Summary:In this episode I address the Hillary Clinton team's role in the scandal surrounding the Trump Tower meeting. I also address the broken immigration system and the complete lack of policy solutions on the Democrat side. News Picks:
Pick up some Dan Bongino Show merchandise here for 15% off. All of our proceeds go to charity.
No, the Trump tax cuts did not all go to “the rich.”
Twitter is out of control. They banned an Iraq War veteran.
The chaos at the border continues.
“Free” college is getting really expensive. Here are the numbers.
If the globe is warming, then why have temperatures been cooling?
The GOP is making serious inroads with the Hispanic community in Florida.
This piece by Chuck Ross details the Trump Tower scandal.
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.
Alright, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
It's Monday, that's my fun day.
Good to be here, Dano.
I know that's not true because I know how you are on Monday and it is your misery day.
Yes.
You know, I like to get back with the audience on the weekend.
I know Joe does, too.
We do miss you, though.
A lot happened over the weekend.
Just one quick note before we dig in.
I gave a speech in Palm Beach recently at this Restoration Weekend, and the speech has gone viral.
If you look it up, Dan Bongino on YouTube, Restoration Weekend.
It is a speech about the entire Scandal to take down Trump.
It's about a half an hour long, but the thing has gone nuclear and is now everywhere.
So if you want to listen to it, go check that out.
It is about the plan to take down Trump.
And I walk everybody through plan A, plan B, and plan C. You know, the unmasking, the spying scandal, and then the Mueller cover-up.
And people seem to love it.
So the good news, folks, is You know, the word's getting out there about what happened here, and people seem to be really gravitating towards it.
So thanks for spreading that around.
If you want to check it out again, just put in YouTube, Dan Bongino Restoration Weekend, and it's right there for you to see.
All right.
I got a lot to get to today, including the caravan, some more disgusting stuff happening on Twitter and where the Democrats are going next with the Mueller probe.
Today's show brought to you by our buddies at WaxRx.
You know how much I love my sponsors.
I will not get involved with companies I can't use, won't use, or don't think you can use.
Well, WaxRX comes in handy for me because I've always had a problem with earwax buildup in my ears, and you cannot stick those cotton swabs in your ears.
That's not what they're for.
Matter of fact, it's very dangerous.
It says it clearly on the box.
So, how do you get stubborn, hardened earwax out of your ears?
Well, WaxRX is the way to do it.
Here's a customer review from WaxRX I want to share with you.
Customer wrote in, I used to have to go to the doctor twice a year to get rid of my stubborn hard NeoWax with the rising cost of healthcare and a $60 double deductible.
They have spent $60 per visit.
That's $120 per year to treat my ears.
Now I can do it myself with WaxRX and a significant savings that also doesn't require me to miss a half a day of work.
Thank you, WaxRX.
Right now, you can try the WaxRX system by typing in gowaxrx.com.
That's go wax rx.com.
Use the offer code Dan at checkout for free shipping folks.
I use it, my family use it.
You are going to be shocked at what is in your ears when you try wax rx.
Go wax rx.com offer code Dan at checkout for free shipping.
Give it a shot.
You don't know what you may be missing cause you may not be hearing it.
Give wax rx a try.
Go wax rx.com promo code Dan.
All right.
Um, first on this caravan, before I get to some other stuff here, uh, this is just, Folks, we're a sovereign country, okay?
As I've said repeatedly on Fox this weekend and this morning on Fox & Friends, the border is not a suggestion.
We are a sovereign country.
If you are on the other side of this argument, I feel embarrassed for you.
I don't understand what your objection to what's going on is.
First, we were told, Joe, we were told two things.
That this caravan is not real.
Remember the liberal media?
It's not real!
There's no such thing!
It is real.
There is a caravan of thousands of people attempting to enter the United States illegally.
So disregard the lying.
I saw her on Twitter.
Michelle Malkin had a great tweet.
You know Shake and Bake, Joe?
Which I love.
Shake and Bake is my favorite.
Well, she calls the media Fake and Bake.
It's Fake and Bake.
It's Fake and Bake media.
The media are hacks.
Understand this.
The liberal media are nothing more than liberal activists.
They lied to your face.
The caravan's not real.
How is it not real?
What are these doctored videos?
What are you suggesting?
This is a Dustin Hoffman wag the dog movie?
That these people are all actors?
Is that what you're suggesting?
The caravan is very real.
You may object to how it's handled politically.
You may object to the caravan being formed at all.
You may object to all kinds of ramifications of the caravan.
But suggesting that it's not real makes you look like a complete imbecile.
Do you understand that?
To the liberals who listen to my show, thank you for being here, but I'm sorry if you continue to propagate the myth that the caravan of migrants coming into the country or attempting to illegally is not real.
Do you know how dumb you look to normal, rational people across America who are watching this on television?
Do you understand that?
So we were told, one, it wasn't real, and secondly, Joe, we were told, oh, this isn't an invasion.
Everybody needs to calm down.
Right.
Folks, granted, is it an invasion on the scale of Utah Beach and Normandy Beach?
No, let's not be ridiculous.
Is it an invasion, though?
It's a very definition of an invasion.
Damn right.
I have a video up.
It's up at the show notes from the Washington Examiner.
Look at it yourself if you missed it this weekend.
Hundreds of people trying to storm the border.
Unless you're suggesting this is made up of some Hollywood production, a Netflix movie, or some Amazon Prime special, you look silly.
People tried to invade our country illegally through the border.
We can argue about the scale of it, fine.
I'm not into hyperbole or drama for effect.
But arguing that it was not an invasion and the caravan wasn't real, you look like fools.
Now the left's new beef, Joe, because the left, make no mistake, it appears they are trying to provoke a confrontation here.
Seems that way, my man.
Right?
Now, this morning, I did an appearance on Fox & Friends.
I do Monday morning at 6.30, as many of you know.
I appreciate a lot of you watching it.
Sometimes I'll be out in public and people say, hey, I watch you on Monday morning.
I appreciate that.
I'm on usually around 6.30 hours, so thanks for watching.
But I did an appearance this morning.
On Fox and Friends.
And I made the obvious point, Joe.
Joe, can we just put this aside and stipulate this point?
Sure.
That normal, reasonable, rational people.
Nobody wants to see pepper spray, lachrymators, any kind of tear gas.
Can we just put that, is that just, can we stipulate that point?
Sure, sure.
Nobody wants to see that.
No one.
Nobody.
Nobody.
I do not want to see another human being have pepper sprayed or any kind of chemical agents used against anyone.
At all.
Period.
But folks, let me ask you this.
What is your suggestion if hundreds of people and potentially thousands of people storm our southern border in complete, utter violation of U.S.
law and sovereignty?
What's your solution?
