Podcast Summary
Dan's Apology to Ben Shapiro and Exciting New Discovery about George Papadopoulos: Dan apologized to Ben Shapiro for their previous heated exchange, shared a new discovery about George Papadopoulos, and promoted Omaha Steaks with a special Father's Day offer.
Dan Bongino's radio show on June 3, 2023, covered various topics including his response to criticism from Ben Shapiro, a major discovery about George Papadopoulos, and an advertisement for Omaha Steaks. Dan expressed his apologies to Ben for the tone of their previous discussion but appreciated his gentlemanly response. He also shared his excitement about a new discovery regarding Papadopoulos and promised to delve deeper into the topic. The show also featured an advertisement for Omaha Steaks, which Dan highly recommended for their high-quality meats and customizable options. He encouraged listeners to take advantage of a special Father's Day offer by ordering through the website and using the code "Bongino" for a significant discount. Overall, Dan's show promised a stacked lineup of topics and advertisements for the day.
Federal vs State legal procedures in arrests: The federal system usually charges before arresting, unlike the state system where arrest comes first. George Papadopoulos's arrest and charging documents were processed quickly and late at night, raising suspicions about the reasons behind the rush.
The way arrests and prosecutions are handled in the federal system versus the state system raises questions about the circumstances surrounding the arrest of George Papadopoulos. While in the state system, a local police officer may make an arrest first and then write up the charging documents later, the federal system typically works in reverse. In the case of Papadopoulos, he was arrested upon returning from Germany and the charging documents came later. This difference in procedure, along with the quick and late-night processing of his arrest, has raised suspicions about why there was a rush to shut him up. It's important to note that this is not an indication of guilt or innocence, but rather a call for transparency and accountability in the legal process.
Federal system usually requires a warrant for arrests, but exceptions exist: In the federal system, warrants are typically required for arrests, but exceptions allow for arrests without one, as seen in the case of George Papadopoulos.
Probable cause arrests are rare in the federal system, and law enforcement agencies generally prefer to obtain warrants before making arrests. This was highlighted in the case of George Papadopoulos, who was arrested at the airport without a warrant despite allegedly holding crucial information regarding potential collusion with Russians. The federal system typically requires filing paperwork, obtaining a warrant, and then making an arrest. However, there are exceptions, and a complaint or grand jury can be used to secure an arrest warrant. The simplicity of this process, especially in complex cases like alleged election collusion, makes the lack of a warrant during Papadopoulos' arrest noteworthy.
Suspicious Timing and Absence of Warrant in Papa Dizzle's Arrest: The arrest of Papa Dizzle without a warrant and the same day damning text messages were discovered between key FBI figures and the Clinton Foundation's lawyer raises questions about potential biases and coincidences in the investigations.
The arrest of Papa Dizzle without a warrant on the same day damning text messages were discovered between key FBI figures investigating Hillary Clinton and Trump, and the fact that Jeannie Rhee, once the Clinton Foundation's lawyer, signed off on the complaint, raises serious questions about potential biases and coincidences in the investigations. The absence of a warrant and the unusual timing of the arrest are not standard procedures in cases of this magnitude. The US Attorney's office and US marshals dislike making unjustified PC arrests due to potential legal complications. These facts, though not conclusive evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, suggest that something suspicious was happening behind the scenes.
Unusual Arrest of George Papadopoulos: The FBI's rush to arrest George Papadopoulos without a warrant and without his attorney present during the initial hearing is not standard procedure and raises questions about the motive behind the arrest.
The arrest of George Papadopoulos at Dulles Airport in 2017 was unusual due to the lack of a warrant and the absence of his attorney during the initial hearing. According to the speaker, this is not the standard procedure for FBI investigations, as agents typically plan arrests in advance and obtain warrants before making them. The speaker also suggests that the rush to arrest Papadopoulos may have been an attempt to prevent him from sharing information with others, as he had mentioned Joseph Mifsud during the interview, who was allegedly the source of Papadopoulos' knowledge about Hillary Clinton's emails. The speaker finds it odd that the conversation between Mifsud and Papadopoulos mentioned "Oconus Lores," which refers to agents operating outside the continental United States, and that there was a sudden interest in Papadopoulos after this conversation was discovered.
Government informants in political campaigns raise concerns: The use of government informants in political campaigns, potentially to create false narratives, undermines the integrity of the political process and raises serious concerns about entrapment and the role of foreign or federal assets in shaping campaigns.
