Podcast Summary
New Revelations in the Collusion Scandal: Senator Graham calls for a special counsel to investigate potential FISA warrant abuse during the Trump campaign, while the left reacts emotionally to these developments. No collusion between Trump campaign and Russian forces has been proven.
The collusion scandal surrounding the 2016 US Presidential elections, which has been a major focus of investigation since then, is being decimated by various sources, including the Mueller report and recent statements from Senator Lindsey Graham. Graham has indicated that there was an anomaly in the FBI's investigation during the Trump campaign, and he has called for a special counsel to look into whether the FISA warrant process was abused for political purposes. The left is reacting emotionally to these developments, but Graham and others maintain that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian forces. Freedom Project Academy, an accredited classical online school, is providing an alternative education option for parents who want their children to learn real-world skills and critical thinking instead of social justice and gender confusion.
FBI's past handling of Russian collusion allegations in McCain's campaign vs Trump's campaign: The FBI's inconsistent approach to investigating Russian collusion allegations against John McCain and Donald Trump raises questions about their motivations and biases.
The FBI's handling of allegations of Russian collusion in the 2016 presidential campaign is not a new phenomenon. As discussed on the show, the FBI had previously investigated Russian influence in John McCain's campaign during his presidential run against Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Yet, McCain received a defensive briefing from the FBI, and the potential collusion was ultimately deemed a non-story. However, during Trump's campaign, the FBI did not provide a similar briefing, leading to speculation about their intentions. This raises questions about why the FBI did not extend the same courtesy to Trump, and whether their investigation into Russian collusion was driven more by a desire to investigate Trump than to protect the integrity of the election. Additionally, Lindsey Graham brought up an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal by Holman Jenkins, which received little attention, questioning Loretta Lynch's handling of the Clinton email investigation and Comey's decision-making in that case. These incidents highlight the need for transparency and accountability in the FBI's investigative processes.
Theories suggest Russian disinformation influenced Comey's decision to announce Clinton email findings: Unproven theories allege Comey believed fake evidence of corrupt deal between Lynch and Clintons, leading to unusual press conference and lack of briefing for Trump
There are theories circulating that Jim Comey's decision to publicly announce the findings of the Hillary Clinton email investigation on July 5, 2016, was influenced by Russian disinformation. According to these theories, Comey may have believed that he had received evidence of a corrupt deal between Loretta Lynch and the Clintons, but this evidence was actually fake. Lindsey Graham and others have suggested that this could explain why Trump was not briefed about the investigation and why Comey took the unusual step of holding a press conference to announce the decision not to prosecute Clinton. The validity of these theories is still unproven, but they highlight the potential for foreign interference in the investigation and the importance of understanding the motivations behind key decisions in the case.
FBI's handling of Hillary Clinton's emails on Anthony Weiner's laptop: The FBI's review of Hillary Clinton's emails on Anthony Weiner's laptop raised questions about their process and potential political motivations, with unclear use of software to deduplicate emails and selective briefing of Senator John McCain about findings regarding Trump.
The timeline surrounding the discovery and review of Hillary Clinton's emails on Anthony Weiner's laptop, and the subsequent closing of the case, raises questions about the FBI's process and potential political motivations. The FBI allegedly reviewed thousands of emails in a very short timeframe, using a mysterious software to deduplicate the emails. However, the exact nature of this software and how it was used remains unclear. The FBI's handling of the case has led to accusations of a political motive, as they briefed Senator John McCain about their findings regarding Trump, but not the media or Congress about the Clinton emails. The FBI's handling of these emails and the surrounding circumstances continue to be a topic of investigation and controversy.
DOJ official raised concerns about potential bias of FISA source: New texts reveal a DOJ official expressed concerns about the FBI's use of a biased source for a FISA warrant, but their objections were ignored, casting doubt on the impartiality of the Russia investigation.
New texts from former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe and FBI lawyer Lisa Page suggest that someone in the Department of Justice had concerns about the potential bias of the confidential human source, likely Christopher Steele, used in the dossier that was used to secure a FISA warrant. This individual, possibly Stu Evans, the DOJ's National Security Division Deputy Assistant Attorney General, could have raised objections, but their concerns were ignored. This raises questions about the legitimacy of the FISA warrant and the role of key figures like Bob Mueller, who was the FBI director at the time and later headed the Russia investigation, and his former chief of staff, John Carlin, who was the head of the DOJ National Security Division. The texts also suggest a cover-up of these concerns, indicating that the investigation into Russian collusion may not have been as impartial as it was presented to be.
Obama White House officials' involvement in Russia investigation revealed: New texts contradict previous statements, suggesting White House had more involvement in Russia probe than acknowledged, potentially politically motivated
New texts have emerged showing that officials from the Obama White House were more involved in the Russia investigation than previously known. In October 2016, there was a meeting at the White House between key players in the dossier scandal, including Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates and the deputy CIA director, David Cohen. This contradicts previous statements from John Brennan that he didn't see the dossier until December and that there was no White House involvement in the investigation. These new texts add to the growing evidence that the Russia investigation may have been politically motivated. The significance of this development is that it challenges the narrative that the Obama administration was unaware of the Russia investigation and that it was a non-partisan effort. The texts also raise questions about the motivations and credibility of those involved in the investigation.
