In this episode, I address the media panic breaking out over the ongoing investigation into the Spygate scandal. The NY Times wrote a piece recently which highlights the deep-state panic. I also decimate the latest liberal talking points about your healthcare. News Picks:An interesting perspective on the current situation between the Syrians, the Kurds, and the Turks that’s worth a quick read.
Here’s why the Democrats are refusing to tell the truth about raising your taxes.
Politics is getting really ugly. Voting may not save us anymore.
The rise of young, black conservatives.
Crazed liberal confronts Rand Paul in California, and it’s all on tape.
Crazy California politicians screwed it up again with this new law.
California is losing their grip on economic reality.
More on the bogus liberal study suggesting income inequality is getting worse.
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.
Hi, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe Armacost.
How are you today on this fine Monday?
Well, it certainly is a fine Monday, Dan.
I'm doing well and glad to be here, brother.
Glad to be here.
How you doing, babe?
Very, again, calm and sedate Joe Armacost on a Monday.
I'm doing good.
Had a great weekend.
Was up in Maryland.
Thanks for all the hospitality up there.
Gave a speech up there.
They gave me a beautiful Maryland flag.
I think that one of the more beautiful flags in the Union in a box.
I'll show you it tomorrow.
It was great.
But thanks for all the hospitality up there.
It's good to see some old friends.
Some interesting things.
Guy I ran against for Congress.
Francis Rooney has come out against Donald Trump on this impeachment thing, which I think is disastrous.
He's apparently not running for office again.
So, you know, I've been getting a million different emails this weekend about all kinds of different things.
So it's been hectic.
Folks, I've got a really loaded lineup for you today.
As always, it's a busy news weekend.
I have some serious debunking to do, which is important because they keep propagating these myths, Elizabeth Warren, AOC, and others, and they're being used and recycled by a compliant, bootlicking, sycophantic mainstream media.
I got to give you the ammo to move forward with that.
So I got that.
I got some Just ridiculous AOC video.
Another video, Rand Paul being confronted in public again.
Joe's like, gosh, this guy, man, can this guy catch a break?
Poor Rand Paul.
Every time he goes out, some lunatic confronts this guy.
Not exactly what I said, though.
Yeah, not exactly, almost.
Close.
It was me paraphrasing and adding in just about every word of it.
But then I also have a break in the crossfire hurricane Spygate case, which I promise you is going to wrinkle your feathers here.
It's a good one.
All right, today's show, ladies and gentlemen, brought to you by our friends at WaxRX.
Folks, WaxRX, here's the deal.
I had a problem.
I have to wear these IFBs all the time, these fancy lingo for earpieces.
I had to do it in my last job as well, and I had earwax buildup, and I couldn't hear anything.
Well, that's an issue, because you're not supposed to stick those cotton swabs in your ears.
It's dangerous.
It even says on the back of those boxes, do not stick in the inner ears for your outer ear.
WaxRx has been a sponsor for almost two years, and because of our support, Walgreens took notice and now carries this terrific product to get rid of your wax buildup.
Listen, it's not the sexiest product in the world, but as I told you, I had issues with your wax buildup in the past, and you don't even know you're not hearing anything.
You know why?
Because you're not hearing it!
That's why!
Huh?
When your ears aren't clean, they get uncomfortable.
They itch.
They're painful.
They get plugged up.
Makes it harder to hear.
Many people use these cotton swabs or cheap drugstore remedies.
No good.
It can even be dangerous to do that.
Try the doctor-developed WaxRx earwash system.
It's just like the one doctors use in their office.
Save money, save a trip, save a co-pay.
It's just better.
Try the WaxRx system by typing in gowaxrx.com.
That's GO.
Like G.O.
WaxRx.com.
Go WaxRx.com.
Use offer code DAN at checkout for free shipping or visit your local Walgreens.
Don't wait.
You have no idea what you might be missing because of Interior Wax.
Go WaxRx.com.
Go WaxRx.com.
Offer code DAN.
All right, Joe, let's go!
All right, number one, and as always, when I show you this video of Rand Paul being accosted by a couple of lunatics, I do it for a reason.
It's not for shock value.
There always has to be a point, or I promise you on this show I won't waste your time on just blind, empty rants.
I wanted to get to a deeper point.
But to do it, sometimes video and audio helps.
So, watch this.
If you're watching on our YouTube account, youtube.com slash Bongino.
If you're listening on audio, you can hear what's going on.
These are two people.
This is actually in California.
But these two people decide.
Rand Paul, he's there with Sergio Gore.
Hat tip, Sergio, for the video.
Who's one of his staffers.
Disclosure, I know.
Not that it's relevant, but whatever.
I know them both.
Uh, and they're sitting there in what looks like some kind of a, I don't know, deli?
Diner?
I don't know what it is.
They're eating.
A little restaurant?
Yeah, yeah, whatever.
Yeah, exactly.
And these two people come up, this is in California, and they're from New York, and the lady is just furious that Rand Paul Joe had the temerity to go out in public and show his face.
So watch and listen to this quickly, and we come back.
I want to make a bigger point about what's going on right now, because folks, this country, we are in legitimate, real trouble.
The Republican The Republic is collapsing right now because of people like this who simply can't control themselves.
Check this out.
You're not being rude.
I'm not being rude.
He's a public official.
I have a right to speak to him.
No, no, no.
You just ran into two people from New York, kiddo, and we're not putting up with your Republican bulls**t!
All I'm saying is that while you and I possibly, probably don't have much in common politically, we are Americans.
Folks, listen, I'm going to be serious here because I can make fun of this lady all I want.
She looks ridiculous.
I don't know if she's in her 60s or older.
I'm not sure.
But it's her husband there who seems a little calmer.
And listen, by all means, publicly elected officials, if you have something to say and you're not breaking any laws and you know, and you could say it with some sense of respect.
I mean, I have no desire to like run up and confront the Democrat angrily and Yeah, I mean, why?
