Summary:
In this episode I address the real scandal that the media is hiding. I also cover the Trump administration’s rule change that is driving liberals mad.
News Picks:
This Jeff Carlson piece makes a compelling case regarding the real Russian colluders.
Rudy Giuliani says Hillary Clinton should be investigated. He’s right.
Are Clinton Foundation whistleblowers about to speak out?
White House says troops can use lethal force to protect Border Patrol agents.
The Trump administration reapproves Kentucky’s work requirements for Medicaid.
The new anti-Trump NYT “bombshell” is complete garbage.
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.
Happy Thanksgiving.
Welcome to The Dan Bongino Show.
Original content produced for you.
We don't abandon you on the holidays.
Joe Armacost, how are you today?
I'm doing well.
Happy Thanksgiving to you, Dan, and to all of our listeners.
Happy Thanksgiving.
It's been a great year.
Yeah, it's been a great year, and thank you.
I mean, it is Thanksgiving, and I want to give thanks to the Almighty first, my family second, and to you all.
You have made my life and Joe's a distinct pleasure.
We love doing this show for you every day.
Yes, sir.
It has exploded into a rather large audience thanks to you.
Not to me.
You did it.
You know, I'm glad you like the content, but thank you very much.
It means a lot to me.
All right.
I've got it.
Yesterday's show kind of blew up a little bit.
I knew something was going on at the end of the show when Joe was writing me notes in the camera.
Like, this is great.
And I'm like, all right.
And yes, yesterday's show about the real scandal of the Clinton Foundation, which tells like a spy novel, in case you missed it, is just gone crazy.
Joe calls it 628 Part 2.
The famous 628, which almost tripled our audience overnight.
Episode number, that is.
So go back and listen to that because I want to not double down on it yesterday.
I've got a couple more things I want to throw in and I want to get to some news I missed out yesterday as well and some stuff that's been breaking since yesterday and today, Thanksgiving.
All right.
Today's show brought to you by Buddy Eats at Man Crates.
Folks, here's the problem.
With the gift-giving season.
Dad isn't going to tell you what to get him.
And the truth is, he doesn't know what he wants either half the time.
I know that because I don't know what I want.
Give him a gift he is guaranteed to love with man crates, hand-picked and packaged gifts for every type of dad.
They have the knife-making kit.
They have my personal favorite, the salami bouquet, which I ate the heck out of.
The knife-making kit for the hands-on dad, or the whiskey appreciation crate for fathers who like the finer things.
They also have Special grill sets and it all comes in a crate, a sealed wooden crate with a crowbar.
It's not a joke.
So you get to pry this man crate open yourself in front of everyone.
This is the greatest gift ever.
You will not be disappointed.
Get a man crate.
When is the last time you gave a gift to your dad or the special man in your life you needed a crowbar to open?
With man crates, you're giving that man in your life more than a gift.
You're giving him a gift experience unlike any other.
Plus every man crate comes with 100% satisfaction guaranteed.
Go today to mancrates.com slash Dan.
That's mancrates.com slash Dan.
Pick up your man crate today.
You will love it.
I had a blast opening up this gift.
It was terrific.
Okay.
So, um, just some more tie-ins, uh, yesterday, the reason these local, these stories are coming out now, yesterday we discussed the, um, Maggie Haberman story at the New York times about, uh, Oh, Donald Trump, uh, asked the white house lawyer if they should, uh, start a special counsel investigation to Mrs. Clinton.
So, There's absolutely probable cause that the Clinton cabal committed crimes.
What?
I don't get what this scandal... There's no scandal here.
The scandal is the New York Times running cover.
So I explained in yesterday's show why they did that.
Because they're already getting ready to say, see, look, when Mrs. Clinton and her team are in fact and may be prosecuted, they're looking to say, look, we said this was political, right?
The Ivanka email story and the other story that popped out in the New York Times about other administration officials using private email is another way to do this.
It is a distraction technique by people in the liberal media.
And I've said I've been consistent on this.
Guys, the rules are simple.
And ladies, you can't use private email in a government.
Simple as that.
Right.
But to compare this to the Hillary Clinton email debacle is embarrassing and you're just making an idiot out of yourself if you do that.
There are no deleted emails.
There are no missing emails.
There are no private servers.
There's no classified information.
This is apples and oranges.
You're just bringing it up as a distraction technique.
Why?
Because, folks, there's a great article out by Jeff Carlson who does some really great work at the Epoch Times.
I'll put in the show notes today.
I really would like you to read it.
It's long, but it is good and it is worth your time.
It's an article about some connections in the Mueller probe with Deripaska, Oleg Deripaska.
Name a blast from the past year.
And I think, again, this is another one of those Let's distract from what's really going on and turn attention back to Manafort and the Trump team.
I've always said to you that this is what happens with the media and the Mueller program.
Their goal is this.
It's very simple.
Let me lay it out for you.
Some of you are probably cooking your turkey right now, listening on your Amazon device, your Google device.
