Trumps Interview Has Liberals Howling # 1001 (Ep 1001)
In this episode I address the hypocritical liberal outrage at the latest Donald Trump interview. I also point out deeply troubling examples of Democrat collusion with foreigners. Finally, I address Bernie Sanders ridiculous speech on socialism. News Picks:Our national debt is exploding because we have a spending problem.
Why is Joe Biden stealing lines from Michael Avenatti?
President Trump’s latest interview has hysterical liberals howling.
Measures of income inequality are biased in favor of liberal talking points.
President Trump may have another opportunity to fill a spot on the liberal 9th Circuit Court.
Illinois liberals cheer late-term abortion bill.
Copyright Dan Bongino 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?
What do you say, Daddy-O?
I'm doing pretty good.
Doing pretty good.
Glad to be here.
Yeah, man.
Good to hear.
All right, I got a stacked show for you today.
Trump's interview yesterday blowing up the internet.
The internet has officially collapsed, folks.
The infrastructure has imploded and fallen apart.
Everybody's losing their mind.
But what Trump said yesterday during his interview with ABC's George Stephanopoulos, which we'll get to, Is entirely consistent if you looked at it without liberal TDS level six infected Trump derangement syndrome virus, viral infection.
Nothing he said was inconsistent with his approach.
Right.
This is not me running interference for anyone.
I will explain that.
Don't go anywhere.
I promise what you hear today, you're probably not going to hear anywhere else.
Hey, one quick correction too.
Thank you to everyone in my audience.
I said the other day and yesterday or the day before show, I'm sorry, Cody Scheer, the alleged journalist who's a Clinton acolyte, that Weiner was his brother-in-law.
I meant Strobe Talbott.
I'm sorry.
It was a little bit of confusing.
I've said that before on the show.
It was just an oversight on my part, but we have to, you know, you have to be precise.
It struck with me just then.
We have to be correct and precise.
Yeah.
I meant Strobe Talbott, who was Bill Clinton, a high level bureaucrat and the secretary of state under Bill Clinton.
That is, in fact, Cody Shearer's brother-in-law.
And conveniently, who was Strobe Talbot's chief of staff?
Victoria Newland in the State Department who works with Jonathan Weiner.
So thank you, everyone, for pointing that out.
I always appreciate your feedback on that.
Okay, we got a busy show.
Today's show brought to you by our buddies at Filter Buy.
Hey, if you're getting the feeling that allergy season's longer and longer, it is.
Believe it or not, the Midwest is seeing an allergy season up to a month longer.
Last month, North Carolina made the news with a pollen blanket that covered the state.
Get relief by doing something as simple as changing your air filters at home or at your business with the company I use, FilterBuy.
It's super simple.
Go to FilterBuy.com, plug in the sizes you need, schedule your filters to be delivered.
As often as you need them to be replaced, I like to change mine every quarter.
Some people like to change them out every month.
They have over 600 sizes, including custom options that ship free, plus they manufacture right here in America.
It's the easiest thing you can do to give yourself some relief and extend the life of your furnace and HVAC system.
Change your filters, tell them Dan Bongino sends you.
Alright, let's go!
There it is.
Ding, ding.
Okay, there you go.
So yesterday, Donald Trump, President Trump did an interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC.
And this line here, at tip ABC for their video here, this line here is driving liberals crazy.
They are losing their mind.
Let's get right to it.
And I'll describe to you why what Donald Trump said is not even remotely controversial.
It's what he's been saying the whole time.
Go.
Should he have gone to the FBI when he got that email?
Okay, let's put yourself in a position, you're a congressman.
Somebody comes up and says, "Hey, I have information on your opponent."
Do you call the FBI?
I don't think- It's coming from Russia, you do.
I've seen a lot of things over my life.
I don't think in my whole life I've ever called the FBI.
In my whole life.
I don't- you don't call the FBI.
You throw somebody out of your office, you do whatever- Al Gore got a stolen briefing book, he called the FBI.
Well, that's different.
A stolen briefing book.
This isn't a sto- This is somebody that said, we have information on your opponent.
Oh, let me call the FBI.
Give me a break.
Life doesn't work that way.
The FBI director says that's what should happen.
The FBI director is wrong.
Your campaign this time around, if foreigners, if Russia, if China, if someone else offers you information on an opponent, should they accept it or should they call the FBI?
I think maybe you do both.
I think you might want to listen.
There's nothing wrong with listening.
If somebody called from a country, Norway, we have information on your opponent.
Oh, I think I'd want to hear it.
You want that kind of interference in our elections?
It's not an interference.
They have information.
I think I'd take it.
If I thought there was something wrong, I'd go maybe to the FBI if I thought there was something wrong.
But when somebody comes up with oppo research, right?
They come up with oppo research.
Oh, let's call the FBI.
The FBI doesn't have enough agents to take care of it.
But you go and talk honestly to congressmen.
They all do it.
They always have.
And that's the way it is.
It's called oppo research.
All right.
I can't even tell you the meltdown that happened on, I can't describe it to you because it was too broad in scope and it would take up the whole show.
I could play for you a montage of liberal far-left TDS infected media figures yesterday.
Absolutely melting down.
Trump's inviting foreign collusion.
Ladies and gentlemen, let me break this down.
According to what Trump actually said, not what the lunatic media told you he said.
And why this is in no way inconsistent with the material on this show or what Donald Trump's been saying the first time.
Number one, if you listen to the interview and you have a rewind button on our YouTube channel or our audio podcast, it's clear as day he's making a distinction between what happened with Al Gore and that briefing book in question, which was, there was some material in there.
Uh, that was questionable, right?
He's making a distinction there between that and Apo Research.
In other words, he says if there was something wrong, you would call the FBI.
Right.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm not paraphrasing what he said.
The words, if there was something wrong, is in the clip.
You can rewind it and see it yourself.
We didn't edit it.
We didn't doctor the video.
We cut it for time, but that is one continuous stream of thought.
Joe didn't do anything to it.
We're not trying to trick you.
No!
That is what he said.
Making a clear distinction between if some foreign government says something to you about your opponent that may be some form of opposition political information, he's going to listen to him.
