In this episode, I address the explosive comments by President Trump at a press conference and the corresponding media freak-out. I also address the latest liberal healthcare scam and how it will deeply impact your healthcare future. Finally I address an infamous Al Sharpton interview where he completely face-palms on economics. News Picks:Why are liberal media activists ignoring the Democrats’ electoral wipeout in Louisiana?
The government collects record income taxes and is still running a massive deficit.
Don’t fall for the healthcare “public option” scam.
Now we know who found those infamous phones used by this key player in the Spygate scandal.
This older article documents the infamous “the White House is running this” FBI text.
This older article documents the infamous “potus wants to know everything we’re doing” text.
This older article or documents the infamous “one voice” communication with the FBI.
This older article documents the infamous “in consultation with the White House” testimony from Brennan.
Video: IL white trustee tells her white board members to shut up, and that they don’t get an opinion.
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.
We found it!
And by we I mean you have located the famous or shall I say infamous Al Sharpton John Stossel video we've been referring to all week where Al Sharpton has no idea How much taxes the rich actually pay humiliates himself.
So I will get to that today.
Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joby back on Monday, gave him a Friday to take a little break with his family.
He's been working really hard.
We had a great night last night in Alachua County.
Thank you for hosting us.
The former mayor over there was hysterical.
He gets up on stage, he introduces himself with his preferred pronouns, and one of his preferred pronouns was corn pop, which was hysterical.
I was.
My side was splitting.
He was really funny.
So thanks for hosting us.
You all were great last night.
But we're back this morning.
Another fantastic Trump rally last night.
Well attended in Dallas.
More people online at the Trump rally for the bathroom than showed up at the Beto rally, the counter rally.
So we will get to all this.
I've got some great video.
I'm going to end the show today.
With a pretty, I think, terrific phone call I had hosting the Mark Levin Show years ago at Joe Love's with another person who claims to know about the tax rates the rich pay and completely embarrassed herself, so that'll be great.
All right, folks, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show again.
Today's show brought to you by buddies at Omax Sleep.
Listen, Omax has a sleep product I can't recommend highly enough.
Their Sleep and Stress Remedy.
You know, it's pretty stressful sometimes.
Listen, my stress doesn't compare anything to the stress of our military, our cops, and we're not even close.
But sometimes we have really busy days, you stress out a little bit, you want to relax at night.
OMAC Sleep and Stress Remedy is the choice in our... Paula, how much do you love it?
She said it works.
We love it.
Folks, when you don't sleep well, your entire day suffers.
You're miserable.
You're irritable.
You know how that feels.
By noon, by one o'clock, you can't get anything done.
The whole day is essentially wasted.
You know, one out of three adults suffer from sleep deprivation with accelerating demands, work, family life, school for the kids, all that stuff.
It's just, you get run down.
You get stressed out.
It's no wonder 60 million Americans feel sluggish, unproductive, or exhausted during the day.
So if some of those sleeping aids or melatonin or other stunts aren't working for your tricks, go with the real deal.
Try Omax Sleep and Stress Remedy with CBD.
This breakthrough triple action CBD oil formula works great.
Helps relax your mind naturally, tranquilo, so you get the best night of sleep ever.
We love that.
I'm here to tell you when you finally get a full quality eight hours of deep sleep, you'll wake up ready to tackle the world.
It's terrific.
We like it.
Trust me, the CBD blend is incredible.
We love it.
We use it in this household.
you'll feel the difference on the first night.
Omax is offering our listeners 20% off with their first box of Omax Sleep and Stress Remedy
with CBD plus free shipping.
And if you don't experience your best night's sleep in just three nights, return it for a full refund.
They're that confident in the product.
Go to Omax Health.
That's O-M-A-X Health.
OmaxHealth.com today.
Enter promo code Bongino, my last name, B-O-N-G-I-N-O, to take advantage of this incredible savings.
That's OmaxHealth.com.
Enter code Bongino, B-O-N-G-I-N-O.
Get 20% off your first box.
All right, let's go.
I'm going to have to do the artificial damn Bongino bell.
Ding, ding, ding.
All right, story number one.
Liberals are losing their mind, including little Jimmy Acosta over at CNN.
President Trump had one of his many pressers.
This guy's the most open president in American history, is he not?
This guy gives pressers press avails.
Takes questions from the press to get out of the jargon.
All the time.
It's kind of funny when they accuse him of hiding stuff.
Trump accused him of a lot of things.
Hiding stuff?
Not so much.
So he's giving this presser and he starts getting into this spy gate and what happened in 2016 and the infiltration into the election process where they tried to harm him and benefit Hillary Clinton, Russians and others, Ukrainians.
And Jim Acosta loses his mind.
I want to play the video first of Trump, what he said.
I just know that our country is looking into the corruption of the 2016 election.
It was a corrupt election, whether it's Comey or McCabe or Strzok or his lover Lisa Page, the two great lovers.
There was a lot of corruption.
talking about what happened in the 2016 election and the liberals lost their minds after they heard this. Check this
out.
Just know that our country is looking into the corruption of the 2016 election. It was a corrupt election, whether it's
Comey or McCabe or Strzok or his lover Lisa Page, the two great lovers.
There was a lot of corruption. Maybe it goes right up to President Obama.
I happen to think it does.
But you look at Brennan and you look at Clapper and you get some real beauties.
I know that they're looking into the corruption.
Obviously, the IG report's coming out soon, so we'll find out.
I don't know anything about the meeting, but certainly it would be appropriate because the word is, and you read it in the same papers that I do, that they did go to other countries to try and hide what they were doing.
Number one.
Paula, what do you think of these guys?
Hilarious.
Like, some of these guys' lines are hysterical.
Can I just say that?
Listen, I get it.
Like, it's not presidential.
Whatever.
I don't really care.
It may bother you.
That's fine.
You know, we live in a constitutional republic.
You prefer different presidential talk?
Fine.
Whatever.
It's your call, not mine.
Vote how you see fit.
But this guy's hysterical.
He talks about Lisa Page and Peter Stroke, two FBI personnel who were involved in the investigation of Trump.
And he calls them, he calls, Paul, you hear him?
The two great lovers.
Like this is like Cleopatra or like Samson and Delilah or something.
The two great lovers.
And then he talks about Comey and clapping those two beauties.
That's just Trump.
He makes me laugh.
You know, some people may not like it.
I think it's hysterical.
