The Dan Bongino Show - Ep. 646 It’s All Going Down

Episode Date: February 1, 2018

The media gets caught, again, propagandizing the public with fake news. Why is CNN desperately trying to rescue the reputation of FBI supervisor Peter Strzok? Why did the FBI change the wording of the letter that reopened the Hillary Clinton email investigation ten days before the election? The fascinating inside story about the battle over the US Census. Unbelievable healthcare news that rattled markets. Liberals were joking about the deadly train crash? This is insane.   Copyright CRTV. All rights reserved. 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. Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino. Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show on a huge news day. Producer Joe, how are you today?

I'm loaded for bear, Dan-o. Oh man, we got a lot to get to. I woke up this morning with an extra cup of coffee, finally back at home. And let me just tell you folks, not to whine, but man, I have never been, Joe and I were chatting before the show. I have not been as exhausted as I was over the past few days up in D.C. for State of the Union coverage in years. And I said to Joe, I was sitting on the set, a little inside baseball for you, for the Hannity show, which was late the night of the State of the Union because the State of

the Union address went till, was it 1030 or so? Yeah, something like that. So Hannity showed it and started till 11, two hours after his 9pm Eastern, regularly scheduled starting time. So I'm on the set and Don Jr. was the guest before us and Newt Gingrich so I'm waiting and it's like 11.45

and I had been up, folks, on just four hours sleep for, gosh you do the math, I got up at like 5 o'clock that morning. I was, so Joe's like, my gosh, you were on the air. You look like you were going to pass out. Now, I can turn it on like that. Don't get me wrong.

You get me on the air, boom, I go. But I'm sitting there behind the set, and we're on the building, and it's like 40 degrees on the top of this building, and I'm freezing. And I'm thinking, I haven't been this tired since Trinidad with Barack Obama when I was the lead advance agent. I hadn't slept more than, say, three hours for three days. And you know that feeling, folks, when you haven't slept. One night's bad.

Two nights is horrendous. By the third night of three hours and four hours sleep, you feel ill, like you have the flu. And the trip was almost over, and I felt so bad. So I slept like a baby last night. So I'm rip-railing to go. Hey, a lot of news. Looks like the memo may be coming out today.

Now, Joe and I are debating to do a supplemental 15 minute show or to fit it into tomorrow's show. I don't know. I have to get this out to you the minute it comes out. And it's the one downside to doing a recorded podcast. I mean, the nice part is we can kind of tailor the material, not have to worry about pre-plan commercial breaks. But the memo may be released today. I've got a ton of material on this for you. And I will be in for Levin tonight as well if you want to listen, fill in for Mark Levin.

Go to marklevinshow.com. You can listen there. You can listen on the radio station that's local. So a lot of stuff to talk about. But today I've got a big question for you. And I also want to debunk some things that are going on out there and we are now in a what I see to be a constitutional

crisis show the FBI not the rank and file management again I can't be clear enough about that the FBI is engaged now in a battle with the President of the United States who the FBI works for that is not in dispute.

The Constitution does not mention the FBI, but is very clear about the delineation of powers the Department of Justice works for the President of the United States under Title II of the Constitution. It is absolutely clear the FBI and the Department of Justice report to

the President of the United States in the checks and balances of political accountability. That is not in question at all. The FBI is now declaring, basically declaring war on the president management level. I'm not talking about the agents. These are patriots. And I'm telling you that there are managers there who are saying, no, you know, the release of the memo there, they're they're using all kinds of language.

I have some some quotes on this to basically go after the president's decision, which it appears because he was caught on an open mic saying so. And he wasn't caught. I mean, he was just saying that he was going to release the memo. We are in a severe right now constitutional crisis. All right, before we get into it, today's show brought to you by buddies at Filter By. Folks, Dallas. Dallas went below freezing.

New York, nine degrees. I was up there in D.C. It was 20 degrees. Minneapolis, minus two. Winners in full swing. Your HVAC systems work in overtime. You know it. If you aren't properly maintaining your filters,

we didn't when we first moved in our house, you're not only breathing unhealthy air, you just might find yourself with no heat and thousands of dollars in repairs and some dirty lungs to boot. Not good. NG, no good. There's a better way now with FilterBy.com, America's leading provider of HVAC filters

for homes and small businesses. You got a small business with a thousand filters in your factory? These are your guys. You got a home with two or three air filters in your house? These are your guys too. FilterBuy.com carries over 600 different filter sizes, including custom options, all shipped free within 24 hours. Plus, they're manufactured right here in America.

Filter Buy offers a multitude of MIRV options all the way up to hospital grade. That's some pretty clean air. So you'll be removing dangerous pollen, mold, dust, and other allergy-aggravating pollutants from the air while maximizing the efficiency of your HVAC system. Right now, you can save 5% when you set up auto delivery, so you'll never need to think about air filters again. Save money, save time, breathe better with FilterBuy.com. That's FilterBuy.com, FilterBuy.com.

It's a great company, folks. Go change those air filters. Winter's around. You're going to be inside a lot. That's some polluted air you're probably breathing. All right. So the FBI, folks, they are not unaccountable. I have this in capital letters.

Please stop saying that. I'm not talking to the conservatives and libertarians in the audience. I'm talking to the liberals that listen to this show and granted, I disagree with you politically, but I appreciate your listenership nonetheless. But please stop tweeting out there and emailing your friends and talking in public about how the FBI should be above politics.

The FBI should not be political, Joe. Right. We're clear on the difference here. The FBI should not be political Joe right are we we're clear on the difference here the FBI should not be political but the FBI should not be above politics what is politics in essence politics is the ability to project political power to advance your ideology to a structural political system that's what politics is the FBI is not above politics. To say the FBI is above politics and above the accountability of the people who use the political system to project their own power, power of the people. I mean, that's what you do. You use the political process.

Joe, you vote, right? Yeah. You vote. You vote to do what? You vote to project power, to advance your causes through elected representatives in a constitutional republic. We are not a democracy. We are not a democracy. We are a constitutional republic. There is a very big difference. should be somehow unaccountable and be beyond the political system, Joe, is suggesting somehow that we should live in a tyrannical society where you have one branch of government that has, by the way, Joe, has the power to take your life and take your freedom, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, that should be accountable to no one who actually votes. Yeah, baloney. Baloney is right.

