In this episode: I debunk disaster economics and expose its proponents. This liberal entertainer seals his insane legacy with one tweet. https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2017/08/28/stop-cenk-uygur-seals-nut-case-legacy-with-harvey-hot-take-thats-beyond-awful/amp/ Liberal snowflakes at this university want military veterans banned from the campus. https://pjmedia.com/trending/2017/08/28/newsletter-distributed-college-campus-calls-banning-veterans/ This longtime Trump aide was just punished. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-28/trump-is-said-to-punish-longtime-aide-after-angry-phoenix-speech Is Denmark taking a hard capitalist turn? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-29/denmark-targets-deep-cuts-to-reduce-world-s-biggest-tax-burden Sponsor Links: www.BrickhouseNutrition.com/Dan www.CRTV.com Promo Code "Bongino"
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Aiming to stop free speech so the speaker can no longer speak is exclusively a far-left phenomena.
I'm talking to moderates in the Democratic Party who are actually interested in what's going on, not blind lemmings walking off a cliff into an abyss of stupidity.
Get ready to hear the truth about America.
The rich did it.
Yeah, the rich did it.
They lent money to people who bought homes and the people never paid the money back.
Oh, wow, that sounds like a great business plan.
On a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.
Hi, welcome to The Renegade Republican with Dan Bongino.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
All set, ready to go, Dan.
Yeah man so uh listen yesterday was a big big email traffic day I got a ton of email on yesterday's show and a couple of questions creeped up which I'm going to get to during the show related to current events you know one of them was about well uh I had an argument with my liberal friend who said you see you know giving a charity is just the same as giving a government and wouldn't that help all the people in Houston and You know, do you have a quick rebuttal to that?
And I thought, well, that's pretty simple.
And another thing I wanted to bring up quickly is just the what's going on with the insurance industry right now, because this is such a catastrophic disaster and how this could potentially, you know, lead to some really serious problems of what insurance is.
You know, I brought this up before.
But a lot of really good stuff in the news today, which I'll have in the show notes.
I strongly encourage you to check them out at Bongino.com.
Story about the media collapsing, which I'll get to in a minute.
But first, just to answer those questions.
Number one, folks, insurance, right?
With this, I mean, biblical level flooding in Houston.
I brought this up on the show before.
This is where you get into trouble with the insurance industry because the whole purpose of insurance, right, is that if we all wanted, say there wasn't an insurance industry, Joe, and we all wanted to insure our homes to rebuild in the event of a fire or a flood or a disaster, we would all have to do what?
We would all have to put in the bank or save enough money to rebuild the house entirely.
I mean, what would that cost you?
You know, the average American, $200,000, $300,000, $400,000?
So what we do is we have an insurance industry, and think about that.
If every American had to save $200,000 or $300,000 to ensure they could rebuild their home, all of that money would be sucked out of the economy and stuck in a financial institution and not put to work in the stock market, in businesses, investments, everywhere else.
You get what I'm saying?
I mean, it would be to some respect, but it would be a lot of capital to have to save.
The reason we have an insurance industry is because Americans don't have to do that, okay?
What the insurance industry does is it allows Americans to pool money.
So we're all putting aside, not $200,000, but say $1,000 or $2,000 a year to insure against that disaster based on risk.
You get what I'm saying, Joe?
Yeah.
So instead of everybody in the country having to put aside $200,000 to rebuild their home, and that money coming out of the economy and not being put to a more productive use, now only $2,000 a year on average is coming out.
The problem we're going to have in Texas is this is such a disaster on a mass scale.
And this was, I mean, the water levels are exceeding even, what was it, the 80 year high water mark?
That in an insurance market, even when the risks are spread, They have reinsurance, too.
So let's say, you know, you have 100,000 people who now need their $200,000 home rebuilt.
A lot of insurance companies, if they don't have the right reinsurance, meaning if even the insurance companies aren't insured, because remember, for an insurance company, it has the same problem the homeowner does, Joe.
For the insurance company to adequately be funded, It needs to either have all of that cash on the sideline to rebuild 100,000 homes, or...
It can engage in what's known as reinsurance, where it does the same thing you did.
It says, well, we're not going to put whatever, $10 billion aside.
We're going to put a billion, but we're going to buy reinsurance on our policies so that if God forbid something happened on a mass scale, we can then go get money from other insurance companies and other entities as well to back up that flow of funds.
Does that make sense?
Yeah.
Insuring the insurance company.
Yeah, insurance.
Exactly.
Insuring.
You always have a way of putting this stuff.
Insuring the insurance company.
It's called reinsurance.
The problem is this is such a mass-scale event that superseded every risk model in the past that there's going to be some significant problems with insurance markets.
And you may see what you saw in Florida.
Again, I'm not suggesting this is a good idea, government involvement in this, because it creates a lot of distortions later on and doesn't necessarily help people in the end, in the long run.
But what you may see is a government-backed insurance entity that's going to have to go in there and insure these people in the end.