So the gist, the takeaway of that though, why the liberals were losing their minds, you know, hat helmets were coming off everywhere, volcanic explosions out of CNN.
He doesn't have any evidence Obama was involved.
Okay.
You sure about that?
Here's a little Jimmy Acosta's tweet, losing his mind.
This guy's just become a total and complete embarrassment.
So at Acosta, Trump on DOJ probe of 2016 election.
Maybe it goes right up to President Obama.
I happen to think it does.
You just heard President Trump say that.
Here's Acosta.
Fact check.
There is no evidence of this.
Folks, this guy's a clown, a joker.
We all know it.
You know what it is?
Acosta's eager for attention because President Trump, as of late, has shut down the White House press conferences that he used to do with Sarah Sanders.
Stephanie Grisham's in there now.
They're not doing them.
Why is Acosta upset?
Because Acosta's whole life is not about journalism or facts or anything like that.
Acosta's life is about getting on TV and making himself look like the anti-Trump resistance.
This guy's not a journalist, you know, any more than I'm the center fielder for the New York Yankees right now.
We're in a little bit of trouble, by the way, in that Astro series.
He's not a journalist at all.
Stop saying that.
It's fake.
It's embarrassing.
Journalists should be roundly avoiding any association with Jim Acosta at all.
So to be clear, Trump is saying that he believes there is some connection between the spying on his campaign in the 2016 election and the Obama White House, and Acosta is laying out that fact check.
There is no evidence of this.
Acosta says no evidence.
You saw it.
I showed you the tweet.
I didn't manipulate it.
Now, again, I'm not a journalist by trade, but we do facts and data here, unlike journalists and fake journalists like Jim Acosta.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to lay out some very clear evidence.
Now, I'm not suggesting to you, for the liberals who listen to the show, that this is the absolute smoking gun final word on it.
I don't do lies and manipulation like Jim Acosta.
However, the evidence I'm going to lay out that the White House was involved in the spying on Trump is most clearly evidence.
Does it meet the standard of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?
I'm not sure we're there yet, but we're darn close.
So Acosta, again, is lying to you.
And what I'm going to do for you, and this is important, in the show notes today, at Bongino.com, my website, or if you subscribe to my email list, if you go to our website, you click on the dropdown menu, it says newsletter, you can subscribe there.
I will send you these articles every day.
Why is that important today?
Because, folks, what I'm about to describe to you is one of the most important segments I think we've done in a long time.
I'm going to lay out to you evidence that Obama and his White House did in fact know they were spying on their political opponents, and I have included the articles in today's show notes.
If you are on our email list, you will get them in your email box.
If you don't want to join our email list, fine.
Go to our website.
You can just look at it right there.
These four articles will be there.
I highly recommend you bookmark them.
Highly.
Let's go to article number one from foxnews.com.
And I'll go to a screenshot.
FBI lovers' latest text messages.
Obama wants to know everything.
Jake Gibson, Fox News, February 7, 2018.
Again, this will be in the show notes.
I thought Acosta said there's no evidence of the White House involved.
Now the liberals will come back and say, well, when Lisa Page and Peter Stroke, who were investigating Trump, Sent these messages to each other about, you know, Obama wanting to know everything.
Excuse me, the White House is running this.
That this could have been about anything.
Folks, it could have.
I mean, I could be, you know, the king of Siam, but I'm not.
The evidence is Peter Stroke and Lisa Page were working almost exclusively on a case involving the targeting of President Trump and his campaign, communicating about it, and in that line and chain of communication, they indicate that, quote, the White House is running this.
If you were a journalist, you'd be curious about that.
If you're Jim Acosta, you're not.
You don't think that's evidence at all because Jim Acosta's just not a bright guy.
Here's a screenshot from the piece where we have the actual text.
Page wrote to Stroke on September 2nd, 2016 about prepping Comey because POTUS
wants to know everything we're doing, according to a newly released Senate
report. This text raises questions about Obama's personal involvement in the
Clinton email investigation. Folks, I mean, you can see the quotes in the text
yourself.
This is what they were doing.
They were scuttling the Clinton email investigation in favor of investigating Trump despite hard evidence of Clinton malfeasance and no evidence of Trump malfeasance.
You remember the original IG report Michael Horowitz put out?
We have another one coming out soon on the Clinton email investigation where he clearly states at the end in his conclusion that he cannot rule out political bias as a reason for getting rid of the Clinton email investigation and turning up the heat on the Trump investigation.
These are a little out of order, by the way.
I'm sorry, the way I had them here.
Okay, article number two from Fox News.
Again, important pieces will be in the show notes.
Bookmark them.
Keep them in your file.
First one there, POTUS wants to know everything we're doing.
So now we know POTUS, President of the United States, wants to know everything they're doing.
The investigators investigating Trump.
Now it says the White House is running this.
Running what?
A chess game?
A Fortnite match?
Quote from the Fox News piece.
It's this page that the two great lovers, as Trump calls them, involved in investigating Trump.
Here's their text.
Went well, best we could have expected.
Other than, and it's blank because it's redacted, Quote, the White House is running this, Stroke wrote to Page on August 5th, 2016.
My answer, well, maybe they are, or maybe for you they are.
Page replied, yeah, whatever, read White House comment.
We've got emails that say otherwise.
Folks, clearly the FBI agents and administrative personnel and legal team, Page and Stroke, that are running the investigation into Trump are concerned that, quote, the White House is running it and they're objecting to it.
Did you read that?
To the liberals out there, can you read?
I mean, are you capable of reading?
Again, this is evidence.
Is it conclusive proof 100% that Obama was running this?
No.
I'm not a liberal fake news journalist.
We do facts here.
Is it hard evidence of suspected serious malfeasance on behalf of the White House interacting with the investigators who are scuttling the Clinton email investigation?
Is it double down on an investigation against Trump despite having no evidence?
Folks, in any sane world, we would call that evidence.
But journalism died a long time ago.
And Acosta is prima facie evidence of that.
Oh, I'm not done.
There's more.
More evidence that the Obama White House was not only involved, but intimately involved with the investigation into Trump and the shelving of the Clinton email investigation.
Let's go to Fox News piece number three.
Keep these up for your friends.
Quote, this is Greg Rhee.
Title, FBI clash with DOJ over potential bias of source for surveillance warrant.
McCabe and Page are texting each other.
