← The Dan Bongino Show
The Dan Bongino Show
What Just Happened With Obama? (w/ Sean Davis) | 07/25/25
00:31:45
Sean Davis from The Federalist joins me to discuss the latest on the Russiagate developments as well as the context as to why it all matters.
Loading summary
Transcript47 lines
- [00:00]
Vince
Foreign welcome to Vince on a Monday. Now, I'm currently traveling and then I'll be in the silverlock studio all week next week. But you thought I was going to leave you without any content? No, no. In fact, I've left you with some great content here. The conversation you're about to hear is between me and Sean Davis and we're talking all about everything that's transpired from Obamagate, or whatever you want to call it, the corruption of the Obama administration as they colluded to upend the duly elected President of the United States, Donald Trump. We'll get into all the details. Obviously, since we had this conversation on Friday, I will stipulate whatever you hear here can't account for whatever broke over the weekend, which is totally fine. But Sean Davis is one of the smartest guys out there and I'm always privileged every time I get to chat with him. Sean Davis now joins us. He's the co founder and CEO of the Federalist. Sean, good to talk to you as always, sir.
- [00:59]
Sean Davis
Thank you for having me. It's a pleasure.
- [01:02]
Vince
Okay, so all of the Tulsi Gabbard disclosures, the media have already been ever since she started them, saying this is old news, she's lying, she's distorting, there's nothing to see here. We should be talking about Epstein. Instead, give us your sense of the gravity of Tulsi's disclosures.
- [01:22]
Sean Davis
I think they were huge. I think they're probably some of the biggest bombshells in what she released, really, since we got a look at the FISA application that was fraudulent and full of lies that they used to spy on Carter Page in the Trump campaign. What she released specifically was back in 2017, the House permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which was led by Devin Nunes, they smelled a rat and so they started digging into the whole Russia collusion hoax. And there were kind of two aspects to what they were looking at because there were really two pillars of the Russia collusion hoax. Number one was the claim that Russia actively interfered in America's elections because they wanted Trump to win and they wanted to steal the election from Hillary Clinton. And then number two, that second pillar was that Trump actively colluded with and worked with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary Clinton. And so the Nunes Intel Committee looked at both of those and we learned a ton, basically. I think everything there was to know about the collusion nonsense. There was a multi year, 30, 40, $50 million investigation from Mueller that found absolutely no evidence whatsoever of any collusion between Trump and the Russians. But we never really got any sort of conclusion or closure on that first pillar, which was that Russia and Putin wanted Trump to win, and that's why they were intervening. And so what Gabbard released was a very lengthy oversight product put together by Nunez's committee back in 2017. And it was their wholesale takedown of why the intelligence community assessment, the ica, that found that Trump or that Putin aspired for Trump to win, it was their takedown of why that was nonsense. And the corrupt intel community, the people who had burrowed into the CIA even after Trump became president in 2017, as well as the Biden admin, they had been hiding this for years. And so Tulsi finally allowed that to be released. And we got to see in open sunlight all the reasons why that initial ica, which was the foundation for the entire Russian collusion hoax, was nonsense.
- [03:45]
Vince
It's so crazy to me that Congress can conduct an investigation, have the truth, and still not be able to release it to the public, that somehow the intel community got to control what Congress could share with the rest of us. Doesn't that seem out of whack to you?
- [04:00]
Sean Davis
Yeah, it's totally crazy that an oversight committee, which created the intelligence agencies, which funds them, which restricts what they can do and cannot do, but that Congress somehow isn't able to release its own documents. And the way the intel community controls information is through classification. I think everyone's heard, classify this, classify that. This is top secret. They have this whole game where they play where they will classify stuff even if it's not classified in any way, so no one can ever learn about it. And they will use that to basically blackmail Congress or restrict Congress from releasing what it wants.
- [04:33]
Vince
Yes. And we've discovered, of course, that they use classification as a way to cover up their crimes. That's what this is. And when you talk about the Intel Committee, one thing that really stands out to me in this saga that I don't think enough people have dwelled on, is one of the lead investigators on the Intel Committee, who wasn't a congressman, was Cash Patel. So the current FBI director knew about the classified contents of this report. He knew all of the stuff that the rest of us are just finding out about. President Trump picked him to run the FBI, and now he's in a position to do something about this. This seems like a big deal. Sean Davis.
