The Dan Bongino Show - Ep. 815 The Big Secret Revealed

Episode Date: September 26, 2018

Summary: In this episode I address the biggest secret of all — the cover-up of a devastating political spying operation. I also discuss the Democrats’ continued efforts to destroy the life of Brett Kavanaugh.    News Picks: Three times Rod Rosenstein betrayed Trump and protected Hillary.    Did creepy porn lawyer Avenatti get scammed?    Sara Carter’s new piece addresses a component of a major international spy scandal.    Chuck Ross’s new piece details more suspicious contacts with George Papadopoulos.    David Ignatius’ Washington Post piece does a poor job of covering up the suspicious web of connections in the Spygate scandal.    Do Democrats have more tricks up their sleeves in the Kavanaugh hearing?    President Trump’s UN speech was terrific. Here are the highlights.    Copyright CRTV. All rights reserved. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

get ready to hear the truth about america on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host dan bongino all right welcome to the dan bongino show i have a stacked stack show don't go anywhere for you producer joe how are you today i'm doing fine hey dude where do we start where do we i don't know um i i i was uh i had to triage our needs today. So I have three or four enormous stories. Sometimes I throw in newsy stories of the day. No time for that today. Let's get right into it. Dig into it. Today's show brought to you by our buddies at My Patriot Supply. Folks, you ensure everything in your life that matters. Why you would not ensure your food supply is bizarre. You ensure your health. You ensure your car from hurricanes to earthquakes, cyber warfare, EMP attacks, which the North Koreans were threatening at one point. Every

American should have a plan to get through an emergency, a natural disaster or anything else. The power being out for weeks, that's another one. I mean, how would you get food? If your food shelves were barren in your place, how long before you'd be looking at your kids saying, what are we going to do? We've seen again, repairs to infrastructure can be slow. If power goes out, what are you going to do? Do you have insurance for your food supply? If not, you need it. And I'll tell you the best place to start because it's a company I use. I'm not kidding. I'm not making this up. I can get freebies from them. I don't. I actually buy this stuff from MyPatriotSupply. Their food, their emergency food lasts 25 years. It's the best out there. It comes in this slimline tote, easy to store. Throw it in your closet and have the peace of mind knowing you have emergency food in case of a disaster.

Everyone in your household should have a four-week emergency food kit. I have about 10, 12 of them. I got to count. I get more. I constantly replace them. I have a special website where you can save $100 now. Go to my special website, preparewithdan.com, pick up one of these three-week emergency food kits. They're shipped fresh and discreetly to your door. Do this now. Order and save $100 per kit on their bestseller this week. Call 888-411-8926 or go online to preparewithdan.com. That's preparewithdan.com, preparewithdan.com or 888-411-8926. The food lasts 25 years in storage. Build the supply over time. Be ready in case something is to happen. You always have to have a plan, folks.

Okay. Let's start off first just on Kavanaugh. And then I want to get to the big scandal, which I reveal in my book and we're going to reveal today in a bit of a teaser. Aha! Yes. This is going to be great. But first, on Kavanaugh, the Joe Biden, Joe Biden to the rescue again.

Now, on Supreme Court picks, Joe Biden is the gift that keeps on giving. Joe, as we know, the delay of Barack Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court in the last year of his presidency and Merrick Garland, where the Republicans wouldn't take a vote on him, we can chalk that up to the Biden rule. It was Joe Biden who gave a speech in 1992 in the final year of the Bush H.W. presidency, where Biden said he should not nominate someone

for the Supreme Court until the voters have decided. Yes. Thank you, Joe Biden. Joe Biden to the rescue. Joe Biden to the rescue! I told you Joe's a musical cat. That was how he got at the radio, right? Joe Biden rescued us. You could thank Joe Biden for Neil Gorsuch. I'm not kidding. I've played the soundbite on the show before. It's not a joke. I mean, Joe's song's pretty funny, but it is Joe Biden who said that when he was a U.S. senator. And that is the rule they invoked, the Joe Biden rule, to not vote on Merrick Garland and to let the voters decide.

They elected Donald Trump and we got Neil Gorsuch. Well, we can thank Joey B again. Now, if you're a listener to the show and you didn't just tune in yesterday for the first time, you heard me saying last week, because I did federal backgrounds as a special agent with the United States government, no one's going to tell me how background checks work because I did federal backgrounds as a special agent with the United States government. No one's going to tell me how background checks work because I did them. They are not criminal background checks. They are criminal history background checks. There's a difference. Joe, do you remember this conversation from last week? I certainly do,

Remember this conversation from last week. I certainly do, Mr. Bongino. I explained last week that the Democrats asking for Judge Kavanaugh to undergo a criminal investigation by the FBI are asking for something that the FBI does not do on backgrounds. They do a criminal history background, meaning it is a character background. Do you understand the difference? I just want to state this clearly one more time because I'm going to play an audio cut of Joe Biden again, coming to the rescue, confirming to you that you're not wasting your time listening to my show and I'm not making this up. The FBI goes out. If they were doing an investigation on me or the Secret Service, it's the same procedures like they did when I was becoming a special agent. They ask you to sign a bunch of waivers for your medical history, for your tax history. You have

to turn that paperwork over. If you don't, you don't get the job. Simple as that. You also have to give a criminal background check where you give them the authorization to go and check you out in computer criminal databases. If nothing shows up, the FBI, they will then go out and conduct character interviews. If one of your neighbors alleges you've committed a crime, a sexual assault or something else, the Secret Service of the FBI refers that to the local police and just puts the note in the file. They do not do the criminal background. Do you understand, folks? They are simply compiling your interactions with law enforcement so that people making the hiring decision, in this case, the U.S. Senate, in my case, it was the Secret Service deciding to hire me or not, can make a decision based on your criminal history. It is not a criminal investigation, period. The liberals are making this up. The reason they are asking for a criminal background check on Kavanaugh is because they know, Joe, it can't happen. And it is simply an obstruction technique to make sure Kavanaugh does not get a vote. Now, in case you didn't

