Podcast Summary
Dan praises McConnell's decision and promotes responsible gun ownership: Dan supports McConnell's choice not to bring up anti-Trump bill, emphasizes importance of proficient gun use through iTargetPro, and criticizes Tillis for focusing on Trump restrictions instead of citizens' needs.
During the Dan Bongino Show, Dan expressed his appreciation for Mitch McConnell's decision to not bring up a controversial anti-Trump bill to the Senate floor. He also emphasized the importance of responsible gun ownership and learning how to use a firearm proficiently, which can be achieved through the iTargetPro system. Dan criticized Republican Senator Tom Tillis for focusing on restricting Trump's powers instead of improving citizens' lives and encouraged listeners to contact his office about it. Overall, the show discussed various political topics, including the Senate and gun ownership, with a focus on taking action and being informed.
Conflicts of interest in Mueller investigation: The Mueller investigation into President Trump raised concerns due to investigators' past connections to individuals involved in the Hillary Clinton email scandal
During the investigation into President Trump led by Robert Mueller, there were clear conflicts of interest as some of the investigators had previous connections to individuals involved in the Hillary Clinton email scandal. Mueller's former chief of staff, Aaron Zebli, was not only a partner at the law firm Wilmer Hale but also represented Justin Cooper, who set up Hillary Clinton's private server and destroyed some of her mobile devices. This raises serious concerns about the impartiality of the investigation and the potential for a smokescreen to cover up the real crimes committed by the Obama and Hillary team. The iTargetPro laser training system, mentioned earlier, is an effective tool for competitive shooters to practice and improve their skills, especially considering the high costs of live fire at the range. For more information, visit iTargetPro.com and use promo code DAN for a 10% discount.
Mueller's Investigation and Conflicts of Interest: Speaker questions Mueller's impartiality due to use of lawyer who represented a Clinton figure and Obama's ex-counsel's involvement in Mueller probe
The speaker expresses concern about the potential conflict of interest in Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, specifically regarding Mueller's use of a lawyer who previously represented a key figure in the Clinton email scandal. The speaker argues that this raises questions about Mueller's impartiality and ability to fairly investigate both the Trump and Clinton camps. The speaker also mentions the involvement of Obama's former White House counsel in representing a cooperating witness in the Mueller investigation, further fueling these concerns. The speaker encourages listeners to read a related article for more information.
Mueller team has Democratic ties and represented Clinton figures: Mueller team, led by Democrat Andy Weisman, has ties to Clintons and represented Clinton Foundation and Obama officials
The Mueller investigation into Trump is being led by a team with strong Democratic ties and individuals who have represented key figures in past Clinton scandals. Andy Weisman, a noted Democrat and big donor, leads the team, while Jeannie Rhee, another team member, previously represented both the Clinton Foundation and Ben Rhodes, Obama's national security advisor, during investigations related to the Benghazi attack and Clinton's involvement in its aftermath. These connections raise questions about potential conflicts of interest and impartiality in the investigation.
Myth of Republican-led Mueller probe to shield Clinton: Despite popular belief, many Mueller team members donated to Democrats, debunking the theory that the investigation is a political ploy to protect Clinton.
The assertion that the Mueller investigation into Trump is a smoke screen to cover up Clinton crimes is not based on fact. Contrary to popular belief, not all members of Mueller's team are Republicans. In fact, at least 10 of the 17 team members have made political donations to Democrats, including Hillary Clinton. The idea that the investigation is solely focused on Trump to distract from Clinton crimes is a baseless conspiracy theory. Additionally, the article from wire.com discussed in the podcast mentions that Mueller was looking to put people on his team who understood the Hillary crimes, not to make them go away, but to investigate them further. The notion that the investigation is a political ploy to protect the Clintons is not supported by the evidence.
Mueller's hiring of anti-Trump lawyer raises bias concerns: Mueller's team hiring of Lisa Page, known for her anti-Trump texts, and other Clinton associates, fuels perceptions of bias and impartiality issues in the Mueller investigation.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller's recruitment of Lisa Page, a little-known Justice Department trial attorney and former FBI lawyer known for her anti-Trump texts with Peter Strzok, further suggests an anti-Trump bias within his team. Mueller's decision to hire Page despite her public animosity towards Trump raises questions about his judgment in assembling his investigative team. This hiring, along with others of Clinton associates, adds to the growing perception that the Mueller investigation may not be impartial. If the Democrats regain control of Congress in the midterms, impeachment proceedings against Trump could be a possibility. Trump, who has shown resilience and a fighting spirit throughout his presidency, is unlikely to go down without a fight.
Political Climate of Conflict: Preparing for a Long Fight: The current political climate may lead to significant upheaval if issues aren't addressed, with both sides bracing for a long and potentially contentious fight
There is a deep-seated belief among some that there are significant political issues that need to be addressed, and the current political climate may lead to drastic measures if these issues are not addressed. The speaker expresses concern over ongoing investigations and potential impeachment proceedings against the president, and the potential consequences for both parties if the situation continues. They believe that Republicans, who they see as ideologically prepared and battle-hardened, will not back down, and that some states may even engage in "soft secession" efforts. The speaker also criticizes liberals for being unprepared for ideological conflict and for being overly sensitive. Overall, the takeaway is that the current political climate may lead to significant upheaval if the issues at hand are not addressed, and that both sides are preparing for a long and potentially contentious fight.
Fighting Political Battles Hardens the Soul: The speaker sees his role as defined by political fights, believes opponents are soft, and emphasizes the importance of never considering oneself vanquished, with John Brennan's actions a significant factor.
