The Democrat's Impeachment Story Collapses (Ep 1099)
In this episode I address the liberal media’s hypocritical attacks on Trump after the testimony of this military officer on the phony Ukraine scandal. I also address some explosive developments in the Nancy Pelosi faux impeachment. Finally, I discuss the disastrous Medicare for all plan and the real reasons behind the California wildfires.
News Picks:Text released of House resolution formalizing impeachment.
Vindman testimony alleges White House left details out of transcript.
This Fox News article addresses the “whistleblower’s” memo where he claims transcripts are “word for word.”
October jobs numbers surpassed expectations.
The liberal media somehow finds problems with the death of ISIS leader.
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.
If you're a Democrat in the Trump administration presidency right now, how do you wake up in the morning and look in the mirror knowing you complete total frauds every single day?
Some of you may have missed my blow up last night with Geraldo.
I will incorporate into today's show, which is absolutely loaded front to back.
Don't miss it.
Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
So Joe, how are you today?
Oh, daddy-o, I'm doing very well.
I'm glad to be here.
And I saw you with Geraldo.
I saw that.
Yeah, I know you did because you were talking about it before.
Yeah, it came out of nowhere because Geraldo shocked me again by making an outrageous statement on the Hannity Show last night.
I had to contradict.
So I'm going to get to that.
I want to cover developments in the impeachment thing.
You can't scrutinize anyone in the military from this point on if they say something against Trump.
Ever.
From the new rules by the media.
Whatever.
They made that one up yesterday.
I got that and I've got some serious debunking of liberal nonsense being used to basically alter your life, your finances, everything else.
Don't go anywhere.
Folks, today's show brought to you by our buddies at Stamps.com.
Stamps.com.
We use stamps.com in the Bongino household for our business.
We have to mail books, we have to mail documents, invoices, everything.
It would be a nightmare going to the post office every day, right Paula?
We would be lost without stamps.com.
When I talk about stamps.com, I always wonder who in the world still goes to the post office and why would you do that to yourself?
Why would you do that?
Stamps.com brings the post office to you.
No need to interrupt your workday to fight traffic to get to the post office,
especially now during the holidays, when the post office is extra busy
with people sending holiday cards and gifts.
These lines are long.
That's why you need stamps.com.
Anything you do at the post office, you can do at stamps.com.
Stamps.com eliminates trips to the post office, saves you money with discounts
that you can't even get at the post office.
Stamps.com brings all the services of post office to your computer, whether you're a small office
or a big online seller sending thousands of packages a day, stamps.com is for you.
Simply use your computer to print official U.S.
postage 24-7 for any letter, any package, any class of mail, anywhere you want to send it.
Once your mail's ready, just hand it to your mail carrier, drop it off in the mailbox.
See the one?
It's that simple.
With Stamps.com, you get five cents off every first-class stamp and up to 40% off priority mail.
It's a fraction of the cost of those expensive postal meters.
It'll save you time and money.
700,000 small businesses already use Stamps.com.
Don't spend a minute of your holiday season at the post office this year!
Sign up for stamps.com and set stamps.com.
There's no risk with my promo code, Dan, you get a special offer that includes a four week trial plus free postage and a digital scale.
No long-term commitments or contracts.
Just go to stamps.com.
Click on the microphone at the top of the homepage and type in Dan at stamps.com.
Click on the microphone at the top of the homepage and enter Dan stamps.com.
Never go to the post office again.
All right, Joe, let's go.
So Democrats are total frauds.
Uh, we know that they've been total frauds.
They have no principles, but I say on a very serious note, and this is kind of why I got into a spat with Geraldo, which I'll play for you.
I usually don't like to play clips of myself because I am myself and I'm here today.
I can just say it again, but this one was good.
Um, because I'm really getting tired of the fact that as a country, what's supposed to be at least a semi unified country in, in, in you may say we're not unified anything you would think In our political discourse, in the friction we have, Democrats versus Republicans, conservatives, liberals, you know, communists versus us, you get it, that we can at least agree on a set of rules when we enter the boxing ring.
You know, one guy's not allowed to bring in a baseball bat into the boxing ring.
We're both going to wear 12-ounce gloves.
Why do we do that?
Why, when we engage in sports and everything else, are there, you know, in court, there's a common set of rules for the defense and the prosecution.
You know, we do that so it's perceived as fair.
Folks, the Democrats have given up on any semblance of fear.
They don't care anymore.
They're fighting right now in a blood sport.
They want Republican opposition crushed.
They want President Trump crushed.
They want you silenced, in some cases jailed.
They want to confiscate your firearms, take away your ability to speak.
They want to confiscate your money.
They want your kids indoctrinated into their social justice warrior lifestyle.
They don't care about you at all.
That's why I've suggested to you repeatedly on the show that we need to start adopting some new rules ourselves.
Because we're fighting in a boxing match where we're there with 12-ounce gloves and the other guy's in there with a baseball bat and the referee, it's supposed to be the media refereeing this, the arbiter of truth, is actually in the can and is ideologically aligned with the guy with the baseball bat.
What do I mean by that?
Where am I going with this segment?
Folks, this is important.
I want to go to the military official, Vindman, Who has a great record in the military, great, but now he's apparently above scrutiny.
But before I get to that, I want to show you how, again, there are no rules in the boxing ring and this political fight room with the left.
How the rules only matter for us and the media is a total joke and it is a waste of your time.
They're complete garbage and they just don't care about the truth.
So just quickly here, remember when foreign interference in elections was a big deal, right?
Yeah.
The Russian collusion hoax.
Well, as I've shown to you many times with this Ukraine story that's morphed into Whistleblowergate and this other fake hoax story.
Well, when Ken Vogel and David Stern wrote this piece in 2017 about Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump, you can see the headline here in the YouTube.
