Podcast Summary
Release of Flynn's 302 interview damages anti-Trump narrative: The release of Flynn's interview report revealed inconsistencies with Comey's testimony and the dossier, casting doubt on the entire case against Trump's presidency.
Jim Comey's credibility and case against President Trump took a significant blow yesterday. The release of the original 302 from Flynn's interview exposed lies and deceit, damaging the anti-Trump narrative. Comey's testimony on Capitol Hill was a desperate attempt to change the narrative, as it was based on the dossier which faced severe criticism. The entire case against Trump's presidency seems to be falling apart, leaving many questioning the motives of those who have been pushing these allegations. It's becoming clear that the truth about America, as presented on shows like the Dan Bongino Show, may be quite different from the media's portrayal.
FBI Director Jim Comey ignored procedures to verify dossier before presenting it to FISA court: FBI Director Jim Comey failed to follow proper procedures to verify the dossier used to investigate Donald Trump, raising serious questions about his actions and potential misconduct. The lack of verification calls into question the legitimacy of the investigation and underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in our justice system.
During his tenure as FBI director, Jim Comey ignored established procedures for verifying information before presenting it to a FISA court. Specifically, the dossier used to investigate Donald Trump was not verified, despite it now being known as a hoax. Comey's failure to follow proper procedures raises serious questions about his actions and potential misconduct. This issue is significant because the integrity of the information presented in FISA courts is crucial, and the lack of verification of the dossier calls into question the legitimacy of the investigation into Trump. Comey's recent evasive comments about the dossier's origins suggest he is aware of this issue and is trying to downplay his role in the matter. The ongoing revelations about the dossier and the FBI's handling of it underscore the importance of transparency and accountability in our justice system.
Former FBI Director Comey linked to debunked Trump-Russia dossier: Former FBI Director Comey's involvement in the debunked Trump-Russia dossier is under scrutiny as a key allegation, Cohen's Prague trip, has been debunked. Ongoing investigations are crucial to examine the dossier's origins.
Former FBI Director James Comey is lashing out due to a paper trail linking him to the verification of the debunked Trump-Russia dossier. Key figures connected to Robert Mueller were involved in this process. Yesterday, three things occurred that further exposed the dossier as a hoax. A central component, the allegation that Trump lawyer Michael Cohen traveled to Prague to collude with Kremlin-connected individuals, has been debunked as Cohen has never been to Prague. This is a significant development, as this allegation was a cornerstone of the dossier's claims. The dossier's credibility has been severely damaged, and it's crucial that ongoing investigations by Bill Barr and John Huber look into these matters.
Michael Cohen's Prague Trip Allegation Debunked: Despite claims in the Steele dossier, Michael Cohen has never been to Prague according to multiple sources, including his spokesperson and reputable news organizations.
The allegation of Michael Cohen's trip to Prague, as mentioned in the Steele dossier, has been debunked by multiple sources. Cohen's spokesperson, Lanny Davis, has stated unequivocally that Cohen has never been to Prague. The Washington Post, a reputable news organization, has spent two years trying to verify the trip and has found no evidence to support it. Greg Miller, an investigative reporter for the Washington Post, has stated that based on sources within the CIA and FBI, it is unlikely that the trip occurred. These revelations undermine the credibility of the Steele dossier, which heavily relies on this allegation.
Russian collusion hoax figures admit potential falsity of dossier: Michael Isakov, Christopher Steele, and the Washington Post acknowledge the dossier's potential inaccuracies, while Alpha Bank sues Fusion GPS and Steele, revealing the Democrats' plan to challenge the election outcome with it.
Key figures involved in promoting the Russian collusion narrative, such as Michael Isakov and Christopher Steele, are now acknowledging the potential falsity of the dossier that served as the foundation for this narrative. The Washington Post, which has been a major promoter of the collusion hoax, now acknowledges the dossier's likely falsehood. Additionally, Alpha Bank, a central player in the dossier's allegations of collusion, has sued Fusion GPS and Christopher Steele, with Steele admitting in court that Hillary Clinton's campaign was considering using the dossier to challenge the election outcome if they lost. The revelation that the dossier was sought by the Democrats to challenge the election result casts serious doubt on its credibility and raises questions about the motivations of those who promoted it.
FBI dossier based on false information orchestrated by those wanting to challenge election results: The FBI investigation against President Trump's campaign was based on a dossier containing false information orchestrated by those trying to challenge the election results. The lack of media coverage and accountability is a serious concern.
The dossier used by the FBI to investigate President Trump's campaign was based on false information orchestrated by those wanting to challenge the election results. Christopher Steele, the author of the dossier, has acknowledged in a court filing that the Clinton team wanted the dossier to challenge the election results if they lost. Steele also admitted to using Russian disinformation in creating the dossier. The implications of this scandal are significant, as it involves the use of foreign information to target a presidential candidate and interfere with an election. Despite this bombshell admission, the mainstream media has largely ignored the story, and those who initially promoted the dossier have yet to acknowledge their error. The lack of coverage and accountability from the media is a serious concern, and it underscores the importance of independent journalists and investigative reporting. The use of false information to target a political opponent is a serious issue that demands transparency and accountability.
FBI Interview with Michael Flynn: Timing and Authenticity in Question: Concerns surround the delayed and edited FBI summary of Michael Flynn's interview, potentially hiding damaging information, and inconsistencies with Hillary Clinton's interview treatment.
