In this episode I address the game-changing State of the Union speech President Trump gave last night. I also address the breaking news on Fox about troubling conflicts of interest in the Mueller witch hunt. Finally, I address the outrageous costs of socialism. News Picks:
Inside the RINO operation to primary President Trump.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez plays the victim card, again, after being called on the facts.
Corrupt Jim Comey says there’s “zero chance” Hillary will be prosecuted for her email scandal.
Nancy Pelosi’s favorite Bible verse isn’t even in the Bible.
Radical liberal Connecticut Democrat proposed an insane ammunition tax.
Copyright Dan Bongino All Rights Reserved.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
I'd love to cover a breaking story I saw yesterday at the Washington Examiner, too.
The anti-Trump losers brigade has been exposed.
Yeah.
And Joe, some of it relates to your territory.
Yeah, I know.
You know what I'm talking about.
All right, I'm going to get to that.
But first, let's hit the speech.
This was just a tremendous, tremendous speech.
Now, listen, I get it.
I get it.
I got a lot of liberal listeners that I entirely understand that some of you will You know, write this off as somewhat, you know, me being some kind of an acolyte or sycophantic.
That's fine.
Whatever.
I think, Joe, you and I have established repeatedly our credibility on this, that we support Trump because he supports our issues.
And when he hasn't, we have, you know, we have made a strong case, I think, against it, which, you know, we open up to the audience for conversation via email.
Now, having said that, Trump's given some good speeches, some okay ones, some weren't so great, but last night's, I don't think there's any question, was his best yet.
I've never seen him any better.
You know what, I guess the best way to sum this up, Joe, I was thinking last night, I'm getting ready to go on Hannity, it's late because Hannity didn't start till 11 p.m.
Eastern last night, till after the speech, the Hannity show on Fox, and I didn't get a chance to get this in, but I thought, what better way to sum this up than, what other politician, Armacost, could you see other than Trump?
That could get a group of self-interested, self-centered, hack politicians to sing happy birthday in unison to someone, which happened last night, during the State of the Union.
And Joe, at the same time, get a group of liberal, quasi-socialist, in some case full-blown socialist, liberal politicians to chant USA in the chamber.
That happened too!
Folks, if you missed the speech last night, you missed a really transformative moment in American politics.
I said, yo, flip you.
Flip you for real.
Yeah, flip you for real.
It happened last night.
At one point, a rather heroic 80-year-old gentleman who was a survivor of the Holocaust and a shooting attempt.
Uh, he, it was his birthday and the entire chamber broke out in unison singing happy birthday.
I'm like, only Trump, only Trump could get this.
And then at another point, Trump acknowledges, I think rather gracefully on his behalf, he acknowledges the impact his economic policies have had on women and simultaneously Joe acknowledges the, uh, acknowledges Excuse me, I just got a text and it interrupted my flow.
Acknowledges that there are now record numbers of women in Congress, even though a lot of those women happen to be Democrats.
And the Democrat women in the chamber on the liberal side start chanting, USA, USA.
I'm thinking only Trump can do this.
This is a Trump original.
So, I want to play for you one of the more powerful lines of the night.
And one of the reasons I want to bring up this speech, too, is not just to give you the standard, you know, post-State of the Union coverage, but there was a real tangible impact on this, ladies and gentlemen.
The impact of speeches like this is to move public opinion, is it not?
If it doesn't, it is a complete waste of time.
Remember what I've said frequently on the show.
It's the do that matters, not the talk.
The talk is fine and the talk is wonderful, but the talk is only wonderful if it motivates subsequent action.
I'll get to that part after I play this cut.
This is Trump taking it right to the radical far left, like I haven't heard in a long time, on socialism.
Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country.
There you go, babe.
It's short and sweet.
But whereas in the past, and I know this because I remember being on trips and dealing with staffers as part of my prior line of work, there was always this focus, Joe, on staying what they perceived to be above the fray, the scrap of politics.
We don't have to bring up social attacks.
I mean, outside of Reagan, very few establishment politicians would get into the scrap on the ideological fight between the tyranny of socialism and the benefits of capitalism.
In a State of the Union speech.
It's more about policy stuff and intricate policy details, not Trump.
On two specific issues last night, Trump took it right to the left in the kind of language the American people use in their everyday talk.
On socialism and on late-term abortion.
On late-term abortion where he described exactly what the termination of life looks like.
He went after Ralph Northam.
It was a wonderful speech.
It was a wonderfully put-together speech.
But moving on on the issues, again, why the do matters, not just the talk.
If it doesn't change people's behavior, now granted folks, this may be a blip in the polling data that may change back tomorrow, but if the purpose of that speech was to change minds so people will do things differently, vote differently, support different sets of policy agendas, and support his immigration front, Trump did not back down one bit yesterday in his talk about immigration, the need for a wall, and the need to control unmitigated illegal immigration into the country, citing, Joe, specifically these crime statistics, 266,000 arrests of people in the country illegally over two years.
For everything from murder to rape to burglary to property crimes to violent crimes and assaults.
He went after it with the numbers and dictated to the American people last night what the real costs of immigration were.
He didn't take the focus group test, the talking points, he didn't take the edge off it.
And as a result of Trump's plain-spokenness and ability to get a message across like few other politicians we've seen in our time, Here, according to CBS News, no bastion of right-wing values.
CBS News ran a spot poll after this speech.
And here were the numbers they came up with on immigration.
Just in from our CBS News instant poll here following the President's State of the Union.
76% of speech watchers said they approved of what they heard.
72% said they approved of the President's ideas for immigration.
Ladies and gentlemen, do you understand the gravity of those numbers? 70%?
Folks, you can't get 70% of school kids to agree they don't want homework on a Friday.
There's always a couple of those kids in the class, you know, I'll take the homework, right?
Always.
There's always those hard chargers in the class. 70%?
In a country divided so significantly in this psychotic, TDS, Trump derangement syndrome era, 70% of people agreed with the tone of the speech or the general layout of the ideas of the speech and agree with his stance on immigration.
Folks, again, I understand.
I don't want to be unnecessarily, you know, hyperbolic about it, that these things could change tomorrow.
They likely will.
There are natural vicissitudes, ups and downs, hills and valleys that come with being the president and getting public opinion on your side and against it based on the news of the day.
But having said that, again, if the purpose of this speech, because we focus on hard facts and data here, was the do and the moving of public opinion to act differently when it comes to voting on the do side, then clearly last night, the speech not only met its goal, but far surpassed it.
