In this episode, Lisa interviews former House Oversight Chairman & FOX News Contributor Jason Chaffetz about newly declassified documents from the Trump-Russia investigation. They discuss evidence suggesting Hillary Clinton’s campaign orchestrated the Steele Dossier to damage Donald Trump, with alleged involvement from top Obama officials. Chaffetz criticizes the FBI’s misuse of FISA warrants and the lack of accountability for intelligence officials. The conversation also covers media bias, the Benghazi email scandal, and ongoing investigations. The Truth with Lisa Boothe is part of the Clay Travis & Buck Sexton Podcast Network - new episodes debut every Tuesday & Thursday.
Follow Clay & Buck on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/clayandbuck
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Welcome to the Truth with Lisa Booth, where we get
to the heart of the issues that matter to you. Today,
I've got a friend and colleague on the show, Jason Schaefitz.
You know him from Fox News. He's also the former
House Oversight chairman as well, and we're going to dig
into the recent documents that have been declassified and have
(00:22):
been pushed out by the Trump administration, these explosive documents
surrounding the Trump Russia probe. So we'll cover the new revelations.
We'll explore who launched the investigation and why, and then
also examine President Obama's role. Also, was it Hillary Clinton
who kicked this all off? Who spearheaded all of this
with the Steele dossier. We'll talk about Hillary Clinton's role
(00:47):
in this manufactured intelligence. Also, did the FBI ignore red
flags about Russian disinformation and all of this as well.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
We'll get to the bottom of that.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
So stay tuned for my friend and colleague, Jason Schaffitz,
who's going to bring us the truth about the Watched
Russia hoax. Well, Jason Schaefits, it's great to have you
on the show again.
Speaker 2 (01:14):
My friend.
Speaker 1 (01:15):
We kind of got into this when we were co
hosting together recently on The Big Show, and so when
I was thinking about a guest, I was like, Jason
is the person for this, So I appreciate you making
the time.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Yeah, Hey, always anything for Lisa Booth. Are you kidding me?
Speaker 1 (01:30):
Well, be careful, be careful putting that out, you know.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
Start to well, I've learned the hard way, So yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
No, I'm just kidding.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
But okay, so Jason.
Speaker 1 (01:40):
So basically, obviously there's like so much information being put out,
and so I think it's like a little bit honestly confusing,
but just I think people are kind of trying to
figure out like what's new, what's not new, just sort
of like sifting through it. And so it's kind of
like the point of the conversation I want to have
with you. It is just sort of breaking it down
(02:01):
and you know, explaining it to both me and then
the audience as well. So I guess it's start off
kind of at the top with all the information that's
been released so far, what's new that we didn't already know?
Speaker 2 (02:15):
Yeah, and let me preface new by saying it's a
growing body of evidence that should have been uncovered and revealed.
If you had actors that were playing by the rules
and by the law. It should have come out, you know,
years ago. So the Democrats are masters at playing this
(02:35):
game saying, oh, well, that's not new, so it's not
worthy of listening to. But that's not true. And so
the newest things that you know were foreshadowed by Telsea Gabbert,
the Director of National Intelligence, John Radcliffe is CIA director.
Cash Pattel has foreshadowed even more documents coming from this
so called annex to the Durham Report, these burd bags
(02:56):
that were found. The startling evidence that is quote unquote
new is Hillary Clinton personally signing off on it, on
this operation to to delegitimize Donald Trump by drawing an
association that was bogus, that was not true in relationship
(03:19):
to Russia. And that comes out in emails from witnesses
who say that's what happened. It's not Hillary rod and
Clinton saying I Hillary Rod and Clinton did this. So
it's an allegation, but it's a serious one because it
was the first hardcore, first hand account in writing that
(03:43):
said HRC has approved this. Now I'm paraphrasing, but that's
essentially the allegation. And this goes back to w Westernman Schultz,
the Florida congresswoman, having interactions with people in George Soros's
orbit and foundations, but to say that that was something
that she personally signed off and that they were good
(04:05):
with moving forward. Another big one which we had not
heard and seen before, was the idea that Barack Obama,
as the President of the United States December of twenty sixteen,
was going to rewrite, in essence, have them go back
and rewrite the findings of the career officials within the
(04:28):
intelligence communities to change the assessment. They believed that the
Steele dossier, which was used as the predicate to spy
on Americans and spy on Donald Trump's campaign and those
in his orbit, that that was discredited, didn't meet the
standards of intelligence collection and therefore they didn't have the
(04:53):
predicate to do the spying. And now that Donald Trump
did the unthinkable, which was get elected, Donald Trump was
going to be able to figure that out unless they
went back and rewrote this, which happened a week or
so before Donald Trump got his first presidential brief as
the candidate elect or the president elect in December of
(05:14):
twenty sixteen, So that again is new information direct involvement
by the President of the United States and again furthers
this and this notion that he didn't want to have
his whole presidency tainted by Hillary Clinton and her email
scandal and something that I was very involved in. Those
(05:37):
are some of the biggest takeaway items. And there's a
lot more to it, but that's those are some of
the newest things that just add fuel to the fire.
And this what could be a quite a conspiracy.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
Who started it, Like who initiated this whole you know,
spying on President Trump and you know, kind of starting
the idea that Trump was like in bed with Putin
in the Russians.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
So the growing body of evidence seems to indicate again
nothing has been proven, nobody's been you know, prosecuted and convicted,
but the growing amount of evidence is that Barack Obama
did not want this email scandal with Hillary Clinton spinning
out of control, and that Clinton's took ten million dollars
(06:30):
out of their campaign to use that money through Mark
Elias and his law firm. They checked it off as
a quote unquote legal expense, which I think has been
ruled on now is it really wasn't a legal expense
to push this money overseas to then come up with
(06:51):
this fiction. It's not as if they said, hey, structure
it just like this. It's hey, we've got a bloody
up Donald Trump and create this proximity in this question
in people's minds that Donald Trumps as a Russian puppet,
you know. And so you start to see the players
(07:12):
in there, and then you start to see the intelligence community.
This is where it gets really nefarious is when you
have people like James Clapper, John Brannan, James Comey seemingly
ponds in executing this not fully investigating Hillary Clinton, not
doing anything to get to the truth about her handling
(07:34):
or mishandling or classified information that's a whole other thread
or vein that we could go and talk about that
I was very involved with. But they use this Steele
dossier as the predicate to then go to the courts.