No, liberals!
You brainiacs out there!
You supposed self-reflective geniuses who look at yourselves in the mirror or in the water reflection like narcissists and you sit there and you quaff your hair because you're so smart and we're all so stupid.
What's your solution?
I'm serious.
Nobody wants to see that, but what's your solution?
I'm serious!
You have hundreds, potentially thousands of people saying, we are not going to listen to your border, to your border agents.
We ignore your border.
We ignore your national sovereignty.
We are going to come in when we want, on our timetable, and according to our rules.
What the hell is your solution?
Oh, we're gonna play staring games with them?
As I said this morning, what, we're gonna use foul language?
You better really stop now!
No one wants to see a confrontation.
But Joe, this is not a question of good versus bad.
Good is they wouldn't storm the border at all and they'd come into the country legally.
Yes, sir.
Like my wife did, right?
But that's not what's happening.
The decision's now because of people choosing to violate our laws, not because of us!
The United States and our brave Border Patrol agents and people protecting our border are not storming into Mexico using pepper spray on people.
People are storming into the United States against our laws, attacking them with rocks!
What's your solution, man?
What is it?
Say something, anything, what is your solution?
Let's just stare at them?
They have a way to get into the United States.
It's called a legal port of entry and an asylum.
They chose not to do that.
They chose to storm the border en masse.
What is yours, I can't say this enough, to your liberal friends, these people out there who are so much smarter than you, these academic and social elites who, these hoity-toities with their noses up in the air, these Thurston Howell lovey-to-lovey, they look at you like you are the great unwashed.
What the hell is your solution to this?
How are you gonna fix that?
If we let hundreds and then thousands and then potentially tens of thousands of people in a caravan you swore didn't exist that wasn't invading the border that is a caravan and did invade the border at San Ysidro this weekend, what is your solution when a thousand and then ten thousand stormed the border?
What is it?
I'll let you back off.
You're just a nationalist.
I'm just a Nat, right?
We're Nat racists.
We're xenophobic.
Meanwhile, I'm married to an immigrant.
Yeah, how did I get past that?
By profound xenophobia.
It's so stupid.
I'm so tired of this argument.
Now, showing you that they have absolutely no solutions.
Joe was kind enough to pull a cut this morning from a leading Democrat from Joe's great state of Maryland.
Elijah Cummings.
This is the takeaway here.
I don't like rants for the sake of rants.
The takeaway to this whole thing is, what is your solution when people invade our border by choice, illegally, in violation of U.S.
law, and attack our border patrol?
I want to know from Elijah Cummings and the Democrats.
I don't want any of your focus group tested crap.
I don't want any talking points.
Enough.
Put your garbage away.
I want to know exactly right now what you would do when a rock comes hurling at you and people storm our border illegally.
What do you do?
And if your answer is nothing, then just be honest.
And listen to this cut, how Elijah Cummings doesn't even have an answer for what we're supposed to do with the border.
If the president cuts a deal with Mexico, are you supportive of that?
No.
No.
Why?
Because that's not the law.
They should be allowed to come in, seek asylum.
That's the law.
And we don't... Would you support changing the law?
No.
No.
I think that we have a system that has worked for a long time.
This president has come in, wants to change it.
That's up to him.
But now the Congress has got to stand up, and hopefully they will.
What the hell was that?
What?
So Joe, at one point... Joe pulled out.
I didn't find that cut.
Joe didn't.
It was good because I wanted to talk about this, but this is the takeaway.
The Democrats have nothing.
Trump has... You may not like Trump.
Fine.
I love our constitutional republic where you are as a free citizen entitled to politically go after whoever the hell you want as long as you don't attack them or violate their civil liberties.
Fine.
Do your thing.
But you cannot argue with the fact that at least he's tried to do something.
Some ideas were good.
Some, like I think the DACA, were not so good.
But at least they were ideas.
Send National Guard to the border.
Let's see if it works.
If it doesn't, he's bringing some of them back.
Let's build a wall.
The Democrats don't want that.
National Guard.
They don't want that.
Increase the border patrol.
Oh, we don't want that either.
Let's get rid of chain migration to break the incentive.
The Democrats don't want that.
Let's get rid of the visa lottery.
They don't want that.
They don't want anything.
Nothing!
So, asked in that interview, he's asked about two things.
What about Trump's proposal to let these migrants stay in Mexico instead of the United States while the asylum claims are proceeding?
Because why, folks?
Why would that matter?
It would matter because when given an asylum hearing in the United States, but, but, but, You're allowed to enter the country.
A lot of these people, these migrants coming in illegally, folks, and legally for asylum claims, are never showing up for their hearing.
Once they enter the United States, Joe, they're where?
In the wind.
They're gone.
You never see them again.
So Trump's team came up with an idea.
You're free to not like it.
But they have nothing!
And that's the idea Chuck Todd, that was Chuck Todd, right?
Asked Elijah Cummings about.
He says, hey, what do you think about Trump's proposal?
Which is perfectly reasonable.
Fine, you want to make an asylum claim, that is the law right now.
We can change it if we don't like it, but that is the law.
You will make it from Mexico, and if you're denied, you'll have to go back home, or Mexico can decide what to do with you.
You can make an asylum claim in Mexico then.
He asked him about it, what does Elijah Cummings say?
No, no, no, I don't like that either.
What do you, do you like anything?
They don't like any... Listen to me, this is what you voted for.
These people are scammers.
I left you on Friday telling you that on Monday I was going to cover how the Democrat Party are nothing but liars and agitators.
I'm embarrassed for them.
I wake up every morning proud to be a conservative because at least I have principles.
Principles you may not like, but they mean something.
The Democrats' principles are anything it takes to get power, which is the very definition of non-principles.
Because principles are not anything it takes.
Principles mean I believe in economic liberty, I believe in healthcare liberty, education liberty, the defense of life.
Those are my principles even if we lose power.
That's what I believe in.
We go down and those are hills we die on.
The Democrats don't die on any hills because they just jump to another hill.
If the Democrats thought tomorrow that being a pro-border security and pro-legal immigration would get them elected, they would switch on a dot.
No, no, they wouldn't, Dan.
They've already done it.
Right, Joe?
How many clips do we have in our library of Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton talking about, you cannot enter the country illegally and be expected to work here.
Bill Clinton saying, you know what, you got to enter the country legally.
We are not going to allow illegals in the country.
Why did they say that?
Because the Democrats are frauds!
They are the biggest phony, fake, liar, agitator frauds out there!
They're a magic deck!
A clown show!
They're not even a good clown show!
They're like the creepy clown show!
You're at a really horrible birthday party for four-year-olds, the clown shows up drunk, and everybody in the room is uncomfortable, even the four-year-olds!
That's the Democrats!