- [05:11]
Sean Davis
It is a big deal. And it's why people like Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell and Mark Warner and all these crooks were so desperate to prevent people like Cash and people like Tulsi from getting into these positions of power and authority because they knew what Cash knew, they knew what Devin knew, and they knew that when they were going on TV and talking about, oh, we have all this evidence of collusion, and they knew those were lies because they saw all the intel and it's why they were terrified of Trump winning another term and getting back in there with people who knew where all the bodies were buried. It's why they wanted to prevent it. It's why they were so desperate to throw Trump in prison and bankrupt him and prevent him from ever becoming president again. Because they knew when that happened, they were actually going to be in some real jeopardy.
- [06:00]
Vince
Yeah, it sure seems like it. So among the people who are very obviously guilty of crimes here is John Brennan. John Brennan is the CIA director. Your website has had fantastic reporting on all of the lies that he's been involved in. We now know that he pushed very aggressively to include the Hillary Clinton Steele dossier as the, basically the entire basis, as far as I'm concerned, of the intelligence community assessment that was released publicly in January of 2017. That document never acknowledged publicly that Hillary Clinton's fake research was used as the basis of it. But the reason it got there was John Brennan. John Brennan would later go on television and before Congress and lie in all of those forums about the use of the Steele dossier. It does seem like that is almost the clearest single piece of evidence we have of the COVID up that was involved here and the manipulations that were being done.
- [07:03]
Sean Davis
Oh, yeah. And it's actually way more insidious than just knowing, oh, he lied about the Steele dossier being cited in the main body of the intel community assessment because he actually played games with different versions. So there was a final version? Well, there were actually two drafts that were pushed around the intel community at the time. The first one, which was released on December 20, 2016, did not have Steele dossier crap in it because the actual intel professionals at the CIA said, this thing's garbage. No, there's absolute, absolutely no way we're putting this in there. And Brennan overruled them, forced it into the main body. And so there was a final version or a final draft that was released of that ICA on December 28, 2016. But there were different versions of that. There was one version that was classified top secret. It was only given to Obama and top intel community heads, people like Comey, Brennan Clapper. It was that version that had the Steele dossier. Cited in the main body of the ica. However, the version they gave to Congress and the version that was declassified and made available to the public, it didn't have that in there. So when Brennan goes and lies to Congress and says, no, no, no, it was never in the main body of the ica, he did that on purpose. He knew it was in there. He personally forced it in there over the objections of intel experts. But he knew that when he went to Congress and said, oh, no, it wasn't in there, he gave them a totally fraudulent version. So it's more than him just lying. He was going to pretty crazy lengths to make sure that no one would ever discover his lies.
- [08:38]
Vince
And that Steele dossier, the way it was weaponized, there's a million ways that it was used and weaponized, but one of them that sticks out to me is, if my memory serves correctly, when Obama was briefed on its existence and how it worked and what it was all about, he was, he talked to James Comey and they had a conversation where he asked around the room, who's going to Trump Tower to brief him, meaning Donald Trump. And it became, it was Comey. And Obama said something like, good luck or whatever. And Comey went to Trump Tower. He briefed President Trump in early January 2017 about the existence of the Steele dossier and the fake allegations inside of it. He didn't say they were fake. He said that the Russians apparently have this intel and then it was instantly leaked to cnn. They run the story and then buzzfeed publishes the entirety of the Steele dossier. So all of those pieces feel like they're very interconnected, Sean.
- [09:35]
Sean Davis
Oh, they are, yeah. So if we're looking at the kind of the post election timeline, Trump wins, he wasn't supposed to win. Hillary was supposed to win. Break the glass ceiling and all that, Trump wins, and suddenly that's when the coup kind of kicks in. And so they had the Steele dossier floating around. The FBI had this open investigation on Trump, but they hadn't really done anything on it other than illegally spying on him. But they hadn't really activated their little plan that happens post election. The ICA was the beginning of it. They had to have the imprimatur of CIA approval before they could go and kind of weaponize all the findings. So the ICA is key to all of it. So they have this ICA which is totally bogus and full of lies that, remember we talked about those two pillars that Russia was actively interfering to help Trump win, which was not true. 2 they had to prove that Trump was colluding. So you have this meeting on January 5th in the Oval Office of 2017, where all the main national security principals get together. It was Obama, Susan Rice, Biden, Comey, Clapper, Brennan. That's really where they're hatching the full plan to launch this coup, maybe prevent Trump's inauguration and cripple his presidency if they can't prevent him from being inaugurated. So on January 5th, they all meet, they all decide on this course of action. Comey's the guy picked to go to Trump Tower and brief Trump. And the sole purpose of that meeting was to leak it. That was the entire purpose. They had been trying to get people to write about the Steele dossier and the allegations in it. And all the journalists who looked at it were like, no, this is garbage. No, we can't go out and say this. So what they knew was, oh, if we go and brief Trump on it, then we can leak that the intel community took it so seriously that they had to brief a current and incoming president on it.