And this is where I think there's the most vulnerability
if somebody is actually going to get prosecuted. Is the
way this works in the you hear this term the
(07:56):
FISA court right. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act gave special police
powers to if somebody's overseas communicating with somebody in the
United States. How do you deal with that? That's not
a traditional warrant between two Americans with constitutional rights, So
how do you do that? They came up with this
(08:16):
faiza scheme under the Patriot Act, which would actually allow them,
the government to put forward a document that goes to
a judge. They call it a court, but it's really
just a judge in a skiff secure compartmental information facility,
and the judge will look at that documentation and either
(08:38):
grant or deny a warrant to surveil somebody. And it's
like ninety nine point something percent of them get approved.
At the very top of this little forma says verified,
like they've verified this information. And at least on some
of the occasions, I believe it's James Comey who signed
(08:59):
off on these applications to get warrants to spy on
people in Trump's orbit. But the allegation is that they knew,
or they should have known, that the underlying predicate, the
Steele dossier was bogus, and therefore they lied to the court.
And there are a lot of us that believe if
(09:21):
you lie to the court, there should be consequences. If
Lisa Booth lied to the court. If Joe Schmo out
in Kansas City lied to the court, If you know,
Jennifer Jones out in you know, to peek at Kansas
lied to the court, she'd probably go to jail. She'd
probably be you know, there'd be repercussions. But that's far
(09:43):
there hasn't been any.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
And the irony is I know Senator Grassley put this
out I think in twenty twenty, well can't some of
the did classified footnotes and found that it believed that
some of the sources of Christopher Steele were tied to
(10:07):
like the Kremlin. So like the irony is that in
an effort to push the narrative that Trump was cozy
with the Russians, they were pushing Russian disinformation from sources
that were tied to the Kremlin.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
So part of what's kind of uncovered here.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
Like they were the ones working with the Russians.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
So part of what gives credence to some of the
career officials who went and looked at this is somehow someway.
We don't know how, but the US government Intelligence agency
picked up on communic cays that the Russians had, that
the Russians had kind of tapped into what Hillary Clinton
was doing, and they foreshadowed that Clinton would do just this,
(10:56):
that she was going to come up with this scheme.
They foreshadowed how they were going to execute on it,
that Joe Biden, then his vice president, would be the
very first to go out and make this allegation about
Donald Trump and that it would roll from there, and
they gave very specific details and markers. And then when
it started actually happening, the US intelligence community looked at
(11:18):
that and said, oh my gosh, what the Clintons are
doing is actually true and real because the Russians foreshadowed it.
They must have an It's kind of scary how good
the Russians are inspiring on us and our political leaders.
They're the bad guys in this, but you know, they
foreshadowed exactly that Joe Biden would do this, and then
(11:39):
the DNC happens in twenty second, you know, the Democratic
National Convention, and then you know, in twenty sixteen, sure enough,
he goes out there and he's one of the first
ones making these allegations, just like the Russians said that
Clintons would do. So that is also new that the
Russians had figured out Clinton's scheme, and they thought it
(12:03):
was I mean, I think the underlying and again I
haven't read every document of every line, but again another
allegation is that the Russians ironically really wanted Hillary Clinton
to win because they had a lot more dirt on
her than they did on Donald Trump. They didn't have
anything on Donald Trump. He didn't have much well, I
(12:24):
think too.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
One thing that was always I think kind of demonstrates
kind of like the collusion and the desire to work
against Donald Trump and all this is that the media
couldn't publish the Steele dossier because they knew it was
unverified and they couldn't verify the information in it. And
so James Comy and Brennan and some of the other
(12:46):
intel guys met with President Trump, then President elect Trump
before he took office in twenty seventeen, and briefed him
on the salacious details of the dossier. And then somehow
that magically leaked. The fact that they met magically leaked
to the media, which I think CNN then covered, and
then it gave BuzzFeed the hook to publish the dossier
(13:07):
in fool, which they couldn't publish previously because it was unverified.
But because the meeting was leaked, that gave them the
hook to then release the unverified dossier. And so it's
like pretty obvious that Comy, who was a history of
leaking to the media, you know, basically set Trump up,
juiced him up with the salacious details they knew to
be false, and then gave uh, you know it gave
(13:31):
the green light to the media to then run with
all this. You know, Clinton wise to begin with, well.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
Look, this is the CD side of why so many
had that's accurate, right, all that, Oh yeah, CD concerns
about James Comy in the way he did business. I mean,
we had the Inspector General, Michael Horowitz at the Department
of Justice recommend prosecution of people who were leaking information,
accepting gifts for information, doing things like that. And then
(14:00):
and then, of course, you know, James Comy engaging with
a somebody he had a long time relationship with who
didn't have a security clearance giving him information. You know,
it's just they had a pattern of this, and I'm
talking about finding shells on a beach. I'm talking about
some you know, stuff that has security clearance issues. And
so that's and then Comy you know, doing a variety
(14:24):
of other things. I mean, how many times did I
get a lecture from James kmy about well, you know,
you have to prove intent. Well, the proving of intent
here on where Comer or Komy, Clapper and Brennan were
going with this stuff is increasingly evident, particularly against Brennan,
who you know, testified that he didn't use the Steele
(14:45):
dossier to write the intelligence, but then as other testimony
and other corroborating evidence that says he did. And so
it's it's still to be played out. Everybody's innocent until
proven guilty. But the these are the these are this
is why it continues to move forward. And it's not
behind us.
Speaker 1 (15:04):
We've got more with Jason schaffit's but first we've got
to take a quick commercial break.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
So there's no doubt in.
Speaker 1 (15:12):
Your mind that Obama knew exactly what was happening and
like basically spearheaded this whole thing.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
Well, the evidence is now showing that he did know,
and that he was not just informed but an active
player and making some key decisions. That that's pretty I
just feel lied to by him. You know, he always
tried to put himself up as all, we're a scandal
free administration. Oh they weren't. I mean I started by
looking at the fast infurious scandal we started. We dove
(15:42):
into the IRS scandal. They had their own set of
other spying scandals with the Associated Press, with James Rosen,
Cheryl Atkinson still has some stuff that's in the courts.
I mean, it just goes on and on with the
Obamas and and Clinton's. It's just to see jess Obama
was this above it all, above the Fray scandal free?
