The Dan Bongino Show - The Most Disturbing Interview I’ve Ever Heard (Ep 1229)

Episode Date: April 16, 2020

In this episode, I address the stunning interview with this Democrat Governor on the Fox News Channel where he makes some deeply troubling comments. I also address the new report from Fox News about the biggest “coverup” in history. Finally, I address newly declassified footnotes about the Spygate scandal which will open your eyes to the malfeasance that occurred.  News Picks: Bombshell report indicates that the Chinese government engaged in the most expensive coverup in history. More explosive information about the China coverup of the Wuhan Virus.  Sheriffs in Michigan are defying the tyrannical Governor. CNN gets caught promoting Chinese propaganda. Jobless claims soar again. More FBI shenanigans in the Spygate scandal.  The Governor of New Jersey says he wasn’t thinking about the Bill of Rights when making these decisions. Unreal! Look what the WHO was spending their money on.  Can the President adjourn Congress.  Copyright Bongino Inc All Rights Reserved. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

get ready to hear the truth about america on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host dan bongino one of the most stunning admissions i've ever seen on live television last night ladies and gentlemen if you were watching the fox news channel at eight o'clock with tucker carlson his interview with governor phil murphy New Jersey. You know what I'm talking about. If you don't know what I'm talking about, then stay tuned because you will know what I'm talking about after I'm done talking about it on this show. I've got that. I've got the declassification of more footnotes, which are absolutely damning in the Spygate

case to a level we haven't even seen before on the damning scale. Today's show is sponsored by ExpressVPN. Don't let others track what you're doing online. Keep yourself safe at expressvpn.com slash Bongino. Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show. Producer Joe, how are you today? Fine, sir. Hey, man, I'm doing good.

Getting ready to set everybody straight. That's what's going on. Yeah. Set everybody straight. Did you see? Joe got to cheat and look at the clips. I did. And the clip I'm going to play for you from Tucker is seriously one of the most damning

pieces of video I have ever seen in my life. And the way it was said so cavalierly. All right, without further ado, let me get right to it. Today's show brought to you by our friends at Helix Sleep. Helix Sleep is a quiz. Quiz that takes just two minutes to complete and matches your body and your body type and your sleep preferences to the perfect mattress for you. I took it. I took it.

I took it. Because why? You don't want to go in some mattress store and get some generic mattress made for Joe Schmo. You need a mattress for you. You a side sleeper like me, a hot sleeper like me, you like a plush or a firm bed with Helix. There's no more confusion and no more compromising.

Helix Sleep is rated the number one mattress by GQ and Wired Magazine. I love it. I call it the most comfortable mattress I've ever slept on. You know why? Because it is. My daughter has one too. It's like sleeping on the cloud. Just go to helixsleep.com slash Dan.

Take their two-minute sleep quiz, and they'll match you to a customized mattress that will give you the best sleep of your life. I took the quiz. I was matched to a Helix Midnight Luxe. I love it. It's medium firm, designed for side sleepers. Best mattress I've ever slept on. Wake up feeling great in the morning.

They have a 10-year warranty. You get to try it out for 100 nights risk-free. They'll even pick it up for you. If you don't love it, you will. You're going to love this mattress. Right now, Helix Sleep is offering up to $200 off all mattress orders. For our listeners, just go to helix, H-E-L-A-X, sleep.com slash Dan for up to $200 off your mattress order. Helix sleep.com slash Dan for up to $200 off your mattress order. Helix sleep.com

slash Dan. All right, let's go. It is. Ding, ding. A quick programming note. We will have an interview show this week. I will be recording it later today for hopefully a Friday release. It will be with the great John Solomon about the spy gang case, who now writes at justthenews.com is the website. Ladies and gentlemen, it will be an in-depth analysis like you haven't heard anywhere between me and John. Don't miss that. Hoping to launch it Friday or Saturday. So look for that on my YouTube channel, youtube.com slash Brian. I was watching the Bible this weekend during Easter. All right, ladies and gentlemen, let's get right to it. Here is a piece of video last night from the Tucker Carlson show where Tucker is interviewing Democrat governor of New Jersey were you using to basically have people arrested who were

praying in a synagogue under your quarantine orders in light of the Wuhan virus from China? What specific powers? It was not an adversarial interview, and it's obviously a very fair, if not appropriate, question right now. And I want you to listen to his response, the governor, specifically his response about the Bill of Rights, which he appears to believe is above his pay grade. Check this out. It was the right decision to make. So you made that decision. And as I noted before, 15 congregants at a synagogue in New Jersey were arrested and charged for being in a synagogue together. Now, the Bill of Rights, as you well know, protects Americans' right and shrines their right to practice their religion as they see fit and to congregate together to assemble peacefully. By what authority did you nullify the

Bill of Rights in issuing this order? How do you have the power to do that? That's above my pay grade, Tucker. So I wasn't I wasn't thinking of the Bill of Rights when we did this. We went to all. First of all, we looked at the data and the science and it says people have to stay away from each other. That's the best thing we could do to break the back of the curve of this virus that leads to lower hospitalizations and ultimately fatalities. And I'm not contesting. Say what? So I'm all right. Let's do our best here. Listen, I've got no personal beef with Governor Murphy,

and I understand, even though I have sincere, heartfelt ideological differences with these Democrat governors, Cuomo and murphy that this is a serious public health crisis it's not virtue signaling that's just a fact right where their politics you know don't matter when it comes to you know my criticism this is a criticism of a guy who is clearly clueless so he's suggesting that arresting people for praying in a synagogue is okay because the bill of rights is above his pay grade it's a you're the governor of new jersey are you kidding me and that because some scientists told him people have to stay away from each other now joe i'm reasonably confident i've read the bill of rights once or

twice maybe yeah if not a couple thousand times to be serious i'm not messing with you i'm not sure there's an asterisk in there that says but if scientists say there's a contagion out there that may infect other people if you're close to them that the freedom of assembly freedom of religion petition all of those rights we have in the first amendment enshrine that those rights go out the window i don't remember reading that anywhere in the constitution and even worse i'm reasonably confident as well if you're the governor of the big one of the biggest states in the country in the northeast corridor that you are not absolved of your constitutional obligations either, because there's a contagion out there.

