Summary:In this episode I address the new revelations about a plot to leak sensitive information to the media in order to damage the Trump team. I also discuss the endless attacks on conservatives and President Trump’s aggressive efforts to fight back. Finally, I address the question, “Do illegal immigrants commit crimes at a higher rate than native-born Americans?”News Picks:
This piece shows the connections of the major Spygate players using diagrams and pictures.
Do illegal immigrants commit crimes at a higher rate than natural-born U.S. citizens?
Victor Davis Hanson’s piece describes the increasingly disturbed response of the radical Left to the Trump presidency.
John Solomon’s new piece describes the troubling new texts about a coordinated effort to use the media to damage the Trump team.
Sara Carter’s piece reveals the FBI leaked information to damage the Trump team.
I debated Chris Hahn last night about the Obama economy versus the Trump economy.
These charts show the significant differences between the Trump economy and the Obama economy.
Hollywood hates guns, unless they can make money off of them.
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.
Hi, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
I'm doing very well, Daniel, thank you.
Yeah, busy day, a lot of news.
Of course, the anniversary of September 11th, which is always...
Always tough for everybody, especially when you start seeing the television coverage of everything going on.
But I've got a lot of news for you today.
Don't go anywhere.
We got some breaking news on what happened last night on The Hannity Show with some revelations by Sarah Carter and John Solomon.
We've also got some news about Immigration State, a little bit of a Twitter fight I got into today.
Unnecessarily so, it wasn't even my article, but about immigration and some of the All allegations about criminality and rates of criminality amongst illegal immigrations versus a native-born population.
So, you know, debunking is my thing.
So we'll see where that goes.
All right.
Today's show, brought to you, should be fun, by our buddies at My Patriot Supply.
Hey, we got a hurricane coming in right now.
Of course, to North Carolina, this is a serious, very serious situation.
We are in the hurricane zone in Florida, so I am intimately familiar with how hurricane planning goes down here.
When an emergency strikes, what's your first impulse?
It's probably to go to the grocery store.
But when you do that down here in Florida, and some of you are probably finding out in North Carolina now as well, what you get is you wind up getting bare grocery store shelves sometimes.
So you have to be prepared.
Ensure everything in your life that matters.
You ensure your health, you ensure your teeth, you ensure your car, your house.
Your house, how do you not insure your food supply?
I have a way to help you out.
Go to MyPatriotSupply.com for your food storage, your emergency food storage, and your food insurance.
It's a small price to pay for the peace of mind.
Get a two-week emergency food supply from MyPatriotSupply.com.
They're only $75.
These food kits, they come in this slimline tote delivered right to your house.
I have about 10 of them, maybe 12 of them now.
I just ordered another one from my Patriot Supply.
These kits, again, are only $75.
The food lasts 25 years.
It contains 92 servings of breakfast, lunches, and dinners.
It lasts for 25 years.
Take action now.
Call 888-411-8926 or go to preparewithdan.com.
That's 888-411-8926 or go to preparewithdan.com.
Rest tonight easy knowing you're prepared.
888-411-8926 or preparewithdan.com.
Rest tonight easy knowing you're prepared.
888-411-8926 or preparewithdan.com.
This is the perfect time to do it.
Okay um just a note uh you know obviously it is uh September 11th and uh I just uh for a lot of the you know I forget sometimes Joe and you do as well that uh it was so long ago you almost you feel like when you live through it that everybody around you lived through it as well and obviously knowing the date being 2001 sometimes I forget you know my kids and if you're under 17 years old uh most of you have never uh you know don't know You know, personally, what it was like to be there.
And I just remember being there that day, and it was one of those days that changes your life forever, and you remember every intimate detail of it.
And just as a reminder, you know, of what happened, you know, it was one of the few times I think, Joe, and correct me if I'm wrong, And for those of you who experienced this, you'd probably agree with me, that you really felt like things had spiraled out of control.
I mean, even in the worst case scenarios, you know, I've been through it.
I'm only 43.
I mean, I missed some of the chaos of the 60s.
I obviously was not there for Pearl Harbor.
I mean, it's just a matter of simple chronology.
But through my experience, it was one of the few times in my life Where I remember like, gosh, what's going to happen next?
And when you grow up in the United States where order is the norm, even in the most chaotic situation, you don't think anarchy is around the corner.
You give it a few days, you know, you'll recover from a hurricane.
You know, the gas will eventually come back.
You know, the food shelves will eventually at some point be restored.
You know, order will generally be restored.
For you younger folks out there that missed it.
I think that's one of the few times that day, Joe, where we went home and everybody was like, oh my gosh, like what's next?
Remember that?
And it was just this feeling of utter chaos.
You know, for me, I remember specifically that morning being in the Secret Service office in Melville, Long Island, which is just outside of Manhattan, getting ready to serve an arrest warrant on a guy who was selling diamonds on eBay.
May I say, well, what's the problem?
Well, he didn't have any diamonds.
That was the problem.
eBay was in its infancy back then in 2001.
Again, people forget back then eBay was the king of the hill, not Amazon.
But the guy didn't have the diamonds.
So we were getting ready to serve an arrest warrant in a hotel.
And I'll never forget because the guy uh was we knew he was he was deaf he was not hard of hearing he was clinically deaf he couldn't hear anything so we were sitting there in the office and this was not a joke by the way we weren't being silly and sometimes i tell this story people think it's it's not this is a real conversation we had you have an obligation when you serve an arrest warrant to knock and announce police police police you know you can't just smash down the door
So we were sitting there concerned.
Well, how are we going to knock and announce if he can't hear us?
So we didn't know what to do.
So we had all kinds of ideas.
We, you know, we put a note under the door.
We didn't know, you know, and again, every time I tell that story, sometimes people think I'm making up that that actually happened.
And I just remember one of the agents, a guy by the name of Tom.
Running in the office, it was a small office.
It was no bigger than probably, you know, 3,000 square feet, probably less than that.
And Tom came running in the office and said, hey, and he was a very calm guy, this guy.
And he came in and he said, hey, I've got really bad news.
I just got off the phone with the New York field office.
And the New York field office was in Seven World Trade Center at the time, obviously the old Seven World Trade Center.
We were on the ninth and 10th floor above OEM from New York City, the Office of Emergency Management.
And he said, a bomb just went off in the World Trade Center.
And we were like a bomb.
And everybody ran inside to my boss's office.
My boss's name was Marty at the time.
He was the resident agent in charge.
And remember, we're only, gosh, 30 miles out of Manhattan.
I mean, we're right there.
And we turned on the TV and we figured for sure that if Obama went off in the World Trade Center that obviously there would be coverage on the news.
I mean, it was just the way it was.
And we turned it on.
I remember he had the channel on, was it ABC at the time?
And I think The View was on.
And I remember saying, I go, Tom, are you sure?
