Summary:
Today could be a game-changer. The report about the Hillary email investigation is expected to be released. I’ll cover what to look for. Also, I’ll address the continued liberal culture war against us, along with a recent Obamacare study.
News Picks:
Why are some liberal commentators trying to turn Russiagate into Israelgate?
Here’s what to look for in today’s IG report on the Hillary email investigation.
A disgusting story about the liberal culture war.
A January story that debunks the myth that wages rose faster under Obama.
Social Security is in trouble.
Copyright CRTV. All rights reserved.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.
All right, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
It's Thursday, Dan.
Of course I'm doing great.
Yeah, there's a lot going on today.
Today is IG Report release day.
Joe, IG Report release day.
This is going to be... Yeah.
I believe pretty explosive information coming out today.
The Inspector General's report, which is effectively the Internal Affairs for the Justice Department, expected to be released.
I have what you need to know, what you need to expect, because we don't want to waste your time.
We want to make sure you get all the relevant information.
So I'm going to get to that in a minute.
Today's show brought to you by our buddies at FilterBuy.
Yeah, baby!
Yeah, FilterBuy.
I don't want to assume too much, but I suspect you have enough bills to pay already and don't need more.
But that might be what you're headed for if you don't trust me on this.
According to the Department of Energy, the most expensive utility for most Americans is their electricity bill, making up roughly 9% of their annual housing expenditure.
Ouch.
This number is aggravated depending on where you live.
You got places that are really hot.
You got Texas.
You got Florida, where I live, where the AC costs a lot of dough in the summer.
Adding insult to injury, this allergy season has been one of the worst, further straining your HVAC system.
You can help lower your electricity bill by making sure your system is running smoothly
with a new set of filters from my friends at Filter Buy, America's leading provider of HVAC filters
for homes and small businesses.
They carry over 600 sizes, and if you're one of those difficult people,
they can make custom filters just for you.
Plus, they ship free within 24 hours.
And if that isn't enough, they're manufactured right here in America,
so there's no excuse.
Set up auto delivery.
Plus you save 5%.
Additionally, you'll extend the life of your HVAC system.
It's getting hotter outside.
The last thing you need is a busted HVAC system on top of allergies.
Save time, save money, breathe better with filterbuy.com.
It's basically a what should we expect from the IG report and it breaks it down into four or five.
Basically, here's what you should expect.
I will cover the ones I think are the most important and of course, I'll put my own unique spin on it.
I'll give you this first.
Number one, this IG report.
Will it find criminality, potential criminal charges now?
Not just with people in the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the FBI, Joe, that may have obstructed justice in the application of the law in the Hillary case.
In other words, did they give Hillary a pass for political reasons rather than actual legal prosecutorial reasons?
It's not just that.
Will they find criminality there?
The big question is, Will they find criminality with Hillary Rodham Clinton?
In other words, will the report lay out a pretty strong probable cause case that Hillary and her Conciliaries there, her folks out there in her campaign space and everywhere else, that there's probable cause that they committed crimes.
Now, I've insisted for a while that that probable cause is there.
So have many others.
I'm not unique in that approach.
Will they find criminality with Hillary Clinton and that that criminality was ignored by the FBI for political reasons?
These are questions, Joe, that are stitched to each other.
They're married to each other.
In other words, if the report finds that there was probable cause of a crime, meaning there could have been an arrest and a prosecution, that probable cause of a crime by Hillary and her deputies and her captains and her satellite officials and her campaign was ignored for political reasons in the FBI, you have Hillary and her team that's liable and you also have FBI personnel that may be liable as well in obstruction of justice.
This is the main question and the big takeaway.
We'll see what happens with that.
And I want you to remember, folks, one of the big complaints about the Comey exoneration speech in July 5th of 2016, when he got up in front of a national audience and basically gave Hillary a pass for everything that happened.
One of the big complaints about it was, don't forget this.
I'm going to just take a note so I don't forget here.
They're twofold.
He struck from the speech—struck, pun intended, if you get the joke—he struck from the speech, people struck from the Comey speech, the line about gross negligence, where that's how they had acted, Hillary, in her setting up of the private email system, the use of the private email systems in circumvention of government rules.
about emailing and you're supposed to email on the government system for security reasons and for historical and archiving reasons.
They didn't do that.
They had the Clinton server to evade all that because they didn't want people watching what they were emailing back and forth.
Changing it to gross from gross negligence to recklessness had a purpose folks!
Why?
Why do you think they did that?
Because the term gross negligence is the actual component of the law used to prosecute people.
The intent standard isn't in the law.
In other words, if Joe sets up a private email server, and he's the Secretary of State, and never emails anyone anywhere other than on his private Joe Armacost email server, and there's classified information on there, Joe doesn't have to, there's no intent to prosecute Joe.
The intent isn't a component.
This is important, folks.
This is all going to come out today.
Think about why that is and why that's important.
Because Joe's defense then, if intent was a component of it, would just be to tell his lawyer, well, I set up the system and I didn't intend to do anything wrong.
Do you understand why that matters?
Counterfeit crimes had the same—counterfeiting U.S.
currency when I was a Secret Service agent—had the same lack of intent standard because you would have the same defense if someone passed counterfeit and said, oh, you know, hey, listen, I just didn't—I didn't know.
That would be the defense for everyone.
Now, it still means you have to go to court and prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, but intent is not a component of the actual statute.
It's grossly negligent behavior.
Gross negligence was in Comey's original speech.
They took that out and they exchanged it for careless.
Which a lot of people believe was done intentionally to take the legal penalty away from Hillary Clinton, which Jim Comey had no authority to do.
Jim Comey was not a prosecutor.
Jim Comey was in charge of the FBI.
They are investigators.
Folks, I've explained this repeatedly.
When you're a federal agent, you have no authority to prosecute at all.
You investigate.
You present a series of facts to a prosecutor, a government lawyer, what we would call an AUSA, an Assistant United States Attorney.
The way it works in the federal system is when you're an agent with the FBI, Secret Service, DEA, ATF, IRS, you name it, you present the facts you have on an investigation you conducted as an investigator to an intake AUSA, a lawyer for the government, a prosecutor, an assistant United States attorney who's in charge of intake.
I was Joe Conway in Eastern District of New York when I was out there.
I don't know what he's doing now.
By the way, you know who was running the Eastern District after that?
Loretta Lynch.
Yeah, I'm not kidding.