One, you're not getting a point across and they just zone you out anyway.
You get what I'm saying?
Like, if I wanted to confront AOC in public, I'm certainly not going to start screaming at her.
We're not putting up with your bull... Yeah!
She flips Sergio the finger, this woman.
I mean, how angry do you have to be?
We're from New York, kiddo!
Listen, I'm from New York.
Like, get over yourself, okay?
New York's a great place.
I loved it.
I went outside of their horrible politicians.
But relax.
Like, it doesn't imbue you with Justice League-like Aquaman, Superman powers.
We're from- You ran into two New Yorkers, kiddo!
Great!
Thank you!
Like, who cares?
They got that New York x-ray vision, Joe.
It's like a power man and iron fist.
They've got special martial arts powers, and they've got skin you can't penetrate.
I mean, it's so goofy.
She looks ridiculous.
Now, a couple of takeaways on this.
Number one, if this happens to you, and I've instructed various people around me, follow me around, if this ever happens to video them, make these people famous right away.
The best thing we can do to control the uncontrollable rage of the left is to show America what the left really looks like.
I'm dead serious.
If, God forbid, this happens to you, and you meet an uncontrolled, out-of-control, rage-filled, lunatic leftist who's flipping you a finger like, I mean, I don't even want to do it because it's family-friendly, but this is, we're trying to keep it that way.
This lady is just completely out of control.
Get them on tape and blast it over right away.
I'm more than happy to put them on the show.
Show America what we're really dealing with.
Yeah.
But on a very, right Joe?
Yeah.
But on a very serious note, folks, I'm anxious and I mean that.
I said this to Paul, I've said it to Joe, I've said it to anyone who will listen.
I'm anxious, a little nervous about what's going to happen if Trump loses.
And candidly, I'm even more anxious and nervous about what's going to happen if Trump wins.
Which is bro.
I know you are.
We've spoken at length about this folks.
These people are out of control.
These people are out of control.
They have no control over their emotions at all.
They have lost their mind.
You have a 60 year old, or, or I don't know how old she is woman in a restaurant.
Who starts flipping off a U.S.
Senator and screaming about how she's from New York, and we're not putting up with your... What B.S.
is that?
Liberty and freedom?
That kind of stuff?
That get in the way of your socialist agenda?
Folks, if Trump wins re-election, and I hope he does, I don't see this getting any better.
Now, that leads me to my second point, and an excellent piece, because like I said, I don't like shallow analysis on any of this stuff.
Mises.org has a really, really wonderful piece up.
I strongly encourage you to read.
It'll be in our show notes today at Bongino.com if you join our email list.
If you join our email list at Bongino.com, inside joke.
We will send you these articles.
It's not a bad one, I promise.
I'll explain another time.
But I will email you these articles every day.
This is a great one by Jeff Deist.
Politics drops its pretenses.
The core of the article, the highlight they're trying to get across, and I want to put a snippet from it up in a moment, is, folks, it's over.
Any air of, let's say, two spheres of thought, Republicans, Democrats, Any idea that there was some overlapping principles we both agreed in?
It's over.
It's gone.
Forget it.
It's done.
There is no middle ground with these people anymore.
They're lunatics.
It's getting hard to distinguish, and I'm not kidding, mainstream Democrat thought from communism You doubt me?
I mean, read Marx and listen to what Elizabeth Warren's saying on stage.
She's the lead candidate.
Read the Marx-Engels reader.
It's getting hard to distinguish the two.
It's like the Warren-Sanders reader.
Just read it.
It's getting hard to distinguish liberals from the Antifa crowd.
This aggressive, violent, at times, confrontation with people in public as a means to intimidate them.
Why else would you scream at someone?
Because I'm trying to get my ideas across.
Right.
Like, screaming this is BS.
Really?
Right.
The pretense here that there's a common ground and that, as he says in the piece, and I'll get to this other part in a second because this is important, that voting is going to solve this.
Sadly, unfortunately, tragically, I think it's over.
It's a shame, folks.
I never thought in my lifetime we'd be at this point.
No.
Where we're not dealing with radical fringes on any side of a political movement.
We're dealing with mainstream Democrat thought and thinkers who have now completely folded and are all in with a destructive What has been deadly ideology throughout human history and their people on the front line are so out of control in an effort to take over the government and instill this socialist system that they confront violently and aggressively at times political leaders out in public and they're proud of themselves.
Now there's a solution for this and that's why I brought this up.
Inside the piece, this is something we've spoken about at length for all of my older listeners.
I don't mean older chronologically in age.
I mean, people have been around for a long time.
If you don't understand, or if you've ever heard of this term, you'll get it now because it's important.
From the Mises.org piece, this is at the end.
Well, what's the solution?
Quote, and clearly the best hope for America's survival will come through an aggressive form of federalism or subsidiarity.
One that dramatically reduces the winner-take-all stakes of national elections.
But mass democracy in a country as large as America is a recipe for strife, bitterness, endless division, and much worse.
Brilliant.
And he's right.
What is subsidiarity?
Ladies and gentlemen, it is the idea that management, management should happen, whether it's of our economy, our local streets, our local law enforcement, management should happen at the smallest level of accountability possible.
That's the answer here, ladies and gentlemen.
The reason why this woman is so out of control, and one of men, I mean, gosh, we could play these videos all day, is because this national election of Donald Trump, she sees it as impacting her life so dramatically.
And folks, vice versa, although very few of us are as out of control as this woman, We felt the same way about Obama, justifiably so.
We elected this guy, he hiked our healthcare premiums, he put some of us out of business, hiked our taxes.
The election of Barack Obama had a direct, personal, make-it-bleed, skin-I-can-feel-it impact on your life.
The Democrats feel the same way about Trump.
Well, what's the solution?
Let's get the level of political management away from the national level and back to the local level.
Folks, the federal government, quite simply stated, Occam's razor, keep it simple, stupid, right?