And he said, Maurice.
Maurice was the guy in the New York field office answering the telephones.
He was an intern at the time.
And he said, Maurice.
I'm pretty sure it was Maurice.
Maurice had told him a bomb went off.
And next thing you remember, I remember sitting there and we were all getting ready to walk out of Marty's office like surely this was a mistake.
And it's breaking news.
Something like an explosion at the World Trade Center.
And obviously it was a plane and just a day.
It was really just a frightening day, folks.
People were crying everywhere.
My brother, who had worked for the New York City Fire Department at the time as an emergency medical technician, at one point we couldn't find him.
And my father is not a crier at all.
My father's a is a very he's a he's a straight edge man he doesn't i'm a bit of i could get a bit emotional i don't think that's a big secret if you listen to my show yeah me and joe are the same you know i don't mind i don't listen i don't you want to always tell people you want to test me out the toughness side i'm game anytime but i have no shame in my game there i'm an emotional cat um my dad's not there i mean he's he loves his kids and everything like that but he's just not an emotional guy and i'll never forget him calling me in in the melville office of the secret service saying i can't find your brother in like a
I mean just he couldn't even talk he was crying so loud and and you remember back then up in New York and those of you who were in New York you remember the phone lines were cloaked was so clogged up from the cell network that you couldn't get a call out no matter what you tried and tried and tried and finally we located my brother obviously he's alive he's still alive now I mean thankfully um a lot of people didn't make it through the fire department though uh and I just remember that night, and I'll leave it as this, I went into the John F. Kennedy Airport office, which is right outside of New York.
You're talking about maybe 10 miles.
And you can see, if you look from the right spot, you can see portions of Manhattan from the John F. Kennedy Airport Secret Service office.
And that whole night the UN was going on.
The United Nations.
So we set up this mini command post in JFK and everybody's like, what do we do?
I mean, what do you do?
You can't get in Manhattan.
They had shut down the bridges.
There was no way to get there.
So we set up this command post and we had hundreds of Secret Service agents in New York for the United Nations.
Because we protect Ed's estate.
And the problem and the fear was, Joe, that a lot of these out-of-state Secret Service agents had no knowledge of New York at all.
Some of them were from the Midwest.
Some of them never been in New York other than for a U.N.
So we were like, oh my gosh, where are we going to find it?
How did they get lost?
And we had this probably 300 names.
And we only had pagers back then.
We didn't have Secret Service-issued cell phones.
So we're paging them, and night goes on, night goes on, and we're knocking names off.
Okay, we got Chris, we got Bob, we got Joe, he's here, this guy's in New Jersey, this guy walked across the bridge, this guy's in midtown Manhattan, this guy's in a police station, this guy's here, this guy's in a hospital, whatever it was.
And we found them all.
There were two names left at the end of the night.
It was probably around 11 30 at night.
Remember, this happened at 8 46 in the morning, the initial strike.
And this one guy, Kevin, who I had worked with in Melville, we couldn't find him.
And I swear, we were like, oh my gosh, he's not... He's dead.
We thought he was dead.
It was horrible because we didn't know... Nobody knew what to do.
We could not find... And then someone came running in.
I remember it like it was yesterday.
I said, Kevin, he's in Nigeria.
He was actually in Nigeria.
We had an office there in Lagos, Nigeria, because of all the fraud that goes on in Nigeria.
Right, right.
And he had just found out about it.
So he called in.
He's like, No, no, I'm okay.
I'm in Nigeria.
We just forgot.
I mean, everybody's so much going on.
But there was one name and Yeah, he didn't make it, folks.
He's a real hero, Craig Miller.
He was a Master Special Officer with the Secret Service.
That was his title, and I always recognized him on 9-11.
He was an Army paramedic who had joined the Secret Service.
Real American hero.
He was 29 years old when he died.
Nobody knows what happened, but the last accounts of what he was doing Listen, he was given his paramedic skills.
He was in the plaza rendering medical aid when the buildings collapsed and he didn't make it.
So I just remember that night, you know, thinking to myself, you know, who was in a headquarters called and they said, we'll take care of it and we'll have to do the notification.
So out of respect for Craig Miller, I tell that story every 9-11.
Oh, boy.
All right, folks.
So yeah, it was a troubling time, and just for you younger kids who have just, you know, read about it.
It's not just a paragraph in a textbook.
It was a transformative time in American history, and it speaks to a very real threat we face this day.
And it's something you should, just like I did all my homework on Pearl Harbor to make sure what that transformative event of that generation taught that generation, it's your obligation to find out what September 11th meant to our generation.
Okay, so there is a really incredible piece by Victor Davis Hanson that I spoke about last night on Laura Ingraham's show on Fox.
I debated Chris Hahn.
We had a little back and forth in the economy and stuff.
But I can't encourage you strongly enough to read this piece.
It's a piece about the crazy times we're living in, Joe.
I'm going to get to that in a second.
One other thing.
Many of you have been asking me in the Spygate scandal.
I'm sorry to jump around, but this is important.
You've been asking me for like pictograms, diagrams about how people tie in to each player.
This guy, like Venn diagrams.
I have that piece for you now.
Matt Palumbo was kind enough.
Again, we're taking Excerpts, excuse me, of my book from Spygate.
You know, listen folks, it's not about the money.
If you want to buy the book, fine.
If not, I promise you, I don't need the money.
I did this because I enjoyed the story.
I think it needs to get out there.
It's available for pre-order on Amazon, but some of the charts and diagrams Matt was kind enough to pull out of the book.
Put in a piece for free available at Bongino.com.
It'll be in the show notes today, and it's titled The Spy Gay Players.
It's not too long, you can read it in 10 minutes, but it lays out how all the people are connected, so check that out at the show notes as well.
All right, getting to the Victor Davis Hanson piece.
Victor's piece is really incredible.
It's one of the better pieces I've read in a long time, and it talks about the times we're in, Joe.
How the absolutely hypocritical far-left, they're raging against Donald Trump for this supposed incompetence.
This new piece we had, this anonymous coward in the op-ed in the New York Times.
I'm an insider, I'm a resistor, and what we're doing on the inside is we're trying to stop the Donald Trump presidency from the inside.
And Victor Davis Hanson makes a couple interesting points in here.
Like, who's really the crazy one right now?
So the assertion by the left is that Donald Trump is so out of his mind and so not fit to be president that it requires insiders resisting the administration from withinside.
Pretty simple assertion, right?
Yeah.
But Victor goes down some points saying, Joe, are we really the crazy ones, the Trump supporters and the conservatives out there, or are they?
So I want to go through some of these because, folks, I had a debate with Geraldo yesterday on Hannity's show, and Geraldo's a nice guy.
You know, to be clear, it's not personal to me.