From the piece, again, There's no evidence of White House involvement.
Really?
Because that's not what Lisa Page and her boss, Deputy Director Andy McCabe, were talking about in their texts.
On October 14, 2016, Page again wrote to McCabe, this time concerning a meeting at the White House.
I thought there was no White House involvement!
Here's Page to McCabe.
Apparently, the Deputy Attorney General, Sally Yates, now wants to be there, talking about a White House meeting.
And the White House wants the DOJ to host it.
So we're setting that up now.
We will very much need to get Cohen's view.
This is David Cohen of the CIA.
We will very much need to get Cohen's view before we meet with her.
Sally Yates.
Better have him weigh in with her before the meeting.
We need to speak with one voice if that is in fact the case.
Folks, I mean...
What kind of imbecility like third grade level intellect are we talking about where you can't process this information as evidence of White House malfeasance or at a minimum misfeasance?
Do you understand what's going on in this interchange with one of the lead FBI lawyers and the deputy director of the FBI?
They're about to have a meeting at the White House while they're talking about the investigation into Trump.
Excuse me.
And in their texts, They're addressing a meeting with the CIA, Brennan's guys, who are intimately involved in the whole spying scandal on Trump in conjunction with foreign intelligence spying on Trump and shuttling information to the CIA.
And they're texting each other about going into the meeting with the Department of Justice at the White House and the CIA and speaking with one voice.
In other words, how do we coordinate our story?
Again, Jim Acosta, I understand your TDS level 6 infection.
As we know from regular listeners to the show, the highest level of Trump derangement syndrome is level 6.
I get it.
It's like CJD, that Cruzfeld-Jacob disease where the prions enter your brain and bore holes into your brain.
I get it.
That's what TDS does.
But whereas I don't jump the gun on anything and we deliberately handle real evidence based on real texts and real data and real facts, you are a delirious, TDS-infected joke!
There's no evidence of the Obama White House's involvement?
I'm serious, are you this dumb?
Can you not read this?
Can you not read this, what I'm putting out there?
Do you not want to read it?
Are you incapable of reading?
Or is just your reading comprehension really that bad?
One more.
Again, there's no evidence of White House involvement, according to Little Jimmy.
This is from an American Greatness piece, which will be in the show notes today, and I encourage you to read it.
Is it Deborah Hine?
Oh, we like her.
She does good work.
American Greatness.
Did John Brennan lie to Congress about 2016 Gang of Eight briefings?
Again, here's additional evidence from the piece that the White House not only knew about the spying on Trump, Was coordinating it and was intimately involved.
Here's a briefing old Johnny B gave in May of 2017.
John Brennan, head of the CIA.
Let me read to you a quote from his sworn testimony up on Capitol Hill.
Pay very close attention to the opening line of this, ladies and gentlemen.
It's important.
And when I say important, I mean critical because this is the coup de grace.
John Brennan, quote, again, in consultation with the White House, I personally briefed the full details of our understanding of Russian attempts to interfere in the election to our congressional leadership, Brennan wrote.
Okay.
So Obama's CIA director is on the record, in writing now, Saying that in consultation with the White House in August of 2016, when Page and Stroke are texting each other about meetings at the White House, Brennan is briefing Capitol Hill people on the dossier.
We know that because they then share dossier information, the Capitol Hill folks he briefs with the FBI in a Harry Reid letter, information that only appears in the dossier.
And Brennan is admitting that the briefing was done in consultation with the White House.
Dreaded air quotes.
Paula gets mad when I beat up on Acosta and Stelter too much.
Because it does.
These guys are so dumb it gets old.
But dumb would be a compliment.
You may say that's harsh.
No, it would.
I mean, so why is that?
Because if they're not dumb, silly, and they just can't mentally process this as evidence, think of the alternative.
That they're smart, they are processing it as evidence, and they're engaged in a full cover-up to cover for their political allies.
Honestly, folks, I'd rather them be dumb.
In this case, it would be a compliment.
Please keep those up.
All right, I got some great video coming up.
Mick Mulvaney, not what you think.
I got a good... It was Mick Mulvaney and a presser.
There was a kind of a misstep there, but there's one part where he absolutely slays this liberal media, the press.
We asked just a dopey question.
He refused to play that game.
I got that.
I got the famous Sharpton thing.
I got a lot coming up.
All right, today's show also brought to you by our buddies at My Patriot Supply.
Ladies and gentlemen, when emergencies strike, What do you do, right?
You run right to your grocery store.
That's what you do.
You need food, food first.
And what happens?
Well, listen, in Florida, we're pretty well prepared, but even down here during hurricane seasons, we have been to the local Walmart and the local Publix and other places, and the food shelves are empty.
I'm not kidding.
Even down here where we do this all the time during hurricane season.
Folks, if you're in an area of the country that doesn't do this, and I'm telling you down here it happens, there is a, sadly, a good chance if an emergency strikes, those food shelves are going to go barren.
How are you going to look your kids in the face telling them, mommy and daddy don't have food?
Folks, it's a big deal.
You insure everything in your lives that matter.
You insure your car, your house, your dental insurance, you insure your teeth.
People have eyeglass insurance.
Life insurance.
You have insurance for everything that matters.
How can you not have insurance for your food supply?
Well, this isn't an insurance plan like you think.
This is actual emergency food that lasts 25 years in storage.
Ladies and gentlemen, have a plan.
The time to prepare for an emergency is now when there isn't one.
Not to wait for the food shelves to be barren.
MyPatriotSupply, our friends over there, are experts in emergency preparedness.
They have guaranteed two-day delivery.
Disasters don't wait, they don't make an appointment, and you shouldn't either.
Act now, you'll get this nice savings.
You'll get $70 off a two-week emergency food kit.
It'll get you through two weeks.
I have a lot of these.
I'll be honest with you, I have about four or five months of emergency food.
It's just, I'd rather have it, not need it, than need it, not have it.
Go to this website, preparewithdan.com.
That's preparewithdan.com.
Preparewithdan.com for exclusive offers.
You can save $70 today on a two-week emergency food kit.
MyPatriot supplies food kits last up to 25 years in storage.
They have enough calories to get you through the day.
They have breakfast, lunches, and dinner, and the food's very good.
Order food today and receive guaranteed two-day delivery discreetly to your front door.
Take action.
You never know what's coming.
Save $70 on a two-week food supply.
Better to have and not need than eat and not have.
