Why Are The Media Ignoring this Bombshell? # 1025 (Ep 1025)
In this episode I address the explosive scandal surrounding this radical opponent of President Trump. I provide troubling evidence of serious fraud. I also address the math problems with the Democrats’ outrageous healthcare plan. Finally, I address the “free” college myth and what it really means for you.
News Picks:Democrats quietly admit that the President is winning the fight against “the squad.”
“Medicare for all” would bankrupt the country. This piece explains lays out the troubling details.
Bernie Sanders admits his healthcare plan would destroy our budget.
Breaking: New poll shows Trump approval up 4 points this week.
Liberal lunatics are freaking out over this actor's shirt.
This is a deeply disturbing story about this radical leftist.
Jim Acosta blows it again.
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?
Hey!
Dan's doing well, man.
Glad to be here, brother.
Did you catch any of the Trump rally last night in Greenville, North Carolina?
No, I didn't.
I didn't.
No.
So, of course, always a lot of news headlines came out of that.
I want to get to that today.
There's a couple of takeaways from the rally last night in North Carolina.
I want to make sure you understand.
I want to make sure you understand also what's at stake in 2020.
Also, please stay tuned.
I don't like to tease stuff at the end of the show.
I'm not trying to, like, bait you in or hook you in, but I've got a lot to get to.
But at the end of the show, I want to hat tip a reporter who has done some Incredible work on exposing radical leftist congresswoman Ilhan Omar and I want to show you a picture that is, I promise you, is going to change the entire debate about what she did, how she got where she was, but you have to stay tuned to the end.
I'll show you the picture and I want to hat tip this reporter and I'm telling you it's going to show you the degree of media malfeasance ignoring what Ilhan Omar really has done because she attacks Donald Trump.
That's why they give her a pen.
So stay tuned for that stack show today.
All right.
Today's show brought to you by our buddies at ExpressVPN.
We use ExpressVPN in the Bungino household.
Why?
Because, listen, you think you're not being snooped on.
Come on, I'm sorry, but that's not, listen, people are watching what you're doing online.
People don't care about your online data.
They'll fleece it in a heartbeat.
Well, I'm sorry to disappoint you.
You're wrong if you think nobody's snooping on you.
They are.
Because you listen to my show, you're clearly smart enough to understand that your privacy's under attack.
Hackers, governments, ad companies, ISBs are gobbling up your data.
We need that turkey thing.
Gobble, gobble, gobble.
Like, all of it.
That's why I recommend getting the software that I trust to protect my online activity.
ExpressVPN.
Their apps use powerful, powerful encryption to secure your data.
ExpressVPN runs in the background of your computer or phone, and use the internet just like you normally would.
Download the app, click to connect, and voila!
You're protected!
I never go online without ExpressVPN.
I want my stuff out there.
You shouldn't either.
ExpressVPN is the fastest VPN I've tried.
Costs less than $7 a month.
$7 a month?
Come on!
It's nothing.
It comes with a 30-day money-back guarantee.
$7 a month to protect your data?
That is well worth it.
ExpressVPN uses cutting-edge technology called Trusted Server to make sure there's no logs of what you do online.
It's time to stop hackers, big brother, and internet companies from grabbing your data.
Take back your online privacy like I did with ExpressVPN.
Protect your online activity today.
Find out how you can get three months free.
Three months free at expressvpn.com.
That's expressvpn.com slash Bongino for three months free with a one year package.
Visit expressvpn.com slash Bongino to learn more.
All right, let's go.
Nice.
OK, so last night, Trump rally, Greenville, North Carolina.
Of course, a lot of controversy generated from that because the media enjoys controversy.
But one of the things I wanted to bring up first that I brought up before is, from a tactical note, the genius of these rallies.
I was talking to an official involved with the Trump campaign.
I'm not going to say who, although he didn't request an anonymity, but you know, I don't want to throw his name out there.
But ladies and gentlemen, let me express to you the genius of these Trump rallies.
On its face, Joe, most people watching say, well, why is he going down to North Carolina, Wisconsin, you know, Michigan, these other states, Pennsylvania?
You know, why do you think he's doing that?
And I think Joe, the normal everyday average observer, not deeply embedded in political strategy, would probably say something like, well, there's swing states up for grabs in the 2020 presidential and you want to go down there to gin up excitement and get some local media coverage, right?
Yeah, that's what I'd say.
Yeah.
Right.
Yeah.
Well, you wouldn't be wrong, Joe.
You'd be right.
That's probably one of the top two or three reasons they do it.
But ladies and gentlemen, that is not the only reason.
The genius of these rallies, which was, and the reason I'm bringing it up is it was mentioned last night on Fox News.
I was on Ingram's show, Laura Ingram's show at 10 o'clock last night afterwards debating Chris Hahn.
One of the reasons they do these rallies is because when you show up, they ask, they don't demand of course, but they ask for some of your contact data.
I'm not talking about your social security number.
I'm not talking about your bank records.
I'm talking about simple things, an email, a phone number to text you messages at, maybe an address for mailers.
They ask you for basic bio data you would give to basically anyone else in an online purchase, right?
Folks, when you have 20 plus thousand people RSVPing at these events and another 20 or 30 thousand more giving their data to the Trump team, I know that term might scare you.
But again, are you in this fight or not?
I mean, I know you are.
I'm talking to people who are on the fence.
If you're in this fight and you want to see this president and his conservative agenda reelected, I'm imploring you To then turn over that basic data to them, because else they have to pay for it.
I ran for office.
I ran once.
To pay for data, as Joe knows, Joe would, you know, I knew Joe through three of my campaigns, is very, very expensive.
Yes, it is.
The genius of going to swing states, conducting 20, 30,000 person rallies, with a 50,000 person RSVP list, is you then get data from potential Trump voters and supporters without having to pay for it.
This is the stuff you won't hear on other media outlets.
Why, Joe?
Because they want to make the Trump campaign appear like a bunch of buffoons.
Oh, he's just showing up down there to scream and yell at swing states.
No, that's not what they're doing.
