Podcast Summary
Discussing latest developments in Mike Flynn and Hillary Clinton cases: Host Dan Vongino shares insights on interconnectedness of Flynn and Clinton cases, emphasizes transparency, and promotes Liquid IV.
Dan Vongino, the host of the show, expressed his strong opinions on various political topics during the previous episode, receiving mostly positive feedback but also some negative comments. He appreciated all feedback and invited listeners to share their thoughts. The main focus of the current episode is the latest developments in the Mike Flynn case and the Russian collusion investigation, as well as updates on the Hillary Clinton case. Vongino emphasized the interconnectedness of these cases and the importance of transparency. He also promoted Liquid IV, a hydration and energy product he uses and recommended to his listeners. Vongino's show, "Get Ready to Hear the Truth about America," is known for tackling controversial topics and providing information that may not be covered in mainstream media. The swamp rats, according to Vongino's operating thesis, all know each other and have something to hide. The show provides a platform for discussing these issues and shedding light on new developments.
Investigating the actions of Flynn's old lawyers: New attorney Sidney Powell probes Covington's role in Flynn's FARA filing, potentially revealing privileged communications and adding complexity to the legal case.
The legal case of Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, who was prosecuted for allegedly lying to the FBI during the Trump administration, is more complex than it seems. Flynn's new attorney, Sidney Powell, is now investigating the actions of his previous lawyers, Covington, who helped him fill out a Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) form. If Flynn's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel by his old lawyers is deemed valid, it could result in the disclosure of previously privileged communications between Flynn and his former attorneys. This development adds another layer to the ongoing investigation and raises questions about the actions of Flynn's previous legal representation.
Conflict of interest in Michael Flynn's representation by Covington & Burling: Michael Flynn's law firm, Covington & Burling, initially advised him but later prosecuted him, raising concerns about attorney-client privilege and motivations.
There is a significant conflict of interest in the representation of Michael Flynn by the law firm Covington & Burling. The firm initially advised Flynn on how to fill out a required form, but later prosecuted him for allegedly falsifying that same form. This situation raises serious questions about the attorney-client privilege and the potential motivations of the government and Covington & Burling in this case. The involvement of a government prosecutor, Van Grack, in the negotiations further complicates the matter. The fact that Eric Holder, a former Attorney General, later joined Covington & Burling as a partner adds another layer of intrigue to this complex legal saga.
Allegations of incompetent services by Eric Holder's law firm impacting Michael Flynn's prosecution: Eric Holder, a former Obama AG, faces allegations of his law firm's incompetence leading to Michael Flynn's prosecution. Roger Stone's lenient sentencing and resignation of prosecutors add to the intrigue, suggesting potential efforts to hide information.
There are allegations that Eric Holder's law firm provided incompetent services that led to the prosecution of Michael Flynn. Former Attorney General Eric Holder, who served under Obama, is connected to a long list of scandals during his tenure, and some believe he may have something to hide. Another development involves Roger Stone, a longtime political operative and friend of Donald Trump, who was prosecuted for witness tampering and lying to Congress. However, the sentencing recommendation made to the Justice Department was much less severe than what was initially proposed, leading to the resignation of three prosecutors. The interconnectedness of these individuals and their involvement in various controversies raises questions about their motivations and potential efforts to hide information.
Prosecutors may have intentionally recommended excessive sentences to manipulate AG Barr: Some Mueller team members resigned, claiming AG Barr interfered in justice system, but their actions may have been manipulative
During the prosecution of Roger Stone, certain prosecutors may have intentionally recommended an excessive sentence to Attorney General Bill Barr, knowing he would object. They then resigned in protest, creating a narrative of Barr interfering in the justice system on behalf of President Trump. These prosecutors, including Aaron Zelensky, were previously part of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team. Their actions raise questions about their motives and the integrity of the entire legal process. The media, in turn, amplified this narrative, further fueling the ongoing political divide.
Connections between key figures in the Mueller investigation: The Mueller investigation raised questions about potential biases and conflicts of interest due to prior connections between key figures and the Obama administration.
During the Mueller investigation, key figures involved had prior connections to each other and to the Obama administration. For instance, Aaron Zelensky, who worked on the Stone case, had previously worked under Rod Rosenstein, who authorized one of the FISA warrants to spy on Donald Trump's team. Brandon Van Grack, who prosecuted Michael Flynn, had worked in the National Security Division, where John Carlin, who approved the spying on the Trump team, once served as chief. These connections raise questions about potential biases and conflicts of interest within the investigation. Additionally, the lead juror in the Roger Stone case, who recommended a harsh sentence, had previously run for Congress as a Democrat. These findings add to the ongoing debate about the fairness and impartiality of the Mueller investigation.
Jury member's political views raise concerns of bias in Roger Stone case: The impartiality of the justice system is questioned when jurors or prosecutors have clear political affiliations, potentially influencing their decision-making in cases involving political figures.
The jury member in the Roger Stone case, Tamika Hart, is a Democrat and has publicly expressed negative views towards President Trump. This raises concerns about impartiality and fairness in the justice system, as Hart's political affiliations could potentially influence her decision-making in the case. The issue of potential bias in the prosecution of Trump associates has been a recurring theme, with critics pointing out the apparent lack of diversity in the pool of jurors and prosecutors involved in these cases. This raises questions about the impartiality of the justice system and the potential for political motivations in the pursuit of these cases. It's important for the justice system to ensure that all parties involved are treated fairly and impartially, regardless of political affiliations or relationships.