Go to preparewithdan.com.
Preparewithdan.com.
That's preparewithdan.com.
Okay, moving on.
This is...
Mick Mulvaney.
I like Mick Mulvaney.
He's the acting chief of staff of President Trump.
He gave a presser yesterday in the Brady Press Room in the White House.
And I'm going to get to the Ukraine quid pro quo controversy in a minute.
Some of you may know about it.
Some of you may not, but it's important because it's been all over the news today, but I want to get to this first.
This is my personal recommendation for you.
If you're looking to get into political activism or politics, being a conservative libertarian or a principled Republican, if you decide to do so, you, I'm just warning you now, if you're looking for fairness and love, it reminds me of that line in primal fear, like, uh, that's kind of vulgar.
So I'll leave it out, but, The guy's like, justice in court?
You want justice?
Go to a mm house instead.
You get what I'm saying?
If you've seen the movie, you know what I'm talking about.
There's no justice in politics.
You will not be treated fairly by the press because they hate conservatives.
They just do.
They're not very knowledgeable.
Most of them, not all, but the ones I've dealt with are not very bright.
I'm just being candid.
They don't know much about economics, finance, healthcare policy.
They don't even know much about journalism.
Some are good.
Some, you know, very few, unfortunately.
But you will not be treated fairly.
One of the things they do is they don't really ask a question.
They frame an answer in the form of a question.
In other words, they're making a statement and they're framing it as a question so that there is no answer.
The famous example always given is the, when did you stop beating your wife question?
You're like, what?
I don't beat my wife.
That's not a question.
That's not, unless it's a serious charge.
The question is designed for you to give a quote that frames you in a bad light.
When did you stop beating your wife?
I don't beat my wife.
You know, damn Margino, I don't beat my wife.
Front page of the Baltimore Sun.
And everybody's like, there's an accusation about that?
Does he beat his wife?
You get what I'm saying?
They do this all the time and you have to be hip to it.
So someone tried this stunt yesterday with Mulvaney.
This female reporter.
And Mulvaney was having none of it.
She's kind of insinuating that President Trump is covering up this Ukraine whole quid pro no nonsense BS.
Here's Mulvaney shutting that down.
This is a great cut.
Check this out.
Why did it have to go into this more restrictive server?
Why was it moved from the one serve to the other?
All right, let's, let's, I'm glad we got that.
It's a good one to finish on.
I'm not going to answer your question the way you want me to, but I'm going to answer
your question, so give me just a second.
I am not going to sit here and talk about how we handle classified information in this
building, okay?
I got a couple questions before about my private conversations with the president.
I don't talk about those either.
I'm not going to talk about that, but I do want to address it, and here's why.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
There's only one reason people care about that, right?
That's because they think there's a cover-up.
They hope there's a cover-up.
Some of them hope that there's a cover-up.
That, oh my goodness gracious, there must have been something really, really duplicitous.
Something really underhanded about how they handled this document.
Because there must be a cover-up.
Because there's always a good cover-up when we've got an impeachment, right?
Nixon had a cover-up of the tapes.
Clinton had a cover-up of the relationship with Lewinsky.
There must be a cover-up here, right?
Let me ask you this.
If we wanted to cover this up, Would we have called the Department of Justice almost immediately and had them look at the transcript of the tape?
Which we did, by the way.
Right?
If we wanted to cover this up, would we have released it to the public?
And by the way, I'm glad that now all of this concern about how the document has been edited and what do these ellipses stand for, because I heard Adam Schiff go on television yesterday, or yesterday, the day before, and say, you know, we don't need to hear from the whistleblower anymore, because now we have the transcript, or the memorandum of communication, or memorandum of document.
Okay?
Everyone wants to believe there's a cover-up.
You don't give stuff to the public and say, here it is, if you're trying to cover something up.
So I'm not going to answer your question by explaining how we handle documents in this building.
All I'm telling you is that you can stop asking the questions in there because there's no cover-up, and I can prove it to you by our actions.
Look, I know we could do this all night.
No, I'm not going to take any more questions, but it's nice to see everybody.
Thanks again.
Yes!
Yes!
Folks, if you ever plan on running for officer, taking some prominent activist role in politics, save that.
Archive it and keep it on your phone or computer as an example of how not to fall into the liberal media's trap.
Understand, you are under no obligation whatsoever, these people have no legal authority over you, to answer a question that is a statement in the form of a question designed to bait you.
That reporter knows damn well the White House can handle classified information, especially with a history of leaks, unfortunately, in the White House, however well they please.
She is trying to get Mulvaney to answer a question about a cover-up that doesn't exist, and he just refuses to play ball.
You answer however you want.
When did you stop beating your wife?
I'm not answering that stupid question, but I am going to talk today about Obama's dreadful tax policy.
Let me tell you, you are under no obligation to answer those questions at all.
Nice job, Mick.
Now, that was well done.
Other portions weren't.
I think he misspoke.
There's a bit of a scuttlebutt this morning during that same presser.
Someone asked him about the Ukrainian phone call.
We have the transcript, folks, for the umpteenth time.
Don't get sidetracked.
You can read the transcript of the call yourself.
Read it yourself.
There is no request for Hunter Biden information by President Trump in exchange for military aid.
It's not there.
Mulvaney went on at one point.
To hint that during foreign policy negotiations, and he's not wrong, that there were requests made all the time for countries to do something in exchange for aid.
Well, of course, you know, the left ran with this and was like, wow, he's intimating that there was a hinting that there was a quid pro quo on the Trump team.
He came out and corrected it.
Folks, here's the, I mean, the legit bottom line here.
We have the transcript!
There's no deal!
Mulvaney's come out and said, that's not what I meant, there's no deal.
The EU ambassador Gordon Sondland, I spoke to Trump, there's no deal.
The Ukrainian president, there was no deal for military aid.
President Trump, there was no deal for military aid.
We have the transcript, there's no deal for military aid.
Stop trying to make FETCH happen!
FETCH is not going to happen, Gretchen.
It's not!
Stop!
Stop trying to make the illicit deal between Trump and the Ukrainian president happen when there's no deal!
I bet Mulvaney would have rephrased that again, but he was trying to give a candid assessment of how internet- and I'm not- listen.
I mean this.
People say something dumb, they say something dumb.
Sometimes I have to come back and correct stuff too, it happens all the time, we're only human.
He just said it the wrong way.
