, it was accumulated through this Christopher Steele who got it from Russian intel, but Christopher Steele was an MI6 agent who had contacts in Russia. Oh, wait, wait, wait. Time out, T.O., red flag under the hood for review. Sperry has an amazing piece in the New York Post where he says, you sure about that?

Because he shows that it wasn't in fact Christopher Steele who was paying those Russian contacts for the information. And remember, don't forget this Joseph, the media needs

that to be true because it lends an air of respectability to the information, right? Oh, a British agent? Oh, my gosh. Sperry's piece is pretty incredible because Sperry says it wasn't him. It was Simpson directly who was being paid by Hillary to contact this guy named Ed Baumgartner, who was the source of a lot of this Russian intelligence that turned out to be fake later. Ladies and gentlemen, why does that matter?

Because again, if the dossier is used and sworn to in court by FBI agents as a means to spy on Trump in a FISA warrant, to cover their tracks in a spying scandal, to cover their tracks in a spying scandal. And now the information that was once attributed to a connected British agent has now been added to the dossier by nothing more than Glenn Simpson himself who's working for Hillary. You have a complete hijacking of the FBI and the entire DOJ.

Let me read you a quick line from this piece, but read the whole thing. It's damning. Turns out at one point simpson in his testimony simpson who's working for hillary fusion gps talks about how there were primary subcontractors used to get the information joe now it was always assumed that those subcontractors were working for steel the brit agent. That's important. They need credibility. But here's a line from the Sperry piece. But it turns out the primary subcontractor worked not for Steele,

but for Simpson at Washington-based Fusion GPS, and he contributed key material for the investigation of Trump underwritten by the Clinton campaign. His name is Edward Baumgartner, a British national who speaks fluent Russian and runs a PR shop out of London and who spent 2016 tweeting his forceful opposition to Trump candidacy. Oh, oh, that stings. Float like a butterfly, sting like a darn bee. That one hurts. So now you've like a darn bee. That one hurts. So now you've got a dossier.

The media needed Steele to be real, man. Because there you go. Oh, a British agent, man. MI6 guy was like James Bond. Look at him. Now he's more like Inspector Gadget. Because now the money trail is being traced to a PR rep out of London who hated

Trump the entire time. Whose information may have been used to spy on the Trump team and sworn to. Holy crikeys. What the hell is going on here, folks? Again,

just to tie it all together back to number one. Obama spied on Trump. The memo is going to expose it. The swamp is in a panic. They used the media the entire time to drive down Trump's approval ratings through phony,

made-up, disingenuous charges on Flynn, through phony, made up, disingenuous charges on Flynn, through phony narratives about collusion. They are now going to desperately try obstruction. But the real obstructionists and the real colluders were the Democrats the entire time. It's devastating stuff. All right. One last thing, because I know, you know, this Trump story has been so encompassing the show. And I know you're interested in it, but I do want to cover some things going on just quickly here in the news.

Hey, there's been a big push lately to move towards a weaker dollar by people within the Trump cabinet. A weak dollar, folks, which it's a mercantilist approach to the economy that's not going to work. What does it mean? I just want to get real simple for you, because, again, I really like what the president's doing, but I do, and I am a supporter. I think we're moving 99% in the right direction. But once in a while, we get a setback, and I think this is a big mistake. The idea behind a weak dollar is, let me just explain it to you in analogy, that people would buy more american stuff and on its face if you don't think past the first order effects it would make sense so joe if one dollar

and one euro is the exchange rate then i could go to europe and exchange my one dollar and get a euro and buy something in europe for a euro let's say it's a bobblehead doll and let's say that the bobblehead doll is a dollar and the bobblehead doll is a euro whether you buy it in the united states or europe joe doesn't matter all right because the dollar is worth one euro so whether i buy the bobblehead in america for a dollar or i buy the bobblehead in europe for a euro it doesn't matter because the dollar is worth a euro it doesn't make a difference you see what i'm saying yep very simply stated weak dollarists this is a huge mistake by the way because it usually means a weak economy their theory here is well if we

weaken the dollar joe which by proxy makes let's say the euro stronger right right so if you weaken the dollar and cut its value by half then what do you get for a euro? Two dollars. Right. Because you just cut the value of the dollar in half. So when a euro was worth a dollar the day before, now the euro strengthens because the dollar weakens. Now the euro buys two dollars. So the theory here by mercantilists and bad economists is that, well, that's great.