The FBI folks should not be political. That does not mean they should be above politics. They have to be held accountable. Why am I bringing this up? The FBI now is basically going to battle with the Trump administration over the release of the memo. How this is happening is absolutely amazing. The FBI falls under Title II. They work for the President of the United States. Who is accountable to who, Joe? The people of the United States who project power by voting

for the President of the United States. To suggest that the FBI should somehow be unaccountable to him and should be unaccountable to his decision-making is to suggest that we should somehow have an independent group of people out there who have are accountable to no one who can take your life take your freedom whatever they may do take your money they can confiscate your assets and should never be held accountable at all do you understand the danger of this now

i bring this up because they're upset about the release of the memo the fbi and the doj and let me give you a quote from a wall street journal piece i have to read it because it's behind a paywall and people get upset uh when i when i put these articles up sorry just getting a drink of water folks um it says the fbi's this is me for a second here the fbi's fight against the release of the memo describing the spying of Donald, spying on of Donald Trump by the Obama administration. They don't dispute the facts. I want to be crystal clear on this. Catherine Herridge from Fox, Joe,

was very clear last night that by her sources, the FBI and the Department of Justice are not disputing. They've read the memo. I have not, but they have read the memo. The FBI and DOJ, people within it. They are not disputing the facts in the memo, Joe. We got to be crystal clear on this. They are disputing, quote, material omissions. Now, this is from the Wall Street Journal piece today, which attacks this idea that the FBI should be unaccountable. It says, note the FBI's language

about, quote, material omissions rather than errors of fact. Until the statement, the FBI was pleading damage to national security. That was their other reason. In other words, don't release the memo. Damage to national security. Now they're claiming, in other words, folks, there's material omissions. Back to the piece. Now that rationale has given way to claim that the House is omitting key details to reach judgments that the FBI apparently disagrees with.

If Mr. Wray, the FBI director, wants to fill in those omissions, he can always ask President Trump to declassify more documents to provide a more complete record. We'd love to see them. And Mr. Trump should give that transparency a boost, even if Mr. Wray doesn't request it. Now, let me simplify a lot of this point i'm trying to make here again i always take it out to 30 000 feet the obama team spied on the trump team that is not in dispute what is in dispute is how it happened and was it legal copy the memo that's about to be released, hopefully today, put together by Devin Nunes, who is a Republican. From what I've heard from rather reliable sources, documents a series of things that happened while Obama was trying,

but spying on the Obama team was spying on Trump and how it happened. We clear on that, Joe? Yep. The Democrats are claiming this is a partisan document. The FBI is claiming it makes material omissions. Here is the one notable thing, folks. I said this to a guy on a plane yesterday. We were getting off and he was asking me

why I think the memo is going to be so damaging. Ladies and gentlemen, if it lays out a series of verifiable facts, facts are not political or partisan. They are just facts. The Democrats are freaking out. Do you notice how the FBI is now attacking material omissions joe and not saying any of it's false right because you can folks if in the memo it says that a judge on this date agreed to uh or signed off on a warrant to

spy on the trump team that is easily verifiable by going back to the records of the court and seeing if it actually happened. Joe, do you understand that's not partisan? The Democrats can't make that go away. There was a paper trail in the Obama spying scandal on Trump, and that paper trail is going to be exposed. Those facts are not partisan. Now, you may ask yourself, why would the FBI then, if these are facts that they know are going to be easily verifiable,

one FBI agent said this, another FBI agent said that, one swore to an affidavit, one, these are all, there's a paper trail here. Why is the FBI losing their minds right now to make this memo go away? I've got a theory for you, folks. And I've got this on relatively good sourcing, let's say. The FBI is worried because the facts laid out in the memo are going to both destroy the careers of and potentially destroy the casework put into other cases as well.

Here's what I mean. Joe, when you're a federal agent or a cop for that matter, I think you may know where I'm going with this. And I go and I swear to a warrant in court. Let's say Joe is guilty of, as someone suggested, we bring back felonious mopery. Joe is guilty of felonious mopery in the umpteenth degree. So I go to court against Joe Armacost, and I swear to a search warrant for Joe's house

to find evidence of felonious mopery. And in that search warrant, I say, for this reason, this reason, and this reason, we should search Joe's house. I saw him do this on a surveillance. Somebody told me he did this. Somebody told me he did that. And the judge says, okay, this is probable cause

that there's evidence in Joe's house of felonious mopery, right? Okay. If the facts I swear to Joe in that court affidavit to get a search warrant for your house for felonious mopery turn out to not be facts, and either I was lying or somebody was lying to me, my reputation as a federal law enforcement officer, a local state law enforcement officer, and I state law enforcement officer, and I do this knowingly, by the way, lie about it, is decimated. Now, this can also be used in other cases where I swore to facts as well.

Other cases can potentially be relitigated. Now, now you see why the FBI has an interest now in making this go away? Because folks, let me tie this up for you. The FBI is not unaccountable. The FBI is not unaccountable because when the FBI makes mistakes, there has to be political ramifications. Those political ramifications are enforced by the president of the United States. If the people disagree with those ramifications or lack thereof, they vote for someone else. The FBI is now attacking the president, even though they work for the president,

because they don't want the memo released because now they're claiming it makes material omissions. I'm telling you this is nonsense, and I read the piece to show you it's nonsense. Because in the journal piece, they clearly lay out the fact that if there are material omissions, Joe, then the FBI should just ask the president

to declassify more and let's not omit it materially let's put it in the stuff you see where i'm going with this yeah yeah the fbi is what i'm trying to get out here is the fbi is inventing new reasons to stop the release of this memo here's the the culmination of why i told you all this. Because in the memo is likely to be information about people who went into federal court, Joe, and swore to information, swore to its authenticity and truthfulness in front of a federal judge.

Those same people are involved in other cases whose credibility in those other cases as well is now going to be called into question and the potential for other cases whose credibility in those other cases as well is now going to be called into question and the potential for other cases and mike flynn and decisions about the hillary clinton case you see where i'm going with this joe the credibility of those people once it's shown they lied in federal court or were lied to and didn't do the proper homework those people's credibility is going to be destroyed in other cases as well. What I'm getting at, folks, is, and I'm sorry about the circuitous route,

but the setup is important, is once that first domino falls and the memo comes out and the facts in the memo are indisputable that people went into federal court, FBI agents and others, and swore to the authenticity and veracity of information that is now shown to be categorically false, that domino's going to fall, and then the Hillary domino's going to fall, the Flynn domino's going to fall, and other people are going to fall as well because those other people were responsible for bringing the information to the FBI. Bingo, baby! Shaggy. These people are in a world of trouble. Yeah.