(16:05):
Now this that he had the intelligence community go back
and rewrite history so that that Donald Trump would never
catch wind of it. I mean, good, just shoe leather
work by you know, the Tulsi Gabbards and John Ratcliffs
of the world to go find this, and now what
Cash Betel and Dan Bongino are finding. I mean, that's
(16:28):
just there's still a lot more to come all these
burn bags. I mean, there's a lot more coming well.
Speaker 1 (16:33):
And the sad thing is like ruined lives and you know,
like Michael Rudo who used to work for President Trump.
You know he had liquidate his his children's college funds
just to pay for an attorney as he you know,
with subpoenat and how to testify and you know, how
to lawyer.
Speaker 2 (16:50):
Up through all of that jail. You know, it's just
people went to jail. And look, they almost pulled it off.
They almost malign Donald Trump enough to manipulate an election
and put Hillary Clinton in there. We were that close
to having President Hillary Clint in place. I mean, you
(17:12):
remember the afternoon of the election, everybody thought she was
going to win. Well.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
I think the only challenge in all this is that
there's so many moving parts and it's so it's kind
of like convoluted, and so I worry with the complexity
of it if that gets lost to the American people
and they're like, you know what, this is just too
much going on, you know, like well sort of thing.
Speaker 2 (17:37):
One of the ones that it's culpable in saving democracy
is the national media, I mean, the intellectually not interested.
It doesn't go to their narratives. How many people pulled
off awards and Pulitzer prizes doing all this work on this,
I mean, did anybody apologize, do a retraction, provide, you know,
(18:01):
turned their awards back in or had their awards revoked
from the Pulitzer Committee? I mean none and That's what's sicking, sickening,
because they were culpable when Tulsi Gabbard stood up was
it last week before the or so? And she stood
up in the White House podium and was making these
(18:21):
allegations about Barack Obama. Several of the people in the
media there in the White House briefing room didn't even
ask a question about that. They wanted to talk about
a different topic. I mean, that's just stunning, absolutely stunning.
If they had this information on anybody else, certainly Donald Trump,
they would be all over it. But because it's Barack Obama, oh,
(18:43):
haven't forbid we actually criticize him.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
I guess, so what do you think is going to happen?
And I also I think it's sort of hilarious because
they were not hilarious, terrible, but you know, they went
after Carter Page, but then like he was working he
was a CIA asset or like spying on a guy
who was actually actively working with the United States against
the Russians. So it's like, you know, but and then
(19:09):
also yeah, yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
Two things. First of all, I hope America understands the
opportunity cost and the loss that is Peter Struck Lisa Page.
You know, they had really pivotal counterintelligence rolls. So instead
of actually going after maybe I don't know, Chinese spies
and the Sineloa cartel and anybody else who's trying to
dismantle the United States, they spent time on this hoax.
(19:34):
And that how many thousands upon thousands of hours was
spent perpetuating a hoax. There's that in terms of accountability.
You know, people always said, oh, Jason, you do this
and that, but you never arrested anybody, never prosecuted anybody.
I said, well, you know, in Congress they don't give
you handcuffs, nor should they. My job is I can
(19:56):
expose it. And to that degree, I think we did
really well as best we could. But we were lied
to even though these documents were under subpoena. And we
have a system in government where you should have to
comply with them and there should be consequences. If there's
going to be a consequence, my guess where there's the
(20:16):
most vulnerability, particularly for James Comy, but others as well,
is this PISA warrant. If you go to the court
sign your name saying it's verified, it's true. Hey, federal
judge I need to be able to spy on this person,
and then they do. There has to be a consequence
for lying to the court. I think the Court under
(20:38):
John Roberts, the Chief Justice who oversees the phiz of Courts,
has got to do something. And I think that the
I think that you're going to see the hopefully the administration.
But the thing that might happen before either one of
those two do anything is that Congress when they get
back from the recess, either under Chairman Grassley or Chairman Jordan,
(21:01):
probably Grassly, he's going to have hearings and we're going
to call out Comy, Brennan, Clapper. All those people will
be called back up with this new information, and then
it'll be really interesting because the country will be focused
on single issues. What did you do and not do?
And that's tough when you've lied at least delegation previously
(21:22):
to Congress. That's going to be must ce TV.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
I don't remember did Biden pardon any of those people?
Speaker 2 (21:30):
That's a good question, Lisa, I don't remember.
Speaker 1 (21:31):
I'll stop my head.
Speaker 2 (21:33):
I think a lot of them thought that the Statue
of limitations it expired. But as John Ratcliffe and others
have explained if you and Brett Tolman, great US attorney,
he's uh, he's explained, if you're perpetuating a conspiracy, then
you start anew on the five year statue of limitations.
So they bring them up before Congress, they start testifying.
(21:57):
That resets the clock again. So I think those guys
will come up before Congress and they'll all plead the
fifth That's that's what I'm afraid of. But I think
I think they have no choice. I think that's what
they're going to do. They're going to plead the fifth.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
Well, and it's also you know, basically all that the
Trump administrations asking people to do is believe that people
who previously lied to them and previously CP's government did
it with Trump as well. I mean like Obama spied
on Associated Press reporters, like Brennan spied on the Senate
Intel Committee. Yeah, and you know, his own party, like
Diane Feinstein called him out for it because he was
(22:36):
spying on them with the waterboarding investigations at the Senate
Intel Committee that they were conducting. So it's like and
then Komy like has already admitted that he leaked FBI
documents that he shouldn't have leaked to a professor buddy
of his to then get its right. It's like all
these people have already like you know, I've already admitted
and we're already aware. Who have you know, been as
(22:57):
bad actors in the past. But I guess, like, what
would the consequences be? Will there be consequences? I think
there's just this like general frustration. I know I feel
it myself as it's like we find out that these
people in DC, whether it be members of Congress or
what have you, do bad things and then it just
feels like there's never an accountability and then people keep
(23:17):
doing it again, you know, like there's never been accountability
for COVID and the lies where you know, it's like
it just feels like it's like, you know, we call
them out and then nothing happens. So like, what could
the consequences be? Do you think there will be any consequences?
Speaker 2 (23:33):
I'd like to say yes, I want to say absolutely,
but I think unfortunately the history that I have over
the last fifteen years sixteen years of this stuff is
the answers. No, it's sad, it's wrong. I mean, take
it away from this whole thing Republicans, Democrats. Let's look
(23:53):
at Butler. You have a president of the United States,
a candidate for the presidency again gets and not even
a single person gets fired, not even one. Like they're
not It's just I'm so sick and tired of people being,
(24:14):
you know, doing something fundamentally wrong, either inept or just
totally abusing this system. There was a case a couple
of weeks ago where the Inspector General for the Federal
for the Department of Justice had made a recommendation for
prosecution of an FBI agent who was overseas using prostitutes
on a regular basis and doing some other nefarious things
(24:36):
recommended for prosecution, and they didn't do anything. They dismissed it.