He was talking about this bigger picture in politics.
He goes on to talk about a Central American AIDS contingent on certain reforms, and it made it appear that there was a deal that wasn't there, which he corrected today.
Sorry, I'm looking at the TV screen.
Looks like some fighting has emerged in Syria after the ceasefire.
I don't trust Erdogan in Turkey at all.
You shouldn't either.
All right, moving on.
But Mulvaney did a good job.
Archive that.
Use that for future reference if you ever want to become an activist.
That's how it's done.
Here it is, folks.
Here it is.
Thank you to the audience.
Judy, Brian, we got it from a lot of people.
Seriously, you all are the best audience out there.
I had mentioned to you earlier in the week that I was looking desperately for this clip of Al Sharpton.
Al Sharpton engaged in a debate with Jon Stossel, which is really not a fair fight at all.
Not even close.
Jon Stossel used to work for ABC, then Fox.
Pretty libertarian guy, but definitely knows his stuff.
Very bright, Jon Stossel.
I interviewed him once on a radio show and he was on a beach somewhere, but he knows his stuff.
This came up because earlier in the week, Elizabeth Warren, as I said to you during the debate, I showed you the clip in some of our earlier shows, is lying to you about hiking your taxes in exchange for her government takeover of the healthcare system.
It's going to cost you a fortune.
It's going to double your tax rates, and it's going to at minimum increase dramatically your healthcare costs too.
She's lying to you.
And I said that one of the things about this debate that infuriates me is, as conservatives, we have the facts on our side.
The rich, the 1%, even the wealthy, the top 20%, Pay the overwhelming majority of taxes in this country.
Yet when you talk to liberals, the rich need to pay their fair share.
They don't know that.
They don't know the numbers.
Because they don't want to know the numbers.
Why?
Because the numbers are inconvenient.
The percentage of taxes the wealthy pay are dramatically higher than what anybody else pays.
So if you're going to argue a fair share, the rich should pay their fair share, at least know the number they pay now, knuckleheads!
Liberals don't even know that!
Now again, thank you to Brian, Judy, and others who found this.
Here is this cut of John Stossel, this is back in 2004, debating Sharpton, and listen to the hilarity here.
Stossel asks him, what percentage do you think the 1% pay now?
Sharpton totally flubs it and suggests a rate lower than what, so he's arguing for a tax cut, he doesn't even know it.
Al Sharpton, check this out, this is great.
The top 1% in this country pays very much less than 10%.
Very much less than 5%.
So what's fair?
The top 1% should pay 10% of America's income taxes?
20%?
They should pay somewhere around 15%.
They don't pay 5%.
Anybody could see that as unequal and unfair.
So they should pay 15%, he says, and the richest 1% now pay less than 10%.
Then he said less than 5%.
But that's so silly because, and I bet most of you don't know this, the IRS says the richest 1% of taxpayers already pay 34%, twice what Sharpton wanted them to pay.
The Reverend barely reacted when I told him.
They're already paying 34%.
No, I think that if you deal with the quality of their lives, he quickly changed the subject.
You know, of all the days, Paul and I have Joe here, this fat folks, we've only had one, I think, or two quadruple monthly's on the show.
That is at least a triple monthly, at least a triple monthly.
So Al Sharpton is on that show in 2004, de facto arguing for a tax cut for the 1% of 20 percentage points.
Do you hear what he said?
This infuriates me.
You know, Paul and I, I try not to talk about politics with her too much because on Friday nights, listen, you all have stressful lives.
Please, this is not a sob story.
I'm not a snowflake.
But sometimes for the sake of your family and your relationship, you do have to step away.
But I think she can vouch for me on this.
This is the one thing I bring up that infuriates me about the left all the time.
I cannot debate you if we cannot agree on basic facts.
I can't debate... Because liberals, I know this is tough.
I can't debate you that apples may be healthier than bananas.
It's an example.
I don't know if it's healthy or not.
If we can't agree on what an apple and a banana is, does that make sense?
If I'm debating you that apples are better for you than bananas, and you say, no they're not, I have proof, and you pull out an orange, I'm not arguing you apples are better than oranges, I'm arguing apples are better than bananas!
This infuriates me about the left, that we are held, thankfully, because it conditions us to be smarter, more tactical, more efficient debaters.
Folks, I promise you, if you ever get in a lengthy debate with a leftist, the reason they always respond with, you're a racist, a transphobe, a homophobe, an Islamophobe, the reason they do that Is one, they're angry.
But two, more importantly, because I'm telling you, the overwhelming majority of them have no idea what they're talking about.
If Al Sharpton doesn't know the rate rich people currently pay, then don't get in a debate about it!
And make a fool of yourself!
He just argued for a tax cut!
Listen to that thing again!
Well, what, Stasilis, at what rate should they pay?
Well, right now they're paying 10%.
No, they're paying 5%.
No, they're paying less than 5%.
Stasilis says, really?
Okay, well, what do you think they should pay?
Well, they should pay at least 15.
Dude, they pay 34.
You're arguing for a tax cut.
You're arguing about an apple and you're showing me a plum.
You don't know what you're talking about.
Listen, not to belabor this point, because this stuff frustrates me and I go on the whole show about it.
If you're a liberal listener of the show, fine!
Welcome!
If you want to argue that the top 1% should pay more, and you know they pay approximately 30%, 28% of their income, or excuse me, 28% of the federal tax load, Say they currently pay 28, I think they should pay X, whatever, 50%, and here's why.
Happy to hear you out!
You're wrong.
I know you're wrong.
I know it will have a negative impact on our economy, because evidence shows that, but I respect the fact that you've taken a stand that are knowledgeable about where you are.
I respect, I don't like it!
I'm telling you, having debated this endlessly, 99% of the liberals you debate have no idea what they're talking about and have no grasp of the data at all.
None.
You need further evidence of that?
Conveniently, this article came out yesterday in CNS News.
This guy Terrence Jeffrey does just terrific work over there, really.
I mean, you follow this guy's stuff.
Proving my point again that liberals have no idea what they're talking about.
This will be in the show notes today.
They're a must-read, the show notes today.
cnsnews.com.
Again, Terrence P. Jeffrey, October 15, 2018.
It's from last year.
Feds collect record individual income taxes in fiscal year 2018.
Still run the $779 billion deficit.
We have a screenshot from that, by the way?
You do, right?
Let me read this to you.
