Best Of The Dan Bongino Show (HOLIDAY SPECIAL)

In just a few weeks, the election season has started. And I'm so honored you've made this show your home. We've got some best of shows to keep you entertained during this holiday season. If you miss this stuff, you're going to see it here.

This is some of the best segments, obviously called best ofs, that we've done during the year and we're based on your feedback. We appreciate it so much. We will be back with you. Live at Rumble..com. Slash Bongino on January 3rd, but for now, I hope you enjoy these shows. Check them out.

There's people who purport to be in one lane and then another lane. Okay, that doesn't mean they're not on the same baseball team. You have starting pitchers on a baseball team, and you have relief pitchers, they're on the same team.

They have the same goals to win games, correct, to win games, honestly and ethically, right? You don't like cheaters, but they have different roles, so you have opinion people in this space who rely on reporting and hopefully get the facts right. But it's largely dependent on who's going to come on and what they're saying and when they're saying it.

If you have guest segments, whatever it may be, but then you have journalists, journalists job, if they say they're doing their job like they're supposed to. It is not to be opinion host, it's to give you the facts and allow you to formulate an opinion, okay?

That was a total that all melted down yesterday, that all melted down completely. It was incredible to watch what I saw yesterday. So you may have heard the breaking news that Fox Corp. settled their lawsuit with Dominion.

Dominion sued him for some alleged misstatements on the air, insinuating that Fox put them on the air maliciously. Fox fought back and said, These were. These were newsworthy claims. We were reporting the news. There's there's simply no way in a live show with guests to fact check every single thing that goes on.

Joe, you've been in the media business, you know, 30 years. You have people come on your show, politicians who say all kinds of things. I understand what they were, what they were claiming, right? So this turned out to be a bizarre case they settled.

I'll leave it up to you to for you to decide if you think that was the right decision or the wrong decision. They obviously don't consult me for that stuff. I have nothing to do with this at all. But what was the most bizarre thing I've ever seen? I think ever seen, and it's related to this specific thing, media lawsuits, the most bizarre thing I've ever seen. One of the lawyers for Dominion after the settlement comes out and gives a little mini presser. And actually thanks the people in the left wing media for helping them out in their case against the media.

The most bizarre thing I've seen in a media lawsuit, I think ever here, take a look yourself. One last thank you which is really to all of you for being with us on this journey.

Listen, I'm going to tell you, yesterday's settlement and this lawsuit in general poses a really grave threat to media everywhere. It doesn't matter what your ideological tilt is, I mean, we all get CNN and MSNBC have a left wing bent, that's not breaking news.

Everybody knows that it's the worst kept secret in the media business. Obviously, you could probably make a good case. Fox has a conservative bent as well. Some conservatives might challenge that, too.

The point is, people have different opinions on it, and I know working there, no one tells me what to say. Joe's called unfiltered for a reason. We air segments. I've never had any issues at all.

I can only tell you the truth.

But I'm curious here as to what the standard is. Joe, you know, feel free to put your input in. You've been doing this a lot longer than I have. I mean, this, folks. I'm not trying to be silly or coy, and I know I always tell you to pose a question, not an assertion.

A question is better. I'm honestly posing a question not to elicit a response in a way to be silly, but because I'm genuinely curious myself. What's the standard now? So, if Hillary Clinton were to be a guest on Madame Bongino's show, probably would never happen. But who knows, one day she might come on and say, I want to come on your show.

I don't know, we're the second biggest conservative podcast. Maybe she wants to give it. We'd give her a fair shot if she comes on the air on my show, right? Because now this is a live stream.

It's 11.

06 and 40 seconds.

If she comes on the show and insists that there's a pee-pee tape of Donald Trump in Russia. And it was used as blackmail material to collude to steal an election. A claim obviously ridiculous and absurd, refuted by a federal investigation by a guy who doesn't even like Trump and Bob Mueller. Can we be sued? And is that a is that a legitimate case? Listen, I'm not a lawyer, I'm, I'm, I'm. I'm asking because I'm really curious what the standard is now. Well, you may say, well, the standard is, you can't air false claims.

Well, what if we're not making them?

I mean, like, I said, Joe, you've been at WCBM forever, people call in on the phone line, Hey, is this Joe? Okay? I'm the guest in your next segment.

People say stuff all the time, so is the suggestion that you're supposed to stop the show, say, hold on, let me check that claim, you said. Maryland had 7 growth last year in income tax revenue. Stand by.