The federal government is too much power.
Let's leave this stuff up to local politicians at best at the county or state level.
The federal government was never intended by the founding fathers to weave its way and snake its way into every decision in your life.
That was not the point.
Now, why does subsidiarity matter?
Shrinking, shrinking, shrinking, shrinking, shrinking management at the local level.
Because folks, two things.
At the national level.
Folks, there's no accountability anymore.
There's none.
There's zero accountability.
The federal level is so big.
330 million people.
That politicians who can just get elected in their little districts over there have no accountability to the national consensus at all.
The Constitution's not limiting anyone.
We have liberal judges on the bench who've thrown it out in the garbage.
There is no accountability whatsoever.
You have the national media, which just ignores facts in favor of fiction, gaslighting, and false narratives.
There is no accountability.
You doubt me?
Obama led one of the worst economic recoveries in American history, the worst in post-World War II American history, and got re-elected handily!
Because a number of people were gaslit by the media in a national election that, accountability number one goes out the window, but number two, your vote doesn't matter!
Folks, I'm sorry to tell you that, but in a national election, it is statistically, you gotta get out and vote.
I'm not suggesting you don't vote.
Because it's an odd collective phenomenon, but your one single vote in a national election is not going to flip the election.
I shouldn't say your vote doesn't, that's a bad line.
I don't mean it that way.
I mean, your vote, the chances of it flipping a national election are nil.
Your vote, however, in a local election is very important.
Gosh, I've seen it over and over.
There it is.
Yeah.
I mean, I lost my congressional race by one point.
I mean, it was a sliver.
If a couple people in a community showed up and got their friends, we would have won that thing.
Yeah.
It's like if you have a hundred votes.
What do you mean national?
I'm sorry.
You have a hundred votes and one of them's won one hundredth of the vote.
You got 10 votes in town and one vote there.
It's a bigger vote, much bigger vote.
It means more.
I didn't mean to walk on you, dude.
No, you're right, and you actually helped me a lot.
I have it down as accountability and your vote matters, but they're the same thing when you think about it.
Because when you're voting in your condo board and there's 25 people voting, your vote means a lot.
They're going to kiss your butt to make sure that your vote goes their way because your one vote could flip the condo board's election.
You shrunk the management down to the condo board.
If you're one of 150 million, 200 million people voting, folks, your vote's not going to flip anything.
They don't need you as badly.
Subsidiarity has always been the answer.
Let California do what California wants to do and let people move.
Let Florida, where I live, do what Florida wants to do.
Let Maryland, where Joe is, do what they want to do.
But don't have Maryland affect Florida and Florida affect California.
The only person that can do that is a person in the federal government who can gather enough votes to impact states across state lines.
This is where we're running into this issue.
Now, you doubt me?
Look at California.
We had this story about- let them- you want to destroy and burn their economy to the ground?
There's this Hollywood Reporter story about another stupid California law that absolutely imploded on them.
Blew up in their faces.
Hollywood Reporter, by the way, a liberal far-left magazine there.
Everybody's freaking out.
Quote, freelance writers scramble to make sense of new California law.
But what does that mean?
What does this have to do with any of this?
Folks, if subsidiarity was in effect, and local lawmakers were deciding the things that matter to you, and as Joe said, one out of, let's say, a thousand people vote in a local election, your vote matters a lot, they would listen to you.
Hey, I don't like your healthcare stuff.
I don't like your tax stuff.
I don't like this new law.
The problem is, with the federal government, even with California, these places are so big and such behemoths, it's very hard to implement public policy unless there's a massive outcry.
So what did California do?
They instituted this stupid law.
This is just a perfect example of how you have to contain the liberal contagion.
Because it's just so... California's become an incubator for stupid policies.
California, due to the unions and union influence, because they have a lot of members, they can actually move an election in California.
Unions push California to pass this law.
What is it called?
AB5 that goes into effect January 1st.
What does it do?
It reclassifies Uber and Lyft drivers From independent contractors to employees, which is a total scam.
And we talked about this a few weeks back.
That's why I'm bringing it up again.
You may say, what the heck does this have to do with Hollywood reporter and freelance writers?
Well, ladies and gentlemen, Precisely because bureaucrats in Sacramento have no idea the ramifications of a law, as Hayek would call it, you know, the fatal conceit, the knowledge problem.
They're just not smart enough to figure the ramifications of a law they haven't yet instituted.
They didn't really think this thing through about reclassifying people, Joe, as employees from independent contractors.
So what happened?
This is from the piece.
Freelance writers, Joe, who perform the same work as staff writers, just less frequently, the odds are that any argument they present about how their roles are unique won't pass muster.
And therefore, the 35 submission cap per year will apply if they want to remain as an independent contractor.
I'll explain this, don't worry.
Work that counts as a submission can include a published individual story, a series, or coverage of a single event, Gonzalez tells The Hollywood Reporter.
What happened?
Well, these idiots in California, instituted this uber lift law trying to get people reclassified employees so unions could unionize them and take union dues and freelance writers Joe got sucked up in this thing and in order to give them kind of a carve out because they don't want to be classified as full-time employees freelance writers because the company then won't hire them that's why they hire them as freelancers they have a bunch of people they can't have 2,000 different employees occasionally submitting stuff
They said, don't worry.
California said, don't worry, freelance writers.
We got this.
We got you.
As long as you don't submit more than 35 pieces a year to any single outlet, we won't reclassify you as employee.
Some people are submitting that in a week, in a series they do once in a while.
So all these freelance writers are freaking out because what's happening, Joe?
Again, the revenge of unintended consequences by liberal bureaucrats who were not smart enough to figure out the ramifications of what they did.
These companies that hire them are now saying, I'm sorry, we can't hire you because if we hire you and you submit a lot, we're going to have to hire you as an employee.
And we don't, we just don't have the money for that.
So now these freelance writers are finding their jobs drying up again.
Don't let common sense get in the way of your genius far left plans.