The Mueller probe's intentions at this point appear simple.
Keep the attention on Donald Trump, hire a bunch of Donald Trump haters and Clinton people, which is what Mueller did, and keep all of the Clinton stuff, the Democrat stuff, and the Obama administration scandals hidden.
Yesterday, I talked about the Clinton Foundation.
Today, I want to hammer on another angle.
The angle is this.
Who was the source for Christopher Steele and the dossier?
Now, there have been a number of different stories about who that source is.
A Russian intelligence official in the United States, Baumgartner over in Russia.
Christopher Steele never went to Russia to get these sources.
So in the dossier, the entire Trump investigation, let's be clear, is based on this dossier, right?
It is a bunch of nonsense, debunked information.
We have never really gotten a hard answer about who starts the dossier.
I shouldn't say who starts it.
Where are the sources?
Who are the sources?
Is it made up?
Who are the sources?
One of the things I want to kind of throw out to you is something I brought up a while ago is about Oleg Deripaska.
Now, Carlson has a really, really exhaustive piece about Deripaska today, but there are some really, really interesting angles to this about Deripaska.
Is he the source, or one of the sources, Christopher Steele was using to feed this fake information to the FBI and the Department of Justice, which was used by the Obama administration to spy on Trump, and why does that matter?
I'm gonna tie this up for you, don't worry about it.
But you gotta understand this, okay?
Why would that matter if Oleg Deripaska was the source for this?
Because, ladies and gentlemen, Oleg Deripaska is a close ally of Vladimir Putin and is, in fact, a very tied-in Russian oligarch with deep ties to Russia and their entire community over there of people who are, let's say, in the know.
We got a Russian, baby!
We got a Russian!
We got a Russian!
The problem is, is Joe always says, sooner or later, you got to produce a Russian.
We need that song, Joe, you did.
We need some cuts from that song.
Joe did a song.
We got to throw that in there.
Folks, sooner or later in a Russian collusion scandal, you're going to have to produce Russians that actually colluded.
But Joe, let me ask you a very simple question.
Yes, sir.
What if there already is a Russian who colluded, but he didn't collude with the Trump team?
He colluded with people hired by the Clintons.
To gather phony information and then get it into the court to spy on the Trump team.
Why is this important now?
Because this Mueller probe, I saw this piece yesterday, I was going to talk about something completely different.
I really believe this Ivanka email story and all this other stuff, despite it being old news, is being leaked now with the Haberman story, because details are going to start to emerge about potentially Deripaskin and others, who were Russians, who were not feeding information to the Trump team, but were feeding it through Christopher Steele potentially into the dossier.
What leads me to believe that?
Folks, the connections are deep, but they're easy to explain.
Deripaska, who's again a Russian oligarch connected to Putin, Hired a law firm, a lobby firm, excuse me, and a lawyer, Adam Waldman.
Adam Waldman was reaching out to Democrat senators on the Intel Committee investigating Trump.
I'm using the air quotes there because it's a witch hunt.
This guy reaches out to Mark Warner, a Democrat on the Senate Committee, this guy Waldman, who's working for the Russian.
Remember, it's supposed to be a Russian collusion case about Trump, not about Hillary's team.
Right.
He hires this guy who's reaching out to Democrat senators.
Why was he doing that?
Trying to set up meetings with who?
Christopher Steele, the same British spy Hillary's team paid to gather the fake information on Trump from alleged Russian sources.
So let's be clear on this.
A lobbyist connected to Christopher Steele paid by Hillary to gather information about Trump's relationship to Russia from Russian sources.
The same lobbyist was also hired by an actual Russian connected to Putin?
If anyone had information on the goings-on inside Russia, it would have been him.
So was the Hillary team colluding with the Russian or was the Trump team colluding with the Russian?
Because the Deripaska connection seems to be connected to the Democrat orbit, not the Trump orbit.
Now, the Ropaskas connected to Manafort because they had business dealings together.
But now the Mueller investigation into Manafort, the relentless investigation into Manafort makes... I'm not defending Manafort, by the way.
It seems like a lot of stuff going on there was shady.
But now the relentless focus by Mueller into the Manafort connection makes a world of sense.
It's his way to keep all the other stuff, the Deripaska being connected to the lobbyist who's connected to Steele, to keep that all out of the public eye.
To keep Manafort from talking about it.
Because people know what happened.
You may say, why draw attention to it then?
And why go after Manafort?
Draw attention to it?
The Democrats drew attention to it by alleging that Trump colluded with the Russians.
Sooner or later, Manafort and somebody was going to talk and say, hey, this guy Deripaska's connections are to lobbyists who are trying to reach out to Democrat senators.
And to Christopher Steele, who was working for Hillary.
The Russian connections are through the Democrats.
What a great way to shut everybody up, right?
Now, some other fascinating connections between Deripaska, the Russian, and people connected to the Democrat space in Hillary.