I didn't read that in the constitution either. The bill of rights asterisk, but not if scientists say otherwise asterisk number two, and not if you're a governor of a big state, I didn't read that. I don't know if you did to our liberals in the audience. If you can show me that asterisk in there, I'd love to see it. Is it a sub bullet? Is it in an appendix, an appendices somewhere?

Is it in the photo section of the book? I'm not sure. Is there a photo constitution where there's a photo binder in the middle and there's a little photo that says doesn't apply if there's an infectious disease? Not sure I read that. It's going to take some real investigating, man. Yeah. Have at it, folks. Do your investigative thing. I'm reasonably confident you're going to come up with naught. Bingo.

With zero. Now, ladies and gentlemen, I asked the question, tucker followed up with another excellent question yesterday and i'll ask you this because the governor had no answer so i'm not gonna there's no answer he had it made no sense there are a lot of infectious diseases out there some transmitted in a respiratory fashion through airborne droplets some sexually transmitted some transmitted through blood, Ebola, and others, bodily fluids. So what you're suggesting, if there's an infectious agent, you have now the power to keep

people and order them away from, even if they're praying out there in a service and they can take upon themselves public health measures. I'm just checking. Ladies and gentlemen, if that's the case, it's all over. The constitutional republic is dead. gentlemen, if that's the case, it's all over. The Constitutional Republic is dead. I said to you yesterday, folks, it's time to dance. It's not the first person who dances, right? It's the first person who follows that person dancing, and then person three, and then everybody's dancing at the same time.

It's going to take some bravery to step up out there. We all know it. But folks, this is ridiculous now i said to you yesterday i believe the lawsuits are going to change everything i know that doesn't have a um and and forgive me it doesn't have a william wallace like hold hold remember with the spears it doesn't have like a william wallace uh kind kind of like freedom you know one goes lawsuits nobody I get that but ladies and gentlemen the effectiveness of the lawsuit is my friend Tom Fitton from Judicial Watch always says the process in the lawsuit is the punishment

it is no one wants to be sued it's not even if you're going to win it's the fact you have to go through the lawsuit that costs you the money. Trust me when I tell you, although it doesn't have a William Wallace fight kind of let's go esprit de corps attitude, it's the lawsuits that are going to bury these tyrants. Now, even the left is picking up on this. This is a follow up to yesterday's show because I'm seeing these articles appear. So here's an article at Slate Magazine. I'm warning you, there's a narrative alert. The left is worried about lawsuits now. They're terrified because they love this police state nonsense. They think this is great. Ladies and gentlemen, they're trying to soften people up. Sorry, I have something in my eye.

They're trying to soften people up and get them accustomed to the idea of a big government footprint in their lives all in their life and get them accustomed to it, they'll be on the side of law enforcement until the end of times. So there's a narrative brewing here. So as I said to you, so you can follow me, I don't want to confuse you and do a circuitous kind of reasoning here, right? These Democrat governors and some Republicans, we've seen it with Hogan and Maryland and others, not to single him out, but others, are engaged in really soft, tyrannical acts in violation of the Bill of Rights.

And they're using this virus as cover. Folks, the governor, we're all adults here. You can recommend to people public health measures. We can do certain things. we can do certain things we can rewrite some laws with respect to the bill of rights that don't stomp all over people's civil liberties while still containing this virus that's not what we've done we have the governor of michigan a total disaster gretchen whitmer who's turned into king george overnight you can't buy seeds in a supermarket i mean this is absurd it's ridiculous and no basis in science here she's just making it up because she fell in love with Lord Acton.

Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan seems to think she has absolute power. The left loves it. Tyranny? Left loves tyranny. The left needs to defend tyranny because there's been a public backlash, as evidenced by the patriots in Michigan who showed up yesterday in their vehicles and said, no, no, not on my watch.

Many of them showed up yesterday in their vehicles and said, no, no, not on my watch. Many of them showed up. So now the left has to build another story to defend their tyranny because they don't want to come out and tell you they're tyrants. So the next line, Joe, the narrative alert's going to be is this is all partisan nonsense, these lawsuits. You don't believe me? It's already out there. Look at this piece and slate. lawsuits. You don't believe me? It's already out there. Look at this piece in Slate, not a down-the-center magazine. This is a left-leaning magazine, Slate. And here's your article by David Goloff. It comes up on JustSecurity, but I found it at Slate.com. Governors and mayors, beware. Lawsuits opposing coronavirus mitigation orders are a real threat. So narrative, it's already happening. The lawsuits are coming in Greenville.

You saw Greenville, Mississippi, where the mayor's now in response to issuing tickets for a religious service. The mayor's backing off that. The dreadful governor of Kentucky, Bashir, is already has lawsuits against him on these religious services thing. The lawsuits are going to be the great corrective. Freedom, lawsuits.

Believe me, it may not have the same aura, but it's going to be the great corrective freedom lawsuits believe me it may not have the same aura but it's going to have the same effect it is going to change how governing works here the left hates this they love the police state tyranny and they don't want any of you fighting back so they're already issuing warnings to the governor and listen to the narrative alert narrative alert in narrative alert. In other words, the left has a fairy tale to tell you to disguise their tyranny from this slate piece. This tells it all. You'll see more of this as time goes on.

Quote, it's difficult to avoid seeing partisan motivations, partisan motivations show nothing to do with the bill of rights or freedom or anything like that. This is all partisan motivations. Listen to the explanation here. Behind these judicial decisions, they're talking about the decision in Wisconsin to let the election go ahead and others. The most striking feature of the Supreme Court's decisions, however, is the extent to which it ignores

the existence of the coronavirus crisis. The majority silence appears to suggest that the threat to public health posed by the virus is simply not in its view a sufficient basis for extraordinary measures. Hmm. Here we go. These people are not stupid. Now, one of the benefits of listening to this show is you are always two to three weeks, if not months, ahead of what the current narrative and the next narrative is going to be in the sequence of lefty BS narratives.

They need cover. They need to scare people. They're trying to frighten the Supreme Court into backing up their Gretchen Whitmer-like leftist tyranny in Michigan because they love leftist tyranny. They want central planners to be able to plan and shut down the economy and open it up when they say. So they're trying to intimidate the Supreme Court by suggesting, if you rule against us, we're going to say you've got blood on your hands and we're going to say it's a partisan motive. There it is right there. Always, always. One of the things I'm telling you I adore about doing this show and having run for office and having worked in the White House and done all this stuff and been a cop is I think I have this antenna. Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding.

