Summary:
The latest twist in the Mueller probe is deeply troubling. The fix appears to be in. Also, I address the socialism scam. Socialism is a farce, and its advocates are complete frauds.
News Picks:
Maxine Waters knows she’s in deep trouble.
What is Bob Mueller up to now?
Read this piece from a left-leaning website about people involved in the Mueller probe.
A solid piece about the Obama “fixer.”
More single-payer horror stories.
Is the next step organized violence from the Left?
The seven preludes of the FBI Trump probe.
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?
I am so glad to be here, Dan-o.
All right, listen, I get a lot of great viewer emails, but I received a really terrific email.
I'm not going to say the guy's name first.
First or last, because he doesn't give me permission to use it.
Talking about Maxine Waters and the left and their lurch toward violence, and how I continue to tell you it worries me specifically because the left has no emergency brake.
Not all Democrats, but the radical far left is based in a secular, world-based, ends-justifies-the-means, state power ideology, and to obtain state power, we're just diving right into today. The ends does justify the means. However, they
obtain power, whatever tactic, they believe the moral ends is state power and the diminishment of the
individual. So there is no emergency break on their behavior, including violence. I've said repeatedly,
that's what worries me about the left.
Whereas with the right, when we believe in the individual powers,
powers, I should say rights, big R rights granted by God.
for you to go over and take those rights from your neighbor, whatever means you use, if
those means involve the harming of your neighbor or another individual, they're morally wrong.
And that places an emergency brake on your behavior.
So not to beat that story to death, but I got a nice email yesterday, and I'll leave
the name out.
This is from a liberal, because we have a lot of liberals that listen to the show.
Joe, I think we're converting many.
So you know who you are.
Thanks for the email.
It reads like this.
Being liberal, I'm reading this verbatim by the way, most of my life and knowing plenty of them, violence really isn't our thing.
We can be great at the gate, but we have hardly any stamina or motivation.
What did I say yesterday?
The liberals can't play the long game.
So he's acknowledging this.
He says, but they have hardly any stamina or motivation.
He writes, I was quite athletic too, but wasn't into the rugged individualism stuff.
I have a hard time believing liberals will take it to the streets and stick with it.
I work with plenty of right-wingers now, and giving them ultimatums, they will fight.
I can't help but think this is a very desperate act by the left.
My guess is they really got caught with their pants down here real bad.
Trump trolling doesn't help them either.
Great email.
And then I got another email from another person who shall remain nameless, who has a PhD in Applied Behavioral Analysis, a field of study I studied in graduate school at the City University of New York.
And he mentioned something I just want to bring up quickly before I dive into some explosive, again, developments on Spygate, which again are going unspoken about because of the false media gaslighting on the border crisis.
They're just fabricating narratives now.
He writes, this guy has a PhD in behavioral analysis, that he believes this is an extinction burst by the left.
Now, that's a very specific term.
I may have mentioned it before on the show, but...
An extinction burst is a behavioral outburst that happens when your behavior you expected a reward for in the past is not in fact rewarded.
So let me give you an example in the real world, Joe.
You go to a vending machine every day at WCBM.
I know they have one in that back room where you work at the radio station.
Yeah.
And Joe gets a disgusting morning donut from the vending machine.
It's been sitting there for a month.
Every single day for three years.
One day, Joe goes to the vending machine.
He drops in a couple quarters or whatever it may be, and a donut doesn't come out.
What does Joe do?
Joe shakes the machine.
Yeah, he shakes it again, he shakes it again, he shakes it a third time.
But that's an extinction burst.
It's a clustered pattern of behavior, the shaking of a machine, because your typical response reward pattern was broken up.
Ping!
Pow!
Boom!
Hat-tipper on P. Ping!
Pow!
Ping!
Pow!
To the vending machine.
Right?
Right!
Boom!
Ping!
Pow!
That's it.
It's an extinction burst of behavior because your typical behavior, quarter in machine, was not rewarded by donut.
That when it's broken up, there's an extinction burst of behavior.
Now, the left's reward in the past was intimidation, media bias, media hackery.
Call them racist, call Republicans xenophobes, misogynists, whatever.
You all know.
You've heard all the litany.
Nazis now.
Call them all this stuff, Joe.
And what was the reward in the past?
You would win.
Yeah.
Because the media would play along.
Yes, Joe Armacost, you're a Nazi.
He's a Nazi.
He's a Nazi.
They're a Nazi.
You're a Nazi.
They're a Nazi.
He's a Nazi, you're a Nazi, everybody's a Nazi to the left.
Everybody's a Nazi, everybody now.
The most disgusting thing, I mean, this is just what the left does.
So the left calls people Nazis and the reward in the past were electoral victories.
So, this guy, you know your name, who sent me this, PhD man, thank you, great email, you're right, this is an extinction burst.
The racist, misogynist, Nazi, xenophobe quarters went in the machine, the media machine.
The media spits out a narrative.
The narrative is used to defeat McCain, Romney, anyone else, local candidates, any Republicans.
But what happened is, what got spit out of the vending machine?
Donald J. Trump!
You feel stupid.
You.
You.
You're good, you.
That's good.
Donald J. Trump came out of the vending machine!
And that's exactly what he said!
When he Biden-planned that, by the way.
And they're like, so what's the extinction burst in behavior?
They violently attacked the vending machine!
They're screaming, this is it!
The guy who sent me this, he didn't give my name, I can't give his name, but this is a, this is a brilliant, it was a one sentence email.
Dan, I have a PhD in behavioral analysis, this is an extinction burst, but, you are right, an extinction burst based on my area of, whatever the hell you want to call it, I hate people who tout their academic credentials, you know that, but I did study this in school, he's right, this is an extinction burst.
It is a clustered pattern of irrational, aggressive behavior because your prior actions, quarters in the vending machine, in this case calling people racists and Nazis, was met with a response.
We win.
We get a Democrat candidate.
Instead, Donald Trump pops out of the vending machine.
And this is your extinction burst.
He's right.