At Politico, this is a left-leaning website, Politico, that wrote an article, literally, not figuratively, about Ukrainian efforts to sabotage the election in favor of Hillary Clinton.
Nobody cared.
Nobody on the left cared at all.
Matter of fact, the media, outside of this Politico writer, has been trying to kill this story ever since.
So remember, I'm arguing here how there are two sets of rules, meaning there are no rules at all.
The left gets to do whatever it wants.
Interfere in elections, pay foreign spies like Christopher Steele to interfere in our elections, work with Ukrainians to interfere in our elections, and nobody cares because you're frauds.
You're losers.
You don't have an ounce of principle, not a drop of a spine.
You are the jellyfish of the modern world.
You disgust me and everyone around me, and I kid you not, you don't have principles.
Foreign interference in elections stinks!
The difference is you did it and we didn't!
You're liars!
You are liars!
Now, this has moved on.
Again, they have no principles at all.
Collusion matters.
Not when the Democrats do it!
Their new rule, and some background on it, you know, I discussed it a little bit on yesterday's show, you have this colonel, this guy by the name of Alexander Vindman, who apparently went up to Capitol Hill yesterday to give some anti-Trump testimony about a transcript of a call with Ukraine we've already seen for the 10,197th time, Joe.
Yeah.
We've already seen it.
We've seen the transcript of the call.
We've seen it.
I don't need Vindman's comments on the call to tell me what I can read myself.
I said yesterday, and I'll say it again, and I mean it sincerely.
I thanked the man for his service.
He apparently was injured in combat.
Listen, thank you from a grateful nation.
Period.
That has nothing to do with Vindman, Colonel Vindman's interpretation of a transcript of a call we can read.
Where am I going with this on the principles or lack thereof front?
Now the media, and they're, you know, as I called them last night, surgically attaching their lips to the ass of the Democrat party, has stated with their Democrat buddies, Joe, this guy's beyond reproach, Colonel Vindman.
You are not allowed to say anything about Colonel Vindman's testimony, despite the fact that his testimony does not comport with the transcript and reality we can already read.
Yeah, boss.
Vindman's suggesting somehow That he was concerned by this call.
Great!
You work at the National Security Council for the President of the United States.
Express your concern and move on.
You, Colonel Vindman, work for the President.
The President does not work for you.
He is the commander-in-chief.
Express your concern, and if you don't like your role on the National Security Council, you're free to go.
I don't mean that as a jerk.
I mean it because it's true.
You don't like the president's foreign policy?
Ask to be removed.
I didn't like Barack Obama's policy at all.
I resigned from the Secret Service to run for office.
So don't lecture me on public service and concern.
I didn't.
That's where I met Joe, and I almost went bankrupt and nearly lost my livelihood doing it.
So please, hard pass on your concern.
There are ways for you to alleviate your concerns.
Go run for office against the president.
You don't want to do that?
You lodged your complaint?
Fine.
But we can all read the transcript.
The media is now saying, you're not allowed to scrutinize Colonel Vindman at all.
He was in the military.
Erroneous!
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Really?
So again, Joe, foreign collusion matters until it's an expose of the Ukrainians colluding with Hillary to attack Trump.
And on this one, we're not allowed to attack military officials or scrutinize or even suggest what they might be saying may be wrong.
No, whatever they say has to be taken as gospel.
There will be no scrutinizing of military officials at all.
Really?
Let's look at this BBC article.
By the way, I could have pulled one of a million.
This is an interesting one by the BBC from December of 2018.
Mike Flynn, judge suggests ex-Trump aide sold US out.
We had a federal judge suggested decorated military officer, patriot, military hero, Lieutenant General Michael Flynn.
President Donald Trump's former National Security Advisor, we had a judge actually suggest Mike Flynn sold the country out.
I thought we're not allowed to do that.
Didn't you just say that?
Oh, let me get this straight.
As long as Colonel Vindman's testimony hurts Donald Trump, then we're not allowed to scrutinize it.
But if it's Mike Flynn, and you think you can damage Donald Trump, Joe, bury him at all costs.
Okay, I got it, okay.
You got the rules or whatever you want to call these thingies?
Because they're certainly not rules.
Yeah.
So bury at all costs military officials who back Donald Trump, but don't dare scrutinize military officials who say things that attack the credibility of the Trump administration.
That's the rule, non-rule, rule, rule, non-rule.
Oh, you think it only extends to Republicans?
No, no, this is all about hating on Trump.
This has nothing to do with scrutinizing military officials.
Here's a doozy about Tulsi Gabbard, who happens to be a Democrat, running against Trump, who dared to attack the Clinton machine.
Opinion!
LA Times!
Tulsi Gabbard, by the way, a military official herself, May not be a Russian asset, but she sure talks like one.
Brian Boyle, October 2018.
I thought we're not allowed to do that.
So now you're basically accusing Tulsi Gabbard of being, uh, talking like a foreign spy working for the Russians.
She's a military officer.
I thought that wasn't allowed.
I thought that's not, I thought that, I thought that that, that, that, that, that, uh, uh.
Uh-huh.
Oh, it's on. It's allowed, wait, so it's allowed.
Oh, so you can scrutinize, accuse people of treason, selling the country out and being
Russian assets that are in the military as long as it may mildly benefit Trump and reflect poorly
on Democrats.
But the minute a lieutenant colonel or a colonel, excuse me, as Colonel Vindman said, says something that may hurt Donald Trump, don't you dare scrutinize Colonel Vindman.
You know, that's bullsh- and you know it.
I said to Joe before the show, in a far lesser capacity, and I mean that, I hold our military in our highest regard, far above the level of sacrifice that I made.
I put them on the totem pole of sacrifice.
I kid you not, I say this without any air of uncertainty at the top of the totem pole of sacrifice.
I put myself and what I did way, way below them.
But ladies and gentlemen, I serve the country too.
I say that not to be laudatory or self-congratulatory.
