Podcast Summary
Dan Bongino discusses Melbourne's civil liberties, promises surprises, and shares thoughts on Spygate and Democrats: Dan Bongino criticized Melbourne's coronavirus measures limiting civil liberties, teased upcoming surprises, discussed President Trump's trap for Democrats, and updated on Spygate. He also promoted Express VPN and Allform.
Dan Bongino expressed his concern over the current situation in Melbourne, Australia, where civil liberties are being restricted under the guise of coronavirus measures. He promised to keep supporting his Australian listeners and shared some surprises for the upcoming week on his show. Additionally, Bongino discussed how President Trump had set a trap for the Democrats, which they had fallen into, and provided an update on Spygate. During the show, they also promoted Express VPN and Allform, discussing the benefits and ease of ordering customizable sofas from the latter. Bongino referred to the Capitol Hill Democrats as "dunces" for failing to listen to his warnings about a trap set by the president.
Political Stalemate Leads to Executive Orders: During economic crises, productive negotiation and compromise are crucial. Refusal to collaborate can result in executive orders, but these may not fully address the issue and could lead to further disagreements.
During a major economic crisis, the use of executive orders by a president, in this case President Trump, can leave opposing parties in a difficult position. The Democrats' refusal to negotiate and come to the table resulted in the enactment of executive orders on student loans, unemployment benefits, and payroll tax suspension. Now, the Democrats are arguing that these orders don't go far enough, despite their previous inaction. This situation highlights the importance of productive negotiation and compromise in addressing significant issues. Additionally, the lack of knowledge and preparation from some political figures, as seen with Schumer's reliance on notes during interviews, can weaken their arguments and further undermine their position.
President Trump uses legal executive orders to bypass Congress: Trump's payroll tax deferral, allowing Americans to delay paying taxes until 2021, was found to be legal despite initial criticisms
During a recent political standoff between the White House and Congress, President Trump used executive orders to bypass Speaker Pelosi's demands, turning her perceived trap into a double trap. Trump's orders, specifically a payroll tax deferral, were found to be legal according to the Wall Street Journal. Despite previous criticisms of executive orders, the legality of Trump's actions was the focus of the question. The payroll tax deferral allows Americans earning less than $104,000 a year to not pay their payroll taxes until after December 31, 2020, with the understanding that they will have to be repaid in the future. The legality of this action comes from the fact that Congress has already deferred the employer portion, and the President has the authority to defer the employee share.
Trump's executive orders on taxes, evictions, student loans, and unemployment benefits are legal: Trump's executive orders on taxes, evictions, and student loans are based on existing laws, but the repayment of deferred payroll taxes and unemployment benefits through FEMA could face legal challenges
During the discussion, it was clarified that Trump's executive orders on payroll taxes, evictions, student loans, and unemployment benefits are legal, as they are based on existing laws. However, the repayment of the deferred payroll taxes, if Biden does not follow through with legislation to cancel it, could put individuals in a difficult position. Trump's orders on evictions and student loans are more straightforward and have been deemed legal by the Wall Street Journal. The order on unemployment benefits, which reallocates funds from FEMA, could potentially face legal challenges. Overall, the legality of these executive orders is a complex issue, but it is clear that they have been enacted using existing laws.
Speaker criticizes Democrats for potential legal action against certain executive orders, but overlooks similar actions taken by Obama: The speaker's criticism of Democrats for potential legal action against executive orders lacks credibility due to their silence on similar actions taken by former President Obama.
While the speaker criticizes the Democrats for potential legal action against certain executive orders, they overlooked similar actions taken by former President Obama. The speaker argues that the evictions, student loans, and payroll tax deferment are legal, but expresses disapproval for an upcoming executive order on unemployment benefits. They then promote ExpressVPN as a solution to protect online privacy and data from being sold to advertisers, encouraging listeners to use the service instead of deactivating social media accounts. The speaker's criticism of executive orders lacks credibility due to their silence on Obama's cost sharing executive order, work permits under DACA, and payroll tax suspension.
Everyone's doorstep is open to political and social issues: Stay engaged and vigilant in defending individual rights and freedoms, challenge double standards and speak out.