Now listen, I get it if you're a liberal. I understand. A guy emailed me the other day. He says, sometimes I play your podcast really loud in my place of business so the liberals hear it too. If you're a liberal, I get it that this bothers you. I entirely understand it. It should bother you.

But understand this. You have nowhere to run if you're defending this nowhere as i said to the guy on the plane yesterday why this memo is going to be so damaging joe you and i if i know you're not a liberal but if you were we can have a disagreement about the effect of tax cuts we can i mean i have facts and i can tell you what you know tax cuts in the past have done but you can project things out into the future and have an opinion on if they may work or may not that's okay i mean we could disagree on it what we can't disagree on is facts in a criminal case that have already been sworn to in court there's a paper trail there's an affidavit i bring to the court folks to swear for a search

warrant that says joe did this this and this i i saw i signed folks i swear to it there's a court record there's minutes this will not go away the democrats adam schiff barack obama people they are not going to be able to say that what happened didn't happen because there joe you see where i'm going with this there are signed court documents the management at the fbi that's been corrupted by this needs this to go away that is why they are pulling out everything remember i just what i read for you from the journal they don't want the memo to come out first they claimed it was going to be a national security damage to national security even though sources and methods joe are obviously going to be redacted that's nonsense national security is not in danger the national security of the united states was in danger because people at the fbi decided that donald trump didn't have constitutional rights and they were going to usurp

the republic bam that's the national security threat once they realized that was good was gaining no traction to stop the release of the memo, Joe, now they're moving on to material omissions, even though the FBI, folks, listen to me, please, can request from Trump, President Trump, that he just not omit it and declassify it. Do you understand how silly that argument is? Don't release the memo. There are material omissions. Well, how about we just include the rest?

No, no, don't include the rest of the information. Wait, you just complained about not including the rest of the information. Yeah, I know, but we don't really mean that. We're just trying to stop you from releasing the memo. You're laughing because it's funny, but it is because you're- Ridiculous. Yeah. It's so obvious that the FBI is panicking over this, and I'm telling you why they're panicking.

Yeah. Because the people who swore to the memos are involved in other cases. Listen, I can't say this enough. When it's pointed out in the memo that what they swore to was factually false, was incorrect. Once that's pointed out, there is no way to backtrack. They swore to it. They signed it. A judge signed off.

Other cases are going to be in jeopardy too. There are going to be civil lawsuits. There's going to be calls to overturn prior cases. Now, ladies and gentlemen, Gosh, I have so much, folks. I'm really sorry. I'm just so passionate about it. I feel like I've been reborn with this thing. Sorry, I have to drink water during the show now because I've been getting so passionate

that my mouth gets dry, and I want to make sure that the sound of it doesn't sound, my voice sounds different when my mouth gets dry. Yeah, I can only do so much, dude. Yeah, I know. I know, poor guy. You don't have to edit that stuff. Joe edits out the sniffles, and sometimes if we do a drop, like a. Yeah, I know. I know. Poor guy. You don't have to edit that stuff. Joe edits out the sniffles.

And sometimes if we do a drop, like a sound drop, there's a little delay because me and Joe are video. He does a great job. And I get a lot of compliments about the audio quality. Joe works super hard. So, and people love you, Joe. And by the way, your tweet yesterday. Yeah.

Everybody loved it. Folks, we hit a million downloads in a month. That's insane, by the way. Thank you. We're number two behind the great Ben Shapiro now. So, proud hit a million downloads in a month. That's insane, by the way. Thank you. We're number two behind the great Ben Shapiro now, so proud to say that. All right, but getting back to this is important. Folks, it is not coincidental,

given what I just told you, that I don't know if you saw this yesterday, Joseph, but Bob Mueller, the special counsel lead in the investigation of the Russian collusion, air quotes, because we all know there was only collusion between the democrats bob muller yesterday asked for a delay in the sentencing of mike flynn uh why do you think that may have happened folks have we not called this thing from day one i'm telling

you the source is ah bingo the reason i strongly believe special counsel lead bob muller asked for a delay in the sentencing of mike general michael flynn is because of what I just told you. The investigators involved in the case for the swearing in of affidavits and the nonsensical, the people who went to court to swear to affidavits in the Trump case, folks, affidavits based on false information, I can't repeat this enough,

are the same people involved in the Flynn case. They're the same people involved in the Hillary case. They're the same people involved in the Hillary case. Their credibility is about to be decimated. And any good Joe defense lawyer is going to say, wait, you lied in court about this? Or presented a series of false information to a judge and swore to it? But you were involved with my client too? Hold on. Time out.

We need a review of this. You think it's a coincidence now before Flynn is sentenced? Folks, Mueller knows this. Mueller knows the people involved in the Hillary investigation, the Trump investigation with air quotes. He knows that these people's reputations are about to be destroyed. There is a reason he asked for a delay in the sentencing of Mike Flynn. Because the Mike Flynn case was a farce from the start.

And wait till this memo comes out today. Just wait. Now, folks, as a federal agent, just one more, just to kind of tie this up. Once you are shown to have lied in court before, that material has to be presented to a defense attorney in any future case. If you get caught perjuring yourself in court as a federal agent and as a state and local officer as well, you are basically done with your job forever. You can never be involved in a criminal investigation again for all intents and purposes. Why, Joe?

Because from that point on, in every criminal case you testify in, after you're caught lying the first time, it has to be disclosed, Joe. It has to be. It's obligatory. You got a scarlet letter, baby. Yeah. Exactly. You are Hester Prynne. That scarlet letter, baby. Yeah. You got the scarlet.

Exactly. You are Hester Prynne. That scarlet letter is on you forever. You are a de facto non-entity in your investigative operation. You will never be used again because everything you touch will be tainted by the fact that you lied in the past. That is the problem.

Is this making sense, Joe? That is why the FBI is engaging in a constitutional crisis war with the president right now, because they're not only afraid their reputation is going to be ruined in the misleading statements made about the Trump Russian collusion case. They are also afraid that the same people were involved in other cases too. And those cases are about to be chucked. That's what's going on.