But Conway was the intake guy.
You would call him up, hey Joe, it's Dan Bongino with the Secret Service, this is how it went.
I have this and this and this and this and this.
I'd like to come in and present this.
And he'd say, okay, I'm going to assign you to AUSA, whatever, Joey Bag of Donuts.
And you would go and you would talk to that, that AUSA and, and he or she would say to you, okay, Dan, good case, but I need this, this, and this.
So then you, as the investigator, you go out and do it.
You're not the prosecutor.
I'm not trying to, this is not a lesson in how this.
I like this.
I didn't know that was a routine.
That's how it works.
It's exactly how the process works.
Jim Comey, whether he's the director of the FBI or not, Joe, as the head of an investigative branch, has absolutely zero authority to dismiss charges against Hillary Clinton, which is what he did in the July 5th speech.
This is why I believe Jim Comey is in a world of trouble.
Not only does he change the language from gross negligence to careless, reckless, to all these other non-legalese terms to, I believe, get her out of legal trouble, But he makes a prosecutorial decision he has absolutely no authority to make.
Now, some would argue, well, Loretta Lynch had already acknowledged that she was going to accept the opinion of Jim Comey.
Folks, that's not Loretta Lynch's role either to forfeit prosecutorial duties to Jim Comey.
Do you understand the circle of deception we're dealing with here?
Loretta Lynch's job is to make prosecutorial decisions, not say I'm going to relinquish that role to the FBI director.
It's not the way the system works!
Now, secondly, the July 5th speech, and we'll see what comes out today with this, with the IG report, but there was also a reference to Barack Obama in the initial speech.
Remember, there were multiple versions of this.
Version number one contained this gross negligence language about Hillary's behavior, which was struck from the speech, I believe, in an effort to cover for Hillary.
Another thing was a reference to Barack Obama himself and an email sent from Hillary to Obama, which, as Andy McCarthy so eloquently wrote about a year ago on this piece, this is the Rosetta Stone to the whole case.
This is why the Barack Obama administration needed desperately this Hillary Clinton email investigation to go away and the investigation to focus on Donald Trump later on.
Why?
Because, folks, if Hillary only, only used a private server and used nothing else, And Comey mentions in that July speech that from that private email server, she emailed one, Barack Obama, President of the United States at the time.
Who becomes implicated in the scandal?
Barack Obama, the President, because how's he gonna say I didn't know about Hillary Clinton's private email?
Dude, you got an email from Hillary on her private email!
You're lying!
You're just making it up!
You had to know!
You got emails from her on a private email!
I've emailed Joe every day on this show, every weekday for the last three years.
I know exactly what Joe's email is.
I know it does not end in dhs.gov or dodepartmentofstate.gov or statedepartment.gov or state.gov or eop.gov.
I know that!
Because I know Joe's email.
Obama got emails from Hillary, folks.
He's implicated in the Hillary email scandal.
That was in Comey's initial speech.
It was changed later to a senior government official.
In other words, she emailed Barack Obama.
She emailed the senior government official.
Then, Joe, in the final version of the speech, it was taken out altogether.
Why?
Why are you deleting facts?
I thought you were going up in front of the public to clear the air, not to muddy up the waters more.
Folks, Barack Obama has no plausible deniability in Hillary's email scandal.
Barack Obama himself was emailed by Hillary.
This is why he needed this to go away.
He could have been a witness in the case against Hillary.
A legitimate witness, Joe.
Yeah.
Potentially later, I don't know, he could have been a co-conspirator, we don't know.
Right.
In the case to set up this email system.
Alright, so that's number one.
Will the IG find criminality?
Not only criminality amongst the Clintons, but obstruction in the FBI as well.
And those are tied to each other.
Please understand that.
If there was PC that was ignored, probable cause, which is the standard you need to arrest someone, and it was ignored, you both have Hillary in trouble and the FBI in trouble.
Second takeaway is pretty simple.
Will there be a new Hillary investigation as a result?
When this information comes out, will there be a new investigation?
Will we see, you know, basically round two of this?
I'm not sure.
I don't know.
I've given up trying to predict what the DOJ is going to do.
I was actually kind of stunned by Sessions defending Rosenstein the other day, so I don't know, folks.
I'm not sure about that.
I'm going to move quickly past that one.
I want to get some of the other ones.
Number three.
There are, in the IG report, remember the IG Michael Horowitz was reappointed under Obama, so alleging that this guy's some kind of a partisan actor is going to be absurd.
There are going to be some significant questions about the Jim Comey closing and reopening of the case.
I just covered the closing of the case on July 5th when he gives the speech.
He suspiciously leaves out the gross negligence language.
He suspiciously leaves out the Barack Obama.
language and changes it to government official and deletes it altogether.
But there's also going to be questions about Jim Comey's reopening of the case
ten days before the election. Now, this is important.
I've said this multiple times and I need you to understand this.
The Democrats are using the reopening of the Hillary Clinton email case 10 days before the election because they found new information on the computer of Anthony Weiner, who was texting inappropriately with a 15-year-old girl.
They found new information on his computer.
That information was found by the New York City Police Department and turned over to the FBI New York office.
Ten days before the election, Jim Comey sends a letter to Congress announcing that they're reopening the investigation, which they close out only days before the election.
It is important you understand this.
The Democrats consistently use this point to say, look, Jim Comey hurt us too.
This is why we lost.
This is their thing.
And it's evidence to kind of show, in a way, I'm not explaining this well and I'm upset at myself because I'm not getting you the point across in a succinct and understandable manner.
Liberals are scammers.
They've always been scammers.
And in order to provide cover for Jim Comey now, Now you may say, well, why would liberals want to provide cover for Jim Comey now?
They want to provide cover for Jim Comey.
How much wood could a woodchuck chuck?
Because they need Comey in the prosecution of Donald Trump.
They need Comey's reputation to be salvaged.
And you may say, now I'm really confused.
You're telling me on one end that they're using his opening of the investigation 10 days out to trash him.
But now you're telling me they need to salvage his reputation to attack Donald Trump.
No, no, you have to think tactically like a liberal, folks.
This is how the libs work.
They don't want Comey to come off as a virulently anti-Trump Actor in this, which he is, Joe.
So in an effort to paint Comey as a non-partisan white knight in this whole thing, they're going to go, hey, look, he heard us 10 days out from the election.
Comey's not partisan.
Joe, please tell me you get this because this is critical.