It's a clown show!
It's a freak show!
They are liars!
Liars!
They are liars and agitators.
They have changed their position on immigration because they are catering to a left-wing base exclusively to get back in power.
So he's asked about keeping them in Mexico, the migrants, until they can get an immigration asylum claim.
No.
He says, I don't agree with that.
Then he's asked about a law change.
Do you support a change in the law?
What does Elijah Cummings say?
No, I don't support that either.
Folks, this chaos is their brand because they think chaos sells.
If this was a Democrat president, they would be fighting for some border control measures because they know chaos doesn't sell.
They want chaos now because they want Donald Trump to look like his administration is just A cornucopia of chaos and poor policy implementation.
The Democrats are actually fighting for chaos at the border right now.
It is a disgrace what's going on.
Folks, this is a... I don't know how you could be a Democrat anymore.
I'm telling you, they're nothing but... I got these stories... I got two stories, too, and I will get to them this week.
Sometimes I tease stories, I don't get to them right away, but this is important.
So much happened over the weekend.
I got two more stories.
One about the minimum wage, where they totally lied to people and they made up a number.
And another one about the female-male pay gap disparity, where there was just a study put out and they lied about that too.
I'm hoping to get to that today, but I just got a lot to get through, so just hang tight with me.
All right, let me get to this because I want to roll through something fast too.
This Trump Tower thing, how this is going to be the new Democrats, this is it now.
The Trump Tower meeting, the Democrats are putting all their eggs in this basket right now.
Before we get to that, today's show also brought to you by buddies at iTarget.
The iTarget Pro System is the single best system out there to improve your proficiency with a firearm.
Folks, I cannot think of a better gift around the Christmas holiday season than the iTarget Pro System.
It is a unique gift.
Listen, what matters when it comes to firearm ownership, right?
Safety, safety, safety, and proficiency.
God forbid you were involved in a self-defense scenario.
You're a police officer, you're in the military, or you're a firearm owner trying to defend your family.
God forbid you're involved in that scenario.
You have to be proficient.
What better gift than to give to that firearm owner in your life than to buy them the iTarget Pro System.
What is the iTarget Pro System?
It's very simple.
Folks, it is a way to dry fire your firearm, yet still figure out where those rounds would have gone.
Now, dry firing means unloading safely your firearm, right?
Unload it, check it, check it twice, check it three times.
And you go to the range, always point in a safe direction, and you'd pull the trigger on a safely unloaded weapon.
What does that do?
It allows you to practice your trigger control, your sight alignment, your sight picture, and your grip, all critical components of proficiency.
It allows you to practice those components without having to spend money on rounds and without having to worry about the recoil.
The problem is you have no idea where the rounds would have gone because there are none.
That's why it's a dry fire exercise.
Competitive shooters dry fire ten times more than they live fire as a way to practice those things.
The iTarget system will send you a laser round for the firearm you have now.
You drop that laser round in, it doesn't do anything to you, you don't need to make any manipulations whatsoever.
That will emit a laser onto a target they send you, and you'll know exactly where those rounds would have gone.
It basically turns a firearm you have now into a laser, and you can figure out exactly where those rounds would have gone.
It is the best system out there for improving your proficiency with a firearm.
Folks, I cannot recommend it enough.
Go to itargetpro.com.
That's itargetpro.com.
That's the letter I. targetpro.com.
Use promo code Dan for 10% off.
It makes a fantastic gift.
It is just an incredible... The reviews on this are amazing.
itargetpro.com.
Promo code Dan for 10% off.
Okay.
Folks, the left is starting to figure out now that the Mueller probe is wrapping up, hence their new doubling down on, we have to protect Mueller.
Listen, one, that would be entirely unconstitutional.
The left, in conjunction with complete zeros up on the hill like Jeff Flake, who is really more damaging to the Republican cause than a lot of Democrats are, who thankfully is leaving, are proposing a bill to protect Bob Mueller and the special counsel from being fired by the president.
He's going to have the bill would institute some kind of review process.
Yeah I know Joe's looking like, neither Joe nor I are constitutional lawyers but we're both pretty bright guys who've been involved in this movement a long time and thankfully you don't have to be a lawyer to read the constitution.
How you are going to pass a bill That takes away the executive powers of the president.
It's puzzling.
You would basically be throwing out the Constitution using it as toilet paper.
Bob Mueller is an inferior officer to the president.
The president doesn't work for Bob Mueller.
Now, however uncomfortable this makes you, liberals, this is a constitutional fact, and unless you want to amend the Constitution, Mueller can be fired at any time.
Now, I thought Mueller should have been fired a long time ago, but I'm here to tell you I don't think it's going to happen.
I don't think the president intends on firing Mueller.
And the reason he doesn't intend on firing Mueller, I wish he had a while ago, is because there's no collusion and Mueller doesn't have anything.
Now, of course, you got rhino Republicans like Jeff Flake and some others, sadly, who are backing this bill.
To have Mueller protected, which would be entirely unconstitutional and would be thrown out.
But why are they doubling down on this now?
There are two things going on you must pay attention to.
Number one, The Mueller probe, I have absolutely no doubt that there are people up on the hill on the Democrat and swamp rat Republican side who are well aware, Joe, number one, of what's in the Mueller report they're compiling.
Oh yeah.
They are probably aware that this report, although as Alan Dershowitz said, is not going to paint politically a great picture because it's being written by partisans, there will be absolutely zero evidence of any kind of criminal Russian collusion at all, and it will blow this whole thing up as a hoax.
Now, Dershowitz said the report will be politically damaging to the president, and I respond back to Dershowitz by saying, of course it will.
It's being written by partisans.
It's being written by lawyers in the Mueller probe, Jeanne Rhee, Aaron Zebley, Andy Weissman, and Bob Mueller, who hate the president.
And any report being written from a one-sided perspective is going to be written to be politically damaging for the president.
The Democrats are worried, Joe, because they've told the public for two years now that this Mueller probe is going to uncover actual evidence of a criminal conspiracy to conspire with the Russians.
That's not there.
Listen to me.
Take this to the bank.
That is not going to happen.
There is going to be no evidence of Russian collusion in that report, and the Democrats are worried a little bit.
Hence this bill.
This bill is all, they know it's unconstitutional.
You see where I'm going with this show?
They're not introducing this bill because they think it's actually going to protect Mueller, be thrown out by the Supreme Court instantaneously.
Right.
They're introducing this bill right now, I believe, to bait people in the administration.
That's the only, to keep the attention on Trump with Mueller.
That's it.
That's the only purpose to it.
That's why I said we should have fired him a long time ago.
Now that he's entrenched, it's forget it.
It's an impossibility right now.
But secondly, given that they know they have no evidence, they're worried about, again, their involvement in this entire scheme.
