Deflections and "her emails!" (07-24-2025--Hour3)

What's going on. Thank you so much for listening to this podcast. It is heard live every day from noon to three on WBT Radio in Charlotte. And if you want exclusive content like invitations to events, the weekly live stream, my daily show prep with all the links, become a patron, go to dpeteclendershow dot com. Make sure you hit the subscribe button. Get every episode for free right to your smartphone or tablet. And again, thank you so much for your support. Last hour, I gave you the latest updates in the Epstein saga. And as I mentioned at the beginning of the hour, like this is an important story, recognize why it's important. I gave you the various angles as to why it's important. Just because the left is using it to beat up Trump and to try to divide the right, the MAGA supporters and the BASS doesn't mean it's not important, okay. And I gave you the reasons why you got the DOJ. They're going to talk to Galline Maxwell and all of that, and it's so interesting to me. I'm not gonna because I went over all of that in the last hour. I'm only resetting the table here. As we say in the Biz I'm resetting the table basically for the podcast listeners because they get the podcast in three different episodes every day for each hour. So if you're listening to this, you may not have listened to our number two. So if you haven't listened to our number two, like you got to get reset. So we talked about the Epstein stuff in the last hour. Not going to go back over it, but there's something interesting about that story and any coverage that you do on that or don't do on that. And on the other side, the stuff that I did three hours on yesterday on the Intelligence Community Assessment, and I watch the text line, I watch my email inbox, and I see the exact same things being said by the different politically aligned people depending on the issue. On Epstein. I get, this is all a distraction. Why are you covering this? You shouldn't cover it. And then I also get you're not covering this enough. Why aren't you talking about it? Who's silencing you? Even though I've done multiple topics or multiple episodes on this very topic over the last two weeks. Same thing on the Intelligence Community Assessment and the bombshell that went off Friday through yesterday about the origins of the Russia hoax right coming from the president, and the corruption of the intelligence assessment. Why are you talking about this? This is old news, This doesn't matter. This is all a deflection from Epstein. It's just it's just interesting. Again, I can walk and chew gum at the same time. Seriously, I've done it. I have actually done it, just to prove to myself that I could do it. Because so this way I would not make any false representations that I am able to do this thing. Beware of people that present false choices to you that you can't cover this story, because that's a deflection, that's a distraction when you should be talking about this thing that I care about. So why do I say that? Well, I have an email that came in from Mark, subject line marinating Pete. Why marinate on this like a Rachel mad Cow. I'm assuming that's a reference to Rachel Maddow on MSNBC. I haven't seen a program of hers in probably a decade. I think, does she work like one day a week? Still? Is that still the thing? I don't even know. Why marinate on this? I'm sorry, Do you not want the information? So I present the information? This is stuff moving in the news, and the reason why I do it is so you are armed with that information so you are not blindsided. But if you don't know what your opponents are talking about, and you don't know the data points, you're going to look foolish when you get into an argument with somebody in front of others. That's how I approach these debates. I don't go into arguments or debates with people attempting to convince them that they are wrong. Usually, if I'm in an argument or a debate with somebody, there are other people around. There's an audience. Whether it's over the dinner table or it's on the radio, there's an audience. All I'm trying to do is to present a better case for the audien to convince them, Because in a one on one debate with somebody and you're arguing, you know, different points, you're not going to get them to be like, oh, you know what, I never thought about that. I completely changed my mind. Now you've changed my mind. Pede, You're awesome. I was wrong. That never happens, right. People get dug in that they don't move. So I'm trying to present an argument that persuades the people who are listening who haven't staked out a public position on something. They're just there to hear how this argument goes. And so in that kind of a context, knowing your opponent's arguments and knowing the issue is paramount. You got to know the details. And so when I go over the details, then I get this kind of response, which is shut up. That's essentially what this is. And I know Mark, he's well intentioned. I'm not trying. I'm not picking on Mark as an emailer here a listener. I'm just saying, like, this is sort of the this is the people refer to these as the program director emails where people are like, I don't like you talking about this, so talk about this other thing. Rush used to talk about this. He called them the stick to the issues crowd. Remember where whenever Rush would talk about football or his Apple iPhones, like whenever he would talk about anything that wasn't politics, he would get people that were mad at him. You need to stick to the issues. So anyway, he says, why mariting on this cover it? Sure, but it's a smaller version of Russia. Russia Russia as Trump alluded to, which I think I actually said in the last hour. Here you go. It's all deflection