70 plus percent.
It was a tremendous, tremendous speech.
The abortion front.
Taking it head-on.
Not focus group testing the words.
Talking about what Ralph Northam from Virginia said and the Democrats' love affair with late-term abortion in the strongest terms possible, the way normal people speak about it.
No focus group-tested terminology.
The line of the night.
President Donald J. Trump, February 5th, 2019.
We were born free and we will stay free.
You're damn right we will!
There were no focus group tested talking points here.
This is a free constitutional republic.
We have a growing, large, a growingly large swath of the far-left radical portion of the Democrat Party advocating for, advocating for a governing system that would take away your political and economic freedom, and Trump last night stood up in front of that crowd and was having absolutely none of it.
Now what was even more telling about last night, y'all?
Not only what happened, But what didn't happen, did you notice the Democrats sitting on their hands, as I said on my Fox News appearance last night with Sean, when Trump said things that, even 10 years ago, would have been considered bipartisan, unanimous, widely accepted tenets of American public policy.
Trump says last night, Joe, That we appreciate the contributions of legal immigrants to our country.
You are welcome here to come here legally.
But you have to enter the country legally, not illegally.
The Republicans get up and the Democrats sit on their hands.
They sit on their hands because the Democrats need illegal immigration precisely because of what Milton Friedman has always said.
You cannot have a country with open borders and unfederal immigration.
And an open access social entitlement system because you'll be bankrupted because every citizen around the world of every country other than the United States will then be able to stake economic claim to the social entitlement tax dollars of American citizens resulting in automatic mathematical bankruptcy.
But that's what the Democrats want!
Because they see power in it!
That's what they want!
That's what they need!
That's why they sat on their hands when President Trump said you have to come into the country legally.
Again, not a controversial idea even 10 years ago.
But now, a seemingly very controversial idea amongst these far-left radical Democrats.
Second, he mentioned that horrors of late-term abortion.
The Democrats, of course, sat on their hands again.
Staggeringly, he mentioned the historic unemployment numbers.
Amongst black Americans, Hispanic Americans, women, disabled Americans, and what happened?
The Democrats, Nancy Pelosi included, sat on their hands.
Folks, it was an embarrassing display last night.
An embarrassing display.
Now, Let me tell you something.
I boxed for a long time.
I love boxing, but sadly I'm now having... I'm sorry to wear you out with my complaints about my health issues.
A lot of people have it a lot worse off than me and I thank God every day for the opportunities you put in front of me and the fact that I'm still breathing is miraculous at times.
But I boxed for a long time and I'm now having really serious problems with my right hand.
I can't make a fist out of my right hand anymore.
I have those little bones in there.
They're all busted up.
I broke my hand like two, three times and it's not healing right.
But in boxing, The old adage was, what's the best punch in the world?
The one your opponent never sees coming, right?
That's the best punch in the world.
I bring that up because, listen, ladies and gentlemen, this was another masterful, masterful display of Trump's strategy.
He doesn't always get it right, but he got it right last night.
Joe, what happened?
What am I talking about?
Tell me.
I'll tell you.
God, I'm good!
Remember the government shutdown, Nancy Pelosi's decision to cancel the State of the Union.
Now, I along with many others, I thought he should have just walked on to the Senate side and done it.
But now I'm starting to see and put together what he was thinking.
Trump understood.
As a guy who's intimately familiar with messaging and marketing, Joe.
The value of the accoutrements and the decorum and the surrounding pageantry of the State of the Union as it's traditionally held.
I gotta give him credit.
He understood that speech needed to happen that way, like that.
Even if it was delayed.
And he waited them out, Joe.
And you know what?
It's now looking like a genius political decision.
I along with many others, Joe, thought he should have walked on to the Senate side.
Others said he should hold it out.
I mean, it was almost unanimous in the conservative talking space that he should have given the speech somewhere else and just, you know, basically stomped on the wishes of the Democrats to not do it when it was cancelled.
Me too.
Now it's starting to make sense.
It's starting to make sense that the Democrats never saw this coming.
They never saw this coming, Joe.
They did not expect a speech as powerful as it was, and it was.
It was a fantastic speech.
I watched the response online.
I watched my mother-in-law's response.
She's political, but not political like me, and I watched to get a general I feel for how, you know, rank-and-file, working, middle-class, dirt-under-the-fingernails Americans would respond to it.
She was really moved by it.
And Joe, it became clear to me yesterday that Trump understood the entire time he needed the pageantry of this event to get a message across in a speech.
And by the way, to the speechwriters who wrote that speech, hat tip to you.
Round of applause.
I gotta clap the wrong way now because my right hand is killing me today.
I have to, usually if you're right-handed, you clap right hand over left, Joe.
I have to do left over.
But gosh, whoever wrote that speech in the White House and put that together, my hat goes off to you.
A magnificent, wonderful job.
The Democrats never said, in case you didn't, I didn't make my point clear what exactly I'm talking about.
The Democrats did not expect Trump To look as presidential as he did last night.
And it is killing them today.
Because he moved public opinion.
Again, it can move back.
It likely will.
But politics is a game of inches.
Inches.
It is trench warfare.
You move a foot, you lose six inches.
You move two feet, you lose three feet.
You move five feet, you lose two feet.
It is a game of inches, feet, moving slowly, methodically.
And President Trump did himself an enormous favor last night.
Okay, I've got more on this.
A couple more points and I got to move on because I got a lot of news to get to.
Today's show also brought to you by our buddies at HairClub.
Hey, confidence is important.
And sometimes one change can make all the difference.
HairClub knows this.
They're inviting you to become part of the HairClub today to see how getting the most out of your hair can change your life.
They understand the emotions you're feeling and the questions you have.
HairClub's the leader in total hair solutions with a legacy of success for over 40 years.
Whether you're looking to revitalize the growth of your own hair or to learn more about the latest proven methods for hair replacement or restoration, Hair clubs, professionally trained stylists, hair health experts, and consultants will craft a personalized solution for you.
See for yourself how great and powerful great hair can be.
Don't miss out on this opportunity.
Ladies and gentlemen, get ready to love your hair again.
If you're a new client, just dial StarStar005 from your mobile phone and we'll shoot you a text to schedule your free hair health and scalp analysis right now from your phone.
That's StarStar005 to set your appointment and get your free hair kit and $250 credit towards qualifying services.