Like I can go at least, I swear to you.
I could sit here for twenty hours in this case
after case after case, and it's frustrating me. For you,
I think they're American people, people care about our country,
and I want them to be held accountable. But I
(25:00):
you know, I don't want to give up on that,
but it is terribly frustrating.
Speaker 1 (25:04):
And then even like on the Epstein stuff, like I
don't think Trump behaved in a way he shouldn't have
with you know, young girls or what have you. But
it's also like, you know, they've kind of like over
promised and underdelivered, and it feels like they're not releasing
certain things and it's sort of just uh, you know,
(25:25):
I think that kind of raises more questions than just
putting it out there.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
Well, I don't think that chapter is done yet. I mean, yeah, yeah,
what are your what are your thoughts on?
Speaker 1 (25:34):
Do you do you find it strange in the way
in the manner in which things have been released or
does that pretty much line up or you know, from
your perspective as the former chairman of Oversight committee, like,
I don't know what are your thoughts?
Speaker 2 (25:46):
Look objectively? The Department of Justice said case closed and
then days later that the Deputy Attorney General is down
interviewing Delane Maxwell for two days. So I don't know
what comes that. I knew that I believe it's August eleven,
James Comer is going to be conducting a hearing or
a transcribed interview at the jail in Florida. That's going
(26:07):
to be whoa, you know what she going to say?
I don't know. I'm just saying that that one hasn't
fully played out yet, and I think there's an insatiable
desire to hear a lot more about it. But this
one is very newsworthy. Rate Now, when I say this one,
(26:28):
you know, Brennan Clapper comy Obama, Clinton all that, it's
just because there's new information and it's you know, but
it's the furtherance of something that has played out since
well back in twenty twelve. Is really kind of where
it started, and now it's still playing itself out. And
(26:51):
but you know, this is so I told you how
pessimistic I was, but I'm also optimistic because truth does
have a way of prevailing. And somehow, some way, the
American people figure this out and there may not be
somebody in handcuffs for twenty years out in some goolog
and you know that we all hope for. But politically,
Hillary Clinton didn't become the president. People figured it out,
(27:14):
not because of this scandal, but because they just figured
it out. And the American people, I don't think, will
reward people who are so nefarious in their intent. It's
just not the American way. And they'll reward the people
who are the adults in the room and do the
right thing, even though if their reputation in others this
costs the Trump family, I don't know, hundreds of millions
(27:35):
of dollars, and there's still people walking around thinking that
they're Russian assets. They put don They put Donald Trump
Junior on the cover of Time magazine and it said
caught red handed. He had like one meeting for twenty
minutes with somebody you'd never met before, and they put
(27:56):
them on the cover of Time magazine. I think the
people have figured out the national media, that's for sure.
Speaker 1 (28:01):
More with Jason on the other side of this break,
if you're enjoying the podcast, please post to social media,
send it to your friends. Appreciate when you guys do that.
Speaker 2 (28:09):
Stay tuned before we go.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
Is there anything like I've missed that you kind of
wanted to convey in all this?
Speaker 2 (28:19):
There's one little side side note here that is really
personal to me, and I'm probably too close to it.
But back when Benghazi happened, I usued a letter of preservation.
The preservation letter requires you to comply with the Federal
Records Act, but it also you have to keep all
(28:40):
of your notes, your contemporaneous notes, thoughts, everything. Because we
had four n in Americans and we could never unearth
all of these documents. Well, that was the quote unquote
email scandal. And fast forward, we found out that Hillary
had her own email system, she didn't use the government
won and that there was this highly classified information that
(29:05):
was traversing through her email system, which is basically the
same as getting an email system from Best Buy and
setting it up at home. And so there was a
few things that happened. We had the Select Committee on
BEng Ghazi, chaired by Trey Goudie, had things like John
Radcliffe and you know, some key people on there. But
(29:28):
Jim Jordan during that hearing asks Hillary Clinton when they
interviewed her under oath, was there any classified information on
your computers? And she said no, didn't send nor did
I receive any classified information. Fast forward to July of
twenty sixteen. I'm conducting the hearing. I'm the chair with
(29:53):
James Comy and Trey GOUDI asked Comy if any classified
information was found on Hillary Clinton's computer and he said yes.
So then I asked Comy, have you has Hillary Clinton
ever lied? And he said, cleverly, not to us, And
(30:17):
I said, well, what about In her answer to Jim
Jordan's saying that there was no classified information, and he
said never looked at it, to which I said, I'm paraphrasing, Well,
I didn't know you needed a permission slip. He said, yep,
sure do, And so I said, all right, we'll issue
a subpoena. All right, we'll issue this criminal referral like today.
(30:41):
It took a day or two to get it to him,
but we got it to him. I don't think they
did anything with that. I would love to know what
happened to that, And how come somebody can come lie
to Congress on a pivotal point like classified information and
have no consequence. And why did he say one thing
and then say, but we never prosecute her Again, I'm
probably too close to that, but that to me is
(31:02):
one of the strings that's still never been dealt with.
Speaker 1 (31:07):
Well, I don't know, hopefully, I don't know if they'll
release any information on that or you.
Speaker 2 (31:12):
Know, but did you lie to the court? Did you
sign your name testifying that it was verified? That gets
to be some really serious stuff, and hopefully if there's anything,
that'll probably be probably be the one where they actually
can prosecute somebody.
Speaker 1 (31:30):
Jason Schaffit's he's got a new book, They're Coming for You,
How deep state spies, NGOs and will corporations plan to
push you out of the economy. We had them on
recently about it and it's pretty terrifying, so very interesting,
so if you want to go out and get it.
Jason Schaffitz, thanks for coming on the show. I really
appreciate your time. My friend always thanks Lisa as Jason
(31:52):
Schaffit's friend and colleague, also the author of the new
book They're Coming for You, How deep state spies, NGOs,
and work corporatedtions planning to push you out of the economy.
Appreciate him for taking the time to come on the show.
Appreciate you guys at home for listening every Tuesday and Thursday,
but you can listen throughout the week.
Speaker 2 (32:08):
Also want to think.