But Geraldo was making the point that Trump needs to basically calm down and let other people do the fighting.
I totally, completely disagree, and I think he's reading this all wrong.
When I go through this list of Victor Davis Hanson's far-left, psychopathic episodes that they've been engaged in, in contrast to what they allege is Trump's problems, stability problems, it's clear as day that the real problem With the loss of rationality and reason.
It's on the left, not on the right.
Therefore, the new rules are in effect.
I can't say this enough, ladies and gentlemen.
The new rules are this.
We don't care about Donald Trump's past personal indiscretions.
Legal ones are a different story, but personal indiscretions.
We don't care.
I don't care.
You don't care.
And we don't care because the left, Joe, has made this a Manichaean fight.
Everything for them is a fight not to win, but to squash their opponents.
The left did this, whether it's on the social issues.
Folks, it wasn't good enough for them to win the gay marriage fight.
They have to make sure they imprison and bankrupt their opponents.
It's not good enough to win the tax fight.
Now they're moving towards socialism.
You heard my show yesterday.
You've got Jim Carrey, Hollywood actors.
You've got Ocasio-Cortez.
You've got far-left candidates like Bernie Sanders.
These are credible candidates.
The guy finished number two in the nomination for president on the Democrat side, pushing not just for taxation now, but for government confiscation of the economy.
That's what socialism is, by definition.
It's not that they want to win, folks.
This is why the right has retreated, and this is what... I don't want to say the never-Trump crowd, because it's becoming a talking point, but the people who are on the conservative side, who I believe are genuine conservatives, but still let their personal animus of Trump blind what's going on.
This is why they don't understand people like me, who are legitimate conservatives, who are not afraid to call out bad policies, but this is what they don't understand about us.
We need a fighter out there because this is not a standard political fight.
Joe, please tell me this makes sense when I'm done because if you don't get this, this is where Geraldo's going wrong.
Okay.
He thinks we're living back in the 40s, 50s, and 60s where there was a more gentlemanly kind of politics.
And I'm not saying, yeah, it's totally gone.
And I'm not suggesting those were the Halcyon days either.
I'm just saying that The JFK party of Democrats that believed in generally higher taxes.
Ironically, JFK didn't believe in higher taxes in many cases, but...
They did not advocate a large portion of them for socialism.
Matter of fact, you know, in some portions of the 70s and 80s, it was a slur.
Now, this comes and goes in cycles, but I'm telling you, like, back then, there was a general consensus on cultural issues, and there was a general consensus that these political fights were political fights, but America was still a great country, and we could get past them, and we would let the public decide.
That is not the consensus anymore.
The consensus now amongst the left is political fights are end-of-times fights.
When we lose them, we will throw everything into the fire.
Everything.
We will destroy the presidency.
We will destroy the legislative branch.
We will destroy the courts.
We will disobey laws.
We will resist everything that happens.
There is no longer a common consensus, Joe, that there will be a peaceful transfer of power, and if we disagree with the direction of the country, we'll vote a different direction in the next election.
The left has given that up.
They've given it up on social issues.
You will obey.
Was that Eric Erickson's line?
You will, you know, I forget his book, but he had a book about that.
It's not just on the social issues on a, you know, on abortion.
You will be demonized if you believe in supporting life.
You will be demonized and you will be bankrupted.
You will be attacked by weaponized government using the IRS if you dare to be a conservative group and speak out.
This is a different fight.
Different fights require different rules.
So just to be clear, again I'm not glorifying the old days, I'm not suggesting they were the halcyon days, I'm just saying that generally speaking, true justice in the American way, fights that were political stayed political, was the general consensus up until about, I don't know, 15-20 years ago.
Yeah.
Where the Democrats decided it was going to be their way or it was going to be no way.
That was not the general consensus with the party of JFK Democrats.
The party generally agreed when we lose we lose we'll take it back later on.
That's not what's going on.
These new fights require new rules.
Playing nice is simply not going to work anymore.
Everything for them is an endgame now.
Therefore, I strongly disagree with Geraldo's statements yesterday that, oh, Donald Trump just has to be nicer.
No, Donald Trump has to double down!
America's looking for a warrior right now.
Because they see things differently.
It's important.
Yeah.
It makes sense.
Everything's good there.
Okay.
Good.
Good.
So we go down this list.
This is the, and this is why, by the way, this, this list of stuff that Davis, Victor Davis Hanson put out, it's this list of, of psychotic episodes by the left that should incentivize you to understand that we're fighting with new rules now.
And the new rules are we have to win and you have to lose.
Those are the rules.
Number one, The left suggesting Donald Trump is crazy.
But Cory Booker can't even break the law correctly.
Again, this is all in Victor's piece.
This guy can't even break the law correctly.
The US Senator from New Jersey, who at the Brett Kavanaugh hearing, tried to break and violate the rules of the Senate by releasing classified information, could not even figure out on the Senate floor, in his phony, I am sporadicus, not Spartacus moment, he couldn't even figure out how to break the law correctly.
The information wasn't even classified and yet let me just to be clear the less assertion is Trump is crazy and these guys got their act together?
Yeah yeah really I mean it's just it's this is cuckoo clock time.
This is crazy town.
This is totally crazy.
Booker cannot even break the rules correctly.
Victor brings up another point.
We have a United States senator out there an Elizabeth Warren calling for enactment of the 25th amendment.
Portions of it, the 25th amendment, which dictate that a president can be removed from office by his cabinet for, you know, mental incompetence and physical incompetence.
Elizabeth Warren is actually suggesting, it's out there on videotape for you all to see, well no tape anymore, but video for you all to see, that Trump be removed from office undemocratically because they believe he's incompetent using the 25th amendment, a majority of his cabinet, And a super majority in the Senate and House if the President disputes it.
Yet Elizabeth Warren is the same Senator who can't even figure out she's not Indian!
This is a woman actually claiming American Indian heritage, who has no proof of this at all, who states her papa told her that she had high cheekbones, who has used this to inflate her personal resume, thinking her appearance as a minority when she's not was going to give her whatever, street cred amongst her movement.
This is a woman claiming to be an American Indian who's not, who's suggesting the sitting president of the United States is insane.
Number three.
This is all in the piece, folks.
I can't recommend this piece to you enough for your friends.
They're suggesting Trump is crazy.
But Obama is the one on the Russia thing.
Obama is suggesting that in his speech here that Trump is soft on Putin.
Now, regardless of your approach to foreign policy, that statement is utterly absurd.
He has increased sanctions via Magnitsky.
He has increased sanctions Trump on personal friends to Putin.
He has ordered attacks on those Russian mercenaries.
Ladies and gentlemen, it's nonsense.
You don't have to agree with this stuff, by the way.
I'm just suggesting to you, I'm not getting into a foreign policy debate.
I'm getting into a debate about Obama's utter stupidity on this.