Audience, if I'm losing you, I'm really sorry.
Let me quickly, one more time here.
Comey needs to be painted as a nonpartisan actor.
In order to do that, the Democrats are going to take a couple veiled shots at him in an effort to show that, hey, he was trying to hurt Hillary too.
Therefore, when he talks about how bad Trump is, we should listen to him.
Got it?
Very good.
Good.
Okay, cool.
Moving on.
The problem, folks, That would be true if Jim Comey was in fact trying to hurt Hillary Clinton ten days out from the election by reopening the investigation.
Alright, look, Comey's so, you know, he's trying to hurt Hillary and now when he talks about Trump, look, he was trying to hurt Hillary.
So when he's going after Trump, we should respect this guy's word because he didn't like Hillary either.
That's not what happened!
I think in the IG report we're going to get some details, wink at a nod here, about how that 10 day out reopening was largely due to pressure on Jim Comey because people in the New York office and NYPD were going to speak out about the case anyway.
They were terrified of a leak to the press they couldn't control.
In other words, Comey was not trying to hurt Hillary like the Democrats want you to believe.
We need to trust Comey when he goes after Trump.
Look, he was trying to hurt Hillary too.
Therefore, Comey's a universal, a non-partisan actor and a universal damager of goodwill.
Nonsense.
Nonsense.
Completely made up.
Comey was afraid of leaks that were going to damage Hillary.
And I think Comey understood if he didn't get out in front of the story ten days out, and control it, and control the information flow, and market it the right way, Hillary was going to lose no matter what.
He wasn't trying to hurt Hillary, he was trying to help Hillary.
So hogwash to these Democrat arguments that, oh, he was trying to hurt Hillary 10 days out, therefore we should trust him when he talks about Trump.
Because look, he didn't, you know, he's a nonpartisan actor.
He tried to hurt Hillary, too.
So, you know, therefore, he's not an anti-Trump guy.
You know, we should just trust this guy.
Look at what he did.
He's an anti-Hillary guy, too.
That's what they're doing.
Please understand their psychology.
I don't mean to beat it to death, but it's important.
You know what, I've given you some kind of pointers as to how I operate in the past and one of the things when I ran for office I would do a lot is I'll watch the Sunday shows and I'll spend a lot of time watching Fox News, watching YouTube videos of debates.
And there's a reason I do that.
Because the Democrats, my experience working with conservative activist groups in Washington DC and running for office is that the Democrats think like the board.
You know, I'm not a Star Trek fan, but they think with like a hive mind.
One person puts out a message and the Democrats are told to repeat it over and over and over endlessly.
Republicans are not very good at that.
You know why?
We're very entrepreneurial.
We like to actually think for ourselves, unlike Democrats.
Not all Democrats, but most of them.
I'm going to get to that later with their new talking point about the economy, which I'm going to debunk so easily, but you'll hear it from the Democrats.
They think with a hive mind.
I've heard Democrats.
This is why I'm bringing this up and I keep hammering it.
Democrats have said repeatedly, Oh, Comey, Comey didn't like any of them.
Therefore, we should trust him because he was a nonpartisan.
Look, he went after Hillary too.
He did not go after Hillary.
He did not go after Hillary.
He loved Hillary.
And if the idea gets out there that Comey was in love with Hillary and wanted her elected president, which he did and his family did, then of course, anything he says in the future to attack the Trump team is going to be taken with a grain of salt because he was so pro Hillary.
So the smart Democrats come out there, all of them on TV.
No, no, Comey didn't like Hillary either.
Ten days out, he destroyed her chances at the election.
He didn't!
He was protecting her!
From other people saying the same thing.
What part of that are you missing?
Okay, fourth.
The tarmac meeting.
The infamous tarmac meeting.
Between Loretta Lynch, at the time obviously the Attorney General, and former President Bill Clinton, while Mrs. Clinton, Hillary Clinton, was under investigation for the email scandal.
Now folks, I was a Secret Service agent before this, obviously, most of you know that, who cares, it's just important in regards to what I'm about to tell you.
When you do an advance with the Secret Service, a security advance, One of the primary responsibilities for the advance agent, especially the airport advance agent, even if it's at an FBO, like a fixed base operator, which is these small private jet airport type places, it is one of the primary responsibilities of the advance agent to make sure de-confliction happens.
De-confliction meaning, who else is going to be there?
Does anybody else have an armed detail?
Does anyone else have security?
What police departments are there?
Are the police departments armed?
Is it a security force, a police force, a tactical team?
Whatever it is.
I tell you that because William Jefferson Clinton, Bill Clinton, still has a Secret Service detail.
And if you believe for a second Bill Clinton's security team, I'm not blaming the Secret Service for this, the responsibility is security, not setting up meetings with Loretta Lynch.
I'm trying to tell you that this meeting was not accidental.
There is absolutely no way the Secret Service detail, therefore the Clinton staff, and the Loretta Lynch security detail provided by the FBI is not provided by the Secret Service.
That these Loretta Lynch security details as well.
There's no way these details did not know that the other one was present.
None.
Zero.
The chances of that are absolutely zero.
I'm telling you, I've been there.
Now, I say that because they're acting like Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton.
Like, oh, this wasn't planned.
We just accidentally ran into each other at a tarmac in Phoenix at a private jet base.
Folks, that's crap.
That's garbage.
This tarmac meeting, I believe the revelations in the IG report are going to be explosive.
I can't wait to actually dig into it for tomorrow's show.
Because I'm going to have to read through it.
I'm going to be up all night tonight because that's what I do for you.
Because I love you to death.
You guys have done a lot for me and ladies and I plan on paying back.
I will dig through this and find the best information possible.
But I suspect that the interviews conducted about that tarmac meeting and some of the emails if they have them about that tarmac meeting could be potentially explosive.
Because if at that tarmac meeting there are even credible allegations That there was some kind of a plot or plan hatched or discussed to make this case go away.
Folks, hell hath no fury.
You want to talk about obstruction of justice?
Joe, who would that bring into the case, too?
Bill Clinton himself.
I'm sorry to say.
Sorry to say, man.
Same guy.
For those of you who listen to the show, when Bill Clinton used to golf, you hit a bad shot, and then you turn around, you're golfing him, you hit a good shot, then he goes, same guy.
Same guy.
He'd say it so many times, we'd keep a little scorecard of how many times he said, same guy.
Same guy.