- [11:27]
Vince
Didn't Clapper say that CNN has this, but they need a news hook? There's an early piece of information. I believe it was James Clapper who said that, that CNN apparently is on this story, but they don't have a news hook for it. And then the news hook was born. Comey went, he briefed Trump. And suddenly it's like, oh, people are talking about this thing.
- [11:50]
Sean Davis
Yeah. And what's fascinating is buzzfeed, which was just a pile of nonsense. Buzzfeed was just a horrific news organization. However, the only truly journalistic thing Ben Smith has ever done in his stupid journalistic career, and it was by accident, was published that dossier. And they did it, in my view, because they thought, oh, once people see these allegations, they'll know Trump is cooked. But the reality is that as soon as people were able to put their eyes on that document, that's when anyone with a brain knew the entire Russia collusion hoax was a criminal conspiracy to get rid of Trump. Because nobody with a brain could read that and think, oh, yeah, this is real. Yeah, all these things happened. Trump, famous germaphobe. Yeah, yeah. He was paying prostitutes to pee on him. Which was a. That was the key salacious claim in the dossier that everyone wanted out there. That was the thing that Comey mentioned to Trump in the meeting. But once you laid eyes on that dossier that BuzzFeed published, that's when we knew, at least internally here at the Federalists, we're like, oh, this thing is a massive criminal conspiracy against the elected government of the United States.
- [12:59]
Vince
I want to talk. I want to back up the timeline a little bit, because I think one of the most important, important acts that demonstrate the intent of the Obama regime was that December 9th Presidential Daily Brief that was supposed to conclude the following finding from the intel community that Putin had not stolen the election for Trump. And in fact, there was no credible evidence to suggest that he was demonstrating a preference for Trump. And that was supposed to appear in the December 9th Presidential Daily Brief. When Tulsi Gabbard first released this, I found it a little puzzling that it mattered too much, because I thought maybe, oh, maybe they're just keeping this out of the document as one, one further way to not memorialize their scheme. That could be the explanation. But again, it's classified. It's not for public dissemination. So what's the point here? And then you come to realize, wait a second. President Trump began receiving the Presidential daily brief on November 15th of 2016 and would ever after as President of the United States, because he's entitled to that. In other words, Sean, it looks pretty clear to me that the Biden people were trying to keep President Trump from knowing that they knew the truth, that Putin did not steal the election and wasn't showing a preference for Trump.
- [14:17]
Sean Davis
Yeah. And by the way, you, as far as I know, you were the first person who made that connection. Like, I hadn't even thought of that. And I think you put it on Twitter, and I found that absolutely fascinating. And, man, kudos to you for making that connection, because you're exactly right. That is why they pulled that Presidential Daily Brief is they had this little plan in motion. It was still half baked because they didn't have the ICA out yet. They needed that out. And so they get this thing in the Presidential Daily Brief saying that actually Putin's cyber operations didn't really accomplish anything, and they really didn't seem to have a preference other than sowing chaos and maybe damaging Hillary on her way in. But, no, that was such an obvious sign of criminal conspiratorial intent that they pulled it because they couldn't have Trump learning the truth, and they needed time to bake up their little conspiracy. And that thing was going to be an arrow in the Achilles heel of what they were trying to do. It is a shocking, shocking fact and piece of evidence in the conspiracy against Trump and the American people that they were running.
- [15:23]
Vince
And let me thank you for the compliment on posting it. I know my post got A lot of attention, but I should extend the credit where it's due, which is I hadn't consumed the interview, but I had seen, I believe that General Flynn, the incoming National Security Adviser, may have said this to Matt Taibbi and his reporting, his great reporting on the subject. And I would later, I did talk to. Actually this past week, I talked to General Flynn about this. I had him on my radio show and I asked him about the Presidential Daily Brief, and he said, it's exactly right. I was receiving them every day. As the incoming National Security Adviser, I was receiving these Presidential Daily briefs. If that detail had been included, I would have seen it. It wasn't included on purpose. And General Flynn believes, for the very reasons that you and I are talking about, it was kept from him. Speaking of General Flynn, talk about a guy whose life was absolutely obliterated by these lies. They cooked up this idea that the Trump people were colluding with the Russians. And General Flynn took so many of the early daggers for that lie.