Brad Parscale and the Trump data team outlet knows exactly what they're doing.
So again, one takeaway, if you're interested at all, and listen, this is totally up to you.
Entirely up to you.
They're not demanding anything.
They can't do that.
It'd be illegal.
If you are interested in helping Donald Trump get re-elected, you would benefit their team strongly if you go to their website and input basic data so they know how to contact you about getting out the vote, where your voter polls are going to be located, how to join the campaign, how to donate if you decide.
Again, totally up to you.
I did that.
I'm just telling you that there's a genius here of what's happening.
So that's takeaway number one.
The data portion of this is going to help them tremendously.
It's not this positive.
It doesn't mean they're going to win by default.
It just means they're going to have a tremendous advantage organizationally.
Second, ladies and gentlemen, the Democrats are quietly starting to admit to reporters, notably Jake Tapper from CNN, who got some off the record comments from Democrats.
They are starting to admit now, the Democrats, as you can see in this bright bar piece, that Trump is actually winning this battle with the squad.
Here it is, unbelievable.
Robert Kraychuk, peace and Breitbart Democrats admit to CNN's tapper, the president won this one.
The squad is hurting the party.
This is an excellent piece up at my show notes at Bongino.com.
If you subscribe to my email list, which I humbly ask you do, I will send you these articles every day.
I submit about five to seven on my email list.
It'll cover the news of the day for you.
Folks, what's happening?
You know the argument, you know what happened.
The president went after Ilhan Omar and the other three members of the squad on tweets saying, go back and fix your country, come back, tell us how it's done.
Of course, that was painted by the media as a, you know, overtly racist thing.
It was not.
You may not like Trump's tweets.
Again, as I said last night, he probably should have worded that differently.
Go back has never been used well.
And that's fine.
You may disagree.
I, you know, I'm not, I absolutely categorically deny with 100% certainty, as I did on Fox last night, that the President of the United States is in any way racist.
Of course, they want to have that conversation of you denying it, because then people go, well, why would you say the President's racist?
It goes back to the when did you stop beating your wife question.
I didn't just beat my wife.
You get it?
Yeah.
Having said that, though, the Democrats really think they won this, some of them, or have been telling the media that publicly.
I should say to be precise.
That's not what's happening in the back channel.
In the back channel, Democrats are quietly admitting that the president won this fight.
Why?
Last night during the rally, he absolutely filleted Omar Rashida Tlaib.
Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley, the four members of the squad, radical leftist congresswoman who've been going after the president.
Why are they quietly admitting the president won?
Now, I'm not sure this was some 4D chess or anything by the president.
I think he just lashed out at them for constantly attacking the man's character, right?
Right.
But folks, what the president successfully did again last night is he is making these four radical leftists who support Unbelievably far, even to the left of Bernie Sanders policies, he is now making them the face of the Democrat Party.
And Joe, for the last, now what, four days since the weekend?
Who has not been in the news cycle?
In lieu of the four squad members, these radical leftist congresswomen, who has not been in the news cycle?
Ladies and gentlemen, the Democrat candidate is running for president.
So whether this was 4D chess or some strategic move, I don't think it was.
I honestly think he just lashed out.
I do too.
I'm just being candid in my evaluation of what I think happened because you deserve that.
He probably lashed out at them.
But whether it was 4D chess or not, Democrats are starting to acknowledge again that Trump again won this fight.
Other politicians would have backed away.
Trump doesn't.
He's not going to apologize.
He is not a racist that's obvious, that's just idiotic leftist talk.
These assertions that he is were going to backfire and now he has made them, through this rally last night and elsewhere, the four members of the squad, he has made them and their radical policies the face of the Democrat Party because for the last four days you have heard nothing from Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, yeah, they've been on Twitter and elsewhere, but the majority of the mainstream media coverage has said Democrats?
Squad!
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm telling you, they lost this, and they're even starting to tell Jake Tapper.
Now, I predicted this on the 5 on Monday where I was co-hosting the show.
What did I say?
If you watched the show on Monday, after they gave the press conference, I said to Dana Perino, I said Dana, and I agreed with Dana, Dana said, and she was very prescient in this, Dana said, I think Nancy Pelosi wants this fight to go away too because she does not want the focus of the Democrat party to be on these four radical leftists.
I entirely agreed with her.
I said this is going to get worse and the tide is going to turn.
Trump will not apologize.
And eventually the Democrats are going to want this story out of the news because they want the 2020 candidates highlighted.
They do not want these four members of the squad, these four radical leftists.
Trump wins again.
Whether you like it or not, folks, whether you like it or not, he has a feel even after Even after the tweet, which again I believe was a misstep.
Even after the tweet, he has managed to turn this into another political win.
This is not me, this is an honest evaluation and I'm echoing the sentiments of Democrats who off the record are saying the same thing.
He has incredible political instincts even after he has to clean something up.
And the Democrats can't match it.
They just can't.
So there's my take on the rally last night.
All right, let's move on.
Secondly, this is just kind of a request.
I need your help, folks.
YouTube is smashing our videos again.
Last night we were down Gosh, I don't know, close to 30, 40%.
Our video, youtube.com slash Bongino.
Ouch!
Yesterday we discussed, if you missed yesterday's show, we discussed, ironically, big tech tyranny and a hearing up on Capitol Hill talking about how big tech, YouTube, Google, Twitter, Facebook can manipulate elections if they chose to do so.
I thought it was a fair commentary.
Again, I have always defended YouTube and Twitter and Facebook from unnecessary government intervention, which ironically, libertarians and conservatives like us are their best friends, even though they target us, because I don't believe in government intervention.
That doesn't stop YouTube and their short-sighted approach from really smashing our stuff.
Our YouTube views yesterday were down significantly.
Now, having said that, some of you may say...
Well, Dan, YouTube's gonna respond, well, maybe it was just the content.
Maybe the show just wasn't good.
Uh, wrong.
Our audio show was up dramatically.
People really enjoyed yesterday's show.
We got tremendous feedback.
There's no evidence of that at all, that it was content dictated.
The content of the show was fine.
Clearly, something happened on the video end that throttled our views.