believe any of that, which I covered last week, here is Joe Biden. Yeah, baby, to the rescue. Again, confirming exactly what I said during the hearings with Clarence Thomas, where he was a senator from Delaware. The next person that refers to an FBI report as being worth anything obviously doesn't understand anything. FBI explicitly does not in this or any other case reach a conclusion. Period. Period. So judge, there's no reason why you should know this. The reason why we cannot rely on the FBI report, you wouldn't like it if we did because it is inconclusive. They say he said, she said, and they said. Period. So when people wave an FBI

report before you, understand they do not they do not they do not reach conclusions. They do not make, as my friend points out more adequately, they do not make recommendations. Period. I did not cut that suspiciously, right? That's an authentic clip.

You saw it. It's a video. Now this is an audio program, so you have the audio of it. Here's what happened there. During the Clarence Thomas just national disgrace of a hearing where they obliterated or tried to this man's stellar character. I love Clarence Thomas. He's one of my heroes. There was an FBI investigation before the charges became public. The Anita Hill charges. You all are pretty familiar where she accused him of various disgusting things. But there was very little.

There was actually no corroborating evidence that it happened. The FBI, before the charges went public, did an investigation and did exactly what I told you. They just did a background that said, he said this, she said that, they said that. You guys draw the conclusion.

It was not a criminal background check. Joe Biden just clear as day told you what I've already told you guys. Now, can you finally put to bed the idea that the democrats are engaging in this kavanaugh back and forth um in in any sense of fairness to kavanaugh they're not they're asking for things that can't be done that's joe himself. Period. Period. Period. Go Joe Biden.

Go Joe Biden. Every time. This guy rescues us every time, Joe Biden. Dude. They do not. I told you this last week. I'm not patting myself on the back. I just, again, want to convince you you're not wasting your time. I don't say things I can't back up.

I did this stuff you go out you get a statement hey i think my neighbor applying for that job with the secret service robbed the bank really when where you write it down you take the notes maybe you record it you call the local police hey we got a problem here you put it in a guy's file obviously the boss is going to get the file and say we can't hire this guy that's what happens they don't do criminal checks so stupid oh biden again now in another note the democrats uh blowing up their own uh you know their own uh assertions i don't know any easier way to say it the democrats are asserting things they later go on and retract because the democrats

are not doing this to get a legitimate hearing into uh blasey ford's uh assertions it's not a lie if you believe it. Clearly not, because the Democrats do believe their own lies. A couple of days ago, what was the Democrats' line? So first it was asked for an FBI investigation that can't happen. What was their assertion a couple of days ago? That this hearing is going to be a farce, Joe, because a bunch of white men, Republican senators, are going to question this one.

What race has to do with it, by the way? I have no idea. The Democrats love to play identity politics. They don't bring race into anything. Their line a few days ago is these white men, Republican senators, these white men, these white men, they are going to question Dr. Blasey Ford, and this is awful.

Never mind that the people actually elected these white men. Again, what race has to do with this, I have no idea. I don't think like a crazed identity politics liberal. Now, Joe, what do the Republicans do in a Mitch McConnell roundabout way to kind of get back at the Democrats? They say, okay, fair enough. You don't like that a bunch of white men, elected representatives of the people are going to question Dr. Blasey Ford. So what do we do? They went out and they hired an experienced sex crimes prosecutor by the name of Rachel Mitchell, who happens to be a female, to do what? To do the questioning.

Now what are they doing? They're complaining about that. Now the Democrats are complaining about that. They're like, this is unbelievable. These Republican senators don't have the nerve to question the senator you're saying. Oh my gosh. Joe, this stupid is so thick.

Seriously, ladies and gentlemen, if you're a Democrat, listen to me, you're welcome here. I really I'm hoping to open your eyes to what's going on. But I'm asking you, do you ever look in the mirror when you registered as a Democrat and vote Democrat and say, OK, this party doesn't make sense anymore? Do you realize just a few days ago they were complaining about white men asking her questions. They hire a woman to do it. Now they're complaining that they hired a woman to do it. Who has expertise in these matters, by the way. Just answer me this quick question, because I really have to move on.

I want to spend all day on this. Which outrage campaign is right? The outrage campaign over white men asking the questions? Or the outrage campaign over not white men asking the questions and women asking a woman asking the question which one is correct because you understand both of those outrage campaigns can't exist at the same time which one is it but it doesn't matter see being a democrat now requires you to be illogical see I work in the world of reason. I gave you facts about backgrounds, facts, by the way, I have a personal, personal commitment to because I did these things. I want to get those

facts out there because I know what happens in FBI backgrounds. I knew the Democrats were lying. By the way, so did the Democrats. They're not stupid. I also knew the Democrats were lying about white men questioning Dr. Ford because it was another obstruction tactic. So when Mitch McConnell does a touche and says, OK, we're going to hire a woman to do it with experience in these matters, they complain about that, too, which says to you that what they complained about the first time was not legitimate. It never is, folks. The Democrat Party is a party of frauds. I'm sorry. I'm not insulting you if you're a rank and file Democrat out there.

That's not my goal. My goal isn't to upset you out there. I'm just telling you that while I don't think Republicans up on the Hill are your saviors either, I've said many times. Now, I would vote for them and I am going to vote for them. And I strongly encourage you because the Democrats are far worse. I don't think the Republicans have done. I think they can do a better job and I think we should incentivize them to do that. But the Democrats are total, complete frauds. They are total frauds.