Now, folks, just to rewind the tape a little bit. The reason they're panicking about this is the process to get a warrant against people, which happened in the Trump campaign when they applied multiple times for a FISA warrant. I just want you to just quickly understand the difference. I explained it a couple of times, but as a federal agent, if you have probable cause to believe there's a crime that was committed, you can get a search warrant or a warrant to what we call in just normal language wiretap. You have to prove you tried to use all of it.

It's not easy to get a federal wiretap, by the way. It's very difficult at the criminal level. Matter of fact, someone in the FBI told me it's very difficult to do, and it's almost like a marker for success. If you were able to get a wiretap, you're a really skilled agent. You have to have probable cause. You have to put together a series of evidence okay now to wiretap someone in an intelligence case using the FISA courts you have to prove provide probable cause that the person was acting on behalf of a foreign agent in violation of U.S.

law what I'm trying to tell you is that people who swore it on swore these affidavits in court using the FISA court Joe in other words other words, claiming they had probable cause, that the person they were trying to spy on, Carter Page, Mike Flynn, whatever it may have been, they would have had to prove that that person was acting on behalf of a foreign agent and they were in violation of U.S. law. I'm telling you those facts weren't present because the only thing verified in the dossier and the information used to get these warrants. The only thing verified from that dossier was that Carter Page, in fact, traveled to Moscow. That is it. I traveled to Moscow twice.

Is the government going to spy on me too? Folks, the Bureau is in a lot of trouble here. And my sincerest apologies to the hardworking men and women who do your best over there. And I know many of you and you guys are great. And ladies, God bless you. And I feel bad. I went through the Secret Service scandal crisis. I left the job, obviously, in 2011. It happened in 2012. But when you're a Secret Service agent,

you're one for life. I mean, it's an honor to have been one. It sticks with you forever. And I had to answer questions about that for a long time. I wasn't even there. But people are like, you were in the Secret Service.

What are those idiots doing over in Columbia? I had friends, family, people touched by this thing. It was awful. You remember that, Joe? I sure do. Yeah. It was terrible. And I know what it's like to have to answer questions for other people's piss poor decisions. And I feel genuinely bad for the unbelievably patriotic and hardworking men and women of the FBI whose reputations have been tarnished by these idiots at the top who made a series of colossally bad decisions. Now, moving on to the second story, because there's been more breaking news last night to show you the media's effort to collude with the Democrat Party to cover, to desperately cover

this story. Before we get to that, today's show also brought to you by our buddies at Brickhouse Nutrition. Hey, today, quickly, I just want to talk to you about their energy product, because it's a great one. Listen, we all have busy lives, and I have to tell you, coming off this three-day... You know they have that thing when you get into drugs, what are they called, a bender or something? I had a three-day work bender, where you just can't... You know what a work bender... You just can't stop working for three days. I mean, seriously, you have no idea what Joe and I did over the last three days. We were at it probably 20 hours a day, right?

I couldn't have gotten through it without Dawn to Dusk. What's Dawn to Dusk? It's Brickhouse Nutrition's energy product. It's the best in the business. They found a hole in the energy product market, the drinks and the pills and the coffee and all that stuff. They were like, listen, this stuff is great, but it lasts for an hour. And then you crash.

So Brickhouse, in conjunction with their scientists and the people they deal with who design their products, who are great, I've spoken to these guys. I know them very well. They said, guys, we need a time release energy product. What we want is a nice boost in energy and mood throughout the day, but we don't want peaks and valleys. They developed a 10-hour time release product. The blend is amazing in there.

It's absolutely terrific. The product is called Dawn to Dusk. It's great for CrossFitters, military types, working moms and dads. You need to be sharper in the boardroom. You need to be sharper on the assembly line. This is the product for you. Joe and I love it.

I wouldn't have been able to get through the three days without it. It's good stuff, right? Yeah. The reviews we get on it are absolutely amazing. It's called Dawn to Dust. Go to BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan. That's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.

Pick up a bottle of Dawn to Dust today. You will not be disappointed. Okay. Now, the media is colluding here with the Democrat Party to cover this story. And a story broke yesterday. And I'll put these stories. I have some great, great stories in the show notes today. This is one of them from Legal Insurrection, a website I love.

Their email list is spectacular. William Jacobson does a great job. But there's a story over there about how CNN, and they were reporting yesterday, Joe, that Peter Stroke, who is the number two FBI agent in counterintel, who is intimately involved in Hillary's email investigation, the Trump special counsel, and the Mike Flynn interview. He is in the room at the White House interviewing Flynn, folks. You have to be crystal clear on this. Flynn is interviewed by Stroke. So he is a player in all of this. Stroke's texts are also the ones that have been released

with Lisa Page. That's the person you're hearing about. Most of you already know this, but I just want to make sure you understand the context of what I'm talking about. CNN thinks they're helping right here because there are some emails now that have been outed that have suggested that it was Stroke who suggested to the FBI director, Jim Comey, obviously through his boss, who's Bill Price, who's the number one in counterintel, and through McCabe, who's the number two in the FBI. So through the chain of command, Stroke suggests, Joe, that once those Anthony Weiner computer emails, remember Hillary's emails were found on Weiner's computer. Once they were found, CNN saying, oh, look, it's Stroke out there who was suggesting that they reopen the investigation. Now, let me read to you.

This is going to make sense in a second. I promise. But it's important. I take screenshots of stuff just to make sure we get it all down. OK. So apparently there were a number of drafts of a letter that was written to Congress by Jim Comey 10 days out from the election, Joe. That letter was the one where he says to Congress, we're reopening the investigation into Hillary's emails.

Remember this, folks? Hillary emails were found on Anthony Weiner's computer. How is that? Hillary's body person, Huma Abedin, who I know and I've worked for Hillary too, so Huma's been with her a long time. Hillary's married to Congressman Anthony Weiner, former congressman, disgraced congressman. She was forwarding emails apparently to a home computer that he has access to.

Those emails were found on her computer, on Anthony Weiner's computer. Ten days out from the election, the FBI Joe's like is like, oh, oh, what do we do now? Are these new emails? Are they old emails? They're not going to be able to make this go away. So according to these new emails, there's a letter that's written to Congress by Jim Comey saying, hey, we're going to have to reopen this. Now, this is from CNN. Apparently, the initial copy, sorry, the initial copy written by Stroke or one incorporating others edits, the draft of the copy states that

the FBI had, quote, an obligation to take appropriate investigative steps to review the newly discovered emails on Wiener's laptop. The next day, October 28, 2016, Comey sent the final letter to Congress editing out the line that he had a, quote, obligation to take steps to review. Instead, new language was added saying that Comey had been briefed by his team, quote, obligation to take steps to review. Instead, new language was added saying that Comey had been briefed by his team, quote, yesterday, and that he, quote, agreed that the FBI should take appropriate investigative steps. He takes out the word obligation. Now, why is any of this important to you?

