Podcast Summary
Protecting Online Activity with ExpressVPN: Using ExpressVPN, an affordable and effective tool, encrypts data and hides IP addresses, safeguarding personal information online against cybercrime
In today's world, it's essential to protect your personal information online, especially when using public Wi-Fi. Dan Bongino shared his experience of engaging in a Twitter feud with a self-proclaimed tough guy, but the real lesson came when Bongino discussed the importance of using ExpressVPN to secure and anonymize internet browsing. Cybercrime is a real threat, and leaving your internet connection unencrypted can lead to having your sensitive data stolen. ExpressVPN encrypts data and hides public IP addresses, making it an effective tool against cybercriminals. It's easy to use and affordable, with a 30-day money-back guarantee. Protecting your online activity is crucial, and ExpressVPN is an excellent solution.
Liberal criticism towards DOJ under Bill Barr is inconsistent: Liberals criticize DOJ under Trump appointee Bill Barr but celebrate investigations from the same department during Trump's tenure. The hypocrisy stems from their selective application of logic and disregard for facts.
The inconsistency and illogic of liberal criticism towards the Department of Justice (DOJ) under Attorney General Bill Barr are highlighted in a discussion between Andy McCarthy and Bill Hemmer. McCarthy pointed out that every Attorney General is handpicked by the President, yet liberals are now criticizing the DOJ for being "corrupted" due to Barr's appointment. However, they celebrate investigations by the Southern District of New York, a division of the DOJ, when it targets Trump. The irony is that the same Department of Justice, which they criticize when it's run by a Trump appointee, is celebrated when it's investigating Trump. Moreover, Mueller's chief investigator, Andrew Weisman, also came from the Department of Justice. This inconsistency exposes the irrationality of liberal criticism and their suspension of disbelief in supporting conflicting narratives.
FBI's Trump probe may have been based on entrapment: New info suggests FBI used entrapment tactics against Trump team in 2016, similar to McCain case in 2008
The FBI's investigation into the Trump team during the 2016 election may have been based on a classic entrapment scheme. According to information that came out yesterday, the FBI had used similar tactics before, including in the case of John McCain in 2008. The goal was to push information into the Trump team through intermediaries like George Papadopoulos, with the intention of pulling it out later to make them look like spies or intermediaries for Russian information. The FBI's changing timeline on the investigation and the reasons behind it may now make more sense in light of this new information. This is a significant development in the ongoing story of Spygate and adds to the growing evidence that the investigation may have been politically motivated.
Obama administration's false accusations against political opponents: The Obama administration made false accusations of Russian collusion against political opponents like Flynn, McCain, Paige, and Papadopoulos, potentially due to their criticisms of the Iran deal.
The Obama administration's use of intelligence to make false accusations of Russian collusion against political opponents, including Michael Flynn in 2014 when he was not yet part of the Trump campaign, raises serious concerns about political manipulation. This pattern of behavior was not limited to Trump and was attempted against McCain, Flynn, Paige, and Papadopoulos. The Obama administration's desire to discredit Flynn may have stemmed from his criticism of the Iran deal, a signature foreign policy achievement of the Obama administration. The 2014 date and recent article by Chuck Ross highlight this troubling pattern of behavior. The use of the Russian collusion label as a political weapon without evidence of criminal activity is concerning and underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in government.
CIA asset's actions fueled Flynn investigation: A CIA asset's concerns about Flynn in 2014 led to investigations, but new evidence suggests his true intentions may have been to manipulate the situation against political opponents.
The timeline of events surrounding the investigation into Michael Flynn's alleged inappropriate interactions with a Russian woman in 2014 raises questions about the motivations of those involved. Stefan Halper, a CIA asset, reportedly expressed concerns about Flynn to intelligence agencies in 2014, and this information was used to fuel allegations of Russian collusion. However, the woman in question, Svetlana Lakova, has denied any connection to Russian intel. Despite this, Halper invited her to a dinner in February 2016, which coincidentally was around the time Flynn joined the Trump campaign. This invitation raises questions about Halper's true intentions and the potential use of Lakova as a source to further the false narrative of Flynn as a Russian colluder. The changing timeline of events and the involvement of Halper, a CIA asset, suggest that the Obama administration may have been trying to manipulate the situation to damage political opponents.