And there are things they're trying to cover up.
And whenever you want to find out what the Democrats did wrong, just look at what they're trying to keep the attention on themselves.
I'm getting some traffic here from people that the Trump Tower meeting is going to be the focus of this Mueller thing.
Now, just to be clear, so you have the facts, I don't want to spend a ton of time on this, but folks, the Trump Tower meeting is hardcore, hardcore evidence of, at a minimum, collusion, maybe not conspiracy, but a collusion effort between Hillary Clinton's team and Russian-connected individuals.
You should be focusing on the Trump Tower meeting.
Now, the Democrats know this, so that's why they're focusing on the Trump Tower meeting between Don Jr.
and Akhmetchin and Veselnitskaya, these two Russians, because they want to keep the attention off their role in this disaster.
Listen, I cannot be clearer on this.
This is going to be the focus of the report.
Don Jr.
met with Russians.
Collusion!
Collusion!
They will not mention in this report.
Well, it'll be mentioned tangentially, as it's not the focus of what it should be, that the two Russians who meet with Don Jr.
at Trump Tower, at that meeting, Are connected to people in the Clinton orbit.
Folks, this is ours.
This Trump Tower meeting should be the focus of an investigation by non-partisan actors for the role in their conflicts with the Clinton team.
I don't want to walk through this a thousand times on the show, but I can't emphasize this to you enough.
Because liberals talk about this Trump Tower meeting and conveniently leave out the facts.
Fact number one.
The woman that shows up, Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Russian lawyer, it is without question, she shows up to meet with Don Jr.
in what I believe to be a setup, while she's simultaneously working with Fusion GPS on another case.
In other words, the Russian that shows up is working with the company hired by Mrs. Clinton to set up Donald Trump.
Listen, please tell me you get this.
You don't get this.
None of this makes sense.
That's why I think the speech went viral and everybody's listening to it.
People are missing the setup.
The woman that shows up, the Russian lawyer that the Democrats are telling you is evidence of collusion with the Trump team, is connected to the Clinton orbit.
She is literally working with a company paid by Mrs. Clinton to gin up negative information on Trump.
This may be so obvious, it may actually be moving over people's heads.
They paid a company to get bad information on Trump.
The same company sends a lawyer that's working with them to Trump Tower to meet with Don Jr.
This is obviously a setup.
The people that showed up are connected to the Clintons.
Secondly, this gets worse, by the way, the other guy who shows up, the Russian, former Russian intelligence guy, this guy, Rinat Akhmetchen.
Folks, Chuck Ross has a devastating piece in the Daily Caller.
From, um, let me look at the date on this so you can, uh, you know what?
I'll put it in the show notes.
Let me just take a note, even though it's older.
It's from May 18th of 2018.
Let me just read something to you.
So let's be clear.
Two Russians show up with a translator who's also has connections to the state department when Hillary was here, but let's forget the translator for a moment.
The first Russian's working with the company hired by Hillary to dig up information on Trump.
Hello, McFly!
What are we missing here?
That's not in dispute.
The second guy.
Here's from Chuck Ross, the reenactment.
The Russian-American lobbyist who attended the infamous Trump Tower meeting had contacts with members of Hillary Clinton's inner circle and knew Clinton herself, he told the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2017.
Here's a quote.
I knew Clinton.
I knew some people who worked on a campaign.
The lobbyist Renaud Ackmetschen told the Senate Judiciary Committee in closed-door testimony on November 14th.
What am I missing here?
When your Looney Tunes kookadoodle liberal friends come out and say, yeah, but they met in Trump Tower.
Yes, with people who were working with the Clintons and knew the Clintons.
This is all on the record.
None of this is mysterious.
None of these connections are cryptic, are hidden.
It is a basic internet search.
That's a quote.
Chuck Ross didn't make it up.
I knew Clinton.
I knew some people who worked on her campaign.
And you don't find this remotely suspicious, so let me be clear.
Your premise is Don Jr.
colluded with dangerous Russians who were connected to the Clintons and quote, knew Clinton.
I knew people who worked on her campaign.
What is it?
How is this a case for collusion without being a case for collusion against the Clintons?
At a minimum, they're Orbit.
How?
Please tell me how that is.
Don't forget this quote.
Commit this to memory.
A Russian intel-connected guy shows up at the Trump Tower meeting and testifies in front of the Senate committee, under oath, the Senate Judiciary Committee, and says, I knew Clinton.
I knew some people who worked on her campaign.
So if this guy's the big Russian colluder meeting with Don Jr., why isn't Clinton being brought in and people in her campaign to describe what their relationship was with the Russian colluder?
Why, Joe?
Because they don't want the answer.
You know it and I know it.
This was a setup.
You're being played for a sucker man.
A fool.
I sat on a panel at Politicon with some imbecile moderator who had no idea of even basic facts of the case.
He was.
He was so stupid.
I'm sorry folks.
The guy was a moron.
He wasn't even a moderator.
He had no idea the basic facts of the case and I'm there with David from And David Frum is bringing up this Don Trump Jr.
meeting at Trump Tower.
This is evidence of collusion.
I simply state the facts that the two people who showed up are connected to the Clinton space and everybody on the panel looks at me like I'm crazy.
Like I'm making this stuff up.
Because they are so blinded by hatred for Trump they don't want to admit the obvious.
The people who showed up are connected to Clinton's team.
It was a setup.
Now what was this about?
Folks, the briefing that the Russian lawyer Veselnitskaya, a few people show up, Goldstone, Veselnitskaya, Akhmetshin, and a translator who has connections to Hillary's State Department, but I'm just focusing right now on the lawyer Veselnitskaya and the former Intel connected guy Akhmetshin.
The Russian lawyer that shows up, who's working with the team paid by Hillary to gin up information on Trump, Shows up with a briefing about Magnitsky, the Magnitsky Act.
I'll get to that in a second.
Who prepares the briefing, Joe?
Fusion GPS!
The company working for Hillary Clinton!
This explains a lot.
By the way, one more thing I'm not going to mention because this thing on Vessel in the Sky is going to take a minute.
But the Russian intel guy?
Joe, his lawyer is a guy by the name of Edward Lieberman.
His wife, Evelyn Lieberman, who's since deceased, Evelyn Lieberman was a Clinton's high-ranking Clinton staffer.
So the guy who says, I know the Clintons, I knew people on our campaign.
Also his lawyer, who he admits to briefing, his lawyer's wife was a high-ranking Bill Clinton
staffer. Uh, the connections are to the Clinton team.
Back to Vessel in the Sky for a second, because this is important.
She shows up with a briefing.
This is all about Magnitsky.
You have to understand this.