So if you wouldn't mind a personal request, please go back, watch our videos, youtube.com slash Bongino.
Please subscribe to our channel.
Again, it helps us get our message out on their platform.
You may say, why are you advertising their platform?
They're hurting you.
Because there's nothing I enjoy more than using their own platform to get a message out of liberty and freedom despite the fact that they hate it.
It's the greatest thing ever!
So please check us out, YouTube.com slash Bongino Wright.
No more on that.
I don't want to whine about it.
It's part of the business and that's perfectly fine.
I'm not recommending any government revenge against YouTube.
I'm just telling you what's happening.
One more thing, quick, I'm sorry.
I get a lot of questions about them demonetizing our account.
People said, well, since they demonetize your videos, meaning we can't earn any money off them, you know, which is fine.
They can do what they want.
I'm just telling you they discriminate against conservatives.
Someone suggested to me an email, well should we wait 24 hours when the videos can earn money again to watch them?
No, it's not about the money to me, it's about the message.
That would probably garner us some extra dollars to finance the show.
But folks, it's not necessary.
I deeply and sincerely appreciate your emails on that and your efforts to help the show and to pay for it.
But don't worry about that.
I'm working on plan B now.
You watch when it's convenient for you.
Don't worry about us or our income stream.
I mean that.
I'm not virtue signaling.
I want to get the message out.
Forget all that other stuff.
I only bring it up so you're aware of the scam.
They demonetize your videos for the first 24 hours and everybody watches them and they go, oh, okay, now it's fine.
Okay, thanks.
Nobody watches after 24 hours because we have a new show.
All right, moving on.
So the healthcare debate is heating up.
Kamala Harris is, you know, one thing about Bernie Sanders, I don't mean to jump around, but one thing about Bernie Sanders is however absurd and ridiculous his socialist, anti-American, economically destructive policies are, Joe, At least Bernie's honest.
Bernie's going to destroy America and the economy.
He wants to institute socialism and he doesn't lie about it.
He's like, this plan, this plan will cost 40 trillion dollars over 10 years.
Health care for all.
At least he tells you the price tag, right?
I will hike taxes on the middle class.
They want to pay more taxes.
Crazy.
It's nuts.
Crazy Bernie's nuts.
But he's honest nuts.
Right?
The one thing that irks me about Kamala Harris, senator from California, of course, running for president now, she's moving up in the polls dramatically.
Is that she lies and changes her position about everything all the time.
So Kamala Harris was on with CNN that for some reason had an inkling to do journalism for a moment.
And they were asking her about her government-run, single-payer, Medicare-for-all plan, meaning your plan would be cancelled because you'd have to go on a government plan.
Now the cost of that, which I'm going to get to, stay tuned.
Are irrefutably high, based on every analysis.
I'll get to that.
They would absolutely, 100% require a significant, maybe doubling of the middle class tax load to finance government-run healthcare, right?
Everybody knows this.
So Kamala Harris being interviewed by CNN, and the CNN reporter's like, wait, wait, you're gonna Finance a government-run healthcare system and you're not going to hike taxes on the middle class?
Can you explain this?
Here's a 49 second clip of Kamala Harris trying to dance around the issue.
She never actually answers it because she can't.
Check this out.
And all of this done without a middle class tax hike.
Without a middle class tax hike?
Yes.
30 trillion over 10 years.
There are ways to pay for it also understanding the investment that we are going to be making in a way that is going to reap great benefits in terms of other costs.
The investment where?
In American health and what we are otherwise paying as a cost for people not having access to health care and the burdens that places on systems across the board when people don't have access to health care.
And when people question that there is no formula for this, that you are going to find money in magical ways, is not realistic thinking.
How do you respond to that?
Status quo is not enough.
I love this.
This is insane.
She can't answer the question.
You are looking at and proposing as a more than credible now candidate for the presidency of the United States.
She's leading in some polls in some places.
Kamala Harris, right?
You are proposing the single biggest, most dramatic tax hike in American history, and your answer to the question about how you're going to finance it is, well, the status quo is not good enough.
That's not an answer.
That's a dodge.
That's a dive.
Like I told you about Bernie, his plans are insane and destructive, but at least he's honest.
Let me go to this Reason Magazine piece, again, up in the show notes today.
Worth reading.
Very, very good.
Be up at the show notes at Bongino.com.
This Reason Magazine piece by Pete Sutterman.
Bernie Sanders thinks Medicare for All could cost $40 trillion.
The cost of single-payer would dwarf the price of Obamacare.
This is a very good piece.
Now, I'm going to go to a section from the piece in a second here, but the reason I put that piece up is even in that clip, the CNN reporter gets the price tag Wrong.
Now, I don't think she did it intentionally, far be it from me to defend CNN, but some estimates of the cost of government-run healthcare for all have been $30 to $40 trillion.
She just erred towards the low end.
She probably did it because, you know, you want to make it sound cheaper.
I can't get in her head.
All I'm saying is she has some journalistic ability to fall back and say, well, that was the low end of the estimate.
You get what I'm saying?
What I'm telling you is even Bernie Sanders, who has an interest in minimizing the cost of this government-run health care program, even Bernie's admitting that the cost is going to be likely $40 trillion over 10 years.
I'm going to tell you, in my opinion, having looked at the studies, Mercatus and elsewhere, The cost, ladies and gentlemen, will probably be closer to $60 trillion.
Having said that, I'm willing for a moment to accept even Bernie's estimate that this will cost $40 trillion over 10 years.
Now, let's compare the two.
Here's where we're going to go with this.
Here's the argument we're making to show you how disingenuous Kamala Harris is, unlike Bernie, who at least doesn't lie about bankrupting you.
Kamala Harris is suggesting to you she's going to institute the same plan as Bernie Sanders.
Mandated government-run healthcare for all.
She is suggesting to you, so we're crystal clear, that this is not going to result in a tax hike for middle-class Americans.
Joe, are you 100% clear on her point?
Yes, I am, Dan.
Thank you.
Bernie's not saying that.
Bernie's already admitting he will significantly increase your taxes on the middle class.