When I see narratives, I know what's coming because the left never tells you what they're, the real story, what they're really about. The real story is they just love tyranny and anyone they can get to enforce their tyranny in central planning, cops, bureaucrats, or otherwise, they are going to support because they want their boot on your neck. Right. Then the economy elsewhere. That's it.

It's no more complicated than that, but they can't tell you that. And they know these lawsuits, they are going to lose and they are going to lose bad so here's the left warning people and putting out a little bat signal hey just say it's partisan and frighten these judges into ruling in our favor every time every time we pick out leftist bs narratives we're all over it all right ladies and gentlemen just to double down on yesterday's show, the now breaking news yesterday in a, I'm not kidding, a really explosive report by Brett Baier and John Roberts at Fox News. The Washington Post has now been fully exposed as a full-blown propaganda outlet. What do I mean?

Let's go to this headline we put up yesterday. This was the Washington Post. Their own headline, not doctored at all. It's their information. The Washington Post by Paulina Farazi. Quote, Tom Cotton keeps repeating a coronavirus conspiracy theory that was already debunked. Senator Cotton repeated a fringe theory suggesting that the ongoing spread of the coronavirus is connected to research in the disease-ravaged

epicenter of Wuhan, China. So that's a conspiracy theory. Now, as I tweeted out right before the show, if you check the timeline, whenever the liberal media suggests that a major story is a conspiracy theory, it probably should suggest to you there's an element of truth and they're trying to cover up that truth because it's damaging the Democrats. You should do your own homework and then double and triple down. Conspiracy theory, that term means nothing now.

It means nothing. So the Washington Post, just to be clear, the democracy dies in the darkness as they promote the darkness was suggesting that any evidence that this Wuhan virus originated in a lab in Wuhan. That's a debunked conspiracy theory, folks. Oh, my gosh.

Crazy. We see this story yesterday. Brett Barrett, Fox News from government sources. Again, this I apply the Bungino rule 24 to 72 hours. I'm just putting it out there because the evidence is starting to build and we're getting outside that 72 hour window of this story where it's starting to look like this is likely the story. A Fox News headline up in the show notes today, Bongino.com slash newsletter. If you want to subscribe to our email list, we'll email you these stories every day. Fox News, Brett Baer, Greg Reed. Sources believe coronavirus outbreak originated in auhan lab as part of china's efforts to compete with the united states i thought that was a conspiracy theory i thought it was already

debunked do you understand how pathetic the washington post is how fake this outlet is how fake and pathetic they are how they are nothing but a full-blown propaganda mouthpiece. Now, I covered this yesterday and evidence was building that this leaked from a Chinese lab, the Wuhan virus. We get that. The Brett Baier story now has

apparently sources from the inside telling him there's information indicating this is likely the story. But the story gets even worse. You're like, that can't get worse. The Chinese lied about this, saying it originated in these wet markets but it may have originated from one of their own labs after people warned them about the biosafety levels of their own labs oh it gets worse why now now it starts to make sense too why the media is in a desperate effort or was to cover

this up and call it a conspiracy theory. Because Trump came out early and spoke out about and against China. And with the travel ban, the WHO then came out and attacked. Trump said that travel ban is xenophobic. The WHO then lied. Trump attacks the WHO. You may say, what does the WHO have to do with this virus leaking from a lab? Well, let's go to the Fox News piece and we can find out, can't we?

Exclusive. Quote, there is increasing evidence that the virus outbreak likely originated in a Wuhan laboratory, though not as a bioweapon, but as part of China's attempt to demonstrate its efforts to identify and combat viruses are equal or greater to the capability of the U.S. Multiple sources who've been briefed on the details of early actions by China's government and seen relevant materials tell Fox News. Listen to this quote, ladies and gentlemen. This may be the costliest government cover-up of all time, one of the

sources said. The sources believe the initial transmission of the virus, a naturally occurring strain that was being studied there, was back to human and that patient zero worked at the laboratory then went into the population in Wuhan. You may say, what? It gets worse than that?

Why was the media so eager to cover this up, the Washington Post, and tell you what was called a debunked, quote, conspiracy theory? Because Trump had spoken out and taken action against China and the WHO. How does the WHO commit to this? Let's look at screenshot two from the Fox News piece. Additionally, the sources tell Fox that the WHO was complicit from the beginning in helping China cover its tracks.

Oh, really? Really? Really? Conveniently, Trump announced that a press briefing, that he would halt all funding to the WHO, saying it had put political correctness

over life-saving measures. Do you believe this? You have a major media outlet with a significant readership, no question about it. The garbage, hot garbage Washington Post, which claims to be doing journalism, which is clearly now engaged in either a misinformation or a disinformation campaign. Because, orange man bad, we hate Trump. we have to own trump on this one we have to wreck donald trump you understand the truth that truth doesn't matter forget the truth the who was complicit in this according to those sources

now because trump has been going after the who and suggesting that they were complicit in this and we're going to have to reevaluate our funding of course the media reflexively has to defend the who even though make no mistake ladies and gentlemen they know the who is wrong here look at this tweet by the who so now the media will double down on a misinformation and disinformation campaign because that's what they do you can see in this tweet the who which now sources are telling so now the media will double down on a misinformation and disinformation campaign because that's what they do you can see in this tweet the who which now sources are telling people was obviously obviously involved in a cover-up that's the sources here's their own tweet january 14th preliminary investigations conducted by chinese authorities have found no clear evidence

of human to human transmission of the novel coronavirus identified in Wuhan, China. Ladies and gentlemen, that is clearly inaccurate information. The only question now, was it intentionally inaccurate? Did they know it was inaccurate? Or were they being played by China too? Now, the media can't have Trump being right about anything, although he was right about China early on, and he was clearly right about the WHO as well. So narrative alert again, narrative alert, sub B narrative alert,

section one, sub B first narrative was what, what tell them what you tell them, tell them what you tell them and then tell them what you told them. And then remind them again, the first narrative was these lawsuits are all partisan. If you rule this way, judges, we're going to say you have blood on your hands. That's the new narrative. The narrative here is pretty clear too, though. Trump was right about the WHO and China from the start. So now they're

going back to a tweet where Trump praised China for its transparency, clearly in an effort to be diplomatic and clearly in a tweet that was wrong because Trump tweets stuff doesn't mean it's always right. They were not transparent, but Trump was clearly as the lead diplomat for the United States being the president United States chief executive in the United States the state department is technically the lead diplomat but you get my point the representative of the United States on an international scale he was clearly trying to work with China engage in some diplomacy over Twitter which clearly turned out to be wrong. Fair enough. But that has nothing to do, Joe. Because Trump tweeted at one point,

thanks to President Xi for their transparency, something to that effect. You get my point? Mistake. Nonetheless, he wasn't being transparent. Trump may have believed him at the time, but we were wrong. Trump is not a medical sentinel.

