Podcast Summary
Dan Bongino vows to fight back against Democrats: Dan Bongino is no longer holding back against Democrats and is ready to fight back with intensity. He discussed new rules, Spygate developments, and Michael Bloomberg's politically incorrect statements.
Dan Bongino, the host of his namesake show, is done with being nice and cute towards the Democrats and is ready to fight back with intensity. He discussed the new rules being in effect and shared a recent development in the Spygate case with Mike Flynn's lawyers dropping a bomb. He also promoted NetSuite as a tool for businesses to grow and accelerate their revenue. Additionally, Bongino mentioned an interesting segment he had on Hannity about Michael Bloomberg, who keeps making politically incorrect statements, which are not typically aired for Democratic candidates. Overall, Bongino's show is focused on delivering the truth and standing up for what he believes in, regardless of the political correctness or niceties.
Michael Savage's call for aggressive politics: Savage advocates for conservatives to use Democrats' tactics of character attacks and identity politics to fight back, but only when Democrats engage in ideological debates.
The rules of engagement in political discourse have changed, and it's crucial to acknowledge and respond accordingly. Michael Savage argues that Democrats have adopted a strategy of maligning and destroying the character of Republicans, and he refuses to give them a pass. He believes that conservatives should use the same tactics, such as class warfare and identity politics, to fight back. Savage also emphasizes that only when Democrats are willing to debate ideas rather than attacking characters should the old rules of civility be reinstated. He urges his listeners not to give anyone a pass and to stand firm against character attacks. In essence, Savage is advocating for a more aggressive approach in political discourse to counter the Democrats' tactics.
Respectful dialogue and factual knowledge matter in political discussions: Avoid derogatory language towards individuals, acknowledge hypocrisy, and seek factual knowledge for productive political discussions
During a discussion about political figures and their policies, it was emphasized that using derogatory language towards individuals is not acceptable, regardless of political affiliations. The conversation also touched upon the hypocrisy of certain politicians who criticize wealth and capitalism while having significant wealth themselves. Furthermore, a historical perspective was shared about the Soviet Union, highlighting the cultural aspects, but also the harsh realities of the Gulag system and the importance of understanding the full context before making judgments. It's important to remember that respectful dialogue and factual knowledge are crucial for productive discussions.
Bernie Sanders' Wealth and Hypocrisy: Bernie Sanders, a millionaire criticizing capitalism, faces accusations of hypocrisy due to his wealth from real estate, pensions, book sales, and campaign funds.
During the discussion, it was pointed out that Bernie Sanders, a leading Democratic presidential candidate, has criticized wealth accumulation and capitalism, yet he himself is a millionaire. The speaker accused Sanders of being a hypocrite and a fraud, using examples from his real estate investments, government pensions, earnings from books, and even campaign funds being used to buy his own books. The speaker also highlighted the irony that Sanders' supporters unknowingly contributed to his wealth through campaign donations. The speaker argued that Sanders' wealth disproves his authenticity as a proponent of communism and that the new rules, which are the Democrats' rules, allow for class warfare and labeling millionaires and billionaires as enemies. The speaker also brought up the Logan Act as an example of how the rules have changed and how Democrats seem to forget their own past actions.
Selective enforcement of the Logan Act: The inconsistent application of the Logan Act risks eroding civil society and fueling political polarization, highlighting the importance of upholding the rule of law and demanding accountability for all.
The Logan Act, a law prohibiting private citizens from negotiating with foreign governments without U.S. authorization, has been selectively enforced, with Democrats criticizing former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn for potential violations while seemingly turning a blind eye to Senator Chris Murphy's reported meeting with the Iranian Foreign Minister. The inconsistent application of this law, along with the broader disregard for constitutional principles, risks further eroding civil society and fueling political polarization. The Constitution, though a crucial governing document, becomes meaningless if it's not applied equally to all parties. Ultimately, it's essential to uphold the rule of law and demand accountability for all, regardless of political affiliations.
Downplaying serious political actions: Individuals and media attempt to minimize the significance of potential Logan Act violations and other serious political actions, sometimes leading to false accusations and prosecutions.
The discussion highlights the ongoing efforts of some individuals and media to downplay the seriousness of political actions, such as potential Logan Act violations, and the lengths some will go to, including spying and false prosecutions. The example given is the treatment of Lieutenant General Mike Flynn, who was falsely accused of violating the Logan Act and later charged with lying to the FBI. The speaker emphasizes that these actions are not going away and that it's important to be aware of them. Additionally, the speaker promotes Stamps.com as a way to save time and money for businesses, especially in the context of mailing out items.
Concerns of political interference in intelligence during Obama's administration: During Obama's tenure, intelligence was used to target political opponents, with Mike Flynn being a notable example. Foreign intelligence agencies were utilized, and contacts between British intelligence and key figures were uncovered.
During the Obama administration, there were concerns about politics infiltrating the intelligence community, specifically regarding opponents of the Iran deal. Mike Flynn, a former high-ranking intelligence official under the Obama administration, was a vocal critic of the Iran deal and warned about the dangers of political interference. He was targeted as early as 2014 and was spied on using foreign sources. This was not a coincidence, as President Obama brought up Flynn as a concern during the presidential transition period. The use of foreign intelligence agencies to target political opponents raises serious concerns about the weaponization of intelligence during this time. Additionally, it was revealed that a British spy master, Richard Dearlove, had contact with Christopher Steele, the author of the infamous dossier, and Stefan Halper, who was assigned by the FBI to spy on the Trump campaign. This further highlights the complex web of political interference and intelligence operations during this period.
Dinner with Russians in 2014 might have sparked collusion probe: An early dinner meeting between Michael Flynn, a retired British intel officer, and a Russian academic in 2014 may have initiated the Russian collusion investigation, but no one from Flynn's DIA reported any suspicious activity.
