In this episode, I address the latest media hoax about the gun issue. I also discuss the solid job numbers and the associated media coverage. Finally, I debunk this persistent “global warming” myth. News Picks:The August jobs numbers are out.
What would really happen if a mandatory gun “buy-back” was instituted?
The NRA’s political donations pale in comparison to those of liberal groups.
San Francisco calls felons “justice involved individuals” and the NRA “domestic terrorists.”
The gun used in the Odessa attack was illegally manufactured and sold.
Devin Nunes filed a lawsuit against Fusion GPS. The discovery phase should be fascinating.
More evidence that global warming is a hoax.
Copyright Dan Bongino All Rights Reserved.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Does it matter to you if your cell phone company is supporting things you don't agree with?
Of course it matters!
Think about this.
In 2016, certain cell phone providers sent hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Clinton campaign.
And where did that money come from?
It may have come from you.
Enough's enough.
Join Patriot Mobile and get cell phone service from a company that will do the right thing by you.
They will donate to the NRA.
Pro-life groups and others that love America and fight for our freedoms.
Thousands of Americans are using Patriot Mobile's reliable nationwide service every day.
You can keep your number, bring your own phone, or get a new one.
And there's great unlimited talk and text and high-speed data plans to choose from.
Switch today at patriotmobile.com slash dan.
Again, that's patriotmobile.com slash dan.
Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.
Nice, big updates.
Finished the audiobook yesterday.
Recording it.
Very happy.
You're gonna love it.
Book two coming out September 24th.
Exonerated.
Pick it up today.
Finished up on it, some finishing touches, re-recorded a few things, make it a little nicer, a little emotion.
So I'm really excited about this second book, folks.
Please pick it up, pre-order it today.
Exonerated by me, available on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and in bookstores Friday.
Stack show today.
What do I got for you today?
What do we got?
It's going to be a debunk-a-thon, a liberal debunk-a-thon on the gun issue, which has been rife with misinformation.
I've got some updated numbers on the economy.
Good news.
Very good news today, thankfully.
And some more debunking global warming hoax stories out there that the liberal media wants you to believe.
So it's a stacked show.
It is Friday.
Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today, my good friend?
It's Friday!
It is.
That was a very long one.
It is Friday.
Joe, knee deep in emotion on these intros lately.
I'm a little banged up today.
Went to my jujitsu class last night, which I never do on the weekday because I don't like to wake up groggy.
But there's a tournament this weekend, so the school is closed on Saturday.
So I went last night, and folks, I have to tell you.
I took a beating last night.
For those of you who do Brazilian jiu-jitsu and grappling, I am a purple belt, a no-stripe purple belt, and I took a beating from a four-stripe blue belt, which are kind of like the same thing, but he was young.
I'm not an excuse at all.
Listen, no excuses in this game.
I'm 44.
I think he's 20 or 30, but he just was quicker.
I cannot, I couldn't, he just was quicker than me.
I was in a, we were doing this mount drill where you get in a mount position on a guy, you know, you've seen in street fights a lot and you got to hold it.
I couldn't hold this guy down.
I could not, he was just quicker than me and my brain, because I'm old and I'm decaying, my half-life We're over, my half-life is, it's speeding up.
I'm like carbon dated, okay?
I'm on the mount position and my brain knows what I'm supposed to do.
Prevent him from pushing on the knee, don't let him buck me up, sit back, chest to chest, hip to hip.
I know exactly what I'm supposed to do and as me and Joe were talking, he's like, the same thing happens in music, Dan.
Your brain says do it and your fingers just don't work that fast anymore, right Joe?
It doesn't come out.
It's just the same way.
My brain is like, do this, and my body just won't do it.
This kid smoked me and I came home last night very depressed because I got annihilated in this drill.
I just could not hold this kid down.
And it's driving me nuts because in my heyday, I would have had no problem.
Gosh.
All right.
Let's get into the content because we've got a snack show for you today.
I'm trying, buddy.
All right.
Today's show brought to you by my buddy's at Helix Sleep.
Thank God for the Helix Sleep mattress last night because I slept well and woke up and felt pretty good.
Go to helixsleep.com and get up to $125 off all your mattress orders.
Here's the difference with Helix Sleep.
Helix Sleep has a customized mattress.
They have customized a quiz, and it takes two minutes to complete this custom quiz, and they'll customize that mattress to you.
Don't go buy some mattress made for Joey Bag of Donuts and someone that doesn't have your sleep preferences.
Why would you do that?
Are you a side sleeper?
A hot sleeper?
You like a plush bed?
You like a firm bed?
With Helix, there's no more guesswork and no more nonsense.
They can even split the mattress down the middle based on the two minute.
That's it.
Take two minutes to fill out their quiz.
They can split it down the middle if you and your spouse, if another, whoever you're sleeping with there in the bed
has different preferences, right?
Just go to helixsleep.com/dan, take their two minute sleep quiz,
and they'll match you to that customized mattress for the best sleep of your life.
We have two of these in our house and we love them.
My daughter has one and me and my wife have one.
It's fantastic, the Helix Sleep Mattress.
You get to try it out for 100 nights free.
That's how confident this is the best mattress in the business.
100 nights risk-free.
They'll even pick it up for you if you don't love it, but you will.
Again, get $125 off all mattress orders.
For our listeners, go to HelixSleep.com slash Dan for $125 off your mattress.
That's HelixSleep.com slash Dan for $125 off your mattress.
HelixSleep.com slash Dan.
All right, let's go!
Yeah!
First, economic numbers are out.
Kind of a good news, bad news, more good news than bad news thing.
But I'd like to give you some perspective.
Stay with me because I've got a stacked show for you today.
We're going to get to the gun issue next and the misinformation and the global warming hoax later.
But number one, even CNN.
Had to acknowledge, for those of you who missed it, the job numbers came out this morning, the official U.S.
government job numbers, despite the New York Times efforts to Maggie Haberman specifically to insinuate that Trump had leaked the job numbers early.
He was talking about the Private industry, ADP payroll numbers, not the government numbers, but it's the New York Times, whatever.
Fake narratives is their thing.
Even CNN this morning had to acknowledge that the 130,000 jobs created in August and the subsequent numbers coming out of that were pretty darn good.
Listen to CNN.
Joe, this must have killed them.
Killed them to have to say this.
Here you go.
Take a look at the jobless rate, 3.7%.
This remains near a historic generational low.
About 500, more than 500,000 people entered the labor market.
So these months and months and months of decent job numbers are encouraging people to come back in.
So that is an important sign of success in the labor market right now.