Trump's been soft on Putin.
This is coming from the guy.
Tell me how crazy this is.
That was caught on tape shaking the hand of Dmitry Medvedev saying, hey, I'll be a little more flexible after the election.
And Medvedev actually says, I'll transmit this to Vladimir.
This is on tape.
It is his administration that sent Hillary Clinton over to deal with Sergei Lavrov from Russia to hit a reset button that didn't even say reset.
And yes, you're supposed to believe that we're the crazy ones and the Democrats have their act together.
Even better!
Oh no!
Even better.
Obama gives a speech again the other day, astonishingly taking credit for an economy knowing the data can't possibly assert what he's saying is fact, right?
It's nuts!
He's crazy!
He's crazy!
I have some numbers for you.
One from the Wall Street Journal today.
I'm gonna put in there.
Here, just to show you how bad, and the Wall Street Journal piece makes a great point, Joe.
We have recovered, as I said yesterday, I don't want to repeat the content of yesterday's show, but it's important.
We have recovered from every recession in American history.
Obviously!
That's why we're here with flat screen TVs and computers, and we're not on horse and buggy anymore.
The question is not, are we going to recover from a recession under a president?
It's how quickly and how robust is the recovery going to be?
That's the only question, okay?
Wall Street Journal this morning.
The average time, Joe, after a recession, remember because we've recovered from every one, to recover all of the jobs, Joe, for all prior, I think they measure 11 prior recessions and depressions.
The average time to recover all of the jobs lost, Joe, is 27 months.
How long did it take Barack Obama?
76 months, folks.
76 months.
Again, we're not arguing that we recovered from a recession under Obama.
We're arguing about, did Obama's policies hinder the recovery?
The answer is clearly yes, if you believe in facts and data.
If you don't and you believe in talking points, this show is not for you.
Now, quoting from the journal piece today, Before Mr. Obama and the 11 previous post-depression recessions, the economy recovered the GDP, the gross domestic product lost during the recession, within an average of 4.6 quarters or a little over a year.
Understand what they're saying here, okay?
GDP is lost in a recession.
That's how we measure recessions.
Growth turns negative.
In other words, it's not growth.
It's anti-growth.
The recovery of that lost GDP has taken an average in these 11 prior recessions of 4.6 quarters or a little over a year.
It took Mr. Obama's recovery 14 quarters or three and a half years to reach that point.
The Reagan recovery took half that time.
Folks, again, are we interested in facts and data at all or is this just, are we just gathering our emotions together and speaking out of our cabooses here?
So again, back to Davis Hanson's point, Victor Davis Hanson.
Is Trump the crazy one?
Or is Obama's people the crazy one for continuing to argue what is entirely illogical based on a fact and data set that says the exact opposite?
Better just take it easy.
Again, I have no pride.
I just want to be clear on this.
I got a nice email from a guy who said his daughter was really moving down the liberal path and Just kind of course-corrected a bit, listened to some of my show.
I'm honored.
I'm not here to shill for any party.
I'm not.
I'm a Republican.
I'm a conservative.
But when things go wrong, we call them out.
It's a responsible thing to do.
Right.
Joe, have we ever defended the historic levels of debt George W. Bush lobbed up before Obama came along?
Never.
No, you've been with me now for three years.
We've done shows.
Bad stuff happens under Republicans all the time, too.
Some good things happen under Democrat administrations.
You know, the Clinton era, again, it wasn't all him.
I believe the Newt Gingrich Congress, based on the facts and evidence, pushed him in this direction.
But you had historic welfare reform, general control of government spending compared to now.
I'm just telling you, do facts even matter?
Arguing at this point that the Obama economy, the recovery was some marker for success, is in defiance literally of nearly every single data point and fact out there.
If you do even a modicum of research outside of partisan hackery.
Oh man.
So he goes on, VDH, and he says, so let me get this straight.
We've been told for months that we're all conspiracy theorists and Donald Trump is nuts and that this collusion thing is real and we're all crazy, yet we find out last week that Bruce Ohr just trashes the entire FBI narrative in one day.
Bruce Ohr basically goes up to the hill and acknowledges that this Number four official in the DOJ was shuttling fake information in the dossier into the FBI that's used to spy on Trump and yet the left, Obama, everyone else will still not acknowledge to this day that Spygate actually happened despite overwhelming evidence from the actual players in the scandal on the record and under oath that it happened like we said it happened.
Again, we're all crazy.
Another point he makes He says, Joe, you know, how often have we been called conspiracy theorists because of the deep state, the deep state.
There's no deep state.
You guys are all conspiracy theory.
You guys are all nuts.
It's so deep state.
Some knucklehead comes out, writes an op-ed anonymously in a New York Times acknowledging everything we said is true.
Oh, he goes, it's not the deep state, it's the steady state.
I don't care what you call it.
Call it the Joey Bag of Donuts state.
Call it the popcorn state.
Call it the cable box state.
I don't care what you call it.
I don't care.
The Johnny Ringo state from Tombstone.
I don't care what you call it.
The deep state, it's the description that matters.
A series of bureaucrats and political appointees who work on their own behalf, not on behalf of the will of the people who elected the president to enact an agenda.
That was the entire New York Times op-ed.
That yes, there are people in the deep state.
We call it the steady state.
Oh, you call it that.
Okay, let's disregard.
There are people in the steady state, Joe, that do exactly what we said they do.
We win elections.
We elect Donald Trump to enact an agenda.
And there are people in the deep state that actively work to thwart it.
And yet, hysterically, the media thinks this is a huge success for them.
Oh, look, we proved that Donald Trump is crazy.
This is the great part about the VDH piece.
He's like, oh, we're crazy?
We've been telling you there's a deep state for two years now.
You've been laughing at us.
And then a guy or a woman comes out and acknowledges in the New York Times anonymously in an op-ed that, no, the deep state's real.
And not only that, I'm a part of it.
All right.
Finally, he ends on this note that this is never going to stop.
And I just want to read from the piece quickly, because this is a good one.
This is really, really good stuff.
He's like, folks, we're the crazy ones.
He goes down the list of things these Looney Tunes leftists have tried to overturn the Donald Trump presidency.
He says they were earlier in serial efforts, serial Looney Tunes efforts, to first, Joe, remember first they wanted to nullify the Electoral College.
Oh yeah.
Remember they were trying to convince electors not to vote for Trump?
Oh yeah!
After the election.
They wanted to sue about election machines.
They wanted to boycott the inauguration.
Introduce Articles of Impeachment.
They want to invoke the 25th Amendment.
They wanted to try the Emoluments Clause.
Then it was the Logan Act.
Then it was suing by cherry-picking liberal federal judges.
Then it was harassing officials in public places and restaurants.
Now it's warping the FISA courts to spy on our opponents.
That's my interjection there.