The WHO is supposed to be doing that right yeah that issue has nothing to do with the world health organization world health organization tweeting out a tweet about human to human transmission being no evidence that was clearly wrong and clearly at this point may have cost hundreds of thousands of lives none they are not related the media is going to try to conflate the two why follow me because they have to defend the who and they know they can't because the evidence is everywhere sources are saying the who covered up the lag bleak sources we don't need sources you can look at their own twitter feed there are no evidence of human or human transmission are you kidding me i'm going to put up uh some evidence in a minute from a national review piece that of course they

knew human or human transmission existed so what the media is going to do now is in order to nail trump to the wall because that's all they're obsessed with they're going to try to say well trump screwed it all up too with China. So the WHO was being misinformed by China. So nobody knew anything. And Trump, you're an idiot too. Look at the dreadful Caitlin Collins from CNN who used to do decent work,

trying to do exactly this, conflate two separate issues because she doesn't want Trump to get a win on the WHO. Check this out. You're criticizing the WHO for praising China for being transparent, but WHO for praising China for being transparent, but you also praise China for being transparent. I don't talk about China's transparency. Well, you know, if I'm so good to China, how come I was the only person, the only

leader of a country that closed our borders tightly against China? And by the way, when I closed our border, that was long ahead of what anybody you can ask anybody that was in the room. Twenty one people. I was the one person that wanted to do it. Deborah can tell you that better than anybody. I was the one person that wanted to do it. You see what she's trying to do? Do you see it? Narrative number two is going to be, oh, they know the WHO is wrong. Forget what they know or don't know. It's only the story they want to tell you because they have to beat up on Trump. They're not interested in the truth.

Trump clearly singled out the WHO early and knew something was up. Clearly. He also singled out China by his actions, not his tweet. The tweet was wrong. He did say that in his tweet. But forget what he said. It's what he did. He shut down traffic from China.

The WHO spoke out against him. He did it and was called a racist by the media. So the media now pointing to that tweet is going to try to say, well, Trump, you got duped by everybody. You praised China's transparency. Therefore, who are you to speak out about the WHO? You see what they do? Instead of Caitlin Collins doing journalism, which she doesn't ever, and asking the question, Mr. President, you know,

this WHO situation's gotten serious. What do you have to say about this Fox News claim that they may have been complicit in the cover-up of the lab leak? Kind of a serious question, no? Yeah. That's not her question. Her question is, you're an idiot. Orange man bad. You tweeted about Z being a nice guy.

Dope. WHO ain't so bad. You tweeted about Z being a nice guy, dope. WHO ain't so bad. Nelson Muntz style. Journalism, folks. Journalism-ing. Pathetic. Pathetic. By the way, a little more on the WHO.

Here's a story from last year from the New York Post. How great the WHO is. WHO, their budget's $2 billion. They spent $192 million on travel. This is a story from the AP from last year. New York Post covered it. WHO, doing a great job, folks. You're doing a knockout job. Biggest pandemic we've had in a long time,

at least infection-wise, not death-wise thus far, thankfully. And the WHO that spent $192 million on travel last year and tweeted out the wrong information and the media's wondering why Trump tweeted that Xi's a good guy? Good job. Now, I got more in just a second. I want to get to my second sponsor, Ben.

One more thing on this and I want to get to the Spygate stuff because of footnotes released. Don't let this story get lost. They're absolutely devastating. But they knew. They knew what was up. Alright. Today's show also brought to you by Buddy's at We The People Holsters. Ladies and gentlemen, check this holster out. Isn't that a cool design? This is their constitution design. Listen, record numbers of people are buying guns and ammunition for the first time. If you're one of them, please be safe and please holster that new handgun in a We The People holster. What's different? Listen, you have a lot of those generic one-size fits all in the waistband holsters. That's what it is. It fits inside your waistband like this.

Okay. These generic kind of one-size fits all ones. I've had them. The problem is they're not customized like We The People holster are for your specific firearm. Look at that mold. It's a precision cut to your specific firearm. You stick it in, you get that click, that click to know what's secure in there. You're not going to get that with these. You're driving, you're moving around. Next thing you know, the firearm's on the floor. Very bad. Very bad. Safety first.

These We The People holsters, which are beautiful, they start at $37. They're custom designed to fit your firearm perfectly. Look at that. Made right here in the USA. They have thousands of options to choose from. An amazing selection of printed holsters. Their proprietary clip design on the back allows you to easily adjust the cant and the ride for comfort. Not like those generic ones

which rub up against that iliac bone in your hip. It's terrible. Now's the time to support American companies. Go to wethepeopleholsters.com slash Dan to get yours. Every holster ships free, comes with a lifetime guarantee. Get an additional $10 off with the offer code Dan. Satisfaction guaranteed.

If it's not a perfect fit, send it back for a total refund. wethepeopleholsters.com slash Dan. That WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Dan. That's WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Dan. Offer code Dan for an extra $10 off. Go check it out today. Okay. So just one final note on this.

Showing you that this new narrative again is going to be, well, Trump, you praised Xi in a tweet, Xi Jinping, leader of China. So who are you to call out the who who are you he's the president united states dealing with a pandemic are you morons are you that dopey that's their new line but jim garrity has a good piece up in national review today again up in the show notes bongino.com slash newsletter please check it out he says china didn't hide this thing for six days because there's a new ap story. I'm not going to put it up. I'm going to, because this covers the AP story better than AP did their own story.