Again, I'm not telling you it's economically the best idea, I'm just telling you we saw it in Florida here with Citizens, the way it worked is Florida had to backstop a lot of these insurance companies after some of the catastrophic hurricanes because, Joe, it wasn't even possible Financially, to re-insure those areas.
You get it?
Like, even the insurance companies said, forget it, we're not going back in there.
Which is, I'm guessing what's going to happen in a lot of these portions of Houston that were overloaded with water.
But even, you know, insurance companies can't even get re-insurance on that.
So, that's where you see state actors jumping in.
So, a question on that, and I got another question on, you know, why government and private charity is not the same thing.
Folks, this is a simple one to answer.
Folks, government number one, what does the government have?
What's the problem with the government that you don't have with private charities?
Well, the Milton Friedman four ways to spend money, that's it.
You know, you can spend money on yourself, you can spend money on other people, other people can spend money on themselves, and other people can spend money on other people.
Those are the four ways to spend money in descending order of efficiency.
When you spend your own money on yourself, cost and quality matter because it's your money and it's your product.
When you have another entity, other people, spending other people's money on other people, which is the government, right?
When you have the government doing that, there is no cost and quality control because it's not the government's money and it's not their product either.
Now you may say, well doesn't an insurance company do the same thing?
No.
An insurance company does not have to worry, excuse me, the government does not have to worry about shareholder feedback, charity monitors, things like that.
Charities and independent folks have an incentive to maintain quality that the government doesn't.
Folks, that's why almost everything provided to you by the government as a third-party payer has quality problems.
Medical care provided by the government as a third-party payer through Medicaid, where outcomes are terrible.
These charities will go out of business if at some point they don't provide some kind of quality services.
You know, I have a lot of disagreements with some charities out there who I think have taken a left-leaning bend, but I don't think there's any question that in times of crisis, they at a minimum are in there and spending some of their assets on these things.
The government doesn't have a real incentive to maintain high quality in their approach because what happens, Joe, the bureaucrats There's no way they're going to be fired.
You can't get rid of people in the government.
You have no problem getting rid of people at a private charity.
You don't get the job done.
And also you have bureaucracy costs.
It's been estimated that 40 cents of every dollar goes to bureaucracy costs in the U.S.
government.
I would argue it's higher.
If you see that in a private charity where, you know, where 40 and 50 percent of the money is going to the maintenance, a lot of those charities are going to get bad grades.
Nobody grades the government on that.
Only conservatives do.
So I just want to get those two questions out of the way in relation to current events because I thought they were important and I was...
Pleasantly surprised that people who heard yesterday's show were asking those kinds of questions, because it's really a good one.
So insurance versus reinsurance and government versus private charity, why it matters.
All right.
Today's show brought to you by our friends at BrickHouse Nutrition.
You know I'm a big fan of these guys.
Glad to have them around.
One of the best young, hungry nutrition supplement companies on the market today.
I got a really nice email I just forwarded to Myles Mudd.
Matter of fact, before we get on the show, about Dawn to Dusk, which is a really terrific product.
These guys saw a hole in the energy market, Joe.
One of the things they noticed is these products out there, they give you a one hour burst of energy, maybe two hours tops, and then you wind up collapsing the rest of the day in a near catatonic state because you're totally sapped of energy after that.
Well, what's the point of that?
So these guys developed in conjunction with the doc out there, they invented a product
called Dawn to Dusk, which is a time release energy product.
Give you about 10 hours of energy.
It's great for crossfitters, for MMA guys, for working parents out there, people on the
assembly line, CEOs, white collar, blue collar.
If you need to get through the day, you got a lot of stress out there, you need the energy,
you can't afford these two-hour bursts and these 10-hour collapses, give this product
a shot.
It's called Dawn to Dusk.
It's available at BrickHouseNutrition.com/Dan.
I get great reviews for this product.
Email I got today was really fantastic.
So go give it a shot.
BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
Okay.
Stories I saw out there, which are really fascinating.
In regards to yesterday's show too, by the way, I wanted to follow up with this Antifa thing quickly.
And there was an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal today and they had a great line in there and I just wanted to pass it on to you.
You know, if you're an Antifa member and you listen to this show, and I'm sure based on our numbers, we have one or two of them out there, you know, you have to remember, and this was said in the journal today, that groups are not only defined by what they're fighting, or even in Antifa's case, what they think they're fighting.
Groups are defined by what they do.
And I thought to myself, you know, if this is, if that's just a really great line, and they didn't make the connection I'm about to make, but I think it's important we keep in mind that Look at the great state of Texas.
Look at what people are doing right now.
People are out there, they're taking their boats, their private property, and they're out there trying to help other people get out of their flooded homes.
Folks, I think as the waters slowly start to subside and the surge happens in people's homes, I think you're going to find, sadly, more casualties from this event.
But there are people out there helping.
People define what they do.
I bring this up.
People define by what they do because we have such an interesting foil right now.