Business information services, big job gains there again.
Healthcare, these have been driving parts of the economy really.
Healthcare and business information systems.
Folks, CNN must have been like this.
They were probably seething with rage before having to put this segment on the air.
Listen, was it the greatest job number?
No, again, I'm going to give you the up and the down side.
We're not here to kind of put lipstick on anything.
It was a very solid number.
The prediction was $163,000, so it was a little below predictions, and there was some revisions downwards to prior months.
But here's the upside.
The upside is the unemployment rate held steady at historically low numbers, 3.7%, despite the fact that you heard the clip yourself, CNN, not me, not the Dan Bongino Show, that 500,000 people entered the workforce.
Why does that matter?
Folks, it matters because even if we have significant job creation, if more people start to enter the workforce and declare themselves eligible to work the way the fractions work, It's pretty simple to figure out.
The unemployment rate can actually tick up.
Meaning job growth was so strong and so solid that even though more people entered the workforce and declared themselves eligible to work, the unemployment rate, the percentage of people unemployed over the percentage of people eligible to work, still held steady.
3,000 manufacturing jobs were created.
Now debunking again liberal myths because you know they will lie about this.
Even CNN had to tell the truth.
Liberal politicians will lie to you.
That's what they do.
That's how they make their living.
That's all they're about.
They live in fairytale land.
They're the Teddy Ruxpins of politics.
You stick a quarter in them, they'll tell you any story you want.
They're gonna say, well, wage growth, this is only for the rich.
Ladies and gentlemen, wages grew 3.2%.
Again, a lot of that wage growth was focused at the lower end of the wage scale, not the higher end.
Wages are going up.
It went up 3.2%.
So the liberal myth that, well, wages are stagnant, again, it's just not true.
I don't know what else to say.
It's just not true.
They just made it up.
It's incorrect.
You are not accurate.
You can repeat over and over, well, wages are stagnant.
That doesn't make it true.
That just makes you a liar.
And it makes the people who repeat it idiots for not doing their own homework.
I'm sorry.
You're just dumb.
You're not repeating.
You're repeating incorrect information over and over, pretending it's true, and you're deceiving people.
Again, I'm giving you the up and the down because it's only right to do that.
The numbers weren't spectacular.
They weren't off the charts.
They were below expectations.
They were very good, however.
These are not bad job growth numbers.
They're solid, especially 10 years into a recovery.
And having to deal with eight years of Obama's anemic recovery.
Here's Fox Business with some other notes.
I want you to pay particular attention to the notes here in the video clip, excuse me, about black and Hispanic unemployment as well, minority unemployment.
Go with the Fox clip.
Average hourly wages up 0.4 percent month over month.
For the last 12 months it's up 3.2 percent.
Now the labor force participation rate edged up at 63.2 percent.
Average hourly work week also up 0.1 hour to 34.4 hours.
Non-supervisory wages rose 11 cents.
The white unemployment rate 3.4 percent.
Black unemployment rate at a historic low since they've been keeping records in 1972 5.5 percent.
Hispanic unemployment rate 4.2 percent.
Hispanic unemployment rate 4.2 percent. Asian unemployment rate 2.8 percent.
Um, again, good numbers.
Great, no, very good, yes.
Right, right!
Now I bring up, and I wanted you to focus on the black and hispanic unemployment portion of it at the end.
Yeah.
And folks, not that that matters, you know, If you're unemployed, you're unemployed.
Whether you're black, hispanic, or asian shouldn't matter.
But it does matter because the liberals are in love with a story, not the story.
And their narrative that Donald Trump has been bad for the minority community, the Donald Trump economy, or the economy under Donald Trump, probably a more precise way to phrase it, That this isn't due to Trump.
Wages aren't growing.
This is only for the rich.
Minorities are struggling.
Ladies and gentlemen, it's not true.
It's just not true.
I'm not sure why you want it to be true.
You can still vote against Donald Trump if you're a Democrat and you don't like him.
Nobody's preventing you from doing that.
But why you're living a lie is genuinely puzzling to me.
Black and Hispanic unemployment under the Trump economy, the economy under Trump, is flourishing.
Unemployment is at historic lows for these minority groups you're saying are being negatively impacted by Trump policies.
What you're saying is factually not correct.
You're just wrong.
You're just wrong.
Again, do whatever you want.
You want to vote Democrat?
You want to vote Independent?
Communist?
Do your thing!
I'm not here... You know, I'm not a liberal.
I'm not Antifa, the anti-First Amendment group that tell you not to speak out or not to do your thing.
I'm just saying, if you're voting based on the idea that the economy under Donald Trump has negatively impacted wages in the minority community, you're voting on a lie.
Vote for whatever other reason.
You don't like his stance on abortion?
Fine.
But you're voting on a lie.
What you're voting on is just not true, okay?
All right, good job numbers.
One downside that I just want to keep your eye on, keep your eye on the ball, our national debt is exploding.
There is no solution on the horizon.
And ladies and gentlemen, if we don't fix this soon, again, I can't warn you enough, it's only a matter of time before this implodes on us.
So that is the one dark side to all of this in the future, which I've warned you about repeatedly.
All right, moving on.
Good job numbers.
I want to make sure I covered that right at the top of the show and do what we always do, debunking liberal myths.
Now, there was a great article sent to me by a listener.
Forgive me, I forget who sent this over, but good job.
Great piece.
I read a lot of your emails.
This was a piece at Reason.com.
I want to get into the Second Amendment gun portion of the show because the misinformation out there after the Odessa shooting is just, again, extraordinary.
The media refuses to tell the truth.
This was a great piece about the gun buyback program, air quotes, which is really a gun confiscation that Beto O'Rourke and others are proposing.
A piece by John Stokes.
Reason Mag, the futility of a gun buyback.
Before you ask how many Americans will give up their guns, ask how many cops will even try to take them.
Excuse me.
Very, very excellent piece.
Very extraordinarily excellent piece, to use in precise English.
Up at the show notes today, but definitely worth your time.
Go to Bongino.com, read the article, or if you subscribe to my email list, which I always appreciate, I will email these articles to you every day.
Great piece.
The question they're asking is a fair one.
So Beto O'Rourke, Robert Francis O'Rourke, who's really a backbencher now for the presidential nominee, he'll have to drop out soon at some point if this keeps going the way it is.
Saying, well, make no mistake, you are going to have to sell back your gun to the government.
Well, it can't be a buyback if the government never owned it.
The government doesn't own my firearms, so there's no reason for me to sell them back to the government.