Hold on, I'll be back. I'm not, no folks, this may sound like me being a me, being an ass, I'm not.

I am really curious as to what the standard is, what's the standard? I mean? The best I think you can do is to invite the opposition party on at a later date, which we do on my Fox Show all the time. They never want to come on Democrats.

We have a segment called the Rebuttal, Why don't we do it more often, debating Democrats? You want to know the hard truth, because they never want to come on.

Folks, I've never seen anything like this. I I'm really confused. Moving forward, what the standard is for the media, and the media, by the way, includes opinion hosts.

Here, I mean, I'm going to prove it to you, that kind of co-op with this. It's 21 minutes long. Joe had a little brain meltdown. He's like, I mean, it's 22 seconds. I'm like, Dude, you got me.

I'm like, Am I reading this wrong? And I sent you another bird because nobody else saw what you saw. I know what is he talking about? I'm like, Joe, cut this in about a minute.

Thirty eight this goes on for what? Twenty one minutes, Joe? It's a long video, you want to see it?

Go to Canada, he does some, that's some good work over there, right? But this is a compilation of left wing Democrat lawmakers.

It's only about a minute, thirty eight seconds. This goes on for twenty one minutes.

College professors, Democrats, liberal media hosts suggesting that voting machines are somehow can are corrupted or can be corrupted, and that in elections can be interfered in. These are all Democrats, so I'm curious, with this new standard the Democrats are trying to lay down, I'm genuinely curious.

Are all of these people? Should they be banned from the show? My guess is yes, based on this new standard, because these are clearly, many of these clearly are likely false claims here. This is Democrats doing the same thing. Fox was sued over.

Take a listen.

You can watch the whole video, it's 21 minutes, plus this goes on and on and on. It would take up a third of the show.

Are they not allowed on the air?

These are fundamentally serious questions that a constitutional republic. Are they not allowed on the air anymore? are they not allowed on the air anymore? Because you can't have it both ways. And don't tell me if I'm wrong either. What they're saying and questioning about machines or legitimate lines of inquiry, which they are voting processes, right or they're not.

They're fairy tales, totally made up and lies, and then those people shouldn't be on the air, right? Am I? Is there an option?

See, right.

Are we going to get sued? I don't know, I don't know. I'm willing to stand up for our ability and the left wing media's ability to speak freely on the air. And if that's part of the process, then that's part of the process.

But it's clearly a newsworthy item, not an effort to defame anyone. To broadcast lawmakers with massive power in the Senate and the Congress suggesting we have problems with voting, that's clearly a newsworthy item on a news program. I'm unsure what the standard is. I ask you not to forget either, that it's CNN and MSNBC taking an insane victory lap yesterday. That their ability in the media to report on news items has now been severely compromised by them. Going on the record, suggesting that every single thing uttered by a person on TV must be lifetime fact checked or something.

I don't think they understand the damage they did to their own networks because they're the ones that lied to the public. About the peepee tape, about collusion, about the laptop, about government spying, I asked CNN to explain this. Now they're going to be a lawsuit on this, is the statute of limitations up?

Here's an article from back in 2017.

That date's wrong. This is 2017. British intelligence passed Trump associates communications with Russians onto U.S. counterparts.

Folks.

Please look up this article yourself, don't take my word for it. You think I'm making up the UrL I created it? Wait, go back.

Go back to that article, I'm not making this up. This is still on CNN's website. British intelligence passed Trump associates communications with Russians onto U.S. counterparts, i...e. they were spying on Trump.

The article is up there still on CNN. That's right, that's ridiculous, dude. We have cited this article. How many times?

Just a hundred. It's on my, it's in my, it's in my footnotes on my book. The CNN reported they were spying on Trump yet April 2017..

Yeah, I figured that here you just you put the today's article right about. So, here's CNN recently fact checking the exact same claim that Obama and Biden spy on the Trump campaign. They wrote about it. Here's their conclusion, Joe.

This is comprehensively wrong. You got you again, chime in here, please. Am I crazy? You guys reported it, not me?

You guys reported it. I hate, you know, Joe? He's like, Please stop trying, please. He's like, you're giving me a headache. It's early.

I got a long day today. He's like, You really hurt my feelings here. This is just really stupid. I can CNN now be sued? CNN is concluding their own reporting is quote comprehensively wrong.