The speaker sees his role in life as being defined by the fights he is engaged in, particularly political ones. He believes that these challenges are hardening his soul and preparing him for future battles. The speaker also believes that his opponents, specifically those on the left, are soft and unprepared for the intensity of the ideological battles to come. He emphasizes that the left relies on media, political power, and cultural pressure to try and vanquish their opponents, but the speaker is determined to never consider himself vanquished. Additionally, the speaker mentions John Brennan's role in initiating the government effort to take down Trump, and suggests that this is an important angle to consider in understanding the current political climate.
Possible Russian hoax in FBI investigation: The authenticity and origin of intelligence used in FBI investigations remain uncertain, with potential for Russian manipulation or misinformation.
Former FBI Director Jim Comey's revelation about a supposed explosive piece of information regarding Attorney General Loretta Lynch and the Clinton email investigation may not be as groundbreaking as advertised. According to investigative journalist Malcolm Jenkins, the intercepted Russian document Comey refers to may have been a fake, sent by the Russians as part of a reverse psychology move to get the U.S. intelligence community to respond. Additionally, John Brennan, the former CIA director, may have played a role in pushing for the investigation into Donald Trump based on information he was aware of, despite not having any law enforcement powers. The authenticity and origin of the intelligence used in the investigation remain unclear, adding to the complexity of the situation.
Evidence of a conspiracy between the Russians and the Trump team to pump fake information into the justice system: During the 2016 election, former CIA director John Brennan needed help from law enforcement to investigate Trump for collusion with Russia. He used a likely fake Russian intercept to initiate the investigation, raising questions about the legitimacy of the investigation and the use of false information to start it.
During the 2016 presidential election, there were allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. John Brennan, a former CIA director, wanted to investigate Trump using law enforcement courts but couldn't do so without a law enforcement charter or an affiant. He needed someone in law enforcement to initiate the investigation. When people in the FBI were reluctant, a Russian intercept was presented as evidence of a conspiracy between Loretta Lynch and the Russians. However, the Russian intercept was likely fake, and if Comey and Brennan knew it was fake, it raises questions about whether the fake Russian email was used to further a law enforcement investigation into Trump, alleging a conspiracy between the Russians and the Trump team to pump fake information into the justice system to start an investigation into the Clintons. This is significant because the dossier, which was also used to investigate Trump, was also found to be fake. It's important to consider the possibility that these fake intercepts and the dossier were used to further investigations into Trump based on false information.
FilterBuy's MIRV offer and economic progress: FilterBuy offers MIRV solutions for indoor air quality and HVAC efficiency with a discount. Economy shows growth with increased investments, productivity, and wages, but debt concerns persist. Controversy surrounds Comey's handling of the Flynn case, and a Supreme Court ruling clarifies deportation rights for legal residents with criminal convictions.
FilterBuy provides various MIRV options to improve indoor air quality and boost HVAC system efficiency, while offering a 5% discount on auto-delivery. Meanwhile, the economy is showing signs of growth with increased investments leading to higher productivity and wages. Productivity is crucial in economics as it measures output and is influenced by investments in workers and equipment. The economic progress is significant, but concerns over debt remain. In the news, there is ongoing controversy surrounding former FBI Director James Comey's handling of the Michael Flynn case, with allegations of cover-ups and inconsistencies in his statements. Lastly, the Supreme Court ruling on the Sessions v. Dimaya case clarified that a lawful permanent resident, who is not an illegal immigrant, can still be subject to deportation based on certain criminal convictions.
Victory for clear laws over vague ones: Gorsuch's ruling emphasizes the importance of clear laws, making it harder for the government to use vague language to target individuals or businesses, potentially impacting future cases involving regulatory agencies.
Justice Gorsuch's ruling against the deportation of a green card holder who committed a crime was a victory for clear, sharply defined laws over vague ones. Gorsuch, known for his opposition to the discretionary state, made it clear that it's not his job to interpret what the legislative branch meant, but for them to write clear laws. This is important because liberals, who often champion vague laws, can use them to go after individuals and businesses in ways that limit economic opportunity. The ruling could have significant implications for future cases involving regulatory agencies like the EPA. In essence, Gorsuch's ruling is a step towards ensuring that laws are written in a clear and concise manner, making it harder for the government to use vague language to target individuals or businesses.
Justice Gorsuch's stance against vague laws praised by Dan Bongino: Dan Bongino expressed gratitude for Justice Gorsuch's clear stance against vague discretionary laws and emphasized the importance of clear and specific laws for a balanced and effective legal system. Listeners' support was also acknowledged, encouraging them to subscribe to the Dan Bongino Show's YouTube channel for more content.
During a recent court case discussion on his podcast, Dan Bongino expressed his appreciation for Justice Gorsuch's stance against vague discretionary laws. Gorsuch's position aligns with the conservative view that such laws are dangerous. Bongino emphasized the importance of clear and specific laws to maintain a balanced and effective legal system. Additionally, Bongino and his team at the Dan Bongino Show expressed their gratitude to their listeners for their support, which helps increase their reach and exposure through subscriptions and following their channels on various platforms like iTunes, Spotify, iHeart, SoundCloud, and YouTube. The team specifically requested listeners to subscribe to their YouTube channel, YouTube.com/DanBongino, to further aid their operation. Overall, the podcast highlighted the significance of clear laws, listener support, and the impact of the judicial system on everyday life.