And as one leader, excuse me, reader, astutely pointed out to me, Joe, I'm going to need a background check on these government officials who want to take my guns back.
Fair enough, right Joe?
And great point.
And if they don't pass my background check, I'm not interested.
So good point, hat tip to the reader who sent that to me too.
We should demand a background check.
Government officials, I want to know who they are, right?
That's what the government wants from us.
So I want that from them too, only fair.
But having said that, a fair question to ask, because we do facts here, unlike the liberal media that's been lying to you, but just about everything, the economy, guns, the environment, everything else.
What a buyback, or a confiscation, which it really is, what a confiscation actually were.
So there's two things I think we should hit, which is Reason Magazine does, Joe, because we do it fair analysis.
And number one would be, well, they've tried policies like this before, because we're trying to give a comprehensive analysis of how this would actually work in the real world, unlike the fairytale land the liberals live in.
Right.
It's been tried before.
Or models of it have been tried before, and what has been the results?
Have people complied?
Have the police officers who were supposed to do it complied?
Have people actually turned their guns in?
Takeaway number one from the Reason piece.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, this has actually been tried before.
Before I get to this, in New Zealand, this is in the piece, I didn't put it up here though.
In New Zealand they tried this, and only 10% of people actually turned in their guns.
But more importantly, if we're not going to use New Zealand, let's use New York.
So New York had not exactly a gun confiscation program, but Governor Cuomo, excuse me, to quote the piece, they had this SAFE Act in 2013.
It was one of the toughest gun control laws in the nation, and one of its important provisions, according to the piece, was the mandatory registration of all, quote, assault weapons in the state.
Wasn't a confiscation or a ban, so it's not nearly as severe as what O'Rourke and others are pushing, but it was just a registration requirement.
So, let's see how that worked out.
So to be clear, Beto wants to confiscate your firearms.
New York implemented a registration requirement if you had a, quote, assault weapon, which is of course a fabricated term by the left.
It's almost meaningless because they can't even tell you what it is.
So all you had to do, you didn't have to turn them in, Joe.
You just had to go and register your assault weapons.
Well, would it be fair enough, Joe, to say, well, if Beto's talking about confiscating them, how did compliance work when people were only asked to register those?
Now, we know in New Zealand the confiscation didn't work at all.
90% of people flipped off the double barrel middle finger and said, nah, no thanks, I'm not turning those in.
Well, let's see.
In the reason piece, how exactly did the registration requirement work out?
Well, the answer is, it didn't.
A conservative estimate by the National Shooting Sports Foundation found that New Yorkers owned, they're being conservative here, that New Yorkers owned about one million assault weapons, air quotes, I have to put that in there, at the time the ban was passed.
So you would assume, Joe, you'd get one million registrations for these, quote, assault weapons, right?
Yes, Dan.
Yes, you would.
Joe, I'm sorry again, but that's not what happened.
So 44,000 were actually registered, which is about 4% of the total.
This non-compliance with the law is widespread and mostly open, but the police aren't even doing much about it.
The piece goes on to talk about how the cops And a lot of local sheriffs and a lot of local police department and law enforcement supervisors and officials in these places are like, no, we're not going to do that.
We're not wasting police assets to go and take people's, I'm sorry, we're just not doing it.
So you have a twofer.
So again, unlike liberals who say, like Beto, we're going to confiscate your guns under the guise of a buyback and never think to what Thomas Sowell calls phase two, right?
Liberals never ever, Thomas Sowell, the most brilliant, I think, economist and philosopher of our time, who I adore in his books.
They're just terrific.
Changed my whole life.
Thomas Sowell always says about liberals that they never ask the question, OK, and then what?
Never.
Yeah.
They put out these platitudes.
They say, we're going to confiscate all assault weapons.
They're dangerous.
They never say, okay, and then what happens?
How do you actually do it?
Because when you say, well, we've tried things like this in the past, and then what happened?
You get gross levels of noncompliance.
I don't mean gross in a qualitatively bad way.
I mean gross in the sense of large.
You have unbelievable noncompliance.
People just say, no, we're not doing it.
And the cops are like, yeah, we're not getting them.
So I guess my point is, so what's the point now?
I want to get to the second part of this in a second, the non-compliance part.
But fair enough, I get, again, this show is, I'm a conservative, but I listen to your liberal emails.
Sometimes I actually get one guy that said, hey, I'm a liberal, I listen to your show, and I disagree.
And he actually brought up a good point, I forget what it was a while ago, but I had discussed it on the show.
But a lot of the liberal emails I get from people, they don't think things through even in their questioning.
Like one person emailed me, for example, a liberal, and said, well, Dan, if you're saying non-compliance with gun laws, in other words, my point on Fox and elsewhere when I talk about gun laws, as a former law enforcement guy myself, has been, folks, criminals don't care about gun laws.
The evidence is overwhelming.
Where gun laws are the strongest in some of our inner cities, gun crime is the highest.
I don't know what else you need to hear.
Even my interviews with people in the street when I arrested them for gun crimes.
Hey, you know that's against the law.
They're like...
Man, I don't care about that!
They, like, laugh at you, like, what are you, an idiot?
Gun laws, like, get it from Cee-Lo on the corner.
They don't, I'm just, I'm not messing with you.
They'd be like, this guy, that's, it was a real guy, I'd appreciate it.
Cee-Lo, he's got him on the corner for whatever, five, six hundred bucks.
Yeah.
The Saturday night specials, those guns.
They're like, gun law, what are you, an idiot?
Because you're like, you're crazy.
Like, dude, why would I care about gun laws?
They just don't care.
The evidence is overwhelming.
But fair enough, liberals have emailed me and said, well, What's the point of any law, then?
If you think people, just criminals, just ignore laws, then we should just abandon... No, that's not the point.
You're missing the point.
Ladies and gentlemen, the purpose of laws is to put perimeters and offense around the behavior of criminals, but to not obstruct the legal big R God-given rights of law-abiding citizens.
Let me give you an example, because that may have been a little too word superfluous.
Okay.
We have burglary laws, right?
The burglary laws are meant to prevent your God-given big R rights to property.
In other words, I have God-given rights to own property.
Private property.
Burglary laws are in effect to say, you, Joey Bag of Donuts the criminal, can't take my property.
It is against the law.
And you can be prosecuted for it.
It puts a limit on the bad guy, not on me.
Why?
Because I'm not a burglar.
I don't steal other people's stuff.
So do you get it?
The purpose of laws, I could give you legions of examples here.
Sure.
Robbery, you know, assault with a deadly weapon.
I have the right to life, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
If you kill me, you've taken all of those.