You want California to screw up California?
Let them do it.
And it's good because the Washington Times points this out in a piece today too, which I'll include in the show notes.
Here's another one.
California bucks Trump, pushes boundaries of liberal policy.
We can assert ourselves at scale.
Catherine Renne, Associated Press, is in the Washington Times today.
In other words, Newsom, the liberal far-left radical governor of California,
saying, "California, we have scale."
In other words, we have a lot of people.
Economies of scale.
We're going to do what we want in the Trump administration because we can leverage that.
And we're just going to go against what you do.
Fine!
Do your thing!
Go ahead!
Do your thing!
Just leave us the hell alone and let Florida and Texas and Wyoming and North Dakota and Tennessee do the same damn thing.
But that's not the way this crazed federal government deep swamp group of maniacs wants it.
What they want to do is regulate the snot and impose laws on conservative states that believe in freedom while letting liberal states like California run amok.
It's insane.
Give us an out.
Please let us get away from these people.
All right, I want to move on.
I want to get to this story because this is really important.
The New York Times, Fusion Kendallanian at NBC.
Ladies and gentlemen, they are freaking out about the Durham investigation into Spygate.
They're freaking out.
We had a break this week at a New York Times hat tip 279.
Nice work on this one.
Before we get to that, our second sponsor.
You know what?
I didn't even do the book tweet.
I'll do that after the thing.
It's a pretty cool thing coming up.
Don't go anywhere.
I got a nice one for you.
Lending Club!
Lending Club.
We love the club.
Ladies and gentlemen, go to LendingClub.com slash Dan.
This is the best place out there.
For decades, credit cards have been telling us, buy now, pay later.
With interest.
Despite your best intentions, you know it.
Your interest gets out of control fast.
Sooner or later, you're only paying interest.
You don't need that.
Folks, Lending Club can consolidate your debt, pay off your credit cards with one fixed monthly payment.
Who's better than you?
Since 2007, Lending Club has helped millions, not thousands, millions of people regain control of their finances with affordable fixed rate personal loans.
No trips to a bank.
Come on.
No high interest credit cards.
Just go to LendingClub.com slash Dan.
LendingClub.com slash Dan.
Tell them about yourself, how much you want to borrow, pick the terms that are right for you.
And if you're approved, your loan is automatically deposited in your bank account in as little as a few days.
LendingClub is the number one peer-to-peer lending platform with over 35 billion in loans issued.
Go to LendingClub.com slash Dan.
Don't wait, do it today.
Check your rate in just minutes and borrow up to $40,000.
That's LendingClub.com slash Dan.
LendingClub.com slash Dan.
Check it out.
Super easy to use.
Very effective.
All loans made by WebBank.
Member FDIC.
Equal housing lender.
Check them out.
All right.
Here's the meat and potatoes of the show.
I'm sorry, but I just want to get to that one first because it's an important point about what's coming up in 2020.
Before we get to that, I want to just thank the President of the United States.
I mean it.
He's a very nice guy.
He's been very kind to me.
He tweeted out my book this morning.
I'll show you his tweet.
So, uh, deeply appreciated, uh, President Trump.
He recommended my new book, Exonerated.
So thank you very much.
I really appreciate it.
Okay, moving on to the meat and potatoes of the show.
Dorham Bar, the Dorham Bar investigation.
John Dorham, the United States Attorney, looking at the Spygate.
Joe, has everybody in a panic, freaking out.
Antenna are going up everywhere.
And the media people who've been involved in Spygate, by the way, who promoted it, they are in a panic.
People like Fusion 10, the New York Times.
Maggie Haberman, all of them.
They're all in a panic because they realize many of them, their roles in Spygate and propagating the biggest hoax in American history are going to come out, and their journalistic bona fides, as if they had any left, are going to go out the window.
So, New York Times publishes a piece just a few days ago.
About this Durham investigation, and here's what they're doing.
They're trying to, like, scare people off.
Review of Russia inquiry grows as FBI witnesses are questioned.
The review led by prosecutor Durham is focused on former investigators who are frequent targets
of President Trump, Adam Goldman, William Rushbaum. There's an interesting line in here.
I mentioned fusion, Ken Delaney and NBC too, because Ken Delaney wrote a piece at NBC.
Like there's no basis for this investigation.
We're not sure what it is.
He's quoting John Brennan, which is there's no basis.
That's hysterical.
There's no basis for this investigation.
They started an investigation on a hoax dossier.
You knuckleheads and you're Johnny B's in a world of trouble too.
All right.
From the piece again, hat tip two, seven, niner.
Nice, nice catch.
This is something I've been discussing with him for a long time, my source.
Quote, "Mr. Durham has also questioned why Mr. Stroke, Peter Stroke, folks,
the lead investigator, opened the case against Trump on a weekend,
again, suggesting that the step might have been out of the ordinary.
Former official said that Mr. McCabe had directed Mr. Stroke to travel immediately to London
to interview the two Australian diplomats who had learned about the Russians' offer to help
the Trump campaign, and that he was trying to ensure he took the necessary administrative steps
Wow.
Why on Sunday?
Why on Sunday, July 31st?
Let me get this straight.
Just to be clear.
The most significant, impactful counterintelligence investigation involving a politician in modern, possibly in all of US history.
You're getting ready to open it, get a case file.
That's how it used to work when I was a federal agent.
You just get a case file, a case number, and you literally open up a case.
It would be back then in the day, it was just a file folder.
You'd pop some holes in it, put some papers in there, you get a case number and you'd be good to go.
So let's just to be clear, Joe.
Yeah.
You go on a Sunday and you wait.
When there's nobody else around?
Nobody's around!
Open up a case against Donald Trump and his team.
Now, what's fascinating about this, ladies and gentlemen, is the FBI has a diag, an investigative guidebook.
And the investigative guidebook, as we cover extensively in my first book, Spygate, by the way, it's laid out, has a series of steps that must, must, must, not may, must be followed To move from an inquiry to a preliminary investigation.