We have amazing Americans and Texans out there doing the right thing when the right thing matters.
And then we have these Antifa people who think they're fighting fascism.
Well, they're fascists themselves, which is fascinating.
But for a second, take them at their word.
I know that's laughable.
But for a second, take them at the word they're fighting fascism.
You're defined by what you do.
Slugging people with baseball bats or broomsticks or kicking people in the teeth and attacking innocent Americans defines you as a criminal thug.
What you say you're doing it in defense of is nearly irrelevant at this point.
And I think Antifa needs to get that through their skulls, that people in the end are ultimately defined by their actions.
And Joe, how many times on this show, and if some of you have seen my political speeches or followed my runs for office, I have said, gosh, a hundred times, a thousand times in speeches, I don't know, a lot of them are on YouTube, the do matters.
Action matters, folks.
Talk is cheap.
The reason I love doing this show is because a lot of times I'll go out there and I'll suggest action items we can do.
Organize.
Donate to your local club.
Email your politician.
Here's why.
Because of voter scores.
And go vote often, even in local elections, because your voter score goes up.
And politicians will have to contact you.
I always give action items because the do matters.
This podcast is useless if it doesn't inspire you to go out and do something and change the world.
Well, that works in reverse, too.
The do matters.
And what you're doing is attacking people violently, beating people up, causing harm and potentially death.
That's what defines you.
It's not what you say you're doing, it's what you're doing that matters.
And I'm really getting tired of hearing leftists on TV.
I just saw an interview on Fox this morning.
Far-left liberals equivocating when asked to call out Antifa.
Guys, ladies.
Be proud of yourself if you're a conservative, libertarian, or a good republican out there.
Be very proud of yourself.
You know why?
We have no equivocation or problem whatsoever calling out violent people in society.
As I said yesterday, they're not with us.
These neo-nazi, you know, savages and these racists.
They're not with us.
These aren't right-leaning groups.
These are just groups of morons.
We don't equivocate at all when we call these people out.
Ever.
I'm not using any uncertain terms here.
Savages, animals, the worst, not even animals.
Animals don't even do that.
I don't know any racist animals.
You have to be a real moron.
Really, it's like an insult to animals.
I mean, my mother-in-law's dogs are better people than these people.
Listen to how they talk about Jews.
Listen to how they talk about people who are black and Hispanic.
You don't need to get 10 seconds into the conversation before you realize you're talking to a savage.
There's no equivocation on there.
Listen to the left, though.
Talk about Antifa.
There is always a qualifier, Joe.
And then, to their credit, there are a lot of... I'm not talking about all Democrats.
Mainstream Democrats, a lot of them have called this group out.
But they always equivocate.
Because the left, as I said yesterday, I have to repeat yesterday's show, but it's important we bring this up again.
The left is now obsessed with this idea that words are violence.
And the violence Antifa uses is a counter to other violence, which is absurd!
It's not even logical or rational, but it's the way in their heads they justify this.
And it's the reason I cautioned you a long time ago to be very careful about far-left speech codes.
When the speech codes, when the left comes out with a new speech code, and the example I always use with Joe is, remember we've done this a couple times, about a year ago I was on a radio station filling in and I read an article how you're now not supposed to call people homosexual, you're supposed to call them gay, or you're not supposed to call- and honestly, I still can't find the article, so I'm not doing this to be silly.
I'm really not, and I'm not doing it to make a point.
I don't remember what direction it went in.
And I don't remember because I don't, there's no obvious answer for me there.
It was like, no, no, you're not supposed to call them homosexual anymore.
You're supposed to call them gay.
Homosexual is offensive.
And I thought to myself, this is epidemic of the left.
They create the rules, Joe.
You're in the boxing ring and they're the only ones creating the rules.
The rules are okay.
Now we're going to be allowed to put razor blades in the gloves, but they don't tell you the rules until the end.
And the reason they create these speech codes and these new terms is because they, and they, and by the way, they do it knowing someone's going to make an air quotes your mistake and say, uh, so I was talking to this, uh, gay activist.
You can't say that you're supposed to call him homosexual.
You're a homophobe.
And you're like, uh, wait, I am?
What?
By the way, this is why the Democrats keep losing elections because people who are not homophobes or or it's the it's or phobophobes or misogynists or whatever the left wants to call you a racist um people are not and they're tired of it and there's been a rebellion a quiet cultural rebellion going on that's leading to politics downstream as someone sent me about Breitbart and he's right Andrew Breitbart used to say that that's leading downstream there's been a cultural rebellion But folks, this is why they do this.
Because they want to say, like, if you were to say gay instead of homosexual, that's violence.
Those words are violence.
Therefore, it's okay to beat you up.
This is how they justify this.
This is the sickness.
The sickness is spreading.
Now, I got another story about the media.
Before I get to that, I have a...
I mean, a laugh, especially in such a somber topic, but I didn't know how to sum up this next segment, Joe.
I get up really early now to do the show because I used to be able to pop out a show in an hour, easy.