Psychologically speaking, take some solace in the fact that extinction bursts die down.
They eventually exhaust themselves.
And if I can get to it, I hope I can.
I'm gonna get to a story later in the show.
If not, I'll get to it tomorrow.
Where in New York City, the liberal extinction burst is eventually exhausting itself.
It's an amazing story about liberalism eating itself in New York City.
I'm hoping to get to it today.
If I can't, I will most definitely get to it tomorrow.
All right, today's show brought to you by our buddies at BrickHouse Nutrition.
You know I love BrickHouse.
They've been with me from the beginning.
They have some of the best nutrition products on the market.
Matter of fact, right before I came on the air, I kid you not, I don't tell tall tales, not for anybody, sponsors or anything, but right before I came on the air, I took a nice dose of foundation.
I took four of their foundation creatine ATP pills.
They are terrific.
It is like having two extra gas tanks in the gym.
And in case you couldn't tell by the spirited opening today, it gives me a little clarity after I take it too.
It's not just the physical performance.
I take a few before the show as well.
Now, the product's called Foundation.
It's available at BrickHouseNutrition.com and some of the benefits, at least for me.
I get a little mental clarity from it.
The performance in the gym goes through the roof and you just look better.
It makes your muscles look more toned.
And if you don't believe me, go take the mirror test.
I can't encourage you enough to try this.
Go look in the mirror.
Take like a mental snapshot.
What do I look like now?
Give it about seven days to load.
Sometimes a little less, five to seven days.
The instructions are on the back of the bottle.
And look at yourself five to seven days later.
You're going to be like, wow, this stuff is legit.
It's the real deal.
Go give it a shot.
BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
And go pick up a bottle of Foundation today.
You will not regret it.
Send me your reviews.
I'm that confident.
Never, ever got anything other than positive reviews about this product.
People love it.
Go check it out.
BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.
It's called Foundation.
All right.
Maxine Waters, of course, is trying to dial back her insane call for mob.
Violence and harassment.
She's now backing down a little bit now.
She's not backing down enough.
She's trying to basically... I don't want to give Maxine any credit here because she's... You know what?
Backing down... Let me take that back.
Because sometimes even I word things, even I, like I'm some kind of deity.
On my own show, I'll say things.
She's not really backing down, she's trying to redirect this to Donald Trump.
Alright.
In other words, she's like, well I didn't call for violence or... No, you called for people to be harassed publicly, mob style.
Yeah.
That is, by any reasonable measure, a call to violence and aggression and confrontation.
Now, Maxine's like, well, I didn't say that.
Now, knowing how Democrats and liberals operate, Joe, my guess is someone got in her ear and said, hey, this is not helping.
You better dial us back.
But now she's trying to turn it around and blame it on Donald Trump.
But let me just tell you from having run for office, when you get rebuked publicly by crazy Chuck Schumer, the Senate minority leader, and Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader in the House, at the same time, two radical leftists from New York and California, you are screwed in the Democrat Party.
Joe, she really damaged the Democrat Party big time.
When Maxine Waters said to the Democrat congresswoman from California, go confront Trump, cabinet officials, harass them, mob them, gather crowds and get them, when she said that on the bullhorn, You know, mob style.
That kind of radical, liberal violence appeals to such a small, absurd, ridiculous, violent, aggressive portion of the population and alienates everyone else that even they had to get in her ear.
What is she doing?
What is she doing back there?
What is she doing?
Nobody can figure it out.
Apparently even Chuck Schumer.
Nobody knows.
I'm going to try to calm down now.
Yeah.
By the way, thank you for the people who sent the drops.
No, no, it was good.
You keep it up, buddy.
You know I love it.
Thank you to everyone who sends in the drops.
I appreciate it.
Good job.
Adam, too.
I'll give you a little shout out.
But Ron P is usually the fastest.
But Adam's good, too.
Adam K. He drops drops like that.
All right.
Listen, there's a major break.
I haven't been talking about Spygate in a while because I don't You know, I'm not here to just fill air time.
My show matters to me.
I have an hour of your time.
I'm not going to waste it if there's nothing to talk about.
There is a big, big break.
Please check out the show notes today.
I know I implore you every day to do it, but I have a bunch of stories, some old, some new, about what's happening now with Erik Prince and why this matters.
There's a nice synopsis from Zero Hedge.
There's also a story in the New York Post.
They're the same story.
I think I have the Zero Hedge story at the show notes today at bunchyknow.com.
If you subscribe to my email list, I'll email them to you.
But Mueller now is zeroing in on Eric Prince.
Now, I'm trying to find a way to lay this out to you so that it makes a world of sense.
So I have it, you know, what does Prince know?
What are they investigating?
Who's talking?
That's how I want to lay this out, okay?
So why would Mueller target Eric Prince?
If you're a regular listener to the show, the operating premise, the 30,000 foot theory that me and Joe have been working with here on the Mueller probe is that the whole purpose of the Mueller probe from the beginning was not to find Russian collusion.
Why?
Because it doesn't exist.
I'm absolutely confident of that.
I would bet my entire professional reputation if I have to stand corrected later on because I find out that Donald Trump personally colluded with Vladimir Putin to win an election, I will do that.
I am so confident that that is not going to happen.
I'm not 99%, I'm 100% confident that that's nonsense.
That's made up.
So the entire purpose of the Mueller probe It's not to find Russian collusion, because everybody with a brain knows it doesn't exist.
The purpose of the probe, as I've repeatedly stated, is to cover up for Hillary Clinton's misdeeds by targeting people who have some tangential connection to the Clintons and roping them into a Trump conspiracy.
Why?
Joe, this is really important, so as the audience ombudsman, I'm asking you, if this does not make sense, please stop me for it.
If I am appointed as a special prosecutor to investigate Joe Armacost, but I know the charge against Joe are BS, but the real purpose is another guy, is to go after another guy who's an enemy of Joe Armacost, right?
So what I do is, this guy's done business, he's a local businessman with Joe and Joe's enemy, right?