Jim Garrity, National Review. China's information about the virus wasn't six days late. In other words, about how contagious it was. It was more like six weeks late. Six days. The AP's like, six days. My God, China really screwed us. No, no, no.

It wasn't six days. It was six weeks. Here, here's the evidence from Jim Garrity's piece. It gets worse. Six days. Don't even give him a pass. Doctors in Wuhan believe the virus was spreading from patients to doctors by Christmas, which means evidence of human-to-human transmission,

contradicting the official assessment from the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission. This was present from early on, if not from the very beginning. The first case, Joe, who had been to the Hunan seafood market, gave the virus to his wife. The wife who'd never been to the market. The Lancet study puts the onset of symptoms in the first recorded patient at December 1st.

On January 5th, the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission put the earliest onset at December 1st. On January 5th, the Wuhan Municipal Health Commission put the earliest onset at December 12th. Ladies and gentlemen, they've been lying the whole time. Now, here's a little bombshell for you. I got an email from a female listener. You know who you are.

I was actually on my Facebook on her messages. Sometimes we get messages there as well. And fair enough. It's a good email because it really, your emails are great because they really conditioned me to be sensitive to how I word things on the show. The Chinese, ladies and gentlemen, really, really engaged in significant malfeasance here and screwed us royally, as my father used to say. As if a royal screwing was any better from a royal. Now we know they may have known about human-to-human transmission for six weeks. So I had said something the other day on the show.

This is where that email comes in. And a woman emailed me and said, Dan, if you have information about this, you said you're going to put it in your next book. My next book, Follow the Money, is going to have a whole section on this, the WHO and China and what they did here. That's going to open your eyes. And I said I had a piece of information.

I was holding, I didn't mean I was holding it for the book. It's fair enough. She said, we need to know this. Like, don't try to make money off that. My life, that's not what I was suggesting. And I responded back to her. I was holding it because we weren't sure we could verify it yet. That's the only reason.

Well, there was some reporting yesterday that this piece of information may in fact be true. What is it? And we'll put it in my book hat tip to one of the people who's assisting me with the research here. It appears not only Joe to the Chinese know for six weeks how contagious and infectious this was while they lied to the world. But think about what I'm about to tell you and I want you to process this.

It appears highly likely now that they restricted travel from Wuhan within China but didn't restrict travel from Wuhan around the world. That's not good. Process that one, man. And woman.

So, the Chinese know this thing is infectious, highly. They know they're dealing with a possible pandemic. They know human-to-human transmission is highly likely. The evidence is everywhere. They lie. They say it came from a wet market when it likely came from their lab. And we'll see. Not absolutely confirmed yet.

They allow people to travel from Wuhan around the globe to contaminate everyone else while they restrict travel within China from Wuhan around the globe to contaminate everyone else while they restrict travel within China from Wuhan. Holy. It's like torpedoes. I'm not trying to be funny. No, you're not wrong. Ladies and gentlemen, how is that not an act of sabotage? Amen, brother. gentlemen how is that not an act of sabotage amen brother i'm not engaging in the upper level conversation i think you thought i was gonna not yet yeah but that's the piece of information and

and we could have broke it on my show but again i'm always very cautious and it's burned me a few times sometimes i get information and turns out to be true later but folks my credibility matters and I was not holding it for the book. That's just completely wrong. And I appreciate the woman's email because I may have phrased that wrong. I just meant to imply that we wanted to confirm it. Now that the story's come out on Fox last night, I heard someone suggest it last night and it's starting to leak out. Those are devastating allegations, but that's the reason i held it because when i get information i want to be sure i'm feeding you the appropriate proper verified checked information so you don't

embarrass yourselves and use my name listen every single broadcaster once in a while gets one wrong i try to keep that to a minimum even though we scooped this thing a couple weeks ago. And I was kind of, Paula was a little upset at me last night, right? She's like, gosh, you got to break something once in a while. I'm like, nah, my credibility matters. I'd rather let it stew for a bit. All right, enough on that. I'm not trying to pat myself on the back. Enough of that crap. Self-praise things. But I just want to get that out there. Okay. You know what? Let me just get to this final sponsor because it's important. Sponsors are important to keep the show paid for. But I want to get to these spy gay footnotes because, man, are they juicy.

There's some more declassified footnotes. You're like, how can this case get any worse? Trust me, it can and it will in the next few minutes. Today's show finally brought to you by our good friends at Lending Club. Lending Club is very easy to use, ladies and gentlemen. With Lending Club, you can consolidate your debt or pay off credit cards with one fixed monthly payment.

Since 2007, since 2007, Lending Club has helped millions of people regain control of their finances with affordable, fixed rates, personal loans.

It's easy to use. Super easy. No trips to a bank and no high interest credit card. Just go to LendingClub.com. Tell them about yourself. How much you want to borrow. Pick the terms right for you. And if you're approved, your loan is automatically deposited into your bank account

in as little as a few days. Lending Club is the number one peer-to-peer lending platform with over $35 billion in loans issued. Go to lendingclub.com slash Dan, lendingclub.com slash Dan. Go today, check your rate in minutes, borrow up to $40,000. That's lendingclub.com slash Dan lending club.com slash Dan go today. Check your rate in minutes, borrow up to $40,000. That's lending club.com slash Dan lending club.com slash Dan, all loans made by web bank member FDIC equal housing lender. Okay. So these spy gave footnotes. I want to hat tip Catherine Herridge undercover Huber at John W.

Huber on Twitter, obviously a parody of John Huber. But a great account. It's not a parody account. People who have done really spectacular work on the foot. Techno Fog, of course. Our buddy Techno always knocks it out of the park. So more of these footnotes from the Inspector General's report.

The FBI spying operation on the Trump team are being declassified. And ladies and gentlemen, I'm telling you, just when you think they can't get any worse, gosh, they do. So let's go to this first one in the interest of time here. Here's footnote 347, which has now been declassified. This is from Catherine Herridge's Twitter account from CBS. That's her handwriting and her notes. I enjoy it because she always highlights exactly what we need to look at. So footnote 347 from the report has now been declassified, and it suggests this.