FBI's investigation into Russian collusion may have involved entrapment: The FBI's investigation into Russian collusion in the 2016 US election may have involved entrapment of Trump campaign associates, including Carter Page and George Papadopoulos, with no evidence of wrongdoing on their part. The FBI's timeline of events keeps changing, suggesting they may be hiding their role in this entrapment scheme.
The FBI's investigation into Russian collusion in the 2016 US election may have involved entrapment of Trump campaign associates. Carter Page and George Papadopoulos were labeled as Russian assets, but there's no evidence of any wrongdoing on their part. Stefan Halper, a long-time FBI and CIA informant, played a role in reaching out to Papadopoulos and offering him money and a trip to London. Halper's interactions with Papadopoulos occurred after the FBI's investigation had already begun. The FBI's timeline of events keeps changing, suggesting they may be trying to hide their role in this entrapment scheme. The alleged "dirt on Hillary" that the FBI claimed was the reason for opening the investigation was never mentioned in the meeting between Papadopoulos and the Australian diplomat, and Papadopoulos has disavowed any knowledge of such dirt. It seems the FBI may have relied on information from an April 2016 meeting between Papadopoulos and a Maltese professor, but they're hiding this fact. The evidence suggests the FBI may have been working with someone at that meeting to transmit information to them. This raises serious questions about the legitimacy of the FBI's investigation and their motivations.
FBI's early knowledge of Russian emails scandal: The FBI knew about the Russian offer of stolen Clinton emails to Papadopoulos in April 2016 but didn't disclose it until May and July 2017, raising questions about entrapment and FBI's motives.
The memo written by Adam Schiff after the Nunes memo reveals that the Russians, through intermediaries like Ms. Sood, informed George Papadopoulos about the stolen emails from Hillary Clinton's campaign in April 2016. The term "dirt" and "thousands of emails" only appeared in the context of this meeting. However, the FBI claimed they learned about this information from an Australian diplomat, Alexander Downer, in May and July 2017. The controversy lies in the fact that the FBI had this information earlier but didn't disclose it. This raises questions about an entrapment scandal and why the FBI didn't admit their involvement earlier. The term "dirt" or "thousands of emails" was not mentioned by Downer to the FBI. Instead, it was mentioned in the context of the mid-2016 meeting, where someone involved was working with the FBI. The FBI's reluctance to admit this could be due to the potential implications of an investigation open in 2016 and their role in targeting an innocent person, Papadopoulos.
The FBI's investigation into Russian election interference and conflicting claims about Russian assets: Questions about the FBI's handling of the investigation into Russian election interference arise due to conflicting claims about the roles of individuals like George Papadopoulos and Joseph Mifsud, who may have been Western intelligence assets rather than Russian agents.
The timeline of the FBI's investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election and the involvement of individuals like George Papadopoulos and Joseph Mifsud is complex and contradictory. The claim that Mifsud, who met with Papadopoulos in April 2016 and allegedly mentioned having dirt on Hillary Clinton, was a Russian asset trying to collude with the Trump campaign is questionable, as Mifsud's own lawyer has stated that he is a Western intelligence asset. If this is true, it raises serious concerns about the FBI's handling of the investigation and possible attempts to entrap U.S. citizens. Additionally, Halper's contact with Papadopoulos in September 2016, offering him money, and the alleged offer of $30,000 from an individual in the dossier, further adds to the confusion and raises questions about potential criminal activity by U.S. intelligence agencies.
FBI's Desperate Tactics: Entrapment Scheme Against Papadopoulos: The FBI's investigation of Papadopoulos involved friendly intelligence assets trying to entrap him, not the Russians, and the FBI's efforts to prevent him from discovering the scheme led to suspicious tactics.