And now we're doing a little bit longer show and we've got a bigger audience and I think it's more, it's important to diversify the topic.
So I got up early to prepare this one.
I couldn't figure out, I'm like, how do I, how do I title this segment?
And I thought, this is it.
The stupid is spreading.
That's the title of this segment.
I have it in all caps.
The stupid is spreading because I didn't know what else to say!
Folks, the virus, the liberal virus is spreading.
So here are two stories that will, um, I would say would blow your mind, but they won't because if you listen to the show regularly, you're probably used to stupid liberal stories.
So there is a group on the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs campus.
It's a group.
It is not the college.
I want to be clear on that because I put this on Facebook and I thought I was crystal clear, but a lady, I guess who goes there was like, the college didn't do this.
It was a, uh, It was a far-left group, and I'm like, okay, I never said that, but so I want to be crystal clear.
This was not the college, nothing official from the college.
Matter of fact, they came out against this, but a group on the campus wants to ban veterans, military veterans, from the college campuses because they say these veterans, they mock safe spaces.
Well, we all mock safe spaces.
Joe and I Hey, over there in the corner is the safe space for ideas.
the campus too because safe spaces are a joke you sissies safe spaces where in the world is a safe
space imagine telling an Iraq or Afghanistan war vet in college who's just come back from the
horrors of combat and telling him hey over there in the corner is the safe space for ideas that's
the safe space where nobody can challenge you the military vet's gonna be like what the f-
Yes Are you serious, dude?
Like, are you crazy?
So they mocked Safe Spaces.
Well, number one, I'm not even sure that's true, but vets, to all our vets out there, if you're mocking Safe Spaces, hey, big round of applause for you guys.
I'm with you on that 100%.
But it goes on.
This group that put this out, and the story's at PJ Media.
Again, I'll put it in the show notes, email it right to you.
If you want to go to Bongino.com, you can check it out there.
Uh, the military is a white supremacist organization, according to the group.
What?
Wow, man, that's insane.
The military, I think of all the, uh, tremendous, uh, leaders we've had who are not in fact white in the military.
I mean, it's just, uh, I mean, Colin Powell, uh, I don't, it's a white supremacist organization that at one point was run by a black man.
That's amazing how that happens.
I mean, gosh.
Yeah.
Oh yeah Colonel West I mean he was a who's a yeah a representative even a local congressman who I just found out is uh is uh is is uh hispanic too Brian Mast I mean he lost both legs I didn't he did I mean but due to an explosion I didn't know it was a white supremacist organization they certainly didn't manage to keep him out of the military uh to lose half his limbs fighting uh for American values I just don't get that but again expecting liberals to be sane and rational is irrational itself.
Because the entire premise of liberalism again is based on critical theory that you should be silenced if you are white and part of the patriarchal power structure because you're taking away things from everyone else which is just absolutely ridiculous.
It's also...
He's populated the military that is, according to this group, by extreme right-wingers who support the NRA.
Oh my gosh, the NRA.
Man, you just bring up the NRA on a college campus and everybody has to flee to safe spaces.
Because again, words are violence, Joe.
And if you bring up the NRA, it might intimidate some people.
So if you support Second Amendment rights and the right to self-protection, you should be silenced and now kicked off campus.
I get it.
You know, I know you'll read the story and you'll be like, well, it's just a fringe group and maybe we shouldn't publicize this stuff.
You know what?
I strongly disagree.
Right.
Because it's not a fringe group.
That's why I titled this segment, The Stupid is Spreading.
Folks, it's everywhere.
If you're a regular listener to this show, we do show, we do stories like this three and four times a week.
It is not limited.
This is spreading.
Here's another one.
This is a doozy, Joe, by the way.
Remember our buddy Kank?
The Kankster?
The Kankscale, yeah.
The Kankster Curve?
Well, Kank is the host of a ridiculous podcast.
How this guy has an audience, I tweeted this out yesterday, the Kank, Kankster from the Young Turks.
I get it, that's not his, I don't really care, so I appreciate everybody sending me emails, I really do, but it's pronounced, I get how, he's Kank on this show.
He's Kank.
If you want to go listen to his show, he's fine, but on this show, it's kank and the kankster curve, right?
He's a liberal far-left.
He's a total dope.
The guy knows nothing.
He is an economic illiterate.
He was the one, if you listened to the show a couple weeks ago, I think it's titled, what, Ben Shapiro Debate?
Listened to this Ben Shapiro Debate or something.
Shapiro debated this guy.
Shapiro's a conservative.
And a guy made a fool of himself discussing these random economic theories he made up on the spot, like the recirculation of money theory, which he seems to have invented and nobody knows but him.
So Kang's just a moron at the Young Turks, and he has the Kangster Curve, which we have on the show, which is a measure of liberal dopiness every day.
And we use it because Kangster's at maximum dopey all the time.
So why am I bringing this up?
My wife always gets mad at me.