It's right there, it's, it's right there, man. Just read it. Where's the lawsuit?

The answer is there shouldn't be a lawsuit. CNN's first story was accurate. CNN's second story was not accurate. But you know what they're going to say, and they've got a darn good case.

They're going to say, well, in our opinion, that didn't constitute spying, it was unauthorized surveillance. All right, it's an opinion, it's an opinion.

You're not going to win that case. The point I'm trying to tell you is they're contradicting their own reporting.

This is I have never seen anything like this. I'm defending CNN, this has been open at is weird, this is freaking crazy.

It gets even worse. Believe it or not, here's Alison Camerota. I don't know what her issue is. Since she left Fox. She seems extremely bitter at Fox. Don't know the circumstances.

Did some hits with Alison? Camerota did not work there. When she worked there, we only crossed paths.

When I was a guest on the network, I didn't find her to be candid, particularly savvy about media stories, tried to explain to her an ATF story. One time she got completely lost on the air.

But here she is. She's very upset about this whole thing. I'm just curious she works at CNN. Was she upset about them lying about the Spygate scandal to the PP scandal?

The Russia laptop hunter scandal shouldn't seem to even say anything about that. Here, take a listen.

I haven't been surprised by any of this, nor am I surprised by the settlement. I predicted there would be a settlement all along. Because Fox doesn't want to air its dirty laundry in a court case. And forgive me, I don't share quite Ellie's, I guess, being impressed at the outcome. This is half of what Dominion asked for. Let's remember.

And yes, obviously, it's a big windfall for Dominion. It's chump change for Fox. They make more than a billion dollars a year, their news division, and so this is, I think this is a victory for Fox.

They don't have to put their big stars on the stand, and they didn't even have to issue a public apology.

They're not even saying they made those claims, they're not even saying which hosts and theirs made their claims. I think that this is the best outcome that Fox could ever have hoped for once they got themselves into this mess.

What does, even what is she even talking about? The irony is, this is one of those scenarios where there are everybody loses, everybody loses, everyone loses. I don't even think Dominion understands how deeply everyone's lost here.

You know how hesitant people are going to be in the future to report on. If let's say, you know with A.I, let's say in the future, there's a real hack of a genuine, widespread, countrywide hack of election systems. Let's say A.I does it right. Maybe far off in the future, but say it happens.

You think people are going to want to report on that in the future. Imagine it's absolutely authentic. It happens, you know, something happened. Vote totals paper ballots don't match up.

There's a massive a.

I hack whatever it is, no one's going to report on that.

Except left wing networks if it benefits them because they're safe.

I'm going to show you another clip coming up from Oliver Darcy, the biggest phony at CNN, a guy who used to be used to be an affiliate of CampusReform.

Org and ran a website like exposing leftists or something. The guy, anyone who knew him at the blaze, said he was a total grifter. He was really cringey and very weird around people and they got rid of him or he left. Whatever it was, he may have resigned.

I'm not sure, but then he figured he was going to go over to CNN and grift off them. This guy used to pretend to be a conservative, he's on the air yesterday, this guy at the PP network taking a victory lap again.

Totally clueless as to this new media ecosystem they brought in today, where no one's going to want to air anything, anyone says. If there's even a remote possibility that it could be questioned, you're going to put Democrats on the air after that.

You're nuts, so I want you to watch this video. This is Oliver Darcy having another one of his on air meltdowns. He's so upset. There was a settlement in this case.

But if you listen to this, I cut this. I had joking I shouldn't say I cut a joke, but I asked Joe to cut it at a very specific point. I want you to pretend for a second that this is an Oliver Darcy CNN goofball, that this is an actual legitimate journalist on CNN.

And I want you to listen to this and pretend for a moment he's talking about CNN and their coverage of the PP tape. The clip 100 percent works. Listen to yourself.

Guys, who's the most conservative, who's not? You could set up a UFC match tomorrow. Listen, our people, the pro-lifers, they don't care if you're a Republican or a Democrat.

You're not with them on their issues, you're out, not the left man. You almost have to admire, in a tragic way, their Borg like manner, where they're immune to shame, they're totally immune to shame.

Here's Oliver Darcy. I've only put this up, I don't know 10, 15 times about Oliver. This is when he was a campus Reform, which is a conservative organization, he used to run. A website called Exposing Leftist Dotcom, a website driven, a video driven website dedicated to exposing the inherent failures found at the core of liberal philosophies. It's the same guy.