Why does it matter? Folks, the media, I'm going to tie these two, first story and the second story together. The media is not covering for the FBI. The media is trying to rescue the reputation of Peter Stroke here. And I'll tell you how they're doing it. Not because the media is trying to protect the FBI, but because the media is trying to protect their Messiah, Barack Obama.

I have told you repeatedly, this scandal will not evade the White House. Barack Obama does not have plausible deniability in this. People who reported directly to Barack Obama are going to be uncovered as having briefed him on this. There is no way Samantha Power and Susan Rice, who unmasked people who were spied on on the Trump team by Obama. There is no way this happened without a regular communications channel with Barack Obama. It's not possible. The media is ferociously trying to protect the crown.

To protect the crown, they have to protect Peter Stroke and make him look like a nonpartisan actor. Stroke's texts are clear as day, Joe. They indicate that he hated Donald Trump. He could not stand Donald Trump and that they had a preference for Hillary Clinton. This is clear as day. In order to rescue the case and make it look like Hillary was treated fairly, and by I mean fairly, like she was subjected to the power of the FBI as well,

they're now saying, oh, look, look, it's Stroke who was pushing Comey to reopen the investigation. You see where I'm going with this, Joe? Oh, yes. Look, Stroke didn't hate Hillary. He's the one who wanted to reopen the investigation 10 days out.

No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Don't fall into the trap. CNN thinks they're helping. But folks, as I told you in a prior episode, the case was reopened 10 days out because the emails on Weiner's laptop were known and I don't want to say discovered, but it was widely known and spread throughout the New York field office that had a footprint in this investigation, the New York field office of the FBI. Comey was afraid at the time that the New York field office to the punch so that the media doesn't get a press release, ladies and gentlemen, saying, Hillary's emails found with a big exclamation point on the front of the New York Post.

A reoccurring theme throughout. Exactly. Covering their tracks, covering their butts. Comey and Stroke both understand this. But you see what I'm saying, Joe? That CNN and the media thinks they're covering for Stroke both understand this. But you see what I'm saying, Joe? That CNN and the media thinks they're covering for Stroke by saying, oh, look,

they wanted to reopen it. No, no, folks, they had to reopen it. They had to beat the field office if there was a leak to the punch to get out there and frame the narrative themselves. And I've also said to you,

so that's number one. And my deepest apologies if this gets complicated, folks, but this is such a critical and important case. Reason number one i'm and my deepest apologies if this gets complicated folks but this is such a critical and important case reason number one they have to beat the new york field office to the punch because they're afraid of a leak if they're going to leak it comey's going to leak it himself and by the way stroke's going to change the language and massage it we don't have an obligation they eliminate that word because obligation makes it seem like it's a crime right yeah they change the

language of the word oh we're going to take appropriate steps from obligation to review. Okay? Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. So they changed the language, but they beat the New York field office to the punch by framing the narrative themselves, by using the delicate language. The second reason, folks, Comey, McCabe, and the others who are clearly pro-Hillary, as I've said to you, they need to clear the deck before the anticipated Hillary Clinton win. Nobody thinks Trump is going to win this election.

Nobody. Absolutely no one. They think it is a ground ball. The decision was made likely to clear the deck for Hillary so she would not be subjected to any blackmail material by anyone else. Although that's highly unlikely. The Russians engage in mutually assured destruction when it comes to intelligence. But still, they still understand that having this information out there creates a very bad situation, let's say, for Hillary when she's in the White House. Comey decides 10 days out, let's just clear the deck and put it all out there

so the material's out there in the public and therefore if anyone decided to use it for potential blackmail or anything like that we'll have cleared the deck in advance.

So there were two reasons for that press conference 10 days out. Beat the New York field office to the punch and frame the narrative. Secondly, put the information

out in the public. Hillary's going to be president anyway, Joe. It doesn't really matter. It's not going to hurt her. We'll clear her two days before the election. Everything will be hunky-dory. All right. Yeah. CNN doesn't understand that though. And they think they're rescuing Stroke's reputation because if Stroke's reputation, who is a key figure in all these investigations as an anti-Trump pro-Hillary guy is allowed to stand, CNN understands they have

absolutely nowhere to go. Now, I'm going to sum all this up and tie these two stories together for you. Why is CNN so interested in these media outlets in protecting the image of Peter Stroke? Well, for some of the reasons I just told you, but why specifically stroke? Folks, who swore to those warrants in court? Someone had to do it. Someone in the FBI had to get up in front of a FISA court judge, a foreign intelligence surveillance court judge. Remember what I told you at the beginning?

Listen to this show twice if you need to. It is so important. Someone had to get up in front of a FISA court judge and swear that they were about to put in an affidavit for a warrant to listen in on conversations and intercept emails on an American citizen because they had probable cause that that American citizen was acting on behalf of a foreign agent and was doing so in violation of a crime. Somebody had to get up in court and do that. Was that person Peter Stroke? If that person was Peter Stroke, do you understand that every single thing he touched is going to go down in flames and that domino just tipped? Everything he touched is going to go down in flames. And that domino just tipped. Everything he touched.

I'm just going to leave that question open for now. Was it stroke? Do they already know that? Is that why he is so important in saving his reputation? Folks, once the well's poisoned, nobody can drink from it. If Stroke raised his right hand in court and swore to the veracity of information that he knew or turned out later to be false, everything he touched is going down. It explains the FBI's hesitance to release the memo. it explains the FBI's hesitance to release the memo,

it explains the media's eagerness to defend the reputation of Stroke now, even though they're throwing him under the bus and they don't even know it. I explained to you why. They think they're defending him. They're just backing up the narrative I already told you. They only outed the email case because they were afraid the New York field office

was going to tell the truth. And they wanted to clear the deck for Hillary. Strokes involved in all of this. Folks, this guy is in a world of trouble. All right. More fake news yesterday on the case. I've got some other stuff too, so just bear with me. But more fake news on the case yesterday. Let's see. I have it right here. Take some photos. Molly Hemingway, another terrific piece at the Federalist. It will be in the show notes. Please go to Bongino.com. Subscribe to my email list. I know I beat you up about it, folks, but it's so important.