In Jeff Carlson's piece, which is in the show notes, in 2005, Deripaska had been given a multiple-entry American visa after he hired Alston & Byrd, a lobbying firm run by former presidential candidate Bob Dole, who's a Republican, for those of you who forget.
Deripaska hired Dole's firm in October 2003.
Notably, this is interesting.
The contact listed in the Deripaska lobbying registration is Jonathan Weiner.
Jonathan Weiner.
Where does that name sound familiar?
Jonathan Weiner?
You mean the State Department official who wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post admitting that he was shuttling information about Donald Trump from Christopher Steele to the FBI?
That guy?
Oh, it goes on.
You mean Jonathan Weiner who would later serve as a conduit between Christopher Steele and the State Department during the 2016 presidential election?
Yeah, same guy!
Same guy!
So Deripaska apparently has a connection as well to a State Department official.
Who is shuttling, who has admitted, ladies and gentlemen, in a Washington Post piece, he has admitted to shuttling information between the State Department, Christopher Steele, and entities investigating Donald Trump.
He knows Deripaska, the Russian.
He's listed as the contact in Deripaska's lobbying registration form.
He's the guy listed.
As Joe keeps telling the audience, when are we going to find a Russian?
The answer is we found one with deep contacts who's connected to Putin, connected to a lobbyist working with a guy working for Hillary, connected to a State Department official in the past who's already admitting passive negative information on Trump to investigative authorities from the State Department.
This guy's not an investigator.
What do we also know?
We also know that a guy working with him is trying to reach out to Democrat senators investigating Trump.
We also know that the FBI tried to use Deripaska to get Bob Levinson back from Iran while Bob Mueller was the FBI director.
For allegations Andy McCabe was involved in that deal as well.
We also know the FBI approached Deripaska about bringing a source Right in and around the Trump investigative time.
We also know that Deripaska was at a economic forum at the same time as a guy named Sergei Millian.
Sergei Millian alleged to be a source in the dossier, source D, of the Trump, let's say, stories about the hotel and the bed and the Prostitutes, well, it's a family day.
But SourceD, according to some reports out there, is alleged to be Sergey Millian.
Right around the time this information is shown, this is all in the book too, the Millian angle.
Millian's at an economic conference when this information appears with Deripaska.
Did Deripaska connect him to Steele?
Is that how this Source D, Millian's alleged information made it into the dossier about the tapes and the hotel beds and all that other stuff?
Joe says it all the time, where's the Russians?
Did we find one?
The Russians connected to everybody in the Hillary orbit!
Yeah.
Now, does that interview with Papadopoulos I did on my podcast where he talks about
Millian reaching out to him with these business deals and approaching him, does that now make
Who asked Millian to do that?
Remember that, Joe?
Yeah!
I said to Papadopoulos, didn't you get approached by Sergei Millian?
Yeah, Millian!
Millian, the same guy who was at this conference with Deripaska right around the same time this information appears?
Folks, read the piece by Jeff Carlson.
Clearly, we're looking for a Russian.
There's allegations of Russian collusion.
As Joe and I have said from the start, the Russians you find may not be connected to the Trump team.
The Russians you find may, in fact, be connected to people in the Democrat and Hillary orbit.
My Russian meter is pointing in that direction.
Of course it is!
The Russian meter, yeah, it took to Hillary.
You're darn right!
Yeah, that's it.
The Russians are connected to her sphere, her space, her orbit.
The rings of Saturn are circulating around the Hillary planet, not the Trump planet.
Folks, I've told you this from the start.
Again, I only bring it up today because yesterday's story about the Clinton Foundation blew people's minds.
I've been getting emails about it all day.
They loved the show.
A lot of people didn't understand how corrupt the Clintons were and their foundation.
Yesterday's show laid it out.
I'm bringing this up today because Jeff's piece, which was released yesterday, is pretty damning about Mueller's investigation into Deripaska and Manafort and now it makes all the sense in the world why they would try to shut Manafort down from talking.
Because he probably understands all the business dealings of Deripaska.
Folks, we gotta get some conclusion to this.
It's driving everybody crazy.
I never thought it in that manner.
You know, the manner... I never thought that that's why they were tying him up.
That's why they're tying everybody up!
That's why yesterday I brought up Viktor Vekselberg.
I'll be.
That's why they're investigating.
It's clear as day.
Remember the Mueller team?
Yesterday, if you go back to yesterday's show, I talk about Vekselberg.
The guy who ran the Skolkovo project.
That's why the Mueller team was looking into Viktor Vekselberg.
It's not to prosecute Hillary.
Or the Clinton Foundation, or the ties I discussed yesterday?
It's to tie him up, to get him to shut up about everything!
It's clear as day!
It's why they were interested in Pinchuk!
It's not to investigate Pinchuk, it's to shut everybody up!
Ladies and gentlemen, you may say, what evidence do you have of that?
I say to you, what evidence do you have that I'm wrong?
Everybody that has been arrested and prosecuted has been a Trump team person for process crimes.