- [16:24]
Sean Davis
Oh, no, he was. He was absolutely martyred. And you go back, you remember the whole case against him was that he allegedly lied to FBI investigators who ambushed him in the White House under false pretenses, interviewed him and said that he had lied about when he said he didn't talk sanctions with the Russian ambassador when he was Sergey Kislyak.
- [16:46]
Vince
Right?
- [16:46]
Sean Davis
Yep. Yeah. Like the Forrest Gump of Russian collusion. I feel like we don't know everything about his true role in that, but that's another topic for another day. But we eventually get this transcript of Flynn's call, and you read through it and you're like, no, he actually never discussed sanctions. He talked about expulsions, which are a very different legal means of dealing with foreign chicanery, where you expel their diplomats from the country. But sanctions has a very particular meaning. And if you go back and look at the indictment of Flint, they cited a very particular section of federal law talking about financial sanctions. And when we got that final transcript after demanding it for years, that they had leaked and lied about to David Ignatius at the Post, you read it and you're like, no, he never talked about sanctions once. He never talked about financial sanctions. And it is to the great discredit to the bar DOJ that that even as they were trying to end that case against him, against the wishes of a totally corrupt judge in dc, they even got that wrong. They were wrong that he talked about financial sanctions. The man never did.
- [17:53]
Vince
Also, maybe I'm wrong, but my assumption that he was that would have been in bounds. He was the incoming national security advisor, so. So, like, even if he was talking sanctions, he's the incoming national security adviser for the duly elected President of the United States. It is not some sort of subvert version of the intent of the people. For the guy who's tasked with handling this massive element of foreign policy to be discussing foreign policy, the idea that that was scandalized in any capacity was an atrocity.
- [18:20]
Sean Davis
Yeah. And we still don't know, by the way, who leaked it. We still don't know who illegally leaked the existence of the call, portions of the call to David Ignatius, who's been a CIA cutout his entire career. So it's criminal.
- [18:37]
Vince
So on this story, on that side of it, this is another piece, I think, that demonstrates the treasonous conspiracy that Tulsi Gaver keeps talking about. Comey has openly bragged in public about how they entrapped Mike Flynn. He said they sent a couple of agents over to the White House in the early days of the Trump White House. He said he took advantage of the chaos of their arrival. And it's. By now, I think, hopefully it should be clear to people, Mike Flynn thought he was just talking to federal government employees. He didn't think he was talking to people who were trying to target him. They come into the White House, they start demanding all sorts of answers. He's allowed to say whatever he wants to them. They leave, they turn it into a federal case against him. Comey bragged about it. He said that he talked about how his deception led to Mike Flynn's prosecution. Strikes me that we should probably include that among the evidence for the treasonous conspiracy.
- [19:32]
Sean Davis
Absolutely. Because you'll hear people complain, well, oh, we can't do anything to them. They've escaped. The statute of limitations is over on them lying to Congress and doing all this. And that the statute of limitations is not over on criminal conspiracy. And that's what this was. This was a criminal conspiracy to overturn election results, to defraud the American people and the President for the purposes of launching a coup against the elected government of the United States. And I've said this for, like, eight years, till I've been blue in the face, until people go to prison for this. And by the way, not a single person has gone to prison, not even the FBI lawyer who fabricated emails to put in a FISA warrant to illegally spy on a presidential campaign. That guy didn't even go to prison. And until people go to prison, we're going to be dealing with the consequences of this Forever, because they're going to do it again. When people know they can get away with treason and sedition, when they can launch coups with impunity, they will do it again and again and again. So people have to go to prison. I don't care if it takes five years or 10 years or 50 years. People have to go to prison for this.
- [20:38]
Vince
It's not like we haven't seen seditious conspiracy charges. The Oath Keepers were prosecuted for seditious conspiracy charges for the events of January 6, 2021. And the only problem they have is that they're not rich, powerful, well connected people and Democrats, particularly in this case. So we have recent history to support this. Do you think it'll happen?
- [21:05]
Sean Davis
I really don't know. I mean, the way they have been talking and the nature of the documents they have been releasing suggests to me that they're serious about taking conspiracy charges against people.
- [21:21]
Vince
Tulsi Gabbard definitely is. I don't think there's any question. I think she's very serious about that.