That's why there's a law against homicide.
Larceny?
Gun laws work in the opposite.
Yeah.
They put perimeters, prescriptions around the behavior of the law-abiding against being able to, they prevent them from being able to protect themselves while doing absolutely nothing to stop the behavior of criminals who don't care.
That's how you know it's an ineffective law.
It doesn't do anything to stop criminals.
They don't care.
The evidence is overwhelming.
All it does is put obstacles in front of law-abiding citizens who want to exercise their God-given right to protect themselves against said criminals.
So your email, which I get, and again, I'm reading them on the air, so you know, thanks for emailing me.
Your email that, well, what's the point of any law?
No, no, you're missing the point of law.
It's to stop the behavior of criminals from infringing on our God-given rights.
Not to stop the God-given rights of people and infringe on them from protecting themselves against criminals.
That's not the point of our laws.
It's never been.
That's why gun laws are so stupid.
They don't work.
Second, it's amazing from this reason piece.
It's just phenomenal how liberals, again, change their minds about anything when it comes to laws following others.
Liberals say, well, it's the law of the land.
Obamacare, the law of the land.
You must respect gun laws.
It's the law of the land.
Yeah.
But then when it comes to other laws they don't like, liberals are like, ah, forget it.
Put up this quote from the reason piece.
This was a great find by the author.
It's a John Stokes.
I mean, who was this who said this quote?
When a prominent politician kind of goes after these phantom sanctuary cities and talks about how bad they are, basically what he's going after is police chiefs.
And I trust police chiefs in terms of knowing what should be done to keep their communities safer and police department and mayors a lot more than I trust that of a Washington politician.
Was that Donald Trump going after gun laws?
Hey, ignore gun laws.
I trust the locals.
No, that was Tim Kaine, Hillary Clinton's vice presidential nominee, talking about how we should just ignore immigration laws and trust the locals to enforce it.
What is it?
So on gun laws, when the local police chiefs and the mayors who respect the Second Amendment say, we're not enforcing that, we're not confiscating people's guns, lock him up too!
Confiscate his gun!
But then when it comes to immigration laws, they don't like Joe, and locals say, we're not enforcing that, we're a sanctuary city.
They're like, that's great, we trust the locals more.
These guys are total frauds.
They're total frauds.
You understand they're total frauds?
They're frauds.
I don't like Obamacare.
Unfortunately, it was passed.
I have to abide by it.
There's no moral inconsistency there.
There's nothing.
Having said that, I have an executed God-given right to protect myself enshrined in the Second Amendment.
Your law saying the Second Amendment is not the Second Amendment is not a law.
I'm sorry.
It may be some bill you signed, but it's not a law.
They can't have it both ways.
That's a wish.
The misinformation, Joe, is just incredible.
I got more of this.
I still haven't gotten to the global warming hoax stuff.
This is going to be an absolute debunk-a-thon.
But I want to get to next, another one of these misinformation pieces.
So again, the first piece, just to tie that up, is gun confiscation laws.
This is the solution.
It's never worked.
Nobody's giving you their guns.
It's not going to work.
The evidence is overwhelming.
The next one I want to get to is the whole donations.
This is infuriating, the whole donations thing.
The NRA is buying off all these politicians.
Really?
Let's compare what the NRA spends versus other groups.
They're conveniently left out.
All right.
Today's show also brought to you by our buddies at Stamps.com.
Stamps.com.
Hey, listen, you have time to go to post office?
No, you probably know it.
You're probably busy like me and Paula, Joe, and everybody else.
You got things to do.
Who's got time for the traffic, the parking, lugging all your mail and packages?
Listen, it's a hassle.
That's why you need Stamps.com, what we use here.
One of the most popular time-saving tools for small businesses like ours.
We save so much time.
The time alone is worth it, not to mention the cost savings by using Stamps.com.
It eliminates trips to the post office, saves you money with nice discounts.
You can't even get at the post office by going there.
Stamps.com brings all the amazing services of the U.S.
Post Office right to your computer.
You're a small office sending invoices, an online seller shipping out products, is that you?
You're a warehouse sending out thousands of packages a day.
It doesn't matter.
Stamps.com can handle all of it.
That's all of it with ease.
Simply use your computer to print out official U.S.
postage 24-7 for any letter, any package, any class of mail, anywhere you want to send it.
When your mail is ready, hand it off to your mail carrier or drop it in the mailbox.
Folks, it is really that simple.
With Stamps.com, you get five cents off every first class stamp and up to 40% off priority mail.
That is a big savings.
It's a fraction of the cost of those expensive postage meters too.
Stamps.com is the biggest no-brainer in human history.
Saves you time and money.
It's no wonder over 700,000 small businesses already use Stamps.com, including us.
Right now, my listeners get a special offer that includes a four-week trial plus free postage in a digital scale without any long-term commitment.
Just go to Stamps.com.
Here's what you gotta do.
Click on the microphone at the top of the homepage at Stamps.com and type in Dan.
Helps support the show.
We really appreciate that.
That's stamps.com.
Click on the microphone at the top of the page and enter Dan.
D-A-N, my name.
We really appreciate that.
Thanks to our sponsors too.
Stamps.com.
Click on the microphone, enter Dan.
Okay.
So I've been inundated again with emails from liberals and some conservatives saying, Dan, can you talk about this whole NRA's buying off politicians?
They're bribing all these people, it's over, the end of them, but off everybody!
But what they call Massacre Mitch McConnell bought off by the NRA.
So I said, okay, because the show does facts and data, I think it would be responsible to talk about How lobbying actually works, how much money is spent, how conservative groups influence elections, how liberal groups, and specifically, let's talk about the NRA.
Again, disclosure, I have never worked for the NRA.
Contrary to what liberals tell you, they can't stop lying.
I did work at NRA TV, as many of you know.
That is not the NRA, as you can tell by the lawsuit now.
It was a production company that does production for the NRA.
I did not work for the NRA, but liberals will lie to you because, again, that's what they do.
So here's a piece by Kimberly Strassel, who is one of the finest reporters out there, does actual work.
Yeah, she's great.
I know, Joe.
You like Kimberly Strassel.
Every time I say Kimberly Strassel, you must really like her work.
Yeah, I do.
I always get a yeah out of Joe with that.
Up at Potomac Watch, which is her opinion section at the Wall Street Journal, she says, the left's lucrative nonprofits, that's the title, powerful interests and dark money are mostly on the?
Democratic side!
Wait, wait, wait, hold on, keep that up.
Did she get that title wrong?