There was a Democrat, I don't want to say, there was kind of bipartisan, but it was led by Ben Cardin, who Joe knows well, because he's a liberal senator from Maryland.
That's how I met Joe.
How do I know Ben Cardin?
I ran against him as a Republican nominee for the United States Senate, and lost.
That's how I met Joe.
I was going to his radio station to do an interview, and I'm like, hey, you're the guy on the radio I hear.
That was, gosh, what, seven years ago?
Who the hell knows?
Yeah, seven years ago.
Something like that, yeah.
That's how I met Joe.
Ben Cardin, who's a Democrat, and it was bipartisan, but they sponsored a bill, which I think was a good bill, by the way, the Magnitsky Act, which sanctioned Russian oligarchs and Russian officials involved in the death of Sergei Magnitsky.
They put sanctions on them and certain travel measures and financial measures.
So basically, Joe, if you were an international business person from Russia or anywhere else, and you're involved in torture, death, or destruction, the United States can say, you can't come in here.
We're going to bar you from certain financial transactions involving the United States.
Five, no problem with that, Bill.
I think it's a good idea.
Now Joe, who didn't like, think, let me just, Joe, this is not a trick question.
If you're a Russian oligarch who is alleged to, or may have been, legally involved, and there may be some legal complications for you, involved in the torture, death, or killing of someone, and you are barred from doing business in the United States.
Do you think that would be a good or a bad thing for you?
I think this is a bad idea.
Bad, bad idea.
This is a bad idea!
Yes, good, good man!
You are correct!
Now Joe, why would you, simple, not a trick, why would you as a businessman want to do business with the United States?
Not a trick.
Because I want to make money.
Lots and lots of money.
Thank you!
Yes!
I saw Creed 2 this week.
You sound like Victor Drago.
It was a good movie, by the way.
Recommend.
Say yes, because you want to make money.
The Russians hated Magnitsky.
They still do.
Who is working and being paid by people with Russian influence to get rid of the Magnitsky Act?
Glenn Simpson at Fusion GPS.
Follow it.
Follow the yellow brick road.
Follow the yellow brick road.
Russians with big time influence in international geopolitics want Magnitsky gone.
The Magnitsky Act.
Because they can't do business in the most profitable business center in the known universe, the United States.
So they pay Glenn Simpson and Fusion GPS money to tar people and smear people who are advocating for the continued expansion of Magnitsky.
Now, does this start to make sense?
So this Russian lawyer, Veselnitskaya, who I have no doubt is connected to people in the upper echelons of the Russian government, Veselnitskaya has an active interest in making Magnitsky go away too.
Why?
Because she's probably working in conjunction with, or at least is being advised in some way, shape, or form by people in the Russian government who want this thing to go away so their oligarchs can travel and do business freely.
Does it make sense now, the Trump Tower meeting?
Fusion GPS, it probably doesn't.
Some of you are like, I don't get it.
Ladies and gentlemen, Fusion GPS is playing two dogs at the same time.
Fusion GPS's income stream is dependent on making Magnitsky go away, but they also want to stay in the good graces of the Clinton team that's paying them to gin up dirt on Donald Trump.
Joe, what better way to kill two birds with one stone?
Throw one stone, get two birds.
It's no better way.
Well, no better way, right?
First, we get to show up, and in case Donald Trump is the president, we get to lobby for Magnitsky, to get rid of Magnitsky, which is exactly what the lawyer does, using a briefing prepared by who?
Fusion GPS.
So if Donald Trump becomes president, great.
But, but, if Donald Trump doesn't become president, we sell all this stuff back to the Clintons as evidence of a Russian collusion scandal because they met with Russians.
Oh!
Oh!
What a... This is great!
This is great!
Glenn Simpson's heads I win, tails you lose!
I show up!
If Donald Trump becomes president, I talk to his kid and his campaign manager about making Magnitsky go away.
Which they didn't, by the way, the Trump team.
Matter of fact, they expanded it and made it worse for the Russians.
Something the left-wing media won't tell you.
Or, if Hillary wins, we say, hey Hills, you know, we did meet with Don Trump Jr.
and you know, Russian collusion, that sounds like a really, here we can get your intelligence community, who's been looking into this in the FBI, we can use this as evidence.
Do you understand now why the liberals are focusing on this Trump Tower meeting?
Because they don't want the real purpose of the Trump Tower meeting, which is the entire core of the setup, to come out.
That the Clinton team was involved in this.
Because the Clinton team got played too.
The Clinton team got played by Simpson.
You may say, how?
I don't get it.
You may say Simpson probably gave them everything they wanted.
Don Trump Jr.
meeting with a Russian, right Joe?
That's what they wanted.
To prove what?
Russian collusion.
That didn't exist.
Folks, I'm not sure the Clinton team was told about track number two.
That they went in there looking to pitch Magnitsky too.
I will bet my last dollar that the Clinton team was under the assumption here or people associated with the Clinton orbit who, again, we know Akhmetian knows.
Joe, I think they were under the impression that this was exclusively a setup.
In other words, hey, go in there and talk about emails or something like that.
Remember, that's what shows up in the Goldstone email.
These people have dirt on Hillary.
I think the Clinton team is under, please follow me folks, I know this is a little confusing, but this is critical you get this, because it's going to explain how they focus on this and why.
The Clinton team is under the misperception that this is all a setup.
That the Russians are going in there.
The Akhmetshin and Veselnitskaya, people that Clinton's orbit is connected with, to exclusively to set up Trump and Don Trump Jr.
for Russian collusion.
But that's not what the people involved in the setup are there exclusively to do.
They're playing Clinton too.
They're being, listen to me, they're being paid by influential people and heavily connected Russians to get rid of Magnitsky too.
The Clinton team isn't aware of this.
Or is aware of this and thinks, okay, that's going to take second place.
The setup comes first.
In other words, they have to go in that meeting and they have to get Don Trump Jr.
on the record asking the Russians for emails or negative information on Hillary.
But Joe, that's not what happens.
What happens is, because Glenn Simpson's also being paid to get rid of Magnitsky, the Veselnitskaya lawyer there starts talking first about what?
Her bigger priority, which is getting rid of Magnitsky, but Don Trump Jr's smart.
And so are the people in the meeting.
They realize quickly this is not a good idea, this is a waste of their time, and they say, we're out of here.
Joe, she never gets to the email thing.
She never gets to the email thing.
Now, the Democrats, let me say this, the Trump team would have a serious problem if in that meeting a plot was laid out to steal Hillary's emails, break the law, they would.
But folks, nobody disputes that that never happened.
That did not happen.
Fusion screwed up.
I think they thought when they got the meeting that this thing would go on forever.
So they probably said, Joe, you know, bring up Magnitsky first.
You know, Trump could be elected president.