There is nothing genuine about the Democrat party anymore. Nothing. All right. Moving on. Another just quick note on Kavanaugh so i i was gonna i was hesitant to address this but it's gotten such uh such a head of steam that i feel like uh you deserve as my audience given that it is a news uh newsy program uh for me to give you kind of a summation of what's going on so uh creepy porn lawyer cpl uh michael avenatti but maybe the creepiest man in america i mean this guy when i see him i'm just like i want to wash my hands, my face, my hair, everything else. Michael Avenatti was claiming, he was Stormy Daniels' lawyer, as many of you know, was claiming a couple of days ago that he has a couple of clients that are going to come out. And I warned you about this.

And these clients are going to come out and say that Brett Kavanaugh was engaged in gang rapes and rape training. I mean, just disgusting, horrible stuff. There is a rumor on the website 4chan that Avenatti may have been punked. Now, the Washington Examiner has a good summation of this. I have up in the show notes, which I strongly encourage you to read. It's short. it's sweet, but it gives both sides of this that just be cautious here for a couple of reasons.

The 4chan site where this appeared, what happened was there's a poster on 4chan laid out a story that him and his girlfriend had called Avenatti, made these charges about Kavanaugh that it's all a scam and that Avenatti offered them a significant amount of money to do an interview on CNN with Poppy Harlow. Saw it.

Yeah. Now, listen, Avenatti is the creepiest, slimiest guy around right now. I mean, I don't know. The guy has just been, I don't know. I don't know anything else to say about the guy. But it could be a prank on 4chan about a prank. I'm just encouraging you to be careful. You know how I feel on this show about our credibility. We've had to retract very few things in three years, maybe one or two that turned out later on.

We just pride ourselves on trying to get things right and not being first. I don't want to be first. I want to be right. And I'm not sure what's going on here. I am sure of this though. Avenatti is creepy and he destroyed any credibility he had a long time ago. So I'm not particularly worried about his charges here. I don't want people to get baited in that it was a prank and it may be, it may not. So just be careful of that. And there's a good Washington Examiner piece I have up at the show notes today, which kind of covers both angles of this. One, that it's a prank and two, it's a prank about a prank. In other words, that it's not really a prank. Avenatti may think he has something, but they're pranking you. So I don't know. You know, you got to check that out

yourself. Michael Nasferuto. I know what that means. You know what? I know you're talking about vampires, right? Yeah. Not many people know that, you know? We're going to find out. I remember the Anthony Hopkins appearance in the Dracula movie.

Call him Nosferatu. Yeah. Okay. All right, this is important. Yeah, this is important. We take a like, last night uh the sean hannity show is i i always recommend highly at nine o'clock at night on the fox show he has the best guests around he's in dc at sarah carter and john solomon on last night and sarah and

john solomon both i will consent i will continue to insist that john solomon at the hill and sarah carter from sarahcarter.com John I believe knows the whole story I can't say this enough he's a reporter his sources have been amazing I believe he knows the story I know and others know um and I believe he's leaking it out slowly but surely now he talked about last night a piece in the Washington Post, and the problem is the piece is so complicated, I tried to find a way to get this to you in a digestible way. And I said, you know what I'm going to do, Paul? I was talking to my wife last night. I'm going to give you the lead first and the takeaway and explain later rather than explain it and get to the lead.

The reason is the lead is very, very easy to understand. The details, if you're not viewing it in context of the lead, are complicated. Here's the lead. This is the central premise of my book, Spygate. You can order now. It'll be at your house probably by next week or the week after. What were they really hiding?

What was Spygate really about? And why did I title my book Spygate? Ladies and gentlemen, what's freaking out the Democrats, what's freaking out the media, what's freaking out the liberal activists and the Hillary campaign is not

the fact that the collusion fairy tale is going to fall apart. That's bad enough. The collusion fairy tale that Trump colluded with the Russians was a ex post facto effort to cover a bigger scandal. I haven't said this yet. Like I said, I'll tell you what's in the book. If you buy it, good. If you don't, I'm going to tease it now and let out some of the bigger stuff.

This was a political spying operation on the Trump team from day one. That's the scandal. You may say, well, I don't get it. What do you mean? Of course it was. No, no, no, no, no, no. You don't see what I'm, you're missing what i'm picking up here i can tell by some of you who are treating this in a blasé man listen to what i'm telling you the spying operation on the trump team was never ever to uncover russian collusion because there was none the russian collusion was an after the fact explanation for the political spying on the trump team do you understand please understand what i'm telling you the democrat liberal media narrative the entire time has been that the obama administration spied on the trump team because they suspected russian ties and therefore engaged

in spying i'm telling you now and i'm prepared after a year now of covering this case this is what's laid out extensively in a book that what really happened here is the reverse the obama administration was spying on the trump team for pure political reasons intelligence to give to the hillary team the hillary team to use it as a weapon to find out what was going on to develop narratives to attack the trump team something that happens in politics right joe all the time but not with the assistance of the United States government. No. This is like a third world Republic stuff. The real story is this. The operation to spy on Trump happened first.

The collusion nonsense happened afterwards as a reason to cover up an international spying operation that was happening against the donald trump team to aid the hillary clinton team in winning oh dad this is getting crazy this is like tinfoil cap stuff is it really you sure about that because i have articles by the way in my book extensively footnoted from left-wing organizations showing exactly what I just said is true. I told you I read the headline all the time. British intelligence passed information onto the United States counterparts by CNN. Notice, they never specify what exactly that intelligence is.

They mention sometimes the Russians, but folks, do you understand? I can't hammer this home enough. The political spying operation on the trump team the weaponization of the united states i've never said this i know you think i have but i haven't the political spying operation on the trump team and the weaponization of john brennan and jim clapper's intelligence entities paid for by the taxpayer being used as an opposition political research term is unprecedented in modern u.s history the collusion fairy tale was a reason given later on for the political spying not the other way around again democrats we spied because of russia the real story we spied we invented r Russia later as a reason for spying.