obviously, as where was any democrat or media I repeat myself interest in the past four years. Mark, that's a point that I have made. I think I actually made that also in the last hour, and I made it last week when I gave the update on what was happening with the Epstein files. Then the wins and next big steps are what's important, by the way, any criticism on Trump big things. What's up with TikTok again, supposed to hear a deal two weeks about four weeks ago. Yeah, I don't know what the deal is with TikTok And yeah, I don't know what's going on with that either. I saw some headlines on it the other day, like, to me, this is it's an this is an egregious violation of law in my view by the Trump administration. The law was passed, it was signed into law. It was bipartisan telling TikTok it's got to divest and that's it. And now he's delaying the implementation of a law and you don't have the authority to do that. Yet nobody is suing over it. And I think I saw something where they were talking about like Oh well, we'll just you know, have the government take it over. Like what, No, what are you talking about. That wasn't part of the law. You got to divest this thing to some other, some other private ownership that's not controlled by the chi cooms, right, see that I can. I'm talking about other issues. So here's one too. The other day when I was talking about the ICA, I think it was the ICA and and I was accused of, you know, trying to distract away from the Epstein files, and the person on the text line I think they said something to the effect of, oh, what's next Hillary Clinton's emails? And I said at the time, as a matter of fact, I do have an update on the email story. I didn't get to it that day, but I'm going to get to it up next. You know, stories are powerful. They help us make sense of things, to understand experiences. Stories connect us to the people of our past while transcending generations. They help us process the meaning of life, and our stories are told through images and videos. Preserve your stories with Creative Video started in nineteen ninety seven and Minhill, North Carolina. It was the first company to provide this valuable service, converting images, photos and videos into high quality produced slide shows, videos and albums. The trusted, talented and dedicated team at Creative Video will go over all of the details with you to create a perfect produce. Satisfaction guaranteed. Drop them off in person or mail them. They'll be ready in a week or two. Memorial videos for your loved ones, videos for rehearsal, dinners, weddings, graduations, Christmas, family vacations, birthdays, or just your family stories, all told through images. That's what your photos and videos are. They are your life told through the eyes of everyone around you and all who came before you, and they will tell others to come who you are. Visit creative video dot com. Okay, so this from Legal insurrection dot com, a piece by Elizabeth Stouffer. No relation to the stuffing as I understand it, the frozen foods either. For years, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin have been seeking the release of a thing called the Clinton Annex. It's not a building, okay, it's a report. It's I don't know why they just call it. Don't call it an appendix or something that's not the body part. But like the in a report, the stuff at the end, you have this appendix. They call it an annex. It's just something you tack on to the end of a report. And much like the Steele dossier was added as an anex to the Intelligence Community assessment. Right, so the Clinton annex was an appendix to a Department of Justice Inspector General report from back in June of twenty eighteen. Right, so, two years after Trump beat Clinton, DOJ and the put their Inspector General, Michael Horowitz, put out this report about the DOJ and FBI's handling of what they called Midyear Exam. That was the name of the investigation Midyear Exam, which was the investigation into Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server during her tenure as Secretary of State. Okay, once again, I'm going to point this out because so many people are misled or ignorant of the fact that this scandal, the smoking gun in the scandal, let me say, was the existence of the server in the first place. That's the scandal. That or that's the smoking gun of the scandal. The existence of the quote homebrew server. She literally had somebody come in and set up a server, not an email account. This isn't like you know, Hillary at Gmail, at Yahoo whatever. This is a server. So she could have I forigured what the extension was. It was like Clinton mail or yeah, something like that dot com. And the reason why you would set up your own server versus just having an email account is so you can control all of the emails and the data that is in the emails. Because if I use my you know, Yahoo account or my AOL, I'm just getting nobody uses that. Actually some people still do use it. But if I use those email servers, Gmail, Yahoo, whatever, and I delete all of my emails and then I had, you know, stuff in there that the Department of Justice wants to see, they can go to Google or Yahoo and they can say, hey, give us all of the server info on all of Pete's emails, and if they have a subpoena, they can go and get them. So the reason you would have the server is so you can delete all of that and then there's no way to retrieve it. Right, That's the point. There's no other reason why you would go through the hassle and the expense of building and maintaining and using a private server, except to control the data, so you can then delete it all and avoid Freedom of Information Act requests, right, avoid subpoenas, avoid incriminating information or data, stuff that you're