It's the same guy I know, is I already? I can already tell you what he's going to say. I had an awakening or whatever.

Sure, you did, buddy, called a paycheck. That awakens a lot of people don't have any principles. I'm sure you did.

You had some grand awakening, the same guy. Here's what got Joe and I before the show.

Listen, call me crazy, but I, I. I still maintain a little bit of hope, a little bit of hope. I have to, because, you know, the world can be very dark sometimes. I maintain a little bit of hope. That there are some guys at least trying to do news. And you know, Tapper, I really thought better of the guy than this and my my expectations aren't high for CNN people.

I got to tell you, but I really thought, here's Tapper, who again purports to be a journalist, not an opinion guy. You're an opinion guy, folks. We have a lot of fun here. Laugh away.

I'm not even suggesting laughing's a bad thing, but laughing at a media story you're supposed to be covering as a journalist, not an opinion guy. I don't get this at all. This is what Joe was talking about before the show. I mean, for your position, absolutely unprofessional.

Can you imagine fox like Bret Baier doing this? Laughing No, I mean, you may, whether you like Bret or not. I'm telling you, Bret's as serious as a heart attack. Yeah, I hear here's Tapper. He thinks this story is hilarious.

Saying this, by the way, on the PP Tape network, check this out.

This settlement reflects Fox's continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards. We are hopeful that are just sorry.

Good, good, good act you put on, but see, the whole idea is that you're pretending to be a journalist, but just somebody journalist does. He doesn't levy an opinion through humor based on the case. Oh, this case is hilarious, is it?

Is it, Jake? I'm curious because I'm wondering what would happen if you were sued for allowing footage about people who reported that the Russian Russian collusion hoax were real, was real. I wonder what would happen to you if you got? If you think that was funny, I bet your answer would be, What was I supposed to do?

Fact check them live on the air. I don't have the capability to do that. I have the guy on the show. They had a serious allegation, which is ironic, that some of the same things some of the Fox people said you thought was really funny. Jake seems to forget this story to national Review.

CNN settles lawsuit brought by Covington Catholic student Nicholas Sandman.

He sued for what a couple hundred million.

CNN only had to do some basic homework on that. They aired the allegation. They lost that. One kind of ironic, really. I mean, these are media people.

Folks, just, I mean, a tough day for everyone and I'll leave the segment here with this. I am genuinely curious, moving forward, what the standard is now for reporting on what politicians and prominent public figures say? I understand the legal ramifications defamation with actual malice for public figures. I've been defamed. I had a lawsuit based on it where a media outlet implied that I was fired from a job I absolutely was not fired from. And they knew it.

That case didn't work out because the judge ultimately ruled in the case, which I thought was odd.

That, Joe, you remember this? That it's not defamatory to suggest someone was fired, even if they weren't. And even my lawyer was scratching his head, like, huh, they knew it? they knew I wasn't, they sent me a text.

They told me, Hey, I heard you left. Yes, I left, meaning I wasn't fired. I left. I chose to leave.

Now I'm really confused again. Even in losing that case, I thought I understood it all right. Judge didn't agree with the guy. I thought it was a silly decision, but respect it, got to move on.

He didn't think it was actual malice. I don't know what it is anymore. Are we allowed that? we not allowed to have Hillary Clinton on Hillary Clinton? Every time? She goes on, insists the election was stolen by a bunch of Russian bots in Russia, a ridiculous, outlandish, fabricated fairytale claim.

Is every network opening themselves up to being sued? You know what, folks? I'm not a lawyer, but I have a number of really solid, strong legal friends who've suggested to me you might.

So I'd warn everyone out there, you better keep Hillary Clinton and Adam Schiff off the air. Remember Adam Schiff looking right into the camera on Tucker's show? You guys remember this? I tell, Tucker says, Tell the audience. You have evidence of Russian collusion. I have evidence of Russian collusion with everything.

Looked right in the camera and said it.

Is Adam Schiff open to be sued right now?

No idea I wouldn't have him on your network. You're taking a big chance, OK, folks? Explosive new Twitter files drop. You may have missed this.

This is the one story of the last three or four days that, sadly, has gotten buried in just the deluge of information that's come out. You had the RNC chair thing, you had Memphis, you had the Paul Pelosi video come out. I mean, this was just the last couple of weeks was just a cornucopia of information that candidly was hard.