Investigation into government corruption raises concerns over conflicts of interest and questionable actions: Congressman Devin Nunes suggests potential improprieties in Mueller probe, citing connections between prosecutors and the Spygate scandal
There are concerns about potential conflicts of interest and questionable actions in the investigation into government corruption, specifically regarding the Spygate scandal. Individuals involved in the investigation have ties to the Mueller probe and have been implicated in the scandal themselves. Devin Nunes, a congressman, has suggested that there may be more evidence of improprieties in how the Mueller probe was conducted. Nunes, due to the sensitive nature of the information he handles, communicates in code during media appearances. He has indicated that there are connections between the prosecutors involved in the Stone and Flynn cases and the Mueller probe, which raises questions about the legitimacy of the investigation.
Prosecutors involved in Flynn and Stone cases were also part of Mueller's team investigating Russian collusion: Despite no evidence of Russian collusion, Mueller's team continued the investigation, and the same prosecutors now trying to punish Flynn and Stone were involved in the hoax
The same prosecutors involved in the cases against Flynn and Stone, who are trying to punish and silence them, were also part of the Mueller team investigating alleged Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. This investigation, which started in 2016 and was paid for by Hillary Clinton, was based on the Steele dossier, which was a fabricated allegation. The FBI had investigated this matter before Mueller was hired, but Mueller and his team continued the investigation despite having no evidence of collusion. It is now clear that the entire investigation was a hoax, and the prosecutors may have been trying to hide this fact by prosecuting Flynn and Stone.
Investigation focused on process charges, not collusion: The Mueller investigation, based on a potentially false dossier, was used to arrest individuals associated with Trump on process charges, rather than for collusion with Russia. The investigation was prolonged to protect the FBI's reputation, despite lack of evidence for collusion.
The Mueller investigation, based on a potentially false dossier, was used to arrest individuals associated with the Trump orbit on process charges, rather than for collusion with Russia. The investigation was prolonged in order to protect the reputation of the FBI, despite the lack of evidence for Russian collusion. The Mueller report focused on the Russians' alleged bad actions, but did not provide evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia. The investigation was a scam, and those involved were protecting their jobs and bosses, rather than seeking justice for actual collusion.
Prosecutors with connections target Flynn, Mueller's old chief of staff heads National Security Division: Prosecutors with ties to Eric Holder targeted Flynn, and the National Security Division, led by Mueller's former chief of staff, spied on Trump. Frustrated, they targeted people they knew would cooperate.
During the discussion, it was revealed that a prosecutor involved in the Mueller investigation, who targeted Flynn, used a law firm associated with Eric Holder, who told Flynn how to fill out a form. Additionally, the prosecutors in the National Security Division, which spied on Trump and was headed by Bob Mueller's old chief of staff, all know each other. The speaker also mentioned that a Ukrainian official resigned in protest and had previously worked for Rod Rosenstein, who signed off on the warrants to spy on Trump. The speaker expressed frustration that they didn't find anyone else to target and needed people they knew would do their bidding. The speaker then transitioned to promoting Lending Club, a company that helps people consolidate debt and simplify their finances. Lastly, the speaker discussed Trump's unique ability to flip the script on reporters and turn their questions into statements, making it a setup for a negative sound bite. Trump has mastered this technique and refuses to fall into their trap.
Trump flips the script during interview: Despite pressure to admit to learning a lesson from impeachment, Trump accused Democrats and media of being 'crooked' and 'vicious' and mocked a reporter. He turned the tables on his critics, a tactic that has become his communication style.
That during an interview, President Trump responded to Republican leaders' expectation that he would admit to learning a lesson from the impeachment process by instead accusing the Democrats and the media of being "crooked" and "vicious." He also mocked a specific reporter for attempting to elicit a confessional soundbite. Trump's strategy was to flip the script and turn the tables on his critics, a tactic that has become a hallmark of his communication style. The conversation also touched upon the idea that many individuals involved in the targeting of Trump are getting rich while the public feels exploited. This theme was further explored in relation to the Skokovo project in Russia, which was described as an attempt to establish a technology corridor akin to Silicon Valley.
Allegations of US academic institutions taking funds from foreign governments: Investigation into Harvard, Yale, and other US schools for potential collusion with foreign governments over funds, raising concerns about propaganda and tech secrets theft.
There are allegations that academic institutions in the United States, particularly those with liberal leanings, have been soliciting funds from foreign governments and companies, some of which are known to be hostile to the US. One such project is the Skolkovo Foundation in Russia, which has been accused of stealing US technology secrets to build hypersonic weapons. Hillary and Bill Clinton have been associated with this project. The Education Department is currently investigating Harvard and Yale, among other schools, for their involvement in these transactions. This raises concerns about potential collusion between these institutions and foreign governments, which could lead to the spread of propaganda and the theft of research benefiting foreign entities. While some may dismiss these allegations as conspiracy theories, the potential implications are significant and warrant further investigation.
Allegations of Clinton-Skolkovo connection: The Clinton family, Skolkovo Project in Russia, and US universities face scrutiny for potential tech theft and conflicts of interest, with Bill Clinton planning to meet the Skolkovo head.
There are allegations of a connection between the Clinton family, the Skolkovo Project in Russia, and liberal institutions of higher education in the US. The Skolkovo Project, which is under scrutiny for potentially stealing technology from the US, has reportedly been promoted by the Clintons and has received donations from companies that also contribute to the Clinton Foundation. Bill Clinton is also reportedly planning to meet with the head of the Skolkovo Project. Meanwhile, there are concerns that these institutions may be influenced by the Skolkovo Project's funding. Additionally, Rudy Giuliani recently revealed troubling information about Joe Biden, which Dan Bongino plans to discuss further on his show. Overall, there are concerns about the interconnectedness of these individuals and organizations, and the potential for conflicts of interest and unethical behavior. The public discourse around these issues highlights the importance of transparency and accountability in politics and business.