She's like, why do you have to say that and insult these people?
Because they do things like this.
Here's what our buddy Kang tweeted out yesterday, last night.
This is at Twitchy, by the way, and again, I'll put it in the show notes.
Horrified at the human toll of Harvey.
Okay, starts out alright.
It degenerates rapidly from here.
Not sad about the billions of damage to the oil industry.
Chickens coming home to roost.
Hashtag climate change.
I'm gonna add another hashtag on that that wasn't in his tweet.
Hashtag imbecile.
Folks, this is unreal.
So, let me get this straight.
This is a human crisis, a tragedy in Houston we're undergoing right now.
I mean, it's a national tragedy, it really is.
Houston is the fourth largest city in the United States.
I'm watching live coverage right now of just a flotilla of people being evacuated.
This is a tragedy on a mass scale.
This is not the time to be sending out tweets about climate change and how you're happy about the billions of dollars in damage to the oil industry now.
In an effort to get away from the emotions of this, because I tweeted some bombs back at Kank last night, including the fact that his eponymously named curve, what we use on our show, the Kankster Curve, is a meddler of dopiness, and that he is currently 100%.
Here's a couple of things.
Number one, folks, for liberals trying to use this to leverage your argument for climate change, we haven't had a major hurricane of this level, which was a Category 4 when it made landfall, Hurricane Harvey.
We haven't had a hurricane hit landfall with this kind of power in 12 years.
So how do you explain away, if you're trying to make a political climate change argument, not a scientific one, that storms are so bad because of climate change when we haven't seen a storm like this in 12 years?
I mean, it's a serious question.
I don't understand if your premise is, you know, your entire premise here is that climate change is causing these apocalyptic storms and where were they for 12 years?
I don't understand, like, oh no, it just happened when Donald Trump got elected.
Alright, I mean, whatever, if that's your logic, then you really need to attend a logic course at Modus Ponens and Modus Tolens in college, because you're just really not that bright.
Okay, number two.
I brought this up before, but this is a common theme too amongst, and he doesn't really go there in the tweet, but And Kank doesn't know much about economics at all, but I think what he does know, he kind of read it like Salon.com or something.
They have this fascination with destruction economics, the left.
Paul Krugman's been noted for this Nobel Prize winning economist who's now become a politician.
He's not a serious economist anymore.
He writes for the New York Slimes.
But Krugman has this fascination with destruction economics too.
The left, I don't want to say they like this, that would be irresponsible.
They don't like destruction, but they think in the end that this is good for the economy because their idea is that, oh now look Joe, all of these people are going to go back and rebuild Houston and it's going to be all these jobs and stuff.
Folks, destruction economics is never a good thing.
Now I'm going to give you in a nutshell how to explain this way to your liberal friends because they are fascinated by this idea.
Krugman bought up the idea once of like a Martian attack, how if they destroyed the earth and we all had to build it up, like how great it would be because everybody would be working.
Well, It's been explained multiple times.
Bastiat explains it with his analogy of the glazer, the glass repairman, basically, and the baker.
According to liberal destruction economics, if you ever have a bakery, Joe, and someone comes and smashes your front window, well, this is a great thing, because the window's been destroyed, but what did it do?
Created a job for the glass repairman.
The glazer comes in and fixes it.
Look, everybody sees him working.
A hundred dollars changes hands.
The baker gives the glass repairman a hundred dollars.
And look, everything is great.
That's Kank's recirculation of money theory, I guess.
I'm giving it to Kank, because Kank doesn't even know what it means, right?
So, yeah, I was right.
Now, why does that, see the left, a lot of them are simple minded, not all, but a lot of them are simpletons.
And they see the glazer working to fix the glass and getting the money and they're like, oh my gosh, this is great, people are working.
But here's what you don't see, and this was Bastiat's argument of the seen versus the unseen.
And this is where liberals, you're free to stop listening now.
Because we're going to get into rationality and reason now and really sound economics and how things really work.
In the real world, what happens is you have to look at what did the baker have before and what did he have after.
Before the window was broken, he had a business with a glass pane in front and he was making money.
Yeah.
Window was broken.
Window is fixed.
What does the baker have afterwards?
He has a business with a glass pane in front and he's $100 lighter in the wallet.
You bet.
There is no economic benefit to the glazer at all.
Now, how does that apply to the catastrophe going on right now in Houston?
Yes, eventually we are going to rebuild Houston, thankfully.
I mean, it's one of America's great cities.
But folks, this is not an economic benefit.
It's a necessity, but it's not an economic benefit.
That money, where you see everybody working and homes being rebuilt, you know, according to Kank's recirculation of money mystery theory he made up, oh it's all great, everybody's working, money's flying back in there.
Folks, it's not.
The money's coming out of the economy.
Just like I had mentioned to you in the reinsurance scenario and the insurance scenario.
The money's coming from somewhere.
The only question here is the flow of funds.
The money's going to be coming from taxpayers in the form of government support.