To a full investigation.
And those steps require requisite evidence and an accumulation of verified facts.
Why, Joe?
I mean, it's as obvious as the audience on Budsman.
So that the FBI is just not opening cases on randos, on random people because they don't like them.
Yes.
There is a step, a series of guidelines in their own investigative operations guideline manual.
About the information needed to move from step to step.
Now folks, that doesn't appear to be what happened here.
They moved into this full open investigation on a Sunday without any corroborated facts whatsoever.
Why would they do that on a Sunday?
Well, let's check out what Lisa Page had to say, FBI lawyer who worked directly for Andy McCabe, when questioned by Trey Gowdy under oath.
Gowdy's asking her a question precisely about this.
Well, it's kind of strange you went in on a Sunday with nobody around, right?
Weird, isn't it?
Hmm.
Here's Page's answer.
Right, right.
Well, so that's a different sort of context, which I'm happy to explain.
Here's the quote.
The one thing I'll note, I just think it might maybe alleviate some concern.
The reason that Pete, talking about stroke, opened it is that it was Sunday.
So the reason he's both the originator and like the approver is because it was a Sunday.
And so there's nobody around.
That's her quote.
If you're watching on the YouTube, youtube.com slash Bongino, please subscribe.
You can see it.
We circled it for you.
So they pop in there.
They don't... Just to make... I want to make this crystal clear.
This is an important... This is what has the New York Times freaking out right now.
And they're trying to run cover.
Well, they just want to administratively open everything before they went to Australia.
Really?
What?
Had you already moved to a full investigation despite meeting any of the evidentiary steps to do so?
Folks, it's like investigating a bank robbery with no bank actually calling in a robbery.
Forget it.
You shouldn't even be out of the inquiry stage.
Forget about preliminary.
It's a full investigative work.
They had nothing.
They waited for nobody to be around on a Sunday and they moved in and opened up a case file behind everybody's back.
And by behind everybody's back, I don't mean the senior leadership of the FBI who clearly knew what was going on.
I think they were doing this to avoid the scrutiny of someone maybe in DOJ or elsewhere asking them who may have been, may, we may have had some good guys in this, not many.
Hey guys, we're moving kind of fast here.
Is this dossier even true?
I mean, is our source legitimate?
Where did he get this from?
Have we vetted the source?
Is it secondary, tertiary information?
Was any of that legwork done?
The answer is no.
The answer is heck no.
None of the legwork was done.
And Paige, I believe, inadvertently admits to it.
Well, Pete opened up the case on Sunday because nobody was around.
You think a case on the soon-to-be President of the United States who was a candidate at the time is a little more important, maybe deserves a little bit more scrutiny?
Nah, nah, no big deal.
Let's open it on a Sunday when everybody's home watching Ren and Stimpy episodes.
That's a great idea.
Well done, guys.
Nothing unusual here, Fusion, Ken Delaney and NBC.
Nothing unusual.
Don't you worry.
You go back into your media cocoon, continuing gaslighting the country.
Just ridiculous.
These people are so outrageously dopey.
I'm mortified I have to cost you axon dendrite connections by speaking about them.
It seems weird a little bit.
Weird a little bit.
Doesn't it, Pee-wee?
I know.
All right, moving on.
Scandinavian bootlicking continues.
These Democrats, they just worship the Scandinavians.
I'm not even kidding.
Listen, I love Denmark, Norway, Sweden, gorgeous places.
They are Sven.
They're beautiful.
I'm not even kidding.
Like I'm not messing with you.
They are amazing places full of super friendly people that would love to have you.
They're great.
Now they have big nanny state governments and a different style of government that works in those relatively homogenous countries.
For them, they voted into office, although they've been shrinking their governments a little bit, especially in Sweden and elsewhere, because their move towards socialism didn't work and started collapsing what was once a vibrant economy in Sweden.
But the Scandinavia worship continues on the left, especially amongst people who I'll get to in a little bit.
AOC, I've got some video of AOC just humiliating herself again in another epic facepalm.
But they love these countries, they idolize them.
Bernie Sanders should run to be the prime minister in one of these Scandinavian countries.
So Matt Palumbo is nice enough to put together a piece basically knocking Elizabeth Warren, who's another Scandinavian worshiper, Talking about middle class tax rates.
It's debunked this.
It's up on our website now.
Check it out again in the show notes today, too.
Here's why Democrats refuse to tell the truth about middle class taxes.
Now, I'm going to get to this in a minute, too, in a more extensive analysis of Elizabeth Warren and her impact.
This is the portion of the show where I have to give you the ammo for 2020 because Democrats and the media will not do any of that.
They will lie to you.
Elizabeth Warren is proposing a massive government takeover of the health care system that is going to devastate you, your family, your health care, your tax bill.
But she's not telling you the truth about the middle-class tax load.
She keeps comparing it to these Scandinavian countries while leaving out some pertinent facts, which Matt Palumbo was kind enough to put up for us inside the piece.
Let's look at the tax load in Scandinavian countries, Joe, if you don't mind.
Yeah.
And even if you do mind, we'll do it anyway.
The large welfare states of Scandinavia are not without their costs, quoting from Matt's piece.
In 2007, all three countries, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway, had levels of taxation exceeding half of every dollar earned.
How do you like those tomatoes?
Taxes as a percent of GDP.
Here we go.
Sweden.
50.7%.
Half the economy consumed by taxes in Sweden.
You may say, wow, that sounds bad.
Denmark must be better.
Uh, it depends on what your definition of better is.
53.5% of GDP consumed in Denmark.
More than half of your money goes to the government in Denmark.
You may say, clearly Norway's the leader in this pack.
Oh, they are, but for all the wrong reasons.
54.7% of your GDP is consumed in Norway.
You earn it, you produce it.
Norway, Denmark, and Sweden, eat it up.