The use of government informants or spies to interact with political campaigns, as seen in the case of George Papadopoulos and the alleged entrapment of Carter Page, raises serious concerns. These interactions, which were aimed at extracting information, could potentially be more disturbing than the initial focus on the polls suggests. The possibility of foreign or federal assets pushing information into the campaigns, creating a false narrative, is a form of entrapment and undermines the integrity of the political process. The rapid arrests and interviews of individuals, such as Papadopoulos, without proper legal representation, add to the concerning nature of these events.
CIA asset's role in targeting Papadopoulos questioned: Michael Mukasey raises concerns over possible entrapment of George Papadopoulos by a CIA asset turned FBI informant, Stefan Halper, during the 2016 campaign.
The interaction between George Papadopoulos and a CIA asset named Stefan Halper during the 2016 presidential campaign may have been part of an entrapment operation. Former Attorney General Michael Mukasey raised questions about how Halper, a CIA asset, became an FBI asset and targeted Papadopoulos in a law enforcement investigation. The efforts to shut down Papadopoulos and arrest him quickly after he mentioned a certain name suggest an attempt to hide the origins of the operation. Some have suggested that Papadopoulos may have been working for the bureau himself, but this is not a widely accepted conclusion. The importance of understanding this interaction lies in shedding light on the origins of the investigation into the Trump campaign and potential attempts to influence the election.
Practice shooting with laser rounds using iTargetPro: Competitive shooters can save costs and train effectively with instant feedback using iTargetPro's laser rounds instead of live fire range practice.
The iTargetPro system allows competitive shooters to practice dry firing with laser rounds, providing instant feedback on groupings and accuracy, making it an effective and cost-saving alternative to live fire training at the range. Papadopoulos's wife's recent interviews suggest inconsistencies in the allegations against him, with Papadopoulos himself introducing Mifsud's name in an FBI interview and being threatened with additional charges if he didn't confess to false statements. The case against Papadopoulos continues to raise questions, and it's important to consider all perspectives before forming conclusions.
Papa D's conflicting interests and potential entrapment: Conflicting beliefs about Papa D's allegiances and the possibility of an entrapment case complicate the situation, emphasizing the importance of understanding motivations behind silencing efforts.
There are conflicting interests at play regarding Papa D (George Papadopoulos) and his connection to Miffsud (an individual believed to hold significant information). Some believe he's a Russian agent, while others claim he's an ally of Western intelligence agencies. The push for silencing Papa D could have originated from friendlies rather than the Russians, potentially leading to a major entrapment case if proven true. This complicates the situation and highlights the importance of understanding the motivations behind the push for Papa D's silence. Additionally, during this discussion, there was a promotion for Man Crates, a gift service that delivers unique, handpicked gifts for various types of dads, which comes with a real crowbar for opening the package. The Man Crates offer was emphasized as a fun and engaging gift experience for Father's Day.
Tension between free speech and anti-discrimination laws: The Supreme Court acknowledged the tension between free speech and anti-discrimination laws but didn't reach a definitive conclusion. They emphasized individuals' right to decide what's offensive and the government must respect that.
The Supreme Court case involving a baker refusing to make a cake for a same-sex wedding highlighted the tension between free speech and anti-discrimination laws. The court acknowledged that there's a continuum of expressive content, and as the degree of expressive content goes up, the degree of constitutional protection kicks in. However, they didn't reach a definitive conclusion on this matter. The court was more clear on the issue of religious freedom, condemning the anti-religious comments made by the Colorado Civil Rights Division and emphasizing that the government cannot determine what is offensive. Instead, individuals have the right to decide for themselves what they find offensive, and the government must respect that.
Supreme Court ruling impacts business refusals and labor market: The Supreme Court ruling limits the Civil Rights Division's ability to determine what is offensive, forcing businesses to find new reasons for refusing service. The labor market remains a concern, with a high adjusted for labor force participation unemployment rate, but job growth is improving under Trump.
The Supreme Court ruling on the cake shop case was more significant than it initially seemed, as the Civil Rights Division no longer gets to determine what is offensive, and businesses must find new reasons for refusing service. Another key takeaway from the discussion involves the labor market. Despite the strong job numbers under the Trump economy, the adjusted for labor force participation unemployment rate remains high at 10.3%, with the extensive welfare safety net being a contributing factor to the low labor force participation rate. However, there is good news as well, with job growth improving under Trump, with an average of 213,000 full-time equivalent jobs added per month, compared to 93,000 under Obama.