Speaker 1 (32:09):
John Cassio and my producer for putting the show together.
Until next time.
Welcome to the Truth with Lisa Booth, where we get
to the heart of the issues that matter to you. Today,
I've got a friend and colleague on the show, Jason Schaefitz.
You know him from Fox News. He's also the former
House Oversight chairman as well, and we're going to dig
into the recent documents that have been declassified and have
(00:22):
been pushed out by the Trump administration, these explosive documents
surrounding the Trump Russia probe. So we'll cover the new revelations.
We'll explore who launched the investigation and why, and then
also examine President Obama's role. Also, was it Hillary Clinton
who kicked this all off? Who spearheaded all of this
with the Steele dossier. We'll talk about Hillary Clinton's role
(00:47):
in this manufactured intelligence. Also, did the FBI ignore red
flags about Russian disinformation and all of this as well.
Speaker 2 (00:56):
We'll get to the bottom of that.
Speaker 1 (00:57):
So stay tuned for my friend and colleague, Jason Schaffitz,
who's going to bring us the truth about the Watched
Russia hoax. Well, Jason Schaefits, it's great to have you
on the show again.
Speaker 2 (01:14):
My friend.
Speaker 1 (01:15):
We kind of got into this when we were co
hosting together recently on The Big Show, and so when
I was thinking about a guest, I was like, Jason
is the person for this, So I appreciate you making
the time.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
Yeah, Hey, always anything for Lisa Booth. Are you kidding me?
Speaker 1 (01:30):
Well, be careful, be careful putting that out, you know.
Speaker 2 (01:34):
Start to well, I've learned the hard way, So yeah.
Speaker 1 (01:38):
No, I'm just kidding.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
But okay, so Jason.
Speaker 1 (01:40):
So basically, obviously there's like so much information being put out,
and so I think it's like a little bit honestly confusing,
but just I think people are kind of trying to
figure out like what's new, what's not new, just sort
of like sifting through it. And so it's kind of
like the point of the conversation I want to have
with you. It is just sort of breaking it down
(02:01):
and you know, explaining it to both me and then
the audience as well. So I guess it's start off
kind of at the top with all the information that's
been released so far, what's new that we didn't already know?
Speaker 2 (02:15):
Yeah, and let me preface new by saying it's a
growing body of evidence that should have been uncovered and revealed.
If you had actors that were playing by the rules
and by the law. It should have come out, you know,
years ago. So the Democrats are masters at playing this
(02:35):
game saying, oh, well, that's not new, so it's not
worthy of listening to. But that's not true. And so
the newest things that you know were foreshadowed by Telsea Gabbert,
the Director of National Intelligence, John Radcliffe is CIA director.
Cash Pattel has foreshadowed even more documents coming from this
so called annex to the Durham Report, these burd bags
(02:56):
that were found. The startling evidence that is quote unquote
new is Hillary Clinton personally signing off on it, on
this operation to to delegitimize Donald Trump by drawing an
association that was bogus, that was not true in relationship
(03:19):
to Russia. And that comes out in emails from witnesses
who say that's what happened. It's not Hillary rod and
Clinton saying I Hillary Rod and Clinton did this. So
it's an allegation, but it's a serious one because it
was the first hardcore, first hand account in writing that
(03:43):
said HRC has approved this. Now I'm paraphrasing, but that's
essentially the allegation. And this goes back to w Westernman Schultz,
the Florida congresswoman, having interactions with people in George Soros's
orbit and foundations, but to say that that was something
that she personally signed off and that they were good
(04:05):
with moving forward. Another big one which we had not
heard and seen before, was the idea that Barack Obama,
as the President of the United States December of twenty sixteen,
was going to rewrite, in essence, have them go back
and rewrite the findings of the career officials within the
(04:28):
intelligence communities to change the assessment. They believed that the
Steele dossier, which was used as the predicate to spy
on Americans and spy on Donald Trump's campaign and those
in his orbit, that that was discredited, didn't meet the
standards of intelligence collection and therefore they didn't have the
(04:53):
predicate to do the spying. And now that Donald Trump
did the unthinkable, which was get elected, Donald Trump was
going to be able to figure that out unless they
went back and rewrote this, which happened a week or
so before Donald Trump got his first presidential brief as
the candidate elect or the president elect in December of
(05:14):
twenty sixteen, So that again is new information direct involvement
by the President of the United States and again furthers
this and this notion that he didn't want to have
his whole presidency tainted by Hillary Clinton and her email
scandal and something that I was very involved in. Those
(05:37):
are some of the biggest takeaway items. And there's a
lot more to it, but that's those are some of
the newest things that just add fuel to the fire.
And this what could be a quite a conspiracy.
Speaker 1 (05:50):
Who started it, Like who initiated this whole you know,
spying on President Trump and you know, kind of starting
the idea that Trump was like in bed with Putin
in the Russians.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
So the growing body of evidence seems to indicate again
nothing has been proven, nobody's been you know, prosecuted and convicted,
but the growing amount of evidence is that Barack Obama
did not want this email scandal with Hillary Clinton spinning
out of control, and that Clinton's took ten million dollars
(06:30):
out of their campaign to use that money through Mark
Elias and his law firm. They checked it off as
a quote unquote legal expense, which I think has been
ruled on now is it really wasn't a legal expense
to push this money overseas to then come up with
(06:51):
this fiction. It's not as if they said, hey, structure
it just like this. It's hey, we've got a bloody
up Donald Trump and create this proximity in this question
in people's minds that Donald Trumps as a Russian puppet,
you know. And so you start to see the players
(07:12):
in there, and then you start to see the intelligence community.
This is where it gets really nefarious is when you
have people like James Clapper, John Brannan, James Comey seemingly
ponds in executing this not fully investigating Hillary Clinton, not
doing anything to get to the truth about her handling
(07:34):
or mishandling or classified information that's a whole other thread
or vein that we could go and talk about that
I was very involved with. But they use this Steele
dossier as the predicate to then go to the courts.
And this is where I think there's the most vulnerability
if somebody is actually going to get prosecuted. Is the
way this works in the you hear this term the
(07:56):
FISA court right. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act gave special police
powers to if somebody's overseas communicating with somebody in the
United States. How do you deal with that? That's not
a traditional warrant between two Americans with constitutional rights, So
how do you do that? They came up with this
(08:16):
faiza scheme under the Patriot Act, which would actually allow them,
the government to put forward a document that goes to
a judge. They call it a court, but it's really
just a judge in a skiff secure compartmental information facility,
and the judge will look at that documentation and either
(08:38):
grant or deny a warrant to surveil somebody. And it's
like ninety nine point something percent of them get approved.