The political and social issues we see in society today are not confined to certain areas or communities, but can reach anyone's doorstep. The example given was of a high school football coach in Florida who used the school logo to support "Blue Lives Matter," sparking an investigation. This incident serves as a reminder that everyone must be prepared to stand up for their beliefs, even if it means facing potential backlash. The speaker encourages individuals to speak out and challenge double standards, as staying quiet may not be an option. The fight for individual rights and freedoms is ongoing, and it's essential to remain engaged and vigilant.
Parents pushing back against school closures lead to policy change: Collective action and speaking out can lead to policy shifts, even when faced with strong opposition. Balancing competing priorities and finding solutions that mitigate risks is crucial.
Collective action and speaking out can lead to changes in policy, even in the face of strong opposition. The discussion highlights the example of parents pushing back against school closures, leading to a shift in stance from Democratic leaders like Chuck Schumer. The debate over school reopenings illustrates the importance of challenging narrow perspectives and being open to finding solutions that balance competing priorities. The conversation also emphasizes the need to navigate the complexities of life, as there are always risks involved, and the goal should be to find ways to manage and mitigate those risks rather than trying to eliminate them entirely.
Parents and advocates fought against school closures with facts: Despite misleading headlines, children are not 'super spreaders' of COVID-19, and the risk of transmission from them to adults is extremely low.
Parents and advocates successfully lobbied against school closures in 2020 by reaching out to their legislators and sharing facts about the low risk of children transmitting the virus to adults. Despite misleading headlines suggesting otherwise, research does not indicate that children are "super spreaders" of COVID-19. The virus is a deadly threat, particularly for those with comorbidities and older adults, but the risk of transmission from children is extremely low. The debate over school closures was won by acknowledging that children can get the virus but are unlikely to transmit it to adults. The media, including the Wall Street Journal, contributed to unnecessary hysteria with misleading headlines, but the facts remain clear: schools should not have been closed based on the evidence available.
Study does not prove children spread coronavirus: Media misinterpreted study results, causing unnecessary fear about children transmitting COVID-19
Despite a misleading headline in the Wall Street Journal suggesting that children are spreading and transmitting the coronavirus based on recent research, the actual study did not show this. Instead, it suggested that children could potentially transmit the virus, but there is little evidence to support this claim. The media hype around this topic may contribute to unnecessary fear and hysteria, particularly regarding school reopenings. It's essential to critically evaluate headlines and read the underlying research to avoid misunderstandings and misinformation.
Balancing priorities in life and during crises: Making decisions involves balancing costs and values, and finding a middle ground through careful consideration of trade-offs is crucial.
Life is full of trade-offs and making decisions often requires balancing different priorities. This was highlighted in the discussion about getting a hand-painted portrait from Paint Your Life, where the decision to spend money on a personalized gift involves considering the cost and the value of the memory it will create. Similarly, during times of crisis like the COVID-19 pandemic, there are no easy answers and making extreme choices without considering the consequences can lead to unintended negative outcomes. For instance, releasing prisoners from jail due to COVID concerns can result in both the spread of the virus and increased crime rates. It's essential to recognize that every situation has shades of gray and that finding a middle ground through careful consideration of the trade-offs is key.
Mask mouth: Dental issues caused by prolonged mask use: Prolonged mask use can lead to oral health issues, including bacterial growth and cavities, due to mouth drying caused by breathing through the mask instead of the nose.
The prolonged use of masks during the pandemic has led to an increase in oral health issues, a condition dentists refer to as "mask mouth." This condition arises due to the drying out of the mouth caused by breathing through it instead of the nose, which in turn incentivizes bacterial growth and cavities. The host also discussed the controversy surrounding mask-wearing during President Trump's press conference in New Jersey, where attendees were labeled as not following guidelines but were actually exempted due to political activity and peaceful protesting. Additionally, the host highlighted the significant revelations from the declassified document regarding the FBI's handling of the Steele dossier during the Russia investigation, which has been described as a huge story with serious implications.
FBI misled Senate about Steele dossier source's concerns: The FBI, under Wray's leadership, provided false information to the Senate about the primary source for the Steele dossier expressing concerns about its accuracy, potentially delaying the uncovering of truth in the Russia investigation.