If there's something wrong, you call the FBI.
Just rewind the tape.
You don't have to listen to me.
Listen to him.
Secondly, again, he makes the clear distinction between what happened with Al Gore and potential national security information and political opposition research.
Ladies and gentlemen.
He makes another, you know, you need to understand here.
He is not saying that if foreign governments like Russia and China were to present him with national security compromising information that he wouldn't contact the FBI.
That's not what he said.
There's a third takeaway here.
I'm going to move quickly because the lady got annoyed on email yesterday.
She thinks I talk too much about, uh, you know, rewinding and going back to material.
I just want you to understand.
So forgive me folks.
I'm not, I'm not trying to dumb the content down.
I just really, this stuff matters to me.
That's the reason I do that.
So I'll go through it quick.
The third takeaway though on this is important.
The third takeaway is this happens all the time where foreign officials contact congressmen and women and senators up on the hill.
Now Joe, I could sit here and waste your time with the Adam Schiff prank video.
I'm not going to do it because it's long.
A seven minute video of Democrat congressman lying, shady, shifty Adam Schiff.
Shifty!
Adam Schiff, literally, not figuratively.
On the phone with a person he thinks is a Russian operative.
This is on tape, folks.
You can Google it.
It's seven minutes long.
I'm not going to waste your time.
We've played it here before.
It's annoying, to be honest with you.
It is Adam Schiff, the actual congressman.
Not a guy who stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night pretending to be Adam Schiff on the phone with a guy he thinks is a Russian insider who is trying to give him information about Donald Trump.
It turns out to be a prank!
But I don't understand, like, if this whole thing about you're not supposed to be talking to foreign government, that's the takeaway, right?
The liberals were losing their minds.
Oh my gosh, talking to anyone in a foreign government, you must immediately contact the FBI about everything.
Then what's the story with Adam Schiff?
Why is he on the phone working with foreigners trying to get information on Trump?
Now, I'll give you an even better, even though that example is damaging enough.
It speaks to Adam Schiff.
Listen, Adam Schiff, they use the old adage, how do you know Adam Schiff's lying?
His lips are moving.
The guy is a fraud.
He's a total scammer.
How people elect this guy to Congress is unbelievable.
He's the shadiest guy up on the hill.
Him and Swalwell.
But, interestingly enough, a more, I believe a more damaging example.
Of people up on the hill talking to foreign operatives about damaging information where the FBI was not called.
What about Senator Mark Warner?
Senator Mark Warner was working with Dan Jones, a former staffer for Democrat Senator Dianne Feinstein, and speaking on the phone with a lawyer, Adam Waldman, who represented Oleg Deripaska, a Russian tied to Putin like this.
Trying also to set up meetings for another foreign operative, Christopher Steele.
Why is Mark Warner, I don't understand, why is George Stephanopoulos going to ask Mark Warner that question too?
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm not justifying any kind of foreign interference in our election, God forbid.
I'm suggesting to you that what Trump said is absolutely accurate.
That this stuff happens all the time.
People with connections to foreign governments call political people and political operatives and staffers and bureaucrats and politicians all the time with information.
And the examples are all over the place on the Democrat side.
You may say, okay, Dan, that's two examples.
Okay, let's go with a third.
Let's go to this Politico piece.
Politico.
Written by Ken Vogel.
Basically a left-wing activist for Politico.
They call it Bull-tico.
You can fill in the rest.
Because they're so far left.
Kenneth Vogel and David Stern.
January 11, 2017.
Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire.
From the actual piece.
Remember what we're talking about here.
The left-wing media is freaking out because Trump said if foreign governments contact you with opposition research, he's not talking about national security information, that you don't necessarily call the FBI about it.
That's the point.
You got it, Joe?
Headline.
And the left is losing their minds.
Why aren't they losing their minds about this from the Politico piece?
By the way, hat tip Peter Hassan, Daily Caller, who pointed this out and made this highlight on the Politico piece.
The Ukrainian officials, working with DNC officials, who were involved with the Democrat campaign, were actively passing information to Hillary Clinton's team, trying to sabotage the campaign.
You can see it right there!
Read it yourself!
Joe, I'm just checking now.
Yes?
Paul and I got a little, we're going to play a little game with you soon.
Not on this show, but Paul and I were putting this together yesterday.
How many hats you've worn?
Bank robber, federal investigator, accountant, economist.
We were trying to lay it all out.
We got to about 50 and we stopped.
Now, I'm asking you to be a geography teacher for a moment here.
Joe, it's not a trick question.
All right, Danny.
Is Ukraine, I'll give you a moment to think about this, is Ukraine Part of the United States.
Go.
Danny, you know that it's not.
Why do you keep asking your teacher these silly questions?
Thank you, Joseph Armacost.
You're welcome, Daniel.
So, you can confirm on the show, Joe, that Ukraine is not in fact part of the United States.
What has two thumbs and loves Joe Armacost?
This guy.
Very nice, well done geography teacher, Joe Armacost.
You're welcome, Daniel.
Folks, read the political piece yourself.
Ukrainian officials were passing information to the DNC and then former DNC official Alexander Chalupa and media figures to damage the Trump campaign.
I thought Stephanopoulos' interview made the point that foreign information passed to politicians in the US was some form of like treason.
What is it?
Is it treason?
Is it criminal?
Or is it not?
Because why is Adam Schiff, Mark Warner, and Hillary Clinton not in prison then?
I don't understand.
Yeah.
You can't have it both ways.
You can't.
It doesn't make any sense.
Either talking to foreign governments is entirely illegitimate when your political opponents come up, and you should contact the FBI for everything, or it's not.
I saw Dinesh D'Souza on Laura Ingraham's show a few nights ago, and he had a great line.
It was actually Friday.
I was up in New York.
I had just finished Hannity.
It's funny because people wait for you outside of Fox News, and I was walking back to the hotel after I had coasted the show.
I ran into a bunch of people, so I was all wired up.
So I go back to the hotel, and I'm sitting there, and I'm watching Ingraham's show afterwards, and Dinesh came on, and he had this great line talking about Democrat double standards here.
You know, double standards.