Let's make sure we at least have an open conversation about getting rid of Magnitsky.
And don't worry, towards the end of the meeting, we'll also cater to the Hillary people, bring up this email thing and give them the collusion narrative they need just in case Hillary loses.
But they never get to it.
They never do it because Trump says, I'm out.
Bye Felicia.
See you later.
Not interested.
Have a nice day.
And then they're probably looking at each other like, wait, what?
What do we do now?
We didn't, we don't have a, well, we can go back and tell the Clinton people we met with them.
Yeah, but we don't have anything.
It doesn't matter.
Don't worry.
They'll appoint a special counsel later and they'll just keep saying that the meeting's evidence of collusion, but no collusion happened.
It doesn't matter.
Do you see how they need to cover these connections up?
Some of you may still be a little perplexed on this.
They are focusing on this Trump Tower meeting because they know the media's in their pockets because they're a bunch of hacks and they will never tell the truth.
They know the liberals in Congress and the liberals in the Congress and the Senate and the activist groups can keep the attention using Mueller.
If they didn't have Mueller as a special counsel, this Trump Tower meeting and all the shenanigans behind it would have probably gone away.
They know they can count on Mueller's team to never tell you about the devious connections of the Clinton side.
That's why they want to highlight this Trump Tower meeting because, folks, it does look bad.
It does.
Let's be candid.
It looks bad.
It's not criminal.
Nothing happened there.
Don Trump Jr., to his credit, released all the emails about it.
I think everybody acknowledges the meeting was a bad idea.
But they know they can count on the politically biased team of Bob Mueller to ignore everything I just told you and highlight the fact that Donald Trump met with Russians, met with Russians, met with Russians, and he will tell you over and over enough and dopey people will believe it's evidence of collusion that never happened.
That's why.
That's why they use it.
I'll wrap it up on this.
Maybe I should have put the lead out first.
They will highlight the meeting because they know Bob Mueller will protect you from the truth.
Protect, I'm using air quotes.
So why not use it?
If Joe met with Russians and nothing happened, and I know I can count on the media to not disclose that nothing happened, and that the story will be Joe met with Russians, then I'm just going to continue to run with it.
Why?
Because it's politically damaging to Joe.
You will never hear the truth.
They can count on Bob Mueller to keep all of that stuff hidden.
He will never investigate that stuff.
So they know that Trump Jr.
meeting with Russians, despite the fact they're connected to Hillary, is only damaging to who?
Trump Jr.
They know that.
They're not dumb.
So they keep pushing this out there.
This is the biggest scam in human history.
You are a sucker if you believe in this nonsense.
Thank you.
I rely on you here because it's just I understand this is a complicated case and I'm bringing this up not to rehash a Chuck Ross article from back in May.
I bring it up because I'm sensing and getting from some people who are intimately familiar with the details of this case that this is going to be the core of the Mueller report.
This Trump Tower meeting and the report is going to ignore the entire Democrat Clinton DNC involvement in all of this stuff.
And suckers are going to eat it up.
Suckers.
Disappointing.
All right, folks.
Final read for today.
This is a great company.
By the way, my wife has insisted, insisted that I tell you how much she loves—I'm not making this up.
Hey, Paula, you want to tell people how much you love GlareGuard?
She does.
She loves this.
We live in Florida.
And down here in Florida, for those of you residents of Florida, Texas, you know, you live down south or sunny areas, the sun can be pretty potent, especially in the morning.
We were given a sample of Glare Guard and my wife's like, listen, we got to take them on as a sponsor.
They're really, really terrific.
And I love this product.
She thinks it saved her from a few car accidents because it's really hard to see down here.
And a lot of times those visors you flip down, Joe, are no good because you can't see through the visor.
You can see through Glare Guard.
It's like having like sunglasses for your windshield.
It's terrific.
Glare Guard.
It was found in 2015 by Mark Smith and his son, Dane.
It's manufactured and distributed right here in the United States from Pennsylvania.
It is the only American-made polarized visor out there.
It's made from the same high-quality materials seen in name brands such as Ray-Ban and others.
I'm telling you, it's like having sunglasses for your windshield.
If you live in a sunny area, this thing is invaluable.
It's the only visor with aluminum brackets on a ratcheting system so you can align your visor with your specific height and vision.
Velcro straps for added security just in case you hit a pothole.
It won't fall off.
It's really secure.
It can be used with or without sunglasses.
Sunglasses will just add another layer of protection and darken your surroundings a little bit more.
It's easy to clean.
Other visors have issues with fingerprints.
Not this one.
Each visor is hand cut, routed, and expected for quality.
Folks, this is a terrific product.
I love it.
You simply slip it inside the CarVisor extender and hook around the Velcro straps.
We put it on in two minutes.
It's super easy.
Coupon code DAN will get you 25% off your entire cart if you go to glareguard.com.
That is glareguard, G-L-A-R-E dash guard dot com.
glareguard.com.
Use promo code DAN.
You will get 25% off your entire cart.
It is really, really good.
Super well priced.
It's great for your car.
It'll probably save you from some Accident at some point.
God forbid.
Glareguard.com.
Glare-guard.com.
Glare-guard.com.
Promo code Dan for 25% off.
Go check this out.
You'll love it.
Okay.
Let's see.
What else do we got this weekend?
So enough on that.
I get really upset talking about that.
All right.
I said I was going to get into this small town thing, and this is an important story.
I've got so much.
You know what, before I, one quick thing, Joe, Jesse Kelly has been banned on Twitter, by the way, an Iraq war veteran who ran for Congress as a Republican.
This is, I just want to put that out.
This is another example of Twitter, absolutely losing their minds and banning people.
Folks, this is getting out of control with Twitter and the social media space.
And I'm going to put out this suggestion, but before that I put out before a couple of times, I can't say who, but there are major entities who are really, really starting to marshal the forces against Twitter right now.
I'm going to suggest that someone, I don't know who, but someone with a more prominent five, about 700,000, someone with a following in the millions on the Republican side, if we could spread this around, that we start some kind of a Twitter blackout.
That we just get off the platform.
You know what?
And you may say, oh, you know what?
We're not going to get our ideas out there.
You know what?
Let them feel it.
Let them feel it for a month or two where, you know, 10-20% of the conservative movement just gets off the platform for a while.
Let them see it.
Remember, you may think that's counterproductive.
It's not.
Twitter functions on the exchange of information we voluntarily give.
I'm happy to start it, but we gotta know that there's a critical mass of people, and if someone picked up the story, Twitchy, Breitbart, Daily Caller, someone, and we started a Twitter blackout month, or a Twitter blackout week, or even a couple days if you want to keep it short, I understand.
Some of you need it for business, and I don't want to hurt anyone.
I would absolutely get involved in that.
But it is time.