Kim Strassel, September 5th, 2019.
I thought we'd been told by the media out there who lies to us constantly that dark money's a Republican problem.
Um, apparently not.
From Kim Strassel's piece, let's talk about how much dark money is spent on liberal causes versus conservative causes.
Okay, let's get right to it.
Liberal public policy charities organized under the 501c3 tax code Bagged $7.4 billion of this foundation money in 2014.
This dark money.
So liberals, just to be clear because I know liberals have a tough time with math.
So this dark money they're talking about, liberal non-profit or liberal public policy charities, got $7.4 billion.
For conservative charities, the figure must have been higher because we've been told by the media clearly it was higher than $7.4 billion because dark money is a Republican money.
No, the figure was a mere $2.2 billion.
That $7.4 billion also dwarfed the total 2013-2014 campaign receipts to federal, state, and local campaigns.
$4.1 billion on that spending cycle by independent groups, $830 million.
So, folks.
You have almost three times as many liberal public policy initiatives influencing elections and public thought.
You have nearly three times as much money going into liberals. It's a dark, I just,
oh, I mean, I'm telling you, I wake up every morning. I'm like, what?
What life.
Can you tell me, is there one, is there just one thing liberals tell the truth?
I'm not, I'm not kidding.
I'm not talking about personal stuff.
And I'm talking about the big macro too, not the micro issues.
Cause you know, some, I don't want to get into like individual stories, but in the macro debate about the big things, education, economics, firearms, the second amendment, abortion, right to life.
Do liberals tell the truth about anything?
I'm not kidding.
I'm almost at the point now where it's getting so easy to debunk their stuff.
I want them to actually debunk me at some point.
Dark money's a Republican problem.
You guys are getting almost three times as much, almost four times as much money through these public policy liberal groups than conservative groups are getting.
Where's the dark money problem on your side?
Now, Let's get to the NRA specifically.
So here's a National Review article about how much money specifically has been spent by each of these, by the NRA versus by Planned Parenthood and others.
I have it up in the show notes today for you to check out.
Folks, by Alexandra DeSantis, this is from February 28th of 2018.
NRA critics ignore the political influence of Planned Parenthood.
From the peace.
Folks, again, the NRA, you may say, the NRA spends money on lobbying, and they do donate to kids.
There's no doubt about that.
I'm not here to tell you they don't.
The problem I have with the liberal critics of it is when you bring up the counterpoint that Planned Parenthood, in many cases, and their affiliates and associated groups donates more money, they don't, well, that doesn't matter.
That doesn't influence how we think.
It's only the bad guys at the NRA that do.
So, from the peace.
During the 2016 election cycle alone, Planned Parenthood's political action arms shelled out over $38 million to elect Democratic politicians.
In its 2016-2017 annual report, the group reported spending $40 million on public policy, as well as upwards of $175 million in such nebulous categories as movement building.
Strengthening and securing Planned Parenthood and engaging communities.
Undoubtedly, much of that money is flooding into the pockets of those who will push for policies that benefit Planned Parenthood's bottom line by protecting abortion on demand.
Keep in mind, and unlike the NRA, they get taxpayer money upwards of $500 million a year.
Or did.
Where's that conversation?
Again, I'm not suggesting to you or sitting here telling you that the NRA doesn't attempt to influence public policy in the direction of Second Amendment protections.
I'm not saying that.
I'm being transparent and honest.
Again, I didn't work there.
I'm just giving you the facts.
But when you look at actual political donations to the NRA since 2012, Planned Parenthood spent $2.6 million on direct political donations.
NRA, $2.7 million.
Effectively the same amount.
On donations.
Now, they did spend, depending on the estimates used, $55 million on issue advocacy and elections in 2016, which is a good amount of money.
But again, Planned Parenthood is almost at the exact same figure when you're talking about donations, and far greater when you're talking about outside influence.
So if we're going to have a fair conversation, the reason I bring this up is that my friend Wayne who listens to my show, I ran into him in the gym the other day, and he's like, you know, I'm getting tired of this with this constant demonization of the NRA as being this, you know, 700 pound boogeyman in the room.
If they're bad, if- NRA bad.
NRA bad.
Because they donate money to candidates and why is Planned Parenthood not equally as bad?
No, no, that's good money.
We are advocating for the termination of life in the womb.
That's a noble cause.
So you have one group advocating for the right for you to protect yourself against criminals.
That's what they do.
Bad.
This group's advocating for wiping out life in the womb.
No, no, no, that's good money.
That doesn't have any effect at all.
Again, they're hypocrites.
You as a conservative or a libertarian, we're principals.
We have no problem saying, yes, you are correct.
There are lobbies out there that advocate for the Second Amendment and the rights of firearm owners out there.
Yes, you're correct.
Does that money go to some politicians?
Yes, it does.
Does that influence those politicians?
I would think.
Oh, how can you say that?
Because I'm not an idiot!
Now, does it influence all politicians?
No.
You may say, that's impossible, Dan.
You get a donation.
Does it?
Ladies and gentlemen, I have been a Second Amendment advocate on this show for my entire life and during my entire tenure doing the Dan Bongino Show.
I assure you, if I ran for office and the NRA donated money to me, it's not going to make me extra super Second Amendment support.
You get what I'm saying?
Are there some on the fence that may be influenced by political money?
Folks, we'd be morons to say no, all of us.
Of course, we're human beings, and they're influenced by this stuff.
I have no problem saying that.
But most of the people advocating for Second Amendment rights believed it before the NRA donation.
Having said that, the same goes for Planned Parenthood.
Because again, we're principled here, we're not liars like the left.
There are liberals out there running for office, Joe, who believe that life could be terminated in the womb up to the ninth month of pregnancy.
They believe that.
The Planned Parenthood donation isn't going to affect them one bit.
It's going to help them.
But, likewise, vice versa, are there other Democrats out there who may have had pro-life tendencies, who now, because of Planned Parenthood money, are going to become rabidly pro-abortion?
Of course!
But again, we're principled.
Unlike the left.
That just will not tell you the truth.
Blood money, the NRA!
What about blood money at Planned Parenthood, where actual life is terminated?
Ugh, it's infuriating.
Alright, you know what?
Let me get this, uh, one more sponsor for today.
Cause I want to go, I've got a lot of really good stuff for you.
Red flags for red flag laws, big trouble for red flag laws.
And I've got the perfect example.
And I also have, I have some video at the end of the show.
I don't want you to miss.
The ban this brigade.
Hat tip Elizabeth Harrington on Twitter.
Uh, there's montage on CNN of liberals wanting to basically ban everything in existence.