The money is going to be coming from insurance companies, which you're going to have to charge people now, Joe.
Higher rates.
Because if the insurance company and the reinsurance companies are bankrupted by the mask, by the failure to appropriately diagnose the risk in Houston, which from every report I'm getting happened, no one saw this coming.
The insurance rates are not going to be indicative of the risk.
Either are the payouts.
The payouts don't come from the money fairy.
Just like the glazer getting paid the hundred dollars to fix the glass doesn't come from the money fairy.
It comes from somewhere.
It comes from the baker who now has a piece of glass that he had before and is a hundred dollars lighter in a wallet.
So any liberal goes, oh my gosh, you know, this could be great for the economy.
Look at this.
We're going to be built.
It's not great for the economy.
It is a human disaster on all fronts.
People lost their property, their homes, their lives, their pets, their cars.
This is an epic human disaster.
This is not an economic boom.
And it never will be.
So wipe that clean from your minds.
That was the second point I wanted to bring up.
And again, to be fair, the kankster didn't really bring that up in his tweet, but I just thought it's an important time to discuss this kind of stuff.
Here's the third point of this, though.
Kank's a hypocrite.
He's a total hypocrite.
He's talking about bankrupting the oil industry right now and how they're losing billions of dollars and this is a good thing.
I am absolutely sure that Kank is unaware that a lot of these oil products are used in products outside of energy.
Do you know that show?
A lot of plastics are made from petroleum byproducts.
Yeah, because we've discussed it on the show.
Of course you did.
But it's not just the energy that matters, it's all the products in your communication devices, plastics, a lot of this is made from petroleum products and byproducts.
Kank uses these products.
I am absolutely sure Kank is not driving around on a bicycle all day.
Kank drives a car.
So I'm bringing this up to say that this is an obvious hypocrisy.
A hypocrisy I brought up before, but the reason I'm bringing this up and I wanted to discuss this today is not to hammer the obvious that liberals are hypocrites, because they are.
It's that I was listening, I was out there this week, I was putting a coat of wax on my Raptor.
So I like Econ Talk, which is another podcast by Russ Roberts.
He's a Hoover institution.
Economist.
He does a really good job.
And my favorite guest is Joe's bête noire, Nassim Taleb, who wrote The Black Swan.
You know, Joe likes it, I'm just messing with him.
But I bring up the book a lot because it's a really fascinating explanation of risk and fragility, and I enjoy it.
And he's always a good guest, Taleb.
And they had Taleb on a recent broadcast, and he brought up this exact point.
And I thought about liberal hypocrisy.
He doesn't get political that much, but he's talking about the hypocrisy of people who prefer higher tax rates.
And I thought, yes!
Yes!
He explained it like I wanted to on the show, and I have always failed to get across to you.
The example I always use about one, and again, just to parlay this to Kank, who wants to bankrupt the oil industry while simultaneously using the products of the oil industry to fuel his podcast, his show, and his lifestyle, because he's a total phony.
He brings up the idea of taxes and the example I've always used on taxes is you can prove liberals are hypocrites because when you look at the amount of money raised by the government, federal government, in voluntary tax payments, in other words Joe, the taxes you're legally obligated to pay and then people who pay more, I think a record year is around 10 to 15 million dollars, based on some numbers I saw, in additional payments.
Joe, think about that.
Say 30% of the country is liberal.
You have 300 million people in the country.
You're talking about millions of people who, if they really believe that higher taxes are a good thing, a net societal good, would voluntarily do it themselves.
But they don't!
Only a fraction of people pay anything extra to the government.
As a matter of fact, even liberals who run for office It's John Kerry, Charles Rangel, Hillary Clinton, in Rangel's case separate, but I'm not alleging criminality on Clinton or Kerry's part, but they avoid, remember, tax avoidance is not a crime.
Tax evasion is.
But John Kerry and Hillary Clinton have employed accountants who avoid paying higher taxes.
Not only are they not giving more, they're giving less than they should.
They're doing the exact opposite.
Taleb brings up a great point because Russ Roberts said to him at one point, he goes, well, you know, to be fair, the criticism from the left is going to be this, Joe.
They would say, well, I would happily give more as a liberal in taxes if everybody else was forced to do it too.
Oh, I see.
But Taleb had a brilliant response that, folks, forgive me for you regular listeners to the show that I have never thought to bring up before.
He said, really?
Is that the moral code?
Like, imagine that moral code applied to something different, non-political.
Imagine you said, God forbid, to a flood victim, I'll go out and help a few flood victims, but only if everybody else does it too.
Imagine if you said, you know, on the street, I'll pick up that piece of litter.
He didn't say this, the litter part's mine, but I'll go pick up that.
I don't want to attribute words to him.
I'll pick up that piece of litter, but only if everybody else does too.
Really?
That's your moral code.
So what you unambiguously defend as a societal good, higher taxes, is only good if you force everybody else to do it.
Folks, conservatives don't live by this code.
This isn't our creed.