not supposed to be sending yourself or passing along to other people, or talking with people about certain things like. All of that stuff then gets deleted and nobody can go back and get it if they have a subpoena. That's the problem with having your own server. That's why that's the smoking gun, and it always was. It's not about put her emails. It's not her emails. I mean, yes, it's about the content in the emails, but that's not the smoking gun. The smoking gun was all the stuff that she deleted, the thirty three thousand emails. The reason she was able to do that was because she owned the server and wiped it like with a cloth, ha ha ha, as she said, with a cloth, and then of course went and bashed the phones with hammers to destroy any ability to retrieve information off of the phones as well. These are not the behaviors of somebody who is not trying to hide something. Okay, So Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson have been trying to get this thing called the Clinton annex this appendix that was part of the DOJ Inspector General report, and Grassley announced finally that Attorney General Pambondi and FBI Director Cash Pttel have finally released it. They released the thirty one page document to the public this week. They did this on Monday. The FBI. Here's the Washington Examiner piece by Kaylin Deese. The FBI, under former President Barack Obama failed to examine fully several thumb drives containing hacked State Department data, including messages link to Obama, during the twenty sixteen investigation of Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server. So not only did she have the server that was then you know, bleach bit cleansed, wiped with a cloth, not only was the server uh compromised and you know, cleaned up, but apparently there were thumb drives and I guess they didn't get to those, but the FBI got them. The thumb drives were actually supplied by a confidential source, but they were deemed too sensitive to be reviewed fully at the time due to concerns about the privileged victim data they could contain. Victim data m A draft memo within the FBI recommended analyzing the material to quote, assess the national security risks tied to Clinton's server, a stick that the bureau ultimately declined to take. So you have these thumb drives, they've got information on it. Somebody, some confidential source, gave these thumb drives to the authorities, to the DJ and the FBI said, hey, we should like look at the analysts. We're like, hey, we should analyze this stuff, see if there's any national security threats. And the FBI said, leadership said no, we're not going to look at this stuff. The revelations have renewed scrutiny of former FBI Director James Comey, whose team limited the scope of the Clinton investigation while aggressively pursuing allegations of collusion by then candidate Donald Trump and Russia. I am completely shocked at this development. This is why no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges. Member call me said that, well, yeah, if you withhold like incriminating evidence, yes, I guess no reasonable prosecutor would do that if they didn't have all your evidence. Here's a great idea. How about making an escape to a really special and secluded getaway in western North Carolina. Just a quick drive up the Mountain and Cabins of Asheville is your connection. Whether you're celebrating an anniversary, a honeymoon, maybe you want to plan a memorable proposal, or get family and friends together for a big old reunion. Cabins of Asheville has the ideal spot for you where you can reconnect with your loved ones and the things that truly matter. Nestled within the breath taking fourteen thousand acres of the Pisga National Forest, their cabins offer a serene escape in the heart of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Centrally located between Asheville and the entrance of the Great Smoky Mountain National Park. It's the perfect balance of seclusion and proximity to all the local attractions with hot tubs, fireplaces, air conditioning, smart TVs, Wi Fi, grills, outdoor tables and your own private covered porch. Choose from thirteen cabins, six cottages, two villas, and a great lodge with eleven king sized bedrooms. Cabins of Ashville has the ideal spot for you for any occasion, and they have pet friendly accommodations. Call or text eight two eight, three, six, seven seventy sixty eight or check out all there is to offer at cabins of Aashville dot com and make memories that'll last a lifetime. Going over this latest update in the Hillary Clinton server scandal from Yes what at twenty sixteen, nine years ago, eight years ago, we just finally got the Clinton annex published thirty one page document where it describes the existence of thumb drives, and the FBI did not use the thumb drives, did not review the thumb drives as part of its investigation into whether or not Hillary Clinton was using this server to transmit top secret sensitive information all around, which, by the way, she was. And remember the assessment came out afterwards by the Inspector General that near one hundred percent certainty that foreign entities adversaries hacked into this and were able to get all of this because she did not encrypt the server, she did not take safeguards to keep this stuff from being pilford. So this report shows that the FBI Cyber Division had tried to obtain access to these thumb drives in twenty sixteen, but there were internal objections inside the FBI about privilege. I'm not sure if we can look at that. There may be attorney client privilege or something in there, or there could be privileged I guess from the President to the Secretary of State, and so they blocked the effort. The deputy director of the FBI at the time was