Now, if that's your bag of donuts and you like paying half of every dollar over to taxes, That's your thing.
You want to be controlled and you prefer the government to run your life.
I want the government out of my life.
Now you may say, well, those tax rates, Joe, in Scandinavia, they don't really affect the little guy.
Those tax rates are only for the rich people.
Yeah.
Really?
That was nice enough to analyze that question, too.
You'd actually be wrong.
From his piece, quote, high income taxes also kick in at far lower levels in Scandinavia.
In Sweden, for instance, the lowest tax burden applied to the first kronor of income, that's their national currency.
Yeah.
Is 32%.
Very, very hard.
Think about this.
That's awful.
Isn't it in the United States and Matt includes us in the piece, but I'll just throw it out there for you.
In order for that kind of a tax burden of 32% follow me.
And if this doesn't make sense, Joe interrupt me.
Okay.
In order for a 32% tax rate that hits the lowest income earners in Sweden to hit you in the United States, You have to earn about $500,000 a year.
Okay.
Or eight times the national median income.
Yeah, makes sense.
You get it?
Yeah.
In Sweden, that tax rate, boom!
Yeah, man.
Right in the face, gut shot.
On your, nearly your first dollar of income.
So, Folks, please don't buy the liberal nonsense.
Well, you know, the taxes are high in Sweden and Denmark and Norway, but they don't necessarily hit the middle class.
No, you're right.
They hit the poor and the middle class.
The tax rate you'd have to pay.
To get the Swedish and the Danes and in Norway and Scandinavian levels of social services will not only impact taxes for middle class folks, but poor people too!
You have to pay eight times the national income, earn eight times the national income to get hit with the same tax rate you'd be hitting Sweden the minute you get off the boat if you decide to go over there.
It's a lie.
They're just not telling you the truth, but they're really good at that.
They're experts at not telling the truth.
Read the piece by Palumbo on my website.
It's excellent.
It's definitely worth your time.
All right.
I want to get to this AOC thing because this is just infecting our political process.
It's just so pathetic.
I can't stand it.
Um, before I get to it though, final sponsor of the day, LawShield.
Ladies and gentlemen, please.
I'm asking you as a friend, if you are a carrier of a firearm for protection for yourself and your family, smart move.
Excuse me, that's a very good thing to do.
Do not carry naked.
I don't mean naked like going out without clothes.
I mean without the protection of U.S.
law shield.
I keep seeing these crazy stories about gun owners being referred for criminal prosecution for doing something simple like protecting themselves or their families.
Here's another that just happened.
A Texas woman was cleaning her home in the middle of the day.
This guy comes in with a gun, breaks in, she grabs her gun, she hides in a closet, but he found her.
When he opens the door to the closet, she fired one shot, center mass.
When the authorities arrived, he was pronounced dead at the scene.
You'd say, well, okay, good for her.
She defended herself, right?
But it's the last sentence in the story that caught our attention.
Quote.
The case will be referred to the district attorney's office to determine if any charges will be filed.
What?
Wait, what?
Every day, heroes like this woman defending herself were forced by actions of others to act in self-debate.
They did nothing wrong.
That other bad guy brought this on them.
And they're still dragged in our legal system.
Which is exactly why I'm a proud member of U.S.
Law Shield.
We love U.S.
Law Shield here.
Don't carry naked without these protections for less than $11 a month.
Think of all that nervous anxiety you can put aside.
You'll have access to immediate 24-7, 365 access to an attorney.
You won't pay a penny in attorney fees if this nightmare ever happens to you, God forbid.
You have my word.
You'll feel better knowing you have us law shield on your side.
If what happened to the lady in this store ever happens to you, they have a free $100 gift for any of my listeners who go to us law shield.com slash Dan right now to check them out.
No strings attached, get the peace of mind you deserve and your free $100 gift in the process.
Us law shield.com slash Dan us law shield.com slash Dan that's us law shield.com slash Dan.
Check them out today.
Okay.
AOC stuff.
I see it.
I know.
I know.
I get it.
I'm with you.
I feel the heart, the heart.
I'm pulling at the heartstrings.
I get it.
You're tired of this person with no business.
I'm going to try to be kind here because I, no business experience at all.
The business acumen of a six year old constantly lecturing America about Macro and microeconomics, finance, international business.
She knows nothing about any of this!
Nothing!
Zero!
Here's AOC at a Bernie rally, and she endorsed Bernie, which I told you was great for Joe Biden.
If you missed that last week, it's important.
Biden didn't want the progressive radical vote consolidated with Elizabeth Warren, which was happening.
Bernie was losing steam, folks.
So now AOC, Socialist AOC comes in and gives Bernie a lifeline, which is now, again, splitting that, is going to split that vote, which helps Biden.
This helps Biden out.
He's the happiest person out there.
Check this out, because remember, if the college consolidates behind Warren, Warren beats Biden.
You get what I'm saying?
Does that make sense?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
All the progressives have enough power.
If they're split in a plurality race, Biden has a chance to kind of slip through the back door.
Yeah.
I covered that last week, so no need to keep harping on that.
Check this out.
Here's AOC demonstrating her massive economic acumen here.
This is great.
Talking about how, you know, property, Joe, it's all of it.
Reminds me of that movie, The Dark Knight, when they start pillaging everybody's property.
Now it belongs to all of us.
Great!
Check this out.
and decided by working and all people in the United States of America. That is what...
I, you know, I say this with all sincerity. Sometimes I envy liberals. I do because
you never have to know anything.
The media never calls you out on your BS.
You can be violent and aggressive in public with people, and you're celebrated as a martyr and a hero.
There's never any accountability.
You have to have no grasp of basic facts at all, and you are lauded and celebrated and put on a pedestal as some kind of modern-day conqueror, like Napoleon Bonaparte or something.
This AOC doesn't know anything.
Do you realize how dumb what she just said is?
You want to live in a United States that's owned and operated by all the people?
Owned and operated.