It was like drinking from a fire hose. It's hard to kind of segregate it out and triage it into important, kind of important. The Twitter file story, The drop, I'd argue to you, is probably the most important one yet. The Twitter files, of course, are a series of reports by people like Matt Taibbi and others who've been given access to Twitter. After Elon Musk took over, exposing the massive left wing misinformation machine.

That was Twitter, how it was used by the swamp to destroy conservatives and Donald Trump. You probably missed this because of all the other stuff. If you didn't, you were in for a real eye opener. I'm going to tie it all together first.

I want you to meet someone involved in this. Later Twitter, they said, This last Twitter files drop, this person is just the. I mean, you want to talk about a face of the deep state NGO lobbyist, FBI, CIA, Intel, Community, government liberal George Soros, media money machine, swamp, the cabal, deep state, sloppy state.

I don't give a what you call it. You want to see the face of it. A guy who's just epidemic of how it works, it's this guy. This was in the first tweet of the Twitter files dropped by Matt Taibbi.

It's a video of a former FBI agent and government goon swamp, rat loser, life loser, a guy by the name of Clint Watts. Take a look.

So there's Clint Watts, he's a member of a group called Hamilton, 68..

Hamilton, 68, by the way, associated with a group hilariously titled the Alliance for Securing Democracy. That's a that's a good, that's really funny, that's good right now. Who's part of the Alliance for Securing Democracy?

Otherwise known as the Alliance for F'ing Over Democracy. John Podesta Yeah, jumping like Hillary Clinton, Crony Flack liar. Yes, yes.

He's part of that group, too, the CIA's Mike Morrell. It sounds like what I just talked about before. NGOS, lobbyists, FBI, CIA government, LIBs, SOros, the media, the Cabal, the Deep State Cabal, Bill Kristol, anti-trump lunatic Nosferatu of the left, who claims he was a conservative at some point.

Yeah, Bill Kristol, they're all part of this group. It looks like Michael Chertoff, who is again, was aligned with the Republican administration, showing you that the swamp is a bipartisan endeavor. So this group, Hamilton, 68, led by this guy Clint Watts, is all over the media, telling people, Oh my gosh, the Russian bots are everywhere, colluding with the Trumpies and the MAGA people, Twitter. You got to stop it.

Here's Clint Watts Twitter avatar. You can look at this loser right here. Here. He is nice little picture in the background, he's like, Hey, look at me.

I got an off center picture showing you a little of the scenery in the background. That's Clint Watts, you'll notice he's an MSNBC contributor.

MSNBC It's a media outlet, folks, MSNBC. So they've got this guy in there who's been totally and completely exposed now by this last Twitter false trial. But if you missed this, you missed a bombshell story on Friday. He's been totally exposed, him and his group, as I don't know any other way to say it. Just basically fabricating a narrative that anyone in the MAGA group or the Republican Party, even the Democrat Party, they disagree with.

Is a Russian bot? They've been completely exposed, and the guy still works for MSNBC and Microsoft. By the way, they look at this guy that's not his avatar.

A little bio He takes good pictures of Offset, offset a little so you can see the background. I want you to watch Clint Watts again. Here's a buddy Clint up at a gullible Senate hearing here, where the Republican Senate is taking this all in.

Actually, it looks like he accepts some of this he's talking about, and I want you to watch what Clint Watts does. Here's what they do the left, and by the left, I mean, communists like this guy.

What they do is.

They'll make spurious connections based on the thinnest of evidence. The thinnest of evidence would be discredited immediately. If people like Republican senators and media people would just ask basic questions, what they do is they do innuendo. So I know Joe lives in a specific part of Maryland, so if a bank is robbed in Maryland. What I can say is, listen, I can't say Joe did it, but all I can say is Joe was in the area when the bank was robbed.

Now, a normal media person, a Republican senator with half a brain, would say, You live in Maryland. It would use the old usual suspects line by Kevin Pollack. We could put you in Queens on the Night of the Robbery. Really, I live in Queens.

You figure that out yourself well, you got a team of monkeys working around the block. But because, you understand we have, that's a really good to watch a movie. Because we don't have a functioning media and we have suckers who are afraid to, you know, take on the narrative du jour or the current thing, right? This is what happens. Here's Clint Watts using innuendo up at the Senate to make it seem like Trump is working with Russia and a group of Russian bots.