You know what they are.
There's a standard for Republicans.
Talking to foreigners is really bad.
Call the FBI.
But when it comes to Democrats, like Schiff, Warner, and Hillary Clinton seem to talk to foreign governments, nobody in the media seems to care.
Nobody.
That's a double standard.
One standard here, one standard there.
D'Souza had this great line, Joe.
He goes, you know, behind every double standard is a single standard.
Well, what did he mean by that?
Obviously, he meant the single standard is, the standard is just attack Republicans, right Joe?
There's no double standard.
The standard is, what can we do to fillet Republicans and Donald Trump?
That's the standard.
Great line, Dinesh.
Hat tip to you, buddy.
Salute.
Behind every double standard is a single standard.
I don't even know who he was quoting, but I sat there watching it going, nice.
He was on with Pete Hegseth, who was guest hosting.
Now you saw the political piece.
Let me point out another glaring double standard.
Buck Sexton, who I'm a great admirer of, he does great work, worked for the NYPD and the Central Intelligence Agency as, I believe, an analyst over there.
Buck has his own radio show, too.
Buck sent out one of the better tweets I've seen in a long time, again yesterday, talking about this media double standard that's really a single standard, and the single standard is this, fillet and attack Republicans and Donald Trump at any cost.
There's no double standard, that's the standard.
Here's Buck Sexton's tweet, pointing out the obvious.
There was an NBC News article, and we'll put the NBC News article up in a minute, don't worry.
And the NBC News article in their tweet, which is subtweeted here, it's Buck Sexton, says
"Representatives of at least 22 foreign governments appear to have spent money
at Trump Organization properties," an NBC News review is found.
Oh my gosh. Joe.
Yeah.
Are you ready for this?
Dude, get ready.
You have your nitroglycerin ready?
Because you may have heart problems.
This is going to be extremely traumatic and stressful.
Get ready.
Elizabeth, Elizabeth, get ready for Joe because he may be coming for you, okay?
Here's the suggestion here.
Trump is a real estate magnate who owns hotels and properties.
There are foreign organizations and governments Are you ready?
Are you ready?
Hold your heart, Joe.
I'm ready.
That may have actually stayed at some of these properties.
Paula, dial 9-1-1.
Get him to Martin County.
Out of Rundle County, Maryland, to take care of Joe Armacost.
He's about to lose it.
It's the dumbest story ever.
Now, keep in mind, in the piece, can you draw up the piece?
I'm sorry, jump back.
I'll go back to Buck Sexton in a minute.
You panted like a dog!
This is NBC News' big breaking news, Joe, that the extent of the spending isn't really known because it's a private company.
But Trump had promised to donate any profits from these foreign governments, and the Trump Organization has in fact sent $343,000 to the U.S.
$343,000 to the US Treasury for 2017 to 2018.
Okay, this is their big, folks, this is their big story.
Again, behind every double standard is a single standard.
Republicans suck and we're gonna attack Donald Trump.
That's the single standard.
There it is.
So just to be clear, the Trump organization has donated the proceeds from these foreign governments staying at their hotels.
It's believed to be about $343,000, which has been sent to the U.S.
Treasury, which NBC confirms.
Trump doesn't take a salary.
The $450,000 a year he gets for being the president is his salary.
He doesn't even take that salary.
He donates that back as well.
This is your scandal?
That people who live overseas stay in hotels in the United States that the Trump team owns and the proceeds of it they send back to the government.
That's your scandal.
Just like your scandal before was that foreign governments, according to George Stephanopoulos' interview, may talk to the president about opposition research and not everything is worthy of calling the FBI.
Although Schiff, Mark Warner, Hillary Clinton, and believe me, a lot more.
We now see Steny Hoyer's team may be roped into this, who Joe knows from Maryland, another senior Democratic Congressman.
Hold steady.
Now we find out that that standard doesn't matter for them, it only matters for Trump.
But now money-changing hands that may benefit the Trump Organization, that they donate to the government, is a huge scandal in the amount of $343,000.
Back to the Buck Sexton tweet.
Thank you, Buck Sexton, for nailing this.
Greatest point I've seen on Twitter in the past two weeks.
Buck Sexton says, so let me get this straight.
These 22 foreign governments have spent less at all the Trump properties combined than Bill Clinton's slick willy received from a Russian bank for one speech while his wife was Secretary of State.
Man.
So much journalism-ing.
That's Buck's words.
Very nice.
Nice job, Mr. Buck Sexton.
So Joe, here's the single standard.
Let's go after the Trump team.
Here's the alleged double standard.
On one side, foreign governments giving people money that may influence politics, even though it's donated back to the treasury.
This is scandalous.
It's worthy of an NBC News report.
But the fact that Bill Clinton Took $530,000 more than the $373,000.
$130,000 more than the $342,000, or was it $373,000?
It doesn't matter, $100,000 more for one speech from a Russian bank that was connected to
the Uranium One deal through some financial machinations, right?
While Hillary Clinton, who was the Secretary of State, had the ability to speak out about this devastating Uranium One deal.
That's no problem at all.
No, no.
That's a conspiracy theory.
No problem at all, Joe.
No problem.
Ladies and gentlemen, throw these media reports in the garbage.
NBC, WAPO, the New York Slimes, it is garbage.
This ABC breaking news yesterday, garbage.
It is total garbage.
I think they meant broken news.
Oh, pathetic.
And notice how Stephanopoulos, I didn't play the beginning of that, but we'll have it recut into this Molly Hemingway thing in a minute, so don't go anywhere.
But notice how Stephanopoulos, Joe, brings up the Trump Tower meeting too, and now regular listeners to the show know this.
But what does he not bring up, Joe?
The fact that the people who showed up to the Trump Tower meeting to meet with Don Jr., the Russians, were actually connected to the Clinton team.
He doesn't bring that up at all, because Stephanopoulos is a political activist, that's what he is.
He's not a legitimate journalist.
Connections to foreign governments are really awful.
If I were President Trump, I would have said, oh, the Trump Tower meeting?
George, were you aware that the Russian lawyer that showed up was working for the company hired by Hillary Clinton?
Just yes or no, George, were you aware of that?