a guide. You probably have never heard this guy's name, but it was Andrew McCabe. He sought to use the drives in No, No, no, not the not Hillary's server investigation. No. McCabe sought to use the thumb drives in the Russia investigation, but he was also denied. Although the drives were queried, so searches were conducted, like, hey, you know what's in the thumb drives? Where are these thumb drives? What's the information in there? Because the FBI has its own internal like file management system. The drives were queried at least three different times, including once by the Special Council Robert Mueller's office, so they knew they existed, apparently looked, they searched for them, but there was no comprehensive review of their contents. The appendix also highlighted foreign intelligence that the FBI encountered during the investigation, including Russian language documents that alleged political interference by Komy and then Attorney General Loretta Lynch Oh, Well, I think I know why they didn't want the thumb drives to be queried or to be investigated and reviewed. Right, If Komi's name is in there, think about the timing on this, by the way the Clinton campaign had built or paid for the Steele dossier, and if they were trying to inject this into the intelligence community bloodstream in order to secure her victory. If there was proof in these thumb drives or on the server, I don't think think the people that were helping her inject it into the bloodstream would want that to be divulged. Right. The documents also included claims about Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who was the chairwoman of the DNC at the time, right claims about Wi Wasserman Schultz and George Soros linked operatives. They were reviewed and dismissed, though as unreliable according to FBI agents that were cited in the Inspector General report at the time. Komi defended his July fifth, twenty sixteen decision to exonerate Clinton publicly before interviewing several key witnesses. He cited concerns about internal leaks. We can't possibly bring her in because people will talk. He had no problem about all the leaks that he was doing against Trump. Obviously, his decision made. His decision was made without even notifying Loretta Lynch, who was the attorney general. That has remained a point of controversy, particularly because the FBI soon launched its Crossfire Hurricane investigation, which targeted Trump's twenty sixteen campaign. The revelation also comes as the FBI under the Trump administration is now actively investigating Komy and XCIA director John Brennan over their roles in the origins of the Trump Russia investigation and possible misconduct tied to intelligence handling. That's all from the Washington Examiner. Back to Legal Insurrection, They've got a quote here from Chuck Grassley's memo. He said, under Komey's leadership, the FBI failed to perform fundamental investigative work and left key pieces of evidence on the cutting room floor. The Komy FBI's negligent approach and perhaps intentional lack of effort in the Clinton investigation is a stark contrast to its full throated investigation of the true from Russia collusion hoax, which was based on the uncorroborated, discredited Steele dossier. Komi's decision making process smacks of political infection. Okay, hang on, there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for why it would seem that his decision making process smacks of political infection. It's because it's politically infected. Okay, Like that's the reason why it seems like that is because it obviously was the FBI's failure to examine eight thumb drives that were obtained from a confidential source that contained a large volume of emails obtained through redacted cyber intrusions into the Department of State. So that's where the info came from. Cyber intrusions by somebody, some entity something into the Department of State. That's how they got the emails. So they didn't get it from her server. The report states that, but at the vast majority. So that tells me that maybe we hacked somebody who had hacked her. Right if the Russians, let's say, hacked into her emails through her server and got this stuff, and then then we hacked into Russia and we got them back. Basically, we saw what they saw and put them all on thumb drives and then the FBI has got it, and they're like, yeah, we can't use this. Oh my gosh, the boss's name is in here. Let's not look at that. Let's not look at that. All right. If you're listening to this show, you know I try to keep up with all sorts of current events, and I know you do too. And you've probably heard me say get your news from multiple sources. Why well, because it's how you detect media bias, which is why I've been so impressed with ground News. It's an app and it's a website and it combines news from around the world in one place so you can compare coverage and verify information. You could check it out at check dot ground, dot news slash pete. I put the link in the podcast description too. I started using ground News a few months ago and more recently chose to work with them as an affiliate because it lets me see clearly how stories get covered and by whom. The blind spot feature shows you which stories get ignored by the left and the right. See for yourself check dot ground, dot news slash pete. Subscribe through that link and you'll get fifteen percent off any subscription. I use the Vantage plan to get unlimited access to every feature your subscription then not only helps my podcast, but it also supports ground news as they make the media landscape more transparent. Stan texts When Jim Comey said no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges in this case regarding the Hillary investigation, was he aware of the