That's the story. Why do I bring this up now? Great, great piece at Sarah Carter's website up on my show notes today. Please read them. By the way, I have another great piece upon Gino.com up at the show website today in the show notes. Three ways Rod Rosenstein screwed you all over, which is really great. Check that the show website today in the show notes. Three Ways Rod Rosenstein Screwed You All Over, which is really great. Check that out. It's in my show notes. Go to bongino.com. But Sarah Carter's piece covers, and I think Sarah kind of knows the whole story too.

Sarah covers today how the Downer meeting with Papadopoulos, Downer is the Australian ambassador to the United Kingdom at the time. He's an Australian in the United Kingdom. His meeting with Trump team member George Papadopoulos in that infamous meeting in that London bar. Sarah Carter points out an interesting discrepancy that Downer can't seem to clear up, Joe. Downer was asked in a recent BBC interview, to clear up, Joe. Downer was asked in a recent BBC interview, Hey, George Papadopoulos thinks you recorded him in your meeting in that London bar.

Did you do that? Now, Joe, if you and I are talking on the phone and I say, Hey, Joe, I'm going to record this, I would tell you. All right. And if you ask me later on, Hey, did you record that? Yeah, I told you, remember?

Yeah. Why can't Downer answer a very simple question about whether he recorded his conversation with Papadopoulos? Why do you think he wouldn't answer that? Well, he wouldn't answer that because the logical next question is what, Joe? What'd you do with the recording? it means there's physical evidence out there of the conversation that happened number one that probably didn't happen the way the democrats are telling us this is where i don't want to get lost in the details keep in mind what i'm talking about here the obama team spied on the trump team it tried to invent a russian collusion narrative later to cover their tracks. What if the recording Downer made,

allegedly, according to Papadopoulos' theory, what if the recording he made has absolutely no indication whatsoever of any kind of a Russian collusion fairy tale? At all. Now, who is right? Again right again we gotta wave the finger oh oh why is this a big uh-oh now it's if you don't think it's a big uh-oh it's because you've heard this so many times that you're already immune to the idea that this was was all a setup. But keep in mind what we're talking about here.

The crossfire hurricane case. Opened up. At the end of summer. At the end of summer. In 2016. The case into Donald Trump. The investigative case into Donald Trump. By the FBI.

According to every leak we've heard. In the New York Times themselves. Was based on what, Joe? The Downer meeting with Papadopoulos. Is there evidence? In other words, the FBI opened up the most significant counterintelligence operation in United States history against a presidential candidate in opposition to the sitting President Obama,

based on the fact that we were told, according to the leaks, that Papadopoulos said so many devastating things to Downer about the Russians and information. A fact now disputed by Downer himself, who says there's, quote, nothing nefarious discussed at the meeting. Why would Downer be saying that now? Maybe he knows there's a recording and he's about to be exposed. Oh, oh, that one kind of hurts, doesn't it? So this whole political spying operation and the formal case in the FBI was opened based on a meeting that there may be recordings of?

Does it make sense now why Downer can't answer a simple question ladies and gentlemen angle number two on this not just was there obviously now obviously yes obviously media hacks listening to this a political spying operation going on in the trump team through national security letters through unmasking through the use of the 702 database, probably. Through the use of international spy outlets that are friends of ours to relay information about the Trump team. Not only did that happen, but a case was opened up to investigate later on, probably as a cover-up based on faulty assertions altogether, and there may be a recording of it. Where is that recording?

Who was that recording given to? Now, we know Downer passed information. You might say to yourself, of course he passed it on to intelligence entities. No, no, no, no, no. If you're a regular listener, you know that's not true. Downer did not go to intelligence agencies or law enforcement. Downer went to politicians and bureaucrats

and the United States State Department, Elizabeth Dibble. Why would he do that? Who asked him to do that? Did someone ask him to make that recording? Alexander Downer, and to all the Australians listening, friends of ours, you need to pressure this guy to speak up. He has avoided these questions for too long. He has intermingled himself in United States politics, and it's his responsibility now to discuss what his role in the most significant spying operation on a political candidate in United States history was.

He owes it to the American people. I'm sorry, but this guy placed himself in the middle of one of the biggest scandals in U.S. history. He owes it to the American people to speak up. A couple other things on this. So please read the Sarah Carter piece because it talks about how Downer now won't answer the question.

And Sarah, like John, kind of alludes to things that are coming later because I think she knows more than she's letting on, which is good. I mean, she doesn't have to put it all out at once. It'll, you know, everybody will get lost in the information. But Sarah alludes to the piece, again, to something we've been insisting on this show since episode 628, We've been insisting on this show since episode 628 that the real scandal here has been the spying operation by others to pass information to the United States government. To the United States government. The touche today has been that the Russian collusion narrative is just a cover up for that whole thing. We have told you the Australians in the United Kingdom and likely others were being used.

They were being used. Now, ask yourself this question. Why were they being used? Folks, John Brennan, the head of the CIA during the Obama administration, had the tools to do a lot of this himself. But we have relationships with Five Eyes countries. The Five Eyes, it's an intelligence sharing arrangement, New Zealand, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, United States. We have this relationship. They have looser surveillance rules than we do, folks.

We saw this in the Snowden documents that were exposed. Their ability to surveil people is far looser and less restricted than we have rules and than our rules in the United States. Now, I'm not suggesting that intelligence community assets in the United States did not abuse their authority. We already know there were multiple unmaskings of people involved with the Trump team by the Obama administration unmasking their identities on tapped calls. We also know national security letters were issued. We also know the contents of those calls were leaked. The Mike Flynn call was leaked to David Ignatius of the Washington Post. Oh, he'll appear in a few minutes. Don't you worry. how significant was this network why did they use them they used them

folks because john brennan was trying to keep his fingerprints off this entire thing number one and he realized that these foreign intelligence assets had far less restrictive rules on their own surveillance now does that gchq that meeting between the head of British intelligence and the general communications headquarters, the equivalent of the, well, not head of British intelligence, the equivalent of the British NSA, I should say, to be more precise, Bob Hannigan, the head of the British equivalent of the NSA, meets with John Brennan strategically right around the time all this is happening at a director-level meeting and says he has important information to give to him.