Take a listen.

S election is because the commander in chief has used Russian active measures at time against his opponents. On 14 August 2016, his campaign chairman after a debunked. And when you say his who's who's all? Manafort cited the fake Incirlik story as a terrorist attack on CNN, and he used it as a talking point. On 11 October, President Trump stood on a stage and cited what appears to be a fake news story from Sputnik News that disappeared from the internet.

He denies the intel from the United States about Russia. He claimed that the election could be rigged. That was the number one theme pushed by R.T Sputnik News White outlets. All the way up until the election. He's made claims of voter fraud, that President Obama is not a citizen, that, you know, Congressman Cruz is not a citizen.

So, part of the reason active measures works, and it does today in terms of Trump Tower being wiretapped, is because they parrot the same lines. So Putin is correct, he he can say that he's not influencing anything because he's just putting out his stance. But until we get a firm basis on fact and fiction in our own, in our own country, get some agreement about the facts. Whether it be do I support the intelligence community or a story I read on my Twitter feed, we're going to have a big problem.

I can tell you right now today, gray outlets that are Soviet pushing accounts tweet at President Trump during high volumes when they know he's online and they push conspiracy theories. So if he is to click on one of those or cite one of those, it just proves Putin, correct that we can use this as a lever against the Americans. So this started.

And then he says something really interesting at the end. Keep in mind, this guy's now been totally discredited. We'll go through that in a second. Even Twitter knew it was wrong. Keep in mind here, he says at the end.

And by the way, don't trust any of these bots on Twitter. You need to trust the Intel community, despite the Intel community being the single biggest source of misinformation about Trump.

Don't go anywhere. The Twitter people knew this guy was full of crap and they amplified this moron anyway. I want you to keep in mind, this guy's using nothing but innuendo. Suggesting that. Because a Russian somewhere on planet Earth had a shot of Russian vodka, and Trump mentioned once years ago that he knew a guy that had Russian vodka. That Trump must have must have stolen an election with Vladimir Putin. And because we have media people who don't ask any questions at all, this virus was allowed to persist.

This misinformation machine was allowed to go, well, how do we know it was misinformation? Because this goon, Clint Watts working with MSNBC, Goons and elsewhere, and media people and Chertoff, and and Morrell, and Crystal, and all these other folks. What they did is, they said. Well, Twitter is promoting these Russian bot accounts that are amplifying misinformation in the United States. Well, for that story to be true, Joe, the Twitter accounts had to be actual Russian bots, which is kind of weird because the new Twitter files. Dropped by Matt Taibbi.

He has the emails from Twitter. Here's Yoel Roth, big time Twitter executive, and, by the way, a diehard leftist. Here's Yoel Roth saying Yes, exactly. It's so weird and self-selecting that they're so unwilling to be transparent and defend their selection.

What is he talking about? He's talking about Hamilton, 68, saying, Hey, look at these accounts, they're Russian bots associated with that MAGA crowd, amplifying Russian misinformation. So, he says, it's weird that they're not even willing to defend this, he says. I think we need to just call this out on the Bull that it is.

Twitter's looking at the accounts that are supposed to be Russian bots and telling each other on emails and internal communications this thing is total crap. These aren't Russian accounts, these aren't Russian accounts. amplifying messages. This is all made up. Twitter knows this.

Now you'd think Yoel Roth if the man had any human dignity at all, which he doesn't, he knows this is garbage and a lie that's tearing the nation apart. The Russians are working with MAGA people to destroy the republic. He knows it's fake, but they do nothing. It gets even worse.

Not only were they not Russian accounts, they appear to be completely legitimate right-leaning accounts. How do I know that? Because that's what Yoel Roth literally put in the email, he's talking about. These Russian accounts that the Hamilton Dashboard quote falsely accuses a bunch of legitimate right-leaning accounts of being Russian bots. They're asking how we publicly push back.

But I don't think there's anything noteworthy about this hashtag beyond that. How do you publicly push back? You go to the media and tell them this story's garbage?

Well, it looks like they tried that off the record because they didn't have the balls to do it on the record. But this is how the cabal operates, they always the cabal accuses you of what they're doing. What's the cabal? Non-governmental organizations, as I referred to before, as NGOS, SOROS type groups getting money from the State Department and elsewhere.