What about the alleged Russian intel connected guy, Akhmetchin, Rinat Akhmetchin, that showed up?
Were you aware that he's already acknowledged he has relationships with the Clinton team?
Were you aware of that, George?
That's what I would have said.
Hey Dan, didn't George work in some capacity for the Clintons at one point in time?
I'm not sure.
I know you're being funny.
Of course Armacost knows the answer to a question.
He's not really, it's, it's rhetorical.
Yes, of course Joe, he did, but that is a good point.
You know, and you know what?
I'm messing with you a little bit, but I'm actually glad you brought that up because, you know, we have a very smart audience, but some people, you know, are younger.
They may not remember George Stephanopoulos was in fact The Clinton insider.
Yeah.
A political operative worked inside the White House with the Clintons.
So, you know what?
I'm messing with you, but Joe is right in pointing that out.
Stephanopoulos was a Clinton insider.
So he obviously, his loyalty is elsewhere, but good point.
All right.
Today's show also brought to you by our buddies at Policy Genius.
Listen.
Procrastination is a bad thing, right?
Yeah.
Well, sometimes, sometimes procrastination may help you.
If you've been waiting to buy life insurance, yeah, that's good.
You, you.
Procrastination may be a good thing in this case because if you've waited, now is the opportunity for you to save money on life insurance, other forms of insurance as well, at policygenius.com.
Compare quotes in just two minutes.
If you need life insurance, but you've been putting it off, congrats!
You've managed to procrastinate long enough for technology to make it super easy for you.
We use PolicyGenius.
Super simple.
PolicyGenius is the easy way to shop for insurance online.
In just two minutes, you can compare quotes from top insurers to find your best price.
This is so easy to use.
Why waste your time on the phone with 20 different insurance companies?
Once you apply, the PolicyGenius team handles all the paperwork and the red tape.
You don't have to get involved in that.
It's great.
No sales pressure, no hidden fees, just financial protection and peace of mind.
There's no price you can put on that.
PolicyGenius doesn't just make life insurance easy.
They can help you find home insurance, auto insurance, and disability insurance as well.
If you need life insurance, but you've been busy doing literally anything else, check out PolicyGenius.com.
It's the easy way to compare all the top insurers and find the best value for you.
PolicyGenius.com.
Nobody wants to shop for life insurance.
That's why PolicyGenius.com made it super easy.
PolicyGenius.com.
Okay.
Moving on a bit.
Again, talking about this entire... Molly Hemingway, who's one of the more talented political commentators and writers out there.
Yeah, a very, I mean, just a fantastic, very well-researched person who has been all over Spygate from the beginning.
Her library of material at The Federalist is worth your time.
Molly Hemingway frequently does appearances on Bret Baier's show at 6 p.m.
Eastern Time on the Fox News Channel.
They're always good and she can be a real brawler.
Molly Hemingway echoed exactly what I'm talking to you about now on her appearance last night.
We'll get to in a second, but I just want to get a headline that She points out the double standard that, again, alleged conversations with foreign governments are supposedly a big thing and worthy of an investigation and impeachment and all this other stuff until we find out that the Clintons did exactly that in their team and then they ignore it.
Here's Molly Hemingway, and you'll see in the beginning they do kind of a recut of George Stephanopoulos' interview, but this is worth your time.
Check it out.
If foreigners, if Russia, if China, if someone else offers you information on an opponent, should they accept it or should they call the FBI?
I think maybe you do both.
I think you might want to listen.
There's nothing wrong with listening.
If somebody called from a country, Norway, we have information on your opponent.
Oh, I think I'd want to hear it.
Thoughts on that?
This is what I've been talking about repeatedly.
George Stephanopoulos' good friend Hillary Clinton took information from a foreign government.
If it is a huge problem to take information from a foreign government, he should be asking her and Democrats.
The Democratic National Committee secretly bought and paid for this dossier that, by their own accounting, was sourced to government officials in Russia.
So if this is a huge problem, and many people have been telling us for years that it is, why aren't the media doing more to find out exactly what happened there?
Why they created this hoax conspiracy theory?
How they got it into the highest levels of the government?
I would like to see some people ask some tough questions of those people.
Oh, yeah.
Oh, we need a macho man.
Oh, you don't have macho man.
We need macho man now so bad.
Oh.
Oh, yeah.
Remember Macho Man?
Yeah!
There's nobody... Listen, I love my own commentary on Fox.
I don't mean that in a self-praised, kind of egomaniacal way, but I like my commentary on Fox.
I think I'm sure it's sweet.
Molly's terrific though.
She's an A-plus teamer.
She just nails it every time.
Is it a problem or not?
We are simply asking you as conservatives to give us some rules.
They won't.
I'm not really asking them.
It's silly because the media doesn't care.
They're activists.
But let's say in a fair, rational media environment where they're interested in doing journalism and actual fact-based reporting.
If that were the case, Molly's making a clear point.
Just give us the rules of the road about what is unethical and immoral and what is worth reporting on as a scandal.
If Donald Trump's suggesting that taking information from a foreign government, which he did not, by the way, the Trump Tower meeting was fruitless.
There was nothing in there of any significance, so that is universally accepted now.
The meeting was a bad idea.
I get it.
Donald Trump Jr.
has been honest about it.
It's done.
People make mistakes and we move on.
He's exposed all the emails about it.
He released them.
There's nothing hidden there.
Right.
Mistake.
Okay, fine.
But Molly Singh, what are the rules of the road?
If meeting with them is a bad thing, immoral, unethical, and potentially illegal, then why aren't you investigating Hillary Clinton?
No answer.
None.
Nobody has an answer.
Because they don't want an answer.
But really, really, really well done.
Now.
By Molly Hemingway, that is.
I want to go to another video.
This is an important one.
Another gentleman I admire greatly, Andrew McCarthy, former federal prosecutor, another guy Joe's run into in the course of his prior life as a radio producer and engineer.
Really great guy, and really in person.
I hope I don't bore you with these personal commentaries, folks, on these people, but you see them a lot on TV, and I know them, and I don't share any of their personal stories out of turn, but I've met them in green rooms, and Andy I know very well, and I hope it adds to the color of the show.