The FISA court's in there.
To fund a foreign spy to do opposition research, to weaponize the FBI, NSA, and Justice Department, along with the now boring celebrity assassination chic rhetoric of blowing up, stabbing, shooting, burning, hanging, smashing, and decapitating Donald Trump.
But yeah, folks, you're right.
We're all nuts.
The left has it all together and we're all crazy.
Idiots.
You're an idiot.
Listen to me, please.
Please go to the show notes.
They're at Bongino.com.
Subscribe to my email list.
I'll email him every day.
I hunt down on the internet these stories.
Now, to be fair, a producer from Ingram sent me.
I did not see VDH's story yesterday.
She sent it to me.
It is awesome!
Because it rebutts this entire theory that we're the crazy ones.
They are!
This is, again, another effort at gaslighting.
These guys and women are nuts on the left.
We're the ones holding it together, not them.
Read the piece, it's worth your time.
And please, read the Spygate piece about the players.
Once you see the pictures, which you've all been asking me for, it'll make a world of sense.
Go check it out, Bongino.com.
All right, today's show also brought to you, blinds.com, blinds.com.
Window treatments is one of those soulless adulting terms for something necessary but boring.
You're blind, so you don't even think about them unless they move or they break.
You don't, right?
When they're right, everything in your house looks better.
When they're wrong, everything in your house looks cheap.
But let's be honest, taking the time to pick out and buy blinds sounds expensive, kind of boring, and installing them yourself sounds harder than any self-respecting adult wants to admit.
Now listen, I have blinds.com in my house, in my daughter's bathroom, in one of the windows, and my wife and I, well, my wife's actually pretty handy.
I honestly, folks, am not.
We put these things in, no problem, and it looks terrific.
Blinds.com.
Don't get this wrong.
This is a great company.
But Blinds.com makes it really, and Joe, you know how not handy I am, right?
That was, wow, yeah.
Joe's worked with me on stuff.
Joe knows I am about the most unhandy guy on planet Earth.
I had to get Joe to drill a screw into a table one time.
With Blinds.com makes it easy for you.
Not sure what you want?
With Blinds.com you get a free online design consultation.
Just send them pictures of your house.
They'll send you back custom recommendations from a professional.
Tell you what works with your color scheme, furniture, and your rooms.
They'll even send you free samples to make sure everything looks as good in person as it does online.
And every order gets free shipping!
And folks, this is the best part.
You screw up, you mismeasure, you pick the wrong color, Blinds.com will remake your blinds for free.
Free.
Gratis.
They've really made it easy for you.
No excuse to leave those mangled blinds from the 1940s up in your house.
Get them down.
Get them down.
Get to Blinds.com.
For a limited time, you'll get up to 20% off everything at blinds.com when you use the promo code DAN.
That's 20, not 2, 20% off.
That's blinds.com, promo code DAN, for up to 20% off everything.
Faux wood, blinds, cellular shades, roller shades, and more.
Blinds.com, promo code DAN.
Rules and restrictions apply.
We love that stuff.
Blinds.com.
I put them in.
Joe, how incompetent am I with a drill?
Well, I'd keep them away from you.
Unless it's like an Eli Roth horror film.
Yes.
You don't want me... No, in that case, you definitely don't want me near you.
That movie was the worst.
That movie, Hostile.
But yeah, you don't want me near you with a drill anywhere.
But we even put them up.
So that speaks to how blinds.com is.
Okay.
Just another stunning report.
I know what's going on now with this whole scandal.
I know it.
I have really strong feelings that both Sarah Carter and John Solomon, based on information, again we do a lot of homework because I'm already preparing like SpyGate 2, that they know the whole story.
I've said this to you before, I'm sure of it that John Solomon has the story and is putting it out in drabs because it's a lot of information to digest at once.
One of the drips and drabs that came out last night at sarahcarter.com and John Solomon's piece at The Hill, which I have them both up there, is the fact that Peter Stroke and Lisa Page read that this is, folks, This is unbelievable.
This new text we got our mitts on, right?
Peter Strokes, the lead investigator in the Donald Trump crossfire hurricane case.
He's a senior manager at the FBI.
Of course, he's having this affair with Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer, and they're texting back and forth.
So we get this text last night, and the date is significant, folks.
Do not miss this.
The date is April 10, 2017.
What happens?
The next day a major report comes out in the Washington Post about Carter Page and the FISA war.
So the day before, this is the page, this is the text stroke text Lisa Page.
He says, I had literally just gone to find this phone to tell you I want to talk to you about a media leak strategy with the DOJ before you go.
Um, wait, just, I mean, folks, think about what I'm telling you right now.
The lead investigator for the FBI in this case, a senior manager in headquarters, who is making contact daily with not only the director, the deputy director, but a cadre of upper-level officials, senior management of the FBI, who is investigating Donald Trump, is texting his love interest, who's an FBI lawyer, about a coordinated DOJ media leak strategy?
Now, to give you both sides of this, if you saw Sean Hannity last night, Andy McCarthy, who's a former Southern District of New York Assistant United States Attorney, who I have a lot of respect for, he urged caution a bit and said, just to be clear on this, he said, we don't have all the facts yet and I don't want to get, you know me, I don't like to get out ahead of stuff because if you're proven wrong, you know, it obviously hurts your credibility and I refuse to do that.
It's a simple calculation on my part about getting you the facts and not putting you in a bad spot either.
So I do want to give you both sides and I'll tell you how I feel.
That's a bad text, Joe.
If you're investigating me and you're texting your girlfriend at the time about a coordinated strategy to release information about a FISA warrant about Carter Page, ladies and gentlemen, you know how sensitive that information is?
We could be talking about potential criminality here.
Serious criminality amongst Stroke and Page, depending on what exactly they leak.
This could be very, very serious, this revelation.
It also brings the Justice Department into the fold, and the argument that this was just a few rogue FBI agents here now goes out the way- You could throw that argument out the window, it's silly, but the left always has an excuse, right?
Right, right, right.
But McCarthy did say this, and he is right.
There is a strategy in law enforcement in general, and he brought it up, he's right, even the terminology he uses is right.
They call it tickling the wire, where sometimes information will be leaked out to the media in an effort to maybe tease out who the bad guy is.
I'll give you an example from the protection end when I was a secret service agent.
I was doing a motorcade, and I'm not going to say what country, but we had gotten information that these media people had gotten an advance hold of our motorcade route, which is obviously a bad thing because of a terrorist.
It was not a particularly dangerous country, but it was a country I was concerned about.
Because of some past hostilities there, that the media had gotten a hold of our motorcade route.
So I worked with some people, let's just say, to leak information to the media through channels that was actually inaccurate.
It was the wrong way.
And sure enough, they printed the wrong motorcade route, which was great!
Everybody's like, hey look at a motorcade!