Lobbyists, media people, politicians, liberals, liberal money people, the CIA, the FBI. They are knee deep in a massive misinformation machine where they will do anything to protect their grift. And their grift is evidenced by nothing greater than the Biden scandal. If the Biden scandal goes down, Joe Biden and his kid taking money overseas to influence U.s policy, they all go down because they're all doing it.

So when Trump was going to expose it, I can't say this enough. They had to take him down by accusing you of exactly what they were doing, creating misinformation for money.

Here's how the misinformation machine works. Here's a tweet from Taibbi's Twitter false Drop. These Russian accounts, they concluded, are neither strongly Russian nor strongly bots, Twitter concluded. There is no evidence to support the statement that the dashboard is a finger on the pulse of Russian information OPs, hardly illuminating a massive influence operation.

Ladies and gentlemen, the receipts are right here. Taibbi's got all the emails attached. Where are these people in the media? You gutless goons, you jellyfish type snakes? Folks, listen to me, you have been months ahead of the news cycle on this show.

I am telling you, the single most destructive force right now in this constitutional republic is the freaking filth in our media. Openly fabricating fairy tales to shred this piece of this place apart and tear it into pieces, people are disgusting. The evidence is right in front of your face.

They all knew, Twitter knew, Hamilton, 68, must have known, the people involved must have known, and they sold themselves out.

They sold themselves out in order to keep their grift going overseas, and they let their names all be used. I want you to look at this media compilation. You may say, Dan, that's hard to read, that's the point.

Taibbi couldn't even fit them all on one screen. Look at these disgusting filth human waste outlets Mother Jones, The Daily Yeast, and elsewhere. Newsweek.

Filth outlets, filth garbage, disgusting outlets propagating this story of Russian bots and bots. Any time they didn't. They didn't like the walk away movement, the Brandon Strzok thing. Russian bots, they didn't like Dan Bongino's account, Russian bots, they didn't like Dennis Lynch's account, Russian bots.

And media goons degenerate losers. And folks, if you're offended by the language, I mean, it's not even strong enough. I want to say worse, but I can't go unfiltered that way because there are probably kids listening. You're looking at the most disgusting scandal in United States history a massive media misinformation machine working with the cabal to protect people like Biden and international influence. Peddling.

And the cabal? They are defending themselves.

Now Twitter Yoel Roth gutless loser. Instead of going public and saying, Hey, this whole allegation that conservatives are Russian bots and all that stuff, it's really fake. They didn't have the balls to do it, so they tried to speak to reporters off the record again because they had no guts to do it publicly. And listen to this, you want to see the human filth our media is?

Filth. human filth like dogs.

One of the Twitter people notes Hey, you know, we tried to speak to reporters off the record, and reporters are chafing. It's like shouting into a void.

They're telling the reporters this is all a lie, a lie tearing the country apart. Russians are everywhere infiltrating the Republican Party. They're telling them it's a lie and reporters don't want to hear it. They don't want to hear it because there's sellout hacks and human garbage.

Now a real reporter, Glenn Greenwald, by the way, is not a conservative. A real reporter. Sounded the alarm on this five years ago. In 2018, he sounded the alarm on Tucker Carlson's show Proving My Point. Again. If you're listening to this show, Tucker and other good quality shows out there. You're at least probably five years, maybe more, ahead of the information stream.

Greenwald warned everyone about Hamilton, 68, and what they were up to, and, of course, Greenwald was called. What Joe? A Russian agent, you see how that works, exposed people with a fake Russian agent scandal.

And you're in fact a Russian agent. Gosh, so weird how that happened. So hat tip, grandma, Eileen used to say. As I says, as I says, you listen to the right media outlets, people on the right who will tell you the truth. And you would have known the truth years ago. Here's Glenn Greenwald exposing this operation and the media goons back in 2018 on Tucker. Check this out.

They're just people who, in the eyes of Bill Crystal and his friends, are people who espouse Russia or pro-Russia themes. And they just constantly make claims about what Russia is doing on Twitter, that the U.S media, in the most shocking way, uncritically ingest and puts into their headlines as fact about what Russia is doing.

You have to understand these media folks and these cabal people and these Hamilton, 68 people are actual agents of disinformation, openly seeking to destroy the Republic. This is not an accident. They knew damn well they were lying about this Russian bot scandal, and they did it anyway. And who do they use?