Yep.
So what do I do?
I know he has information on Joe.
Maybe not criminal, but maybe not the most appetizing thing in the world.
But I know he has criminal information on Joe's enemy, right?
Yeah.
But I gotta shut, you know, this guy down.
Why?
Because I'm afraid he may talk about the stuff he knows about Joe's enemy, right?
What do I do?
I go after him for minor stuff on Joe.
Hey, Joe, I heard you and this guy were jaywalking one day.
You arrest the guy for jaywalking.
You say, listen, we're going to give you 30 days in jail, but here's the deal.
We'll cut it to five if you agree to keep your mouth shut.
And what happens?
The process bogs the guy down too.
He's busy paying legal fees and all this other stuff.
I'm absolutely convinced that's what's happening in the Mueller probe.
All of the people they're targeting for alleged ties to the Trump team are deeply tied to the Clinton Foundation and others.
Now, They're also people who have significant information, or claim to have significant information, about misdeeds about the FBI and the DOJ and the Clintons.
Eric Prince is the perfect example.
Now, I have a clip here.
It's a little long, it's about a minute and a half, which we don't like to play them that long because, especially on live radio, people think they're listening to the wrong radio show.
And I gotta be honest with you, the quality here is not terrific.
It's definitely...
Audible, but it's not great.
This is a hat tip Breitbart News on Sirius Radio.
This is an interview between Eric Prince and Alex Marlowe.
Eric Prince goes on Breitbart News right before the election.
Forgive me if you've heard this before on the show, but we have new listeners.
This is important.
After you hear what Eric Prince has to say, about what the New York field office of the FBI and the NYPD knew about Hillary Clinton, her partner Huma Abedin, and her husband Anthony Weiner in the emails.
Maybe it'll make more sense now why Bob Mueller needs to shut down Eric Prince, but I've got a wrinkle on this I promise you haven't heard anywhere else.
All right, play that cut.
Because of Weinergate and the sexting scandal, the NYPD started investigating it Through a subpoena, through a warrant, they searched his laptop and sure enough found those 650,000 emails.
They found way more stuff than just the, uh, more information pertaining to the inappropriate sexting the guy was doing.
They found State Department emails.
They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this Sex Island convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times.
Hillary Clinton went there at least six times.
The amount of garbage that they found in these emails of criminal activities by Hillary, by her immediate circle, and even by other Democratic members of Congress, Was so disgusting.
They gave it to the FBI and they said, we're going to go public with this.
If you don't reopen the investigation, you don't do the right thing with timely indictments.
I know, and this is from a very well-placed source of mine at one PP, one police Plaza in New York.
The NYPD wanted to do a press conference announcing the warrants and the additional arrest they were making in this investigation, and they've gotten huge pushback to the point of coercion from the Justice Department, with the Justice Department threatening to charge someone that had been unrelated In the accidental heart attack death of Eric Garner, the guy, almost two years ago.
Wow!
Neutron bomb!
Look at that!
So Prince, right before the election... By the way, this is not a...
This is an incredible guy.
This guy was the CEO of Blackwater.
This is not some shmuck, some dope they pulled off the streets.
This is a guy who's been around.
In case you missed what he said there, that is one of the most important pieces of audio I've played on the show in a long time.
He says right before the election, That the NYPD and the FBI found evidence of Hillary Clinton's State Department emails, the missing emails, the 650,000, on Anthony Weiner's computer.
The husband of Hillary Clinton's assistant.
Because they were being backed up.
Hillary Clinton's assistant, Huma Abedin, was backing up their emails.
She was doing all of Hillary's business on email, basically.
Not all, but most of it.
She was representing Hillary.
She was backing it up to a personal computer in her house, which was accessed by her husband.
Who was then subsequently arrested for inappropriate sexual conversations with an underage woman.
The NYPD found the computer and Prince is alleging that the NYPD and the FBI office wanted to go forward with the case but were being, this is incredible, pressured by the Department of Justice headed by Loretta Lynch to shut it down.
This is incredible stuff.
Now does it kind of make sense why Prince may be a guy you may want to keep off the media to shut him down?
Make a little bit of sense now?
Now!
It gets worse, by the way.
Breaking Supreme Court is upholding Trump's travel ban on a 5-4 vote.
So breaking news, good news, another victory for Trump.
Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding.
Racking them up.
Okay?
That's unsurprising, by the way, to any of us.
Of course he could have instituted that travel ban.
This is where it gets interesting.
So again, 30,000 foot, Mueller is trying to shut down people who have information or are connected to the Clintons.
He is not investigating Trump.
He's trying to shut these people down so they don't expose the failures of the DOJ and the FBI to investigate the Clinton Foundation.
Because if these people are allowed to talk, Then the scams the Clinton Foundation was pulling will become obvious and will come out in the press.
I hope you're picking up what I'm putting down.
Mueller's sole purpose is to cover for the DOJ and the FBI who are investigating the Clinton Foundation.
And if the Clinton Foundation schemes are allowed to come out, it'll be obvious that the GOJ and FBI at high levels acted corruptly.
Mueller is the cleanup man.
He's the cleanup guy.
He's the Department of Sanitation right now.
His sole purpose is not to investigate Trump.
So, Prince has information.
By the way, Prince isn't the only one.
If you listen to prior shows, you know he was targeting Victor Pinchuk at one point, too.
He's like, wow, Pinchuk made a six-figure speaking fee payment to Trump to speak at an event.
Okay, that's not illegal.
Oh, who else would Pinchuk?
Pinchuk donated between 10 and 25 million to the Clinton Foundation.
Pinchuk also was a big donor to the Atlantic Council that partnered up with a gas company that hired Joe Biden's kid and John Kerry's stepson's friend.
But don't mention any of that.
Let's investigate him for his $100,000 speaking fee, which is a tip in a restaurant for Donald Trump, that he gave to Trump to speak on video at an event.
I'm telling you, it's so obvious this is what Mueller's doing.