While everybody they've interviewed that's been connected to Hillary Clinton and her team has gotten a complete pass.
That's the evidence.
The evidence is you can't produce a scintilla of evidence that Mueller's team is doing anything to uncover actual Russian collusion.
The collusion is clear between Hillary's team and the Russians.
It's clear as day.
Just pay attention.
Open your eyes.
All right.
Let's move on to other stuff.
But this is it.
The connections are just outrageous, folks.
I want to talk about this Trump going to battle with John Roberts, too.
This is just terrific.
I love it.
I do.
It's Trump does not take any any crap from anyone.
It's it's just amazing.
Let me just pull up this tweet.
So a second.
I have fat finger everything on my phone.
I do.
It's there we go.
Okay, today's show brought to you by our buddies at ExpressVPN as well.
I haven't read for them in a while.
I have ExpressVPN, it's great.
With all the recent news about online security breaches, it's hard not to worry about where your data goes.
If you make an online purchase or you're simply accessing your email, you could put your private information at risk, and I travel a lot.
You're being tracked online by social media sites, marketing companies, and your mobile or internet provider.
Not only can they record your browsing history, but they often sell it to other corporations who want to profit from your information.
That's why I took back my privacy using our friends at ExpressVPN.
It has easy-to-use apps ExpressVPN that run seamlessly in the background of my computer, my phone, and my two tablets.
Turning on ExpressVPN protection only takes one click.
Super easy to use, folks.
ExpressVPN secures and anonymizes your internet browsing by encrypting your data and hiding your public IP address.
You can be anonymous out there.
Protecting yourself with ExpressVPN costs less than $7 a month.
That's a great deal to get your privacy back.
ExpressVPN is rated the number one VPN service by TechRadar and comes with a 30-day money-back guarantee.
So if you ever use public Wi-Fi and want to keep hackers and spies from seeing your data, ExpressVPN is the solution.
If you don't want to hand over your online history to your internet provider or data resellers, ExpressVPN is the answer.
Protect your online activity today.
Find out how you can get three months free.
At expressvpn.com slash Bongino.
That's expressvpn.com slash Bongino for three months free with a one year package.
Visit expressvpn.com slash Bongino to learn more.
Great company.
Take back your privacy.
Okay.
Um, so yesterday Trump, he was, I don't know when people are going to get the hint that Trump is not a, uh, here to take anybody's BS.
Uh, he doesn't care who you are.
Um, he, listen, folks, You can make any of the value judgments or moral judgments you want about Donald Trump, obviously.
It's a free country and I'm not here to criticize people who have their own separate opinions.
All I ask is that you base it on fact and what's happening on the ground.
So some people had problems with Trump's criticisms of prominent military officer McRaven.
Also, some people were saying with John Roberts yesterday, Chief Justice, who had kind of alluded to in his comments and criticism on Trump, oh, maybe Trump should be quiet about this.
Ah, folks, I just don't think so.
Again, you're free to think how you want about Donald Trump.
I get it about his fighting, punching back style.
But the guy is clearly a counterpuncher and always has been.
So here's the background.
Here's what happened.
The asylum ruling, where this liberal judge, who's a liberal, he was appointed by Obama, somehow ruled that we now can't control our borders.
The judge ruled that Trump's edict that you had to claim asylum at a port of entry, which Joe, is common sense.
In other words, if you're going to enter the United States, Without citizenship or green card or any legal ability to do so, and you are going to claim asylum to do it, you have to do it at a port of entry, at an actual legal border crossing.
This is not controversial.
It's only controversial to lunatic liberals, right?
But unfortunately, we have a bunch of liberals on the courts who just write the laws themselves and don't seem to care anymore, right?
So, of course, it gets in front of an Obama judge who says, no, Trump can't say that.
You now can apparently, according to the judge, who's just making it up as he goes along.
And I'm tired.
Listen, I'm really, really fed up with this faux deference we have to pay to the judiciary.
They just make it up as they go along, Joe.
Dan Horowitz from Conservative View has been on this from day one.
Why we're supposed to treat them as if they're some kind of Yeah, you know, the anointed ones, as Thomas Sowell would call, you know, the vision of the anointed in his book, while they act like just standard everyday politicians, I'm not sure I'm not doing that.
And by the way, I give exactly zero of that anyone thinks otherwise.
You do what you want.
Judges want to act like politicians.
That's exactly how you're going to be treated.
So.
Trump came out with a statement criticizing this judge, and he emphasized in his statement that this guy was an Obama-appointed judge.
So John Roberts, you know, fake conservative and savior for Obamacare, remember it was Justice Roberts who made up, started just creating out of thin air, new legal penumbras to save Obamacare, criticized kind of covertly Trump and responded to a press inquiry and said, We don't have Obama judges or Bush judges.
We have judges basically taking a shot at Donald Trump.
So Trump fired back in a tweet, sorry Justice Roberts, but you do indeed have Obama judges and they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country.
It'd be great if the Ninth Circuit was indeed a quote, independent judiciary as Roberts alleged.