Now, does this make sense? John Brennan is the puppet master for Obama. They're spying for political. Do you understand what I mean by political? They're using government intelligence and its connections overseas in a network of friendly countries to basically provide political opposition research to the obama team to use against trump do you understand how that this is watergate this is watergate like romper room this is this happened carter kind of hints at it how the really big scandal and what Nunes and others have been hinting at is a bigger, larger scandal. Now, Joe, do not let me forget this Nunes sot.

All right. You know what? Folks, I'm sorry. I do have to pay for the show. I appreciate your patience. We keep it free. But I want to get to two other points on this, and I'm going to play something from Devin Nunes from a while ago

that is going to scramble your eggs, I promise you. Oh, boy. Because he knew this well over a year ago. All right, today's show also brought to you by buddies at Filter By. Hey, a new study just came out of China discovering that air pollution causes a huge reduction in intelligence. This is in addition to air pollution's negative effects on your physical health. High pollution levels lead to significant drops in test scores with language and arithmetic, the average impact equivalent to

having lost a year of education. Now we know what's going on over at DOJ where they probably never change the air filters filter by. You guys are funnies. This is especially important with 95% of the global population breathing unsafe air. So do the smart thing. Go to filterbuy.com, America's leading provider of HVAC filters for homes and small businesses. These guys are great. I can't recommend them enough. Choose from over 600 sizes, including custom options that ship free within 24 hours, and

they support working Americans building their stuff right here in the great old USA. You can save 5% when you auto subscribe and then an auto replacement, you'll never have to change your filters again because you won't have to worry about it. They'll just come to you automatically and you'll save extra money. Filter Buy saves you time. It saves you money. You'll breathe better and apparently, you'll become more intelligent in the process. So stop procrastinating. That's filterbuy.com, filterbuy.com, filterbuy.com. Don't forget to tell them Dan Bongino sent you. We appreciate it.

Okay. So now I know that this is why I started with the lead. This is why I said, because now does the subsequent details I laid out make sense? The real scandal is political opposition research being done by a weaponized United States government working with foreign intelligence entities who are now trying to hide the evidence. Downer, who clearly was interacting somehow with some intelligence entity through bureaucratic channels, not official intelligence channels. We have multiple reports by CNN of others, foreign intelligence entities passing information to Brennan.

Brennan's trying to cover his tracks using these foreign intelligence assets. Is this making sense? Because he doesn't want to do it himself. If he can get foreign friendlies to do it with less restrictive rules, he can pass it on to political operators. That's the scandal. Joe, cue up Nunes. This is Devin Nunes in March of 2017.

This is right after. So when I talked about on Friday, the soundbite. This is right after Nunes for the first time goes over to the White House to view information kept on the White House complex only. About information that was clearly briefed to the White House. Remember what I told you about this classified information? There's some information that's classified that exists only on these standalone computers. It's not connected to the internet. To go view it, you have to go to that facility. If Devin Nunes went to the White House complex to get this information, what does it tell you? That somebody in the White House complex to get this information. What does it tell you?

That somebody in the White House was involved with the consumption of this information. Today I briefed the president on the concerns that I had about incidental collection and how it relates to President-elect Trump and his transition team and the concerns that I have. As I said earlier, there'll be more information. Hopefully by Friday, the NSA is cooperating very, very well. And lastly, I'll say that the reports that I was able to see did not have anything to do with Russia or the Russia investigation or any tie to the Trump team. This is what I've been holding back a bit. But I really, I'm not financially motivated enough to

say, hey, I read it. It's in my book. Listen, it's in the book. If you want the details, check it out. Fine. But I really, I can't i i've got to just get the info out to you do you hear what he just said nunes goes to the white house this is the whole scandal he told us a year and a half ago he told us a year and a half ago he goes to the white house on the complex to review information only in the White House that they consumed he says it's pretty clear that there was some kind of intelligence gathering operation going on here but none of it relates to Russia wait I thought this was about Russian collusion. That's why they were spying on them. Dipsy-doo.

Flipperuski. That's not why they were spying on them. This has been an excuse the whole time. Now, let's incorporate the Nunes translator again. Go back and listen, if you can, again to Friday's show, please, where I discuss the presidential daily brief as the likely endpoint of the information Nunes was reviewing at the White House. What the heck was Obama looking at in the White House?

I thought the story was they had spied on the Trump team because of Russian collusion. But Nunes just said when he reviewed the information at the White House that the information didn't have anything to do with the Russia investigation. So what the hell was it? Folks, the biggest scandal of all is that the dossier, Crossfire hurricane, the setup of Papadopoulos, the setup of Carter Page, this was all a cleanup operation at the end of the campaign to create an ex post facto excuse and after the fact excuse for a massive political spying operation including international operators that people within the Obama administration were conducting on their political enemies. That is the entire story.

That is the real spy gate. Hey, mom, the meatloaf. What is she doing back there? What is she doing? That's what she's doing back there. There's your meatloaf. That's what she's doing. That's what she's doing back there. She's not making the meatloaf. That's why he needs the meatloaf, because she's not making the meatloaf, mom. What mom was doing was spying on the Trump team. By the way, maybe others too. Remember people in the Obama administration who were other dossiers. Oh!