He's investigating people with significant ties to the Clinton Foundation because the DOJ and the FBI let them off the hook and he's the cleanup man.
Now, I believe this is happening with people inside the Justice Department and I'm not so sure about the FBI, but at the minimum, the Justice Department, who are Obama holdovers, who understand the damage Obama and Loretta Lynch and others did, they're working now to clean up the operation.
Now, so now we know question number one, what does Prince know?
We know what he knows because you just listened to the audio.
He claims to have a source within one police plaza, they call it 1PP, which is NYPD headquarters in downtown Manhattan.
Who says that they had all this information on Hillary, Hillary's emails, and the Justice Department pressured them to go away.
Now, what is Mueller now investigating?
Let me go back to one of my – I had to take a lot of screenshots today.
Okay.
Here is a piece from ABC News.
Well-connected Lebanese-American businessman George Nader.
Remember the names?
Remember the names?
Well-connected Lebanese-American businessman George Nader, a key witness given limited immunity by Mueller, has been interviewed seven times by prosecutors on a wide range of subjects.
He told investigators, listen up, that he set up a meeting in the Seychelles between Erik Prince and Russian Sovereign Wealth Fund CEO Kirill Dmitriev mere days before Trump was inaugurated.
All right.
So, there's a meeting between Prince, who we now know, according to his own words, has some devastating information he's been told about the Hillary team.
Prince meets in the Seychelles with the CEO of a Russian direct investment fund, Kirill Dmitriev.
Who's Kirill Dmitriev?
Kirill Dmitriev, keep in mind, is the CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund.
Here is a piece from Salon.com I will put in the show notes.
It's an older piece.
Salon.com.
The left-leaning site.
Far left.
Like radical left.
Like to the left of Bernie Sanders.
This is their words, not mine.
In his report on the Clinton machine's ties to Saudi Arabia, Isikoff, Michael Isikoff, yes, the same guy who was working with Christopher Steele and others on an information exchange.
Also notes that two of the Clinton lobbyists bundlers Richard Sullivan and David Jones are principals in a firm that, until late last year, represented the Russia Direct Investment Fund.
Oh, a sovereign wealth fund co-founded by Vladimir Putin when he was Prime Minister.
So two Clinton bundlers represent the Russia Direct Investment Fund run by the guy who conveniently met with Eric Prince, who's now being investigated by the Mueller team.
You think they just met?
Oh, who set up the meeting?
Let me go back and read again.
ABC News, line one.
Who set the meeting up?
A well-connected Lebanese-American businessman named George Nader, who now has been given limited immunity by Mueller and has been interviewed seven times.
Wow, who is this Nader guy who set up these meetings?
These meetings just keep happening, Joe.
This is crazy how all of these people mildly associated with Trump under investigation by the Mueller team and connected somehow to Clinton people and Clinton bundlers and Clinton lobbyists and people working with Clinton lobbyists.
All of these people wind up in meetings with these suspicious Russians set up by people who are suspicious themselves.
Let's learn a little bit about George Nader, who set this meeting up.
New York Post, yesterday.
This information about the meeting, Joe, between Prince and these Kirill Dmitriev, who was represented by Clinton lobbyists.
Oh, oh.
This information came to light after it was revealed that the Lebanese-American businessman George Nader, a representative of the United Arab Emirates, was part of the Seychelles meeting and was cooperating with Mueller's probe under immunity.
Wow.
Wow.
Now here's where it gets fascinating.
Who do you think, folks, is representing George Nader?
Now, some of you... Some of you may be asking, by the way, why is this news today?
Because some of you may have heard some of this before on my show.
Because Mueller has apparently now seized Erik Prince's phones and his computers.
That's the news as of today.
This is not me, like, rehashing old stories for the sake of, you know, inter-show drama.
Mueller is now, my guess is Prince was reluctant at first, so Mueller's doing what Mueller does.
Turning up the heat on people with connections to people with connections to the Clintons to get them to shut up so they keep their mouths shut, do the midterms, or so that he can sweep up the DOJ-FBI mess when they let the Clintons off.
That's the only thing that makes sense.
Make sense?
Yes.
Big time.
Yep.
So the guy who sets up this random meeting in the Seychelles between a guy who has information and it could, you know, could go out public on this information about the Clintons.
The guy who sets it up way in advance, right around April, Joe, when all these other meetings were set up between Joseph Mifsud, the Maltese professor who I believe pushed the information into Papadopoulos about Hillary dirt that was pulled out later by FBI spies.
Ladies and gentlemen, this was a setup the whole time.
This was a setup.
Let me read to you from another piece.
Catherine Rumler, one of Nader's attorneys, reportedly told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow that the Daily Mail report that Nader had fled is totally and unequivocally false.
Her client is back and forth between the U.S.
and UAE.
Catherine Rumler.
Catherine Rumler.
Who is Catherine Rumler?
White House?
Yeah, I know.
Let's scratch into your head.
Now, let's quote a piece by Sidney Powell at TheObserver.com, which will be in the show notes today for you to read.
Just follow me here.
Catherine Rumler is a lawyer representing a guy named George Nader, who set up this meeting right around April where all of this counterintelligence activity to entrap the Trump team started, right around the same time.
They set up a meeting between Eric Prince, Who later on goes on and says he has information about Hillary and is connected to the Trump administration through his sister, who's the education secretary, winds up in this meeting with a Russian who is represented by Clinton bundlers.
Who sets up the meeting?
George Nader, who's represented by Catherine Rumler.
Catherine Rumler, quoting the Sidney Powell piece.
Enter Catherine Rumler, former White House counsel to Barack Obama, who was repeatedly on the short list for Attorney General.
There is mounting evidence that she should just be renamed The Fixer, the Olivia Pope for this president, Barack Obama.
This is an older piece, but it's in the show notes.
Mr. Obama reposes great trust in Ms.
Rumler.
He has applauded her impeccable legal judgment and still considers her, quote, a close personal friend.
But yesterday, Ms.