Just give them hat tips and let you know that they're really behind the scenes, genuine, honestly good people.
If they were jerks, candidly, I'd tell you.
But this guy is such a good guy and he's such a sober, honest broker of information.
So Andy McCarthy writes for National Review.
He was up on Capitol Hill.
During this hearing, they had two FBI officials who were totally clueless, former FBI people.
They didn't even read the Steele dossier.
Their cuts are so insignificant and boring, it's not worth your time.
But Andy McCarthy brings up an interesting point.
This is hat tip Chris Stewart, who had this on his Twitter feed, who's a Republican congressman from Utah.
He asks Andy McCarthy a question here.
Let me set this up a bit.
He says, listen, is getting information The theme of the show today, from foreign operatives, basically is this a bad thing or not?
I'm here to suggest to you, as I've consistently said for the past two years now, it's not that the government got information.
It's not that the government investigated information.
It's that the government failed to verify the information.
Joe, as my witness on the show for the thousand and one shows you and I have done together, have I not said a minimum of a hundred to two hundred, maybe more times, that the real scandal is the Woods procedure?
In other words, ladies and gentlemen, it's not that the FBI, thank you, got the information from political operatives.
That's bad, yeah.
But people do get information from shady sources all the time.
Sure.
It's that the FBI did not verify said information according to their own procedures and then used it to swear that the information was true when it was not.
Do you get it?
That's the scandal.
No FBI agent's gonna say, hey, listen, I don't want that.
Whatever, send us what you got.
You take a look.
This was easily shown to be debunked information.
Quick example before I get to McCarthy.
Remember, I want you to pay close attention to it because at the end of this cut, he brings up this very point about it's not where you get information.
The shadiest people around give you information.
It's your failing to verify it and swearing that it was true.
That's the scandal.
They did not do their own proper verification procedures.
And ladies and gentlemen, before I get to the cut, it's important because the information was so easily discredited.
That Michael Cohen had been to Prague.
Just check his passport history.
It's clear he'd never been to Prague to set up this collusion scandal.
Christopher Steele's claim that the payments for the collusion scandal were being made through the Russian consulate in Miami.
A State Department official, Kathleen Kavlik, who has no experience in investigations at all, pointed out there is no Russian consulate in Miami.
Debunked like that!
Now, with that much fanfare and that much of a tease, here is Andy McCarthy explaining exactly what I just told you in really fine and a very eloquent way.
I've taken information from the worst people on the planet.
I've taken information from terrorists.
I've taken it from murderers, from swindlers.
When you do this kind of work, The people that you get information from tend not to be, you know, the kinds of people, the question is, do you, what do you do with the information when you get it?
And the more suspect that the source of the information is, the more and higher your obligation is to verify it before you use it in any way that's going to intrude on anyone's rights.
Oh my gosh, folks.
Yes.
Thank you.
Guys, ladies, listen, I know I have a lot of liberals listening.
Some of you hate my guts based on your emails.
That's fine.
I actually welcome you here, and you can hate me all you want.
This show is for everybody.
We do facts.
It's not a Republican show.
It's a conservative show, but it's not a Republican show.
You think that, you've been listening to the wrong show.
This is a conservative show.
We want to conserve good ideas.
But I will put people on, like Andy.
Andy, who has never, ever been some kind of Pro-Trump, blinded-to-the-facts guy.
He is a sober analyst with sincere decades of expertise in the legal arena.
He prosecuted the Blind Shake case in the Southern District of New York.
He wasn't even in a conservative judicial district in the Southern District of New York.
Otherwise known as the Sovereign District.
It's a joke in some places.
Keep in mind what he just said.
This is your takeaway.
Because information comes into the government and may make its way to the FBI.
It doesn't mean, number one, you should be contacting the FBI about opposition research, political information, if it's not national security related, every single time.
You don't want to sick the FBI and your political opponents like the Clintons did.
Trump has been entirely consistent on that point.
So what, a foreign government during the course of a meeting says, hey listen, this Biden kid is in a world of trouble in Ukraine, so you're suggesting that Trump should open an investigation in the FBI?
Oh, you mean like they suggested should happen?
When, you know, not the FBI in particular, but when Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, suggested this was worth looking into?
What did the liberals say then, Joe, and the media?
Remember the New York Times?
We put it up on the show.
The New York Times was like, this is weaponizing the government.
Ladies and gentlemen, what is it?
Media hacks.
What is it?
Are we supposed to call the FBI about Joe Biden's kid, Hunter Biden, involved in some very shady deals with Rosamond Seneca, Devin Archer, the Chinese, and the Ukrainians?
Or are we not supposed to call the FBI?
What is it?
Again, not a double standard, a single standard.
If the information hits Republicans and makes them look bad, call the FBI.
If the information comes from foreign governments like the Ukrainians about Joe Biden's kid, which is devastating by the way, we've done in total shows on them, forget that information, don't call the FBI.
Single standard.
Republicans suck, and we have to go after them.
The media's a joke!
They're a joke!
The New York Times wrote a story trying to dissuade the Trump administration from calling the FBI and getting an investigation started into actual allegations of criminal conduct from a foreign government.
There is no legitimacy to be conferred on the mainstream media anymore.
I respect their right and will fight for it till the day I die to be a free and fair press.
But with that freedom comes a certain sense of responsibility and you've thrown it out the window.
You have the freedom to be stupid as well and unfortunately you've taken us up on that opportunity every single time.
You're a loser.
Big time.
McCarthy was so good there.
It's not that they got information from a foreign country.
They get information from drug lords, terrorists.
You have to verify the information.
They didn't do any of that.
This operation was being run out of the Russian consulate in Miami.
There is no Russian consulate in Miami.
Run with it anyway!
Spying on the Trump team!
Michael Cohen coordinated the operation in Prague.
Michael Cohen's never been to Prague.
I swear to it anyways, my other Trump team.
Carter Page took a $10, $20, $30 million bribe from Rosneft.
Carter Page has never met those people.
Run with it anyway!
You're supposed to be the FBI!
Unreal is right!
Our standards are entirely consistent.