Why, keep that up for a second.
The reason I'm reading this to you is because, again, liberals are arguing about apples and showing you a grape.
They're telling you that Trump tax cuts cost the government money.
Trump tax cuts cost, we need to raise taxes, get more money to the government to redistribute to people.
If they cost the government money, folks, then tax revenue would go down from the piece.
Quote, the federal government collected a record.
$1,683,533,000,000 in individual income taxes in fiscal year 2018, according to the monthly Treasury Statement released today.
It's government data!
It's on a right-wing website.
$1,683,000,000,000!
However, the federal government also ran a deficit of $778,000,000,000 during the fiscal year, according to the statement.
according to the monthly Treasury statement released today.
It's government data, it's on a right wing website.
A trillion 683 billion.
However, the federal government also ran a deficit of $778 billion
during the fiscal year according to the statement.
Folks, Do you do this data thing?
Do facts matter anymore?
I mean it.
That's Treasury's own data.
Do you dispute it?
Is the Treasury lying?
Is there some big conspiracy, the Treasury, the United States Treasury, to lie about tax data?
So Trump cuts taxes, and as conservatives have always said, the government will likely not raise less revenue because economic growth from people having more money will lead to a bigger economy, which will lead to higher tax revenue even at a lower rate.
That is a confirmed hypothesis.
Is it causal?
No.
Is the correlation confirmed?
Yes!
Taxes went down, federal income tax revenue went up.
There are the numbers!
So why are we still running a massive deficit?
Because the government spends too much money.
Folks, you can raise all the tax revenue you want.
If you continue to spend more than you raise, tax revenue, spending, tax revenue, spending, you will run a deficit no matter what.
It's not the tax rates that are the problem, it's the spending.
Oh my gosh, do you even do data anymore?
It's frustrating.
Seriously, it's frustrating.
But know this, watching this show, I promise I will never leave you in a lurch.
You will always be prepared for these sixth grade level arguments with your friends.
It's not even hard.
Dismantling liberals in an argument, I can tell you with a straight face, I cannot think of a single debate.
With no air of pretension, I promise you, it's not hubris.
I cannot think of a single debate.
I've ever lost on foot.
You know what?
One time, I think was it Ed Henry or Griff?
I had forgotten this immigration policy.
We're talking about like Simpson, Mazzoli and Reagan.
I forgot the name of it.
And Ed got, I think it was Ed or Griff.
And I just couldn't think of it.
My fault.
But I cannot think of a debate with a liberal.
Those guys aren't liberal.
They're journalists.
I cannot think.
And it's not hard.
I'm not patting myself on the back.
You can do it too.
They just don't know what they're talking about.
It's like, uh, let me argue about this apple here.
Uh, Philippe Reines, that's a grape.
No, this is an apple.
Okay, dude, whatever.
Put your pants back on.
For those of you who know Philippe Reines, you know that story.
Google it.
It's pretty funny.
All right.
Our last sponsor, then I'm going to get to this, uh, this, uh, you know, I promise I have the Levin call.
We're going to do that at the end of the show.
Paula, sorry if I got you out of it.
We'll do the little bit.
We'll end the show with that.
Cause it's actually pretty funny, but I want to get to some of what's going on with Ukraine.
Great.
Cause Ukraine gate, whistleblower gate, whatever this nonsense story is, because there've been some more revelations about that.
Finally, today's show brought to you by Our good friends at eToro.
So happy to have them on board.
Why?
Folks, again, I'm always candid about knowledge gaps.
I did not know a lot about cryptocurrencies.
I didn't.
I knew what they were, how they work.
I know how blockchain works, but I wasn't hip to the investment of it.
And I was a little shy about it.
Thankfully, eToro jumped on board as a sponsor.
I am now, I work with eToro now.
I have an account myself.
And the great part about eToro is they allow you almost like a practice round.
With, you know, on their app where you can, you can open up a portfolio, not with real money and kind of practice and tinker around.
It helped me dramatically.
I am an investor in cryptos.
I really like cryptos.
It's a great way to diversify your portfolio, your money supply.
I really enjoy it.
And the easiest way is eToro.
If you go to eToro, that's E-T-O-R-O, etoro.com slash Bongino.
It makes crypto trading easy, super simple.
I figured it out quickly.
We recently saw Bitcoin prices rise in China, excuse me, rise after China devalued its currency in global markets tank.
Bitcoin went up after they saw what happened over there in China.
We can now see how cryptos are becoming a real alternative to gold and a good hedging strategy in and of themselves.
For me, the best place to trade, hands down, best place to trade cryptocurrencies is our friends at eToro.
Here's why.
Need reasons?
I got a lot of them.
eToro smart crypto trading made easy.
eToro is the world's number one social trading platform, has over 11 million active traders and facilitates over 1 trillion in trading volume per year globally.
They know what they're doing.
You can access the world's best cryptocurrencies.
They have 15 different coins available, not five, not 10, 15.
They have low and transparent fees.
And I got to sneak up on you there.
Advanced charting features for smart strategy building.
Here's what I like.
Help me.
Try before you trade with a virtual portfolio with a $100,000 budget.
Tinker around.
Feel it out.
See what you like.
See how it works.
Never miss a trading trend with charts, pricing alerts, and social feeds.
Sign up today at etoro.com slash Bongino.
That's E-T-O-R-O.com slash Bongino.
Etoro.com slash Bongino.
You won't regret it.
Go check the best, uh, easiest platform to use for cryptocurrencies.
Don't be left out in the cold.
Etoro.com slash Bongino.
Check them out.
Okay.
Um, just quickly on this story again about the latest hoax.
Whistleblower gate, Ukraine gate.
So again, as we discussed in the beginning of the show, we have the transcript of the Trump call.
There is no deal.
Give us information on Hunter Biden or holding military aid up.
The Democrats say that was the quid pro quo, the something for something.
It doesn't exist.
I don't know what else to tell you.
It's not in the transcript.
Now they had the EU ambassador from the United States, a Trump appointee, Gordon Sondland, Up on the hill testifying.
And I don't know how many times this guy, Gordon Sondland, who was intimately involved in diplomacy with Ukraine during the time the fake quid pro quo, I call it the quid pro no, happened.
How many times this guy has to say this, but there was no quid pro quo from the Wall Street Journal.
My gosh.
I mean, how many times does this guy need to say this?
Here's the headline.