Same guy.
Clinton, the guy's the worst golfer.
That tarmac meeting, it's true.
Same guy, gonna be explosive.
All right, we'll see what comes of that, but it was not accidental.
That, I'm 100% sure.
Okay, today's show also brought to you by our buddies at iTarget.
Big fans of iTarget.
If you're gonna own a firearm, you have to own it safely, responsibly, we all know that, but most importantly, you have to know how to operate it.
You know, I usually do these pretty standard reads for a lot of our companies, and I add in a few little Flavorful tidbits, I try, but I'm going to get off the script a little bit today.
You know, when I first joined the police department, New York City Police Department, I had never fired a pistol or a semi-automatic firearm in my entire life.
I had, you know, I mean, listen, the mechanics of it aren't hard, you pull the trigger, but the mechanics of doing it right are actually extremely complicated.
There are a number of things.
There's a grip.
There's the tightness of the grip.
There's the alignment of your thumbs.
Where your thumbs are.
Do you cross over the thumbs?
Do you line up the thumbs on the off side of it?
How do you align the sights?
Do you acquire the top of the front sight first?
How do you get the equal light on both sides of the sights?
How do you align them?
This may sound like Greek to a lot of you.
You may be like, well, I don't understand.
Exactly.
So I'm trying to tell you that it's buying a firearm is not right.
Buy it and you know, God forbid anything you need to use it, pull the trigger.
No, it's not that easy.
This is very, very complicated.
How to depress the trigger?
Where is the trigger on your trigger finger?
Some people put it in the wrong spot.
The finger pad is the place you want to use it.
These are all skills you have to learn.
But you're not going to be able to learn them if you don't get to effectively pull that trigger, depress the trigger, and practice the act of actually firing the weapon.
Well, you can do it at the range, which is a good way to do it.
Nobody's knocking that at all.
But the range is tough to get to.
You gotta buy ammo, you gotta clean your weapon afterwards, sometimes it's a drive for you.
We have a system for you to practice in the safety and security of your own home.
It is a great system.
It is the iTargetPro system.
That's the letter I. The website's iTargetPro.com.
iTargetPro.com.
They will send you a laser round with a target.
The laser round goes in the firearm you have now.
Whatever you have.
You have a 9mm, .38, .40 caliber, .357 Sig.
Whatever you have, they can send you that round.
And now, when you put that round in a safely unloaded weapon, check it, check it twice, check it three times, make sure that weapon's safely unloaded, you drop that laser round in, when you depress the trigger on that safely unloaded weapon, it'll emit a laser and now you can see where the round would have gone.
You have the target.
You have the laser, the target it comes with.
You can see the entire grouping.
This is the best system out there for learning how to operate a firearm proficiently.
It's really important.
It's not just, hey, get it, and you pull the trigger.
God forbid you're involved in a self-defense scenario.
You want to make sure you can operate that thing proficiently.
This is great for cops.
It's great for law enforcement.
It's great for military.
It's great for first-time gun owners, hunters.
Please check it out.
The website's itargetpro.com.
That's itargetpro.com.
I'll give you a promo code.
Dan, my first name, D-A-N, you'll get 10% off.
itargetpro.com.
Go check it out.
You won't regret it.
Okay.
I have a really troubling story yesterday someone said to me that has really been bothering me for a long time.
Well, not long since they sent it to me yesterday, but it's been on my mind.
Like, usually I read a story and I've got so much going on between the NRA TV show, which, by the way, thanks for everyone who's watching.
Our show is taken off, available every night, free, free at NRATV.com.
Just log in.
All you have to do is give an email.
It's not, you don't have to pay anything, and I can ask for a credit card number.
And really, it's just so they can send you the shows.
It's not, but even the first few shows are free.
You don't even have to put an email in.
But NRATV.com, 5.30 p.m.
Eastern Time every night.
We're live.
It's free.
Go check it out.
But someone sent this to me in my show prep.
I've been thinking about this all night, ever since I saw it.
It's driving me crazy.
There's a story, Joe.
There's a Second Amendment rally and a anti-Second Amendment rally that happened in Boston.
And this is evidence of, I have the takeaway from this, I like to kind of bottom line things, that political power for us is now more important than anything.
I don't mean it in the Democrat-Liberal way.
I don't mean corrupt power.
I mean winning elections to advance the cause of liberty is now more important than anything.
Why?
Because I'm telling you right now, the culture war is getting suffocating.
The economic war, the culture war.
Liberals will not stop.
They will not rest.
They are tyrants.
They want to destroy people's lives, put them out of business, bankrupt people.
This story is indicative of that.
So here's the background.
Anti-Second Amendment rally and a Second Amendment rally happened in Boston at the same time.
You know, there's some yelling back and forth, but it's largely peaceful.
No big issues, right?
After the rally, Joe, the pro-Second Amendment advocates go to a tavern called the Green Dragon Tavern.
And they're sitting down there, and I'll have this story, thanks to the listeners sent it in, it's from Newsweek, in the show notes today at Bongino.com, along with that Daily Signal article about what to expect, so please check it out at Bongino.com.
But these Second Amendment advocates, Joe, sit down, having their meal, no problem, maybe had a couple brewskis, who knows, but they're sitting down, get beers, let's get a few beers, reminds me of the Bronx Tale, right?
Now you guys can't leave.
So, they're minding their business, nothing happens, right?
The anti-Civil Liberties, anti-Second Amendment, these goons come in, and I say goons because what they do next earned them the title of goons.
They talk to the bar owner, the tavern owner, and they're like, hey, you got to get those guys out of here.
And the guy's like, well, you know, the owners are like, well, why?
Why would we do that?
Well, these are hooligans and thugs and they're Nazis and racists.
And the guy's like, they're Nazis and racists?
What are you talking about?
They're sitting there eating.
Keep in mind, Joe, there was nothing Nazi or racist or anything like that at the actual rally.
This is liberal.
They lie because liberals are goons and they're liars and they're economic tyrants.
That's what they are.
So the owner's like, oh, I can't throw them out.
I'm not going to throw them out.
I didn't do anything wrong.
Read the piece.
Even in Newsweek, which is a left-leaning rag, acknowledges that there was no complaints of malicious behavior, activity, or malfeasance at all.
None.
Besides from the liberal goons, who are always the goons in this scenario.
So the goons are like the little snowflake, whiny little babies.
They don't get what they want.