More filth like Adam Schiff, remember the disinformation machine? Clint watts up at that Senate hearing, talking about the Trump campaign and its relationship to Russia tied to Russia. Well, one of the angles they always use is they use this Paul Manafort angle. Now I'm going to debunk this, not for the last time, I wish it was for the last time, but it'll come up again.

Because if we had an informed, honest media, we do not. The angle that they're using to connect Trump to Russia is through his campaign manager, Manafort, who did have some dealings. That's a fact. With a guy by the name of Konstantin Kalimnik, they want you to believe Kalimnik is some kind of high level Russian operative. And you're saying, Dan, if Manafort met with him, then clearly there's a Trump tie to Russia.

Media people don't know squat about this case. Watch how they let Adam Schiff this is his past weekend. We already know there is zero evidence.

Trump colluded with Russia to steal an election. We know that watch Schiff totally mischaracterize the Mueller report because he's a lying piece of human filth, this disgusting human being, and watch him parrot this exact same talking point. And the CNN host, of course, has no information to refute it because she doesn't want to refute it.

Watch him parrot the Kalimnik. when he talks about a Russian asset, and Manafort, he's talking about Kalimnik. Take a listen.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller said in his report quote The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government. Republicans argue that's proof that you used your position on the intelligence committee to intentionally mislead Americans, which is why you should not be on that committee. If you read the Mueller report, he makes clear, even in the first few pages of the report, that he states no conclusion on whether Donald Trump and his campaign colluded with the Russians. But what he does reveal in his report, what we found in our investigation is that. Donald Trump's campaign manager was sharing internal campaign polling data and their strategy for key battleground states with an agent of Russian intelligence, while that same unit of Russian intelligence was helping the Trump campaign.

Those are facts. You notice how he confuses facts with evidence. Joe has nothing to do with the bank robbery. But if you're stupid and you're in the media, you're like, Oh my gosh, Joe Bankright, such a nice guy in the Dan Bongino show.

Notice how the dunce at CNN doesn't ask any questions about this alleged Russian agent because that sounds serious. And notice how the stupid CNN audience is like, Shit, man, he's onto something. Trump's campaign manager talking to a Russian, Oh my gosh, a Russian agent. Here's the daily beast.

Yeah, the same Daily Yeast, part of that compilation before of media idiots openly promoting agitprop like good Soviets. Here they are. Dan Ladin Hall. They'll never retract this. By the way, Manafort owns up to passing campaign data the suspected Russian agent.

Oh my gosh, he publicly admitted giving polling data to Konstantin Kalimnik, a suspected Russian asset. I've only debunked this a thousand times, which that part's true, by the way. So let's just establish media and journalistic principles here, because we do actual reporting here. So Paul Manafort is dealing with this guy. Konstantin Kalimnik, who Adam Schiff is claiming, is some big time Russian agent getting ready to steal an election.

Wow, you know what's really fascinating, fellas? The Obama State Department was dealing with the same guy. What would it be weird? What were they stealing? An election to John? By the way, please read these pieces.

They're in my newsletter today, Bongino dot com slash newsletter. Please take this screenshot for your leftist friends who are probably imbeciles and say, Oh so. Kalimnik was a Russian agent looking to steal elections. Well, why doesn't the report state the Mueller report that Kalimnik was quote a sensitive intelligence source for the State Department? Going back to at least 2013? Who was the president in 2013?

He, Do you know? Pop quiz It was Barack Obama, Joey, Can you double check that it was Barack Obama, right?

13.

Yeah, 2013, Yeah, Joe's doing some math.

Yeah, yeah, I can triple check it, OK, we're good, we're good guys. So Kalimnik, the same alleged Russian agent, was an Obama administration source.

So strange. They know Kalimnik wasn't even just some run of the mill source. He interacted with the chief political officer at the U.S embassy in Kiev. You know, the same one coordinating the takedown of Donald Trump, where Joe Biden's son was working for money. Sometimes meeting several times a week to provide information on the Ukrainian government, he even relayed messages back to Ukraine's leaders and handwritten and delivered written reports to U.s.

Officials via e-mails that stretched on for thousands of words.

So again, Adam Schiff, who is a lying piece of human filth and a dopey media person who knows nothing, keep saying that Paul Manafort was dealing with this Russian agent who, ironically, was an Obama administration source.

You're freaking homework in the media. Are you this stupid all the time? You can read the memos yourself? So, if Paul Manafort is in fact an agent of Russia through Kalimnik, then so is Barack Obama's State Department.