But if it is, why are so many Opposing views on border and safety cases filed there.
And why are vast numbers of these cases overturned?
Please study the numbers.
They are shocking.
We need protection and security.
These rulings are making the country unsafe.
Very dangerous and unwise.
Good for you, DJT!
Tell me again why we're supposed to be treating these judges like judges when they're acting like politicians.
Folks, they are politicians.
I'm sorry.
You can either respect the Constitution, you can respect the law as it's worded, 212F of the Immigration and Nationality Act, which clearly states the President can keep any class of aliens out of the country based on a national security interest, or you can make it up yourself and act like a politician, which is what the Obama judge Did, in overturning Trump's rule.
Think about this now, Joe.
Anybody now at any time can walk across the border anywhere they choose, just say asylum and no problem at all.
You don't even have to go to a point of entry or a consulate to do it anymore.
Why?
Because one judge appointed by Obama said it.
And we're all supposed to sit back in deference to his massive intelligence.
Oh, he's so smart.
Oh, this is so wonderful.
The judge said it.
Nah, hard pass.
No thanks.
He's a politician, he's acting like a politician, this judge, and I'm damn glad Donald Trump called him out about it.
Good for you.
If you don't come in at a port of entry, who are you supposed to plead asylum to?
Claim asylum to?
I knew you were going to say that.
I have no idea.
None.
Okay, fine.
Listen, I'm not trying to make any sense out of this, and I can sense your hesitation to try to digest this, to try to chew on it yourself.
You're like, okay, so we have legal ports of entry where you can come to the United States, you can claim asylum, you can gain entry into the United States as a legal resident or a citizen.
And then we have illegal border crossing areas.
So now you can apparently walk anywhere.
I mean, next, Joe, you're going to be able to walk anywhere you want along that, you know, thousands of miles of border and just demand the hearing right there.
And these liberal judges are going to say, you know what?
I think the government should pay for not only a lawyer, but a private judge to meet you in the middle of the border section you choose, where you can have an asylum hearing heard right there.
That's a pretty good idea.
I should be careful because you're right, Joe.
Some libs are probably saying, damn, Bongino's got a great idea.
We should have judges in the middle of the border everywhere and lawyers.
Folks, this is nonsense.
I applaud Trump for fighting back and I'm glad he's finally calling out both John Roberts and others.
John Roberts was a Bush appointee who basically saved Obamacare by himself.
By saying that the tax that Obama's team said the individual mandate wasn't a tax John Roberts said, no, it's a tax.
Really?
You should listen to Obama who argued to George Stephanopoulos in an interview that the individual mandate wasn't a tax.
I'll take him at his word.
Roberts is like, no, no, no.
I'm saying it's a tax.
Why?
Because I want to save Obamacare basically.
All right.
So I wanted to get to that.
Oh, I didn't mention that yesterday.
All right.
Let's see here.
What do we got?
Oh, Betsy DeVos.
Folks, the left has found a new target.
I missed this in yesterday's show.
Education Secretary Betsy DeVos.
The left... I shouldn't say a new target.
She's been a target for a while.
But they have really doubled down to the point where Betsy DeVos needs security by the U.S.
Marshals now.
The left is just... has put her in their sights and they cannot stand Betsy DeVos.
And they now are losing their minds over Title IX.
Well, what happened?
This is important, and this could affect your kids in the future.
I want to make sure you know about these developments.
The Obama administration, while they were in office and in power, wanted college campuses to become this new system of discretionary justice for sexual assault cases.
Folks, this is serious stuff.
This is not a joke.
Right.
Obviously, this stuff happens.
There's no doubt about it.
But the Obama administration, what I believe is a test case for their form of discretionary justice and other tribunals and, you know, bureaucratic panels and bureaucratic judges, what they can't get done through the criminal justice system and the civil justice system, they want to get done through these bureaucratic panels.
Maybe I'm not explaining this well.
I want to be clear on this.
Joe is the audience on BuzzMedia.
He looks a little bit confused right now.
The left does not like being bound by the law, and they don't like being bound by the standard rules of justice.
The left wants to punish their political enemies.
They always have.
That is the genesis of the Spygate scandal, the genesis of unmasking, the genesis of discretionary government, of Obamacare.
The left does not like rules because they believe in big-ass state power in their mind.
You know, what is it with Napoleon?
L'état c'est moi, right?
Was that what he said, Napoleon?
I am the state, right?
This is what they want.
Obama thought he was the state.
So they love the idea of these panels, especially on very serious issues, knowing that Republicans would and should take them seriously.
Sexual assault panels on college campuses.
And these trials were turning into a real disaster for these colleges.
Because anybody at any time Could accuse someone of sexual assault on a college campus, and according to the Obama administration's guidance, and it wasn't really guidance, folks, because if these colleges didn't apply by the guidance and the rules set forth, they would lose what?
Federal funding.
Now you understand why the Obama administration wanted to control the student loan industry and took it over?