Rumler, this is an older piece, was all over the front page of the Washington Post, this time in the Cartagena sex scandal cover-up.
As previously reported, Ms.
Rumler was also in the middle of the IRS email scandal and the Benghazi cover-up, and she was the most vigorous protector.
of President Obama while increasing government secrecy and violating the rights of others.
Is this incredible?
The fixer's back!
The fixer's back!
So Obama's lawyer, Obama's lawyer, Catherine Rumler in the White House, otherwise known as the fixer, the fixer on the Benghazi scandal, the fixer on the IRS scandal, the fixer in the Secret Service scandal, the cover-up of the White House staffer, Catherine Rumler, the legal fixer, Joe, incredibly winds up representing the guy who sets up the meeting in April when all of this entrapment activity with Papadopoulos and others is going on between a guy who knows Donald Trump and a Russian connected to Clinton bundlers.
That's just phenomenal!
That's just crazy!
Brilliant!
That's insane!
I mean, it's tactically brilliant!
And then you get mullered later on, hey Bob, here's how things are going to go.
We need to clean up this entrapment operation.
We tried to entrap Prince, Papadopoulos, Michael Caputo, Roger Stone, all of these other people involved in the Trump team.
Carter Page and this Russia scandal.
We don't have anything.
Trump shocked us all by winning the election, okay?
We don't know what to do.
This has to go away.
So here's what we need you to do.
We need you to come in here.
And start criminal investigations into all of these people that are aware of the details of what happened.
Prince, Pinchuk, Papadopoulos, Mike Flynn.
We need you to start investigations into all of them.
Hammer them with anything you can.
False statements charged, felonious mopery in the unteenth degree, felonious jaywalking.
Charge them with anything you can and get them to shut their mouths because if they start talking about all of this stuff with the Clintons, not only are we going to be proven malicious and intent for targeting the Trump team and entrapping them without any information to do so, we're also going to be shown as criminally corrupt for obstructing justice in the Clinton email investigation.
Shut them down no matter what.
Ladies and gentlemen, do you think this is all by chance?
It's all a conspiracy theory!
No, it happened!
Listen, fair enough.
You can suggest to me, and listen, that's your opinion, it's my show, I do what I want, you do what you want on your liberal kooky shows too.
You can suggest to me that this is all chance.
That a Maltese professor met with a kid on the Trump team, Papadopoulos, suggested they had emails, that the Maltese professor's friends are suggesting he's tied to Western intelligence, in other words, us and our friendlies, that's all chance.
You can suggest that the meeting with Downer in the bar was all chance and that Papadopoulos mentioned the emails even though Downer himself mentions nothing about emails and it's all chance.
You can suggest that it's all chance that Prince says he has information on Hillary Clinton's investigation and corruption at the Justice Department and he finds himself now to be a target of Mueller who now wants all his phones, all his emails, everything.
You can suggest it's all chance.
I can also suggest you're an idiot.
Because criminal cases in court, to build beyond a reasonable doubt, are not built on absolutely 100% dispositive evidence.
In other words, a confession.
They're not.
They are built on building blocks of circumstantial evidence that lead to a condition where you say it is beyond a reasonable doubt.
This is important you understand this, because, you know, I just was reminded this.
Marie Harf on Fox, who is a very nice person in person, but her politics are bizarre.
She has this habit, what I've noticed on the shows, where she does this thing where, well, there's no evidence of that.
Like, she discounts circumstantial evidence.
A lot of liberals do this.
That is not true, folks.
Circumstantial evidence is the bedrock of the majority of criminal cases.
If I see Joe at a scene with a bloody knife and there's a guy on the ground stabbed, okay, and Joe says, I didn't do it, he may be right.
Matter of fact, Joe may have defended the guy on the ground against another criminal who Joe in fact knifed.
Joe may be the good guy.
But if I have video of this scene, and video of the surrounding scene shows nobody else walking through there other than Joe and this guy.
You know, Joe, it's like if another guy at the scene then shows up later on and says, hey, I remember this guy, too.
You know, this guy, he didn't like him.
Joe didn't like him.
Joe, they had a beef.
These are all circumstantial evidence items that can be used to prosecute that guy in the future.
This is obvious.
This is how criminal cases are built.
Joe doesn't need to confess.
Matter of fact, most of the time they don't confess.
Do you ever notice, just to prove my point here.
All right.
Did you ever notice how you go to a prison and you talk to people in the prison, they're all innocent?
I didn't do it, I didn't do it.
They were all convicted, most of them, by circumstantial evidence.
I'm telling you the circumstances here are adding up.
All of these people that approached the Trump team over and over, matter of fact, Lee Smith has a great piece in, excuse me, Real Clear Investigations, I should put that.
In the show notes.
Let me take a note on that.
Lee Smith, about the seven approaches to the Trump team by people connected to the Clintons, the FBI and other people in the Obama administration.
It's becoming obvious at this point.
Folks, this Prince thing is deliberate.
So read that.
I have the stories in the show notes.
Please check them out.
It's important.
All right.
Hold on here.
Where should I go?
Okay.
Interesting piece in the Wall Street Journal today.
This is an important story.
Bernie Sanders.
I brought it up yesterday how these guys are total hypocrites and frauds and it's really starting to bother me.
You know, I'm curious for these, the college kids that listen to my show that are liberals.
I know because I get your email sometimes.
I appreciate you being here.
Don't get me wrong.
It's not, you know, my effort is to try and at least to get some on the other side, even though some are unreachable.
But what is the allure of socialism?
I don't understand defying all reason and fact.
There's an interesting piece in the Journal today about how Bernie Sanders keeps supporting these primary candidates all over the country that keep losing, and yet this guy is a rock star despite any evidence that he lives by his own credo.
The guy's a believer of socialism or the government control of the means of production, yet he engages in a rather capitalist free market lifestyle where he accumulates wealth that he does not in fact redistribute himself.
Now, you know, I'm wondering what part of that, I don't, you know, the only email I've got, I've received back in return from people.