The Debunked Dossier: Trump-Russia Collusion Case Unfounded: The dossier, which formed the basis for allegations of Trump-Russia collusion, has been debunked as false. The Mueller probe found no evidence of collusion.
The dossier, which was the basis for the FBI's investigation into collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 election, has been debunked. None of the accusations in the dossier, including the allegations of an extensive conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, secret meetings between Trump attorney Michael Cohen and Putin aides, and corrupt bargains between Trump associate Carter Page and Russians, have been verified. The Mueller probe, which was the investigation into Russian interference in the election, has concluded and found no evidence of collusion. Therefore, the dossier, which was the collusion case, is proven to be false. This has significant implications for those who have based their professional credibility on the validity of the dossier.
Brennan's Changing Story on Russia Dossier: Former CIA director John Brennan's assertions of a Trump-Russia conspiracy lack credibility due to his inconsistent statements about his knowledge of the dossier and its origins.
John Brennan, former CIA director, continues to assert the existence of an extensive conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, and he believes that more indictments, potentially including Trump's family members, are coming in the final act of Robert Mueller's investigation. However, the only evidence of this conspiracy appears in the debunked dossier, which Brennan claims he didn't see until after the election. Yet, in sworn testimony given to Trey Gowdy in May 2017, Brennan denied knowing who commissioned the dossier. This inconsistency raises questions about Brennan's credibility and truthfulness regarding his knowledge of the dossier and the Russia investigation.
Former CIA Director John Brennan under scrutiny for potential lies about dossier involvement: Brennan briefed Harry Reid about controversial dossier, which may have contained false information, potentially misleading the FBI investigation into Trump campaign.
John Brennan, the former CIA director, is under scrutiny for potentially lying about his involvement with the controversial dossier used in the investigation of the Trump campaign. The dossier, which was funded by Democrats and contained allegations against Trump, was reportedly shared with Brennan by British intelligence in the summer of 2016. After receiving the information, Brennan briefed Harry Reid, the Senate Democratic leader, about it, which led Reid to write a letter to the FBI urging an investigation into Trump. It now appears that Brennan may have shared information from the dossier during these briefings. If true, this could be a significant development in the ongoing investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe. Additionally, former intelligence chief Jim Clapper has also faced criticism for his role in the intelligence community assessment regarding Russian interference in the election, which Trump has attacked but reportedly now agrees with. Clapper has since seemingly implicated President Obama in the situation by suggesting that the assessment may not have been initiated without Obama's involvement.
ICA had no basis in reality regarding Trump campaign involvement: Former intelligence officials, including Clapper, released an unreliable ICA to justify the Mueller investigation, but the dossier, its primary evidence, was later found to be unreliable. Clapper's role in the ICA's release now puts him in a precarious position.
The Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) that allegedly showed Russian attempts to help the Trump campaign during the 2016 election had no basis in reality when it came to the Trump team. Former intelligence officials, including James Clapper, pushed for the ICA to be made public despite suspicions from some agencies, and it ultimately served as a justification for the Mueller investigation. However, the dossier, which was the primary evidence linking the Russians to the Trump campaign, turned out to be unreliable. Once this was discovered, the intelligence community needed a new reason to keep the investigation going. They used the ICA, which inadvertently implicated Clapper and Obama in requesting an investigation into the Trump campaign based on false information. Clapper's actions have now put him in a precarious position, and the truth about the origins of the Mueller investigation continues to unravel.
Officials leaked dossier info to media, causing uproar and Mueller's appointment: James Clapper, Rod Rosenstein, and others deceived the public by leaking details from the dossier to the media, leading to the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller and their subsequent involvement in the investigation.
High-ranking officials, including James Clapper and Rod Rosenstein, played a role in leaking information from the dossier to the media, leading to the public outcry that resulted in the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Clapper discussed the dossier with CNN journalist Jake Tapper around the same time he told Jim Comey to brief President-elect Trump about it. Later, Buzzfeed published the dossier, causing an uproar and the subsequent appointment of Mueller. Meanwhile, Brennan and Clapper have been found to have lied about their knowledge and involvement with the dossier. Additionally, Rosenstein's signature appeared on several key documents related to the investigation of Trump, including the FISA renewals and the memo firing Comey. These officials' actions demonstrate a complex web of deceit and manipulation to further the investigation into Trump.
Trump's masterful maneuvering during investigations: Despite facing opposition, Trump outwitted his investigators, turning the tables and emerging victorious.
During his presidency, Donald Trump managed to turn the tables on his accusers, who were investigating him for various allegations including spying and obstruction of justice. The person overseeing these investigations was the same person who ultimately signed a memo exonerating Trump. Trump's ability to outmaneuver his opponents, despite facing opposition from the Democratic, media, and foreign policy establishments, has been described as a masterful move. The complex spy story unfolding in Washington D.C. lacks the glamour of fictional characters like James Bond or Jack Ryan, but the imbeciles involved are being exposed. Ultimately, Trump emerged victorious, demonstrating his ability to outwit his adversaries. The host, Dan Bongino, expressed his appreciation for his audience and encouraged them to share, subscribe, and check out the video version of the show.