Sorry folks, my eyesight is getting bad here.
That's a total value of $300.
It's like a nonstop.
Really, I'm gonna have to hit the hair club guys next for my hair.
That's a total value of $300 for new clients.
Or if you're a new client, just dial star star zero zero five from your mobile phone and we'll shoot you a text to schedule your free hair health and scalp analysis with one of our hair health professionals.
It couldn't be easier.
Dial star star zero zero five from your mobile phone today to set your appointment and receive your free take-home hair kit and $250 off qualifying services.
Experience your hair.
In your life at its best with HairClub.
I'm certain you'll love the club.
Check that out!
Yeah!
Okay.
A couple other things last night.
He used the term execute in his speech when he was talking about abortion, and he said at one point, let us build a culture to defend innocent life.
Ladies and gentlemen, again, I've said to you repeatedly about Donald Trump, not to keep hashing on the State of the Union because I do want to move on, but this is critical.
What have I said to you repeatedly about Trump that would you rather a guy, because we get this from the Never Trump crowd, and this will segue nicely into my next story about the Never Trump Looney Tunes.
Would you rather a guy who gives flowery speeches, looks presidential, wears the right tie knot, speaks presidentially, whatever that may mean, but fails to advocate for and advance conservative policies when it matters, or would you rather a guy who maybe at times does things differently?
chooses to handle his speeches in a more kind of uh you know a vuncular way talking like that uncle of yours that you met in the street when and and speaks like normal middle class people do.
Maybe in the past hasn't been the most loyal conservative but decided that this is time to move the ball.
In other words, I'm asking you, do you prefer the optics or do you prefer the action?
That's the simplest way to say it.
Give me the actions, babe.
You're damn right!
Give me the actions too!
Because it's interesting how now the Never Trump crowd, which has backed people in the past who claim to be pro-life, conservative, pro-tax cuts, Pro-shrinking government, pro-regulatory form, and did very little, if anything, on it, are some of the same people now speaking out against Trump.
Despite the fact, Joe, on the at-least-a-life front, this guy's been an advocate like we haven't had in a long time.
Well, in the past, he had said things positive about Democrats and Planned Parenthood.
He's not doing that now!
Well again, what do you care about?
Do you care about the optics and the looks and the speeches?
Or do you care about the action?
Does any of this matter?
Folks You know, I... I frequently talk about battlefield morality.
With Trump.
And I wish this would get through to more people on our side who seem to still be up in the air about this guy.
We are not in anymore a battle of ideas.
The Democrats, there's no more battle.
The Democrats have now gone full radical.
They're all in on post-birth execution of infants, not abortion when you're born.
They're all in on socialism, the government control, the means of production, confiscatory tax rates.
They're in on all of that.
You're not going to change their minds anytime soon.
The problem is it's in a battle of ideas.
There'd be some back and forth and you'd see some Democrats open to, okay, well, maybe socialism isn't a great idea.
Maybe we'll talk about some kind of balanced approach.
Ladies and gentlemen, that's gone.
The Democrats have gone far left.
We have candidates for president now openly advocating for the government control and take over the healthcare system.
70-90% tax rates, it's crazy!
The problem is we're in a battlefield morality time.
Where battlefield morality, it is an existential fight now.
This is no time to argue about, well, the other side made some bad tweets.
They want us wiped out.
They want your economic freedom wiped out.
They want your ability to defend life wiped out.
They want your ability to practice your religion wiped out.
I mean, look at the questioning of Naomi Rao, who's on the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.
Joe, you have that?
By Cory Booker yesterday.
Cory Booker.
It's one of the most uninformed.
This Spartacus, or as we call him here, Sporadicus, if you've ever seen the movie Clueless.
Cory Booker Spartacus, claiming that he wants to run for president now.
I say claiming because this is an embarrassing way to start out.
Questioning one of Trump's nominees yesterday for the DC Court of Appeals, the second most powerful court in the land.
She's a great conservative.
She's a more than qualified candidate.
Even the American Bar Association, those left-leaning folks over there, I've rated her more than qualified for this position, right?
Cory Booker decides he's going to ask Naomi Rao, basically because she's advocated for freedom of religion, the idea that people should be able to defend their own religion outside the public space.
But listen to his questions about Naomi Rao and her What are your feelings about the LGBTQ community?
Senator, I think civil rights and equal protection of the laws are two essential values in our system, and if I were to be confirmed as a judge, I would firmly uphold that.
Have you ever had an LGBTQ law clerk?
I've not been a judge, so I don't have any law clerks.
Sorry, someone working for you.
I'm to be honest, I don't know the sexual orientation of my my staff.
So I, you know, I take people as they come, you know, irrespective of their race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, I treat people as individuals.
Those are the values that I grew up with, you know, and those are the values I would apply for confirmed.
Now let's be clear here.
Again, the battlefield morality.
Cory Booker, when he was the mayor of Newark, Jason Reilly has a piece in the Wall Street Journal about this today, actually held some, some, very few, but some reasonable ideas, Joe.
There was a movement towards some form of school choice in Newark, some form of law and order on the streets.
Very few, but some good ideas.
Cory Booker in the now battlefield morality, far-left approach now that we have to be wiped out.
Cory Booker is marching straight in line with the radical approach to the left-leaning Democrats, and he is attacking Naomi Rao, this nominee for the second most powerful court in the land, for one reason and one reason only.
Because she respects freedom of religion.
Therefore, he starts questioning her about, have you had any LGBT law clerks?
She's never been a judge!
Is this guy that stupid?
How could she have law clerks?
You can't have law clerks if you've never been a judge!
Apparently, Cory Booker doesn't do his homework.
And then he asks her an equally dumb question.
Well, have you ever had anybody LGBT working for you?
By the way, Joe, I'm pretty confident it's illegal to ask someone their sexual orientation.
How is she going to know that?
Pretty confident.
Yeah, pretty confident, right?
Cory Booker just humiliated himself again.
But why is he doing this?
Again, ladies and gentlemen, we are on a battlefield now where these people want to wipe you out.
They have to humiliate, they wanted to expose her for having some connection to a religious freedom of religion and wanted to expose her and humiliate her and essentially expose themselves.
This is why, on our side, we have to get behind Trump when it matters.
Because Trump sees this, and he's willing to fight back, he's willing to get dirty, get the grease and the dirt under his fingernails, and scrap with these people, as we saw last night in the State of the Union.