So let me just throw something out there at you to scramble your eggs a little more. There were other dossiers. Were there other dossiers on other candidates, Joe, with other after-the-fact narratives being put together? Joe, I'm going to ask you, I'm not setting you up here, but I need you to be the audience on Buzzman because if this doesn't make sense to you, I'm going to ask you, I'm not setting you up here, but I need you to be the audience on Buzzman,

because if this doesn't make sense to you, I'm going to have to ask it differently. All right. Why would people within the Obama administration intelligence community now weaponize to act as political opposition research, not as intelligence gathering? Why would they prepare dossiers against other candidates for the presidency on the Republican side?

It's not a trick question. Before they knew the results of the election. Well, it's an insurer's policy. Damn, you're good. Oh! That's why I love this guy. I did not prepare that with him. At all.

I swear to you on my life I did not lip sync I did not write a note to him that Solomon knows this so does Sarah Carter Paula's going to go crazy you're getting an email I'm warning you right now you know it she's sending it right as she hears this with an ax paula send him his email right

now step time stamp that folks i didn't coach him on his that's the that's probably the insurance policy they were talking about how many dossiers are out there did they have a set of contingencies okay they're using they're clearly now weaponizing the entire IC, the intelligence community. By the way, remember the thing by John Solomon that there were other FBI investigators? There were? Yeah. Oh, crazy. Crazy talk.

Crazy. How many contingencies were there? Was there a contingency for Cruz? Was there a contingency for Cruz? Was there a contingency for Rubio? How much? Folks, how big is this thing? Do you understand now how like we I focused a lot on the dossier and debunking the collusion nonsense.

But the real story here is that all this collusion stuff it's entirely made up as a contingency in case trump won so they can go back and justify a massive political spying operation by the obama administration oh damn that's never happened before oh really because brennan's team already admitted to spying on uh Hill staffers with the Iran deal. Oh, yeah, yeah, that never happens. They already admitted the Obama team, by the way, to the AP phone record scam and trying to get access to James Rosen from Fox News emails. No, they never spied on anybody. You sure? You sure about that?

Folks, they were so sure they were going to win that they, I think they thought, ah, some entrepreneurial media type gets a heart and a soul and decides they'll look into this. We should probably have a backup plan as to why we spied on them. So we should probably have some contingencies. I want to know. And you should be asking, Jojo, wink, wink, nod, nod. You should be asking jojo wink wink nod nod you should be asking how many dossiers are out there what was the purpose was it legitimate political opposition research or were these going to be after the fact stories to cover up for a dragnet of surveillance

imposed by the obama administration on its political opponents in a presidential election. Oh, my. Folks, this thing is a disaster. I'm telling you, it's a disaster. It is a disaster because if there is not civil, legal, dramatic penalties, massive fines, jail time, I honestly don't know how we continue as a republic. I have no good explanation for you about how we move forward. Because the Rubicon's been crossed here.

It is now clear as day to any impartial observer that there was a massive political dragnet of spying and that the media and the Democrats are absolutely desperate to cover up the real story. That was the entire purpose of the collusion fairy tale. Now, I want to get into part B of this which is david ignatius's piece who was intimately involved in this he's the one of course who was on the recipient end of potentially devastating classified information about mike flynn's call with kislyak who wrote the story about that david ignatius from the washington post ignatius suspiciously comes out

with an opinion piece the Washington Post you know I don't want to give these guys clicks but please it pains me to tell you this I put it in the show notes today I want you to read this and I want you to read it for one specific reason

my evaluation of it is Ignatius knows what's going on and it is a clear effort now to separate him from the scandal and to start to acknowledge, Joe, that some pieces of this Russian collusion story are true while keeping attention away from the bigger scandal. In other words, they're running out of ways to say this didn't happen, that didn't happen. So to maintain some semblance of media please understand what i'm saying here to maintain some semblance of media credibility they're going to have to acknowledge that parts of the russian interference part with relation to the democrats

are true while i believe ignoring the larger narrative that it was obviously a spy network by obama and obama's team he's trying to cover up by saying, okay, well, the Republicans may be right about this, but the rest of this is conspiracy theory garbage. Does that make sense? Read the piece. That's why I hit the lead first. The lead is this was a political scandal. The Russian narrative was made up later to cover the political scandal. Read this piece with that in your head and it'll make sense. Again, I hate giving the Washington Post clicks, but this is a serious critical moment. And I need you to understand the media's role in this too. Read Ignatius' piece and it'll make sense.

All right, I'm going to get to that now. Hey, one last reading and I always appreciate your patience. Today's show brought to you by Brickhouse Nutrition. They've been with us from the beginning. The finest nutrition supplement company out there. These guys are great. They are at the tip of the spear in nutrition science research. One of my favorite products is Foundation. Foundation is a creatine ATP blend. It covers really two of the most important things out there

for most people. You perform better and you look better. Yes, a lot of people want to look good, right? That's why you work out, you do your thing. Foundation is, it's almost like having two extra gas tanks in the gym. But importantly, it doesn't just allow you to perform better in the gym. And if you don't believe me, by the way, take a little training log with you. Do whatever, squats, deadlifts, whatever it may be. Buy Foundation, BrickHouseNutrition.com, pick up a bottle, give it about seven days, and then look in that activity log you were keeping there and see how many more reps you do. I'm telling you, it's that good. This stuff is incredible. It's the equivalent

of months of work in the gym in some cases. It'll also look better. It has an intracellular volumization effect. What does that mean? It makes your muscles look harder and look bigger and look well, you know, formed better. It's just so good. I call it the mirror test. Try the product, give it seven days, look at yourself in the mirror after seven days. You're going to be like, wow, this stuff really works. Go to brickhousenutrition.com slash Dan. That's brickhousenutrition.com slash Dan. Pick up a bottle of foundation. Give it a shot. You only need one try. Once you'll be, you'll be hooked. It's great. Pick up foundation. Send me your reviews. I never ever get anything but stellar reviews

about this product. BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan. Pickup Foundation today. Okay. So on the Ignatius story. Oh, wait. One more thing before I get to that. I'm sorry because I don't want to miss anything. Sorry. I don't mean to jump around, but I underlined this and I passed it. Just skipping back a second again to the political spying scandal, the John Brennan role in it, and his effort to keep his fingerprints off it by using foreign entities that fed us intelligence. Does Jim Comey's interview now,