It's just a fact.
Right, yeah.
I spent time in the Secret Service.
Nobody, nobody ever gives me, and I, Joe, how many times do we say on the show, ladies and gentlemen, please don't take my word for it, go look it up yourself.
I don't even want my own audience to take my word as gospel and not to scrutinize me.
What, because I was in the Secret Service?
Great!
There are millions of federal agents and cops and military people out there.
And 99% of them are patriotic, loyal, terrific, wonderful Americans with hearts of gold.
But folks, not everybody's motives are pure all the time.
And I want to thank, and I mean this, from the bottom of my heart, I'll get to the Geraldo blow-up in a minute.
I mean this.
I got tons of emails last night.
So did Paula.
I got tweets, Facebook messages from people after the blow-up with Geraldo about this very thing.
How we're not supposed to scrutinize anyone in the military ever, as long as they say something anti-Trump.
I got a ton of emails from military people, soldiers, officers, marines, saying, I was injured in combat.
I got a Purple Heart.
I got no pass at all.
Thanking me for saying that.
I thank you for your service.
Your emails meant a lot.
Folks, we're talking about overturning an election and trying to impeach a duly elected president.
In a time of economic prosperity and relative, relative calm.
And we're not, and just to be clear, what you're projecting is your key witness, Colonel Vindman, we're not allowed to question his reading of a transcript we can all read, even though his reading doesn't comport with reality, because he was in the military and was injured?
What does one have to do with the other?
Well, it speaks to his character.
It does!
He clearly has high character.
That doesn't mean his motivations or his reading of the transcript is correct.
It doesn't.
You can read it, too!
Now, I've, again, received a boatload of emails from people.
Because, folks, there's... And I need you to pay close attention to this.
And, Joe, get your audience on Bud's Manhattan.
Get this ready to go.
Settin' ready, brother.
I need this, and I desperately need this, because I can see what's happening right now, and as always, our show is two and three weeks ahead of the news cycle.
The Democrat narrative is falling apart.
Forgive me, but Byron York has a piece in Washington Examiner's that we don't have it yet.
I'll try to get it in the show notes.
The numbers on impeachment are turning really bad for the Democrats because they see it for the witch hunt it is.
The poll numbers are not good.
The Democrats are now figuring out, Joe, that Trump touchéed them.
He checkmated them by releasing the transcript of the call because their whole case is what?
Trump called the Ukrainian president, demanded information on Biden in exchange for military aid.
What did Trump do?
He released the transcript of the call and none of that is in the actual transcript.
Right.
So now, Joe, you copy?
Copy.
The transcript of the call does not say what the Democrats' primary impeachment charge says it says.
There is no deal in the call.
The Democrats are sensing they are losing the initiative and their political capital is dwindling because America can read the transcript and what they're saying is there isn't there.
So now what they're trying to do, through Vindman and others, is they're trying to suggest, and I got into a Twitter spat with Chris Hahn, who I'll be debating tonight on Laura Ingraham's show.
Please tune in.
I got into a Twitter spat with Hahn, who's trying to do the same thing, suggesting, Joe, that no, there's a deal in the transcript because the transcript is not a real transcript.
What?
And somebody's hiding something.
As this New York Times photo, New York Times, excuse me, article suggests.
You get it?
Read headline, New York Times.
White House Ukraine experts sought to correct transcript of the Trump call.
Oh, I've got my, I just pulled some up on my phone too before the show.
That's great.
So you get what they're doing, Joe?
They're saying, no, no, no.
The transcript America's seen that doesn't have this illicit Trump deal with Ukraine in it that we say exists.
The transcript we've seen is not real, Joe.
It's a reconstructed transcript and Vindman's here to correct the record.
Oh yeah.
Okay.
He is.
So the transcript isn't what actually happened on the phone call?
That's funny because I'm reading, I'm at Matt Wolking, who works with the Trump team, I believe.
Here's a tweet from him quoting the New York Times themselves.
I'm just reading this one.
The transcript released by the White House of Mr. Trump's July call with Mr. Zelensky was accurate and comprehensive, a Ukrainian official familiar with it said, adding that significant information was not omitted, including by the ellipses.
Okay, so Democrat talking point two.
Talking point one, illicit deal on the phone call.
Now we've released a phone call.
Talking point number two, that's not an accurate transcript of the phone call.
That's funny, that's not what the Ukrainians are saying.
Adding that significant information was not an OT.
Omitted?
Huh, strange.
Yeah, yeah.
Let's go to this Fox News article from a little while ago, too, which will be in the show notes and is a must read.
It's an older piece from a few weeks back by Katherine Harridge and Bradford Betts.
Why is this piece interesting?
Here's the title.
It's in the show notes.
Bongino.com.
Subscribe to my newsletter.
I'll send them right to you.
Whistleblower wrote memo after learning of Ukraine call, saying White House official called it crazy and frightening.
Oh, there it is.
What does that have to do with the transcript the Democrats are now saying?
There's a super secret other transcript out there, Joe, with this illicit deal.
Vindman knows about it.
He does?
That's interesting, because the thing that started this whole fake scandal hoax, Joe, was a whistleblower complaint, right?
Yeah.
Well, from the Fox News piece, what does it say in the actual whistleblower complaint?
It says, the whistleblower memo appeared to rebut criticism that the White House release transcript was notes or a summary, writing that it was, quote, the standard practice for the White House Situation Room to produce a word-for-word transcript that memorializes the call.
The whistleblower also stated that the transcript was produced and being treated very sensitively.
Um, uh, okay, so talking point number one, there was a deal that was illicit and Trump should be
Okay, let's look at the transcript where the deal was made.
Okay, there's no deal in there.
There's no deal.
Deal or no deal?
There's no deal.
Remember that, Jojo?
Deal or no deal?
No deal.
Oh, because we've seen the transcript.