At the very top of this little forma says verified,
like they've verified this information. And at least on some
of the occasions, I believe it's James Comey who signed
(08:59):
off on these applications to get warrants to spy on
people in Trump's orbit. But the allegation is that they knew,
or they should have known, that the underlying predicate, the
Steele dossier was bogus, and therefore they lied to the court.
And there are a lot of us that believe if
(09:21):
you lie to the court, there should be consequences. If
Lisa Booth lied to the court. If Joe Schmo out
in Kansas City lied to the court, If you know,
Jennifer Jones out in you know, to peek at Kansas
lied to the court, she'd probably go to jail. She'd
probably be you know, there'd be repercussions. But that's far
(09:43):
there hasn't been any.
Speaker 1 (09:45):
And the irony is I know Senator Grassley put this
out I think in twenty twenty, well can't some of
the did classified footnotes and found that it believed that
some of the sources of Christopher Steele were tied to
(10:07):
like the Kremlin. So like the irony is that in
an effort to push the narrative that Trump was cozy
with the Russians, they were pushing Russian disinformation from sources
that were tied to the Kremlin.
Speaker 2 (10:26):
So part of what's kind of uncovered here.
Speaker 1 (10:28):
Like they were the ones working with the Russians.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
So part of what gives credence to some of the
career officials who went and looked at this is somehow someway.
We don't know how, but the US government Intelligence agency
picked up on communic cays that the Russians had, that
the Russians had kind of tapped into what Hillary Clinton
was doing, and they foreshadowed that Clinton would do just this,
(10:56):
that she was going to come up with this scheme.
They foreshadowed how they were going to execute on it,
that Joe Biden, then his vice president, would be the
very first to go out and make this allegation about
Donald Trump and that it would roll from there, and
they gave very specific details and markers. And then when
it started actually happening, the US intelligence community looked at
(11:18):
that and said, oh my gosh, what the Clintons are
doing is actually true and real because the Russians foreshadowed it.
They must have an It's kind of scary how good
the Russians are inspiring on us and our political leaders.
They're the bad guys in this, but you know, they
foreshadowed exactly that Joe Biden would do this, and then
(11:39):
the DNC happens in twenty second, you know, the Democratic
National Convention, and then you know, in twenty sixteen, sure enough,
he goes out there and he's one of the first
ones making these allegations, just like the Russians said that
Clintons would do. So that is also new that the
Russians had figured out Clinton's scheme, and they thought it
(12:03):
was I mean, I think the underlying and again I
haven't read every document of every line, but again another
allegation is that the Russians ironically really wanted Hillary Clinton
to win because they had a lot more dirt on
her than they did on Donald Trump. They didn't have
anything on Donald Trump. He didn't have much well, I
(12:24):
think too.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
One thing that was always I think kind of demonstrates
kind of like the collusion and the desire to work
against Donald Trump and all this is that the media
couldn't publish the Steele dossier because they knew it was
unverified and they couldn't verify the information in it. And
so James Comy and Brennan and some of the other
(12:46):
intel guys met with President Trump, then President elect Trump
before he took office in twenty seventeen, and briefed him
on the salacious details of the dossier. And then somehow
that magically leaked. The fact that they met magically leaked
to the media, which I think CNN then covered, and
then it gave BuzzFeed the hook to publish the dossier
(13:07):
in fool, which they couldn't publish previously because it was unverified.
But because the meeting was leaked, that gave them the
hook to then release the unverified dossier. And so it's
like pretty obvious that Comy, who was a history of
leaking to the media, you know, basically set Trump up,
juiced him up with the salacious details they knew to
be false, and then gave uh, you know it gave
(13:31):
the green light to the media to then run with
all this. You know, Clinton wise to begin with, well.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
Look, this is the CD side of why so many
had that's accurate, right, all that, Oh yeah, CD concerns
about James Comy in the way he did business. I mean,
we had the Inspector General, Michael Horowitz at the Department
of Justice recommend prosecution of people who were leaking information,
accepting gifts for information, doing things like that. And then
(14:00):
and then, of course, you know, James Comy engaging with
a somebody he had a long time relationship with who
didn't have a security clearance giving him information. You know,
it's just they had a pattern of this, and I'm
talking about finding shells on a beach. I'm talking about
some you know, stuff that has security clearance issues. And
so that's and then Comy you know, doing a variety
(14:24):
of other things. I mean, how many times did I
get a lecture from James kmy about well, you know,
you have to prove intent. Well, the proving of intent
here on where Comer or Komy, Clapper and Brennan were
going with this stuff is increasingly evident, particularly against Brennan,
who you know, testified that he didn't use the Steele
(14:45):
dossier to write the intelligence, but then as other testimony
and other corroborating evidence that says he did. And so
it's it's still to be played out. Everybody's innocent until
proven guilty. But the these are the these are this
is why it continues to move forward. And it's not
behind us.
Speaker 1 (15:04):
We've got more with Jason schaffit's but first we've got
to take a quick commercial break.
Speaker 2 (15:11):
So there's no doubt in.
Speaker 1 (15:12):
Your mind that Obama knew exactly what was happening and
like basically spearheaded this whole thing.
Speaker 2 (15:19):
Well, the evidence is now showing that he did know,
and that he was not just informed but an active
player and making some key decisions. That that's pretty I
just feel lied to by him. You know, he always
tried to put himself up as all, we're a scandal
free administration. Oh they weren't. I mean I started by
looking at the fast infurious scandal we started. We dove
(15:42):
into the IRS scandal. They had their own set of
other spying scandals with the Associated Press, with James Rosen,
Cheryl Atkinson still has some stuff that's in the courts.
I mean, it just goes on and on with the
Obamas and and Clinton's. It's just to see jess Obama
was this above it all, above the Fray scandal free?
(16:05):
Now this that he had the intelligence community go back
and rewrite history so that that Donald Trump would never
catch wind of it. I mean, good, just shoe leather
work by you know, the Tulsi Gabbards and John Ratcliffs
of the world to go find this, and now what
Cash Betel and Dan Bongino are finding. I mean, that's
(16:28):
just there's still a lot more to come all these
burn bags. I mean, there's a lot more coming well.
Speaker 1 (16:33):
And the sad thing is like ruined lives and you know,
like Michael Rudo who used to work for President Trump.