The federal funding is everything.
Basically, they put your college out of business if you didn't obey the new rules.
And the new rules on these sexual assault tribunals Well, that there was not going to be any cross-examination, and the standard of evidence was not anywhere close to beyond a reasonable doubt.
Now, no cross-examination.
These are bedrocks, bedrocks of our modern judicial system.
The fact that there was no cross-examination at all in these cases is just outrageous.
So Betsy, because think about it, folks.
These are very serious cases.
There's no doubt about it.
But if you, your son, or your daughter is accused of a sexual assault and is not even allowed to defend themselves, this could be your kid.
What if they're not guilty?
What if they didn't do anything?
So there was no cross-examination allowed.
Mm-hmm.
Betsy DeVos came in and they put out new rules for these procedures saying, no, there will be cross-examination and you will basically be allowed to defend themselves.
The left is losing their minds.
Folks, listen to me.
I'm telling you what this is really about.
This story matters.
It is important.
It matters.
Because the left wants this.
They don't like the idea of people being able to defend themselves in court when they weaponize the government to go after them.
That's why they love the idea of SEC appointed judges for the Securities and Exchange Commission that can go after these banks and stuff with a lower standard of evidence.
You get what I'm saying?
Does this make sense?
Through the court system they'd have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt.
It's hard to target your political enemies in a spy gate type scandal when you have to go to a regular court.
Notice, where did they go to target Donald Trump?
The FISA courts.
Where the Trump team would never find out about it.
There is no ability for Trump's lawyer to come in there or Carter Page's lawyer or Papadopoulos or anyone else to challenge it.
The left loves the idea of unaccountable judges attacking their political enemies.
They love this idea.
Yeah.
This is what this is really about.
Establishing a bureaucracy of people able to punish.
Now, this stuff is serious.
This isn't a joke.
This isn't some scam.
But the fact that Betsy DeVos and the Education Department are now overturning these rules and instituting basic principles, ladies and gentlemen, like if you're accused of this very serious thing here, sexual assault, you're actually able to cross-examine and defend yourself.
The left doesn't want it.
They are losing their minds.
They are going after Betsy DeVos.
They are losing it.
College campuses, liberals on college campuses, they're saying this is an assault on on people who are so it is not it is a basic tenet of our constitutional republic that if you are accused of something that serious that is a serious crime that you should be able to defend yourself and the colleges don't want to do that they have been sued multiple times by people who have been wrongly accused who've later on they've had to pay damages Left doesn't like it, folks.
The left doesn't want any accountability.
They want to be able to use all of these bureaucrats and others.
They want to be able to use them to target their political enemies, and they don't want any ability whatsoever for them to defend themselves.
All right, another story I didn't get to yesterday.
Folks, this is important stuff.
The work requirements for Medicaid.
This is important.
The Trump administration, in a pretty substantial Obamacare reform, had authorized the state of Kentucky to put in work requirements for Medicaid.
The work requirements for Medicaid were then... I'm sorry, I'm trying to get this out in a functional way so you can understand it.
The Obamacare Medicaid expansion did not have work requirements built in, meaning you would get this substantial government, you know, air quotes, free health care, folks.
You would get this free health care benefit from the government.
And you would get it basically with no work requirements.
You wouldn't have to work at all.
Now, Kentucky asked for a waiver from that.
Kentucky was granted a waiver by the Trump administration.
And so Kentucky instituted some basic form of work requirements.
Which should be standard.
If you're going to get some benefits from the government, taxpayers who are paying them, poor folks, middle class folks, and wealthy folks alike who are paying for your benefits, and you can work, you should work.
I don't think this is in any way controversial.
Of course the left lost their mind, they sued, the Trump administration lost the lawsuit.
It's important, the articles in the show say the Trump administration, instead of backing down, which other administrations would have done, the Trump administration just basically fired through, plowed straight through, and reauthorized the work requirements.
And now Kentucky, it looks like they're going to implement this.
This is important, folks.
Why?
This would save a fortune.
There was a similar project, I believe, in Arkansas, where people who were on the Medicaid rolls, getting government benefits, who could work, but just did not want to.
Remember, because there are exceptions for people who are in treatment, healthcare, people who have significant health issues, people who are primary caregiver.
There are exceptions.
This is for people who are able-bodied and can work.
If you can work and other taxpayers are paying for your benefits, you should have some kind of work requirement built in.
You should be a taxpayer too.
Right.
Well, I believe it was in Arkansas, the roles of people on Medicaid slowly shrunk because some people who could work just didn't want to take up the work requirement and refused to take the benefits.
Folks, this is important.
We have to get some control over out-of-control entitlement spending.
And one of the ways to do that is to make more people, not less people, actual taxpayers.
The Kentucky decision by Trump is important.
Most Republicans would have backed down.
Let me just walk you through it again.
Kentucky requested a waiver, said, you want Medicaid?
You're gonna have to work.
If you can.
It passed.
The liberals sued.
They won.