You could buy two bobblehead dolls in America and look, bobblehead producers would be going crazy, hiring people. And now if you're listening and you stop at phase one here, which is what liberals do, and some bad economists, you'd say, well, what's the problem, Joe? So what? We just get a lot more jobs for bobblehead producers. We sell more bobbleheads. Folks folks the problem here is twofold number one the bobblehead is not produced a matter of fact almost nothing in the united states is produced exclusively with american-made products so if the bobblehead doll producer has to get his plastic for the bobblehead from europe he now has to pay twice as much to get a euro because he now has to give up $2 to get one euro to buy plastic for the bobbleheads.

So what does he do? He raises the price of the bobbleheads to account for his new cost to import the plastic because the dollar's weak, which now raises the cost of the bobblehead to $2, meaning you now have no gain at all. Before the weak dollar, $1 bought you one bobblehead. After the weak dollar, you're now paying $2 for one bobblehead because the global supply chain, folks, is broken up. We're not living in the world we were living in 200 years ago

when you produced tobacco in your yard and sold it to your neighbor. The global supply chain is entirely integrated now. Weakening the dollar will do nothing to make people buy more bobbleheads. They will only make bobbleheads more expensive. Secondly, why this is a horrible idea. Other countries are not going to take this lying down. Mario Draghi overseas in Europe is already talking about, well, now we need to weaken the euro too.

So we weaken the dollar, Joe. Remember, you cut the dollar's value in half. That means it strengthens the euro. The euro now buys, say, $2 instead of one. But what do the Europeans say? Well, we want to make our products more competitive too. So we're going to weaken the euro and make $2 worth two euros. Now all of a sudden, people who even were thinking about

buying bobbleheads in the United States because the dollar was weak are now going to say, well, the Europeans just weakened their euro too. Let's just go right back to Europe. And then what do you do? Then you say, well, we got to weaken the dollar further.

And then the Europeans say, well, we got to weaken the euro further. We got to weaken the dollar further. And what do you get? How do you weaken the dollar and weaken the euro? By inflation. You print more money. You print more and more and more, which makes the money you have now worth less and less and less. And all of a sudden you have rampant inflation, prices going out of control around the world, and a basically race to the bottom in the global economy. Folks, this is a huge mistake. When you correlate success

of the United States economy over time, it is correlated almost exactly with a strong, not a weak U.S. dollar. This is a big mistake by Mnuchin. I'm sorry. A huge mistake. We need a strong, not a weak U.S. dollar, and we should not pursue policies which do this. And when I say mercantilist, I mean focusing exclusively on trade deficits is a mistake. The money has to come back to the United States. When we send the dollar overseas to buy foreign products, the dollar can't be spent overseas. It's converted to the local currency.

It's in a foreign bank. The dollar can't be spent there. It has to come back to the United States. Whether it buys U.S. products, buys U.S. debt, we're getting lost in this trade deficit and this weak dollar approach is an effort for us to produce more to sell to other people when other people are producing it cheaper. Does that make sense, Joe?

Yeah. You think so? Yeah. I can see your... I was just thinking about the weak euro stream. Yeah, yeah. It's important. Dude, you know, if I didn't see you,

I wouldn't have gotten that. Of course. You always got one of these doozies. He flies out. They're always at the end of the show too when I'm not paying attention. No, it's important because this is going to be a big push. And it's a big, big, big mistake, folks.

The weak dollar will lead, just to sum up here, will lead to two things. The broken global value, the value chain's global now. Everybody, it's not going to increase exports because we have to import stuff to export stuff. And secondly, it's going to cause international global competitors

to just weaken their own currency and you're going to have a race to the bottom and you're going to look at inflation. Your money is going to be worth less. It's as simple as that. All right, folks, thank you for another great week of shows. Please tune in next week on Monday. I'll be following up on a lot of this stuff. I got more information coming in by the day. And please go to Bongino.com and subscribe to my email list there. I appreciate you all tuning in, and I really appreciate you all spreading the word on Twitter about the show. I have been watching it. I've been liking a lot of your tweets, so please share the show. I really appreciate it. Thanks a lot. See you next week.