Standard number one.
Not every piece of information relayed from a source, foreign government, or elsewhere should be relayed to the FBI to open investigations into your political opponents.
We have been entirely consistent on point one.
Point two, if you get information that's suspect, like Trump made the distinction with, he said, no, no, we're not talking about the briefing book, we're talking about political stuff.
He makes the distinction clearly if you watch the interview I did.
Unless ABC edited it, that is, which they didn't.
You watch the interview I did.
Point number two is, if you get information that's shady, where he says, hey, if something's wrong, you call the FBI.
His words, Donald Trump, not mine.
It's the FBI's job, Joe, to then verify the information is accurate.
I don't understand why that interview was even remotely controversial.
Nothing he said is inconsistent.
Now, listen, I get it.
You know, Trump's not a Barack Obama-like orator of BS.
Obama was like the BS champion.
He gave these... I mean, I called my wife once from the Shelbourne.
She was my girlfriend back then.
Right, Paul?
I'm not making this up.
After I heard Obama's speech at the Democrat National Convention for John Kerry when he was a nominee, and I said, this guy's gonna be big trouble.
She remembers the call like it was yesterday.
Because he was such an excellent speaker.
He was also an excellent BS-er.
The thing about Trump is he's just not a BS-er, folks.
I'm sorry if that bothers you.
Maybe he's not your candidate.
It doesn't bother me.
He made two consistent points.
Call the FBI if it's serious, but the FBI should verify it.
But that doesn't mean you open an investigation into every bit of oppo-political research that comes in from a foreign government.
There's nothing confusing about that.
Paula, we need to snippet that for a piece today.
That's a good mark.
She's always telling me to give her a sign.
You know, that's what I love about this show.
We don't have like some EP somewhere trying to tell us what to do.
We do whatever we want.
So she's like, give me a sign if you see a cut where you're being put on Facebook.
Here's the sign.
Or I could just say, cut that piece for Facebook.
I love this.
What'd you say?
These are not the droids we're looking for.
She goes, that's not the sign.
There's the new sign.
I just want to sum that up.
I just don't understand what is such a big deal about it.
All right.
I've got a lot more to get to, including some really terrific and by terrific, I mean horrendous Bernie Sanders material, which is just classic.
Hey, today's show.
Yeah, it's great.
Also brought to you by these guys, my buddies at Dynatrap.
We have these all over our house.
This is their indoor fly light.
Now down here in Florida, I love Florida.
It's the greatest state in the union, but the issue with Florida is we are insect heaven.
Dynatrap put these up in your house.
I have one up in my garage.
I have two up inside the house, one in the bathroom, one in the kitchen, putting them up in the new house as well.
You will not see an insect anywhere in sight.
The Dynatrap fly light, I have one outside.
I have two in the new place up on the little balcony up there.
It is terrific.
There will not be an insect anywhere to your house after using the fly light.
Listen, it's summer.
And the only thing more annoying than some of Nancy Pelosi's crazy comments are flies and insects invading your home.
They're gross.
You don't know where these flies landed before they landed on your food.
It's disgusting.
We'd like to thank our sponsors at Dynatrap.
Yeah, it's gross.
They're the leading manufacturer of outdoor and indoor mosquito and insect traps.
And they've come up for a solution.
They've come up with a solution for indoor pests.
The fly light I just showed you works day and night.
Has a little glue trap on the inside.
You don't see it.
It looks like an indoor nightlight.
It doesn't look like one of those nasty fly strips.
You see them struggling around like, remember that movie, The Fly?
You're not gonna see any of that.
It actually looks like a nightlight, and the glue trap is on the inside.
But you're gonna pull up that glue trap if you have a lot of insects in your house the next day, and you're gonna be like, oh gosh.
Mosquitoes bite us all night, no more, thanks to this Dynatrap fly light.
I've been using it for a long time.
Get yours at dynatrap.com, that's D-Y-N-A, trap.com, dynatrap.com, enter promo code Bongino, and you'll get 15, yes, 15% off any of their products.
Dynatrap, the safe, silent, and simple solution to household insect control.
Can't recommend this enough.
Dynatrap.com, promo code Bongino for 15% off.
Okay.
Let's go to Bernie Sanders, shifting gears just a little bit here.
Bernie Sanders was on CNN yesterday.
This is a great clip, Joe.
I'm sure you enjoyed it.
So he makes a couple of absurd points, which Bernie Sanders is great at.
Bernie Sanders, I cannot make enough stupid points in one segment.
I have to consolidate the stupidity to 30 second soundbites.
Here is the stupid for the day.
So Bernie goes on with Anderson Cooper, I tipped this CNN, Anderson Cooper 360.
He goes on and he makes three ridiculous points.
Point number one, socialism is really fantastic and people love it.
Point number two, that people really wanna pay more taxes, he ends with that.
And point number three, that inequality in the United States
is so horrible and growing.
Of course, all three points are complete, complete nonsense, but he distills them down
to his Bernie Sanders-like talking points.
Here is crazy Bernie on with Anderson Cooper in just, I mean, another ridiculous sound video clip.
Play the cut.
You know how the president's gonna paint your talk of democratic socialism,
besides Venezuela, is, Do enough Americans know what you mean by that and what that actually looks like?
Well, Anderson, that's why I'm on your show tonight.
That's why I'm asking you.
Look, what we have to understand, for example, just for example, the United States is the only major country on earth not to guarantee health care to all people as a right.
In many countries in Europe, Germany for one, you go to college and the cost of college is zero.
I think in Finland they actually pay you to go to college.
In most countries around the world, the level of income and wealth inequality, which in the United States today is worse than at any time, Since the 1920s, with three families owning more wealth than the bottom half of America, that level of income and wealth inequality is much less severe than it is right here in the United States.
No, the taxes in many of those countries are much higher than they are, the individual personal taxes are much higher than they are in the United States.
Yeah, but I suspect that a lot of people in this country would be delighted to pay more in taxes if they had comprehensive health care as a human right.
This guy's great.
This guy, I am going to be so disappointed if he loses the nomination.
Paula, what are we going to do for material if we lose Bernie?
What are we going to do?