Now, talking point number three, the transcript is definitely not accurate.
That's funny, the Ukrainians seem to think it's accurate, and the whistleblower himself, in his own memo, said it was standard practice for them to produce a word-for-word transcript.
So the whistleblower is saying it's word-for-word, the Ukrainians are saying no significant information was omitted, and yet they're still going!
You may say, interestingly enough, well, what did Vindman have to say, Joe, in his testimony?
Well, here's an interesting little tidbit from Vindman's own testimony.
On July 21st, 2019, the Ukrainian President Zelensky's party won parliamentary elections in a landslide victory.
The NSC proposed that President Trump call President Zelensky to congratulate him.
Let me get this straight.
So President Trump was so eager to extort the Ukrainians, threatening military aid, because he wanted information on Biden, that he jumped on the call he didn't want to make, that Vindman himself acknowledges his own National Security Council that Vindman worked on pushed him to make?
Let's not scrutinize Vindman at all.
No, no, we can't.
We can't ask any questions.
Again, we can Annihilate the character of decorated military hero Mike Flynn and shred Tulsi Gabbard, military officer, at every opportunity.
Hack lunatics in the media and liberal side.
But God forbid you question Vindman, who seems to be in his testimony suggesting that Trump wanted to extort the Ukrainians for information on Biden, despite the fact that it wasn't even his idea to make the call.
Buddy, I tell you, I know... I'm dying, man.
I'm dying!
This is maybe a record for Joe Gruntz in 22 minutes of the show.
The stupidity is non-human.
I mean, it's... It is.
It is non-human.
It's animal-level stupidity.
It is!
Animals are smarter than us.
You know, animals, you know, Descartes, I think, therefore I am.
What is it?
Cognito ergo sum, right?
Animals don't know they're they, and a dog doesn't know it's a dog.
It just, you know, it thinks you're like a big dog.
It doesn't know.
We think, therefore we are.
You have a concept of self.
Like, you're supposed to be smarter than this.
We read the transcript of the call.
The whistleblower's own memo states it's word for word.
That's standard practice.
The Ukrainians are saying there's nothing omitted there.
And yet, Vindman says he was concerned.
Yeah, yeah.
We're all concerned.
At the fact that the Democrats are lying about a deal that never happened.
Now, without further ado, it's about a minute long.
Here's where last night on Hannity, Geraldo and I Just one at it, big time.
And again, forgive me for paying cuts of myself, but I've been getting a lot of emails.
Some of you missed it, and I don't want to talk about it, not play it, even though it's kind of goofy to play your own cuts.
I try to limit this stuff, as Joe well knows.
But here's Geraldo suggesting as well that Vindman, despite the fact that he's not contradicting anything in the transcript, he couldn't, he was apparently looked like a deer in headlights when they asked him if he had information about, you know, what was deleted.
He didn't have any idea or any demands made of the Ukrainian president.
But we're not supposed to question him at all because he's in the military and apparently he said something that, you know, is going to negatively impact Trump.
Check this out.
I think that Colonel Vindman, by earning the Purple Heart and serving his country honorably, deserves a pass.
I hated what they did to General Flynn.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no No, no.
You don't get a pass, Geraldo.
That's total crap.
The truth matters.
Mike Flynn didn't get a pass.
Mike Flynn could go to jail.
You can't say Jesse's not telling the truth.
It's not your truth.
It may not be your truth.
It may not be your truth, but he's a patriot.
He's got to be treated differently than the slugs and the bureaucrats.
That is garbage.
No.
You are wrong.
Take that back.
You are wrong.
That is garbage.
Nobody gets a pass on the truth.
Answer no humble heart.
Does this help?
Last question.
Does this help?
Yeah.
Good job, Dano.
That's the first mid-show bell we've ever had.
Well, it deserved one, my friend.
No, folks.
Nobody gets a pass.
You want to impeach the President of the United States?
You want to throw the country into turmoil?
You want to- Literally is literally the most overused word in the English language.
But you want to literally nullify the votes of a half of the voting population of the country over a fake scandal?
And your star witness is not to be questioned because he served in the military?
Heroically, I might add?
No.
No.
Sorry.
I am very sorry, but the answer is hell no.
I love debating Geraldo, and I don't take any of my feelings off the air ever.
But that was a steaming pile of hot garbage.
I mean, folks, if that's the case and we're applying that rule, you can't scrutinize the military.
Anyone.
Ever.
Why is Clint Lawrence and all of these other people?
Why are they being prosecuted by the U.S.
government for use of force?
I thought you couldn't scrutinize them.
Oh, you don't like the way use of force was applied in a war zone, so you're prosecuting all of these militants.
I thought we couldn't scrutinize them.
I thought they were above reproach ever.
Oh, when you can prosecute them, we should scrutinize them.
When you can prosecute Mike Flynn because he worked for Trump, then of course we can scrutinize him.
You're total frauds.
You make me sick.
I'm not even kidding.
I wake up every morning.
Every morning.
And I am so thankful that I am not a liberal fraud.
Every single morning.
And I'll bet you're thankful, liberals, I'm not too.
Which makes me even more thankful that you're thankful that I'm thankful I don't associate myself with you lunatic imbeciles.
Thank you.
Can't scrutinize the military.
Ever.
For any reason.
Ever.
Sure.
Baloney.
What is this?
A junta?
What is it?
We working under Idi Amin now?
Anytime, anybody?
Listen, I can't thank the man enough for his service.
I mean it!
It doesn't absolve him of the responsibility to tell the truth!
Is he telling the truth?
It doesn't comport with the transcript!
There was no deal.
All right.
I'm sorry.
I'm fired up about this today.
Really?
I'm still carrying over from last night.
Don't blame me.
Geraldo caught me off guard with that.
I mean it, folks.
I don't blame you.
If you want a little behind the scenes, one of the best things about debating with Geraldo is you never know what he's going to say.
