BillOReilly.com Premium Members welcome to the No Spin News for Wednesday February 7th, 2018. Take Your Country Back.

Now, we're supposed to be in the city, in the studio today. But it's snowing and raining and everything and I'm checking in with my friends in Florida. It's 80 in southern Florida and I'm checking with my friends in L.A. and it's 80 in L.A. and I'm going, why am I here in New York, getting taxed more than I would be in Florida, a lot more. Anyway, we will be in the studio tomorrow with Austin Goolsbee, I believe in a brand new feature. Remember the Water's World thing we did, we're kind of modifying it a little bit. So we'll have that for you tomorrow in the city. 

Late breaking news doesn't really matter I told you this would happen three weeks ago. The Senate has come to an agreement on a two-year budget. You know this budget business, is just used in political circles. I told you not to worry about it, it'll work out, it has worked out. The problem with it is, it's you know, increases the spending caps and if you look at the debt that we have at 20 trillion dollars and more now it becomes an absurd situation. Donald Trump is not going to deal with it. I mean he's just not because any kind of discipline in that area would have to get into Medicaid and Medicare and Social Security and it would change the ages and they'd have to change disbursements. No president is going to want to have to do that. It's such a mess. So anyway, for our purposes here today, government funding for two more years that helps Trump, he can avoid chaos there and not a big deal. 

What is a big deal is there were some new e-mails released or text whatever, between the lovers. FBI agent Peter Strzok and his mistress FBI lawyer, Lisa Page. Now you remember that these two have embarrassed themselves, their country, the Bureau everybody by carrying on, you know, this correspondence more than 50,000 texts and emails between the two of them where they disparage Donald Trump and they disparage a whole bunch of other people. But remember Strzok was the lead investigator on the Hillary Clinton e-mail thing. And Lisa Page was very close to McCabe, the Deputy Director of the FBI. So they're involved up to here, now the latest is Barack Obama, put this up on the screen, Lisa Page e-mails to Peter Strzok on September 2nd. Alright. Two months before the presidential election POTUS, that's Barack Obama, wants to know everything we're doing and this is in the Hillary Clinton email investigation.

Let me put it into perspective. James Comey the FBI director had already exonerated, already exonerated Hillary Clinton from any crime in the e-mail deal. Alright. However, the FBI agents and apparently Barack Obama all knew there was new stuff coming. Alright. So that's what this is about. Then Barack Obama apparently, I mean Lisa Page would know, since she's counsel to the Deputy Director of the FBI. He wants to be informed about all this. Now that links right into the Russian collusion investigation. OK because Strzok and Page were involved with that as well. And so was Comey and so was McCabe. So they're involved in both. In addition today, there's another e-mail that says Comey and McCabe held back from Congress for 30 days, new information about Hillary Clinton's e-mail situation. That some of the classified e-mails showed up on Anthony Wiener's computer. And of course, Weiner, who's in prison now was married, uhm and I think they still are married now And Huma Abedin was Hillary Clinton's top aide. So Hillary Clinton's classified e-mails showed up on Weiner's computer. Apparently, the FBI knew about it for 30 days before they told Congress, anybody else and that was why Comey came out at the end of October and said well we have some new stuff, new investigations stuff, remember that and that got Hillary and Hillary's people crazed because it was just a few days before the election. This is all a tangled web. I hope I'm explaining it clearly to you. If you've been following us for the last week or so, you know that my take has been there's criminal, possible criminal malfeasance here and I think the evidence grows stronger every day. 

Now let me deal with Barack Obama. The Obama haters are going to get crazed about this e-mail. But it doesn't really say anything more than the President the United States wants to be informed about two very high profile things, and that to me, I don't want make any excuses here, because Obama did say he was going to stay out of the Hillary Clinton e-mail thing. He said that in public but if you're the president and you're sitting there in September with a big presidential election coming up, you want to know what's going on. That doesn't seem to be crazy to me that POTUS wants to know what we have. Alright, so I'm not going to put a noose around anybody's neck here, other than to say it raises questions. How deeply involved was Barack Obama? How deeply involved was he in talking to the FBI? Who was the conduit? All of those things should be known by the American people, particularly because we have such a chaotic situation now with the FBI tainted in both investigations. Hillary Clinton's e-mails and Russian collusion. 