It's priceless.
So stay tuned.
All right.
Today's show brought to you by Bravo.
Bravo!
I got their shirt on.
Bravo Company Manufacturing.
Ladies and gentlemen, they manufacture the finest rifles and pistols in the market.
When I went to go pick up my BCM rifles, my rifle and pistol at the FFL, The guy behind the counter told me, Dan, these are really, really some of the best in the business.
BCM Rifles, if you're in the market for a rifle or a pistol, ladies and gentlemen, Bravo Company Manufacturing is the only place you should be looking.
They are really, really high-quality, precision-made equipment.
Now, having said that, BCM Rifles, this is not a sporting arms company.
They manufacture life-saving equipment.
They understand that their rifles and pistols could wind up in the hands of an end-user that's a citizen who needs, unfortunately, to protect his life in a situation that he wished wouldn't have happened.
Their rifles and pistols will wind up in the hands of a police officer, a military officer out there.
They manufacture life-saving equipment.
They manufacture their equipment right here.
They build it to combat standards because they believe the same level of protection Should be provided to every American regardless if they're a private citizen or a professional.
They manufacture by hand.
They are hand-assembled rifles and tested by Americans in Heartland, Wisconsin to a life-saving standard.
They put people before their products.
They feel it's their moral responsibility.
BCM rifles.
Their moral responsibility.
Provide tools that will not fail the end-user when it's not just a paper target, but God forbid someone trying to do them harm.
They make life-saving equipment.
Ladies and gentlemen, to learn more about Bravo Company Manufacturing, I can't encourage you in strong enough terms to check them out, head on over to BravoCompanyMFG.com.
That's BravoCompanyMFG.com, where you can discover more about their products, special offers, and upcoming news.
That's BravoCompanyMFG.com.
You need more convincing?
Find out even more about BCM and the awesome people who make their products at youtube.com slash Bravo Company U S A. And thank you for the cool shirts.
This is my personal favorite chick.
Sorry, folks had to back away from the microphone.
I just said, check that out in case you missed it on the audio only.
I know, I get a lot of emails from you, I'm sorry.
It's like, Dan, you're driving me crazy!
Sometimes I'm in my car and you back away from the mic.
I promise you, when I back away from the mic, it's usually me saying something like, check out this shirt.
And it's me on the video just showing the shirt.
That's really it.
So, my fault.
I know.
I'm just a very active animated guy.
It's the Italian part of me.
Okay, red flag for red flag laws!
Big trouble.
You know I don't support these.
I believe they entirely violate due process and I believe they will have severe unintended consequences.
A little bit of background, what are red flag laws?
They're the equivalent of gun, they call them gun violence protection orders, where you can go to court without charging someone with a crime.
That's the problem I have with these.
And you can have someone's gun confiscated or firearms confiscated without accusing them of a crime.
Now, folks, the potential for abuse.
Now, I don't have any doubt that if you were to implement these, like anything else, Joe, I mean, if we were to implement a, say, a no-need-for-a-search-warrant policy, right?
Say we throw the Constitution out the window.
I'll give you an example of why I don't like red flag books, right?
If we were to throw out the search warrant requirement in the Constitution, yes, you'd prevent some crimes.
Cops could just storm into whatever house they wanted, eventually you're going to find people selling drugs.
You would have sacrificed liberty for security and later you'd have none because there'd be a mass revolt because people want their civil liberties back, right?
The same thing with red flag laws.
Are you going to stop some gun crimes?
Probably.
The problem I have with them is the potential for abuse is massive.
How do I know that?
Look at this story at Legal Insurrection.
What's going on in San Francisco right now?
Be up in the show notes by Leslie Eastman.
San Francisco declares the NRA to be a, quote, domestic terrorist organization.
So let me be clear on this.
The same organization Excuse me, the same city that has a human defecation map so you can avoid stepping in human waste because people consider the streets of San Francisco, because it's so poorly run, a one big public bathroom.
As my buddy Tim used to say, I always do the Tim voice.
He was my co-instructor in the Secret Service Academy.
He'd say, the world's a man's bathroom, man.
I don't think he meant that in San Francisco, okay?
They can't even clean the poop off the streets.
They want to start designating people as domestic terrorists because you're an NRA member?
Or you're a member of the NRA?
The same people, by the way.
Did I lose you on the audio there?
Yeah.
I did.
I was going to say, because I didn't hear you for a second.
I was like, where's Joey?
I usually hear a grunt here and there or something.
Yeah.
So we're talking about the enemy.
So San Francisco that can't clean a poop off its own streets, you want them to be able to designate people.
The San Francisco government has a red flag and be able to take your guns.
Now, this is the same city, by the way, San Francisco.
Remember the story from a week ago?
The same city that doesn't want you anymore in official city paperwork to refer to felons as felons.
They want you to refer to them as justice-involved persons.
So just to be clear in San Francisco, the human waste in the streets, capital of the United States, the defecation capital of the world, San Francisco.
If you're an NRA member, you're a domestic terrorist.
But if you're a felon, you're a justice-involved person.
Ladies and gentlemen, if that isn't a red flag for red flag laws, I don't know what is.
Stay away.
To the Trump administration, this is a really, really bad idea, these red flag laws.
They will absolutely blow up in people's faces, because governments like San Francisco are guaranteed to abuse them.
Alright, here's a quick story, moving on.
Last thing on the firearm issue, because it's important.
The Bogino Rule!
Again!
Ah!
I can't tell you this enough!
Wait 24 to 72 hours before reporting on an anti-conservative, anti-Trump story making its way around the media.
There is a significant, not 100%, but a significant chance the story will be debunked later.
Now, I'm just going to give you one example.
Here's a tweet by Jim Sciutto from CNN.
New Odessa gunman purchased weapon in private sale, which does not require a background check.
Josh Campbell disgraced the former FBI guy reporting.
This guy just is a hack on CNN's guy Campbell.
So, then of course, remember Jim Sciutto's CNN and his lackey Josh Campbell?
I wonder how many federal arrests that guy ever made.
He was like the Comey dude.
I think it's the same guy.
They're reporting, just so you're clear, again, a story, not the story.
And the narrative they're reporting on, CNN, Shooto, and others, is the Odessa shooting.
There was a loophole.
We gotta fix the law for background checks.
In other words, he made his circumway, slithered his way around the law.
So you're meant to believe here that the law, a new background check law, would have stopped him because what he did was legal.
Please tell me you understand before I go on.