The owner doesn't throw them out because you're liberal goons.
And that's what goons do.
You goons.
You do goony stuff because you're goons.
You're tyrants.
You're little whiny snowflakes with spines made of feathers.
You're a bunch of wusses.
And you're sickening little children.
You tell them a little upset about this.
It's literally been on my mind all night.
I hate that literally most overused word in the English language.
Not literally been on my mind the whole night.
It's been on my mind for a while now since I've read it.
So what happens?
The next day, Joe, All of a sudden, the owner sees his Yelp account.
You know what Yelp is?
Yeah.
Yelp.com is where people go to review places.
Right opinions and stuff, yeah.
Yeah, like you go to a hotel.
This hotel's great.
This hotel sucks.
This restaurant's great.
It's a review site, basically.
The guy who owns the Green Dragon Tavern in Boston looks at his Yelp site and the Yelp site's like, this place is disgusting, this place is filthy, they host white nationalists and racists, people were sitting in a restaurant wearing swastikas on.
By the way, none of this is actually true.
They overwhelm the poor guy in his business and they try to bankrupt him to the point, Joe, where the guy has to go out and actually give a press conference saying, hey, I don't have anything to do with white nationalists and racists and Nazis.
I don't know what these people are talking about.
Now, even Newsweek acknowledges, Joe, that there's video of the incident, or lack thereof.
And in the video, there is no controversy, there's no swastikas, there's no white nationalists, there's no Nazi saluting going on.
Of course, we live in the dumbest of times.
The fact that we even have to talk about this is absurd.
But liberals are lying goons.
That's what they are.
So the goons lied.
So now Yelp had to get involved, Joe, because the guy's business is suffering.
He had to give this press conference saying he's not a Nazi, which is unbelievable.
But this is how liberals are.
They are liberal goons.
They are tyrants.
They're the worst.
What they cannot win in political power to take over legislatively and dominate your life, they will take over by trying to destroy your business, to destroy you, and they're liars!
Liberals are liars!
You cannot trust these people!
They are liars!
They will lie, they will cheat, they will steal, they will attack, as we've seen with Antifa and their support of Black Lives Matter and some of their violent rhetoric.
These are violent people!
That's why my takeaway here is political power is more important than ever.
Why?
Because a political fight was lost in Ireland too recently.
Ireland decided to pave the way towards debating legalized abortion, which is the termination of human life.
Now, in Ireland, of course, that happened, and liberals will always argue, because liberals lie even about their intentions, Jo.
Liberals lied when it came to the gay marriage issue.
They said, well, Jo, we just want to be left alone, let us marry, and we're not going to bother anyone.
And what happened?
What happened is it turned into the jailing of people regarding certificates, marriage certificates.
Folks, listen, you're free to have opinions on this.
I don't think government should be in the marriage business.
For those of you who are regular listeners to my show, I've made that clear repeatedly.
But don't you find it odd that liberals will always tell you, oh, you know, there's no slippery slope here.
Here's what we want and we're, you know, we're good with being left alone.
Just like conservatives want to be left alone too.
That's not what happened.
You have people being put out of business now because they won't make cakes, floral arrangements.
You had one woman who was put in jail because she wasn't going to sign a marriage certificate, right?
Now in Ireland, they haven't even, by the way, passed the legislation, they've repealed the Eighth Amendment, but they haven't passed the legislation yet on the legalized abortion.
But the Taoiseach over there is already saying, Leo Varadkar, is already saying that the hospitals, now that if you receive state money, Regardless of your religious beliefs or lack of beliefs, you will be forced to perform abortions too, which is next.
This is what I tell you.
Folks, political power for us is the only thing we have left.
I think we are making progress in the culture war.
I think we are making progress in the economic war liberals are waging against us.
Conservatives are figuring out rapidly to support conservative companies.
But political power is the only way to hold back the hordes.
The only way.
It is critical we turn up and vote in this 2018 midterm election.
It's the only way to stop these people.
What they cannot win in politics, they will try to win through the culture.
The culture war cannot be legislated away.
They will try to bankrupt your business.
They will lie about you on Yelp.
They will do all this stuff.
This is what they are determined to do.
They will try to get you fired from the university.
They will try to get your show taken off the air.
They will try to boycott your sponsors.
This is what liberals do.
It will never stop.
The only thing Preserving liberty and individual freedom is getting conservatives in power who will protect the Constitution and protect the right of conservatives to exist.
That's it!
Political power is more important than ever.
I think it is, too, for one more reason.
This is a little personal, if you'll allow me.
My mother-in-law, who I adore, she's great, just got back from Columbia.
Not South Carolina, Columbia, South America, the country.
She was down there for a while.
She was down there for a month.
My wife's Colombian and obviously my mother-in-law as well.
So she goes down there sometimes.
She's down in Columbia, Joe, and she came back and she was visibly upset yesterday.
She stopped in.
She got back to Miami in the airport.
She drove up here.
We're on the way up to her house.
And you could tell.
It had changed her a bit.
And she's been back to Columbia a lot, but this particular trip seemed to really... The poverty there always bothers her, because she's a caring, loving human being.
But I've never seen her so upset.
And I was talking to her last night, and we're sitting there watching Bret Baier and Fox, and I'm like, Miriam, what's up?
And you know, and that accent she has, which I love, you know, she said, you know, she calls me Donnie.
She's like, I don't, I don't know what to tell you.
She's like, the poverty there was gut wrenching.
And she's mentioned some, you know, she's politically inclined.
She's a big Trump supporter, which by the way, defeats all the liberal identity politics, uh, nonsense about how immigrant, uh, Hispanic females support, uh, Democrats.
She does not.
She is, uh, she's more conservative than most conservatives I know.
But she said the Venezuelans, Joe, sleeping on the streets and begging at people's doors for food.
She's like, Danny, it never, ever stops.
She's like, they're everywhere.
Venezuelans, poor, hungry, their country decimated by socialism, are fleeing across the border by the hundreds of thousands into Colombia.
She couldn't bear it.
She said, you walk down the streets, you see Venezuelan women with their kids, Joe, two, three, four, five-year-old kids, sleeping on the streets.
She's like, she almost felt guilty.
Because she's a very successful woman.
She came here early, worked hard, she saved.
She's not rich by American standards, but she's rich by middle class standards.
She's extremely rich by Colombian standards.
She's like, I couldn't give away enough money.
She's like, I couldn't give away enough.