- [21:25]
Sean Davis
Well, and then you saw that DOJ is using what's called a strike force to examine conspiracy and fraud charges, as opposed to a special counsel, which I think is a very, very good idea. If you look at the history of strike forces, these were used by DOJ early on in their war against organized crime. And they're used to align multiple different federal agencies towards the same goal, which is bringing to justice people who have been running massive conspiracies and fraud. So I think that fact is a really good development in this. So I'm hopeful. But I'm also super cynical, having been alive and conscious for the last eight years.
- [22:04]
Vince
Yeah, yeah, yeah. No. But I think the players here are important. So Tulsi Gabbard is legit? I think she's totally legit. I think Kash Patel and Dan Bonjeano are sincere about this. They've written books on the subject. They're obsessed with it. They want to bring it to a conclusion. Ed Martin is the head of the weaponization group at the Justice Department. He's obsessed with this. He represented January 6th defendants and he was crucified for literally being a lawyer on behalf of a defendant. Thom Tillis tried to destroy him, kept him from becoming a U.S. attorney. You've got a lot of really, I think, dedicated public servants who are in a position to do something about this now. But you're right, you still harbor all this skepticism that something will be done. Because as you pointed out, that FBI lawyer Kevin Kleinsmith, he Just got a wrist slap. There was nothing. He straight up lied in documentation to spy on a Naval Academy graduate, Carter Page. He lied and it was allowed to happen, and there were no consequences. So that detail, this detail in particular, is why so many people keep throwing their hands up and say things like, well, nothing is going to happen. Nothing is going to happen. This is our best shot, isn't it, Sean, in terms of the people and the timing.
- [23:11]
Sean Davis
It is, especially given what happened to Trump over the last several years. They tried to bankrupt him, they tried to imprison him, they tried to make him die in jail, they tried to kill him. So this is a different man. Especially having watched what they did during the 2020 election and knowing what we know and what I think Trump has known for years about the Rush collusion hoax, I don't think they're messing around. Now. I get the cynicism and the discouragement from people who are mad that no one's in jail yet, and they say, oh, well, who cares? We knew all this. No, we didn't know all this. And even if no one goes to jail, which would suck, we deserve to know all this information. So I get frustrated with the nothing matters. Who cares? We all knew this crowd. Because it's really, really important to have transparency. Yes, you have accountability, but you have to have transparency.
- [24:01]
Vince
Also. It's creating a permission slip for the left's abuses. When you say that, when you basically tap out of this subject, having worked as doggedly as the right has worked to try and bring about some corrections of this for years, and if you tap out of this and you're like, oh, it doesn't matter. This is all old news. Nothing is ever gonna happen. You've surrendered. You've waved the white flag of surrender to the left, which abused its power and hurt so many Americans, and they don't deserve to get away with it. I think justice has to come to these guys, and I'm desperate for it.
- [24:29]
Sean Davis
Yeah. And you can't have justice until you have transparency. Transparency is always the beginning step. You have to know what happened before you can hold someone accountable for what happened. So we should be applauding everyone because it took a great amount of courage and effort and work and dedication to get this information out. And thank goodness Tulsi was dedicated to going and declassifying and giving us this transparency because we need it, and we. We are owed it. As American citizens and voters, we are owed this information.
- [24:57]
Vince
Let's talk about who might be held accountable and we'll start. I think Tulsi's disclosures have changed the quality of the people that we're going after, because it used to be people like Peter Strzok and Lisa Page and these various characters who you only came to know by way of the scandal. But now the names that we're talking about are at the highest levels of our government. John Brennan, James Clapper. And Barack Obama's name keeps coming up. There's a lot of debate going on right now about the extent to which he might be able to claim some sort of presidential immunity for actions that he took in that era. But as you point out, the conspiracy statutes typically involve, you know, going all the way five years past the latest overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy. Sean, this past week, Barack Obama issued a public denial about his involvement in a conspiracy, which lawyers will tell us is an overt act in furtherance of a conspiracy. Do you think Obama is in any capacity, exposure here in the midst of this for consequences?
- [26:03]
Sean Davis
Well, yeah, I think in the long term, no, I think he'll be viewed as immune by the courts. However, I said the exact same thing about Trump when they went after him for the stupid J6 stuff for having given a speech telling people to be peaceful that they didn't like. So, I mean, I kind of believe turnabouts, fair play. We said as they were arresting Trump, you know, you can't do this. He's president. You can't criminalize presidential acts. And they said, oh, whatever, who cares? You're a seditionist. I feel like they should get their turn in that same barrel and let the court sort it out.