The FBI, under the direction of Christopher Wray, provided misleading information to the Senate in February 2018, a year after they had knowledge that the primary source for the Steele dossier had expressed concerns about the accuracy of the information in it. The FBI's briefing to the Senate claimed that the source did not raise any significant concerns with how his reporting was characterized in the dossier, which was a lie. This false information was used to support the ongoing investigation into President Trump's alleged collusion with Russia. The implications of this deception are significant, as it potentially obstructed the Attorney General's office, including William Barr, from uncovering the truth earlier. Wray's connection to Sally Yates and the extensive history between them raises further questions about his leadership and credibility. The FBI's actions demonstrate a clear disregard for transparency and truth, and Wray's continued tenure as FBI director is a matter of concern.
Man claims U.S. government may have funded Trump team spying: A man named Stephen Shraggy alleged on Maria Bartiromo's show that the U.S. government, specifically the Pentagon's Office of Net Assessment, may have paid for spying on the Trump team through Stefan Halper, Shraggy's PhD supervisor.
During an appearance on Maria Bartiromo's show, a man named Stephen Shraggy claimed to be a whistleblower in the ongoing investigation regarding the spying on the Trump team. He raised questions about the source of the funding for the spying, suggesting that the U.S. government, specifically the Pentagon's Office of Net Assessment, may have paid Stefan Halper, Shraggy's PhD supervisor, to spy on the Trump team. Shraggy's claims add a new layer to the scandal, as it is not just the spying itself that is under scrutiny, but also the potential use of taxpayer money to fund it. The difference between a food supplement and Fielder Greens, which was also discussed during the show, is that Fielder Greens is made from real fruits and vegetables, not extracts, and is labeled as nutrition facts, not supplement facts.
Professor Paid by Pentagon for Russia Research May Have Had Conflicts in FBI Probe: A professor who received large sums from the Pentagon for research on Russia may have had a personal interest in the FBI's investigation of a Trump campaign member, raising questions about potential conflicts of interest and the use of taxpayer funds.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, a professor named Stefan Halper was paid large sums of money by the Pentagon for research on Russia. Months later, the FBI began investigating Carter Page, a member of the Trump campaign team, based on a controversial dossier. Halper, who had expressed disdain for Michael Flynn, a Trump advisor, may have had a vested interest in the investigation. Halper claimed to have known about Flynn's calls with Russian officials before they were made public, raising questions about the source of his information. The scandal goes beyond the question of whether the U.S. government spied on political opponents based on a dossier. The real scandal may be whether taxpayer money was used to fund the investigation and whether those involved had conflicts of interest.
FBI handler's potential role in Flynn targeting: The FBI handler, Steven Soma, may have played a significant role in the targeting of Michael Flynn by pressuring him and potentially leaking classified information to a CIA asset, leading to his downfall.
The FBI handler, Steven Soma, who has not been scrutinized in the Spygate scandal, may have played a significant role in the targeting of Michael Flynn. According to the discussion, Flynn was being pressured by his opponents when the FBI was trying to close out its case on him due to lack of derogatory information. However, six days later, an article was published in the Washington Post revealing classified details of Flynn's call with the Russian ambassador, which was highly classified information that neither Halper nor the Washington Post had authorization to access. This suggests that someone may have leaked the information to Halper, potentially making it a felony. Soma, who has managed to escape scrutiny despite being a key player in various scandals, is mentioned as Halper's handler in the discussion. The importance of Soma and his potential involvement in the scandal is further explored in the speaker's book. Overall, the discussion raises questions about the role of the FBI and its handlers in the targeting of Flynn and the potential leaking of classified information.
FBI's Decision Not to Open a Case Against Flynn Sparks Mysterious Events: The FBI's decision not to open a case against Michael Flynn in August 2016 led to Halper's sudden appearance and the sharing of the Trump-Russia dossier, raising suspicions of a coordinated effort to target Flynn
The FBI's decision not to open a criminal case against Michael Flynn on August 10, 2016, led to some mysterious events the following day. On August 11, 2016, FBI handler, Stefan Halper, appeared at the FBI office, working with his handler, Stephen Soma. Halper's sudden appearance coincided with the opening of a case against Flynn a few days later. Additionally, on August 10, 2016, the infamous Trump-Russia dossier, compiled by Christopher Steele, was shared with the FBI, mentioning Mike Flynn for the first time. The timing of these events raises questions about potential collusion between the FBI, Halper, and other anti-Trump forces to take down Flynn. The details of these events are extensively covered in the book, and it's recommended to read it for a thorough understanding. Overall, the sequence of events suggests a coordinated effort to target Flynn based on the FBI's initial decision not to open a case against him.