Because there's a National Review piece I'm going to put up in a second to show you if you would have waited, unlike Jim Sciutto and Josh Campbell, if you would have waited 24 to 72 hours, which I always do before reporting on these types of stories, you would have found out that the narrative they're trying to tell you That this guy didn't break the law, Joe, that the law just wasn't strong enough?
And if we had better laws, this guy wouldn't have been able to buy this gun?
If you would have reported that, you would have been wrong again.
Like Shooto.
National Review.
Ladies and gentlemen, the gun used in the Texas Odessa shooting was illegally manufactured and sold.
Jack Crowe, National Review, September 5th, 2019.
Be in the show notes today.
Folks, as I was debating Chris Hahn and Laura Ingraham on Wednesday night, trying to explain to Chris, liberal Chris who is not getting it lately, the Odessa shooting was an illegal sale.
The fact that it was private is irrelevant.
It was not legal.
The Odessa shooter was prohibited from buying that firearm.
18 USC 921 and the guy who made it illegally manufactured it and engaged in an illegal sale to him.
It was already against the law.
What do you want?
I said this the other night and a lot of people email me.
I wasn't trying to be funny.
The fact that it came off as humorous was unintended.
But I said to Chris, so the Odessa shooting, that guy already broke the law and you want to make another law to make it what, Joe?
Extra supercalifragilistic illegal?
Yeah!
Justice League twins activate illegal?
Like, really, really illegal.
Extra super illegal.
It was already illegal.
So in other words, the story, not the narrative, the story, the real story, if you would have waited, is the Odessa shooter illegally bought a firearm because he didn't care about the law.
That's the facts.
How do you know he didn't care about the law?
Because he did it anyway!
He tried to buy a firearm, was told no!
So he went around and engaged in an illegal sale.
The fact that it was private is irrelevant.
If I can hat-tip David Harsanyi on Twitter.
Harsanyi made a great point on Twitter.
Notice how, the liberal, this is a excellent, excellent, verdict is in, excellent point David Harsanyi.
Joe, when someone buys crack in the street in a private sale, do you refer to that as a private crack sale?
It's an illegal crack sale!
You're laughing, but it's an illegal sale!
It's illegal!
Yes, thank you!
No one goes, it was a private sale of crack.
It was an illegal drug buy!
Man, we need background checks though, you know?
When you buy a gun in the street... Jesus!
Right?
You sold them crack without a background check?
It was illegal!
It was illegal!
Against the law!
The criminals don't care!
The guy who sold the drugs doesn't care.
The guy who bought the drugs, they don't care!
They don't care.
They ignored it!
This guy did not engage in a private gun sale.
It was an illegal gun sale!
They're only using the term private sale because they want to reinforce this image that there's this major loophole that these people, and if we just fixed it by another law, it would stop people.
There already is a law.
If you're a prohibited possessor, you cannot buy and you cannot loan a prohibited possessor a firearm.
They just don't care.
Reinforcing my point from the beginning that gun laws don't work.
Probably just as poorly as a lot of our drug laws.
They just don't work.
No.
The difference is there is a public good to owning a firearm.
You get to protect yourself.
There is no public good from smoking crack.
None.
Nope.
And I'll make a strong case to you that drug laws don't, I mean, that's a whole other show.
I'll probably get some negative feedback on that, but fine.
But that's a, we, I don't have the time for this here, but at least with crack, it's a very difficult argument to make like, um, You know what, it's good for weight loss.
No, it's not.
It's a really awful thing and a plague on our society.
Owning a firearm is not.
Right.
People protect themselves, their property, areas that have second amendment based laws and regulations.
You see lower property crime rates because people don't want to break into a house where the owner could defend themselves.
My gosh.
If you just would have waited.
But they can't!
Huh.
Report it.
It was a private sale.
A private crack sale.
Wait, I don't know.
You understand?
You understand what we do on the show?
Like, one of the common evergreen themes has always been to point out to you the narrative so you see it now.
Whenever you see on Twitter or on Facebook, it was a private sale.
Your first question should be, was it illegal?
Yes, it was.
So why is it a private matter?
It doesn't matter.
What does that add to the story?
It was an illegal gun sale.
It'd be no different than if a gun owner in a gun store as an FFL sells a gun to a guy who's a prohibited possessor.
It was a gun store sale.
It was an illegal sale!
The law didn't matter.
It doesn't matter.
Criminals don't care.
Framing.
It's how they frame issues.
When we learn to pick them apart, we can more effectively debate this stuff.
And remember, we're never debating the libs.
They're not open to information.
I'm sorry.
Most of them.
You're debating the liberals so the third party guy or woman listening hears it and sees you're the more rational one.
All right, moving on.
So the ban brigade continues.
This is a great montage, again, hat tip Elizabeth Harrington on Twitter.
The CNN telethon on the global warming hoax, which was a disaster for the candidates.
They're all on the record now, all these candidates who agreed in the global hoax-a-thon, global warming hoax-a-thon on CNN.
They're all on the record now talking about banning everything from cheeseburgers.
Bring on the ribeyes, as I said yesterday.
Wait a minute, cheeseburgers, Cow farting.
They want to ban everything.
Here's a little montage they put together of the global warming hoax-a-thon and all the bans.
Check this out.
There's no question I'm in favor of banning fracking.
We're going to be okay if the vast majority of the world goes vegetarian immediately.
Coal-burning plants.
No one's going to build another coal-burning.
We've got to shut the ones down we have.
Do you ban plastic straws?
I think we should.
I love the vision of the Green New Deal.
Do away with commercial air travel and a lot of other things.
We have to take combustion engine vehicles off the road as rapidly as we can.
What about offshore drilling oil?
Would you ban it?
Yes.
Absolutely yes.
Yes.
Some of it is with light bulbs, some of it is on straws, some of it, dang, is on cheeseburgers, right?
I was writing that down.
You see my pen?
I was furiously writing that.
So here's the bad... From the hoax-a-thon.
Here's the bad list.
The Democrats want a ban.
Straws?
Plastic straws.
Coal.
I wrote so fast I can't even read what I wrote.
What is that?
Oh, natural gas.
It looks like cars.
I have such awful handwriting.
They want a ban on air travel.
Engines.
Combustion engines.
Offshore drilling.
What is this one?
Cheeseburgers and meat.
So, straws, coal, gas, air, travel, engines, drilling, meat, and cheeseburgers.
What's left?
What's left?
I don't know.
I don't know what's left.
I don't know how my house would even function.
I don't know.
No meat for dinner.
I wouldn't be able to travel up to New York to work.
I can't drive anywhere because I have a combustion engine.