The email list, I'm putting out information every day. I am pulling from across the web, some old, some new, that explains this case to a T. You read these pieces, you will nail it. For those of you who ask me, oh, I missed prior emails, I just signed up for your email list, go to Bongino.com. Just scroll down through the podcast section. All the links are there.

You can see them for yourself more fake news yesterday now if they can't defame uh excuse me if they can't rescue the reputation of stroke joe their alternate strategy the democrats and the media is going to be to defame and lie about devin nunes devin nunes is the republican congressman responsible for what's in the memo. The memo is a documentary evidence, from what I'm hearing, of exactly how the Obama team spied on Trump without any probable cause to do so. So now, again, just to be clear, first, they want to clear the name of Stroke because Stroke's an integral figure in all of this. Again, who swore to that warrant? Secondly, if they can't do that,

at the same time, actually on a passion, say if they can't, as on a parallel track, Joe, they're going to attack the credibility in a scorched earth campaign against Devin Nunes. It started yesterday. Article in the Daily Beast. Remember the media buddies? Their media buddies always come to their back. They've got to defend

the crown. Defend the crown at all costs. So headline yesterday from the Daily Beast. Devin Nunes won't say if he worked with the White House on anti-FBI memo. There's an anti-FBI memo? Where's that? That's funny. I thought it was a memo about the Obamagate spying scandal. But no, Joe, notice how the media works.

It's an anti-fbi so the memo i don't know remember jack nicholson and the shining all work and no play makes jack a dull boy and he's got 700 pages of that and the wife realizes he's crazy so what does the devon newness memo say the fbi stinks the fbi stinks the fbi stinks the fbi stinks do you see how dumb the media is these are idiots these are imbeciles but they're smart imbeciles they really are they're smart imbeciles. They really are. They're smart imbeciles. I know that sounds kind of counterintuitive,

but they're imbeciles because they're being suckered. They're being suckered by Democrat hacks trying to cover the Obamagate spying scandal up. But they're smart in the way they cover for them. And the way they cover is they use the language. And the language is very clever. Devin Nunes won't say if he worked with the White House on the anti-FBI memo. There is no anti-FBI memo. That's just made up. Now, here's the allegation. They're saying now that in a committee hearing, in a closed committee

hearing that the information and the transcript is out there, in an effort to attack Devin Nunes' credibility, Joe, do you know this story? No. In an effort to attack Devin Nunes' credibility, Joe, do you know this story? No. No. In an effort to attack his credibility, Adam Schiff, the Democrat hack, the swamp rat police state anti-civil liberties advocate now, Adam Schiff's saying, well, they asked him a question, one of the representatives in the committee, and said, did you work with the White House on this? And the leak in the story, you would insist, you know, Devin Nunes won't say if he worked with the White House. Joe, clearly from the headline, you would believe that Nunes refused to answer the question.

So let me just be clear, just in case any of you are missing this. I asked Joe, who's involved with the memo, which Nunes is, and Nunes is the central figure in the investigation. I asked Nunes, Nunes, did you work with the White House? According to the story, he said, I'm not going to answer that. Let's go to the videotape, as Warner Wolf used to say in New York. Here's an actual transcript by Molly Hemingway, who did an unbelievable job at the Federalist,

of entirely debunking these fools at the Daily Beast and the liar Democrats in Congress lying again. Here's the question. Is this guy, Mr. Quigley, who's a Democrat, who's asking Nunes in the meeting. He's talking about the White House now. So here's the guy questioning Nunes. Did they have any idea you were doing this? Did they talk about doing this with you?

Did they suggest it? Did you suggest it to them? Did you consult in deciding how to go forward with this before, during, and after this point right now? I yield. Here's Nunes' answer. Now, according to the Daily Beast, the answer is he refused. I refuse to answer that question. Here's the real answer from the actual transcript.

Nunes, I would just answer, as far as I know, no. And I would say that we are all well aware that the minority has not wanted to conduct this investigation by the public, opposition to the subpoenas that we issued back in August, that we're clearly looking into matters of FISA abuse and other matters. Let me just read that opening line again. When he asked if he coordinated with the White House. I would just answer, as far as I know, no. Now, let me read again the headline of the Daily Beast piece.

Devin Nunes won't say if he worked with White House. Devin Nunes, again, I would just answer, as far as I know, no. Daily Beast headline. Devin Nunes won't say if he worked with White House, an anti-FBI memo. Again, the chairman, Devin Nunes, I would just answer, as far as I know, no. Folks, do you, I mean, dovin Nunes, I would just answer as far as I know, no. Folks,

do I have to read that a fifth time? How is that not fake news? You may not like the answer, no. And of course he's going to say as far as I know because at some point, you don't know. Did somebody talk to a member who talked to another member and the information got back to you and you heard it during it? The guy did not coordinate

with the White House. He answers the question clear as day. But again, here we go. The Daily Beast, fake news again, and they're entirely debunked. Folks, I'm telling you what's going on here, okay? They are in a panic on parallel tracks. Rescue Peter Stroke. Why?

Because Stroke is a centralbi figure in all of this and if he swore to something or someone else swore to something and he knew the information was false that they were giving to the person that swore to it stroke is going to take down everything else with him because he touched all of these cases second track we must discredit the republicans leak fake news to the media oh Nunez wouldn't answer the question have idiots in the media who do no fact checking at all then repeat and echo the message hope that message gets out and people mistrust and won't trust the government at all anymore. In other words, Joe, if the government documents shown are going to show that the Democrats

and the FBI had a role in the illegal spying on of Donald Trump, Joe, then the Democrats are going to burn that sucker down. They're going to burn it all down. In other words, you aren't going to trust the government at all then. We're going to discredit everything. We're going to feed stories over and over. This guy, chaos theory. Folks, they are creating the ultimate bath and soup of chaos so you don't trust anything anymore. Even though what they're telling you is easily verifiable as false. The transcript is there. It is in the Molly Hemingway piece in the Federalist. Read it. It's in the show notes today. Nunes' answer is clear as day. It is in a recorded

transcript. The media is lying. Now, from what I know, there's been no retraction yet i'll have to check by the daily beast but it is fake news again in an effort to discredit newness folks i just want to tie this up because i do want to get to some other stuff today i know it's running a little late here, but there's two big questions and my source is gold on this. Now, the first question will be obvious if you listened to the episode today and you paid attention. The two big outstanding questions in this case that are going to, from an investigative standpoint. Now, from a moral and ethical standpoint, Joe, I understand your question because I get them on email. A lot of people say to me, why? Why did Obama spy on Trump?