Now the four people who I said may have criminal liabilities and it could be more than this are James Comey, Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok. If information gathered by them or held by them was given to a judge, in order to get a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign or somebody close to it; Carter Page and Comey and McCabe and Strzok and Page knew the information was bogus, the Russian dossier. It's a crime, fraud on the court. Now that's all speculation, not been proven but we're building a staircase on facts.

Let's bring in Brett Tolman and we're very pleased to have Counselor Tolman. He's a former U.S. Attorney for the District of Utah and he knows what he's doing. Alright, he's dealt with this kind of stuff before, and you don't have any ideological bent here. Right? I mean you're just a crime fighter or you were. Now you're a private attorney. But you don't, you're not involved with any Republican or Democratic Party stuff, are you? 

"No, none and in fact this is now beyond politics." 

AH! Thank you! Thank you! I've been banging this drum for a week, that it is not a political story anymore. 

"It's not a political story." 

So how difficult is it to bring criminal charges against federal investigative officials if indeed it pans out, they knew the information they took to the FISA judge was bogus? 

"Well, well let's look at this because you're absolutely right. There may be criminal issues here in this case. The FISA court itself has a rule that you have to make the judge aware of information that may invalidate the basis for a search warrant. That's articulated in the court and it's very different than your Federal courts that you're getting a search warrant on a drug case. In addition to that you have perjury issues, if you're put under oath when you swear to or attest to the information you're giving to the judge, you may have perjury issues. You also may have what's referred to as, a thousand and one prosecution potential and that is are you knowingly giving false information to a federal official. And if you are there's a specific statute that governs that. And then on top of that, Bill, if it is knowingly and you stated it correctly, we want to know what they knew and when did they know it. If it's knowingly you cannot argue that obstruction of justice prosecution should apply in some instances and not also argue then that it wouldn't apply here. And that may be the more difficult hurdle for those that would be accused of knowingly giving the false information to find a judge." 

Now the FISA court was set up solely to protect the United States from terror activity. It's a totally different thing than you mentioned the drug court or anything like that. James Comey, did two things that startled me. First thing he did was he came out and said that the dossier the FBI used at least partially to convince a judge to write the warrant against Carter Page, Comey admitted that it was unsubstantiated, he publicly admitted that, yet he put his name on paperwork that was submitted to the judge to get the wire, basically partially based on this dossier. The second thing that stunned me was after the memo from the Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee came out Comey tweeted, "is that it?". I thought that was pretty arrogant of him to do. I mean, you know, maybe you should be a little bit more concerned here former Director Comey. What were your take on it? 

"You know the FBI has had a long history of prosecuting corruption and now the allegations are turned and it's facing them and the question becomes did the steele dossier constitute the most important part of what was presented to this judge, this FISA judge. Apparently, it is the first thing that is presented to the FISA judge. And having worked in the United States Senate I had top secret clearance, I worked on some of the rule making for the FISA court and the process is supposed to be like this: several days before they're going to approach the judge. They're going to give them a packet of all the wiretaps they want and in that packet is supposed to be the critical information. It can't be anonymous sources and it's supposed to be vetted information. That judge then takes that packet and reviews it days in advance. And that's very different than a federal court when it you know last minute talks to an agent and is talking to them to get a drug search warrant. This is several days in which that FISA court judge, can sit and review and outline the types of questions that need to be asked of these agents. Now, I've been asked before is it possible that the Director doesn't know what's being presented to the FISA court judge. I will tell you why that's so hard to believe. The rule making behind the FISA court expressly indicated that the Director and the Deputy Director are the only authorities that can govern the FISA Court authority that they seek to obtain. Now it can be delegated but it's very limited on that on that. So it's very hard to believe that it doesn't go all the way to the top." 

That's why I say that when Andrew McCabe the Deputy Director of the FBI says to the Senate Intel Committee, we would never have gotten this wire on Carter Page had we not used the dossier and then Comey his boss says we know the dossier is unverified. I put those two statements together and I go there's got to be a crime here. Maybe it's something, that maybe they were just the gang that couldn't shoot straight but it's hard to believe a guy like Comey and McCabe these guys, would be that stupid. 