Fine, you want to vote for that?
At least he's honest, right?
Now, let me give you some numbers here to show you how ridiculous this is.
Kamala Harris's assertion she can do this without a tax hike on the middle class.
So, ladies and gentlemen, this is estimated to cost, even by Bernie's low estimate, $40 trillion over 10 years.
The entire federal budget, ladies and gentlemen.
So $40 trillion over 10 years means $4 trillion over a year.
Simple math.
That's the whole budget now!
The whole budget.
The entire amount of the federal government's spending load for one year is what this plan would cost per year.
In other words, everything we spend money on, our military, FBI, Secret Service, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, S-CHIP, TANF, everything, everything we spend money on, we would have to double to finance this ridiculous program.
We would have to double the federal budget.
Ladies and gentlemen, we are already a trillion dollars short in that $4 trillion spending plan this year.
Understand what I'm saying.
This is like a household that spends $100,000 a year that makes only $75,000.
They're $25,000 in debt every single year, piled on.
$25,000, $25,000, $25,000.
This is like a household then committing to spending another $100,000 next year despite not even having the $100,000 this year.
Many thousands of people will die.
Will die?
Absolutely, at least Bernie's honest.
Thousands of people will die.
Thousands of people will die.
At least Bernie's honest.
Ladies and gentlemen, you may say to yourself then, okay, if Kamala Harris is proposing doubling federal spending, despite the fact we don't have enough money this year, Is her point correct that this can only be financed by taxes on the wealthiest Americans where you won't be touched?
Now, I think your, you know, the lick the wind thing is that the winds are blowing in a bad direction.
You're like, well, obviously it doesn't make any sense.
But ladies and gentlemen, I'm here to put meat on the bone for you, not just throw out random assertions.
So I did some rough calculations.
Let's say Kamala Harris's point that the wealthiest Americans only are going to finance this doubling of the government budget.
So Joe, there are a lot of estimates out there, so I have to be candid with you.
There's a bit of speculation in these numbers.
Nobody really has an ironclad number because measuring it is difficult.
But a rough estimate of the entire owned assets and wealth of the top 10% that are supposed to finance Kamala Harris' plan is $60 trillion.
So the top 10% of Americans have about $60 trillion in assets.
So ladies and gentlemen, just to be clear on this, If you confiscated their houses, their stocks, their businesses, their bonds, their government bonds, their corporate bonds, their land, real estate, every single piece of wealth the top 10% of Americans had, you may be able to finance this doubling of the government budget.
You may say, well, Dan, you just made Kamala Harris's point.
Did I?
Are you sure?
Ladies and gentlemen, what is the wealth?
What comprises the wealth of the top 10%?
Ladies and gentlemen, the businesses you work for.
The homes you may rent from them.
The assets they provide in the economy, that would be gone!
You're talking about the outright confiscation.
By the way, it's not even constitutional, it's ridiculous.
That's just outright communism.
Forget the soft socialism the Democrats are trying to propose.
Even if you did, the economy would be finished!
I know some liberals who listen to the show may have a genuine disdain for the wealthy.
Sorry about that, that your life is so meaningless that you have to, instead of living your own life, you have to envy the success of others.
I feel for you.
I don't.
I don't care.
I do my own thing.
I have my own family, my own faith.
I'm good.
But if your life revolves around the envy of the wealth of others, and you are intent on this, I'm sorry about that.
But your plan, even putting that aside for a minute, is ridiculous!
You're gonna confiscate their cars, their homes, their businesses, everything?
What would be left?
Who do you think is providing the capital and the income for the economy to grow so that middle-class Americans have jobs?
Who do you think is doing that?
And by the way, ladies and gentlemen, that top 10% of earners in society is not the same people every year.
Thomas Sowell used to tell a joke about this.
Great economist.
Legend.
He used to say, you know in New York, every 8 seconds someone's hit by a car.
And the joke is, man, that guy must be in a lot of pain.
It's not the same guy!
You get the joke?
Those 10% of rich people are not the same people every year!
Rich people go bankrupt, poor people get rich.
Middle class people get poor, middle class people get rich.
Really rich get rich, rich get really rich.
Really rich go bankrupt!
It's not the same people!
So you're telling me a middle-class guy whose company finally hits it big, who manages to creep into the top 10% the next year, you're now going to confiscate all his wealth?
Folks, this is an utterly absurd, ridiculous, insane plan!
Now, Even the government predictions.
I'm going to move on.
I didn't plan to spend this much time.
But I wanted to show you how insane these liberal policies are and how rational people never ever do the math and think this stuff through.
We're going to tax the rich to pay for it.
Yes!
The government's projected over the next 10 years to generate how much in income taxes only?
$23 trillion.
And another $3 trillion in corporate tax.
That's $26 trillion.
Ladies and gentlemen, if the plan is going to cost $40 trillion and the federal government is only going to raise $26 trillion in taxes, how, again, are you going to pay for this only using middle class, keeping the middle class free of a tax hike?
I just gave you the numbers.
I told you it's utterly absurd.
It is going to require, by any estimate, even left-leaning economic think tanks have acknowledged, a dramatic, if not doubling, of your middle-class income tax load to pay for this.
This plan is simply insane, folks.
Come on.
If we're gonna debate it, at least let's debate it like Bernie.
Here's that piece from Reason, by the way.
I just wanted to put this up, because again, at least Bernie is being honest and we know what we're voting for.
He says, the author, and Sanders appears to think the costs could be higher than those estimates.
At a Washington Post forum, Bernie Sanders acknowledged that his plan expects to cost between $30 and $40 trillion.
He defended the price tag on the grounds that it would actually be cheaper than the alternative of letting today's system or something like it continue.
He told Bob Costa something between $30 and $40 trillion.
And then he goes on to talk about that it may be something like 50 trillion.
Again, I'm giving you the low estimate.
Folks, I'm telling you the actual cost is probably going to be closer to 60 trillion, which would wipe out the top 10% of earners altogether.
Wipe them out, clean, bankrupt every single earner in the country and producer.