It was the wrong one.
Now that was done intentionally to throw any potential attacker who would think about setting up in advance on our motorcade route off the scent.
So tickling the wire there is, he's right, it's not common, I wouldn't say, but it does happen.
So McCarthy says, listen, everybody take a breath for a second and let's find out if that's in fact what they were doing.
Now, again, Much respect to Andy.
I love him.
I disagree with him.
Actually, he's not even saying... I think he's skeptical, too.
He's just saying take a breath.
So I agree with him on that.
We should always take a breath.
I'm just saying, based on the available evidence, I think it's pretty clear what happened here.
Why, Joe?
Because as I told you when I opened up the story, remember the date!
April 10th because the next day this major story about Carter Page and the FISA comes out the Washington Post.
So I think it's pretty clear at this point based on the circumstantial evidence that the leak was probably information about the FISA from Carter Page in an effort to damage Trump.
Combine that Joe with the fact that we already know Stroke and Page hated Donald Trump.
This is not a mystery.
No.
This is not a mystery.
We already know that.
We have their text.
I can smell the Trump supporters.
This guy's the worst.
We got to do something.
We need an insurance policy, etc, etc.
You've all heard the text.
It's pretty clear at this point that they don't like Trump.
I base that on the fact that the leak happened the next day.
That is pretty clear.
I think this was a media strategy to hurt Donald Trump.
Now, folks, that's a serious problem.
Again, because we're talking about not leaking minor details here.
We're talking about leaking sensitive FISA, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court information out to media people, not in any way clear to receive it, and in a strategy to do maximum damage to Donald Trump, possibly to get the momentum behind the special counsel going.
This is really, really devastating information.
And Sarah Carter, I have a link to her report and John Solomon's.
Please read them in the show notes.
They're very important pieces.
I know, folks, again, sometimes we have these major revelations that I put these boxes together.
This is a simple story.
This is not hard to understand.
Right.
But I don't want you to mistake its simplicity for a lack of importance.
Again, I'm an investigator.
There's nothing more I like to do than say, hey, folks, did you miss this?
Did you miss that?
And people email me, oh, I never saw it.
This is simple as pie to understand.
Two people involved in the investigation of Donald Trump were leaking sensitive information to the media to hurt Donald Trump.
But Carter last night was right, Joe.
She came out, she said, I believe this is one of the most important revelations we've seen so far to date in this investigation.
I can't agree with her more, folks, because now it talks about an actual conspiracy here.
If accurate, that these leaks were designed to hurt Trump about sensitive information, leaked in a potentially criminal way.
We have an actual criminal conspiracy, at least evidence of it, not conclusive at this point, but strong evidence that a criminal conspiracy did exist to impact deeply and damage politically the Donald Trump administration using law enforcement powers.
We're talking about actual crimes now.
We're not talking about fairy tales.
We're not talking about the collusion hoax.
We're talking about actual, potential, documented evidence of a crime.
Now, again, is it proven at this point that this was a, that the information leaked was criminal?
It's not.
I'm clear on that.
I'm telling you there's evidence there that I think we'll find out over the coming days because I'm telling you people know this whole story.
We're going to find out over the coming days.
That I believe that's where it's leading us.
That this was an actual criminal conspiracy to deeply impact the Trump administration.
Remember, that's important.
You may say, Dan, you've been talking about that for a while.
No, no, I haven't.
I've been talking about an effort politically to subvert the Trump administration, administrative issues within the department.
I've been talking about criminal leaks.
The criminal conspiracy, though, is an entirely different case.
Does that make sense, Joe?
If Joe leaks information... Explain that, please.
Explain that, please.
Okay.
What I've been talking about in the past is the criminality in the cases, the leaks about Mike Flynn, if you've been listening to the show, about Mike Flynn's conversation, which was clearly unmasked.
That was clearly classified information leaked to the Washington Post and David Ignatius.
I also talked about the October leak of the existence of the Trump investigation to the media to...
Is it the New York Post or the Washington Times?
New York Times, excuse me, the New York Times, in October.
These are potentially criminal leaks.
The criminal conspiracy, in other words, it's not just Joe, it's Joe conspiring with others in the Justice Department and FBI to magnify the gravity of this and coordinate The coordination, Joe.
The conspiracy is a different crime.
Joe, you robbing a bank is a crime.
You conspiring with 15 different people to rob the bank and laundering the money is a conspiracy charge as well.
Is that making sense?
Thanks, bro.
I'm glad you brought this up because if you don't get it, other people probably don't either.
Thanks, bro.
The reason this conspiracy matters and this new text is important, as Sarah Carter said last night, is because it's the first time we have an indication in their own text of admitting Joe.
Let me quote the text again.
I want to tell you about a media leak strategy with DOJ before you go.
We have evidence of an actual conspiracy now.
A coordinated effort to coordinate with Barack Obama's Department of Justice to take down the Trump team.
That is a far different bag of donuts we have now than isolated incidents of criminality.
It speaks to a conspiring amongst important players in this in Obama's DOJ to do it.
Sarah's right.
Stay tuned.
Stay tuned.
Thanks, man.
Yeah, man.
Glad you are.
See, that's why I have you as the audience ombudsman.
That's why people love Producer Joe.
All right.
Finally, today's show also brought to you by our buddies at GenuCell.
Hey, summer is gone, but not the sunspots.
By the way, it's not gone down here in Florida.
That's why my wife uses GenuCell every day.
Brown spots and UV damage to your face, neck, and shoulders, all common in the sun.
You got to protect your skin.
Introducing GenuCell's brand new sunspot corrector and the 10-day only summer repair sale.
Roseanne from Akron, Ohio says, hey, in just days I saw lightning of dark spots under my cheeks, which my wife can vouch for.
I'm ordering more now.
My wife loves this stuff.
So does my mother-in-law.
She's like, Danny, get me more bottles of that.
And just like Roseanne, if you click or call right now, you'll get the Genusell Sunspot Corrector absolutely free just for trying.
Genusell for bags and puffiness today.
Finally, see those stubborn sunspots vanish, even the ones you've had for years.
And those bags and puffiness?
Gone!
Gonzo!
And for results in less than 12 hours, the GenuCell Immediate Effects is also free.
Gotta go out?
You need to look your best in 12 hours?
Try GenuCell Immediate Effects.
Go to GenuCell.com now.
That's G-E-N-U-C-E-L.
GenuCell.com now or call 800-457-8287.
And while supplies last, Chaminade's Micro Dermabrasion is also yours free for the first time this year.
Keep the great memories from the summer fun, not the wrinkles, inflammation, and sunspots.
Call 800-457-8287 or go to GenuCell.com.
That's GenuCell.com.
GenuCell.com.
Okie dokes.
So, another great piece by Matt Palumbo.