Our two, I think, most viral fights were over Israel and this, and both times he said, I didn't expect him to say that.
Hence my emotional reaction.
Today's show also brought to you by buddies at SimpliSafe.
Folks, we just installed SimpliSafe in our house.
Again, we love it.
Paula installed it.
What, Paula?
Under an hour, right?
Folks, I'm not looking at my phone.
I'm looking at my phone because there's the app.
There it is on my phone.
You can turn your alarm off, on.
I mean, the app is so easy to use, SimpliSafe.
The system is easy to install.
We love it.
Believe this, according to studies, just over 10% of break-ins are planned beforehand.
The rest are spur of the moment.
They're crimes of opportunity.
In other words, random.
People are concerned, Americans, according to polls, about burglary more than even terrorism, car theft, and murder.
That's crazy, but it's true.
Nobody wants people breaking into their house.
And you know when most break-ins happen?
In the middle of the day between 6A and 6P, not the reverse.
According to the FBI, the average loss in a burglary is over $2,000.
Ladies and gentlemen, that's a lot of money.
That's a lot of money.
That can be hard to recover from.
There are over 2 million burglaries reported every year.
That's one every 13 seconds.
One in five homes...
Only one.
Have home security.
Why is that?
Maybe because most companies really don't make it that easy.
That's why SimpliSafe.
S-I-M-P-L-I.
Safe is my top choice.
SimpliSafe protects your whole home.
Every window, room, and door with 24-7 monitoring for just a fraction of the cost.
Their police dispatch is up to three and a half times faster.
Why?
Because they use video verification.
There's no contract, hidden fees, or fine print.
It's designed to blend right into your home.
No wires, no drilling.
It is easy to order, easy to set up, usually in under an hour.
That's about what it took us.
Real simple.
Simply save one ton of awards from CNET to the New York Times to Wirecutter.
Prices are always fair and honest.
Around-the-clock monitoring is just $15 a month.
You can't beat that.
Visit simplysafe.com slash Dan Bongino.
You'll get free shipping.
Nice.
And a 60-day risk-free trial.
You're going to love it.
You've got nothing to lose.
Go now.
Be sure you go to simplysafe.com slash Dan Bongino.
That's simplysafe.com.
That's S-I-M-P-L-I, safe.com slash Dan Bongino, simplysafe.com slash Dan Bongino.
You're going to love it.
Super easy to install.
All right, getting back to the show.
So I'm going to move on because I've got a lot of stuff to get to.
We've been really heavy on impeachment, the Ukraine hoax and all the other stuff.
And I don't want to lose the forest for the trees.
We have an election going on and we need the material, as Joey says, in under an hour to give to you to fight back against liberal nonsense.
Just remember the big takeaway from that first segment.
The whistleblower's own complaint suggests it's a word-for-word transcript.
The Ukrainians have suggested no information was omitted from the transcript either.
Do not fall for the liberal argument number three that the transcript isn't accurate.
Your first question should be to them, is the whistleblower lying?
Because that's not what his memo says.
They'll be like, huh?
They won't know what to say.
Because they're always confused by things like facts.
All right, moving on.
I've been getting a lot of emails about this too, the horrible, tragic fires in California.
If you've seen some of the footage, whether it be on Twitter or YouTube or on the news, it's horrendous.
I mean, I'm familiar with the 405 in that area.
My wife and I go to LA a lot.
It's beautiful.
I always say I really feel bad and we've always been treated.
I can't say this enough.
Haven't we, Paula?
Seriously, in LA, I have never had a bad interaction in LA with anyone, ever.
Um, I know California is run by, you know, lunatic liberals in the government, but you California conservatives, you know, the guy, I'm not going to say your name or your restaurant, cause I don't want you to be boycotted, but we went in a restaurant, a super liberal area in Beverly Hills.
And the guy could not have been nicer to manage the restaurant.
We spent some time with him outside afterwards.
Thank you.
Um, but I genuinely feel bad for you because what's going on right now, you're being lied to with these fires.
Um, you're being lied to because again, the media's sole purpose, Joe, It's not to tell America the story.
They're not doing journalism.
Journalism is dead.
It's to tell you a story and a story is not the story.
The story they're telling you is usually a liberal version of events that is entirely inaccurate.
What do I mean by that in regards to these fires?
Well, here's a snippet from a business insider piece that wants you to believe something that is a story, but it's not the real story.
The piece is entitled PG&E has announced power outages for 2 million Californians after acknowledging that a broken wire may have sparked the Sonoma blaze.
This is... Now, I want you... Look at this little snippet from the piece, and I want you to pay very close attention about, again, the story they're trying to get you.
Because it's not the real one.
Check this out.
As the world continues to warm... Wait, what?
As the world continues to warm, wildfires are expected to keep getting bigger and more frequent?
Here we go.
So PG&E chief executive Bill Johnson has indicated that blackouts might be the company's go-to strategy when the risk is high.
So let me get this straight from Business Insider.
So this is a global warming.
It's a hoax, global warming.
It's the biggest hoax outside of the Russian collusion hoax, the Ukraine gate hoax, and the Mueller hoax.
This is actually a bigger hoax.
This has been going on longer than those hoaxes.
So this has hoax and yarn.
Hoax seniority is big because the longer you perpetrate a hoax and you have hoax seniority, the more people are going to be suckered by the hoax.
So Business Insider wants you to believe, just to be clear, that this is a global warming thing.
Global warming caused these wildfires.
Folks, what's causing these wildfires is a confluence of events due to really horrible atrocious liberal policies that are creating dangerous conditions which are the precedent for these fires to erupt.
I'm sorry if that bothers you, but if you're looking to solve a problem, you investing all the money in the world and fighting a hoax like global warming, I promise you, is not going to stop one of these wildfires.
Let's go to a piece from the Wall Street Journal, because now...