This isn't our code, Joe.
At all.
Well, there was that word force in there, I heard.
Of course you heard, because liberals love force.
They embrace force.
They're fascinated by using government force to force people to do things.
We don't do this.
I don't have any, I kid you not, any conservative or libertarian friends, I know, who donate to charity only conditioned on other people being forced to do the same.
Yesterday, I'm not patting myself on the back, I'm just saying, yesterday my wife went online and donated money, and I encourage you all strongly, you're all, I mean, you can all figure it out yourself, I'm not lecturing anybody, but we donated money to a relief effort yesterday, a specific charity for the Houston folks.
We didn't ask, I'm glad if you do it, but Joe, imagine if I got on here and said, if you don't all do it and send me your receipts, I'm not doing it either.
Right.
That's what liberals, dad, do you understand how the liberal, the sickness is spreading?
How these people are total hypocrites?
You know, the example I've used about charity, I've used all the time.
I had a fight with a Chris Van Hollen, who's a Democrat Senator from Maryland.
He was a Congressman at the time.
Staffer at the Montgomery County Fair.
I've told this story before, where he came up to me arguing for higher taxes when I was campaigning for office.
And I said to him, well, why don't you donate more?
I don't understand.
If you're making the case to me that government spending is a societal good, why do you need other people to do it?
What are you, some kind of baby?
You a sissy?
Or you really don't believe what you're saying?
I don't need you to donate to charity for me to donate, but you need me to pay higher taxes before you do it?
They're total hypocrites, and Taleb's answer was brilliant, and a big, fat round of applause.
He has a new book out, by the way.
That's why he was on the Econ Talk podcast.
Nicholas Taleb.
You can look him up on Amazon.
Forgive me, I forget the title.
I didn't intend to do a book promotion.
But he's a good author, and he really writes great stuff.
But that's a brilliant point, Joe.
What, you're not going to save a flood victim unless someone else does?
That's your moral code.
And Kank should be really embarrassed.
It's really kind of disgusting.
This guy's just a fool.
All right, moving on, I got a couple other things I want to cover here.
So, CRTV, have you signed up yet?
I really appreciate all the feedback out of a couple nice emails yesterday about our content at CRTV.
Folks, you're paying a lot of money for cable, and candidly, you're getting a lot of crap out there.
Now, we're doing great things over at CRTV.
I work here for a reason.
I've had other offers to leave, and I won't do it because I know what we're doing, and most importantly, Joe and I both know what's coming in the future.
And this is really, we're at the tip of the spear right now.
We have Mark Levin's show, we have Steve Dace's show, we have Michelle Malkin's show, we have Steve Crowder's show, all available for a fraction of what you're paying on cable.
You're wasting a lot of money for a lot of garbage out there, right?
And really, outside of Fox News and the Velocity Channel, I don't watch much anymore on cable, seriously.
CRTV is my go-to.
You can watch it on your computer, you can watch it on your tablet, you can watch it on your smartphone, you can sling it to your TV.
You're not going to waste your time watching a lot of this junk coverage out there.
Folks, give us a shot.
That's all I'm asking.
Use promo code BONGINO.
B-O-N-G-I-N-O.
My last name.
Promo code BONGINO.
You get $10 off.
Give us a shot.
You watch one or two episodes, you'll be hooked.
Go to CRTV.com and check us out today.
All right.
On a little bit of a lighter note, I saw a story at Bloomberg today, which again will be in the show notes at BONGINO.com.
And I really felt bad for this guy.
I don't know him.
I've seen him.
You've seen him on TV before, even though you probably don't know you've seen him.
But if you look at the article and you see his face, you'd be like, I recognize that guy.
There's a guy named George, and forgive me if I say his last name wrong, Gigicos.
G-I-G-I-C-O-S.
So if I'm saying it wrong, George, You know, my apologies, but I kind of feel bad for this guy.
Who's George, you ask?
Yeah, Joe's like, who's George?
I mean, I'm sure every listener is saying this, right?
Trust me, you've seen this guy before, and if you see the article in the show notes, you'll be like, oh, that guy.
He's around Trump all the time.
He is the advanced guy for Trump.
He's the one, in essence, that goes out and coordinates these big rallies.
Apparently Trump gave him a big smack.
I mean, I don't mean literally.
He's on Antifa.
But they smacked him down a little bit because that Arizona rally recently, the one where Trump went out to Arizona, was less than full.
And according to the article, at least, Trump is not happy when his rallies aren't full.
Now, Listen, the rally did well.
They had 10,000 people there.
So let's be clear.
But I like the president.
I think you all know that.
I think, you know, I've been a fair arbiter of what I think is his good policies and his bad sides.
But I do like him and I think he is doing the best job.
He's impressed me in a number of ways.
But I tell you, I think this one's a bit of a mistake.
Apparently he wasn't happy with this guy after the Arizona rally because the crowd wasn't packed from the beginning.
Apparently it filled up later in the night but when Trump got there he looked out in the crowd it was relatively empty.