The FBI received information early June of 2017, which revealed, among other things, that they were, something's redacted, personal and business ties between the subsource and Steele's primary subsource. Okay, so just let me declassify that for a moment. All right. memory subsource. Okay. So just let me declassify. Let me declassify that for a moment. All right. Steele, Christopher Steele, who allegedly writes the dossier. I don't believe that. I believe he's a small part of it. I believe it was written by Simpson and possibly Halper too. Steele, his name is on the dossier. He's the one giving it to the FBI. The dossier is what you use to

spy on Donald Trump, full of the PP tape stuff and the nonsense. When they asked Steele where he's getting his information from, he says, I have a network of sources, my primary subsource, and then they have networks as well. So I get my information from Joe. Joe tells me he gets it from Tommy. Now, there's no vicarious credibility. That's a whole other, Andy McCarthy's delved into this, a former United States attorney. There's no vicarious credibility. That's a whole other, Andy McCarthy's delved into this, a former United States attorney. There's no vicarious credibility. In other words, I have to verify the information myself if I'm a source. I can't just pass off my credibility onto others and then onto others, onto others.

We're playing the telephone game, right? Needless to say, the FBI standards went out the window, obviously, with this joke of a case. So Steele said, I have this subsource, and they have subsources too. Now, for those of you watching on the YouTube who got to read ahead, put up that footnote again. This is unbelievable. What were we told, ladies and gentlemen? Trump went to the Russians, they colluded, and the Russians wanted to help Trump win,

right? Well, that's not what the redaction in this footnote says. It says that contacts between Steele's subsource and an individual in the Russian presidential administration in June and July of 2016. And the subsource voiced strong support for candidate Clinton in the candidate Clinton in the 2016 election. That can't possibly say that. No, it does. Come on, dude. That's at least a triple mutley. Are you serious?

Yeah, dub us single. We haven't seen a mutley in a while. You got to come out strong. It's getting hard to earn. That's at least a triple mutley on that one. This is hilarious. Holy cow. Hilarious in its stupidity.

So you don't even need, and I'll talk to John Sondra about this in our interview later today. You don't even need to be a Spygate expert to figure this out. The story we've been told by the liars, hoaxers in the media, the propaganda artists who told us that the Wuhan lab thing was a conspiracy theory and so was Spygate, is that Trump colluded with the Russians because the Russians wanted to help him win and they did, right? I mean, it's not a hard story to follow. The deets can be, the details, but the overall headline of the story the media wanted you to believe and promoted endlessly, Trump colluded with the Russians who loved him, was that they wanted to help him.

That's not what that footnote says. That's not what that footnote says at all. That footnote doesn't say that. Do you understand that's not what that sub-source told Steele who told the FBI? They told him the exact opposite. Nothing you've been told is true. Just when you're like after yesterday's show and the day before, this case can't possibly get any worse.

It punches you in the face and does. I'm going to have to provide some law enforcement translation. I have two more footnotes I want to get to. One of them was declassified, unredacted a few days ago. But again, it begs larger questions now that it's out there too. Here's footnote 350. It's a rather long one. I'm not going to read the whole thing.

But the gist of it is this, that the FBI had received information indicating that there was a potential for Russian disinformation influencing Steele's election reporting. Now, scrap that. Come back to me. Thank you. Really appreciate your help over there. Seriously, it's the best. She can like read my mind now. Right ahead of me. So footnote 350, we now have clear indications that at a minimum, at a minimum, the FBI suspected that some of Steele's information may have been Russian disinformation from the Russians who supported Hillary Clinton. I thought you said they supported Trump. Paula, what does that mean tonight?

That means something to her. No, no, no. No, no, no. What is that? That means something to her. She gets the inside joke, right? Nothing to do with this show today at all. But for this case, it means I'm tying in the first footnote to the second footnote.

So now we know one of Steele's alleged subsources, we know, supported Clinton. And this may have been Russian disinformation. I thought all of this was to support Trump. Russian disinformation. I thought all of this was to support Trump. So now two big questions should be exploding in your cerebral cortex right now. Neurotransmitters should be popping here and there. Axon dendrite connections solidifying right now. So if the FBI suspected that Russian disinformation was being propagated by people who supported Hillary Clinton, what the was Bob Mueller doing? Is anyone in the media asking this question? So Bob Mueller, who's supposed to be, according to his edict from Rod Rosenstein, supposed to be investigating, you can read it yourself, Russian interference in the 2016 election. does nothing to the Hillary team, investigates no one on the Hillary team, nobody.

And yet we now know the whole time they knew this was a Russian disinfo op. Some of it, I'll get to that part. I said, no, some of it, because I know what you're saying. And that it was done by some of them who supported Hillary? What the hell was Bob Mueller doing? Please tell me again, he's such a noble, honorable guy. Ladies and gentlemen, I'm sorry. With all due respect to the man's prior service in the military,

this man disgraced himself and the country and how there is not a full-blown investigation right now into what the hell Bob Mueller was doing with Andy Weissman, who knew Steele was a propagandist. He learned about it in August of 2016, Weissman. Ladies and gentlemen, it is clear as day now. they were engaged in a witch hunt the entire time with no basis in fact ignoring the evidence in front of them that the real russia probe should have involved hillary while they were simultaneously trying to entrap president trump in an obstruction of justice trap there's no question about that anymore amongst among serious people again not talking about the media. We're talking about serious people now.

So question one again. If even slivers of this were Russian disinformation and some of these people supported Hillary, what the hell was Bob Mueller doing investigating Trump? Entrapping him, obviously. But question number two is more important. As I told you yesterday, don't fall for it was Russian disinfo, that trap.

There may have been slivers of it in there. There likely were. But ladies and gentlemen, don't fall for that. It's going to be the media excuse. This was all lies, deliberately done, made up stories with the Hillary cabal, Johnny B, Jim Comey, McCabe, all of them, suckers in this whole thing, falling into this Hillary Clinton trap, lobbying for jobs later on, who simply knew the stories were made up and attributed.

They are fake. Don't forget this. Don't forget this. The dossier is a fake story attributed to real Russians. The information is fake. It's a lie. It was all made up. It was an entrapment scheme from the start.