Just insane that this would even be considered in a constitutional republic.
If they're still in the country at that point.
Thank you.
They tried this in France, Joe.
As a matter of fact, who better to talk about than Joe in Maryland where they said, oh, let's institute a millionaire's tax.
It's going to raise all this money.
It lost $130 million because the millionaires went over to Virginia.
Yeah.
Remember that, Joe?
Oh, daddy-o.
Yeah.
All right.
This Ilhan Omar story, I promise you, I am not overselling, is going to be... This guy, Dave Steinberg, has done some phenomenal work on this, and it's time Ilhan Omar's real history starts to come out.
All right, today's show brought to you by our buddies at Policy Genius, part of adulthood is having to do things you really don't want to do.
Red-eye flights, working late, visiting in-laws.
I don't like my in-laws.
Getting life insurance.
But another part of adulthood is learning to delegate what you hate.
And while you can't delegate a visit to the in-laws, you can definitely delegate life insurance shopping.
Policy genius.
Policy genius.
Policy genius is the easy way to shop for life insurance online in just two minutes.
You can compare quotes from top insurers to find your best price.
Don't do all this hunting down of it yourself.
Go to PolicyGenius.
Once you apply, the PolicyGenius team will handle all the paperwork and red tape.
There's no sales pressures, no hidden fees, just financial protection and peace of mind.
And PolicyGenius doesn't just make life insurance easy, folks.
They can help you find the right home insurance, auto insurance, and disability insurance.
If you need life insurance, but you don't want to deal with all the legwork, PolicyGenius is your team.
Go to PolicyGenius.com.
It's easy to compare all the top insurers and find the best value for you.
PolicyGenius.com.
Delegate what you hate, especially if you hate getting life insurance.
PolicyGenius.com.
Super easy to use.
Okay.
Let's see.
Harris.
All right.
Let me just hit this story before the Ilhan Omar thing, too, because it's important.
Stack Newsday, I get eight stories.
I'm going to try to get through them all.
So story up in the Wall Street Journal today again about another ridiculous Bernie Sanders Kamala Harris far-left progressive program that I'm sure Ilhan Omar and the squad supports as well.
Free college!
Dreaded air quotes free.
Nothing's free as PJ O'Rourke said.
Do you think health care is expensive now?
Wait till it's free.
When government says something's free they're really saying they are going to Basically empty your wallet to pay for it with no cost and quality controls.
Wall Street Journal piece.
Who will take a pay cut for free college by Joseph Epstein?
This is a really, really terrific piece because ladies and gentlemen, we obviously know nothing is free.
Healthcare is not free.
Doctors have to pay for their education.
They have to pay their staff.
They have to pay the electric bills in their office for their machines.
They have to pay to buy the machines, mammogram machines, x-rays, sonograms.
Cat scans, whatever it may be, this stuff costs money, people produce that stuff, and it has to be paid for.
The fact that this simple fact is escape liberals shows you that they live in an intellectual vacuum, or that they lie.
There's no option C, right?
Nothing is free.
Nothing.
Whether it is a service, education, or a commodity, a good, Gold, washers, computers, iPhones, supplements.
They cost money.
They have to be produced.
People have to be paid to produce them.
Again, I don't know why this is hard for liberals.
A university education system is no different.
Buildings have to be bought and paid for.
They have to be maintained by employees or contractors who maintain them.
Electric bills have to be paid.
Equipment in labs has to be bought.
Books have to be bought.
Teachers, adjuncts, professors, administrators have to be paid for their services.
This isn't complicated.
Nothing is free.
The only question is what is the price and who is going to pay.
There is no such thing as free college.
This is a selling point for idiots.
So Joseph Epstein's piece in the journal brings up a great point.
For anyone on a college campus that supports this, then listen, are you willing to take a pay cut?
Because remember, This isn't free.
The question is, who pays?
So if the government, through taxpayers, because taxpayers finance the government, the government doesn't produce anything of value.
The government doesn't produce things.
The government takes.
The government is a taker.
Their money comes from you.
It's not a private business that generates capital.
It takes from you, under the threat of force, via taxes.
So if you're suggesting free college, meaning taxpayers pay for it, then the taxpayers should be entitled to a deal.
Now Bernie Sanders has proposed, through his plan, Medicare for All, a 40% cut to doctors and healthcare providers.
That's to keep it under his $40 trillion marker for it.
So folks, is it reasonable to ask, and if you're a college administrator listening to this and you support this stuff, free college, then when are you taking a pay cut?
Step up!
Epstein's piece is great.
It talks about how these college presidents show earning two to three million a year.
How the revenue streams from Duke basketball and Alabama football and others.
Hey listen, I love college sports, but if these colleges are going to be free, does the revenue from that go back to the taxpayers?
These are lucrative TV deals for Duke basketball.
You bet.
Stanford and others, and I'm sure Berkeley has sports teams.
Do they generate revenue?
What about sales from Berkeley t-shirts and attire?
Do the taxpayers get that back?
Joe, are these not fair questions?
These are fair questions, Dan.
Here's some other ones.
So he proposes Epstein.
Well, there should be some major pay cuts.
Teachers?
Administrators?
Hey, you all want free college paid by the taxpayer.
The taxpayer should not be forced to pay lucrative salaries.
What about salary caps for teachers?
Fair enough.
There's going to be caps for hospitals and doctors under Medicare.
They do that now.
You should be capped too.
Here's a better one.
You're a teacher at a university and you're only teaching one or two classes.
You should be paid by the hour.
Why is the taxpayer paying you an annual salary for hourly work?
What's your hourly wage?
$50?
$100 an hour?
Fine, you get paid by the hour now.
When you teach, you get paid.
I don't want to pay you to sit around.
We don't get to sit around on our show.
This is an all-day affair on this show.
Again, some other things.
Can we cut the administrative staff?
If we, the taxpayers, are financing it, why do we need bloated administrative staff?
Why do we need 16 deans of diversity?
I'm not paying for that.
I'm not paying for it, I'm sorry.
You want free college and you're going to argue for this?
Then you should step up and do the right thing.