Just a quick insider's perspective and I'll move on because I don't want to bore you to death.
In my last line of work, this is all we did Joe, at the Secret Service, is we worked with staffers like George and they would be the representative White House staff member on the trip and they were responsible for what we would call crowd building.
I'm telling you, if you're out there thinking of getting into politics, crowd building is the most stressful thing you can do.
I mean, seriously, it's even worse than running for office.
It is horrendous.
Because it's impossible to build crowds.
I feel bad for this guy.
It's a lose-lose job.
And I remembered one of the last sites I did, I was a lead advisor.
Meaning I was a lead advance agent who was advising a Secret Service agent show doing his first lead.
You always have to go out with an advisor on your first one.
So I had done enough leads at that point, I don't know, six or seven maybe, that I was now an advisor to someone else.
And we went to Newark with Barack Obama for a...
A rally for, what was it, John Corzine or something like that?
I don't remember.
Yeah, Corzine was running for governor and they thought they were going to get something like 18,000 people and like 7,000 people showed up.
Barack Obama got re-elected, Corzine didn't, but I'm telling you folks, it is super hard to build a crowd.
I feel really bad for this guy.
It was really hot that day in Arizona and if anyone from the Trump administration is listening, Man, give the guy a break.
I don't know him.
Again, I have no vested interest in his career at all.
I hear he's at the RNC now.
But give George Jigokosa a break.
That is a super, super tough job, folks.
I've run for office, Joe.
Joe, you knew me when I ran for office.
How hard it is to get people to show up to anything.
Gosh, we used to have ringers at fundraisers, Mike Lee, Louie Gohmert, and it was still tough to get a crowd out there.
It's really hard to get a tough job.
So I just thought, I just remember that like it was yesterday, when we were at the Newark thing, a little inside baseball, and I remember that day, the crowd guy, the crowd builder for the Obama event with Jon Corzine, we were at the Prudential Center where the The Newark, uh, gosh, what's the name of the hockey team?
I'm losing my mind here.
The Devils!
The Devils!
Yeah, of course, the Devils.
Gosh, where the Devils were and they had to tarp off or curtain off the top section because they didn't want the media taking pictures of all the empty seats.
And even though I'm obviously a political opponent of Barack Obama and John Corzine, who was a Democratic governor, I have to tell you, I felt really bad for the guy.
He was sweating that day bad.
I mean, he kept asking the guys, the Secret Service guys at the magnetometer, how many?
How many?
Because we could tell by the flow rate.
Usually process, a four man team will process 400 people an hour.
So if it's a packed crowd in a dense line, you'll assume a four man team in an hour has processed 400 people.
If the line stops flowing after two hours, you only brought in about 800 people at that checkpoint.
How many?
He was in a total panic.
All right.
One last story.
Tomorrow, by the way, I'm going to get to... So don't miss tomorrow's show.
I'm going to get to something I saw Joe Rogan, who has a really popular podcast.
I mean, our show does well.
Joe Rogan's show does, like, ridiculous numbers.
I mean, I'm not privy to the inside details, but he's probably doing millions of downloads per show.
I like Joe Rogan because he's an MMA guy.
I love mixed martial arts.
He's also a black belt in Brazilian jiu-jitsu.
I think he got his black belt from Eddie Bravo.
And he has a really funny podcast.
But Rogan tweeted something out the other day about Believe it or not, Joe, fake news in the New York Times coverage of the Mayweather-McGregor fight.
And I want to make a bigger argument there tomorrow about the mainstream media, whataboutism, and why this Rogan thing is relevant, because it's seeping into the culture now.
So don't miss tomorrow's show.
But one final story.
For those of you out there, Bernie Sanders supporters who tweeted me when He would frequently point to Denmark being a socialist country despite the fact that the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Danes, the Dan
Denmark is now proposing, Joe, and the story's in Bloomberg today, available at the show notes, a $3.7 billion in U.S.
money, of course.
Tax cut!
Why?
Because it'll make it more attractive to work and more worthwhile to save up towards retirement.
Sounds like a conservative manifesto to me, but don't let Bernie fool you, Democrat socialists out there with air quotes.
Don't let Bernie fool you into thinking it's a socialist country.
It's not.
They're already seeing the failure of their big government model.
Unless Bernie's endorsing a tax cut as well, aligning with Denmark is just a foolish thing to do because they're going in the opposite direction of Bernie Sanders.
But shh!
Don't tell your liberal friends.
Hey, thanks again for all the reviews at iTunes.
We're almost over 400.
If you haven't reviewed the show yet, I really appreciate it.
Go to iTunes and click the review and punch in whatever.
I read them all.
I really appreciate it.
And go to Bongino.com and sign up for our email list, folks.
I'll send you the show notes every day.
Thanks again.
Don't miss tomorrow's show.
You just heard the Dan Bongino Show.
Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com.
You can also get Dan's podcasts on iTunes or SoundCloud.