The investigation into the Trump campaign for Russian collusion may have started as early as 2014 when retired British intelligence officer, Christopher Steele, attended a dinner with Michael Flynn and a Russian-born academic, Lana Lakova. Flynn's attendance at this dinner was later used as evidence of collusion, despite denials from all parties involved. However, it's important to note that no one from the Defense Intelligence Agency, where Flynn was serving at the time, reported any suspicious activity regarding the dinner. The FBI opened their investigation into the Trump campaign on July 31, 2016, but didn't target Flynn until the day after, on August 11, 2016. This meeting between Flynn and the FBI raises questions about the origins of the Russian collusion investigation and the role of the intelligence community in shaping the narrative.
CIA's Role in Pushing for Russian Collusion Investigation: The CIA, led by John Brennan, pushed the FBI to open an investigation into Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. They failed to disclose their prior knowledge to the FBI and used false information from the Steele dossier to open investigations into specific campaign members, primarily targeting Flynn due to his opposition to the Iran deal.
During August 2016, the CIA pushed the FBI to open an investigation into Russian collusion with the Trump campaign. The CIA failed to inform the FBI that they had already briefed Harry Reid about this collusion, who then wrote a letter to the FBI urging them to open an investigation. The dossier information in Reid's letter came from the same source as the Steele dossier. John Brennan, who headed the CIA at the time, denied seeing the dossier until December but lied, as it was clear that Halper and Steele were the sources. The FBI used this false information to open investigations into Manafort, Page, and Papadopoulos, but their real target was Flynn. The CIA wanted Flynn investigated due to his opposition to the Iran deal and his exposure of their political activities. To help the FBI open an investigation into Flynn, Brennan suggested interviewing their "pal" Halper, who magically appeared at the FBI office the next day with information on Flynn. It's clear that there was an intelligence backchannel between the UK and the US, specifically between Brennan and British intelligence, facilitated by Halper.
British intelligence's role in US election interference allegations: British intelligence may have played a role in the FBI's investigation into Trump campaign associate Michael Flynn by providing information that led to the opening of a case and the creation of a dossier, but the timing and motivations behind these actions are unclear.
During the 2016 presidential election, there were allegations of illicit intelligence activities involving the British and Americans, with a particular focus on targeting Trump campaign associate Michael Flynn. The British spy master, Halper, was reportedly involved in this backchannel, and Flynn had warned about it. The FBI opened a case against multiple individuals on August 10, 2016, but not against Flynn. On the following day, Halper briefed the FBI, and a dossier from Steele, another British friend of Halper's, implicated Flynn. The timing of these events raises questions about the possible involvement of British intelligence in weaponizing information against political enemies. The CIA is also suspected of having duped the FBI into opening these cases to take out Flynn, who was seen as a significant threat due to his knowledge of intelligence activities.
The CIA misled the FBI about Russian collusion: The CIA provided false information to the FBI, leading them to investigate based on misinformation and potentially damaging U.S. trust in law enforcement institutions.
The FBI was intentionally misled by the CIA under John Brennan's guidance regarding the Russian collusion investigation. The CIA presented false information as credible sources, leading the FBI to open cases based on these falsehoods. This included Halper, who was working with the CIA and provided information about Russian collusion to the FBI, but the bureau was unaware of this relationship. The FBI's mistrust of Flynn and their desire to investigate him may have clouded their judgment, allowing them to ignore warning signs and continue investigating based on false information. A key example of this is the September 19th reporting, which the FBI claims to have received on that date but was actually obtained earlier and shared with the CIA. This deception highlights the serious issue of the FBI being misled and the potential consequences of relying on false information in investigations.
Intelligence Community Targets Political Opponents: Allegations suggest early access to controversial info led to targeted investigations, potential deception, and political manipulation within the intelligence community
There were allegations that both the FBI and CIA had access to controversial information much earlier than they claimed, and they may have used this information to target political opponents. The speaker, "Stroke," expresses his frustration over having missed this information at the time, but now sees the signs of potential deception and manipulation. He suspects that the CIA was feeding the FBI false information, leading to the opening of investigations against individuals like Michael Flynn. This situation is described as a major scandal, with the intelligence community targeting a decorated military officer and manipulating the system for political gain.
Comparing healthcare rationing to other services: Individuals have the right to access resources, including healthcare, through capitalism, not government rationing, as shown in the analogy of legal services.
During a discussion about healthcare and rationing resources, it was argued that suggesting older individuals, such as those with prostate cancer at the age of 95, should be denied healthcare and essentially "go die," is a form of forced rationing. This perspective was compared to other services, such as legal services, and it was emphasized that such an approach would not be acceptable for other services, yet it is being suggested for healthcare. The argument was made that individuals, regardless of age, have the right to access resources, including healthcare, through the freedom of capitalism, rather than through government rationing. The analogy of lawyers and legal services was used to illustrate this point.
Dan expresses gratitude to his audience for their support: Dan Bongino values his audience and encourages them to subscribe to his YouTube channel for free access to additional content, with over 390,000 subscribers and counting. He is also active on Twitter (@DBongino) and his show can be accessed through iTunes or SoundCloud.
Dan Bongino values the support of his audience and encourages them to subscribe to his YouTube channel for free access to additional content. He mentioned that they are close to reaching 400,000 subscribers and expressed gratitude for their continued support. Dan's show can also be accessed through iTunes or SoundCloud, and he is active on Twitter (@DBongino). It's clear that Dan is dedicated to providing engaging content for his audience across multiple platforms. So, if you're a fan, make sure to show your support and stay connected with Dan Bongino.