Every other Republican would have backed down, not the Trump administration.
They went back and re-approved the same waiver after a comment period, and now I think you're gonna see this finally go through.
I think it'll be a model for other conservative states saying, hey, this is only fair, folks.
I'm sorry we gotta break the hard news to you, but if you can work, you should work.
The taxpayers should not be forced to work to finance your lifestyle if you just don't want to.
There are exceptions built in, but if you are able bodied and can work and you're accepting taxpayer money, especially expensive healthcare from the government, they're paying and you should work.
No doubt.
Okay.
Uh, let me get to this one last year.
And I want one final story.
And I want to just, uh, let you in on a little story of mine.
I want to thank someone.
It's important.
All right, folks.
Today's show also brought to you by our buddies at Robin hood.
Love Robinhood.
It's so easy to use.
It's an investing app that lets you buy and sell stocks, ETFs, options, and cryptos all commission-free.
They strive to make financial services work for everyone, not just the wealthy.
It is a non-intimidating way for stock market newcomers to invest for the first time with true confidence.
I use the app.
It's on my home screen on my phone.
They have a really cool watch list for stocks that I really like.
The watchlist keeps me frosty, so check it out.
It's super easy to use, simple and intuitive.
It's a clear design with data presented in an easy-to-digest way.
Folks, it's simple.
It's no commission fees.
Other brokerages charge up to $10 for every trade, but Robinhood doesn't charge commission fees.
You can trade stocks and keep all of your profits.
It's super easy to use.
They have easy-to-understand charts.
It's not the complicated mumbo-jumbo and market data.
You can place a trade in just four taps on your smartphone.
The Robinhood web platform also lets you view stock collections like the 100 most popular, entertainment sectors, social media, and curated categories like female CEOs and analyst ratings of buy, hold, and sell for every stock.
Learn how to invest as you build your portfolio, discover new stocks, and track your favorite companies with a personalized news feed.
They have custom notifications for price movements so you never miss the right moment to invest.
I use Robinhood.
It's really awesome.
It's super easy to use.
Like I said, I like the watch list.
It's my favorite part of the app.
Robinhood is giving listeners a free stock like Apple, Ford, or Sprint to help build your portfolio.
Sign up at bongino.robinhood.com.
That's bongino.robinhood.com.
bongino.robinhood.com.
Go check it out.
You'll like it.
Super easy to use.
All right, folks.
One final story I wanted to get to.
There's some confusion about what's going on with the Speaker of the House race with Nancy Pelosi.
Some people don't understand how it works.
I want to start this out by saying the general rule about trying to take out the king or the queen, I'm talking about politically in this case, is don't swing and miss.
If you're going to try to do that, you better well win.
Well, Marcia Fudge, who is a Democrat congresswoman, decided she was going to try to take on Pelosi.
And folks, listen, I'm just telling you, if you're going to try to take on Nancy Pelosi, for as much as I disagree with this woman's political ideology, Nancy Pelosi is not going to go down without a fight.
She's going to swing right back.
So Marcia Fudge throws out this idea that she's gonna try to throw her name into the Speaker of the House pool on the Democrat side.
And what happens?
So all of a sudden, all these negative stories about Marcia Fudge start appearing in the newspapers.
Marcia Fudge, she had wrote a letter of recommendation for this man who was convicted of domestic violence, who went on to commit crimes later.
All of a sudden, these stories start creeping out.
Folks, listen, who do you think was behind that?
You think Pelosi was going to go down without a fight?
I'm just warning the Democrats out there.
If you're going to do it, you better go for it.
And you better be in it for the long haul.
Because Pelosi is not in this playing games.
I'm not a fan of her.
Don't mistake this as some kind of like adulation.
She has been an enemy of the conservative cause forever.
We were stuck with this crap Obamacare now precisely because of Nancy Pelosi.
I'm just telling you as a practical matter, these Democrats who thought they were going to take her on and she was just going to go, Oh, okay.
Goodbye.
Thanks folks.
It's been fun.
Wrong.
Here's how this works now.
You need an outright majority from the House, not an outright majority from your party to take the Speaker's gavel.
They'll take the vote right before the incoming session of the new Congress.
So, depending on how many members are seated, she'll probably need close to 218.
We don't know that because we don't know how many members will be seated or present that day.
It's an outright majority.
What happens if she doesn't get a majority?
They vote again!
What happens if she doesn't get a majority there?
They vote again!
They just keep voting until they get a majority.
I believe, uh, the... What was it?
There was... Back in the, uh, 1800s, there was... Who was the, uh, Speaker of the House?
They had to vote something like 40 times or something like that to get a majority.
That's how it works.
So the problem is Nancy Pelosi is going to need close to 218.
They only have right now between, you know, depending on how some of these races turn out, a 16 seat cushion or so.
So if 16 Democrat lawmakers say they're not going to vote for Pelosi, and I can assure you there's not a Republican out there who is going to put their name in for Nancy Pelosi.
Remember, the Republicans and the Democrats nominate someone.