thumb drives and the information they contained? So I got it, So I would say like ninety nine percent with certainty. Yes, he was aware that the thumb drives existed. Was he aware of everything on there? Probably not? Maybe so because they shut down. I guess they started looking at some of it and then they were like, no, we're not going to look at any of this, and then they just buried this stuff. And Grassley has been trying to get this released for eight years, and now now he got the annex that talks about the thumb drives because he was obviously tipped off from a whistleblower that these thumb drives existed. They had eight of them. The report stated that the vast majority of the data was never reviewed by the FBI, including the for counter intelligence purposes, so it may not so Comy may not have even known about some of the stuff that was in there. But somebody obviously saw enough where they were like, stop looking. The FBI stated reason for not pursuing it was their concern that information from certain US victims may be privileged. The OIG Office of Inspector General noted that they had obtained a copy of a draft of an FBI memo from late May twenty sixteen, which said that an examination of the thumb drives was essential in conducting a thorough and complete investigation and to assess the national security risks associated with Clinton's use of a private email server. But quote, the FBI never finalized the memo or submitted a request to the State Department. Although the source, date and nature of one of the documents cited in the report are redacted, it states, quote Obama is not in the mood to mar the very final segment of his presidency, his legacy with a scandal around a leading nominee for the Democratic Party. To deal with this, he is using Attorney General Loretto Lynch to mount pressure on FBI Director James comy alas so far with no concrete results. End quote. What does that mean? Obama was mad at the server scandal, he was mad at Hillary. He did not want this to mar his very final segment of his presidency, his legacy with this scandal, and so he is using his ag Loretta Lynch to pressure the FBI director. Do you remember. I'm old enough to remember this. Maybe you're not, but do you remember there were all these concerns about Donald Trump politicizing the Department of Justice. Do you remember that? I mean it was a while ago. Oh, that's right, it was after this. This is like the iron law of woke projection, right, like they are guilty of that which they accuse you. They were pressuring the FBI director on this to make this go away, and lo and behold, it did Loretta Lynch she had no idea. Oh my gosh, she wasn't even told about this. That was the line. I just read that line in another story that Loretta Lynch was blindsided by Comey's announcement. She had no idea. That's horse hockey. Obviously, she was pressuring him to make this thing go away. That's according to whatever this email was that was picked up off of the thumb drive, which is completely relevant to this investigation that the FBI was supposed to be conducting. The same document references media reports suggesting possible corruption within the Clinton State Department, including claims that the Secretary of State gave preferential treatment to Clinton Foundation donors. I am shocked, shocked that there is gambling occurring here. You're winning, sir, thank you. Oh yeah, this is exactly what we all suspected was the case, it states. Quote according to Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, so far, the FBI does not have any hard evidence against Hillary Clinton because data was removed from the mail servers just in time. End quote. Well, which mail servers would that be the ones Hillary controlled? See? Because you can't delete them from the servers if it's on the State Department servers, because those don't get deleted, those get saved. Those get saved because you might need them for Freedom of Information Act requests. But when you control the server, you get to wipe them, which is what Hillary did, and Wasserman Schultz was aware of why she wiped him. So far, the FBI doesn't have any hard evidence because Hillary Clinton against Hillary Clinton because data was removed from the mail servers just in time. Again. She was the Democrat National Committee Chair from twenty eleven through July of twenty sixteen. In the end, the OIG report largely confirmed what many had previously suspected, that the government was merely going through the motions when it came to investigating Hillary Clinton. From the text line, Joey says, of course, Comy knew what was in there. Yeah, Like, if I had to bet, I would say, yes, he did know what was in there, unless you want plausible deniability, right, which is possible, Like he could say, don't tell me what's in there. So this way, if anybody asks, I can simply say I don't know. I've not seen it. I was unaware of what was in there, Right he could, He would have believability when he denies this stuff. Somebody says on the text line, nothing is ever deleted. Get some brainiac it wizard to have a look under the hood. I believe they did, but it was she used a program called bleach bit, I believe, which would be a fantastic advertisement for bleach bit if they ever wanted to use that. Like we wipe the Secretary of State server, we can do yours too. All right, that'll do it for this episode. Thank you so much for listening. I could not do the show without your support and the support of the businesses that advertise on the podcast, so if you'd like, please support them too and tell them you heard it here. You can also become a patron at my Patreon page or go to thepetecleanershow dot com. Again, thank you so much for listening, and don't break anything while I'm gone.