Joe, and then you think, all these Venezuelans, once one of the richer countries in South America, their economy decimated by socialism, and you think, as I put up on my Facebook, and I encourage you to read it, you know, I'm gonna give you some tough medicine here, if you're college kids listening to this, and I love you to death, and I can try to be delicate about this, to try to convince you, but I'm sorry, there's no easy, this is only tough love, it's the only thing possible to kind of shake you from your, Ignorance.
By you advocating for socialism because you're a dopey college professor who's as rich as he is or she is because of capitalism, not for socialism.
Do you understand that you are providing air cover for the destruction of human life?
You are human filth for doing this.
Human filth.
You are advocating for a system that has tortured, maimed, killed, destroyed the lives of millions of people and families.
You know what?
I'm gonna ask every one of those college kids and those socialist college professors, if you believe in this so much, get your ass on a plane tomorrow.
Go over to Venezuela and you go live there for yourself.
By the way, if they don't kill you in that regime for being a spy, I'd be astonished.
But that's how socialist governments are.
But go over there, if that's your socialist paradise, right?
If you believe so strongly in what you say, get your butt on a plane.
Get over to Venezuela and go live there yourself.
Watch the destruction of human life.
Two and three year old kids living on the street with their parents.
Begging door to door.
She said that people knocked on the door all the time when she was there.
She was staying with a friend.
Joe, they don't even ask for money.
They ask for food.
And she said they show up with these brushes, these straw brooms that they make themselves from twigs.
This is her first-hand account, folks.
This isn't like some hyperbolic, liberal BS paper some 18-year-old knucklehead wrote in college because his dopey socialist professor told him to.
This is an actual person's experience in the real world on the ground, something you idiots don't have.
Talking about, so wonderful.
It's not wonderful!
People knocking on doors with brooms they made out of twigs, begging for, not even begging for money!
They're begging for food.
Because of socialism.
Government takes over the means of production.
This happens every time.
The factories, the farms.
They don't know how to run any of it.
They run it into the ground.
People starve.
Business is destroyed.
People die.
Period.
Gross.
Gross.
You supporting it.
Filth.
You're advocating for the death and destruction of human life by really atrocious, horrible means.
Idiots.
I'm sorry.
I heard that story last night.
I mean, she's devastated.
And by the way, she has pictures.
She was showing me some of the pictures, some of these people.
You know what?
I was going to put them up and I changed my mind because they're real people.
And, you know, even though they're obviously living in the streets of Columbia, very poor, they haven't given any me any, and it'd be unfair for me to do that.
But I'm telling you, That the pictures are pretty horrible.
They're horrible.
Horrible to look at.
People sleeping all over the streets of Columbia to escape the scourge of socialism.
Alright, I got a couple more stories I want to get to.
Also, I want to get to this, the new liberal talking point about the economy, which is a joke.
It's so easily debunked that I'm sad I have to do this, but you're going to hear it, and I want you to be prepared to debate your liberal friends, because as the economy gets better and better and better, you're going to hear this argument about wages, about wages and wage growth, but it's nonsense.
All right.
Today's show also brought some good news here.
Yeah, good.
Today's show, yeah, we needed it because the pictures were depressing.
But this is some good news.
We got a new sponsor and I'm really honored to bring him on board because even though I have a really serious dog allergy, I've kind of adopted my mother-in-law, the same woman I was just talking about, her dogs.
Baby and Linda.
I love them.
Linda and baby.
I love them to death.
And I don't really care about the allergy because I love dogs so much.
I'm thinking about getting one.
And it was interesting.
They reached out to me, the company that owns our podcast, The Rights to Sell.
They said, would you be interested in talking about Puppy Spot?
And I said, hell yeah, I'll do Puppy Spot.
Matter of fact, I want one myself.
So I went to Puppy Spot I went to the website and I checked it out.
Puppyspot.com slash Dan is the website and the pictures I melted.
Welcoming a puppy into your home is one of the most rewarding things you'll ever do, but how can you be sure they come from a responsible breeder?
That's important folks.
Some of these breeders out there are entirely unethical.
Online classifies are not the answer.
Puppyspot's the answer.
The best place to find the perfect puppy is Puppyspot.com.
A trusted service connecting the nation's top breeders to caring, responsible individuals and families.
You've got to check this website out.
You're going to melt right away.
Because a puppy joining a home shouldn't feel too big to handle.
It shouldn't be full of mystery or compromise.
Puppy Spot is more than a service.
They're advocates.
Their 200 plus dog loving team members ensure that only the highest level of licensed breeders enter their exclusive breeder community.
You can view thousands of puppies from Golden Retrievers to Yorkies to Labradoodles.
I was looking at Jack Russell's yesterday.
They were awesome.
And their puppy concierge service will help find the right breed for you.
Once you find the pup you love, you can relax because Puppy Spot handles the rest.
Their industry-leading health guarantee means your puppy's vaccinations are up to date and they receive the nose-to-tail health exam from a licensed veterinarian before they're brought safely home to you.
Fetch your new best friend.
Here's the website.
Get ready.
At Puppyspot.com slash Dan.
Puppyspot.com slash Dan.
Because for a limited time, all Dan Bongino listeners will receive access to the Puppyspot VIP program with discounts on everything you need for your new puppy.
From food to walking services.
Go to puppiespot.com slash Dan for the special offer.
That's puppiespot.com slash Dan.
Please check it out.
You're going to fall in love.
It was, oh man, the pictures of the Jack Russells there.
I showed my daughter, my six-year-old.
She's like, oh, she was melting.
Oh boy, they're great.
Okay, some good news.
Again, I didn't mean to get off on a tangent on the Venezuela story.
No, it's good.
In Colombia, it just really hurt me.
But it's a super bummer.
Yeah, it is.
It hurt me.
Yeah, it is a bummer.
It really is.
Because you just, as Christians and human beings, Joe, you know, it makes you almost feel guilty for your prosperity.
Doesn't it?
I mean, my mother-in-law, she left all her clothes there.
All her clothes.
She came back with the clothes on her back.
Because the lady, Abuela, she's 94, she had one set of clothes.
That's it.
Just one set.
So they were so grateful.
My mother-in-law left her used clothes there and they loved it.
And you're like, gosh, man, I throw out clothes every day.
But that's the beauty and God's gift of free markets and capitalism.
That is a gift.