Alright, moving on, I've got a... The anti-Trump brigade is... I've got a couple of great stories, but I want to spend some time in the State of the Union, and remember that.
You want a guy who does the act, or do you want a guy who actually goes out and gets it done?
This guy's not into the optics, he's into the action.
Action, not optics.
Put that on a t-shirt.
All right, today's show brought to you also by Bravo Company Manufacturing.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have two of these rifles.
They are absolutely incredible.
They sent me a pistol and a rifle from Bravo Company Manufacturing, otherwise known as BCM.
It is the smoothest firing, most accurate rifle I've ever had.
I really, really, really like this.
I had a really good time at the range with this.
Listen, owning a rifle is an awesome responsibility, and building rifles is no different.
Started in a garage, BCM was, by a marine veteran more than two decades ago.
BCM, or Bravo Company Manufacturing, builds a professional-grade product built to combat standards.
This is because BCM believes the same level of protection should be provided to every American, regardless if they are a private citizen or a professional.
Bravo Company Manufacturing is not a sporting arms company.
They design and engineer life-saving equipment.
They assume when a rifle leaves their shop, it's going into the hands of a responsible citizen, law enforcement officer, or a soldier overseas.
Quality is the utmost value and they manufacture right here in Heartland, Wisconsin, to a life-saving standard.
They always put people before products.
Ladies and gentlemen, to learn more about Bravo Company Manufacturing, I highly recommend this company.
Head over To BravoCompanyMFG.com, where you can discover more about their products, special offers, and upcoming news.
That's BravoCompanyMFG.com.
Hey, you need more convincing?
Find out even more about BCM and the awesome people who make their products at YouTube.com slash BravoCompanyUSA.
YouTube.com slash BravoCompanyUSA.
Their products are legit.
Check them out.
Bravo Company Manufacturing.
Awesome stuff.
Joe, one note before I move on.
I'm a little down today, folks.
A good friend of mine, some of you who you may know of, was taken from us way too soon.
I don't know if many of you are listeners to what used to be The Blaze, he's since left, but Doc Thompson.
A wonderful guy who was a very, very close personal friend in the movement, who has spoken kindly of me on his show on many occasions, was hit by a train and was killed yesterday.
Maybe it was this morning.
I'm just getting the news over Twitter and from friends.
You know, Godspeed, my friend, in the second creation.
He was a good man and really kind of devastated.
Doc was a real patriot, man, believed in the cause.
And he was a real thinker, too.
We'd spend a lot of time on the phone together talking about ways to get the conservative message out there and to break through this wall.
So, God bless you, my friend.
Rest peacefully with the Lord.
All right.
Yeah, it's always tough to move on from that stuff.
I'm sorry, I don't mean to be dead, you know, but he was a good man, folks.
So I read a piece in the Washington Examiner today.
I encourage you all to read because you have to understand what the other side is doing and the marshalling of forces, where they're looking to go with this stuff.
There's an article in the Washington Examiner, which is really troubling to say the least.
It talks about this effort to get together a Primary opposition towards Donald Trump.
Some form of a primary opposition towards Donald Trump on the Rhino Republican side.
I say that because, as I just said to you before, in a battlefield morality these people are interested more in optics than they are in action.
They don't seem to care that Donald Trump has actually advanced the conservative football.
They just seem to care that their power is weaned because of it.
And the piece is interesting, Joe, because it says that this, this, I call him the anti-Trump losers brigade.
Evan McMuffin from, I remember the guy who ran for McMullen, but Evan Egg McMuffin, who ran for president from Utah.
I think I may have gotten more votes for running for Congress than Evan.
I'm not sure.
I got to check that out or reset it that he got running for president.
He was, McMuffin ran for president.
I think he only got on the ballot in one state.
So apparently McMuffin's part of the Losers Brigade.
Rick Wilson, you know Rick Wilson of you all have no teeth fame.
If you've seen Rick in person, listen, I don't like to comment on people's looks, but if you're gonna open up the door and suggest that your ideological opposition doesn't have any teeth, you may not want to look like Rick Wilson.
I'm just saying.
Mike Murphy, who was a McCain guy, a bunch of former McCain aides, and the Niskanen Center are apparently meeting and trying to find a pathway to challenge Donald Trump from the right to weaken him.
Now, there's a couple takeaways here.
I mentioned earlier in the show, I didn't forget, that Joe's up in Maryland.
Yes.
There's a connection.
Joe knows where I'm going.
I saw him smile.
So one of the names getting Bandied about to say, as a potential primary nominee, they're choosing, they're going, there's three options they're considering before I get to the name.
One is a primary, one is an independent candidate, and one is supporting a moderate democrat, okay?
So on the primary traditional front, running a republican, the primary Donald Trump, the name they're passing around is Larry Hogan.
That's a terrible idea.
It's a horrible idea!
Horrible idea!
Larry Hogan is the Republican governor of Maryland.
Now, disclosure, I know Larry.
I ran in the same election cycle.
I lost by a point.
He managed to pull out that race over Anthony Brown.
He managed to get re-elected by just a resounding margin in Maryland.
And I have supported Larry Hogan in the past with donations, and I thought Larry Hogan was going to be good for Maryland, and I think overall he has been good for Maryland.
But let me just say to Larry Hogan and his team, if you are even considering this, I'm going to... Joe, I swore off predictions forever, didn't I?
It's just too tempting, isn't it?
It is!
It is!
You're right!
You know me well.
I'm getting back into prediction.
And if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.
But I'm going to put this out there.
What's the show?
Today is show number what?
9-10?
9-10.
February 6, 2019.
I'm going to put this out there, timestamp it.
If Larry Hogan Decides to run for the Republican nomination for president against Donald Trump.
I'm going to go on the record and say Larry Hogan will lose.
You think?
No, no, we know he'll lose.
Of course he's going to lose.
We all know that.
But I'm going to go on the record and say Larry Hogan not only will lose the primary badly, the nomination, but will lose the Maryland primary too.
Tell me what, Joe, you're in Maryland.
No, but listen to me, folks.
I know sometimes you say I don't let Joe talk.
It's not that.
Joe interjects whenever he feels.
Joe has an open invitation on the show.
But nobody knows Maryland politics like me and Joe.
Nobody.
Joe has been involved on the Maryland political scene where the claimed in the piece, the guy they're considering the primary Trump is the governor.
Very few people know it like Joe.