I don't know.
This guy is so great.
Whenever, and I wasn't struggling yesterday due to the Trump interview, but whenever I, this is a little behind the scenes, whenever you're struggling on a Monday or a Tuesday for material, you know, a slow Wednesday, Right Joe?
We always go to Bernie because you can never go wrong.
This guy is such a body of economic ignorance, every time he talks it's just a gem.
So, it's amazing he says at the end, That people want to pay more taxes.
He says, quote, they'd be delighted.
I don't know who he's talking to.
Now, because John Kerry and all his ideological opponents who John Kerry, who parks his boat in Rhode Island to avoid paying Massachusetts taxes, Al Sharpton, who has his own tax nightmares and his other ideological foes, excuse me, allies like Hillary Clinton, who had that real estate investment thing to get around taxes for other things.
You know, I don't know where he's finding these people who want to pay more taxes because they don't.
Nobody actually does pay more taxes.
Now, what Bernie really means is people like Bernie want other people to pay more taxes.
People want other people to pay more taxes.
People are not delighted to pay more taxes.
So with the greatest of respect, and I mean it, we're not the, you know, we're the peaceful ones on the conservative right here, You know, I'd encourage you in Vermont to email Bernie's office nicely and tell him, I don't know who you're talking about being delighted to pay more taxes, but I certainly ain't one of them, Bern.
I ain't feeling that Bern.
But Joe.
Yeah.
A more rational, logical question for you, my friend, you will now put on your accountant hat for the day.
I thought Bernie just said they'd be delighted to pay more.
No.
Why would they have to pay more?
Well, think about it.
He says in the opening of the clip, which you're free to rewind, The opening of the clip, he says, and the cost of college in Europe is zero.
Hmm.
The matter of fact, they pay you to go to college.
If the cost is zero, why are we paying more?
Joe, stew on that for a second.
I'm stewing.
Still!
Why?
In mid-stew... Folks, while Joe is stewing, why would you have to pay more?
The cost is zero.
He just said that in the same interview.
If the cost is zero, why are we paying more?
That's ridiculous.
Because it costs more.
So the cost isn't zero.
No, it's zero.
You just said it costs more.
But I meant zero.
Zero's not a number.
But it costs more, Bernie.
Not more.
It costs less than more.
More is less.
And less is more.
Lester more.
More Lester.
What are you talking about?
I'm confused.
This guy in the same interview said people would be delighted to pay more taxes.
They wouldn't be.
About a program, free college and healthcare, he just said doesn't cost anything.
If it's free, why are we paying more?
Because it's not free.
Oh my gosh.
I need a Valium.
I'm just kidding.
I don't like Pharmaco.
I can't self-medicate.
I'll lose it.
This is just insane.
I do take some B12 sometimes.
It'll protect my neurons from Bernie Sanders activity.
Never ends.
What is it?
It never ends.
Never ends!
Unreal.
Okay, moving on.
He makes another point there.
That inequality.
Inequality, it's so bad.
In the United States.
Ladies and gentlemen, there is no system on earth, none, where there is income equality.
None.
It is a, it's what we call logic, the utopia fallacy.
The utopia fallacy is when you compare a fallible human system.
Every system of government is going to have its flaws.
Remember Federalist 51?
If men were angels, you know, we wouldn't need government.
They're not.
Every system of human organization is going to have significant flaws.
We're all sinners, folks.
We all have proclivities, and thank God a lot of us, you know, find the righteous path, but we're, you know, we're sinners at heart.
Only one person for your sin, and it wasn't me, or Joe, or Paul, or anyone else.
The question is not, are incomes equal?
There is no system in any known universe where incomes are equal.
None.
Nor will ever will be.
Even if you leveled incomes tomorrow, and gave everything from the rich, and leveled incomes at $50,000 a year, within minutes, incomes would be different.
Because people who work harder would immediately become more successful, and people who don't would squander the $50,000.
Within minutes, you'd have income inequality again.
But folks, there's a great, great piece at The Hill.
The show notes today are worth your time.
There's about six or seven articles, but they're all really good.
This is an older one from 2018.
I can't encourage you strongly enough to read this.
By Aparna Mathur, an opinion contributor to The Hill from January 12, 2018.
And it says income inequality isn't as bad as you may think.
I love this piece.
I've read it before.
I keep it up sometimes.
She talks about the major flaws in income inequality that the left uses to hammer home talking points that aren't true.
I'm just going to quickly go through a few of them because they're very simple to understand.
When you understand the left wants you to believe Income inequality is really bad in the United States, Joe.
The rich, the aristocrats are everywhere, and us poor are sitting there waiting for the scraps from Longshank's table.
Folks, income inequality will always be a thing, okay?
The question is the degree of it.
The left's talking point is the degree of it now in the United States is worse than ever, it's horrible, and the rich are screwing you over.
Point number one, they're making the peace.
Folks, income is frequently underreported.
A lot of these income studies that measure income underestimate income at the lower end of the income scale.
So Joe, if you're getting accurate income assessments from wealthy folks, but people who are middle class and lower income are under-reporting their income, is income inequality going to look worse?
Of course!
If you really make $50,000 and you're claiming you make $30,000, but the guy who makes $250,000 is claiming it accurately, it's going to make income inequality look worse than it is.
Joe, this makes sense, right?
This is not hard.
Thank you!
It is for a liberal zone.
The author of the piece says, frequently people at the lower end of the income scale don't factor in transfer payments.
In other words, the money they get for Medicaid, money they get for maybe Medicare, disability insurance, Social Security, TANF, food stamps, welfare payments.
Folks, I assure you, that's real money.
If you don't factor that in, and it doesn't appear part of your income, you're going to look poorer than you really are.
So how do you correct for that, Joe?
Well, a more precise way to measure standard of living, it's not income, Joe, it's consumption.
In other words, if people are going to under-report their income, let's see what they actually buy.
That'll probably, Joe, be a more accurate measure of how they live, right?
Not hard.
I have a few clues.
So, I strongly encourage you, check this piece out.
The author writes, in five decades of research, we found out that if you look at income inequality only, again, it's underreported significantly, you'll see that it appears to be a 29% disparity here, income inequality, that measure.