The Papadopoulos case appears to involve an entrapment scheme by friendly intelligence assets, not the Russians, who were trying to get information about Hillary Clinton's alleged dirt. Halper, an intelligence asset, met with Papadopoulos in September 2016, but Papadopoulos did not disclose the information Halper was looking for. In January 2017, the FBI interviewed Papadopoulos and asked him to wear a wire against a woman named Sood, who had set up a meeting with him in April 2016. It is believed that the FBI was trying to throw Papadopoulos off the trail and prevent him from discovering the entrapment scheme. The FBI's desperation to avoid scrutiny of their sources is indicated in a suspicious footnote in a FISA renewal, as pointed out by Margot Cleveland in a Federalist article. Overall, the case raises questions about the morality and tactics used by the FBI in their investigations.
Stefan Halper's Role in Russian Collusion Investigation: Stefan Halper, an academic with intelligence connections, interacted with Carter Page before the FBI's investigation, adding complexity to the Russian collusion narrative.
The allegations of Russian collusion during the 2016 US presidential election may not have been as straightforward as initially believed. The discussion suggests that an academic named Stefan Halper, who had contacts with the Trump campaign, may have been working with intelligence sources to gather information on the campaign. Halper's interactions with Trump campaign advisor Carter Page took place before the FBI's investigation into Russian interference began. Halper's connections to Western intelligence and his past efforts to investigate Russian collusion as early as 2014 add complexity to the narrative. The Paige situation is also mentioned, which could potentially make the entire investigation appear suspicious. Overall, the information presented raises questions about the motivations and timeline of the investigation into Russian collusion.
Russia investigation timeline might not be accurate: New information suggests the Russia investigation began earlier and with a different person than initially reported, potentially changing the narrative
The sequence of events in the Russia investigation, as it has been publicly presented, may not be accurate. According to the discussion, it's suggested that a FISA warrant for George Papadopoulos might have been obtained before the one for Carter Page. This would mean that the investigation began earlier than previously known, and with a different person than initially reported. The speaker also implies that this person, Halper, was working with friendly intelligence assets, not Russians. This could potentially change the narrative around the origins of the Russia investigation. However, it's important to note that these are allegations and not confirmed facts. Further investigation and evidence are needed to validate these claims.
Obama Administration's Early Interest in Russian Collusion: The Obama administration may have started investigating Russian collusion with the Trump campaign before July 2016, targeting Carter Page with a FISA warrant based on information from George Papadopoulos and a professor named Halper.
The Obama administration may have planned the investigation into Russian collusion with the Trump campaign long before July 2016. Carter Page, a former Trump campaign advisor, was targeted despite having no evidence of working on behalf of the Russians. The FBI used a FISA warrant to surveil Page based on information gathered from George Papadopoulos, another Trump campaign advisor. Halper, a professor with alleged Russian connections, played a key role in this investigation. Halper had previously worked with the FBI and was used to make contact with Page. The Obama administration's eagerness to label anyone associated with the Trump campaign as a Russian colluder raises questions about the legitimacy of the investigation. The fact that Halper had connections to both Trump officials and enemies of the Obama administration further supports this theory. The investigation into Russian collusion may have been planned and orchestrated by the Obama administration well before the public was aware of it.
Dan Bongino's Upcoming Book 'Exonerated' and Show Updates: Dan Bongino's new book 'Exonerated' is now available on Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Listeners can access his podcasts on iTunes or SoundCloud and follow him on Twitter @DBongino.
Dan Bongino, the host of the Dan Bongino Show, discussed various topics including his upcoming book "Exonerated: The Failed Takedown of Donald Trump by the Swamp." He emphasized the significance of the book and encouraged listeners to read the show notes for a better understanding. Bongino also expressed gratitude to his audience for their support and announced that he spent an additional hour finalizing the book's details. The book is now available on Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Bongino concluded the show by thanking his audience and expressing that it was a great week. Listeners can access Dan's podcasts on iTunes or SoundCloud and follow him on Twitter @DBongino.