Just to be clear on what's going on here, some of you may follow me on Twitter, some of you may not.
You don't have to follow me to understand the context of this conversation, but I have writers, people who write for my website, and Matt Palumbo is one of them.
Matt is my resident debunker-in-chief because he's...
He's wonky with facts and numbers.
He just is incredible.
He does a lot of research and he's good at getting to the depth of the real heart of an issue.
So he asked me the other day if he could do a piece on an appearance on Fox News.
Let me get this.
I don't want to mispronounce this guy's name.
I don't mean this out of any disrespect.
It's just a bit of a difficult name to pronounce.
Hold on folks, excuse me one second.
Tweets and repo.
I'm going to my own Twitter account.
His name is Alex Nowraste.
Alex, if I'm saying it right, I absolutely mean no disrespect.
Alex Nowraste.
He works at Cato, and he did an appearance on the Tucker Carlson show on Fox, and it was an interesting appearance, and the appearance was about this.
Is the rate of illegal alien crime in the United States higher than the rate of crime amongst American citizens?
Do they commit crimes more often than native-born American citizens do?
Matt asked me to write a piece.
I said, sure.
I know illegal immigration is a hot topic.
Go ahead and write it.
Alex, I think, thought I wrote the piece.
I didn't.
It's on my website, but I don't You know, unless Matt says something factually incorrect, I don't correct this.
That's not how it works, Joe, right?
I mean, you know, that's not how these websites work.
People write things at the Daily Caller that the editors probably don't agree with all the time.
Unless it's factually incorrect or somewhere else, you know, you leave it up.
Matt wrote a rebuttal.
Alex's premise is that the evidence doesn't support that, that illegal aliens commit crime at a higher rate than U.S.
citizens.
Now, if you saw the debate on Tucker, you know, if you go to my website, you'll see his picture.
You may remember it.
It was an interesting debate.
I thought some good points were made on either side.
And listen, I'm not a restrictionist.
I'm open to arguments on immigration back and forth.
But Matt brings up some interesting points on this because, oh, let me just get to the photo.
I had to take a snapshot.
So Alex's premise is that there's no evidence supporting that.
And Matt's point is a good one, Joe.
He says, listen, any time we talk about the rate of crime amongst illegal immigrants in the country, it's always going to be an underestimate.
An underestimate of the actual rate.
In other words, it's going to indicate less when it could have been more.
Why?
It's a very elegant but simple point Matt makes.
He says because a lot of illegal immigrants who are caught in crimes are then later deported.
So their ability to re-commit a crime in the United States is limited by the fact, Joe, that they're not here!
Yeah.
In other words, Native Americans can... Native-born Americans, not Native Americans.
Native-born Americans, excuse me.
Native-born Americans.
Native-born Americans, when they get out of prison, will typically stay in the United States, and if you're prone to repeated episodes of criminality, will repeat that episode again and again and again, which would increase the rate of criminality amongst Native-born Americans.
If you are deported, there's always going to be a natural underestimate.
Again, I'm not saying any of these data sets are conclusive about any premise, I'm just saying Matt's point Begs a rebuttal.
So I invited Alex on my NRA TV show.
I'm hoping to have him tonight at 5 30 at NRATV.com.
It's free if you want to watch it.
But I want to bring up a couple of points about this and why I believe the data that Illegal immigrants actually commit crimes at a lower rate.
Why?
I believe that data is not, in fact, accurate.
First point I just made.
Joe, does that make sense, by the way?
That if you're an illegal immigrant in this country, you commit a crime and you're deported, the rate of illegal immigrant crime is going to be lower because you're not there to commit another crime.
You've been deported.
It's a matter of physics.
Yeah, yeah, it's a matter of, right, exactly, right.
It's pure physics.
It's chemistry, too, because the molecules interacting are not interacting on US soil anymore, right?
But he brings up another point.
Apparently, and I'm going to allow Alex to, and if you check out his Twitter feed, it's Alex Nowritesh.
He has some rebuttals on there as well.
But Alex had said in the Tucker Carlson piece that some of the evidence out of Texas is that the illegal immigrant population in Texas commits crimes at a lower rate.
And he's right.
But as Matt points out in my piece, which again, available at Bongino.com and it'll be at the show notes today, Matt brings up some other points.
He says, well, what about Arizona?
Where 68.57 illegals, and these are the numbers, in prison for... You can't have 5.57, these are averages, obviously.
Illegals in prison for homicide per 100,000 illegal aliens compared to 54.06 per 100,000 for legal citizens in Arizona.
That's 21.16% higher.
Now, Alex has some interesting rebuttals about the Arizona data set.
You can read them.
It's interesting.
California, Joe.
The murder rates are 25.1% higher, based on some imprisonment statistics.
New York, 250.69% higher.
So again, pointing out just Texas, where the rate is lower, the homicide rates among people here illegally in the country, and Florida, where it's lower as well, ignores other states where the rate, like New York, is much higher, 250.6%.
So Matt's piece, this is Matt's data set here.
So illegals actually are safer than the general population in Texas, hence why Nowratess chose to highlight Texas as Exhibit A in proving illegals commit less crimes, in this case murder.
However, he points out that the lower rates are overwhelmed by higher rates in other states, so that may not exactly be an accurate comparison.
Now, I'm going to try to get him on the show tonight, to be fair to him, put that out there.
I want to hear his rebuttal.
I'm interested.
I'm interested in data.
I'm not interested in talking points.
But the two points to take away on this is, of course, any measure of crime amongst illegal aliens is going to be an underestimate because you have to factor in deportation rates.
1.5 million illegal immigrants have been deported between 2005 and 2015.
Some of them have reentered, some haven't.
Obviously, the crime rate is going to be an underestimate because they've been deported.
You can't run a control experiment, Joe, where you let them out and say, will you commit more crimes here or in the country you came from?
That's not, experiment's not gonna happen.
So it's always gonna be an underestimate.
Okay, final story of the day, but an important one.
Big, big news coming out of D.C.
and I really hope the Republicans in the Senate, and if you are listening, this is one of those activist moments where I need you to get involved and I need you to email or call your United States Senator's office because it's important.
There is some talk about the release, Paul Ryan released it yesterday, the blueprint for tax cuts 2.0.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is a golden opportunity to point out the ranks-thinking hypocrisy of the Democrat Party.
I am tired of them getting away in the media of lies, lies.
Folks, this is what they do.
Democrats, unfortunately, they cannot stick to a standard.
They will lick their finger where the wind blows and change their principles in a heartbeat.
You name me a topic, I'll tell you where they lie about it.
The tax cuts.
They're, oh man, these tax cuts are crumbs.
Crumbs?
I thought, wait, let me get this straight.
I thought your whole argument about tax cuts, liberals, were that higher taxes work.
Now you're arguing that we lowered taxes, but we didn't lower them enough?