Sondland criticizes Trump over efforts to pressure Ukraine.
U.S.
Ambassador to the European Union says he was disappointed by President's directive to work with Giuliani.
Ah!
That's an ominous headline.
Not when you get into the core of the piece.
Quote.
In his testimony, Mr. Sondland said he asked Mr. Trump, what do you want from Ukraine?
The president responded, liberals, please listen.
I know.
Get the blinders off.
Take the lead shielding away from the skull for a moment.
The president responded, nothing.
There is no quid pro quo.
Goes on.
Mr. Trump, who appeared to be in a bad mood, repeated no quid pro quo multiple times, Mr. Sondland said.
He also said he couldn't independently verify the president's assurance since he wasn't involved in the hold on aid.
Uh...
Ukrainian president.
Was there a quid pro quo?
No.
Gordon Sondland, was there a quid pro quo?
Not only was it there, the president repeated it multiple times.
The president, was there a quid pro quo?
No.
The transcript of the call with the fake quid pro appears doesn't appear.
There's nothing in there!
I'm moving.
This is just stupid.
I'm so sick of covering this stupid stuff.
I'm just putting this out there and it pains me to do it because I have an obligation and an hour to inform you.
But again, Liberals, do you ever do facts?
Is the quid pro quo you're alleging ever going to appear anywhere other than the fake whistleblower who doesn't know anything because he never saw the transcript?
Alright, quick story before I get to the Levin stuff because that's important.
We got the Trump video too.
That's a good one.
I want to get that.
We got to that.
I know Paul.
It's quick.
I'll get to that with this.
A great, great, great short snippet of Trump.
Total.
This is like on Friday.
I want to leave on a good note.
Just a word of caution is peace up in the Hill.
Ladies and gentlemen, do not fall for the public option.
Wait, got that.
Yeah.
Got him.
Did I get him?
Just a little fruit.
There's a fruit fly flying around.
It's driving me crazy.
You can leave that in there.
It is, it's driving me nuts.
We leave the doors open and things have been flying around.
If I get this sucker during the show, I'll show you the carcass.
Do not fall for the public option scam.
Here's an article in the Hill.
Support drops for Medicare for All, but increases for the public option.
Let me, this is in the show notes too.
Let me explain to you the scam what's going on here.
This government-run takeover, Medicare for All, that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are supporting is turning into a disaster.
Even the left-wing media, Joe Biden and others, are starting to call Warren out on the fact that she's lying.
Oh, by the way, I'll be on Tucker tonight for my Famous, maybe infamous, news explosion segment at the end of the show.
Don't miss it.
I'm going to try to cover this story tonight, too.
Elizabeth Warren's lying.
She's going to hike your taxes dramatically, and other Democrats are starting to pick up on that.
So they're saying, and Paul, if this doesn't make sense, give me a thumbs down.
They're saying, we're not for Elizabeth Warren's government-run takeover.
We're just for a government-run option, a public option.
Cool, right?
Everybody can choose the government option.
It'll be cheaper.
And even some Republicans, check out this little portion of the piece, even some Republicans have fallen for this scam.
Look at the polling.
The Kaiser Family Foundation tracking poll found support for a public option is growing.
73% said they supported the proposal in October, compared to 69% in September.
The year's where it gets troublesome.
Independent and Republican respondents were more likely to support a public option than Medicare for All.
While only 28% of Republicans polled said they supported Medicare for All, 58% said they support a public option, including Biden's plan, which might fare better in a general election.
Ladies and gentlemen, please, please, with all that's good in the world, marshal your strength and look at these numbers and understand you're being scammed.
The public option is a government takeover.
How, Dan?
They're just offering an option.
What are they going to do?
The reason they want the public option is because they're going to institute a government-run health care plan at lower than market rates.
Well, how can they do that?
Health insurance costs what it costs.
Not when you're paying with taxpayer dollars, it doesn't.
Government could charge whatever it wants.
Monopoly power.
Do you get what I'm saying?
If 20, 30 million people sign up for a public option, they can use taxpayer money to offset the difference between the premiums and what the plan actually costs.
Did you get it?
Some of you may not.
Let's say healthcare on a plan for Joey Bag of Donuts.
Let's say his healthcare, the insurance company to make a decent profit and stay in business.
Has to charge $500 a month.
Just, let's use round numbers.
You get it?
That is the actuarial sound value of the plan so they don't go out of business.
Say it's $500 a month.
And that's the average for every Joey Begadonis out there.
The government can come in on a public option and say, no, no, no, Joey B, we're going to charge you 400.
Great.
How can they do that?
I just told you to stay in business.
They need 500 because the government can just take taxpayer dollars and use it to subsidize it.
They have a pool of money.
They don't have to make a profit.
They can just take it from the people.
They can charge whatever they want.
If any money they lose, they just take from tax.
You get it.
Paul, does that make sense?
You lose $100 a person, doesn't matter, just tax another person $100 to pay for it.
Insurance companies can't do that.
So Dan, what's the problem?
The problem is once you undercut the free market, insurance market, they're all going to go out of business.
How can you compete with a $400 a plan when you need $500 to stay in business?
They're all going to go out of business.
It is Medicare for All, government-run health care, the public option.
It's the same scam.
It's just a focus group tested word to make you feel like it's a choice when it's not.
Union people out there, men and women who worked hard negotiating those health care contracts from your employers, your plan will go bankrupt immediately when the public option is instituted.
They will undercut you.
It's a sucker's plan.
Don't get suckered.
They will use taxpayer money to fill in the funding gaps.
Meaning your health insurance is going to go away and your taxes are going to go up too, as you pay for other people's cheaper health care.
There's the best way to sum it up.
Okay, quick video and I'll get to this Levin call.
I really enjoyed it and I think you will too.
Thanks to producer Joe who found this for us.
Before we get to that, here's President Trump, just in a quick thing.
This French reporter, before the speech yesterday, asks President Trump, hey, unemployment here in the United States is doing pretty well, unlike in France, where we're really struggling.
It's about 10 seconds.
But listen to the answer.
If there was ever a Trump thug life one, this is it.
Check this out.
You have very low unemployment rate in the U.S., and we have a very high unemployment rate in France.
How come with the recipe for... Well, maybe we have a better president than you do.
If there was ever a Trump Thug Life moment, that was it.
Well done, President Trump.
This cigar, by the way, tastes pretty good.