He's been on the radio there for decades talking to every knucklehead politician that came in and out, me included.
That's how we met.
Joe, do you think Hogan would win the Maryland primary against Donald Trump?
Yeah, I do think he would win.
I think he would.
Interesting.
Interesting.
All right.
Now, we have this time stamp.
I know you didn't think I was going to say that, but... No, no, no.
I did not discuss this.
I want your honest opinion.
I don't want you to... I hate yes people.
Joe and I disagree, and I vigorously disagree with you on this one, Joe.
I just...
Understanding the activist community in Maryland, I am going to get on the record now and say, if Hogan decides to run, he will not only lose the nomination badly, but he will lose the Maryland primary.
Now, listen, Larry Hogan has been good for Maryland, and I don't, I really don't like Republican on Republican, and it's not an attack.
Hogan has been good, and I don't want to diminish his political capital in Maryland to move the ball on tax cuts and other things.
Hogan has had to govern as a centrist, sometimes left-leaning Republican.
And I don't agree with a lot of what he's done, especially on guns and abortion.
And he's limited in what he can do.
I'm a political realist in the state of Maryland, where there's, you know, super majorities all over the place.
But I'm just telling you, I think if he runs, he will lose in Maryland, too.
Yeah.
For some reason.
I think I shall now be sick.
I forgot about the word primary there.
Yeah.
No, hell no.
He doesn't have a chance.
Oh, so all right.
So you thought, no, you think I'm talking about him running as an independent, like in a general again?
No, no, I mean exclusively in our... Here's why I say what I say.
Folks, not that you need to get knee deep in Maryland politics, but this is important because it's not, it's emblematic of the larger trend.
Trump's popularity amongst Republican voters, especially after things like last night, is upwards of 85 or 90 percent.
They are not... Larry Hogan was the The best worst option for them.
And they picked him.
A lot of Republicans reluctantly went back and voted again knowing he wasn't a really good conservative during his first term.
He has no chance in a primary.
Marco Rubio here in Florida, who is the favorite son of many people down here in Florida where I live, got smoked in the state of Florida by Donald Trump in a primary.
Hogan will not, he will get crushed and I'm suspecting even in Maryland where his popularity is sky high.
Maryland politics is a very conservative place on the Republican side.
Yeah, man.
Yeah.
Mountain, Maryland.
Carroll County.
Frederick, the Eastern Shore.
These are very conservative places.
Don't be fooled by the big three.
Baltimore City, Montgomery, and Prince George's.
They run the state because of the population density, but when it comes to Republican primaries, outside of those three counties, the state is quite conservative.
Okay, so the anti-Trump Losers Brigade, McMuffin, Wilson, Toothless, Mike Murphy, McCain, as the Niskanen Center, apparently they're trying to recruit Hogan.
Now, there are two other options they're looking at that are going to be equally fruitless and ridiculous.
One of them is to back an independent candidate.
Now, Joe, I may have confused you with, you may have thought I was talking about Hogan.
That's not, I don't think they're, now that may be the, I doubt it though.
If they run Hogan, they'll run him as a Republican in the primary and he will get destroyed.
Absolutely.
They're looking at backing potentially an independent.
I don't know if that's a Howard Schultz type, the CEO of Starbucks has already declared his interest in the race.
I'm not sure what that is, but I think that could be very damaging.
Because for as much as I dislike Toothless and McMuffin and this McCain crew that wants to get involved and do damage to Trump, although their success record isn't great, obviously, they're not stupid.
And they can find ways, Joe, to throw significant monkey wrenches into the machinery.
True, true.
They can.
They're forest fires.
They burn down everything they touch.
But they're not dumb.
And us writing them off as being just, oh, they're just punched.
That's what they do to us.
You're all toothless deplorables.
Fine.
You underestimate us.
We're not going to make the same mistake with you.
Yeah.
We know exactly what you are.
But they do know what they're doing when it comes to sabotage, right?
That could hurt them.
Their third approach is to back a moderate Democrat of the Jim Webb type from Virginia.
That's a complete loser.
They would have to win a Democrat primary, and candidly speaking, folks, as I just told you, we are now in a battlefield morality time where everybody on the Democrat Party who's really fired up is moving more towards the left, not to the right.
That's over.
You have no chance.
The people turning out to vote in Democrat primaries are going to be hard left neo-radicalized voters.
You have no chance running towards the center.
So let's scrap that.
Let me just go back to one quick thing.
Running Hogan against, and I feel uniquely qualified to talk about this given the fact that I know Larry, and I believe I understand the Republican voters in Maryland, where we almost pulled off a huge upset up there.
One of the examples they frequently cite, Joe, where if they ran Hogan, they could do critical damage to Trump, is the Pat Buchanan-George H.W.
Bush primary.
I know you remember it.
Some may not, but Pat Buchanan ran in the Republican primary against George H.W.
Bush and did fatally damage his campaign.
Of course, George H.W.
Bush was not re-elected.
Bill Clinton won.
And he did some significant damage to George H.W.
Bush.
Now, there's a difference, though.
Buchanan ran to the right of George H.W.
Bush, Joe.
In other words, Republican primary voters right now, who have solidified around core Republican ideas in this president, are moving to the right, are not moving towards the center.
They're moving towards the right!
So if you're gonna try to take out Donald Trump in a primary, you're not gonna do it by running towards the center!
Or if you're trying to even fatally damage his campaign, you're not gonna do it by running towards his left!
So the example they're using, well, Buchanan, we could use the Buchanan model, we could at a minimum damage Trump, and then maybe run an independent, is silly!
It's stupid!
Buchanan ran to the right, not to the left.
This is just common sense.
I'm actually surprised people who claim to be these advanced political strategists don't see this.
But again, they are experts in sabotage.
They know what they're doing.
You can't run to the right.
It'd be a big, big loser.
Alright, I've got a couple other stories to get to that are really important.
Catherine Herridge.
Put out a story on Fox, which has been getting a lot of traffic.
Catherine does great work.
It's a story we've talked about before, but she does great work.
She managed to get portions of the testimony now on the record, but it's an important story that's worth repeating, because you're going to see it.
Sean Hannity discussed it on his radio show and TV show, too.
That's now starting to get mainstream media traffic.
You know, I'm happy with the fact, I say this in a non-celebratory way, but that we're a couple weeks ahead of the news cycle here, because we use other sources too.