Lead by example.
Which they never, ever, ever do.
I remember running for office in Maryland.
I'm at the Maryland GOP booth in Montgomery County at the Montgomery County Fair.
Chris Van Hollen, staffer, shows up.
He's a senator now.
At the time he was a liberal Democratic congressman in Maryland.
He starts arguing me about taxing the rich.
I asked him a simple question and he lost his marbles in front of a bunch of people.
I said, why don't you pay higher taxes?
Voluntarily.
There's a box to check to donate money to the government.
In other words, if you think government is a net good, and that by giving them more money, that's what you're advocating for, right?
By higher taxes?
Why don't you lead by example and pay more yourself?
Oh, Joe, he lost his mind.
Conservatives donate to charity, the government doesn't force us to do it.
My wife and I do.
We do a scholarship fund.
Again, I don't need anybody's pat on the back.
I'm not someone I'm saying... No, all I'm simply suggesting to you is nobody forces us to do it.
We do it because we think it's a net good for people who need it.
Right.
That's it.
It's the only reason.
We're not self-celebratory about it.
We don't run around with a sign, look, we donated charity.
But if you believe government's a net good, then give more.
If you're a college administrator, you want free college?
Okay.
Come out and say you're gonna take a pay cut.
Lead by example.
You'll never do it.
Never.
Because you're frauds.
You've always been frauds.
How do you argue that?
Government's in that good.
We should pay more.
Do you pay more?
No, I don't.
Holding 15 yards offense.
First down.
They are frauds.
Total frauds.
Great piece.
So good for Epstein for calling them out.
Okay.
I'm going to get to this Omar story now because this is.
This is troubling.
And the fact that the mainstream media has ignored the work of this guy is incredible.
One last sponsor for the day.
Welcome on board, Candid.
Candid, ladies and gentlemen, you might be overpaying for braces if you're going to the dentist.
Candid can help you out.
Do you know your teeth move as you get older?
Yeah.
And if you want to get your teeth fixed, the last thing you want to do is wear braces.
That's why I'm happy to tell you about CANDiD.
CANDiD, the clear alternative to braces.
CANDiD has an orthodontist who is licensed in your state and a treatment plan for you.
CANDiD only uses experienced orthodontists.
That's important.
They even create a 3D preview of what the final results will look like.
You can smile again.
Once you approve your 3D preview, Candid creates custom clear aligners that will be sent directly to you.
Who's better than you?
That means no hassle of having to go into the orthodontist's office.
Candid, get a load of this, Candid costs 65% less than braces.
Save yourself some money.
You can save thousands of dollars and have straighter, brighter teeth in an average of just six months.
Come on, who's better than you?
You're one step away from getting straighter, brighter, better looking teeth.
Learn more at CANDID.
Candid Company, CandidCO.com slash Bongino.
That's CandidCO.com slash Bongino.
Candid, C-A-N-D-I-D, CO.com slash Bongino and receive $75 off with promo code Bongino.
That's CandidCO.com slash Bongino and receive $75 off with promo code Bongino.
Go check it out today.
Check that out.
Candid, welcome on board.
Love you.
All right.
So let's go to Jim Acosta first.
A couple of tweets from Jim Acosta so we can kind of summarize what's going on.
All right.
The president was asked on the South Grounds yesterday by reporters about allegations that radical leftist congresswoman Ilhan Omar may have married her brother I'm going to try to keep this section family friendly.
May have married her brother in an immigration fraud scam.
Trump was asked about it on the South Ground and responded that, hey, I don't know.
There's some reporting on this.
We'll see what happens kind of a thing.
So, of course, hapless Jim Acosta from CNN, who, you know, claims to be a journalist, hysterically claims to be a journalist, which is kind of funny, tweeted out yesterday this about the allegation.
At Acosta, Congresswoman Omar has denied this, that she married her brother, basically, and other claims about her as, quote, disgusting lies.
But Trump was willing to dive right in.
So, OK.
According to Jim Acosta, alleged journalist, right?
The fact that Ilhan Omar has said this didn't happen.
Oh, stay tuned, ladies and gentlemen.
Omar said- that's enough, Joe.
Omar has denied it.
Ladies and gentlemen, case closed.
Alright.
Right, Joe?
Yeah, we're done.
This is a journalist- an alleged journalist that has no interest whatsoever in probing this story at all.
Omar has denied it.
Well, hat tip to Caleb Hull, who has done some good work on Twitter, who found this additional tweet by Jim Acosta regarding a Trump denial.
Remember, His first principle about Ilhan Omar, because she's a Democrat and Acosta's a Democrat activist, is denials by politicians are enough to squash the story.
Here's another tweet by Jim Acosta.
Says she's talking about Sarah Sanders, Jim Acosta's.
Sanders said this is in response to questions about whether Trump was aware of the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels.
Look, the president has denied the allegations.
So Acosta then says, well, that's not really answering the question.
Okay, fascinating.
Now Acosta becomes an alleged reporter again when it comes to Trump denials of this $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels.
He says, well, that's not answering the question.
Apparently it was for Acosta beforehand with Omar because he's a Democrat activist now.
Ladies and gentlemen, Ilhan Omar, which I'm sure she will do to me and anyone else who airs this, I don't care at all, not even a little bit.
She will call everybody an Islamophobe, a racist.
I don't really care.
Coming from Ilhan Omar, it's meaningless.
She calls everybody a racist for every reason, like ever.
You like a tweet that criticizes her, you're a racist.
Everybody's a racist or an Islamophobe.
Nobody cares.
This guy, Steinberg, this guy, David Steinberg, who has done some really incredible reporting, exposed, this is gonna get a little complicated, but I wanna show you some of the evidence he has, that at a minimum, Joe, should have mainstream media people going, this doesn't look good.
So here's a piece of PJ Media, I want you to pay specific attention to the date, David Steinberg, PJ Media.
State Rep Ilhan, she was a state representative at the time when she was running for Congress.
State Rep Ilhan Omar swore to apparent falsehoods in court while divorcing her alleged brother.
What's the date on this piece, folks?