So just to be clear, folks, because unlike AOC, as Thomas Sowell says all the time, conservatives, you know, what makes us different is we say and then what, right?
Yeah.
Okay, that sounds great.
Everybody say yeah!
Owned and operate!
Yeah!
Go AOC!
Everybody should own stuff, okay?
Have you thought and then what?
So, folks, you own a business, many of you.
Some small, some large.
We have great listeners.
How do you feel that your business now, a claim on your business and its proceeds, despite you doing the investing, grinding your fingernails down at work every day, maybe you own a restaurant.
Say you own whatever, Chipotle out there.
And you're busting your butt every day and you're sitting there watching everything and doing, you're busy, you're sweating, you're cutting a new, what do they have, that new steak thing there they have?
I just tried, what's that called?
Carne asada, yeah.
It was okay, it was a little dry the other day though.
Yeah?
Yeah, it was good.
One day and then the other day it was a little dry.
You're busting your butt all day and all of a sudden AOC's plan is for what?
People to come in and get an equity stake in your company who've never worked one day there and haven't put up an ounce of capital?
Folks, I'm not going to wear you out with a lot of time on this because it's so dumb.
It's almost... I put it out there to let you know again, to harp back to the beginning of the show.
Voting's not going to save us anymore.
We have two completely distinct visions of America that have no overlap whatsoever.
We now have mainstream Political thinkers, celebrated by the left, who are actually discussing things like the confiscation of private property and using flowery talk to disguise it.
We should all own it and operate it!
Like what?
Like Bain?
We need Dana Laschia for her Bain voice.
She has a far better Bain voice than I do.
Oh, fear comes later.
We'll take all of your property.
I was born in the night.
I mean, what kind of crap is this?
This has become accepted and celebrated.
Has anybody thought to ask her about that?
So everyone, how is that going to work?
See, we're all going to take it.
All right, let's move on to a more substantive piece.
But I put this out there as a warning.
Subsidiarity and shrinking management down to the local level is the only way forward.
There is nothing at the federal level red states and blue states have in common anymore.
Nothing.
Sad, but true.
Alright, let's check out this piece from the Wall Street Journal about Elizabeth Warren, who subscribes to this nonsense too because it's important.
By Lawrence Kotlikoff.
This is an excellent, excellent piece.
make three huge errors in denying the rich pay the government more.
Now by Lawrence Kotlikoff, this is an excellent, excellent piece.
I have been warning you about this study, this, uh, this Gabriel and
Zuckman, the GZ study that they've been talking about that the rich are getting
Yeah.
We covered it on Friday.
You may say, why are you bringing this up again?
Because it continues to become the focal point of Warren and Bernie Sanders' talking points on the trail.
Look at this new study!
We're seeing that the rich pay less than the poor.
Folks, it's idiocy.
It's not true.
It is factually incorrect.
Little background for those of you who missed last week's show.
This Zuckman study, They're trying to claim that the rich pay a lower tax rate than the poor.
Clear?
Period.
Full stop.
This was picked up by every liberal rag out there.
Look, the rich are getting over it.
It's false.
This study has been discredited 75 different ways from Sunday.
Now, this piece sums up nicely what three big faults of this study were.
This is great.
This was very well done.
Number one, Folks, it doesn't take into account net taxes, but gross taxes.
Quote, the flaw in their method is even more obvious when you consider that American tax laws incorporate benefit subsystems, and benefit laws incorporate tax subsystems.
The federal personal income tax, for instance, includes the earned income tax credit, a major transfer program.
Let me decipher that for you.
Problem number one.
Remember, their thesis here that Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have pounced on, Republicans pounced, The rich are paying a lesser tax rate than the poor.
Well, you have to inflate the poor's tax ratio to make that seem real, right?
Because I told you it's fake.
This is a fake study.
It's not real.
It's inauthentic.
So how did they inflate the tax rate the poor are paying to make it seem like the poor are getting screwed over while liberals are getting a pass?
Well, Joe, they measured gross, not net taxes.
In other words, if you're getting the earned income tax credit, which millions of people in this country get, that is a refund check from the government.
When you were getting essentially money back from the government on taxes you paid, Joe, do you think that's kind of important in factoring in your tax law?
In other words, if Joe pays $10,000 a year in taxes, right?
Yep.
And gets an EITC credit of $9,000.
Did Joe pay $10,000 in taxes?
No!
Joe paid a thousand in taxes because he got a $9,000 EITC.
Oh man. Folks, the gross tax is the dumbest, most juvenile way to measure this. But it's done that
way specifically to give you a false narrative that the poorest income tax load is higher.
What are you doing over there?
Messing with some stuff?
Sorry, me and Paula messing around with it.
We love the two studios, all kinds of gadgets.
That's the first way they do it.
The second, from the piece, the lifetime tax liability.
They don't take into account the lifetime tax liability.
They move it in an acute fashion.
Now, this gets a little complicated, but I promise you it'll make sense.
Folks, if you are invested in a bunch of equities and stocks, And you own those stocks.
It's important to understand that when you cash those stocks in, at some point you are going to have to pay tax.
So if you want to make it appear that the rich, who probably own, like, well, we know own, own more in stocks and in financial assets than people who are poor, that's what makes them rich, folks, right?
If you don't take into account when they cash them in they're gonna pay the taxes, it makes it look like they got over.
And it makes their tax burden seem lower.
Remember the goal of liberal lunatics.
Fake researchers and politicians who want to sell you on the rich are getting over on you.
They want to shrink the income tax rate of the rich, Joe, right?
Look, they're paying so little.
And they want to expand the income tax load of the poor.
I'm showing you through this piece exactly how they do it.
Here, let's put up how they describe it.
This is a little complicated, but it makes sense when you think about it.
Right.
So I'm sorry, it's not Gabriel and Zuckman.
I'm sorry, it's Saez and Zuckman.
It's the SZ study.
Forgive me for that.