You know he had liquidate his his children's college funds
just to pay for an attorney as he you know,
with subpoenat and how to testify and you know, how
to lawyer.
Speaker 2 (16:50):
Up through all of that jail. You know, it's just
people went to jail. And look, they almost pulled it off.
They almost malign Donald Trump enough to manipulate an election
and put Hillary Clinton in there. We were that close
to having President Hillary Clint in place. I mean, you
(17:12):
remember the afternoon of the election, everybody thought she was
going to win. Well.
Speaker 1 (17:18):
I think the only challenge in all this is that
there's so many moving parts and it's so it's kind
of like convoluted, and so I worry with the complexity
of it if that gets lost to the American people
and they're like, you know what, this is just too
much going on, you know, like well sort of thing.
Speaker 2 (17:37):
One of the ones that it's culpable in saving democracy
is the national media, I mean, the intellectually not interested.
It doesn't go to their narratives. How many people pulled
off awards and Pulitzer prizes doing all this work on this,
I mean, did anybody apologize, do a retraction, provide, you know,
(18:01):
turned their awards back in or had their awards revoked
from the Pulitzer Committee? I mean none and That's what's sicking, sickening,
because they were culpable when Tulsi Gabbard stood up was
it last week before the or so? And she stood
up in the White House podium and was making these
(18:21):
allegations about Barack Obama. Several of the people in the
media there in the White House briefing room didn't even
ask a question about that. They wanted to talk about
a different topic. I mean, that's just stunning, absolutely stunning.
If they had this information on anybody else, certainly Donald Trump,
they would be all over it. But because it's Barack Obama, oh,
(18:43):
haven't forbid we actually criticize him.
Speaker 1 (18:48):
I guess, so what do you think is going to happen?
And I also I think it's sort of hilarious because
they were not hilarious, terrible, but you know, they went
after Carter Page, but then like he was working he
was a CIA asset or like spying on a guy
who was actually actively working with the United States against
the Russians. So it's like, you know, but and then
(19:09):
also yeah, yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
Two things. First of all, I hope America understands the
opportunity cost and the loss that is Peter Struck Lisa Page.
You know, they had really pivotal counterintelligence rolls. So instead
of actually going after maybe I don't know, Chinese spies
and the Sineloa cartel and anybody else who's trying to
dismantle the United States, they spent time on this hoax.
(19:34):
And that how many thousands upon thousands of hours was
spent perpetuating a hoax. There's that in terms of accountability.
You know, people always said, oh, Jason, you do this
and that, but you never arrested anybody, never prosecuted anybody.
I said, well, you know, in Congress they don't give
you handcuffs, nor should they. My job is I can
(19:56):
expose it. And to that degree, I think we did
really well as best we could. But we were lied
to even though these documents were under subpoena. And we
have a system in government where you should have to
comply with them and there should be consequences. If there's
going to be a consequence, my guess where there's the
(20:16):
most vulnerability, particularly for James Comy, but others as well,
is this PISA warrant. If you go to the court
sign your name saying it's verified, it's true. Hey, federal
judge I need to be able to spy on this person,
and then they do. There has to be a consequence
for lying to the court. I think the Court under
(20:38):
John Roberts, the Chief Justice who oversees the phiz of Courts,
has got to do something. And I think that the
I think that you're going to see the hopefully the administration.
But the thing that might happen before either one of
those two do anything is that Congress when they get
back from the recess, either under Chairman Grassley or Chairman Jordan,
(21:01):
probably Grassly, he's going to have hearings and we're going
to call out Comy, Brennan, Clapper. All those people will
be called back up with this new information, and then
it'll be really interesting because the country will be focused
on single issues. What did you do and not do?
And that's tough when you've lied at least delegation previously
(21:22):
to Congress. That's going to be must ce TV.
Speaker 1 (21:25):
I don't remember did Biden pardon any of those people?
Speaker 2 (21:30):
That's a good question, Lisa, I don't remember.
Speaker 1 (21:31):
I'll stop my head.
Speaker 2 (21:33):
I think a lot of them thought that the Statue
of limitations it expired. But as John Ratcliffe and others
have explained if you and Brett Tolman, great US attorney,
he's uh, he's explained, if you're perpetuating a conspiracy, then
you start anew on the five year statue of limitations.
So they bring them up before Congress, they start testifying.
(21:57):
That resets the clock again. So I think those guys
will come up before Congress and they'll all plead the
fifth That's that's what I'm afraid of. But I think
I think they have no choice. I think that's what
they're going to do. They're going to plead the fifth.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
Well, and it's also you know, basically all that the
Trump administrations asking people to do is believe that people
who previously lied to them and previously CP's government did
it with Trump as well. I mean like Obama spied
on Associated Press reporters, like Brennan spied on the Senate
Intel Committee. Yeah, and you know, his own party, like
Diane Feinstein called him out for it because he was
(22:36):
spying on them with the waterboarding investigations at the Senate
Intel Committee that they were conducting. So it's like and
then Komy like has already admitted that he leaked FBI
documents that he shouldn't have leaked to a professor buddy
of his to then get its right. It's like all
these people have already like you know, I've already admitted
and we're already aware. Who have you know, been as
(22:57):
bad actors in the past. But I guess, like, what
would the consequences be? Will there be consequences? I think
there's just this like general frustration. I know I feel
it myself as it's like we find out that these
people in DC, whether it be members of Congress or
what have you, do bad things and then it just
feels like there's never an accountability and then people keep
(23:17):
doing it again, you know, like there's never been accountability
for COVID and the lies where you know, it's like
it just feels like it's like, you know, we call
them out and then nothing happens. So like, what could
the consequences be? Do you think there will be any consequences?
Speaker 2 (23:33):
I'd like to say yes, I want to say absolutely,
but I think unfortunately the history that I have over
the last fifteen years sixteen years of this stuff is
the answers. No, it's sad, it's wrong. I mean, take
it away from this whole thing Republicans, Democrats. Let's look
(23:53):
at Butler. You have a president of the United States,
a candidate for the presidency again gets and not even
a single person gets fired, not even one. Like they're
not It's just I'm so sick and tired of people being,
(24:14):
you know, doing something fundamentally wrong, either inept or just
totally abusing this system. There was a case a couple
of weeks ago where the Inspector General for the Federal
for the Department of Justice had made a recommendation for
prosecution of an FBI agent who was overseas using prostitutes
on a regular basis and doing some other nefarious things
(24:36):
recommended for prosecution, and they didn't do anything. They dismissed it.