What the liberal governance and governor of California are trying to do is, given that they've failed their state and they have a now third world electric grid, they're trying to blame the problems not on them, which they started, they're trying to blame these problems on PG&E and others.
And I took a little note, you know what's fascinating?
The liberal governor of California, Gavin Newsom, otherwise known as Gavin Newsom, Joe, him and his allies took $208,400 in donations for his 2018 election.
How'd you do that?
Yeah.
Why did you do that?
I thought they're terrible.
PG&E and all those people.
I thought they're awful.
The electric company you want to blame.
I thought they're terrible.
Why did you take their money?
Because you're a fake and you're a fraud and you wake up in the morning looking in the mirror knowing what a hypocrite phony you are.
Let's go to this Wall Street Journal piece, though.
This is stakeholder capitalism in action.
Well, what does that mean?
What does that have to do with PG&E and the wildfires that liberals want us to believe are being caused by global warming?
Explain that for us.
Remember stakeholder capitalism?
We talked about this a couple weeks ago.
Not shareholder capitalism.
Remember, shareholders actually own the company.
Liberals want capitalism to revolve around stakeholders.
In other words, cater to everyone who doesn't own the company.
A stakeholder, environmental group.
No, no, I want to actually cater to the people who own the company, even invested their money.
But stakeholder capitalism is a new woke expression.
You see a company, Prospectus, that says they are involved in stakeholder capitalism?
Sell that stock, stat, because you are in a world of trouble.
Well, what's really going on with stakeholder capitalism, PG&E, and the wildfires in California?
Well, here's a takeaway from the Wall Street Journal piece.
It's quite good.
Joe, remember PG&E's at fault because they're horrible capitalists and they're profiteering.
Really?
Quote, utilities are amongst the most heavily regulated businesses.
In California, their rates and their return on equity, that is their profits, are set by the California Public Utilities Commission and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Every three years, PG&E must submit funding plans to CPUC, Which holds public hearings with stakeholders, including customers and activist groups.
Wait, wait, wait, hold on.
Time out.
Time out.
T.O.
Man, how does that work?
So we were just told by liberal hacks that greedy PG&E capitalist Mercenaries are causing these wildfires because of greed.
Corporate greed.
Wait, now we find out that they don't actually set their own rates, that the state does it?
So just to be clear, they're profiteering in conjunction with the state, or the state is marshalling the profiteering?
Or is the state somehow profiting from the profiteering they regulate because hundreds of thousands of dollars then flow in to the state's representatives, like the governor, who are then running for re-election?
Don't let those unkind facts get in the way of your story, Media Hacks.
Let's continue to blame it on global warming that doesn't exist.
You understand?
You got that, right, Joe?
Yeah, I got it.
That's only takeaway number one.
Okay.
The utility they're blaming is regulated by the state.
They can't even dictate their own profits.
By the way, I don't know anybody in PG&E, and I'm reasonably confident I don't own any portion of the company.
I have no skin in this game at all.
I don't live in California.
You mean you're not a global stakeholder?
No, I'm not a stakeholder at all.
I feel bad for the people.
That's why I'm addressing this.
It's sick.
I'm not at all.
I'm a global stakeholder.
Should put that on a t-shirt.
Takeaway number two.
Remember capitalism and PG&E did this.
Really?
Quote from the journal piece.
The commission and the state legislator in California can also dictate energy investments.
So let me get this straight.
Now they can't even dictate their own profits or their investment strategy?
State law in California requires utilities to obtain 60% of their power from renewable sources by 2030.
The commission has also ordered utilities to buy energy from homeowners with solar panels, paying those homeowners a higher rate than the wholesale providers even get.
Last year the commission directed PG&E to install 7,500 electric car charging stations at apartment buildings and workplaces.
So let me just be clear on this.
Oh.
So now PG&E, those evil capitalists, who the state regulates and tells them what they can make and not make while PG&E is donating back to the same state office holders who are profiteering electorally from this, right?
They can't even dictate their own investment strategy?
So now when you find out that PG&E is not engaged in a massive effort like we do down here in Florida to prune trees, to get rid of debris that would catch fire.
That's it, brother.
Now you find out, well, they can't invest in that because they've been told to invest in electric car
charging stations for an electric car population usually comprised of wealthy people who
can afford electric cars.
And then you find out, by the way, that when Californians express concern about the burn
danger from accumulated forest debris, that they're not
allowed to do control burns because environmentalist groups don't like that either.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
You're right, folks.
It was capital.
Do you know what kind of a moron you have to be to believe this?
I'm serious.
Do you know what kind of an idiot you have to be to ignore everything I just told you?
We have debris, it could catch fire.
Well, maybe we should do a controlled burn to get rid of it.
No, no, environmentalists said no.
You realize it's gonna burn at a lightning strike, right?
Or at a mild ember hitting it, and it's gonna burn everybody's house down in an uncontrolled burn?
That's okay.
The environmental group said it was okay.
No, PG&E did it.
You mean the PG&E that donated to the liberal governor?
You mean the PG&E That's regulated almost exclusively by the state and federal government that can't even dictate its own profit or business plan?
Or you mean the same state legislator that regulates the investments PG&E can make and regulates it towards hoax global warming goals rather than safety?
But yeah, keep being suckers, Libs.
Don't worry about it.
Keep being a sucker for the media narrative out there.
Yeah, it's global warming.
Yeah, that did it.
Yeah, it's global warming.
What a hoax.
Suckers, man.
Big time suckers.
All right.
Finally, today's show brought to you by buddies at iTarget.
Folks, you want a firearm?
Many of you do.
I do.
I have a Sig Sauer 365.
Love it.
Glock 43.
There are two priorities if you want a firearm.
In this order.
Safety first.
Always safety first.
And proficiency.
Folks, God forbid you're ever in a situation.
Ever.