Is, well, the man's entitled to make a living.
Wait, what?
Are you serious?
Like, the whole point to socialism is that you're not entitled to make a living.
That the government is only entitled to redistribute the means of production to other people based on how they think you should make a living.
Folks, I'm not kidding.
Thank you for your emails.
But I've received this email repeatedly from liberal supporters of Bernie Sanders.
Tweets as well.
Well, the man's entitled to make a living.
So am I!
So are you!
That's the whole point of free markets and economic freedom.
Anti-socialism.
I don't fault Bernie's ability to make a living.
Bernie faults your ability to make a living.
My politics end at my front door.
I don't leave my house or my property imposing my will on you.
Your politics begin at my front door.
Your politics is you knocking on my door trying to take my money, trying to take my kids' education, my health care.
That's you, not us!
Don't you see the hypocrisy here?
If Bernie Sanders is not willing to live himself an advocate for this cause you claim he believes in
Why would he believe in it if he himself is not willing to apply those standards to his own life?
Why do if Why don't
If you believe the government is the best way to say it is a benevolent force in society that is there to do good it
is It is the single most destructive force we have out there right now.
Bureaucratic power concentrated in the hands of a few is destructive.
But if you believe the opposite, that it is some philanthropic good force in your life, why don't people like Bernie Sanders Go and in fact turn over their money to the government to then redistribute it to people who need it.
Why don't they do that?
The answer is because they know it's garbage and they don't believe in it.
The point of the piece is his failure to get primary candidates elected.
That these primary candidates he supports keep losing and yet there's still an appeal to him.
And they point out a couple pieces of obvious failures of socialism or attempts at socialism and redistribution that have failed and failed miserably and yet amazingly Younger people and older adults, who either are ignorant or manipulating others, still cling to this idea that this is an effective system of collective organization, when it's not.
You feel stupid.
Example number one in the piece, California single-payer.
Folks, the state of California, one of the most liberal, if not the most liberal state in the union, Power-wise, definitely the most powerful liberal state in the union, tried to institute a single-payer healthcare system, government-run healthcare in California.
It failed!
Thousands of Americans were died.
Because, and I quote, they couldn't find a plausible funding source.
In other words, there was no money!
When you don't care about cost or quality, because as Milton Friedman said, it's government spending other people's money on other people.
They don't care about the cost because it's not their money.
You only care about cost when it's your money.
Right.
They're spending other people's money.
The quality doesn't matter in the healthcare either because they're spending it on other people.
It's not even their healthcare.
It's the government spending it on other people.
The cost and quality go down the drain.
They could not find a funding source because the cost would be out of control.
There is no cost control.
The piece talks about the National Health Service in the UK.
A single-payer health care system.
Major scandal.
I have the story in the show notes.
It's a subscription article, but all you need to read is the first three paragraphs and you can see it.
The National Health Service.
Thousands of people died due to faulty syringe pumps.
Older folks.
Misapplications of the amount of medicine.
Thousands died.
But they're hiding it because they were trying to avoid a national scandal.
Here's your single-payer health care.
Inflation in Venezuela, where they went full-blown socialist.
Inflation in Venezuela up 24,600 percent.
24,000 percent.
Why?
Because they ran out of money.
So what happened in Venezuela?
When they always run out of money, when the government takes over the means of production, they destroy it.
What happened?
They then started printing money, which then did what?
Devalued the money they had in circulation.
Devalued it so much, if you read the piece, they're actually using Venezuelan boulevards to make purses.
Folks, not to buy them.
They're making the actual purses out of the money, because the money's worthless.
This is socialism.
Why are you so immune to this?
Why are you so immune to the real-world ramifications of your own decisions?
And the reason is this.
I'm going to tie this into this other piece.
You've been able to hide the costs.
You've been able to hide the costs.
The country's so rich in the United States that despite your endless calls for government confiscation of the economy, government confiscation of money through higher tax rates, you have been able to escape the cost yourself.
Liberals are living on a college campus.
They're living there in an insulated environment, insulated from the real world.
There are no penalties for their behavior.
They go out, they attack conservatives.
They go to the mess hall, the food is always there.
They don't have to worry about eating squirrels like they do in Venezuela.
They don't have to worry about any of that.
You have found a way to hide yourselves from the costs of your own policy preferences, which are socialism.
You don't, just like Bernie Sanders, you don't suffer the consequences of your own decision-making.
None of it.
You've been able to hide and insulate yourself.
Now, I'm going to show you how when people can no longer hide from the costs of socialism, how all of a sudden the calculus changes and liberalism eats itself.
All right, before we get to that, I want to do a quick read here.
My buddies at Dynatrap, we love Dynatrap, especially down in Florida, the insect capital of the world.
So summertime is officially upon us, and the only thing more annoying than Maxine Waters calling for violence against Trump and all this other crap are flies, mosquitoes, and other insects invading your home.
So we'd like to thank our sponsors over at Dynatrap.
This is a really terrific product.
Dynatrap is the leading manufacturer of outdoor mosquito and insect traps and now they've come along with an indoor Dynatrap fly light.
I have this in my house.
The Dynatrap fly light looks like a subtle night light and it plugs into any indoor outlet.
The Dynatrap fly light works day and night.
To attract and trap flies, mosquitoes, and other pesky insects.
I'm telling you, this thing works.
My house in Florida, they come in all the time.
So the trap, you probably have to change it once a week, maybe once every two weeks.
The Dynatrap, it works so well, I have to change it like every three days.
I've been using the Dynatrap Fly Life for a couple of days now.
It's insane, and it's insane the number of flies, mosquitoes, and gnats it's caught that would otherwise be buzzing around my house, which is totally unsat.
Unsat!
Trust me, there's nothing more embarrassing and gross looking than hanging up those old school fly papers in your house.
No one wants to do that.
Plus, you never know what kind of bacteria those flies are spreading.
Instead, visit Dynatrap.com.
That's Dynatrap.com.
D-Y-N-A-T-R-A-P.com.
Dynatrap.com.