"It is incredibly damaging to acknowledge that they would not have gotten the Steele dossier or gotten the warrant without the Steele dossier, that if that is accurate, that is one of the most damaging facts in this scenario and it doesn't matter if you're Democrat or the Republican."

That's what Republicans on that committee say and they put it in a memo. 

"That's correct. And the fact that they could not have acquired this search warrant without the Steele dossier and then what did they know and when did they know it? And if they knew that wasn't accurate or that it was paid for, they had an obligation to bring that to the FISA court judge. And I would also say the judge had an obligation to ask questions and find out who is this Steele and why is it that this dossier is in front of me." 

Right, and the FBI has admitted as far as I know, OK. That they didn't tell the judge that the Steele dossier was paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the DNC, they never mentioned it. I mean it gets deeper and deeper and deeper into criminal territory. 

"When the FBI seeks a search warrant for for a drug search warrant bias doesn't really matter, whether we agree with that or not. A Federal Judge can receive biased information, the agent can be biased, it's supposed to look just at the four corners of the information for the search warrant. The FISA court is different. It's national security and it's wiretapping and it's done without necessarily any probable cause that a crime has been committed but that you are concerned about National Security." 

That's right. 

"It's a higher standard." 

Last question for you, who's going to investigate the FBI? There isn't an agency in the country, a federal agency in the country with the resources to do a criminal investigation on the FBI itself, is there? Who's going to do that? 

"You asked the key question people say why are we, why are we going after the FBI and why is this such a, there's so many good agents. The problem here is there's nothing higher. There's no other resource. This is the, supposed to be the pinnacle of our investigative powers as a country. So without a Special Prosecutor, with a team of individuals willing to go in and I do not buy for a second that the OIG is capable of uncovering this type of corruption, they're are good, you know Inspector Generals are good, they're diligent. I don't think they have the absolute ability to uncover what might have gone on here." 

So you think a special counsel, which I have called for, is necessary to look at Comey, McCabe and the rest of the FBI people. The problem is, it's got to be appointed, the special counsel, by the Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, who has recused himself in the Russian part of all of this. So then it gets to be messy there and Sessions has been like very, very quiet. He has not been aggressive here at all. Right. But he would be the guy that would have to do it. 

"It would have to come through for the IG, I mean think about the other option. Congress? Is Congress going to be able to do this? They can't organize themselves to do it. So then we are left with that." 

So then the President orders Sessions to do that. 

"Well, the recusal issue is a concern. The Department of Justice should take a quick look at the Deputy Attorney General and the Attorney General, recusing there are principal Deputy Attorney Generals that can fill this role who can step in to do it." 

Rosenstein, he may be implicated in this. It's a long shot but he was with Comey and all these guys. 

"Right. 

That's right, that's right. But who, can Trump pick up the phone and say to Sessions look you two got to get out of their Sessions and Rosenstein and you got to get a third guy in there to to give this Special Counsel, some support so that we can get to the bottom of it. Would a president, should a president do that? 

"The President can have his counsel reach out, reach out to the Department of Justice and say we want a non-recused. You know, all appearances above board. Third in charge to step in and make a determination on a Special Counsel. This cannot be investigated by any other entity or a group of entities." 

And Sessions doesn't have to take that, he doesn't have to do it but he could get fired if he didn't do it. And so, the mess continues.

You know I got to tell you Counsel, that was the best interview that I have seen on this subject. I'm not saying about, bragging about me. But you put forth to my viewers tonight, the best and most honest and clearest scenario of what we have in front of us as a nation. So I hope you'll come back and I hope you'll be our go to guy as the story gets bigger and bigger because it will. And we really, really, really appreciate that. 

"Thank you, Bill. Good to be with you. 

Alright, Mr. Tolman, thank you. And I'm not saying that with any hyperbole at all but in that interview and it's just for you Premium Members now and I'm going to break it out on Friday so everybody can hear it. Now you have it, alright. That's a former U.S. Attorney, knows what he's talking about, that you have to have a criminal investigation of Comey, McCabe, of Strzok and of Page and maybe others guy named or involved in this, who have left the FBI. 