I'm not a cigar smoker.
Who gave us this?
This was Troy?
The Troy cigar?
Thank you, Troy.
A little cigar in my mouth.
A piece of cigar.
But it does taste good.
That's what I love about this guy.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
Maybe we just have a better president.
This is just classic Trump all the time.
This is what I think.
I can't speak for every voter in America, obviously, unlike Malcolm Nance while we were in the truck with him coming back from Politicon, that crazy leftist who has these Trump conspiracy theories, who insisted to me in policy he could speak for every single black voter in the country.
But my guess is the appeal of Trump is that he doesn't talk in focus group tested words.
Notice the tie-in.
Like public option.
He just tells you what he's thinking and you can make, you can formulate opinions on your own.
He's not lying to you.
Public option.
It's Medicare for all.
It's a takeover.
All right, without further ado, I just want to get to this quickly.
We don't take all our segments on the show.
We may one day.
We are instituting some new features coming up soon, by the way.
I don't want to say too much because we're still working on it, but with the new studio, we have some more capabilities, so stay tuned for some big news ahead.
I kind of teased it earlier in the year, too.
Getting back to the beginning of the show, when I talked about Al Sharpton and the tax revenue going up after the Trump tax cuts, and how liberals don't argue apples to apples.
They say they're arguing apples to apples, and then they produce a grape or a banana.
They just don't know what they're talking about.
So I was hosting for Mark Levin a while ago, and a woman called in, and she was trying to make the same argument Al Sharpton was, and that Elizabeth Warren is, that the wealthy should pay more, despite not knowing what the wealthy actually pay.
They just don't know anything.
So during this caller segment, listen to how it starts.
She starts like raving and ranting about how the rich don't pay enough.
And I ask her a pretty basic question because she says she has no political representation.
I'll play it in two parts, but this is definitely worth your time.
Check out part one.
Kathy from New York City, New York.
How are you tonight?
You're on with Dan Bongio.
Great.
I want to say, sir, That the rich in this country should pay 100% of the taxes, because the rich have 100% of the representation.
And the American colonists fought the Revolutionary War to end taxation without representation, which is what we have right now in 2018.
Okay, um... Representation with no representation!
Every single American knows!
Kathy, are you wealthy?
Only the rich have any representation in this government.
Okay, uh, Kathy, are you rich?
Hell no.
You're not.
So you don't have a congressional representative?
Kathy, let me ask you a question.
What congressional district do you reside in?
My congressional representative... What's the district?
Who she cares about is Charles's brother.
What's the number?
What district are you residing in?
I do believe it's Charles Koch.
Okay.
Kathy, you don't even, let me get this straight.
You want the rich to pay 100% of the taxes.
You're making the claim that you have no representation.
You simultaneously do not even know the number of the congressional district you live in and you're expecting us to take you seriously.
Is that where we are with this?
I know my district.
I'll give you a second, Kathy.
Well, I rarely do this on the air because I'm up against the break here, but I'll give you a second to Google it.
Tell us who your representative is and what the district is.
Go ahead.
Do your thing.
Maybe we'll play the Jeopardy sound.
You don't know, do you?
You have no idea.
Are you kidding me?
You think I don't know?
Who doesn't represent me in Washington?
Who is it?
Exactly.
Who doesn't represent me in Washington?
Kathy, who is your representative?
Simple question.
I had totally forgotten about that, Jim.
We have part two to this, right?
I had Joe, producer Joe, Found that.
And he, cause we were talking about the rich and tax rates.
So just to be clear, Kathy calls in, wants the rich to pay more because she says they earn a hundred percent of the money and she has no political representation.
While she simultaneously doesn't even know the number of the congressional district she's in or the name of the representative.
She says it's Charles Koch of the Koch brothers.
Uh, pretty sure he wasn't a Congressman.
This continued for about another minute, but I promise you again, the crescendo is worth the wait.
Check this out.
What's the congressional district number you live in?
I love Rich.
Rich, you are the greatest producer ever.
Kathy, we got the Jeopardy sounder in the background.
Have you figured out yet who your congressional representative is?
Go!
Come on!
Liberals are hoping, they're praying you come through in the clutch.
You're making a strong argument here that the rich should pay 100% of the taxes.
We're asking a basic question.
Oh, you think I don't know, sir?
You think I don't know?
No, I'm just asking, who is it?
You know exactly.
Just make up a name.
Here, I'll make up.
For the liberals out there, Cathy's congressman is Joey Bagadonas.
Representative Bagadonas.
Cat, is that it?
Is it Bagadonas?
And that is the truth.
The rich is the only people they represent.
Kathy, is this a prank call?
Are you for real?
Seriously, are you a conservative quietly calling conservative shows to act like a liberal who has lost it to make people go out and vote for conservatives?
Is this a joke?
I'm serious.
Is this a prank call?
When billionaires are paying nothing in taxes, you think we should be paying anything?
Rich, this is the greatest phone call ever.
This is the g- Can you please send me the tape of this?
This may be the- I have to put this- This is the greatest phone call- Billionaires pay enough!
Okay, Kathy, because I got 20 seconds.
One more shot.
Come through for the libs all across the country.
Who's your congressional representative in what district?
Come on!
Here you go!
Let's hear it.
Revolutionary War 2.0!
And then producer, Mr. Producer, Fred Rich, who of course has been with Mark forever, just in one of the finest radio quickie turnarounds ever, finds the Jeopardy sounder and plays it in the background as Kathy.
She couldn't even Google it.
Just Google it.
Go to who is my representative.
It comes up in two seconds.
She couldn't even figure that out.
Again, making my point that I started off the show with, that you can't argue an apples-to-apples comparison if the liberals are producing plums, grape, bananas, oranges, and everything but an apple.
They just don't know what they're talking about.
But you do.
Thanks for all your support, ladies and gentlemen.
We had another epic week.
Our show has grown dramatically this week.
Dramatically.
Like a lot.
Like a real lot.
Thanks to you.
Thank you to everyone who hunted down that Al Sharpton clip.
I really appreciate it.
You all are great.
Please subscribe to the YouTube show, youtube.com slash Bongino on the audio podcast at Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, iHeart, SoundCloud.
The subscriptions are all free.
They help us move up the charts and they help other people Uh, find us.
So that's really helpful.
Thanks folks for a great week.
I really appreciate it.
And please don't forget to pick up a copy of my new book, Exonerated.