It's the gift of prosperity and the fact that we can't share it with others because governments get in the way and insist on taking people's prosperity away is one of the most destructive things about human beings, this quest for power at the expense of other people's liberty.
Horrible.
The Democrats' new collective talking point on the economy, because Joe, they're running out of metrics to cite.
Unemployment's gone down, the stock market's gone up, and I just want to be clear on this, and I encourage you to do this, I do not I would avoid ever using the stock market, by the way, as a metric for economic success.
It's unquestionably a proxy when the economy's doing well, the market goes up, but I would avoid that because it doesn't necessarily mean that the economy is growing.
It could have a lot to do with the printing of money, a very loose fiscal policy, a very loose monetary policy, fiscal policy as well.
They're two separate things, but that have some ties.
I would be careful with that, but they are metrics, okay?
They're running out of ways to bash the economy.
And as I said to you in a show the other day, the Democrats have a two-pronged problem with the economy now.
Prong number one, they can't talk the economy up.
Why?
Because none of them voted for the Trump tax plan, which in poll numbers, a good swath of Americans attribute the economic success to.
They can't talk the economy up.
Because the president, fairly or unfairly, and I don't believe the president is largely responsible for all the economic success, And I don't think Obama was responsible for all of the economic downturns.
He was responsible for a lot of it.
But the economy will move up and down to a degree, you know, partially irrespective of the policies of the president, because human entrepreneurship is not going to be held down.
Now, again, I'm not suggesting the president doesn't have a role in it.
I undoubtedly believe the Trump tax cuts played a huge role in this economic burst.
But I like to be fair about my economic analysis because if the stock market crashes tomorrow, I'm going to give you the exact same take.
That folks, the stock market and sometimes markets and industries move independently of who the president is doesn't mean he did anything wrong.
And that's why I don't like to fall in love with economic analysis based on simple metrics.
Having said that, the Democrats are in a pickle.
They cannot talk the economy up because the American people largely, again fairly or unfairly, attribute the performance of the economy to the sitting president.
The sitting president right now is Donald Trump.
The Democrats hate Donald Trump worse than they hate a hangnail.
They can't stand him.
They have a visceral reaction to Donald Trump.
So the Democrats running in 2018 and the Democrats who are going to be running in 2020 for the U.S.
Senate, Congress, and the presidency at that point cannot talk up Donald Trump.
That's problem number one.
Not being able to talk up a good economy when you're representing constituents in Congress and the Senate who are benefiting from it is a problem!
You don't want to be Debbie Downer!
I mean, Joe and I talk before the show every day.
The show is doing great.
Imagine if Joe, every day, called me and, you know, we, last month we blew past three million downloads in a month, which is like insane.
That number, I still can't grasp the fact that three million times our show is, it's just amazing to me.
Me either.
Imagine every time Joe picks up.
You know, the lion on the Skype here, and we talk for the show, and I'm looking at him.
I'm like, oh, 3 million.
Bunch of idiots.
We could have done 5.
Then we do 5.
Joe, this show sucks.
We could have done 10.
After a while, Joe's going to be like, dude, I'm out of here.
I'm sorry.
You're driving me crazy.
I really, I can't take your negativism anymore.
Democrats are in that boat now.
Who wants to be sitting there, Debbie Downer, at the party when the economy's motoring along, running on campaign ads going, this sucks, that sucks, this sucks, that sucks.
Nobody wants to do that.
It's true.
Right?
Yeah.
So that's problem number one.
They can't celebrate the economy because of Trump.
Problem number two is you can't talk down the economy either because it comes off as anti-American, anti-worker, anti-employee, anti-prosperity.
What are you going to do?
What are you going to do?
Go out there and go, this really stinks.
We need to crash this economy.
Well, Bill Maher actually did, by the way.
Yeah, I heard that.
But Bill Maher can be kooky sometimes.
I'm talking about people running for office who actually have some electoral liability, unlike Bill Maher.
Bill Maher's not running for office.
Bill Maher was praying for a recession.
Bring on the recession and get rid of Donald Trump, which is just asinine, right?
Crazy nutjob.
But you can't talk down the economy either!
Nobody wants to hear that!
You think a dad or a mom who just got a raise or was underemployed and finally got the job they like instead of the job they didn't want wants to hear at a campaign rally?
This stinks!
You stink!
He stinks!
Your job stinks!
Your wages stink!
Your boss stinks!
Everything stinks!
Vote Joey Bag of Donuts 2020!
Everything stinks!
Crumbs.
Remember Crumbs?
Nancy Pelosi.
Crumbs Pelosi.
Who also, I call her Whoop-Dee-Doo Pelosi too.
Because her other line was, so what?
Unemployment's down to 3.9.
Her line was, Whoop-Dee-Doo.
Whoop-Dee-Doo Crumbs.
Crumbs Whoop-Dee-Doo.
This is their thing.
They sound like complete idiots.
So they're in a real pickle right now.
They are desperate for a focus group tested talking point, Joe, that they can put out there to say, okay, things are great, but, okay?
Because they can't say things stink.
I gotta be clear.
If you follow the Democrats like I do, it's my whole life.
You all have given me the honor of hosting this show.
I love my job.
My job is to do the homework so you don't have to.
I follow select Twitter accounts, Facebook accounts, and online access to things, and certain email groups who I've inserted myself into, amongst liberals.
And I know this is their problem.
Trust me on this, guys.
They cannot say the economy stinks.
So their line now is the economy is good, but... What's the but?
The but now is wages.
Wages.
They're going to say, oh, well, wages.
Wages aren't really growing that fast.
In other words, the economy's doing good, but why would... Let me ask you a question.
I'm going to set you up here.
You're a voter.
I'm a Democrat.
I don't want to be Debbie Downer.
So I say the economy's good.
But I'm at a campaign rally with you and I pull you aside and I go, Joe, you know what?
You should vote for me because the economy's good, but wages aren't good.
Joe, do you get a wage?
Yes, I do.
So you think if you hear wages aren't good that that's going to personalize it for you?
I'm starting to worry, Dan.
You're starting to worry!
You're done right, even though in your head you're like, wait, I'm doing okay, like the economy's doing my 401k's up, you know, my job's secure, I just got a new contract, but now all of a sudden you hear about wages and they plant the seed.
Democrats are very tactical.
This is not done by mistake.
You doubt me on this, by the way?