Other people out there doing good work on the internet, notably the Epoch Times folks, Jeff Carlson, and others, and people on Twitter who have been doing some good research.
Now the story we got to, and we talked about a couple weeks ago, which are breaking at Fox now, Is the fact that Andy Weissman, Bob Mueller's chief bulldog, keep in mind, ladies and gentlemen, this is the key figure in the Trump investigation.
He is the number one investigator Trump is using to hammer, I mean, excuse me, Mueller's using to hammer Donald Trump.
Andy Weissman is connected to all of the players in this.
He is the perfect guy to cover up this enormous scandal that this Mueller probe has become.
Weissman's the perfect guy.
Weissman, Harrods break yesterday, was briefed about the political origins of the information from Christopher Steele in August before the FISA.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is a huge story.
We talked about it a few weeks ago.
Harrods just got it out there now.
Now Fox is starting to ask questions to Bob Mueller like, hey, Your guy, Andy Weissman, knew that this was political information from Christopher Steele from the Clinton campaign before he joined the Mueller probe and before this information was fed into the FISA court to go and attack Donald Trump?
Now it's starting to make its way into mainstream media reporting and Bob Mueller is being forced on the defensive.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is a key conflict of interest.
The whole investigation was started because of a scope memo, an expanded scope memo Rod Rosenstein wrote for Bob Mueller that no one has seen.
I have made the case to you that I believe that scope memo.
In other words, Bob Mueller, go investigate this too.
That the initial scope memo said investigate Russian collusion.
There is none.
There was an expanded scope memo that is still classified that I have argued to you probably has information that was contained in the dossier.
A dossier we now know Mueller's lead bulldog and investigator knew had political origins, likely knew was garbage, and he knew about it last August.
I'm sorry, the August before last August, even worse.
Folks, this is a critical Mueller blunder.
He has a guy on his team who is knee-deep in a political investigation, not a criminal one.
Do you get what I'm saying?
He knows it.
But he picked Weissman anyway.
Why?
Because Weissman is one of the key figures in this case who's connected to everybody who had a role in the spying operation on Trump.
They need to cover that up by keeping the heat on Trump.
And Weissman has a vested interest in keeping the heat off of him and everybody else and on Trump.
He's the perfect guy.
Weissman was a government attorney on the Enron case.
Who did he work with?
Lisa Monaco.
Bob Mueller's old chief of staff.
Also, Barack Obama is one of his White House Department of Homeland Security advisors.
Yes, I said that right!
John Carlin.
Bob Mueller's old chief of staff, who was one of the final guys to sign off on the FISA while he was employed at the DOJ National Security Division.
That was Mueller's old chief of staff!
Well, Mueller was working with Weissman on these cases.
Katherine Rumler worked on the Enron case with Weissman.
Rumler was Barack Obama's White House counsel while all this was going on.
That's Weissman's buddy!
Now we know Weissman knew this case was political the whole time?
I'm glad to see Fox is on there nailing this now.
They are going to be in a world of hurt right now.
Mueller is going to have to answer this question.
How he can possibly have an investigator on this case who was aware the entire time the origins of the case and the expanded scope memo were likely entirely political.
How is he going to answer this?
He can't.
We have to keep the heat on, folks.
We're starting to get results.
Some of this good, solid reporting.
And Herridge, she has the testimony.
The piece I have in the show notes today from Fox News, check it out.
She has the testimony where Bruce Ohr admits, the DOJ lawyer, that he met with Weissman in August of 2016 and discussed at some point the political origins of this case, that he was skeptical the information from Steele in the dossier was in fact true!
Gosh, ladies and gentlemen, it only gets worse.
It only gets worse.
All right, I've got a couple more things I want to get to and some important stories.
One quick thing before, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, it keeps going downhill and going downhill fast.
I have another story at the show notes from Right Scoop.
Yeah, folks, it's really incredible.
Don't be cowed or, I don't have to say it to you, my audience has got colonies of steel, but, Don't be cowed on Twitter.
Respectfully, of course, I don't have to say that, I'm not lecturing anybody, but respectfully going after her silly ideas.
They're silly, matter of fact, they're dangerous.
I was sitting there with my mother-in-law last night on the couch, who was a legal immigrant from Colombia and came here from an entirely different place for a better life, and when they went to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, my mother-in-law looked at me and said, she's dangerous.
Her ideas are dangerous.
They're dangerous to your economic future.
They're dangerous to your political future.
They're dangerous to the existence of a constitutional republic.
The things she's advocating for have been proven to result in notably socialism, deprivation, depravity, death, starvation, economic destruction.
But do not be cowed at all by her Twitter, you know, bot brigade of people every time you tweet to her, tweet back to her about one of her silly ideas who come after you in Legion.
Don't be intimidated by that at all.
And by the way, ladies and gentlemen, don't buy into the theory that, oh, if we just ignore her, she'll go away.
That is not true.
I don't know who told you that, why you would believe that.
The media is in love with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.
They are in love with her ideas.
She will not go away.
Her ideas have to be combated at every single turn of the corner because they are dangerous.
Ignoring them will not make them go away.
Ignoring them did not make Bernie Sanders go away.
It did not make socialism go away.
As a matter of fact, when you poll millennials, a lot of them think socialism is a good idea.
She's not going away.
I bring this up because there's a good article in the Right Scoop, again I have it in the show notes today, where Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was questioning someone Regarding National Institutes of Health funding, Joe, for revolutionary pharmaceutical drugs.
And the point she was trying to make is that the taxpayers fund the NIH, which they do, and that a lot of the research into these powerful pharmacological agencies, new drugs that we fund, is then turned over to pharmaceutical companies which can make a profit off it.
Okay, fine.
That does happen.
There are drugs.
And let me just be clear, because we do facts here, unlike Ms.
Cortez, Representative Cortez.
There are drugs whose origins were in taxpayer-financed public research.
There's no doubt about that.
Points stipulated.
The problem is, Representative Cortez, if you read the right scoop piece, you can see the back and forth, seemed to indicate, Joe, That this was a widespread issue and that the majority of these pharmacological agents out there are coming from taxpayer financing, whereas private companies can then reap the rewards.
Ladies and gentlemen, that is not the case.
A guy named Derek Lowe, who has actually written on this topic and worked for some of these companies, who understands the mechanics of how this works, indicated yes, although there are agents that have been paid for drugs Funded by NIH, Joe.
It is a very small minority.