Where you have to engage a hostile target to save the life of yourself, your family, or someone out there in the general public with your firearm.
You must be proficient.
You cannot afford to miss.
We were responsible during my prior career in the Secret Service for every round.
They used to drill that into our heads, even in those simunition games, all the time.
Every round.
Proficiency matters.
You have to be able to hit where you're firing at if you're in a life or death situation.
Well, how do you do that?
Well, obviously the easiest way is to go to the range and practice with that firearm with a qualified instructor.
You'll practice your sight alignment, your sight picture, your grip.
These are all the components of fine marksmanship.
Folks, that's hard to do.
Let's be honest.
The range typically isn't close to your house.
Some may have, some may be lucky.
Most people aren't.
It's a hike.
It costs money.
You have to clean your farm.
And although you have to do that, it's good to fire live rounds.
Folks, you have to also dry fire practice and it's more convenient.
In between you go into the range, or if you can't make it to the range, dry fire.
Now what's the problem with dry fire?
What is dry firing?
Dry firing is when you depress the trigger on a safely, check it, check it twice, check it three times, unloaded weapon to practice your trigger pull, your sight alignment, and your grip.
The problem with a dry fire is there's no round.
You have no idea where the round would have landed on the target because there's no round.
It's empty.
Well, iTarget Pro has solved that problem.
Go to itargetpro.com.
Use promo code Dan for 10% off.
They will send you a laser round.
It fits in the firearm you have now.
You don't have to make any manipulations.
It's not going to damage or hurt your firearm in any way.
You drop it in a safely unloaded weapon.
It comes with a target.
It emits a laser.
You'll now see where those rounds would have landed on the target.
First, you'll start like this, then like this.
After a couple of weeks, your groups are going to be like that.
You're going to be shooting golf balls, wings off a Firefly.
Is that good?
People send me pictures of their targets and their groupings go from this to this, to this, to this, this.
Even if your groupings are already like that, get them like that.
Go to itargetpro.com.
That's the letter I, I-T-A-R-G-E-T, itargetpro.com.
Use promo code Dan, pick up the iTarget Pro system today.
It works in conjunction with a phone app.
Your proficiency is going to go through the roof.
iTargetpro.com, use promo code Dan, save 10%.
All right, moving on.
Great system.
We love it.
I get tons of good reviews about it, too.
So, folks, you know what?
Paula, can I move around to the impeachment thing?
I can see you smiling over there.
Is that going to cause any issues with the videos and the impeachment stuff?
All right.
Sorry.
I don't like to upset my wife.
We still have to live in the house.
I don't want to get her on my bad side.
So, I do have a lot of stuff on Medicare for All.
I'm going to try to get to it this show.
If I can't, we'll get to it this week.
Don't worry.
I've got a lot of ammunition here.
No pun intended.
The impeachment panic is breaking out amongst the Dems.
We have an article up at Bongino.com.
It's a good read.
It's worth your time.
Text release of House resolution formalizing the impeachment inquiry.
Folks, I brought this up yesterday.
Democrats are in a panic over impeachment.
There's a bunch of audio and video out there.
They don't know how to accurately describe what's going on.
Why?
Well, I touched on it a bit yesterday.
I want to elaborate a little bit today and play a couple video cuts that you're going to want to watch about this meltdown going on in the House right now.
They can't call it an impeachment, even though that's exactly what's going on.
Now, from the Bongino.com piece, look at Steny Hoyer, senior member on the Democrat side of the House with a lot of whack.
Joe knows him well.
He's a congressman up in Maryland where Joe lives.
Here's Steny Hoyer talking to Fox News.
This is not an impeachment resolution.
Well, it is a revolution.
Yesterday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi also insisted it's not an impeachment resolution.
Ladies and gentlemen, that's exactly what it is.
It is a set of rules to resolve impeachment.
An impeachment resolution.
Why are they saying this?
I showed you the video yesterday of Nancy Pelosi.
It's not an impeachment resolution.
Because, ladies and gentlemen, moderate Democrats in Trump districts are freaking out.
We discussed that yesterday.
They are freaking out.
They know they can't be on the record saying they voted for impeachment.
You get it?
So what are they gonna say?
They're gonna say, I didn't vote for an impeachment resolution, I voted for an investigation.
Folks, the resolution lays out rules, which you can read in our piece at Bongino.com, for impeachment!
It is an impeachment resolution.
Do not, if you are in Conor Lamb, or that guy Max Rose from New York, if you are in these Republican-leaning districts where they elected, bizarrely, a Democrat, Do not let them off the hook one minute.
Light up their phone lines.
They are voting for impeachment.
Make no mistake.
Now, here's Steve Scalise filleting them on this.
Here's some audio of Republican Steve Scalise showing you just how stupid their rules are and how these rules are just a Soviet-style or old-school star chamber for an impeachment trial they don't want out in the public.
Check this out.
It's clear Pelosi needs to declare a mistrial.
This has been a tainted process from the start.
What happened today confirms, even worse, just how poorly Adam Schiff is handling this process and denying the ability for Republicans to even ask basic questions that are critical to the heart of whether or not a president of the United States is impeached.
This is, by the way, something that Hamilton himself warned against.
When he was writing in the Federalist Papers expressing concerns about how Congress would handle impeachment, this is exactly what he talked about.
This stinks to high heaven.
This shouldn't be allowed, not in the United States of America.
So folks, just to be clear what sleazy Adam Schiff is doing, who in conjunction with sleazy Jerry Nadler and Nancy Pelosi On the Democrat side, are marshalling and impeachment a removal from office process that will be resolved in the Senate in a trial?
A removal from office to nullify your vote?
To remove a president from office because they don't like the election outcome?
They're doing it and Schiff is doing two things.
He's not allowing Republicans to ask questions of any of the witnesses.
Can you imagine a trial, Joe, or an effort out there?