I'm watching Fox yesterday, and one of the, a liberal commentator I cannot stand, this guy, Zach something, I forget his last name, he's the bald guy on Fox, he's the most annoying commentator, because he just, this guy, I don't even think he, I think he lies about lying, like he, he's a liar, so obvious a lie about being a liar.
But he was on Fox yesterday, and he brought up this wage thing, which I've heard four or five times before, so I went home, I did some homework on it, And I'm like, alright, this is going to be their new talking point.
So let's debunk that for you.
Their point is the economy's good, but the wages are not growing under Trump.
One of the metrics we use as a standard for the growth of wages and the economy, Joe, is something called the Employment Cost Index.
In other words, the cost to an employer of an employee.
Now, Joe, simple question.
If you are employing an employee and the employment cost index rises, meaning the cost of that employee goes up, do you think that means the employee's cost went up because he's making more?
Yeah.
Yes, of course!
You want it to go up!
Now, the boss doesn't, but the employee does.
So one of the proxies for wages going up is the ECI, Employment Cost Index.
Now, to help you, in case you think, again, Dan Bongino does not do his homework, and I'm just making this up because I'm bored, I went and searched through about 20 or 30 articles on this yesterday, and I wanted to pull one, which I always do, from either down the center or left-leaning website, because it gives your liberal friends no room to say, oh, well, Breitbart said it, conservative reviews, as if Breitbart states a fact, it's not a fact.
But understanding how dopey your liberal friends are, which they are, I pulled an article from CNBC from January.
Can't be any easier to read, folks.
It's only about 500 words, which you can read in about two minutes flat.
It will be in the show notes, and it will confirm the statistics I'm about to tell you as being true.
Now, it's from January, but January, why would it be from January?
Because it was citing Trump's first full year in office.
We've not yet completed 2018.
The Employment Cost Index rose under Trump 2.6%.
Meaning, as a proxy for wages, wages were going up.
2.6%.
It went up.
So you may say, okay, well that's in 2017, his first full year in office.
Well, of course, statistics are meaningless without context.
Liberals do this all the time.
Let's give you the context.
If, as a proxy for wages going up, Trump hit that 2.6% mark in his first full year in office, liberals telling you, oh, well, wages aren't going up, Obama did so much better, you would think, in simple mathematical terms, that Obama had done better than 2.6%, right Joe?
You would think.
You'd be wrong, of course.
the best Obama has ever done is 2.2 percent in 2016 and 2014 and six of eight uh the six of the
eight additional Obama presidency years were either 2.2 percent or below. So let's just do this.
Simple math for liberals.
I know you have a tough time, Max.
So your new argument, your liberal friend's gonna be, wow, wages, wages, wages.
It's not, wages aren't going up.
Wages are rising using a proxy called the ECI, Employment Cost Index, which is in the CNBC piece, in the show notes.
Rose under Trump, 2.6% his first full year in office.
Barack Obama's best year, 2.2%.
Six of his eight years, 2% or lower.
By the way, Trump's 2.6% number, Joe, was the best since 2008.
2007 that's according to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics a government agency Again, liberals are full of crap.
They're full of garbage.
They're making this up.
They have no statistical, mathematical, arithmetic, factual ground to stand on.
They make things up.
The reason they're doing this is because they know the term wages is personal, because everybody working in the workforce, off the books and on the books, gets a wage.
So liberals understand they can't talk down the economy.
So their new tactic is going to be put the caveat in it.
Well, the economy's doing good, but...
But, here you go Joe.
Wages, knowing that's going to be personal to you, are stagnant.
To which you should promptly respond, wow that's funny you say that because a proxy for wages, this employment cost index, rose 2.6 percent under Trump's first year in office.
Barack Obama never did better than 2.2 in six of his eight years.
He was two or below.
So I don't understand, where are you going with this?
You just said Barack Obama was handed Trump this motoring economy and wages are stagnant, yet wages are rising dramatically under Trump while they didn't under Obama.
So explain to me again how Obama handed Trump some motoring economy.
Just watch the news.
You aren't going to thank me for it.
You'll email me because I get all your emails.
You will email me and thank me for this.
Watch Fox.
Watch any of the cable news channels.
Watch the liberal commentators on the economy.
And, you know what, it's almost like, you'd be rich if I could give you a nickel every time they bring up stagnant wages.
This will be their new talking point.
The problem with it, it is absolutely not true.
Hey, I'll have another, that article, by the way, will be in the show notes today.
It's from January, but read it.
It's from CNBC.
Send it to all your liberal friends.
Because what are they going to say?
Oh, CNBC, that's a right-leaning reg.
You're just idiots, I mean, by saying something that stupid.
Hey, I have one other piece of the show notes today I want you to read.
I don't want to harp on this unnecessarily, but I brought up the idea of the problem, I should say.
It's kind of an unfair characterization, but the problem with Social Security often, and I know it always sparks some interest, In the audience for obvious reasons.
A lot of you did follow the rules of social security and you're upset that the system is bankrupt and I entirely understand that.
I have, you know, a grandparent still alive too that relies on a system.
She was made promises by the government that broke those promises.
But it doesn't do us any good to ignore the obvious, and I want to put a piece up from the Daily Signal by Romina Boccia.
It's really good.
It's in the show notes today.
It's short and sweet, but it points to four pending crises with the social security system.
I'll just motor through them quick.
2017 alone, $41 billion deficit in the money that came in, the money that was paid out.
Problem number two, $16.1 trillion in unfunded obligations over the next 75 years.
Point number three, it's going to be insolvent by 2034.
They will not have enough money even in the trust fund, which is really just IOUs from us to us, us paying ourselves.
Folks, if this insolvency continues, by law, benefits will be cut 21% by 2034.
Folks, you're not going to solve any problems by ignoring it.
There's no money in this system.
This system has been broken.
These politicians have entirely screwed you over.
Now, they propose a couple pretty simple fixes at the end, including raising the retirement age, means testing some benefits, but I encourage you to read the piece to get a grasp of how severe the problem and the crisis which Social Security is.
It's devastating.
The government took that money in those IOUs.
There's no trust fund.
I already spent it.
We're in a real problem with it.
All right, folks.
Thanks a lot.
I really appreciate you tuning in.
Chum Store is open at Bongino.com.
It's been selling like crazy, especially the Fanula News.
People seem to love to be on the lookout for Fanula News.
So go check it out.
Chum Store, Bongino.com.
I'll see you all tomorrow.
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.