August 8th, 2018.
This is a year ago.
The mainstream media is completely ignoring this.
Now let me set this up before I show you this picture because I want to hat tip this guy for really Some incredible journalistic work.
In 2009, right around there, it's alleged that Ilhan Omar, from 2009 to 2011, was married to her brother.
The brother, the allegations are that she married her brother so that the brother would be allowed to stay in the country as part of an immigration scheme.
Copy.
Now, when questions started to surface, because she then divorces her, this is sick, this is just really gross to even talk about, but this just goes to show you how the media is entirely dead.
The media is dead sleeping, they have no interest in probing Democrats at all.
Story's been out there since 2018.
In a divorce proceeding in 2011 from the brother, Omar states in the divorce documents that she has not seen him again, basically an abandonment thing.
Now, she doesn't acknowledge in the divorce documents that this is the brother.
So just to be clear on this, she says after 2011, I haven't seen this guy again.
Abandonment.
You know, again, at that point, the allegations that her brother, she denies it.
To be clear, she denies it's her brother.
I'll give you both sides.
I'm just telling you the evidence here is overwhelming.
Now, Joe, if she hasn't seen him since 2011, Then you would think that she wouldn't be appearing in photos with him in 2013.
You'd think, yeah.
But that is in fact what happened.
If you read the Steinberg piece, you will in fact see Facebook photos of Ilhan Omar with the guy alleged to be her brother.
You track him?
This is years later.
After she says, I've never seen this guy again.
She's in pictures on her own social media accounts with him.
Now, the brother The alleged brother, and the evidence is overwhelming, gets confronted about these pictures later, and says, hey, I thought you hadn't seen Ilhan Omar since 2011, is that you in the pictures?
And he goes, yes, yes, that's me, but I'm not the brother, because the brother has a birth date of April 4th, 1985.
Audience ombudsman Joe, are you tracking me?
10-4.
Omar marries brother.
Omar divorces brother in 2011.
Alleges she's never seen the guy again.
2013, she appears in pictures again with the brother.
The brother's identified.
The brother's questioned.
He goes, yeah, yeah, that's me in the picture, but I'm not the brother because the brother, air quotes, was born on April 4th, 1985, and that's not my birthday.
Hattip David Steinberg, who captures this gem of a photo off of the brother's actual account.
Now, YouTube.com slash Bongino, if you want to see the photo, I'll explain it to you, though.
What is this?
What are we looking at here?
Keep this up for a second.
You may even be confused on the video, like, I don't get this.
I'm looking at a picture of an IV in a hand from the brother's account.
Yes, it is a picture of an IV in his hand.
Apparently, he had surgery.
Ladies and gentlemen, what's on his hand in addition to the IV being in it?
That's right.
A hospital band.
What's the birthdate on the hospital band?
April 4th, 1985!
It's the same guy!
It's the same dude!
Now, that's real journalism by Steinberg, unlike fake journalist, full-time activist, fraud phony Jim Acosta.
Oh, dude!
Is that not... Dave Steinberg, genius!
Yeah, my man!
I gotta tell you, I was a criminal investigator for 12 years and a cop for 4.
Genius work!
The same guy saying, I'm not Ilhan Omar's brother, he was born on April 4th, 1985, has a picture of a surgery with a hospital band with that exact same birthdate on!
Even worse!
There are other pictures.
They're all in the PJ Media piece.
Oh, it's so worth your time.
At the show notes today.
Yeah.
Again, join my email list.
I'll send them right to you.
He has other photos as well of children he's holding of Ilhan Omar when they were born saying, welcome my niece.
Now I'm reasonably confident that he understands his niece means it's the daughter of his sister.
There you go.
Folks, while the media has spent the last four days trying to decimate the reputation of Donald Trump for challenging these four members of the squad, one of the members of the squad has managed to skate almost entirely outside of some local reporting by the Star Tribune that, by the way, only did the report because of Steinberg's work.
has managed to avoid overwhelming evidence that a sitting member of the United States Congress
engaged in marriage fraud to her brother to engage in an immigration fraud while
simultaneously lying on an affidavit about never seeing him again.
The media...
Useless.
The media is useless.
Absolutely useless.
If this was Nikki Haley or a prominent Republican.
Oh, oh my god.
This would be an international cosmic scandal.
You'd have to have like the Cree from the Marvel movies intervene.
This would be so dramatic.
But where have you heard about this in the nightly news?
Nowhere.
Is anybody going to be asked to explain?
What did the guy do?
If the guy's not the brother, did he commit insurance fraud and he lied about his... Did he lie about his birthday on the band?
What is he doing in the pictures?
Nobody cares, Joe.
Nobody cares.
All right.
Wait, wait, wait.
Where's that?
Yeah, that's Joe.
Here it is.
Here it is.
Hat tip, cricket guy who sent this to Farrah.
Sorry, is it Mike?
I forget.
I did so much stuff.
I love this.
This is my favorite.
This is supposedly a cat toy, but sometimes it works.
Sometimes.
There we go.
There's the me.
Here's Acosta.
Isn't it?
It's the greatest thing ever.
I don't even have a cat.
It's a cat toy.
I had a cat once, Neve.
It ran away when I was single and I worked in Keyfood and lived on Metropolitan Avenue in Queens.
Keyfood's a CVS now.
The cat ran away.
She kept jumping in my sink, the cat.
Because I used to eat tuna fish all the time because I had no money.
And you know, they loved, even though I would clean the cans out, she would jump in the sink all the time.
I guess she got tired eventually.
And then she, this is the funniest thing ever.
I had a screen door.
It was a cheap basement apartment I lived in.
She used to jump on the screen and hang there.
And people thought it was a decoration.
It was the cat.
It was not a decoration.
People thought, cause like people would come into the, into the key food.
And they knew me.
They'd be like, Dan, that's the weirdest decoration the cat you have on the screen does.
You could see it from the street.
I'm like, dude, that's not a decorate.
That's the real cat.
Hanging from the thing eventually ran away.
I never saw poor Neve again.
Who knows what happens now.