Twitter needs to be taught a lesson by conservatives.
It is ridiculous.
They banned Jesse Kelly, an Iraq war veteran, who ran for Congress.
It is just a shame.
So I have that story in the show notes today too.
I just wanted to bring that up quickly.
I can't suggest that in strong enough terms.
Something needs to happen.
with these people.
They have just taken way too many liberties with their platform.
They're supposed to be a platform, not a publisher, and they've thrown that out the window.
Okay.
Let's see.
This I want to talk about last week.
I brought this story up.
So I read a couple pieces.
I want to tie in a few different stories I've been reading.
Let me just give you the lead on the story first.
The lead on one story was that there's a small-town renaissance going on.
Joe, if I don't explain this well, be the audience on Budsman and stop me, because this is a critical story.
Okay.
Small-town renaissance going on for economic reasons, which I'll get to in a minute, meaning small towns which were being hollowed out, and many still are.
I don't want to be overly dramatic, but there's been a renaissance in a lot of small towns across America, which are seeing populations move back in.
They're seeing a little bit of an economic renaissance.
There's a reason for that.
I want to tie it with another story about voter trends that'll matter to you for 2020 and beyond.
And the voter trend story is that the Democrats with their increasingly far left liberal lurch, which I told you about in the beginning of the show with the immigration thing, how they've lurched entirely to the left on immigration, is growing their support amongst their liberal base, but is alienating rural and exurb voters.
In other words, small towns.
Why does this story matter to you?
Folks, the growth and population growth over the last few decades in American population centers, notably cities, has done significant damage to the Republican political cause.
I'm just giving you a tactical political fact.
There are a lot of theories out there why people who live in cities tend to go from moderate to Democrat to liberal, or just tend to leave the Republican party and vote Democrat.
A couple of those theories are the reliance on public services.
Think about it, Joe.
You're familiar with Baltimore and I'm familiar with New York City.
I grew up in Queens.
There is a heavy reliance in cities, San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, on public transportation and public services.
A reliance that requires tax dollars and big government to support.
I mean, if the trains go out in New York City, in Manhattan specifically, I got news for you.
You're screwed.
There's just no getting around it.
Right.
So, again, I'm not suggesting these theories explain the 80-20 voting patterns of some of these big cities, Democrat versus Republican.
I'm simply suggesting there are a lot of theories out there and I'm giving you some of them.
Again, one of them, the reliance on government.
That government, people see it as a net good in their lives or a benefit because they use public services you just don't use in small towns.
Make sense, Joe?
Police officers as well.
You know, crime rates tend to be higher in cities.
People want cops, want more cops.
You know, when it comes to school teachers and stuff, people will rely on public schools.
You know, they can't have an overproliferation of private schools because the rents are expensive.
So you'll rely on public services.
Another theory out there is the groupthink theory.
That when you surround yourself with larger numbers of people and you hit a critical mass of people who happen to be liberal and democrat that just by what ideological osmosis being surrounded by people of like mind that you will tend to eventually at some point succumb to far-left theories yourself.
You'll start to fold.
You know, when you were young, you believed in the second amendment.
All of a sudden, you hear over five or six or seven years, a bunch of liberal cocktail party, oh, guns are bad, guns are bad, guns are bad, instead of the reality that people are bad, using guns are just tools, that eventually you start to, just by social pressure alone, succumb.
So the growth in cities has corresponded to a growth in Democrat power in the coasts and in the population centers, which obviously, in a constitutional republic, can create a lot of problems for conservatism.
Now, the double whammy is that small towns, which tend to vote conservative values, these small towns have been hollowed out.
A lot of components to that.
Deindustrialization, the massive growth of China onto the international commerce stage.
There have been a lot, you know, the loss of labor-oriented jobs and a largely services economy now.
But think about it.
Why would small towns tend to lean more conservative?
Because think about it, you have to rely more on your family.
You know, when you live in a city, you know, I'm not suggesting people who live in the city don't love their families.
Don't take that the wrong way.
I grew up in New York City.
I love my family to death.
I'm simply suggesting you don't have to rely on them as much.
If you live in a small town with not that many people and you need help, you know, you don't go to the handyman.
He may be hard to find.
There may be one or two in town.
Where do you go?
You go to your cousin, you go to your brother, your uncle.
Hey, Uncle Joe, can you help me out with the house?
There's a reliance on family.
That family, if they tend to be conservative, they tend to grow up conservative.
Your groupthink is groupthink around conservative ideas.
Freedom, family, country, the second amendment.
You've been around guns your entire life.
They're not scary to you.
You haven't been indoctrinated by a bunch of liberals telling you how awful and dangerous guns are and it's not the people, it's the gun.
But there's also a self-selection effect in small towns.
And in cities as well.
Small towns where you're not surrounded by as many people just as a matter of pure geography and population density as people in big cities, Joe, who are your Facebook friends?
They're probably other people in small towns who share your conservative thoughts, which I believe are right, ideologically.
No, no pun intended.
So just to be clear, I'm just trying to explain why people in cities tend to lean Democrat, why people in smaller towns and exurbs and stuff tend to lean conservative.
There are a lot of explanations, I'm not suggesting this is all of it, but it explains probably a large swath of it, right?
One of the demographic trends which Republican prognosticators and strategists I know, some who are very good by the way, have told me in the past was going to be big trouble, is Joe, the hollowing out of America's small towns, again due to de-industrialization and other things, was causing a real problem because as people move into these cities they're exchanging and swapping out their conservative values for the Democrat party and liberal values.
This was going to be the demographic trend in the future that they believed was going to lead to a large-scale wiping out of the Republican Party and nationally in their national power.
We'd be a bunch of small-town mayors.
Folks, that's changing.
This is why these two stories are tied together.
There was an interesting piece in the Wall Street Journal.
Last week, which talks about how the growth of two specific things, Joe, is leading people to move back into small towns now, which is starting to reinvigorate the conservative vote.
And that's why I think it's tied to the second story about how Democrats are now getting crushed in the rural and excerpt vote.
What are those two factors, Joe?
Internet shopping and mobility services.
Now, think about it.
If you lived in a small town in the past, your access, Joe, 30 years ago, your access to products was through the Sears catalog.
Yeah.
You probably had, I mean, I don't want to be the little house on the prairie, but you probably had some form of a general store, a supermarket, a hardware store.
But that was really it.
I mean, Home Depot is not going to move into a small town with only a thousand residents.
They can't afford the infrastructure to build out a massive store that's only going to cater to probably a couple hundred people.
So Home Depot would be in bigger cities, suburbs, where the population was dense.
Joe, now with internet shopping, none of that crap matters anymore.
You go on Amazon, you go on eBay, it doesn't matter.