We don't have, well, we do have natural gas, right, over in the other place, right?
Coal, I don't know what percentage.
But you're, and plastic straws, we, I use glass straws in the house anyway, it's not really much of an environmental thing.
Although listen, if we can find options, great.
But folks, do you understand like how ridiculous this party has become?
The band brigade?
And I just took a couple notes here because...
You know, I think what makes our show different is I like to add just a level of color commentary, just not the rant.
I mean, rants are great, but they don't really help you a lot.
But just remember, I cited Thomas Sowell before to tie the show together.
If you read Thomas Sowell's fantastic book, Vision of the Anointed, he talks about this, how the central planners have this fatal conceit, to quote Hayek as well, this fatal conceit, this knowledge problem, but they don't think it's a problem.
In other words, the people want to plan your world.
Get rid of coal, get rid of gas, we're gonna plan for so... You understand if they had the knowledge to effectively implement an energy policy that was market-based, effective, and would work, they'd be in the private sector and not in government?
The reason they're in government telling you what you can't do is because they failed at finding what you could do in the private sector.
They could find no way to find a hole in our economy they could fill.
And they can't make any real money in the private sector because they're not smart enough.
So they go into government and they have the fatal conceit of the knowledge problem where they think they're now smart enough in government to tell you what they couldn't figure out in the private sector themselves.
The anointed ones, as Thomas Sowell calls them in his vision of the anointed.
Self-anointed.
Genius planners.
Who couldn't plan a simple company to make money in the private sector, but all of a sudden can figure out how to marshal the resources of the entire U.S.
economy.
Sure.
Good job, guys.
All right, amazingly, I'm gonna wrap this up.
This is another great article from Commentary Magazine in the show notes today.
I'd really like you to read this.
It's very short, but it's very good.
John Steele Gordon, September 3rd, 2019, Commentary Mag.
Global warming?
Or bad data?
Garbage in, garbage out.
Folks, more debunking of the biggest hoax of our time, the global warming hoax.
More evidence, I should say.
Now, you would think if you were trying to show, Joe, I'll get to some snippets from this piece in a second.
If you were trying to show that the globe was warming, Joe, it's not a trick question,
I'm not setting you up, but as the audience on Budsman, wait, we're gonna need our hat,
here we go, the audience on Budsman hat, I'm gonna get it for Joe, is it heavy yet?
If we were looking to see that the globe was warming and to prove that the global warming
hoax was not a hoax, do you think you'd need temperature readings to do that?
Not a trick question.
Yes, Dan, temperature readings would be a major part, Dan.
It would be very good, right?
It would be a major part of showing the temperature went up.
Okay, good job.
The audience on BuzzFeed comes through in the class.
Well, Jode, do you think those temperature readings would be a problem if the devices you were using to obtain those temperatures were, say, sitting behind a Chinese food place that had a heat vent blowing onto the temperature?
Would that be a problem?
Just throwing that out there for you.
That would suck everything up, Dan.
Very nice, very witty.
From the commentary piece, this is so good.
So folks, we have these temperature sensors, right, that are trying to prove the global warming hoax is real.
Well, what's the problem with these sensors?
So check this out.
Many of these sensor stations have a big problem.
They haven't changed appreciably over the years, but the land around them has, often profoundly, with big growth in urban and suburban areas.
Listen to this one.
The weather station that was put in the middle of Nassau County, Long Island, where I live for a point, it was a potato field in 1923.
But the sensor's still in the same spot.
But the potatoes are long gone.
And now it's behind a strip mall, 20 feet from the kitchen exhaust fan of a Chinese takeout joint.
You think that might impact the...
Folks, these weather stations haven't moved.
It's kind of a problem if you're behind a kitchen exhaust fan.
You think that may be an issue?
Now, again, the incompetence here is stunning.
Now you may say, okay, you just mentioned one.
No, no, the piece goes on.
I'm not done.
A study by meteorologist Anthony Watts found that almost 90% of the 1,221 weather stations in the U.S.
did not meet the National Weather Service's setting standards, which requires that they be at least 100 feet from any artificial heat source or radiating surface.
This is unbelievable!
You can see some of the most egregious violators here, and they have a link in the piece.
Read it.
Here's their solution.
This is unbelievable.
To deal with this defective information, like a thermometer or a heat station near a heat source, climate scientists, Joe, have adjusted the data to solve the problem.
Invariably, these adjustments have made earlier data show lower temperatures and recent data show higher ones.
Shocker, folks.
Can you hear it?
Do I have another snippet from that piece?
I think we had a record high in Nassau County for January.
98 degrees.
You know, what do you do?
Listen, there were a lot of Kung Pao chicken orders in January.
January in Nassau County, it was 104.
Meanwhile, you go to the place and the guy who owns a Chinese food restaurant has had record orders of Kung Pao chicken.
It's near the exhaust fan.
You think you may want to move that?
No, no, don't worry.
We'll just adjust it down.
It's not 104 in January, Joe.
It was only 82.5.
Oh, that sounds right.
That's what county Long Island.
Holy Moses.
Oh, Daniel.
Oh my gosh.
Folks, this is... Again, I just... I'm not suggesting to you...
That we don't have an impact on our climate.
We do, of course we did.
You know, when we were back in our Neanderthal days, or when North America was populated largely by American Indians, they lit fires too, folks.
Fires emitted, you know, CO2 and other products into the atmosphere.
Human beings naturally produce waste as a function of living.
It's not a matter of if or not if.
It's a matter of how much and what's the impact.
I'm simply suggesting to you that the liberal global warming hoax is a hoax!
The globe is not warming to some catastrophic levels where we're all gonna die!
Matter of fact, the piece points out at the end, when you look at NOAA, the National Oceanographic Administration, when you look at their temperature stations, you see the temperature, folks, has been relatively stable for a very long time now.
It's all nonsense.
Oh, that was, all right.
That was a fun show.
Please subscribe on our YouTube channel.
That was a good time.
YouTube.com.
Last segment cracked me up.
You're not supposed to laugh at your own jokes, but I thought it was funny.
Also subscribe to the show, excuse me, on Apple podcast, Google podcast, and please pick up my book, Exonerated.
It's coming out September 24th.
You pre-order it now.
You'll have it.
I think Amazon ships out a little early.
Barnes and Noble.
Please check it out.
Just finished the audio book.
You're going to love it.
Put a lot of good work into it.
So please, Exonerated, Amazon, Barnes & Noble, coming out in bookstores everywhere.
I promise you're going to love this book.
Remember, I expose the whole movie script scandal, how they tried this before.