Their second mistake is measuring progressivity on a one-year rather than a lifetime basis that ignores the fiscal system's double taxation.
Income earned, taxed, and saved this year will be subject to future taxation on interest, dividends, and capital gains.
This omission disproportionately understates taxes for the rich who save at a higher rate.
The current year focus also understates benefits paid to the poor since future benefits are a bigger share of their resources.
So you ignore the benefits to the poor and the EITC and others, money going back in the other direction to make it seem like you're losing in the tax fight.
And then on the richest end, you ignore the taxes they're going to pay when they cash in their stocks.
Keeping in mind, Joe, they've already paid taxes on the money they bought those stocks with.
What a bunch of frauds!
Shrink the tax load on the rich, expand the tax load on the poor, make it look like the rich are really getting over.
And don't forget last week what I went into too about unreported income.
How in the study they pretend unreported income is the same amongst all income classes.
It's not.
The rich don't hide income as a percentage of their income at the rate people who are paid in tips and wages and cash do.
They can't.
Number three.
Takeaway number three.
An important one though.
Folks, you gotta factor age in!
Quote, their third mistake in this ridiculous study, I put ridiculous in there, is failing to adjust for age.
Folks, the old have paid most of their lifetime taxes, which makes them now look like tax cheats, particularly those who saved out of previously highly taxed labor income.
With changing demographics, this problem will deeply confuse tax progressivity comparisons over time.
Folks, these infamous rich people that Elizabeth Warren, AOC, and Bernie Sanders, and these confused socialists are telling you are getting over, are really a group and a cohort of older folks who worked their whole lives, busted their butts, saved their money, and now have some assets to live on.
Well, they're not paying taxes on that money anymore.
They paid it their whole lives, you knuckleheads.
You have to adjust for age.
These evil rich people are a bunch of seniors who saved up their whole lives.
They didn't adjust for age.
They're evil rich.
They're coming for you.
It's your grandma!
It's Grandma Jones!
You want to take Grandma Jones' money?
Let me throw in one more, which I want Matt to do a debunk this piece on.
Matt Palumbo.
I sent it to him this weekend.
Here's a tweet, again, Hattip National Review for pointing me in the direction.
It's a tweet by a guy, excuse me if I'm saying your name wrong, sir, Wojakopchuk.
I'm not doing it intentionally.
I'm just terrible with names.
But an excellent analysis on Twitter.
He's at www.ojtekk.
He's talking about another scam they pulled.
He says, why does this matter about corporate taxes?
I'll read it and I'll explain it.
If the corporate tax is only on shareholders, its burden is concentrated at the top.
Changes in corporate tax revenue translate into changes at the top.
That's the trend in Saez Zuckman.
That's what drives 2018 after corporate tax cut.
I'll make it very simple for you.
Explain, please.
In the study, they did this little dipsy-doo, flip-a-roo trick nobody else does analyzing the tax structure and who pays taxes in the United States.
What's the trick?
They made it seem that the corporate tax, you know the tax Donald Trump and the Republicans in the Congress cut?
They made it seem that the corporate tax affects only, or primarily, stockholders.
In other words, people who are relatively wealthy, who hold more stock than people who are poor.
Right?
Right.
You tracking me?
Yeah, sure.
You may say, well, that doesn't make sense, Dan.
Because now you're making the other... I thought you said they were trying to shrink the percentage of taxes the rich pay to make it look like they don't pay anything.
That's right.
So the study's saying that the corporate tax falls on rich shareholders.
Then you're making the opposite point.
You're making the point that the rich are paying more and that the study was accurate.
No, no, no, no, no.
Oh, no.
There was a little dipsy-do here.
Keep in mind, nobody does that.
Why does nobody analyze corporate tax like that?
Because, ladies and gentlemen, the corporate tax falls largely on consumers and employees.
When the corporate tax goes up across the country, what do companies do?
They don't pay the tax.
No.
They just pass the prices on to consumers.
And consumers, the bulk of consumers, are in the middle class.
And poor people.
That's not the rich.
The consumers are in the middle class.
In other words, you pay more of the corporate tax.
You say, I still don't get it.
So you're saying the rich people bore more of the corporate tax.
Well, Trump cut the corporate tax.
Significantly.
So what they did is instead of analyzing the Trump tax cut in a way that would benefit The middle class and the poor who pay the corporate tax to increase prices, Joe.
They didn't think anybody would notice.
And they said, no, no, the corporate tax doesn't affect those middle class people because it got cut.
It only affects rich people.
And they got another tax cut.
Look at them.
Nice.
Nice trick.
Almost got us.
Okay.
Almost got us.
But our friend Wojtek Kopchak, I don't even know the guy, but he's very smart.
Great thread on there.
Figured this out quick.
He says, nobody does this.
Nobody.
They clearly did this to make it seem like the rich wear the burden of the corporate tax, which is not true.
They bear some burden, but the middle class bears most of it through increased prices.
They only did it to make Trump's tax cut look like they were giving a pass to the rich again.
This is a political study, folks.
It's a farce.
It's a stunt.
And now, between this show and last week's show, you have a thorough compendium of how false and fraudulent this study is.
And I guarantee you... You're not supposed to point.
You're supposed to use the blade hand.
I guarantee you pointing is rude.
You are going to hear more about this study as the election goes on.
You now have all the tools in your toolbox to thoroughly dismantle any liberal lunatic talking head trying to tell you this study's legit.
It's garbage.
Hot garbage.
All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in.
I really appreciate it.
Please pick up my new book.
We're in, I guess, what is it, week four?
We're still rocking and rolling on a lot of the lists.
It's called Exonerated.
Really thorough breakdown of the Mueller probe and what's happening in Ukraine as well.
I promise you'll like it.
The reviews have been great.
I appreciate your feedback on it.
Go check it out.
Amazon, Barnes and Noble, bookstores everywhere.
And please subscribe to my YouTube channel, youtube.com slash Bongino.