But when you measure consumption, the disparity drops to only 7%.
Whoa.
Read the piece.
When you measure consumption, a lot of this significant gap in income inequality disappears because it measures in transfer payments.
But secondly, folks, measuring income is an entirely imprecise and frankly pretty awful way to measure someone's standard of living.
Because income is not assets.
You have people 65 and older sitting on bank accounts, not a lot, but a large portion of successful Americans, of $500,000 to $1,000,000 in their 401ks, they're living off the interest.
They're not living like fat cats, but they're living okay.
But they have no income.
So when an income measure, they look poor.
They're making zero dollars.
Zero.
Gotta do the two hands cause the media idiots.
Those of you who watch the show know what I'm talking about.
Right?
They have zero income.
They're super poor.
They're not poor.
They've accumulated assets of up to a million dollars and they live in a, you know, three, $400,000 house that's paid off.
They're not poor.
They're not victims of income inequality.
Oh my gosh, I can't believe we gotta explain this every day to goofy liberals.
So again, nothing Bernie Sanders tells you is true.
Alright, I got another story, again proving my point from yesterday's show, about how tax policy isn't the problem.
Go watch yesterday's show, we debunk Paul Krugman, Joe calls him a Freddy Krugman.
We debunk his liberal nonsense about taxes.
But there was a great article up in CNS News today I want to get to in a second.
Really important, though.
So we'll leave the show with that today.
But finally, today's show brought to you by our buddies at G-Code, the finest holsters out there.
Ladies and gentlemen, big Second Amendment advocate.
Order online.
The best holsters out there.
I use them.
Range5.com.
Use promo code Bongino for 15% off.
Listen, I'm a firearm owner.
I carry.
Most of you know that.
It's not a big secret.
Practice with it all the time.
And listen, depending on the state you live in and the concealed carry laws, you want to protect your family when you go out, which is why you'll need a great holster, not a good one, to properly carry your gun.
That's where G-Code comes in.
More than 20 years, G-Code has produced the finest holsters in the business.
I love them.
They lead the pack today.
They are 100% American-made products.
All materials are sourced right here in the U.S.
The owners of G-Code holsters are military veterans, and they are meticulous about quality and workmanship.
Excellence, excellence, not goodsmanship.
Excellence drives everything they do, and every product comes with a lifetime warranty.
Whether you're military, law enforcement, or civilian, G-Code has a holster for you.
These are really great holsters.
Please support our sponsors.
They're really, really good.
Check out the all-new G-Code Phenom in the waistband holster.
It is a total game-changer.
People love it.
It is a must-have.
The reviews on it are incredible.
Order online at range5.com.
Range5.com.
Range5.com.
Use promo code Bongino for 15% off.
Check out their Phenom waistband holster.
Go to range5.com.
Promo code Bongino for 15% off.
Okay, last story of the day.
Great holsters, by the way.
CNS News, quick piece from it.
I think this is a Terrence Jeffrey piece.
Can you put that up for me?
He does some really terrific work on the national debt and spending.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are in a national debt deficit catastrophe right now.
Yeah, it is Terrence Jeffrey.
Federal spending tops $3 trillion through May for the first time.
Deficit hits $738 billion.
This story, along with the one I just told you at the Hill, is worth your time.
It's up in the show notes today, available at Bongino.com.
If you subscribe to our email list on the website, we'll email you these articles every day.
Terrence does really terrific work, and I try to, every time he puts a piece up, I try to cover it.
Folks, we're in a really catastrophic debt situation.
I don't know any other way to say this to you.
We have got to get a lid on government spending.
It is out of control.
This is the most predictable economic apocalypse financial crisis we have ever seen in American history.
I don't know any other way to say this to people up on the hill.
This modern monetary theory garbage that debt and deficits don't matter is so dumb it's barely worth discussing on a show with sentient rational beings.
You've got to fix the spending problem.
Now, for the liberals listening who are still confused about, well, maybe we shouldn't have cut taxes.
Clearly the taxes are creating a deficit.
From the actual piece at CNS, which involves facts and data.
I know liberals have a really, I know.
I know liberals have a really tough time with this stuff.
Total federal tax revenues in the first eight months of fiscal 2019 hit $2.2 trillion, which fell $5.6 billion short of the record $2.28 trillion in constant dollars that the Treasury collected in 2016.
Here's the kicker.
Ladies and gentlemen, even with the second highest tax revenues ever collected, that's this year, I thought the tax cuts were going to cost the government, air quotes, cost the government tax revenue.
We've had the second highest amount in constant dollars ever collected in the history of our government.
Even despite that, the federal government still ran a deficit of $738 billion through the first eight months.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have a spending problem, not a tax problem, if you are a thinking, oxygen-consuming being.
Cut the spending before we are looking at a financial economic apocalypse.
My gosh, are you guys and ladies this dopey that you're missing this.
That's infuriating.
All right folks, thanks again for tuning in.
Paula's going to throw up here at the end.
We received so many emails and I deeply appreciate it.
You can see it up on the screen now.
If you want to check it out, go to youtube.com slash Bongino.
We took your identifiers out, but...
A sincere heartfelt thank you.
We received, gosh Paula, hundreds of emails, maybe more than that, about our thousandth show yesterday from all you Lawyer listeners.
Some joined us episode 628, some even earlier, some have heard every single show.
It's really an honor to be here with you in this fight.
This is my third or fourth career.
I never thought I'd be here.
I'm glad I can do it freely.
I don't have any economic pressure to do it.
I'm here because I believe in it.
But I'm here because of you.
Your feedback means everything, even the negative stuff.
You know, a lot of you are really nice and cool about it.
And like I said, I referenced that lady in the beginning of the show.
She thinks I explain too much.
It's out of a sense of really wanting people to understand.
So forgive me for that.
But thank you for your dedicated, loyal listenership.
It really means a lot to me.
You can always check those out.
Like I said, here are some of your great, fine emails we received.
Check us out at YouTube.com.
Please subscribe there.
Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, iHeartRadio, SoundCloud.
Thank you so much.
Hopefully we'll have a couple thousand more with you.