And I've tried to explain that to you with the other back episodes about Uranium One and the need for Obama. The bottom line is a lot of untoward things happened in the Obama administration. They wanted to make sure in the case Trump won that there was some effort to discredit Trump and maybe pursue an avenue for impeachment. So they wanted to dirty up Trump too. But from a legal perspective, mechanical perspective, there are two outstanding questions that you need to burn into your brain. Number one, who swore to the FISA warrants in court? Folks, I'm working on it.

I think I know. I've laid the groundwork on this show. But once that person is discredited as having sworn to inauthentic false information in court, the entire house of cards is going to come down. and the FBI discussed this a bit yesterday. When you bring in an asset, a source, a spy like a Christopher Steele, hey, we got information on a bank robbery. There is a process to verify that asset. Who ultimately signed off on the use of Christopher Steele as an asset? Was he paid? And did Christopher Steele acknowledge

he was working for Hillary Clinton and Fusion GPS and that he was also feeding information to the media as well? When those two questions are answered, you are going to have two major league problems. Problem number one, someone swore in court to information, swore on their reputation and their legal position, swore in a court of law in in violation of the law, on information that was absolutely false. Number two, an asset was used to provide information to the FBI to swear to in court. An asset that unquestionably was corrupted by being paid at the same time by political operatives and also reporting the information he had to the media at the same time he was giving it to the FBI. The whole thing is going to come apart.

The memo today is going to be damning. I mean, this may be the first time ever we have to do an addendum to the show. Yeah. I mean, I don't, we've been at the forefront of this thing with a lot of other folks. Folks, please, I'm not trying to take any credit for this. There are people doing outstanding work out there. That's why I'm so mad at a couple others who seem so obsessed with who gets credit for everything. There are people out there who are legit, I know, it's like head to desk, and I'm just flipping them in the middle finger, like, guys, you're all doing great work. You're all doing great work.

But because two people report the same thing at the same time does not mean they didn't learn about it at the same time from the same. Do you get what I'm saying? It's amateur hour. It really is. It's really disappointing. We have to get to the bottom of this. I hate that term. Gosh, scratch that.

That's a Democrat term, get to the bottom of this. All right. Another interesting story. I do want to get to some news of the day. I hate that term. Gosh, scratch that. Oh, that's a Democrat term, get to the bottom of this. All right. Another interesting story, because I do want to get to some news of the day. It's really important. So Jeff Bezos from Amazon, Warren Buffett from Berkshire Hathaway, and Jamie Dimon from JPMorgan Chase made an announcement yesterday that rattled markets everywhere. These are three huge companies, Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway from Warren Buffett, and JPMorgan Chase, enormous companies. You're talking about close to,away from Warren Buffett and JP Morgan Chase. Enormous companies. You're talking about close to, I think it's $1.5 trillion in combined wealth from these companies. They came out yesterday, Joe, and said, oh, listen, we're looking to form this new nonprofit

to cut healthcare costs that are going to affect our three companies. Healthcare markets were rattled everywhere. Everyone from Walmart to pharmaceutical book operators, managers, it shook the markets like few announcements have in a long time. Now, I only bring this up because one of the... I love economics. And for you regular listeners to the show, you know that. But for our new listeners over the last two weeks, Joe and I, over the course of two years, have spent a lot of time debunking. We love economics. It's our thing. We debunk a lot of myths that liberals put out there on economics. And one of the reasons I have a beef with their announcement is not that they want to come in there and do something creative with healthcare markets.

That's great. It's clearly broken. It's the nonprofit line. In other words, nonprofits are great, but there's an insinuation in their release that the profit motive is what's destroying healthcare. Just quickly, folks, because this debate's going to come up over the coming days because of this announcement. That is not true. It is not the profit motive or the incentive to generate revenue that is destroying healthcare markets. It's two things. Number one, it is government distortions in the healthcare market created by the fact that the

government pays between 40 and 50% of the healthcare market created by the fact that the government pays between 40 and 50% of the healthcare bills now in the United States. Why does that matter? Folks, there's this thing called the third party payer effect. When you have two parties to a transaction, you know, Joe goes and buys a bagel in a bagel store. There's two parties. There's Joe and the owner of the bagel store.

They both agree on a price. If Joe walks into the bagel store and the guy says, hey, this bagel is $17. Joe's going to say, thank you. Have a nice day. Joe walks in. Guy says, let me get an onion bagel with butter. Guy says, that's $1.50. Joe says, that's fair. Joe gives him $1.50. Two parties, folks. Joe, bagel store owner. Joe, bagel store owner. When you have a third party, that's why it's called third party payer problems, When you have a third party, that's why it's called third party payer problems, that transaction's distorted. Why? Think about it in terms of healthcare.

Joe is not paying his doctor. Joe is paying taxes to the government. If Joe is on Medicaid or Medicare, which is a significant swath of our population right now in the United States. Joe is paying taxes. He may not even be paying taxes. That's almost, regardless, that doesn't even matter. The government is paying Joe's bills. The government is buying the bagel for Joe. The bagel store owner knows Joe's not paying for the bagel.

Joe knows he's not paying for the bagel, Joe knows he's not paying for the bagel too. The government's buying him the bagel. Joe has no incentive to care about the price because Joe's not paying for the bagel. The government is. The bagel store owner has no incentive to keep his bagel prices low because he knows Joe's not paying either. He wants to get as much money as he can.

Folks, this is simply, in essence, the problem with the healthcare markets now. The government is the payer in a large, it's not a majority, but close to a majority of healthcare transactions in the United States. Medicare, Medicaid, other products like that, CHIP, government-sponsored healthcare programs where you pay taxes and that tax money is spent. It is distorting the market. It is not the profit incentive. You get what I'm saying? Yeah. It is the profit incentive at the bagel store that actually keeps the cost low, not high. So the government's paying, I want that $17 bagel, baby.