Like I can go at least, I swear to you.
I could sit here for twenty hours in this case
after case after case, and it's frustrating me. For you,
I think they're American people, people care about our country,
and I want them to be held accountable. But I
(25:00):
you know, I don't want to give up on that,
but it is terribly frustrating.
Speaker 1 (25:04):
And then even like on the Epstein stuff, like I
don't think Trump behaved in a way he shouldn't have
with you know, young girls or what have you. But
it's also like, you know, they've kind of like over
promised and underdelivered, and it feels like they're not releasing
certain things and it's sort of just uh, you know,
(25:25):
I think that kind of raises more questions than just
putting it out there.
Speaker 2 (25:29):
Well, I don't think that chapter is done yet. I mean, yeah, yeah,
what are your what are your thoughts on?
Speaker 1 (25:34):
Do you do you find it strange in the way
in the manner in which things have been released or
does that pretty much line up or you know, from
your perspective as the former chairman of Oversight committee, like,
I don't know what are your thoughts?
Speaker 2 (25:46):
Look objectively? The Department of Justice said case closed and
then days later that the Deputy Attorney General is down
interviewing Delane Maxwell for two days. So I don't know
what comes that. I knew that I believe it's August eleven,
James Comer is going to be conducting a hearing or
a transcribed interview at the jail in Florida. That's going
(26:07):
to be whoa, you know what she going to say?
I don't know. I'm just saying that that one hasn't
fully played out yet, and I think there's an insatiable
desire to hear a lot more about it. But this
one is very newsworthy. Rate Now, when I say this one,
(26:28):
you know, Brennan Clapper comy Obama, Clinton all that, it's
just because there's new information and it's you know, but
it's the furtherance of something that has played out since
well back in twenty twelve. Is really kind of where
it started, and now it's still playing itself out. And
(26:51):
but you know, this is so I told you how
pessimistic I was, but I'm also optimistic because truth does
have a way of prevailing. And somehow, some way, the
American people figure this out and there may not be
somebody in handcuffs for twenty years out in some goolog
and you know that we all hope for. But politically,
Hillary Clinton didn't become the president. People figured it out,
(27:14):
not because of this scandal, but because they just figured
it out. And the American people, I don't think, will
reward people who are so nefarious in their intent. It's
just not the American way. And they'll reward the people
who are the adults in the room and do the
right thing, even though if their reputation in others this
costs the Trump family, I don't know, hundreds of millions
(27:35):
of dollars, and there's still people walking around thinking that
they're Russian assets. They put don They put Donald Trump
Junior on the cover of Time magazine and it said
caught red handed. He had like one meeting for twenty
minutes with somebody you'd never met before, and they put
(27:56):
them on the cover of Time magazine. I think the
people have figured out the national media, that's for sure.
Speaker 1 (28:01):
More with Jason on the other side of this break,
if you're enjoying the podcast, please post to social media,
send it to your friends. Appreciate when you guys do that.
Speaker 2 (28:09):
Stay tuned before we go.
Speaker 1 (28:14):
Is there anything like I've missed that you kind of
wanted to convey in all this?
Speaker 2 (28:19):
There's one little side side note here that is really
personal to me, and I'm probably too close to it.
But back when Benghazi happened, I usued a letter of preservation.
The preservation letter requires you to comply with the Federal
Records Act, but it also you have to keep all
(28:40):
of your notes, your contemporaneous notes, thoughts, everything. Because we
had four n in Americans and we could never unearth
all of these documents. Well, that was the quote unquote
email scandal. And fast forward, we found out that Hillary
had her own email system, she didn't use the government
won and that there was this highly classified information that
(29:05):
was traversing through her email system, which is basically the
same as getting an email system from Best Buy and
setting it up at home. And so there was a
few things that happened. We had the Select Committee on
BEng Ghazi, chaired by Trey Goudie, had things like John
Radcliffe and you know, some key people on there. But
(29:28):
Jim Jordan during that hearing asks Hillary Clinton when they
interviewed her under oath, was there any classified information on
your computers? And she said no, didn't send nor did
I receive any classified information. Fast forward to July of
twenty sixteen. I'm conducting the hearing. I'm the chair with
(29:53):
James Comy and Trey GOUDI asked Comy if any classified
information was found on Hillary Clinton's computer and he said yes.
So then I asked Comy, have you has Hillary Clinton
ever lied? And he said, cleverly, not to us, And
(30:17):
I said, well, what about In her answer to Jim
Jordan's saying that there was no classified information, and he
said never looked at it, to which I said, I'm paraphrasing, Well,
I didn't know you needed a permission slip. He said, yep,
sure do, And so I said, all right, we'll issue
a subpoena. All right, we'll issue this criminal referral like today.
(30:41):
It took a day or two to get it to him,
but we got it to him. I don't think they
did anything with that. I would love to know what
happened to that, And how come somebody can come lie
to Congress on a pivotal point like classified information and
have no consequence. And why did he say one thing
and then say, but we never prosecute her Again, I'm
probably too close to that, but that to me is
(31:02):
one of the strings that's still never been dealt with.
Speaker 1 (31:07):
Well, I don't know, hopefully, I don't know if they'll
release any information on that or you.
Speaker 2 (31:12):
Know, but did you lie to the court? Did you
sign your name testifying that it was verified? That gets
to be some really serious stuff, and hopefully if there's anything,
that'll probably be probably be the one where they actually
can prosecute somebody.
Speaker 1 (31:30):
Jason Schaffit's he's got a new book, They're Coming for You,
How deep state spies, NGOs and will corporations plan to
push you out of the economy. We had them on
recently about it and it's pretty terrifying, so very interesting,
so if you want to go out and get it.
Jason Schaffitz, thanks for coming on the show. I really
appreciate your time. My friend always thanks Lisa as Jason
(31:52):
Schaffit's friend and colleague, also the author of the new
book They're Coming for You, How deep state spies, NGOs,
and work corporatedtions planning to push you out of the economy.
Appreciate him for taking the time to come on the show.
Appreciate you guys at home for listening every Tuesday and Thursday,
but you can listen throughout the week.
Speaker 2 (32:08):
Also want to think.
Speaker 1 (32:09):
John Cassio and my producer for putting the show together.
Until next time.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show News
Hosts And Creators
Clay Travis
Buck Sexton
Show Links
WebsiteNewsletterPopular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.