The Russian disinformation is a small portion of it. The rest of it is made up stories attributed to real Russians. And that's where Johnny B is going to be in real trouble, Brennan. Because the question remaining, remember question number one, what was Bob Mueller doing? Question number two is going to be, where'd those real Russians come from?

If it's fake information, made up stories. Oh, I heard it from Nikolai Volkov. Remember the wrestler, right? Cause I'm not going to use names yet. I heard it from Nikolai Volkov and Volkov comes in and goes, the hell are you talking about?

I didn't say that. How did person a saying you heard it from Nikolai Volkov? How did he get Nikolai Volkov? His name? Oh, From Nikolai Volkov. How did he get Nikolai Volkov's name? Oh. Let's take five seconds here. Of just radio silence to think about that. Deep breaths.

How'd Nikolai Volkov's name get out there? Oh boy. Somebody's in trouble. Had to access that WWE file. Didn't you get Nikolai Volkov's name and employment records there. How did that happen? Think Johnny Durham doesn't know about that? We'll see what he does with it. Okay.

Let's move on to footnote number three. Let me do a little translating for you what I think happened because this is confusing a lot of people. There was a footnote, and Inspector General Horowitz, remember, this is his report on the FBI spying on Trump, just so we're always clear. I don't mean, again, to dumb this down for anyone. I'm very sorry, but there's different levels.

A lot of people work for it. I don't have time to do the research that the 10% of us who are masters on this do. So forgive me for repeating myself. But another declassified footnote. It's pretty damning, but there's some confusion out there about are masters on this do. So forgive me for repeating myself. But another declassified footnote, it's pretty damning, but there's some confusion out there about what the heck this is.

Here's footnote 379. And it's written in only the way Inspector General Horowitz writes. Horowitz, I don't believe is our friend. I don't think he's ever been our friend. He's the one who wrote this. He writes in this deliberately confusing way to just confuse people.

He says in footnote 379, we now know because it's been declassified, that according to this letter from the National Security Division, the FBI took and retained on an FBI-issued cell phone photographs of certain property taken in connection with a FISA-authorized physical search on July 13, 2017. It basically didn't comport with minimization procedures. In addition, a separate incident on July 29, 2017, the FBI took photographs in connection with another FISA-authorized physical search

and transferred the photographs to an electronic folder on the FBI's classified secret network. What the hell? There's a lot of confusion out there about what exactly that means in that footnote. Damn, you look good today, Paula. Throwing that in there. She just left the desk and is walking around there.

You're distracting me during the show. Sorry. Getting back to footnote 370. Joe, can you get what that means? No. I'm looking forward to it. Nobody else does either. Here's what I, again, this is speculation based on experience.

I'm just trying to put something out there because I'm reasonably confident that's what this is. What they're saying here is the FBI is supposed to engage in minimization procedures. In other words, in simple man terms, if I get a wiretap joe and that wiretap is for joe's felonious mopery and joe's on the phone talking to whatever little joe about his time in the marines i'm not supposed to listen to that because that has nothing to do with joe's alleged felonious mopery right it's called minimization we're supposed to you get what i'm saying we're not it's not supposed to there are minimization procedures We're supposed to, you get what I'm saying? It's not supposed to, there are minimization procedures involved in this because we're not supposed to do that. Those minimization procedures apply to FISA warrants as well. They apply to a lot of different things. Now, what they're saying here is the FBI used one of their cell phones to take a photo

on a physical search. I think the physical part is confusing people. They're like, well, what did they take a photo of? Carter Page's dog? I mean, what does this mean? Here's what I think happened. Put together the physical search and the photo thing and the FISA warrant, and some of you bells are ringing. And what do I think happened? I think an FBI agent took out their cell phone while they were searching Carter Page's computer, saw emails not related to Russian collusion, Joe, maybe campaign-related stuff, took a little snapperooski on the phone outside of minimization procedures and probably sent it to one of their buddies saying,

hey, look, we got some campaign info on Trump. Hmm. All right. It makes sense. Thank you. on Trump. Hmm. All right. It makes sense. Thank you. Thank you as official designated audience ombudsman and referee Joe Armacost. Anytime. Now, to be fair, I'm speculating here, but with a healthy degree of experience to back it up. And I don't mean experience in that I've done this. I mean experience in that the way Horowitz is wording this is to confuse you about what actually happened.

Physical search doesn't mean a physical item they took a photo of. It means they probably searched through Carter Page's computer or his phone or whatever it may be. And knowing they were seeing information that was supposed to be minimized. Campaign information, personal emails from Carter Page. That may have been interesting if you're looking for political stuff, not law enforcement stuff. They knew they weren't supposed to look at it. So what are they going to do? They can't forward it to themselves.

There'd be an email trail on Carter Page's computer. Hey, you got your phone? Sniperooski, buddy. Send this to my pal. I will. I'm reasonably confident i will be proven correct and the reason it's written that way is because my guess again is it was supposed to be minimized because it was political information why would that be so damning that the ig has to write about

the physical access to the device was taken on another device, sent to another device in lieu of an SMP that did a PMS on an RMP and a UAV. And in the UAV, they did the SMP on the UAV. And everybody's like, what? Instead of just taking, saying, why did these numbskulls take a picture of his screen? Why would you not write that? Because, ladies and gentlemen, then it's more evidence that this was obviously a political attack from the start on the president's campaign totally unrelated to criminal activity you can't just write that though god forbid stay on top of old footnote and by the way i haven't spoken

to 279 today i know you watched the show if you want to dig into that a little more and do some cross-referencing give me a little chatteroatterooski later, I'd love to hear. He's always good on this stuff, having been on the receiving end of a lot of these Title Threes, wiretaps, and otherwise. I think that may be the most damning footnote of all, personally, even bigger than they were trying to help Clinton. That's big. But I think this one, wait, you were taking pictures of something?

Why? Because it blows up there. No political bias narrative. All right. All right, let's go to, moving on. Another, I mean, it's just another hard, it's one of these stories you shake your head, Joe,

with disbelief going, I had to double and triple check this. We have a story up at Bongino.com about it, but in fairness, Daily Caller broke it. Matt wrote it on our site, but he cites the Daily Caller, which we link to. And I want you to see the Daily Caller story because it's just one of those stories you read the headline. You're like, Joe, this can't possibly be true. The level of stupid here is so fantastic, even for the Bidens. There's no way this can be true. Andrew Kerr, investigative reporter at the Daily Caller, which actually does actual reporting, unlike the Washington Post. Listen to this headline, not a joke. Hunter Biden is still listed as a board member of the Chinese company he pledged to resign from in October, business record show.