She's probably in a new Lion King movie or something like that.
Can you feel the love?
Maybe she's singing in a new movie.
That was a long time ago.
I don't think cats live longer than that.
She didn't have nine lives.
I'm sure of it.
All right.
What's my next story here?
What did I say?
Oh, okay.
This is a good one.
Sorry.
I keep them.
Look at that.
I try to keep them numbered and in order.
I know you can't see the writing, but I try to, so we have some kind of flow to the show.
So again, the media has abandoned us completely, but ladies and gentlemen, sadly, so is sanity on the Democrat side to circle back where we got to in the beginning.
Bernie Sanders and others, AOC and others, engaging in these far-left radical plans.
One of them involves open borders, and sadly, folks, This radical far-leftism that's been imbued into the media, into our current politics, sadly, is filtering down into law enforcement.
I say this with a heavy and broken heart, and I don't mean the cops on the street.
I don't.
At all.
You know, I will always have your back there.
I mean law enforcement management, who are politically appointed.
We saw it during Spygate, but ladies and gentlemen, we see it in this now horrible situation that's going on in Oregon.
There is a police chief over there, Danielle Outlaw, and never, ever has a name been more appropriate.
Danielle Outlaw, the Portland, Oregon chief.
She put out this statement yesterday about she's not going to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement in their raids.
So here it is in the Oregonian, posted July 14, 2019.
Portland police won't cooperate with feds on potential ICE raids, chief says.
The chief is Danielle Outlaw.
Ladies and gentlemen, Do you understand the dangerous situation this creates for our patriotic men and women of federal law enforcement, ICE and CBP and others, when law enforcement locally says, we are not going to cooperate.
In other words, we are not going to help you.
Do you have any idea, you know, I've been on the ground on both sides of this as a street cop with the NYPD.
Where the feds come in and do a raid, and I have been on the other side of it as a fed requesting police officers' support in a local, say, raid or arrest warrant.
Ladies and gentlemen, why is this pivotal?
You know, this may sound cutesy to Danielle Outlaw and others who have entirely abdicated their oath to protect and defend people who they're sworn to protect and defend.
But here's the real practical behind the scenes about what happens here.
When I was a Secret Service agent, we were conducting raids in the early morning.
We're in plain clothes.
The Secret Service does not have a uniform.
We have a uniform division that's entirely separate from agents.
It's nothing to do with what we do.
We are plainclothes federal agents.
There's no uniform.
You may have a raid vest, but there's no uniform.
There are no marked cars.
There's no Secret Service agent car that says, Secret Service agent on board.
Why does this matter?
And why is what Danielle Outlaw from Portland, the police chief, doing so dangerous?
The reason when I was in New York, we would call the NYPD where I used to work and say, hey guys, We're serving a big counterfeit raid in this place in Brooklyn.
Can you come help us out?
Or can we at least notify you about what's going on so you put it out in the police scanner?
It's because, ladies and gentlemen, you don't want a blue-on-blue incident and you don't want locals calling the cops because they think it's another drug deal or raiding them.
Or, God forbid, shooting it out because they think it's another drug dealer.
Do you get this?
Now, I know Danielle Outlaw is not dumb.
I know she gets this.
Do you understand the danger you are putting federal agents in, ICE and otherwise, when you allow them to show up at that site and you refuse to provide any support to them at all?
What if the people showing up think they're being raided by another drug dealer or something?
Or if they're dealing drugs.
Or they think it's just some robbery.
And they start shooting it out.
What if the cops show up, the cops haven't been notified, or the word hasn't gotten out to provide any support, and a cop doesn't get the word over the radio, and all of a sudden he shows up and thinks this is a, you know, some kind of a gang-on-gang incident.
Folks, there are real practical effects to this.
Even bounty hunters notify the police when they're working in the area because they don't want blue-on-blue incidents or unnecessary shooting.
Now, showing you what a fraud Danielle Outlaw is, So she's not going to help ICE, Joe.
She's not going to help them at all.
She totally disregards officer safety, street tactics, the fact that people who are doing raids in her neighborhood for law enforcement purposes and law enforcement action otherwise probably should be doing it in conjunction with them because they know the neighborhood best.
She ignores all that.
But then, unbelievably, I did a little research on Danielle Outlaw.
Here's a piece from her from a little while ago about Antifa.
The anti-First Amendment terror group that beat the snot out of a reporter in Portland where Danielle Outlaw supervises the peace and OPB.
Portland police chief responds to national criticism over protest.
This is the same woman.
The same woman who did nothing with her police department while Antifa, the anti-First Amendment terror group, It just pillaged her area.
Beat the snot out of people.
Total public chaos.
She did nothing.
What was her defense to this?
Now, get a load of this.
Now all of a sudden, Danielle Outlaw is concerned about officer safety.
Read this nonsense.
But Outlaw said, quote, the rules of engagement dictate that any intervention, talking about Antifa, should be done carefully to protect the safety of the demonstrators as well as the officers.
Throughout her remarks, she called for more resources, including officers, and support from partner law enforcement agencies.
Holy Moses!
Is this, is this not the greatest, huh?
What?
Huh?
What?
Are you kidding?
So now when Antifa beats the crap out of people and takes over your city, you do nothing alleging, well, I don't want to get my officers hurt and I need support from other law enforcement agencies.
Yet when other law enforcement agencies come into your district to deport people who have been ordered deported by a judge, this is not some random law enforcement action, you do absolutely nothing to help them, nothing at all, despite the fact that you are knowingly putting your officers and them in danger.
This police chief is a disgrace.
A total disgrace and an embarrassment to law enforcement everywhere.
What a joke.
And a bad one at that.
All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in.
I really appreciate it.
Hope you enjoyed the show today.
Again, please subscribe to our YouTube channels.
Nothing better than using their platform to get out messages they can't stand.
I'm sure they'll demonetize us again today and throttle our video.
YouTube.com slash Bongino.
Also, please subscribe to the audio podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, iHeart and SoundCloud.
The subscriptions are free, but they help us move up in the charts and help other people find us because we can't rely on YouTube for that.