You're damn right you do because you don't care. The bagel could be $27. It's not your business. The government's paying. It's all on the G, right? Yes, sir. When Joe goes in, the bagel store owner wants to stay in business. He understands that the bagel guy down the block sells his bagels for $2. Two, well, I can beat that. I'll do it for $1.50 and steal his business. Folks, when people talk about the profit incentive, they talk about it as if it always means higher prices. But if the profit and incentive always meant higher prices, why is it that prices keep coming down? How does that work? Why is it that a flat screen TV you can get is for $250 now would have cost you $3,000 10 years ago?

How is it that an Apple computer when it initially came out, today's dollars would have run you three grand. You could get one now, you know, for what, 1,500 bucks? How is that? How is it that prices keep coming down? This is where liberals have no understanding of economics whatsoever. Where prices don't come... Let me just say this simply and I'm going to move on. Where prices come down, the bottom line is market forces and the evil profit incentive was in effect

because to make profits, you have to charge prices. Prices that are competitive. To charge competitive prices, you have to constantly beat your opponents. Where prices constantly go up, education, college, healthcare. What's the common denominator there? The government.

Because there's no incentive for the prices to go down because the government's paying there's a third party payer problem folks do you understand how the liberals have it all wrong the profit incentive is what's driving prices down the government incentive is what's pushing prices up that's why i have such a problem with this statement they put out we're gonna we to start a non-profit. The profit incentive is this is what's driving healthcare costs up. No, it's not. It's the government that's doing it. One other point on it as well. So you have the third-party payer problem, but secondly, you have the crowd-out problem.

For those economics majors, pretty simple concept. When the government pays for something, it crowds out people in the room who are free market folks and small businesses and large businesses that would have offered the services themselves. You know, when you have the government providing, say, milk to people in the army and buying it from one company and that one company only, other milk producers lose a significant portion of their business because the government's got its sole provider. They have no reason to compete in that market because they can't. The government crowds people out of the room who otherwise would have entered the room and been more effective.

In other words, there's another milk producer that may have produced better milk, more vitamins, more protein at a cheaper price, but they can't. Because the government has decided it's going to buy the milk and it's going to buy it from this person and that's it. It wipes everybody out. When the government comes in and says, we're going to pay for medicine, we're going to pay for 40% of it, and this is how we're going to do it through a third-party payer system, there's going to be no supply demand at all, because the suppliers and the demanders know the government's paying.

Prices always go up. I just get really annoyed at that. They just ignore incentives all the time. And they ignore incentives in other things, too. I mean, think about it. You know, there's this universal basic income argument going on right now. Well, the reason most conservatives object to a universal basic income is just like having a third-party payer in the bagel store

ignores the incentive for Joe to seek a low-priced bagel and for the bagel store provider to charge low prices because the government's paying. The same thing works for universal basic income. The incentives are all wrong. If the government provides a universal basic income, what incentive is there for people to work? None. None. There's really no incentive at all. DACA, same thing. I brought this up with DACA. Oh, we got to have compassion for the kids. Okay, you're ignoring the incentive then. If we provide amnesty to 1.8 million kids, you're only providing an incentive for 2 million more to come across the border, knowing they're going to get amnesty later as well. That's the problem, folks.

All right, one last topic and we'll roll for the day. I mentioned that census the other day, how they wanted to add, the Obama administration wanted to add new racial and ethnic identity categories to the census. They love that because that leads to new lawsuits, new identity groups, and new groups they can paint as victims. There's another component of the census. This is a great story. Ben Weingarten has a piece up. I think it's in the Federalist. Be in the show notes. Please read. It's a really cool story. The government show, you would think this wouldn't be controversial at all. The government wants to add a, are you a citizen box to the census? Oh my God. Are you, is this complicated folks?

US census. Are you a citizen? Yes or no? Very simple. The Democrats are losing their minds, but why? This is fascinating. They're losing their minds primarily because there are large swaths of non-citizens, shockingly, Joe, in sanctuary cities and states like California. And if you're not forced to answer on the census if you're a citizen or not, then obviously the population count of these liberal states where there are a lot of non-citizens is going to go up. If the population count goes up, that state also gets more members of the House of Representatives in Congress because the House of Representatives is based on population. There's roughly one member of the House of Representatives for roughly every 700,000

citizens. So if you have, let's say, 1.4 million illegal people in your state who are there because it's a sanctuary state, you now get, Joe, basic math, two House of Representatives members representing people who aren't even citizens. Now, those people are likely to be Democrats, those House of Representatives members, because they're Democrat states. The Democrats are losing their minds because if non-citizens aren't counted, they will lose votes in the House of Representatives. But interestingly enough,

the Republicans are playing a little smart on this. They're coming back with an argument, very savvy. We've mentioned this before, so it'll sound familiar when I get there. They're saying, well, that's kind of interesting because you're actually hurting minority voters who are citizens. Well, how's that? Because those minority citizens' votes

are now being diluted by people who could potentially vote or at a minimum, their representative in Congress is also representing non-citizens too. So think about it. If you're in a district, Joe, if you were voting on an initiative, right? Let's say, Joe, your vote, right? Your vote is critical to determining

if taxes are going to be if a taxes are going to be cut or taxes are going to be high you bet do you want to vote it's not a trick question do you want your vote to be one of 10 votes or do you want your vote to be one of a thousand votes to have more effect i would say one of 10 dan one of 10 you guys are very smart guy of course because joe's vote is is exponentially more powerful if he's just one of 10 people voting right rather than he's one of a,000, say. So the fascinating argument some savvy Republicans are making is, well, what about those minority voters in California, Joe? Now, instead of voting as one of, say, 600,000 or 700,000, they're voting as one of 1.4 million because there's all these people living there who are

now maybe potentially voting as well, and their votes are being diluted. Very, very savvy. So the Democrats are losing their minds over this because they don't want to lose members of the House of Representatives, but the Republicans and the Trump administration is doing a good job. They're saying, just to be clear and wrap up the story, we're keeping a damn question in there.

Are you a citizen or not? So we'll see what happens with that. I'll keep you updated. It's a great piece, though. Read it in the Federalist today. All right, folks, please sign up for my email list. I implore you. We have so many great pieces today. Go to Bongino.com and do that. You can read the articles there as well. I really appreciate it.

Thanks for spreading the word on the show. We had a great month. One million downloads. Thank you. Thank you so much. D-Bongino Show. Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com. You can also get Dan's podcasts on iTunes or SoundCloud. And follow Dan on Twitter 24-7 at D-Bongino.