This is so serious, I can't even tell you. I mean I'm not trying to hype it but when I watch the nightly news they don't have a clue. The three news organizations at the networks, do not understand the story nor do they care about it. Then you get into cable and it's all politics. Alright. Yeah, we like Trump, we hate Trump all based around that. But I'm looking at this and I'm not a lawyer but this guy Tolman and I never met him before. I've never spoken to him before. First time, I spoke to him was about two minutes before we went to air tonight. My staff got him, alright. I said, I don't want anybody tainted. That's why I asked him up top if he had any affiliations with any party. I said I want a real smart guy who's been in the trenches, who worked for the federal government who knows the ins and outs, to tell me what the hell is going on. Because I'm an American citizen, I want to know not just as a journalist so anyway we're very pleased that we could bring you that. And now you know the difference between what you're getting on television and in the newspapers and in newspapers, they don't want any part of the story. 

OK. Gallup survey fascinating, for a year, last year from January 20th to December 30th 2017. Gallup Agency talked to 180,000 Americans, 180,000 big sample, at least 493 adults in every state and they asked them very simple question: how do you describe yourself politically? 35 percent of Americans identify themselves as conservative. 26 percent as liberal and 35 percent as moderate. 

Now that's, I have a problem with the word moderate, OK because it should have been Independent. If it's a political question Conservative Liberal or Independent, moderate could be anything you could be a moderate liberal, you could be a moderate conservative. I'm an Independent. Alright, who leans toward traditional solutions to problems and believes the country was founded on Judeo Christian principles, and that is a strengthener. That's me, alright so I'm not a Conservative, I'm not a Liberal. I'm an Independent with a very traditional bent. Now, if I had to answer the survey I would have to say I'm a moderate but I'm not, I'm not moderate. You know I get furious about stuff. So that was a problem there. 

Margin of error in this poll, 1 percent. So you can take this poll to the bank. 35 percent of American adults Conservative, 26 percent Liberal, 35 moderate which means Independent. Now the state's; 39 percent of the states, I'm sorry, 39 states out of the 50. Alright, are conservatives. That, this poll, I think goes off the rails there. Alright. It doesn't look, that doesn't look accurate to me.

OK, finally and then we'll get to the mail. There's a school in Florida. Florida Gulf Coast University, commuter school. Alright. Not prestigious. They have a professor at the school. Alright, who wants to be famous, his name is Dr. Ted Thornhill. He's an assistant professor of sociology. Whenever you hear sociology you've got to be worried. He's teaching a course called, "White Racism". Now just imagine if any college professor taught a course called Black racism or Hispanic racism or Irish racism or anything other than White, right off the campus, fired, out of there, gone, see you later. In an Op-Ed, Dr. Thornhill makes the unbelievable statement, that there's no such thing as black racism. Whereupon Louis Farrakhan said what?! OK. No such thing. Now I was going to read you the quote but I'm not going to bother because it's insane. It's crazy.

But my point is that the president of Gulf Coast University, got to know that, if he's got an IQ over 100 and he's got a guy who wants to be famous, he wants to be on cable TV. That's why he's doing it, saying there's no such thing as black racism. Of course, there is. In every ethnic group there are racist and a racist is someone who looks at life through the prism of race and says my race or one particular race is good and others are bad. That's racism OK, period. Very simple. So do I care about Florida Gulf Coast University? No. Do I care about Dr. Thornhill? No. Alright. But this is going on at the highest level, Harvard, Princeton, Cornell and then all the way down, this kind of insanity imposed on the students of America. I would say is an 80 percent of the colleges operating today. That's dangerous. OK. 

The mail, Andrew. Jacksonville, Florida. 

"Hey Bill, I'd like to think you educated your former Harvard classmate Mary Anne Marsh on the memo situation. Seems to be a perception on the part of Democrats and the mainstream media that the FISA warrant memo is not credible simply because it was released by Republican Congressman. 

It's more than that Andrew. There is no desire, zero desire on the part of Democrats. And most of the national media, to know anything about corruption in the FBI alright, if it were corruption directed at Hillary Clinton or another Democrat, then they care. But if it's something that's directed at Trump, zero interest. 