You go on walmart.com and you buy whatever the heck you want and it shows up at your front door.
The small towns, people are moving back in because they realize now they're no longer economically isolated from the rest of the country.
Matter of fact, they're not economically isolated at all.
You may say, well, Dan, surely they're affected in the services industry.
You can't get a lawyer.
No, you can.
You can go to like whatever, lawyers.com or whatever it is.
You're going to see the growth show of telemedicine.
Oh, they're not going to have access to the best doctors.
No, I promise you, you will.
There'll be a surgery center set up.
There'll be people who can do telemedicine.
All of this stuff is moving in the direction where that flow, Joe, the population flow may not reverse itself completely, but it may stem the tide of people from the exurbs and rural America into cities because they don't need the cities anymore.
Here's a big one.
How did I miss this one?
Telework.
Yeah.
I work from home.
I'm looking at Joe right now in his home studio.
Joe and I both.
We don't have to leave the house ever.
Matter of fact, I rarely do outside of working out.
I hate it sometimes.
There's no geographic limitation on me at all.
I send Joe an Adobe Audition file.
He cleans it up.
It gets published on iTunes.
People literally all over the globe listen to our show.
I got an email from New Zealand the other day.
Like, you got a big following over here.
I was like, hey, thanks man.
Love you guys.
You don't have to move into the city anymore.
Why does this matter that the flow, the population flow, may stop or even reverse itself a bit?
Because the Democrats are getting annihilated politically in rural areas of America.
They're getting crushed.
The article I read, which is now, the article about the Democrats getting crushed was in the New York Times, so I'm not even going to bother posting it.
I'll just sum it up for you.
Folks, Barack Obama Obama did better in these rural areas in 2008.
Remember the Hopey Changey stuff, Joe?
Listen, Obama's initial run... Folks, I love putting my email out there, but don't mistake what I'm saying.
I'll get a thousand emails.
I am not suggesting Barack Obama wasn't a radical liberal.
Are we clear?
Period.
Full stop.
He was.
I'm not denying it.
I'm simply stating to you, having lived through his 2008 election, on the inside, when I worked with the Secret Service, he did not run that way.
He ran as a liberal, but not a complete Bernie Sanders guy.
He was.
But he ran on the hope-y, change-y stuff, and all this, you know, we're going to bring back America, we're going to clean up the oceans, and I'm going to save the world, we're going to part the heavens.
Barack Obama did better in these rural exurb communities than the Democrats did in the midterms.
And than the Democrats did in the Trump election versus Hillary Clinton.
It's getting worse.
My point, folks, is if the Democrats can't rely on increasingly high numbers of votes from people leaving rural, small-town America and moving into the cities, and the flow starts to move back, and the Democrats continue to hemorrhage, hemorrhage voters like they're doing now, The demographic destiny may be on the side of conservatism, not on the side of liberalism.
This is not a small deal.
Why is the New York Times bringing this up in their piece?
Because there's a race in Mississippi right now between Cindy Hyde Smith and Mike Espy.
The Republican is Smith, Espy is the Democrat.
The Democrats are trying to paint Cindy Hyde-Smith as a racist, because that's what they always do.
But the Times piece, Joe, says the Democrats are in a difficult quandary right now.
Because they realize that if they use Espy, the Democrat, to paint all the Mississippi Republicans who are, gosh, what, 60% of the vote in Mississippi, if not more?
That if they try to paint them all as racist, that the hemorrhage is going to continue.
And they cannot count on these population centers in Mississippi to save them anymore.
In other words, Joe, the Democra- Please understand, we're going with this.
Point number one, people because of Uber, mobility services, and the internet, the fact that they can get around in small towns just by calling an Uber now, they don't need a subway, are staying in small towns.
If the small towns don't hemorrhage population, and the population flow reverses, and the Democrats get smoked 90 to 10 in small towns, GOP versus Democrat, they have no Democrat future, the Democrats, because they were counting on city dwellers to pick up the slack.
The calculation by the New York Times, though, is that all of the Democrats, you're a racist, you're a racist attacks are garnering them on the margin, Joe.
Very few additional voters in the cities as they continue to hemorrhage in mass.
Voters in small-town America who are tired of being called a racist, listen to me.
This is a very real conversation going on in the Democrat Party right now.
How much more, how often, and how much more can we throw the race card at America before small-town America, which isn't losing population to the effect it was in the past, how much more can they tolerate before it's 99 to 1 in small towns and only 70-30 in the cities?
Are you tracking?
Because this is a big debate.
The Democrats are not stupid.
They are... Notice how Espy, the Democrat in Mississippi, although trying to... There's no question he's trying to paint Cindy Hyde-Smith as a racist.
None.
Because that's what they do.
Notice, though, how he's been very delicate in how he handles it.
He's never outright called her a racist.
He's been like, well, I can see what's in her head.
Listen, he's being disingenuous.
I'm not defending the guy.
I'm just saying, folks, so you understand what's going on behind the scenes in that race.
The Democrats have told Espy, be very careful with this because we're hitting a critical mass on the race card.
We've called so many people racist that we are absolutely getting destroyed in small town America.
And we may not have the votes in 2020 in the cities to get these votes back.
Even the New York Times knows it.
And thanks to transportation, Uber, Lyft, and other services, and the internet, and internet shopping, don't expect the small towns to continue to hemorrhage, folks!
The demographic future may be on our side.
And the Democrats are starting to realize right now that this race car isn't working anymore.
For every one vote they gain, they're losing five or six.
Alright folks, thanks again for tuning in.
I really appreciate it.
Hey, my wife wanted me to tell you we have a special sale going on at Bongino.com for all of our merchandise.
We have hats, we have mugs, we have sweaters, we have t-shirts for the Dan Bongino Show.
Folks, all of our proceeds, we have to split a portion of it with Teespring that puts together the shirts for us to save us the logistics money and the shipping and stuff.
All of our proceeds go to charity, folks.
My wife and I don't profit a dime off this.
I will explain to you where it went after the Christmas season.
I think you'll really appreciate it.
You did a really, really good thing.
I know what we're planning to do and I think you're going to love it.
All of our proceeds from it go to charity.
Please go to bongino.com.
It's 15% off.
My wife wanted to incentivize you to go buy some stuff before the holidays.
15% off.
It is on our website, bungino.com, The Chum Store.
And the link to the store will be in the show notes today on our email list.
If you remember, it'll be right at the top.
So we'd appreciate it.
Again, all of our proceeds go to charity.
It's a really good cause.
I promise you, you'll be very happy.
But 15% off.
My wife did that, wanted to give you all the benefit if you want some stuff.
So Go check it out today.
I really appreciate it, and I will see you all tomorrow.
Thanks again, folks.
You just heard the Dan Bongino Show.
Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com.