The overwhelming majority of life-saving compounds and drug agents and pharmacological agents that are created are created by private companies or publicly traded companies that invest billions of dollars in research.
That is the overwhelming majority.
Ladies and gentlemen, that's just a fact.
So what happens, Cortez, instead of just taking the L, take the L. You lost.
You made that up, okay?
You made it up.
Your inference somehow that taxpayers are paying for all this is not true.
It's a relatively small portion.
Instead of taking the L, she tweets back at the guy.
This is what happens when you're a woman in Congress.
No!
This is what happens when you're uninformed in Congress.
And ignoring that, ladies and gentlemen, is not going to make it go away.
Because impressionable young people who follow Representative Cortez and believe the horse manure that she's spewing at times We'll start to believe, matter of fact, that the NIH is funding every single drug out there and private companies are then reaping the benefits of taxpayers.
That is not true.
It is not true.
The majority of this stuff is funded by companies investing their own money.
It's just not true.
So what does she do?
She goes right back to victimhood.
Do not be cowed by it.
At all.
She wants to play the victim game every single time someone corrects her for a ridiculous statement?
Fine, you do that.
We'll stick to the facts because they're on our side, not hers.
Facts don't have a side.
That's why they're facts, by the way.
But according to her, they do.
You're attacking me because I'm a woman.
No, no one's attacking you because you're a woman.
Donald Trump, matter of fact, ironically, the only time the Democrats got up and clapped last night was when he mentioned the historic number of women in Congress, and they celebrated themselves, the Democrats.
Hey, this is great!
It's the only time they ever got up.
Now, I want to double down on this, because there's a... It pains me to say this, because the Daily Beast is a total tabloid site.
It is.
Of all the shameful sites out there, BuzzFeed and other... Daily Beast takes the cake.
But once in a blue moon, they'll publish someone with a brain And Brian Rydell is a good piece up.
I'm not even giving him the clicks.
I'll read for you from the piece.
But Brian Rydell's a pretty bright guy who talks about some of Ocasio-Cortez's spending ideas and how mathematically ridiculous they are in this piece.
I want a quote from it.
One final read today, folks.
We had a lot of demand this week, so I appreciate your patience.
You guys are great.
These are really great companies.
Hey, Valentine's Day is approaching fast.
What are you going to do?
See, age-old dilemma.
Flowers aren't original.
Sometimes they don't arrive very fresh.
Chocolate.
I can't eat these.
They will make me fat.
Sometimes people say that.
This year, do something original and indulgent for Valentine's.
Something that rings the bell.
My wife loves this.
Go-to.
Indulgences.store.
Make a mental note now.
It's indulgences.store, not dot com.
Indulgences.store.
Make that note.
This stuff is amazing.
Together with Halo Healthy Tribes, Indulgences.store has partnered to create an indulgent line of hot beverage mixes.
Now, I kid you not, Paula tried this the other day.
You put it milk or water, and she couldn't stop talking about it.
Matter of fact, if you're listening, theindulgences.store people, if you wouldn't mind sending a few more our way, I'd really appreciate it.
She tried...
The matcha with white chocolate, and she loved it.
Just add water for some of the most sumptuous mugs of hot cocoa and other flavors.
It is absolutely incredible.
It is so good.
They have the Yogi Goji, pink velvet, white chocolate, cream cheese, the whole latte, love an espresso-infused latte.
Oh, they have chai, Indian spice, black tea, latte.
It is so good.
Go to indulgences.store.
They taste spectacular, 100% natural, no added sugar.
They have superfoods, MCT oil, collagen, prebiotic, inulin, chia seeds, and a lot more.
They are loaded with MCT oil in addition to being 100% natural.
Check it out.
Available at indulgences.store.
I'm gonna give you a promo code.
Go to indulgences.store.
Promo code Bongino for 10% savings.
They're available in Valentine's Day gift packages starting as low as $39, but step up and be a man, indulge with all six flavors and save even more.
Enroll her in the subscription program to get 12 additional flavors over the course of the year.
Act now and get ahead of the Valentine's crunch.
There's a special deal for my listeners.
Enter Bon Geno at checkout and save 10%.
If you order before February 3rd, you'll also save $5 off shipping and handling.
Act quickly to save money.
Get Valentine's Day covered with a gift she'll appreciate.
She'll love it.
It's delicious.
And that lasts and is enjoyed for months.
Indulgeses.store.
Promo code Bon Geno for 10% savings.
Save yourself the grief.
Indulgences.store.
Indulgences.store.
Okay.
So Brian Rydell had a really, really cool piece up at, again, I can't even say it, the Daily Beast, because it's such a tabloid.
But here's a quote from it, talking about the absurd, outrageous spending plans of people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and how the math just doesn't add up.
I'm gonna quote from the piece.
He's talking about the 42.5 trillion additional dollars in spending that, quote, free college, which we know isn't free.
To quote P.J.
O'Rourke, you think your healthcare is expensive now, wait till it's free.
Well, that applies to college too.
Medicare for all, this stuff is gonna be really expensive.
It's gonna cost roughly 42.5 trillion additional dollars over 10 years.
So, Rydell says, in reality, the CBO tells us that raising the remaining 35 trillion dollars, Now, just so we understand where he's going with that, he's saying if we wiped out the tax cuts and we gauged in some modest spending, we would be able to roughly finance $7 trillion of it, but we'll need $35 trillion more to come up with that $42.5 trillion number.
Copy?
So he says, the CBO tells us that raising the remaining $35 trillion would require... Joe, get a load of this!
So listen, liberals, liberals out there, if you're advocating this stuff and you're telling 18-year-olds and 20-year-olds and impressionable adults that this Medicare for All and free college is going to be free, here's the cost from the CBO you all worship, by the way.
It would require either raising the payroll tax to 54% The payroll tax, a payroll tax, a tax on whatever you're, the 54, we're not talking about your income tax, that's separate.
So you would pay whatever your rate, 20%, 18%, 15%, whatever effective rate and income, you would pay a payroll tax of 54%.
Or, or, oh Joe, don't worry, this one's a lot better.
In order to finance Ms.
Cortez's program, Sanders, Bernie Sanders, and others, Don't worry, there's an easier route, Joe.
Take it easy.
If you just imposed a small 90% national sales tax, everything would be A-OK.
Don't worry, folks.
Only a 90% national sales tax.
So think about that.
90%.
So Joe, just to be clear, if you go and buy something for $100, you would pay $190.
dollars you would pay a hundred and ninety dollars.