President Trump's Economy vs. Obama's: President Trump's economy shows significant improvement over Obama's with higher job growth and real GDP growth.
During his last year in office, President Obama handed over an economy with an average job growth of 93,000 and a real GDP growth of 1.84%. In contrast, President Trump's average job growth is 213,000 and real GDP growth is 3.27%. These are significant improvements from the Obama economy. Despite some disagreements, it's important to acknowledge the positive impact Trump has had on the economy. However, the debate continues on the extent of Obama's involvement in targeting the Trump campaign during the election. While some argue that if the targeting was true, why wasn't damaging information released during the campaign, others believe that the investigation was necessary to ensure the integrity of the election. Regardless, both sides should strive for a productive dialogue and avoid personal attacks.
Clinton's late release of Russia-Trump server info: During the 2016 US election, Clinton team released debunked info linking Trump to Russia, raising questions about its origin and why it wasn't made public earlier.
During the 2016 US presidential election, Hillary Clinton and her team released information eight days before the election about a supposed covert server linking the Trump organization to a Russia-based bank. The information was debunked later, but at the time, it could have potentially damaged Trump's campaign. Clinton's possession of this information raises questions about where she obtained it from and why it was not made public earlier if there was a collaboration between her team and the intelligence community to target Trump. However, it was later revealed that there were no criminal charges levied from this inquiry, and the information was entirely debunked. The Obama administration and the Hillary team did release what they had, but they did not have enough evidence to corroborate it and make it credibly reported by media outlets.
Discussing the lack of evidence for Russian collusion before the election: Despite claims, there's little evidence of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign before the election. Post-election revelations, like the Flynn information and Trump Tower meeting, had connections to Clinton's team and did not provide damaging evidence.
The discussion highlights the lack of evidence for Russian collusion with the Trump campaign before the election. The speaker argues that the Flynn information, which came out after the election, did not provide damaging evidence and was not enough to launch an investigation. Additionally, the Trump Tower meeting, which some claim was an entrapment operation, had connections to Hillary Clinton's team and their efforts to gather negative information on Trump. The speaker emphasizes that these are facts, even if the conclusions drawn from them are subject to interpretation. Overall, the discussion underscores the importance of considering all available evidence when evaluating allegations of political collusion.
Connections between Trump-Russia investigation and Clinton world: The Trump-Russia investigation involved individuals with ties to the Clinton world, including a Russian lawyer, a translator, and a lawyer for a Russian intelligence officer. The origins of the investigation are disputed, with some claiming it began after a conversation about Hillary's emails.
During a discussion about the Trump-Russia investigation, it was mentioned that several individuals involved had connections to the Clinton world. These connections included a Russian intelligence officer's lawyer who was friends with the Clintons, a translator who had worked for Hillary's State Department, and a Russian lawyer who could not explain how she obtained a visa for a meeting with Trump Jr. Additionally, it was claimed that an FBI investigation into Trump's campaign began after a conversation about Hillary's emails, but this was later disputed by the Australian High Commissioner who was involved. The speaker also argued against the use of human intelligence assets to investigate political campaigns based on questionable information and against opening investigations before proper procedures have been followed. Overall, the discussion highlighted the complex web of connections and potential miscommunications involved in the investigation.
Clarifying Misconceptions about the Russia Investigation: Despite Trump's statements, there's no solid evidence he explicitly linked the Russia investigation to Comey's firing or called it a hoax. The FBI investigated Russian contacts with the Trump campaign and followed standard procedures if human assets were involved.
During a discussion on a podcast, the speaker clarified that while President Trump may have made disjointed statements regarding the Russia investigation and the firing of former FBI Director James Comey, it's important to note that there's no concrete evidence to support the claim that Trump explicitly stated he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation being politically motivated or a hoax. The speaker also pointed out that Trey Gowdy, a former congressman, did not accurately represent the scope of the Russia investigation when he stated that the investigation was not looking into the Trump campaign. The speaker emphasized that the FBI was indeed investigating Russian government contacts with the Trump campaign and that standard operating procedures would have been followed if human assets were to be employed against a presidential campaign. The speaker concluded by acknowledging the importance of the debate on the issue and appreciating the other party's work while maintaining their disagreement on certain points.