This can't be. This can't be. Read this story in the show notes. The verdict is in. If you don't read it, you're not a real fan of the show. Read this or go to the Daily Call if you don't want to give us the click. That's cool too. Don't care. Just read it. It's in the show notes today, though. What?

So just to be clear here, Hunter Biden, in the middle of this whole Ukraine scandal, who we know for a fact is a member of this board on this company associated with China, BHR, and we know worked for Burisma when they were involved in a corruption investigation for potential corruption, who we know people he knew were reaching out to the State Department to influence some of their decisions. You would think, being that his dad is now the default Democrat nominee for president, this numbnuts would be smart enough to resign from these companies. No, no, don't give this numbnuts that much credit.

He's not that smart. Look at this from the Daily Caller. This is the actual business records thing. Jin Bao, which is an independent service that provides a registration information on Chinese corporations, registration info on Chinese corporations. Also listed Hunter Biden as the member of the BHR board on Tuesday.

Here it is, youtube.com slash Bongino. Look at it right here. Look at it. Director, Robert Hunter Biden. This is Tuesday. Tuesday. It's Tuesday. This is Tuesday.

Not last year's Tuesday. Like the Tuesday that just happened before the Wednesday that was yesterday. That Tuesday. Thursday, Wednesday, Tuesday. Not April, February, 2017, 2015. This is the Tuesday that just happened. This is one of the most highly trafficked stories on our website yesterday. Big hat tip to the Daily Caller for, again, just like Chuck Ross and others over there

who have broken stories about Hal Perlman. The real reporting, ladies and gentlemen gentlemen is happening in the conservative ecosystem if you're not there and you're reading the washington post i'm sorry you're being lied to and you enjoy it if you continue to do it and the democrats want this guy to be but he doesn't even know what state he's in joe biden's reading that though and it doesn't even know what state he's in. Joe Biden's reading that though. And it doesn't even make any sense. He's like, who's Hunter Biden?

Joe doesn't even know Hunter. So it doesn't even matter. Joe doesn't even care. They're telling him, they go, Joe, Hunter's on the board of this Chinese company. Still, we got this thing with China. There's some suspected follow the money stuff, which will be in my next book. Next book, by the way, maybe it's a good idea. Hunter leaves.

Joe's like, who's Hunter Biden? He doesn't even know. This is amazing. You want this guy to be the president of the United States? Are we kidding? Oh my gosh. We live in bizarro. You're in a state of fugue.

Yeah. Fugues. I love that word. Fugues. Cause I wake up in the morning like that all the time. I get confused. 20 minutes every morning, I don't know. I don't even know what state I'm in. I'm in the Joe Biden state.

I'm not even kidding. If I don't have coffee, I'm like, where do I even live here? Is this my, who's this woman next to me? I have no idea. Half the time I'm confused. About 20 minutes later, I pick up on everything and then I get to show rock and roll.

I scare myself like that. I promise you I will get to that debt story. I'll get to it, but I want to talk about the economic, more devastating economic numbers today. You know, 5.2 million more unemployment claims, but that's a longer segment. And I want to get to this debt story. I said, I get to it today.

I want to get to it tomorrow. I want to just finish up on this. Again, I'm sorry to keep doing this to you, but more evidence that these are not serious journalism outlets anymore. I didn't want to call them the National Enquirer because the National Enquirer gets stories right sometimes. CNN, The Washington Post, and The New York Times,

it's a rare occasion. The biggest stories of our time, they're on the wrong side of it. Did you catch just your CNN, their little fight with Elon Musk from Tesla? No. Look at this gem. Now, go to Elon Musk's Twitter to see the full fight,

but CNN puts this tweet up. Again, it's not even, Paul is like, why did they do this? I'm like, what do you mean why they do? Because it's CNN. Like they never get stories. CNN puts this tweet up. At CNN, three weeks after Tesla CEO Elon Musk said he'd obtained more than a thousand ventilators to help California hospitals treating the coronavirus, the governor's office says none of those promised ventilators have been

received by hospitals. I don't mean to laugh. It's not a funny story. I'm laughing because it's not a story at all. It's totally made up. And Joe, not a trick question. Okay.

I'm not messing with you. So I know you're always like doing show programming and distracted by stuff. Do you think yes or no? not a trick question, okay? I'm not messing with you. So I know you're always like doing show programming and distracted by stuff. Do you think yes or no? Not a trick. Then it would be a good idea to reach out to Elon Musk for this story and find out if it's true before you print it. I'm just asking.

I think so, Dan, yes. Okay, thank you. I need your help sometimes. Because sometimes, Paula's this way. She said the same thing. I'm talking to Paula before this year. She's like, why didn't you just ask Elon Musk? Because it's CNN.

That's why. That's why. Because they're not serious. Here's Elon Musk's Twitter feed showing tweets from the actual hospitals thanking Elon Musk for the ventilators they got. Idiots. I can't help it. Elon Musk has emails.

He's honest. You got to go to his Twitter feed. Elon Musk. He's got the emails. They're on his Twitter feed. Hey, man, thanks for the ventilation. All you had to do was ask him. All you had.

What is the purpose of this network anymore, CNN? What is the purpose? Why do they even exist? Why? What's the point? Just like, listen, do reality TV, do specials, the news. It's not for you guys. It's not for you. All you had to do was ask the guy for comment. This news thing, it's, it. News, CNN. News, CNN. They never intercept. This is not a serious network. I expect, of course, George Costanza, otherwise known as Brian Stelter, and his coffee mate, Oliver Darcy, they go get coffee for everyone at CNN. I'm sure they'll cover this, this abomination of a story this weekend.

I'm sure they'll have some stupid explanation as to why CNN couldn't simply reach out to Elon Musk and get Elon Musk's opinion on the story before they printed this stupid tweet. What a bunch of idiots. All right, folks, I will. Oh, boy. Please subscribe to the show. YouTube.com slash Bongino. I will see you all tomorrow. Thanks for tuning in.