She's in a lot of trouble.
But I think you're going to, I only bring this up because I think you're going to see some real sincere schisms within the Republican, excuse me, within the Democrat caucus over this.
Because a lot of these Democrats, remember folks, campaign.
They are on tape saying anybody but Pelosi.
They're now going to have to break as their first campaign promise like Kyrsten Sinema did in Arizona.
I'm not going to vote for Chuck Schumer.
What's her first vote?
Vote for Chuck Schumer for Senate Majority Leader.
A lot of them are going to look like phonies.
They came in, oh, we're not typical swamp politicians, you know, we're, you know, we're done with Trump and all this typical DC politics as usual.
I'm not voting for Pelosi.
Their first vote, I assure you, once Pelosi sticks the hammer to them, their first vote is probably going to be for Pelosi.
Because right now she doesn't have enough votes, Pelosi.
Wait till she starts, uh, Doing what Pelosi does.
You're gonna see the Marsha Fudge treatment start going around quite a bit.
Just Google Marsha Fudge.
See all the stories that start creeping up.
Where do you think those came from?
Republicans?
She don't play around, Pelosi.
All right.
Yeah, folks, last item of the day here, a little bit of a shorter show today, and I appreciate on Thanksgiving you all tuning in.
I just want to thank all our military men and women, our first responders, firefighters, cops, public servants out there, you all serving, and basically, I mean, I don't mean to sound Melodramatic or hyperbolic, but you know everyone putting on a pair of work boots on a holiday, people going out there and working for a living.
I want to thank you and I bring it up because one of the most vivid experiences I had as a Secret Service agent was actually the least vivid of all, but I remember almost every detail of it to this day.
What do I mean?
Thanksgiving one year, I was one of the new guys on The President's Detail.
I think it was Bush.
It all blends in at the time.
It's funny, I remember the details of it like it was yesterday and I can't remember who the actual president was.
I'm pretty sure it was Bush, because I did time with George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
And I got assigned to Camp David, which I hated.
I can't stand it up there.
The beds were uncomfortable, and the agents used to swear that they pump an anti-sleep compound into the air at Camp David.
It's the weirdest thing ever.
You ask any Secret Service agent, no one can sleep up there at Camp David.
I don't know what it is.
They pump, you know, vapor caffeine into the air.
I don't know.
But no one can sleep no matter what.
You'd sit up all night.
It was the worst.
I hated it.
And I lived in Maryland, and it wasn't far from my house.
A little bit of a drive, but A lot of these other guys lived in Virginia and it was quite a hike for them, depending on where they were.
So one Thanksgiving I get assigned up there and we're doing like a half an hour rotation push schedule, meaning you stand post for a half an hour and someone relieves you.
So the president was up there and he's having some chow with some of the military personnel assigned to camp david and i get
assigned to the post in the back of basically this chow hall in a little booth and
i sat there for a half an hour and you know repeated because you wind up
these there for a while you end up going back to the post
And he wind up sitting there, and it was, I gotta tell you, folks, it was the loneliest feeling on earth.
It was kinda like the third or fourth Thanksgiving I had worked, had not been with my family.
There'd been Christmases I worked, I actually worked at Joe's radio station on a Christmas morning one time, after I left.
And it was just really the loneliest feeling it was.
I sat in that box, and I could see, because it's, you know, there's glass all around it, because, you know, you have to be able to see the president and stuff.
It was cold.
Nothing to do.
I mean, you can't get on your smartphone.
Obviously, you're a Secret Service agent.
You got to keep your eyes peeled.
And really, that half hour probably felt like 10 days.
I just missed my family.
I did.
You know what?
That was absolutely nothing.
Nothing.
Absolute peanuts.
Compared to the military men and women who spend years, months away from their families for birthdays, childbirths, Thanksgiving, Christmas.
And not only they're not sitting in a booth up in Camp David, which let's be honest is pretty safe.
They're in an active war zone where they could be killed literally any day.
So I tell that story to kind of mock myself.
I'm serious.
It was the loneliest feeling on earth.
I'm not making that up.
It really was.
I was like, gosh, I really just want to be with my family right now.
I just want to be with anyone because I, you know, it's just, I didn't have a lot of friends in it that was new.
You know, a lot of the senior guys didn't really talk to you much.
These guys and women in our military and these cops and firemen and first responders and EMTs and paramedics working, they do this and they work almost every holiday until they get some seniority.
So I just want to send a sincere debt of gratitude and a big heartfelt thank you to everyone in the military that listens to my show, that emails me.
and our first responders working on this holiday.
If you're listening to the show and you're in your police vehicle, your RMP, or your Humvee, or your Barracks, or the hooch you're in, or whatever, God bless you.
I appreciate you.
You mean more to me than you know.
Your emails are very moving, and I try to respond to as many as I can, but we love you to death.
Thanks a lot, folks.
Happy Thanksgiving.
I will see you all on Friday, tomorrow, for another great, hopefully great show.