There are concerns regarding the timing and authenticity of a summary (302) of an interview with Michael Flynn by the FBI, which took place weeks after the interview and was later edited. This is not standard procedure and has raised suspicions. The interview revolved around allegations that Flynn lied about discussions with the Russian ambassador regarding sanctions and a UN vote. The release of the unredacted 302 could potentially reveal damaging information, but there are redactions in the current version. Flynn was eventually charged and pled guilty to lying to the FBI, but some believe he was coerced into it due to potential threats to his family and financial ruin. The inconsistency in the handling of Flynn's case compared to Hillary Clinton's interview summary further fuels the suspicion.
Michael Flynn's Inconsistent Answers about Russian Conversations: Flynn's inconsistent answers to the FBI about his conversations with Kislyak were due to memory lapses and confusion, not intentional lies.
During his interview with the FBI, Michael Flynn gave inconsistent answers about his conversations with the Russian ambassador, Kislyak. The discrepancy was not about lying per se, but rather about Flynn's memory and confusion regarding the details of their conversations, particularly those related to the UN vote on Israeli settlements. The interviewing agents noted that Flynn seemed to remember the conversations better when they reminded him, leading them to believe that Flynn did not intentionally lie but rather mixed up the details. This miscommunication has caused significant issues for Flynn and has been misunderstood by many, leading to ongoing debates and discussions.
Flynn's thank you to FBI raises questions about his recall: Flynn initially denied discussing sanctions with Russian ambassador but later thanked FBI for reminding him of the conversation, suggesting he may have forgotten the details
Michael Flynn's thanking of FBI agents for reminding him about a call may indicate that he was confusing the details of multiple conversations. The FBI interviewed Flynn regarding his communications with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, and Flynn initially denied discussing sanctions with him. However, the transcript of their conversation revealed that they had indeed discussed the topic. Flynn later thanked the FBI for reminding him of this conversation, suggesting that he may have forgotten about it. This raises questions about the accuracy of Flynn's initial denial and the possibility that he was not intentionally lying but rather confused about the details of his conversations. The FBI agents did not believe Flynn was being deceptive during the interview. Overall, Flynn's case is complex, and the inconsistencies in his recollection of conversations add to the ongoing investigation.
Michael Flynn's conversation with the FBI: Despite forgetting a conversation with the FBI, Flynn thanked them for reminding him, highlighting the complexity of international diplomacy and the subjectivity of memory.
During a discussion, it was mentioned that Michael Flynn, the incoming national security advisor, did not remember a specific conversation with the FBI. Despite this being presented as evidence against him, it's revealed that he thanked the FBI for reminding him about the conversation. The conversation was one of many he was having with various countries, and he was on vacation at the time. The FBI's involvement in this situation is criticized for producing a crime rather than investigating one. Additionally, there was a shift in the conversation to discuss Senator Rubio and his perceived change in character. The discussion ended with a promotion for the Quip electric toothbrush, which is praised for its convenience, affordability, and effectiveness. Overall, the conversation touched on a range of topics, from politics to consumer products.
Senator Rubio's Proposal to Tax Stock Buybacks is Based on Economic Ignorance: Taxing stock buybacks could lead to higher prices throughout the economy and potentially discourage investment, contradicting Senator Rubio's intent.
Senator Marco Rubio's proposal to tax corporate stock buybacks is based on economic ignorance. Rubio argues that companies should invest their tax cut savings in their businesses instead of buying back stocks. However, businesses are not tax collectors but rather pass on taxes to consumers in the form of higher prices. Taxing stock buybacks would result in higher prices throughout the economy and potentially discourage investment in other areas. Rubio's argument that companies should invest in non-productive enterprises instead of buying back stocks is misguided. Businesses make investment decisions based on their cash flow and business opportunities. Stock buybacks return cash to investors, who can then invest in other companies with promising business opportunities. Rubio's proposal would not lead to increased investment and could negatively impact the economy.
Private investment up despite interest rate hikes due to tax opportunities: Private investment continues to grow despite interest rate increases due to the benefits of the Trump tax law.
Despite tightening monetary policy and increasing interest rates, private non-residential investment has been on the rise due to the opportunities presented by the Trump tax test. Rubio's call for taxing buybacks to give the money to the government for investment in employees or shareholders makes no sense as businesses are looking for better investment opportunities themselves. Meanwhile, McSally, who lost her Senate race in Arizona, is now being appointed to McCain's vacated seat, causing controversy among some. In healthcare news, the push for Medicare for all is gaining momentum among Democrats, who are panicking about the potential loss of Obamacare in court. They plan to introduce more government involvement in healthcare, despite the issues with the current Medicaid system. Atlas' Wall Street Journal piece debunks statistics used to advocate for single-payer healthcare and highlights the potential issues with such a system.
Differences in measurement methods affect healthcare comparisons: Comparing healthcare systems and health statistics between countries requires acknowledging varying measurement methods, such as differing timeframes for recording live births and lifestyle factors' impact on health outcomes.
The comparison of healthcare systems and health statistics between the United States and other countries can be misleading due to differing measurement methods. The United States measures every live birth, while some countries only measure live births after a certain period of time. This results in lower infant mortality rates in countries with the latter method. Additionally, lifestyle factors contribute to higher rates of premature birth and obesity in the United States, which negatively impact life expectancy, not the healthcare system itself. Therefore, it's essential to consider these differences when evaluating healthcare systems and health statistics.