And enter promo code BONGINO and you'll receive 15% off any of their products.
That's dynatrap.com, promo code BONGINO and receive 15% off any of their products.
Dynatrap, the safe, simple solution to household insect control.
Go check them out.
Okay, so here's what I'm talking about by Bernie Sanders and others, how they have managed to live a capitalist lifestyle and insulate themselves from the cost, and that's why they can advocate for liberalism.
That's cracking.
Liberalism eventually eats itself.
There are a number of ways it eats itself.
On tax policy, I wrote a couple notes here.
People eventually are bankrupted by the government confiscating their money or they flee the states.
You're seeing that now with this mass exodus from California and New York to places with lower taxes like Florida and Texas.
The numbers speak for themselves.
People are fleeing.
Middle-class income earners and people who are wealthy are fleeing Connecticut, New York, and California.
They are leaving.
They are taking their income with them.
The IRS tax statistics are clear as day.
Remember Obama tried to hide them?
You guys remember that?
They tried to hide the IRS data from people leaving because they were embarrassed?
They're embarrassed.
They're embarrassed because their liberal policy sucks so bad people can't get out of there fast enough.
It will eventually eat itself on taxes.
You'll either go bankrupt or you'll flee.
On health care, as we saw from the story with the NHS and more.
The government will eventually go bankrupt.
California can't even find a funding source for single-payer, even its most liberal state in the union.
Or people will die as we saw in the UK story about the faulty syringe pumps.
Because there's no cost or quality control.
Because the government's paying.
It's not their health care.
What do they care?
Education!
The government will eventually go bankrupt or our students will fall behind.
If there's no meritocracy and a government instituted system where cost and quality don't matter.
Why does that matter now?
Because there's a story in New York that's gotten a lot of steam.
This is an important story.
It may seem localized to New York.
It is not.
There's a test in New York, I mentioned this last week, called the Specialized High School Admissions Test.
It is a test to get into one of New York's elite high schools.
They have, I believe it's eight really elite high schools in New York City.
Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, those schools.
And you have to take a test to get in there.
It's called the Specialized High School Admission Test.
It is an objective, objective measure of your cognitive abilities to handle the workload of these schools.
In other words, it is not subjective.
You don't get to go in and do an interview and four or five people look around and go, oh, he seems nice, and they let you in.
No, you have to have aptitude and achievement.
You have to have achieved significant academic success to answer the achievement questions, and you have to have the aptitude to handle the workload based on the aptitude portions of these tests.
Bill de Blasio, socialist de Blasio, didn't like the fact that a lot of Asian students who are very smart happen to dominate the admissions rankings of these schools and happen to get into these elite schools in numbers that are very high.
Asians, by the way, Asian Americans.
The same Asian Americans that were subjected to discrimination too, sadly, throughout a large portion of our history.
Sadly.
I mean, these are horrible things.
This is not a group that had some kind of privilege in the country.
Yeah, I know.
Now, Asian-Americans, a lot of them who vote Democrat, said, wait, wait, wait, you're going to scrap this test because there's too many Asians in these schools?
So they banded together and said, no, no thanks.
And apparently, a guy named Richard Carranza, some education official, got caught on tape, some liberal saying, taking a shot, by the way, at the Asian community, that no one ethnic group owns admissions to these schools.
Now, the Asian community there, of course, took offense to that, which they should have, because he was clearly referring to them.
And liberalism and a lot of Asian Democrats are now rebelling against liberals.
Why?
Why, folks?
I put this together, this show, like this for a reason.
The costs were impossible to hide.
This is not college, kids.
This is not where you show up at the chow hall and your food is there and your professor kisses your butt all day.
You don't have to work.
You don't have to get calluses.
You don't get sent to a gulag if you speak out like what happens in real socialism.
You don't have to drive a 1960s Buick like you do in Cuba because the country's so poor and they can't import any new parts because they've chosen to be a tyrannical police state.
You don't have to worry about being beaten in a prison.
You have found a way to hide the costs of socialism through your life.
Socialism, identity politics, far-left liberalism actually now had a cost.
Had a cost to who?
The parents of Asian students who would now not get in because they would have done well on a test that the mayor wants to scrap.
Because they want a more balanced, diverse environment, which would take away from the Asian students' kids to compete objectively and on a level playing field.
The parents understandably objected to that and said, no, our children should get the same shot as any black, Hispanic, white, Arab, Jewish, or any other student out there.
So Asian Democrats en masse protested this, and now Eric Adams, who's the Brooklyn Borough President, who happens to be a black man, which is, again, irrelevant to me and the show, but is certainly relevant to Democrats who play identity politics all the time, first came out and supported this.
No, no, we're going to scrap this test.
We need better representation in our schools.
Now all of a sudden he's dialing it back because the Asian American community is saying, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
We vote too.
This is not fair to our kids!
Our kids deserve a shot!
Ladies and gentlemen, I guess you sense my frustration at liberals.
Despite the facts and data you throw in, the historical evidence that socialism and redistribution is not only It's not only not good, it's actually malicious and kills and harms and destroys lives.
Liberals, a lot of liberals have been able to insulate themselves from it.
Look at these liberal enclaves, New York City, where people are so rich that taxes don't matter, or in many cases so poor, and a lot of it based on the government, government's lack of school choice, lack of opportunity, but they're so poor that they become net beneficiaries.
It's the people in the middle who are hurt by socialism who have a lot to lose.
Their taxes, their health care, education.
This doesn't affect the rich.
They send their kids to private schools.
They buy their own health care.
No matter what, they'll find a way around it.
They'll have to pay for a doctor themselves.
They'll hire the doctor for their house if they have to.
And the taxes don't bother them either because they're so wealthy it doesn't make a dent and they can pay accountants to get out of it.
They hide the costs.
They hide the costs.
But where the costs become impossible to hide, like they did in Maryland, Years ago, when I lived there, and the Democrats got thrown out of the governor's mansion for instituting a rain tax that was so injurious to businesses.