John Glenview. Illinois. 

"Bill, when Is President Trump going to realize that Attorney General Sessions is a nothing burger, please fine me." 

You're fine. John, I want you to give 10 bucks to your local church or to the American Red Cross or something like that. Nothing burger. Look I have problems with Attorney General Sessions. I do, I do. 

Wally Shockie. Scottsdale, Arizona. 

"O'Reilly, thank you for making the news less clangorous.

Clangorous, word of the day! I got another one too. What clangorous means, is loud, jarring. 

"My question is about John McCain. I know you say it's personal with President Trump but it's hard to believe McCain doesn't put his country first.

But he does put his country first, because he believes, John McCain believes that President Trump is a danger to America. That what he believes. 

Charlotte Herkins. Greensboro, North Carolina. 

"Love the podcast and all books. Wish I had the opportunity to be a student in one of your classes back in the good old days, Bill. I heard John McCain played a role in getting the phony dossier to the FBI. Please comment."

Charlotte, I cannot comment on unsubstantiated rumors. I don't believe that rumor to be true. But even if I did, I wouldn't comment on it because that's a rumor, nothing to back that up. 

Ed Amato. East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania.

"Bill, you said the FBI and DOJ have reviewed the IG's report, the Inspector General's report that's going to come out." 

Michael Horowitz, that's going to come out in March. 

"If that's true don't you expect leaks available to CNN MSNBC and The New York Times. 

Number one, this I believe this Attorney General, this Inspector General's report is going to be damning to the FBI. And to the Hillary Clinton investigation. It's going to say that investigation was not conducted properly. That's what I think is going to happen. So who's going to leak that to these organizations that like Hillary Clinton. Number two, it has been reviewed, but I think at the highest levels that the FBI and the DOJ maybe just a few people so leaks get tougher, the higher you go. 

Robert Nelson. Climate Falls, Oregon. 

"Don't you think President Trump wonders what his administration would have been like had he appointed Rudy Giuliani, Attorney General." 

Yes, I do. I don't know how introspective Donald Trump is but I would certainly feel more comfortable if Rudy Giuliani were the Attorney General and I bet most of you would too. 

Alexander Demos. Glen Ellyn, Illinois. 

"Sir I am very proud to be a Premium Member. I grew to depend on the No Spin News every evening put the day's events into an appropriate perspective. It's great to have you back on our TV. 

I'm glad you're getting it. You know you can get it through all kinds of things, Amazon Fire and all of that stuff. Get me on the big screen. 

"I recently completed my public service as village president in my community. 

Good for you Alexander. 

"It was a true nonpartisan experience where we openly debated issues but when we left we remained friends and neighbors.

You know that's why I believe in America. It's the local people who are going to have to save us, the local folks. Alright. 

Marie. Miami Florida. 

"Bill, thank you for your fair analysis of Electiongate. I agree with you. I can't even watch cable news anymore. I try but they're insulting me every day. I appreciate being a Premium Member more and more, I've gotten a few of my friends to sign up." 

That is the key. Marie. We gotta spread the word here. Alright. So we have hundreds of thousands of people aware of us. We should have millions. OK. So it's a growth process. We need millions. We can get them. I mean, I just said the interview today, that's just gold. Alright, if you're interested in your country and you're interested in the truth, the interview we had today.

So look we have a deal where you can get three. You buy three BillOReilly.com Premium Memberships. You get your Premium Membership extended a year free and four books, four free books. That's a great way to spread the word here. I know it costs a little money but if you look at it when you do the math on your calculator how much the books cost and your free membership. It's pretty much free. Alright. And if you buy a trial, three-month gift certificate, a trial OK give it to somebody. You get your membership extended by three months. So we have a whole bunch of those kinds of deals. And if you buy Killing England, which is still selling thousands and thousands of copies every week after five months. Alright, it's great if you buy that on BillOReilly.com, what do you get? You buy any killing book, you get a three-month trial gift certificate. You get all kinds of good stuff. 

Word of the Day: Calumny. The Pope used that word recently. He's involved in this South American controversy down there, and he said there was calumny involved. No calumny. Hope you enjoyed it tonight. Thanks for being Premium Members. Talk to you again tomorrow.