I believe it was on Fox News with Brett Baier, start to make more sense? You may be scratching your head, what did he say? I don't remember. Jim Comey appeared when his book came out on Fox News with Brett Baier and was asked about the dossier's role in the FISA warrant. In other words, what was the role of the opposition research document, the dossier, in accumulating enough evidence to spy on the Trump team. Now, Comey gave a very, very strange answer. That answer explains the redactions in the FISA warrant,

which we haven't seen yet. I talked about that yesterday. And it also explains why the Democrats and the media are panicking over what's in those redactions. Comey said, well, it wasn't just the dossier. He couldn't say that. Why, Joe? Because the dossier has already been debunked. He couldn't say we spied on him based on false information. He gave a very suspicious answer. Comey said there was a larger mosaic of information. Remember the mosaic line?

That struck me kind of funny, yeah. Yeah, it struck a lot of people kind of funny. If you Google it, you'll still see it creep up. What exactly was that mosaic, Jim? Was that mosaic foreign intelligence operators, foreign intelligence entities, information that had come from foreign intelligence entities washed through bureaucratic channels, not intelligence channels?

Is that what you're hiding? Now, you may you may say well why would that be a big deal because of what i told you opening up the show when i opening up this portion of the show when i discussed this that would be a big deal because you'd have to ask yourself immediately how were foreign intelligence entities spying on our presidential campaign when the whole narrative has been the whole time that the russians colluded to win the election for trump please get what i'm saying here the created narrative afterwards the russians colluded made up to cover up political spying what if the real narrative and the mosaic or what's hidden those redactions is information that came from actual

foreign intelligence to help the Obama administration combat Donald Trump. Was that the mosaic? Is that why Comey used very diplomatic terms? Is that why John Brennan said the information we were receiving was pulsed against what the FBI had pulsed? What does pulsed mean, you fraud? John Brennan, now does it explain John Brennan's Twitter rants? Brennan is probably freaking out right now as his role as the puppet master of an international spy scandal

against a presidential candidate opposing your president and your ideology as you headed the CIA is about to come crashing down on your pathetic face. The mosaic. Maybe that mosaic will start to make a little more sense now. By the way, I don't believe for a second Brennan and Comey are buddies. I don't. I believe Comey, I'm no fan of Comey.

Comey's a fraud. But I think Comey feels like Brennan used them pulsed against a break. All right. Getting to Ignatius. Sorry about that. I mean, I don't mean to get sidetracked, but it's important.

So the Ignatius story that just comes out, the John Solomon hit last night on Hannity show. So Sarah Carter mentioned the, the foreign spying and the political spying operation. Solomon comes on and says, Hey, do you see this David Ignatius piece in the Washington Post? He manages to bury the lead at the end. Oh, and does he bury the lead? You know what?

Do me a favor. When you read the Ignatius piece in the show notes, scroll all the way to the end of the piece and read the last two paragraphs first, Joe. Conveniently left towards the last two. It's a long piece. All right. Let me do you a quick favor here and read something interesting. David Ignatius from the Washington Post. The last two paragraphs.

Let me start to seep out information because I got to acknowledge some of it's true. Quote, Deripaska wrote in a March 2018 op-ed in the Daily Call about unholy alliances between Fusion GPS and the Justice Department. He's talking about Oleg Deripaska, the Russian oligarch. Deripaska added that an associate of Fusion GPS had told Waldman, Adam Waldman, in March 2017, that the organization, he's talking about Fusion GPS, that the organization was partly funded by liberal billionaire george soros another i love ignatius here as he acknowledges acknowledges what darryl poska said

he writes another boogeyman for trump supporters in russia keep in mind he doesn't say this is that why he doesn't say this is not true that Soros was assisting in the funding of this. He just says, oh, boogeyman, conspiracy theories. This is why Ignatius is a hack and a joker and a scammer. He's a boogeyman. You're all crazy. Listen to this, though. As he tells you you're crazy, that George Soros may have been involved in a funding mechanism for Fusion GPS.

You're all crazy. It's a boogeyman, right, Joe? He's setting us up. I'm reading from his actual piece. He now goes on to show why he's an idiot, not you. Quote, Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson declined to comment for this article. Soros' spokesman, Michael Vachon, told me that Soros hadn't funded Fusion GPS directly, but had made a grant

to the Democracy Integrity Project, which used Fusion GPS as a contractor. He's a boogeyman, Joe. He's a boogeyman. We're all crazy. George Soros, we're all nuts. This is Ignatius, this kook. He's a Republican boogeyman. He's not a a boogeyman we're all crazy charge us we're all nuts this is ignatius this kook he's a republican boogeyman he's not a republican boogeyman you imbecile he's a big liberal donor who he's not the boogie he doesn't have special powers he's not a warlock he's not adam warlock

busting out of a cocoon he's not thanos this guy we don't give him special powers sensible and normal people out there listen to the show who know something devastating happened know full well that george soros has financed battles against their causes this is not a mystery it doesn't make him the boogeyman it makes him an ideological opponent and a significant one ignate but what ignatius is doing again because he's an idiot is trying to make you look silly by saying Soros, who's a frequent Republican boogeyman, has been accused of funding the operation. As he goes on to read you a quote at the end of how Soros' spokesperson himself acknowledges that monies flowed from Soros to organizations that use fusion GPS pass the stupid pie please give it give give him a big slice Ignatius he deserves it that's the last two paragraphs notice how Solomon said this last night