- [26:37]
Vince
Yes, that's right. Yeah. And let's bring it up to the Supreme Court so the court can determine how we distinguish between official and unofficial acts by a president. President of the United States. Because lost in the conversation about presidential immunity is that the court did draw a distinction. They said there is such a thing as official and unofficial acts. So if that's the case, let's test it. Because I would. I would imagine orchestrating a coup against the duly elected incoming president would probably qualify as unofficial. Sean.
- [27:07]
Sean Davis
Yeah, you would. You would think. And again, it's not just Obama. I think he was probably insulated enough. You know, he was not the one in there in writing the ica. He was just saying, hey, you know, give me all the intel. Obama's not an idiot. I assume he kind of protected himself and insulated himself. Comey and Clapper and Brennan did not. And they've all made statements in the last week overt acts. And if they're still lying about what they did, and if they're still lying about what happened, those are ongoing acts in a criminal conspiracy. And by the way, one major actor that I don't think we can leave out, that was a key player in all this was, was the corrupt US Corporate media, the Washington Post, New York Times, and cnn. They were active participants and co conspirators in this attempted coup against our government.
- [27:55]
Vince
Well, they won the Pulitzer Prize, though, so that has to account for something.
- [27:59]
Sean Davis
In all of this.
- [28:00]
Vince
It is amazing, isn't it, that they got the Pulitzer Prize for all this supposed coverage when what they were really doing was breathing life into a hoax that completely ground our country to a halt. And for that matter, think about what they were claiming to begin with. That Russia through an information operation. This is the position. They've backed up into that through an information operation. So discord among the American electorate that hurt our democratic institutions. I'm sorry, what. What you're describing is the actions of James Comey, James Clapper, and John Brennan and Barack Obama. They sowed domestic discord to grind to a halt our democratic institutions.
- [28:40]
Sean Davis
Yeah. And one thing that's gotten lost in this. So the key claims were that Trump was colluding with Russian agents to steal the election. If you go back and look at the actual facts, there was one presidential campaign in 2016 that was using Russian agents to sow disinformation and meddle in the election, and it was the campaign of Hillary Rodham Clinton, because Christopher Steele, the guy her campaign was funding to do that stupid dossier, was in the service of a sanctioned Russian oligarch named Oleg Deripaska, who had business before DOJ at the time. So we have documentary proven evidence that there was a paid foreign Russian agent working in service of meddling in our election. He was Christopher Steele, and he was doing it using funding from the Hillary Clinton campaign.
- [29:26]
Vince
That's right. And he was getting his information from a Russian national called Igor Danchenko, which, you know, the Russians were very involved in manufacturing nonsense against a political candidate. It was against Trump. They demonstrated a preference for Hillary through that action. It's all too much. Okay, let me finish on Hillary Clinton, since you brought her up. How much satisfaction do you think Tulsi Gabbard had reading out all of Hillary Clinton's health problems in the White House press briefing room this past week, where she stands up there and she says that she has these uncontrolled fits of both rage and cheerfulness during the campaign, which is Weird, Dev. An uncontrolled fit of cheerfulness. And then she also says that she was being pumped full of tranquilizers every day just to get through each day.
- [30:16]
Sean Davis
That was amazing. Now, granted, we don't know if that's true. That's what the Russians believe was true and they never released, but, well, John.
- [30:23]
Vince
Brennan says it feels true, doesn't it?
- [30:29]
Sean Davis
Yeah, to me. I cannot stop thinking about, like, the image of them strapping Hill Dog into, like, a straight jacket and then just pumping her full of horse tranqs so she won't spaz out on everyone in the campaign. That makes me laugh so hard. Especially when we have video of them, like, loading her up like a sack of flower and throwing her into that van in September of 2016 and then telling us, oh, no, no, she was just overheated on a beautiful, like, 70 degree fall day. It's amazing.
- [31:01]
Vince
It is amazing. And Hillary just once again picked the wrong enemy. She. She tried that. She tried to treat Trump like garbage, and now she's suffering away in obscurity. And she tried to treat Tulsi like garbage and now she's getting slapped upside the head. Yes. Yet again. It really is. Is amazing. Shawn Davis, you're amazing. Your website's just been fantastic throughout all of this. As always, I appreciate you and the Federalists. Thank you, Sean, for talking to me today.
- [31:24]
Sean Davis
Well, thank you for having me. This was fun.
- [31:27]
Vince
Good to talk. All right, thank you. That was Sean Davis from the Federalist. I appreciate you. We've got a lot more great content ahead this week on Vince. Stay tuned for it and then I'll be back live from the Silverlock studios next week.