Sorry for the sound effects, but I could do this all day.
You give me a point that Democrats make, and I'll show you how they've refuted their own point later.
On immigration.
You know, when Arizona implemented a strict immigration law.
This is a federal issue.
When California put together a sanctuary state policy.
It's a state issue!
The liberals made the exact opposite argument.
They do it everywhere, all the time.
Medicare.
We got to take care of Medicare.
Medicaid.
When Obama's, uh, when Obama's IPAB actually instituted a policy for rationing by price to Medicare.
We got to ration by price.
This is not a death panel.
What are you, I thought you needed more money for Medicare.
What are you guys talking about?
They will not stick.
Conservatives don't have this problem.
We believe in tax cuts for us and for you.
School choice for us and for you.
Patient centered healthcare for us and for you.
There's no, no problem there at all.
We believe debts are bad when Bush did it.
We believe debt's bad when Obama did it.
We believe debt's bad now in the Trump presidency.
There's no discrepancy there at all.
This latest one, though, is a golden opportunity to nail them to the wall.
Why?
Because they are all on tape with the Donald Trump tax package saying what?
And ladies and gentlemen, you doubt me, look it up.
Maybe for tomorrow's show, Joe, I should have done this.
Maybe I'll pull up a sound clip or I'll try to get something together tonight for NRATV and maybe we'll use it again tomorrow.
When we passed the Trump tax cut package, the Republicans, no Democrats voted for it, and their talking point afterwards were, these Republicans, man, they screwed over you, they made the tax cuts for the corporations permanent, but they made the tax cuts for the individuals only temporary.
No!
That is not what happened.
Listen to me.
Regardless of your politics, that is in fact a lie.
If you know anything about the mechanics of the Senate or the House and how it worked, the House and the Senate Republicans wanted to make the personal side, the income tax cuts permanent.
The corporate tax cuts were.
The Democrats threatened to filibuster.
The Republicans, to get around the filibuster, used a process called budget reconciliation, which works in a 10-year budget window.
The only way to make the reconciliation work was to not make those tax cuts permanent, only make them fit in a 10-year window.
Just know this.
If the Democrats had not threatened to filibuster, there would have been no need to use that reconciliation process.
The Democrats could have voted for these tax cuts and they would have been permanent.
It was not the Republicans.
That is factually incorrect.
You believing it makes you easily manipulated or, I'm sorry, makes you just downright silly.
You just don't know what you're talking about.
The income tax side and the personal side, the Republican tax cuts, were not made permanent because Democrats got in the way.
They threatened to filibuster.
Period.
There is no other reason.
Now, Paul Ryan announces yesterday tax cuts 2.0.
There are some pension provisions in there, some 401k provisions, some pass-through provisions, but the big, big dipsy-do-flipperoo on the Democrats show, it's going to put them all in a hole.
Because remember, they're all on tape saying this, Joe.
They're all on tape saying what?
The Republicans did make them permanent for the personal income side.
They screwed you over for big business.
No, no, no, that's not what happened.
This plan they just put out, and Ryan and the Republicans released yesterday, makes them permanent.
And now we're gonna get a vote.
So, I say to all you liberals out there that pitched this phony, garbage, made-up, completely fabricated talking point, I'm expecting you now to come out, the people who said, oh, they ripped this off, they didn't make them permanent, to advocate strongly for Tax Cuts 2.0, which makes these permanent.
But they won't!
Because liberals are frauds.
They're fakes.
They don't stand for anything.
They make stuff up all the time.
This is a genius plan, but here's the problem.
This is why I asked you specifically to call your U.S.
senators.
They will probably have the votes on the House side to push this through.
The Senate has already put the kibosh on this thing and basically filtered out in trial balloons that it's not going to pass through the Senate because some Republicans, I don't know what it is.
Who knows?
They're all such cowards at this point.
It's so pathetic even listening to it.
Not all of them, but a good swath of them.
I shouldn't say all.
I just end up doing what liberals are doing.
But a large swath of the Republican Senate is so full of chumps.
They have no backbone at all.
But there are some Republican senators saying, hey, I don't know if we can do it.
Now, to be fair, a lot of them won't take a vote in the Republican side because what?
They'll need Democratic senators again because they can't go through the same process, the reconciliation, or else it wouldn't be permanent.
Now, some of the Republicans are saying, hey, I'm not going to go on the record and take a tough vote before the election.
No, and it's not going to pass because no Democrats are going to vote for it.
No, I think you're reading this thing all wrong.
It's not about passing it, Joe.
It's about showing the American people what kind of frauds these Democrats are.
They're frauds!
They are on tape!
Tons of them!
Screaming and whining and yelling about, oh, the tax cuts aren't permanent!
Okay, here's the bill!
Tax cuts 2.0.
Income tax cuts for hard-working American citizens which will be made permanent outside of this 10-year budget window.
Here it is right here.
Watch every single Democrat Senator vote no.
Watch Heidi Heitkamp, Joe Donnelly, Joe Manchin.
Watch all of them in these red states where those are three Democrats I just mentioned.
These three Democrats in red states, in deep red states where Trump won by double digits.
Watch them all vote no.
Get them on the record and you got your campaign ad right there.
Oh, is that unethical?
Don't care!
It's not unethical at all.
New rules.
We win, you lose.
We win, you lose.
We win by exposing to the American people what you all are truly made of.
And you're made of lies, deceit, and manipulation.
You argued for months that you didn't like the tax cuts because they weren't permanent.
Here's Tax Cuts 2.0.
Here's your John Hancock.
It'll make them permanent.
What are you gonna do, Joe Manchin, Heitkamp, and Joe Donnelly?
I'll tell you the answer right now.
100% they vote no if this thing gets to the Senate.
If they don't, great.
I'll tell you on the show.
But guaranteed they vote no because they made it up.
They don't care about these tax cuts becoming permanent.
They just care about deeply impacting and hurting Donald Trump.
Period.
Full stop.
Thank you very much.
Have a nice day.
No, not really.
Well, that was my last story.
Folks, thanks again for tuning in.
I really appreciate it.
Please, please, please check out the show notes today.
Check out Matt's piece on illegal immigration and crime rates.
It's really important.
It's well done.
Check out his piece on Spygate.
Please check out Victor Davis Hanson's piece on the psychopathy of the Democrat Party.
And I have a couple of, oh, John Solomon's piece, Sarah Carter's piece.
It'll take you about 20 minutes to get through the articles.
You'll be well informed about what's going on.
I work really hard on the show notes every day.
So please check it out and please subscribe to the show on iTunes, SoundCloud, iHeart.
It's free and it helps us move up the charts.
It really means a lot to us.
Thanks a lot, folks.
I will see you all tomorrow.
You just heard the Dan Bongino Show.
Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com.