Elizabeth I'm coming for you baby!
I'm coming!
Don't worry, folks, you won't have to pay a 54% payroll tax in addition to Social Security, Medicare, your FICA tax, your income tax, and all that other stuff.
You would also have to pay only a 90% national sales tax.
Can you imagine essentially a doubling of the price of every single thing you buy?
Don't worry, folks!
It's all free!
Don't worry!
It's all free!
How do we know?
Because Representative Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders told us it's free!
Kamala Harris!
It's Medicare for all!
Don't worry!
Free college!
It's free!
It's gonna cost a 90% national sales tax.
The piece goes on.
It gets even worse.
But the presidential candidates won't tell you that.
It's easier to cling to the just-tax-the-rich-and-cut-defense fantasy that is no less delusional than the rights all tax cuts pay for themselves.
He's not a hard right guy when it comes to the tax cuts-pay-for-themselves thing either, so the piece can be very open-minded even for your liberal friends.
How about some common sense, he says.
Don't add $42 trillion in new spending until we figure out how to close the existing $16 trillion deficit over the decade.
Don't radically expand Social Security and Medicare until we've gotten a handle on their shortfalls that will exceed $1.6 trillion within a decade.
And for those who are offended that Republicans did not pay for the $3 trillion in tax cuts, they should fight to repeal the new law and not pour $42 trillion in new gas on the fire.
Now, I obviously don't agree with that.
I think the tax cuts As evidenced by historical analysis of tax cuts, whether they pay for themselves or not is obviously a causal argument that'd be hard to make, but the fact that tax cuts have been correlated with higher government revenue in the past is not in dispute.
Whether it's the John F. Kennedy tax cuts, the Reagan tax cuts, the George W. Bush tax cuts, even the Calvin Coolidge tax cuts.
But I'm not going to get into an argument with Rydell over that.
His piece is pretty good, but his point is a sound one.
Ladies and gentlemen, these programs cost money.
They cost a lot of money.
They cost a significant amount of money.
And us arguing with the Democrats about this without presenting the facts over time is going to be dangerous because these kids are going to start to believe and the impressionable folks out there that these programs are free.
There is not enough money to tax the rich.
What did I tell you?
Estimates of if we were to tax people on their wealth who make 10 million or more according to Elizabeth Warren's plan and other people's plans.
There is only about 200 billion dollars in that pool.
How you are going to do that to finance trillions of new spending every year is mathematically impossible.
They will have to tax you, the middle class, and the only way to do it would be through a VAT, a national sales tax, or a dramatic expansion of the payroll tax to levels you've never seen before.
All right, one final story today.
There's a lawmaker in Connecticut, a woman by the name of Jillian Gilchrist, who is proposing another outrageously stupid idea, Joe.
The litany of dopey liberal democrat ideas coming our way seems to never end.
Here we go.
It's like that line at Disney World to get on Space Mountain.
It never ends.
It can be raining and 40 degrees in a week, right?
And the line to get on Space Mountain is always endless over there.
My daughter goes up there all the time.
Well, in the realm of stupid ideas, this one's probably a top tenner.
Jillian Gilchrist wants to propose a 50% ammo tax, ammunition tax, on all ammunition purchases in the state of Connecticut.
Now, why is she doing this?
Ladies and gentlemen, this is an effort.
Basically, to attack the Second Amendment via financial means and to get people blacklisted.
Now, what would a 50% ammo tax do?
An ammunition tax would prevent training, would prevent... Listen, for you to go to the range, it would create a black market for ammunition, but it would de facto Destroy the Second Amendment in the state of Connecticut for people anywhere outside of the wealthy who could afford such a dramatic expansion and the prices of the ammunition they need to train and to load and, you know, load their weapons.
This is going to be what they're going to do.
Now, keep in mind, you may say, well, all right, Dan, it's a stupid policy, but it really doesn't sound as catastrophic as you're saying.
No, no, no, no, no.
You have to read the tea leaves, ladies and gentlemen.
You have to understand how Democrats work.
You may say, yeah, it would be expensive, but you know what?
You could cut your shooting down to once every couple months and you'd still be able to get your hands on ammo.
No, no, no.
What they'll do is they'll open the door on a 50% tax, which will then become a 60% tax, which will then become a 70% tax, which will then become a sin tax of 200%, which will then become a 500% tax, and you will de facto have an ammunition sin tax, which makes a box of ammunition upwards of a regular standard 9mm full metal jacket.
You'll be paying about $200 a box, which would do what?
Which would drive people into other states to buy ammunition, create a black market, but effectively shut down the firearms business in the state of Connecticut.
Don't buy the opening offer ever with the Democrats.
And do you need another example from current events about how the Democrats work?
There is a proposal in Hawaii, Joe.
In the great state of Hawaii.
To expand the legal purchasing age for cigarettes to what age, Joe?
What age?
Forty-five.
Forty-five.
No, a hundred.
I'm not kidding, Joe.
I can see the look on his face.
It's a stupid joke.
I'm not kidding.
There is a lawmaker in a way that wants to expand.
I'm not making this up.
The illegal buying age for cigarettes to a hundred.
In other words, making it completely illegal.
This is what I'm telling you.
This is a dumb idea.
It is a backdoor way to shut down the firearm self-defense, self-protection industry in the state of Connecticut by making an introductory offer of a 50% tax that will soon be a 500% tax, which will prevent anybody but the very wealthy from being able to train or purchase ammunition in the state of Connecticut.
Don't buy it, folks.
The Democrats are a clever lot.
This is what they do.
Don't buy the opening offer.
Ever!
Alright, listen.
I hope you watched last night's speech.
If you get the chance and you didn't see it, please watch some of the highlights and snippets of it.
It really was an incredible, incredible moment and I want to hat tip the president.
There have been few times I watched a speech in politics where I was moved as I was last night.
I thought he did a wonderful, amazing job, and I thought his use of the people in the crowd who exemplify what's great about America, Buzz Aldrin and some of the other folks he had up there, the 10-year-old cancer survivor, was really created a bunch of magical moments I think a lot of people will never forget.
So really, check it.
It's worth your time to check it out.
All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in.
I really appreciate it.
Please subscribe to the show on iTunes.
It is free if you have an iPhone.
If you have an Android, please go to iHeartRadio.
You can follow.
You can also listen at Bongino.com, but it's the subscriptions that drive us up the charts.