$10,000, $20,000 bills.
All of a sudden, socialism wasn't so cute anymore.
They elected a Republican governor.
Same thing happened in New York with the Mario Cuomo rebellion, when they elected Pataki for three terms, George Pataki.
These are not great conservatives, by the way.
The Maryland governor or the New York governor.
Don't misconstrue what I'm saying.
I'm suggesting to you that their election is evidence of what I'm telling you that liberalism eventually eats itself because you can only hide for so long.
Eventually those college kids come out of college.
They're not insulated.
The Chow Hall isn't open anymore.
They're not pampered.
They're not told how wonderful they are by their college professors.
None of that.
They have to go out and work in the real world and they get a pay stub and they're like, oh my gosh, what happened?
Where'd my money go?
There you go.
This is what happened to Asian Americans who vote Democrat, which I still can't understand.
I cannot understand why you would do that.
And it's not just Asian Americans.
I'm talking about hardworking Americans everywhere.
Why would you vote Democrat?
These people don't support you.
They support taking your money, taking your freedom, taking your healthcare, taking your kids, and the fact that these Asian Americans in Brooklyn, who now got the Brooklyn Borough President to change his mind, this is evidence that eventually, when you're, I have this in big bold letters, when there's no way to hide the costs, eventually you fold yourself.
Isn't it hypocritical to vote for this stuff as long as it's imposing costs on others, but when the costs hit you, all of a sudden, now you're like, wow, maybe I'm gonna change my mind.
No!
No.
All right.
Frustrating.
I've got one more story for you today.
Just a quick one about the economy.
So the Federal Bank of St.
Louis put out a survey.
It's kind of a cautionary tale about robotics and AI.
And it's limited in its assertions, but they cover it in the journal today.
It doesn't make these big broad pronouncements, but it does serve as kind of a warning.
It says at one point, it compares kind of the agricultural versus the manufacturing sector and says, hey, you know, listen, we've lost a lot of agricultural jobs due to robotics and productivity gains.
And this may happen to factory jobs in the future.
And the journal piece does a good job of refuting.
This is important, folks, because there's a lot of And I refute this completely.
There's a lot of warnings out there, but oh my gosh, artificial intelligence and robots, we're all going to have nothing to do in the future.
Folks, that's nonsense.
That's total nonsense.
And the journal piece does a good job of refuting that.
And one of the premises, and I don't want to indict the study too much, and to be fair, I did not read through the whole thing.
I got through just a couple.
Nuggets of it, that's it.
But one of the general summary takeaways is, well, this has already happened in the agriculture sector, where the workforce in the ag sector has now shrunk significantly because we have, what, machinery that does things, that winds up harvesting, you know, crops and things like that, and this used to be done by hand.
But the journal piece makes a really good point.
Folks, there's only so much food we can eat.
The agriculture sector is unique.
You can only eat so much food, right?
I mean, your stomachs would explode if you ate endlessly.
But there is no limit to your capacity to consume and buy consumer goods.
Matter of fact, there are goods you don't even know about that you need.
Who knew you needed an iPhone 20 years ago?
Nobody, because there wasn't any.
I mean, I always tell the story of whale blubber.
Whale blubber used to be used as fuel for lanterns and candles and things like that.
Whale blubber.
The oil that used to come out of the ground, seep out of the ground, the black stuff, was like a waste product.
Who knew that was one of the most valuable resources now called black gold, right?
Who knew that?
We create new demand in manufacturing, whereas there's a limit to the demand for agriculture.
You can only eat so much.
So the point they make in the piece is that agricultural productivity and comparing that to manufacturing.
Folks, please understand the premise.
They're saying because jobs are shrunk in agriculture, they may shrink in factories in the future, but they make a great point.
From 1980 to past the 2000s, productivity has doubled, meaning we're producing twice as much stuff in the manufacturing sector But job employment in factories is only down 10%.
And the reason is new things are being created we didn't even know we needed.
Productivity needs to loo wealth as they say.
Which leads to lower costs for the cost of goods.
Which leads to more demand for those goods.
It's important you understand that.
Productivity is a good thing.
If we can get robots to come into factories.
I'm going to just explain it to you this way simply and I'll let you all roll.
I appreciate you bearing with me.
Because this is important.
Because this is the very basis.
I bring it up of the left's secular stagnation theory.
The left and liberals believe in secular stagnation.
In other words, this stupid idea, and it is stupid, that the economy is stagnating because almost everything that can be invented has been invented and therefore we need the government to come in and fill in the holes.
That is garbage!
You have no idea what you... How do you know you don't need an artificial intelligence holographic assistant in the future?
How do you not know?
Because it doesn't exist yet!
The hologram.
There's already audio ones.
Alexa and those other ones.
You don't know what you need yet.
You do know what you need with food.
So comparing the two markets and suggesting in the future the economy's going to stagnate because everything's been invented that can be invented and government's going to have to fill in the holes is nonsense.
We didn't know we needed the black stuff coming out of the ground.
You don't know what you need in the future.
I don't know.
I can't predict.
If I did, I'd be a millionaire.
If I could have predicted, you know, 40 years ago, the advent of Microsoft, I would have invented the Microsoft operating system myself.
Don't buy into this.
Productivity and enhancements.
Would you rather have, you know, in other words, what they're saying is, yes, farms and agricultural communities are losing jobs because of AI and productivity, but that's not how it's going to work.
Not because of AI, because of robotic enhancement machinery and productivity gains.
In the factories, yes, you may have a factory now that decreases its employees from 100 to 10.
But you're also going to have 10 and 20 more factories employing 10 people because of new stuff that's yet to even be created.
Don't buy into the liberal nonsense about secular stagnation.
It's all crap.
It's used as an excuse to introduce bigger government to your life to fill in the demand holes.
It's all garbage.
All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in.
Please subscribe to my show on iTunes.
It helps us a lot in the pod track surveys, the podcast surveys and others.
If you don't have an iPhone, you have an Android, you can follow us on iHeartRadio.