excuse me Solomon who know I'm telling you knows the story, last night puts this out there in his Hannity hit. He says it's fascinating how Ignatius buries the lead of his story in literally the last two paragraphs that Soros money was being used to fund Fusion GPS. Now, how intimately was it involved in the funding of the dossier project? I can't speculate on that because I don't have solid information on that at this point. But I find it awfully ironic that Ignatius includes this in there in the last two paragraphs, buries it, and prefaces the information by setting up the fact that you're an idiot, Joe,

because Soros is a quote, boogeyman. Doesn't that sound awfully suspicious how he throws this in there out of nowhere folks what was Soros's role oh can we not ask that oh I'm sorry David oh are we are we are we making him the boogeyman now so now we know according to his own spokesman that there has been some money exchange between Soros organizations that work with Soros and organizations that worked with Hillary to develop opposition research that was used after the political spying operation to create a false narrative. Is it OK that we ask that or do we have to seek you, you dope, your imprimatur first? Ignatius, who's trying to make us all look stupid. And what's interesting even more,

and Chuck Ross was all over him on this piece. I have another good piece by Chuck Ross. I'm not even going to get to that today, but another interaction with Papadopoulos. This is just ridiculous. How many people approach Papadopoulos trying to seek information? It's beyond the realm of possibility anymore

that he wasn't target number one for intelligence people looking to set him up it's not even in the realm of possibility it didn't happen anymore it's only a question of degree at this point how bad was it the rest of ignatius's piece which i it's a shame giving this this guy clicks after he insults you but it's important you read so you understand the scam he's trying to do this the democrats and the media involved in this entire collusion cover-up of the political spying scandal are now going to have to acknowledge before the redacted documents get unredacted and we see the full scope of what Nunes said in that March of 2017

press conference I played for you earlier, that they were spying on Trump and it had nothing to do with Russia in the beginning. They are now going to have to acknowledge small components of what Republicans have been saying the whole time about this are true while denying the bigger scandal and making everybody else look like conspiracy theorists. This is an effort clear as day in my mind to do this. What else does he put out there? He puts out there in the piece, acknowledges the fact, because this is going to come out too, especially I believe when it comes to the text messages, that the lawyer he referenced in that quote, Adam Waldman, may have had a more significant role in this than the media has been letting on. He's not doing this as a favor. He's doing it again to cover up the bigger scandal with an

effort to keep us focused on minor details. Here's what he puts in the piece. That Adam Waldman, the lawyer, and you already know this if you listen to the show, was a lawyer working with Christopher Steele. He was a lawyer working with Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch deeply connected to Putin. He was also working with Julian Assange from WikiLeaks. Now, Ignatius acknowledges mildly to his credit that there are very suspicious connections

here, Joe, given that the assertions in the case are that Trump colluded with the Russians to win the election. But he acknowledges in his piece, follow me here, that it is a little bit suspicious that the FBI and the State Department and the DOJ were working with Waldman, who's working with a Russian connected to Putin. Now, he doubt, again, I'm not giving the guy too, it is a scam piece,

but he's doing it to acknowledge that, okay, they may not be crazy on everything because they're gonna have to acknowledge he's not doing us a favor but he says what's that you know what what's that let me i don't even remember the headline hold on a sec give me a second folks don't don't cut this out uh oh here we go i just want to read you the headline so you understand because the headline explains exactly what you notice it's an opinion piece too this is ignatius's headline a gop spin on the russia probe reads reads like a noir thriller but doesn't add up in other words you're all a bunch of conspiracy theorists and you're crazy which is odd because throughout the piece and he says something in a piece that's entirely untrue

he says well and christopher steele's information large parts of it have been confirmed no they haven't that's a it's totally it they haven't. That's totally, it's complete fabrication. That's probably why it wound up in the opinion piece section. What am I, what do I think he's really covering up here? Or someone who sourced it to him is covering up?

That Waldman, Steele, Deripaska, and Assange, there was some degree of coordination through Waldman to cover up negative and Assange there was some degree of coordination through Waldman to cover up negative information Assange had and to allow people potentially associated with the Russian government

to filter information through Waldman to get it to the Hillary Clinton team to hurt the Trump team it explains using Christopher Steele as a conduit. Now, there's a very, I have this in my book too, there's a very suspicious timing of, now we know according to multiple public reports that a guy named Sergei Millian was one of the sources,

source D, in some of the dossier documents, Deripaska and Milian appear together effort to get Russian intel, however fake, to Steele to get to the Clinton team, to use in the dossier to later fabricate a Russian collusion narrative to cover up for the political spying. The big question, was Deripaska, Oleg Deripaska, Russian oligarch with deep ties within the Russian government, was he a source? Did he feed information to Millian that got in the dossier? Did he feed information to Steele? We know Deripaska worked with Steele.

He hired him in 2012 to gather intelligence for him. How much information in that dossier, if any, came from Deripaska or people connected to Deripaska and the Russian government, it would be an absolutely devastating finding because it would prove the fact that the collusion not only was made up to cover for the political spying, Joe, but the Russian collusion was real on the Democrat side. That's what they're worried about. Man was at a show today. Yes, sir.

I got more for you tomorrow. I had three, four things I didn't even get to today, including Chuck Ross's new piece. But it's in the show notes if you want to read it. Get a head start for tomorrow. We'll dig into that, too. How the Papadopoulos thing is getting even uglier now. How I think people got desperate and threw everything but the kitchen sink at Papadopoulos.

I'll get to that tomorrow. Read the piece in the show notes. Thanks a lot, folks, for all your support. Please subscribe to the show on iHeart, on iTunes, SoundCloud. It's all free. You don't have to pay for anything. The sponsors are nice enough

to provide financial support for the program, but it does help us move up the charts. So thank you very much. Hope you enjoyed it. I got more tomorrow. See you later.