Remember, it's like a grand jury.
Really?
No one in the grand jury.
What?
The grand jury, only half the grand jury is allowed to ask questions?
Is that how this goes in a grand jury?
That's not the grand jury I remember.
They're running a mock trial where the Republicans are not allowed to question any of the witnesses at all.
But secondly, what they're doing.
Now this cuts interesting.
This is AOC.
This starts different, but it's important.
So number one, no questions.
Number two, Joe, they're holding multiple hearings at the same time.
The Democrats, the sleazy Democrats.
Why?
Because they don't want Republicans with knowledge of the scam, the transcript scam, the Ukraine hoax.
They don't want the Republicans in those hearings.
So they're doing all these hearings at the same time.
Now, AOC is not bright enough to have figured that out.
What does this have to do with AOC?
She makes the critical mistake of trying to call out North Dakota Congressman Kelly Armstrong.
About why he needs to adjourn a hearing, because he has to get to another hearing the sleazy Democrats are holding at the same time.
See, AOC's not smart enough to figure that, so she makes the mistake of asking Kelly Armstrong.
So what you're going to hear is, AOC, why do you want this hearing to end?
Because she doesn't realize what's going on, but, you know, ray overhead again, as always.
And then you're going to hear Jim Jordan, another excellent congressman from Ohio, jumping in at the end.
Explaining to AOC that her party are a bunch of hacks.
This is really, really great audio video.
Check this out.
And I just want to know what the reason for such a disrespect of our process would potentially be.
Do we have a reason for why this hearing is trying to be adjourned?
You know, do we have a cocktail party?
Yes, I have one.
I have a really easy one.
The oil industry is the second largest industry in my state.
My constituents expect me to be here.
We are running it.
We are running an impeachment hearing down in the basement, down in the basement of the Capitol right now.
It's about the economy of the state of North Dakota and my constituents.
I want to participate in this hearing but I also feel the need to be in the skiff because
we're only one of three committees that's allowed to be in the room.
I can do a lot of things, I can't be two places at once.
I'm completely comfortable having this hearing, I'd just prefer to have it at a time when
I can participate in it.
This was a conversation that was brought up and this could not have been brought up before
we convened the senator and the governor?
We're doing this when they're here?
We've expressed this last week about having two things going on at the same time.
It's not like we haven't talked about this, but you guys continue to do hearings at the same time there are depositions going on.
As the gentleman from North Dakota said, we can't be two places at once.
You talk about wanting to do your job?
There's no way to do that when you have to be two places at once.
And just to be clear, there was exactly one Democrat in the room when this started.
Yes.
Yes.
We need to grow a set of tomatoes on the Republican.
So, you know, tomatoes, you need to like put some miracle grow on them or whatever.
And we need to start addressing this a little more vocally.
Good for you.
Now, I played that for a couple of reasons to expose the scam about what they're doing with multiple hearings, but to show you how AOC is clueless.
She doesn't even know she set herself up for a total facepalm because she doesn't understand what her own party's doing.
Good for you, Kelly Armstrong and Jim Jordan.
All right, I do want to get to this Medicare for All thing quick.
This is going to be my last story, and don't miss tomorrow.
I still, I got this Jimmy Kimmel piece I want to get through tomorrow.
It's just a loaded news week, and I want to give everything its proper due, and that Vindman story is critical.
Folks, so Medicare for All has become a big talking point for liberals.
And Elizabeth Warren's moving up in the polls.
It's obviously supported by Bernie Sanders, who I see is moving up the polls again in New Hampshire and Iowa.
These are socialists.
Bernie's a communist.
They're going to take your money, your education, everything.
So Elizabeth Warren's proposing this Medicare for All plan.
And there was an interesting breakdown of the taxes that will affect you that will be required to pay for this government-run takeover of the health care system.
It's a fascinating study.
Check this out.
This is by these CFRB people.
Just to give you a small idea of the monstrous tax bill you can expect.
The piece is called Choices for Financing Medicare for All, a preliminary analysis by the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
Get your wallet ready.
Here's my wallet.
There's mine.
A little dough in there.
Check that out.
Here you go.
Elizabeth Warren gets elected.
Here goes the dough.
Throw money.
No good.
Here, Liz.
Here you go.
What was that mob movie?
You put the beater.
You put the beater on the outside.
No, she's giving me the wave.
This is funny.
She's giving me the wave off.
Usually I agree with put the beater on the outside.
I've got to give it to Liz Warren when I'm done.
What are you worried about?
It's not ours.
Are you still going to mug me?
I got to give it to Liz.
She's going to mug me anyway.
Paul's like, she's usually right.
You're wrong about this one.
Give the beater to Liz Warren.
We always had the mob, it was at the mob movie.
You put the hundred dollar bill.
What was that?
I was at Donnie Brasco.
It was Donnie Brasco!
Put the beater on the outside.
Here are the taxes.
Get your wallets.
You're going to have to forfeit over to Elizabeth Warren.
Hat tip committee for responsible federal budget.
Well, you have to get a 32% payroll tax.
32% payroll.
Wow.
So if you're making $1,000 a week, you're going to pay an additional $320 a week.
Huh?
Man, that better be some good health insurance.
A 25% income surtax.
Wow, that's cute.
Keep in mind, folks, this is in addition to what you're paying now.
Understand, this isn't in lieu of.
This is the taxes you're paying now plus this.
You could pay a 42% value-added tax.
Basically, a nearly 50% tax on everything you buy.
You can pay a mandatory public premium averaging $7,500 per person.
The equivalent of $12,000 per individual not otherwise on public insurance.
Or, no, here's the good, Joe, don't worry, it gets better.
Don't worry.
They could only double all individual and corporate income tax rates.
Oh, there's an easy way out for you.
Maybe you could put an 80% reduction in non-federal health spending.
There's another way out.
They'd have to nearly cut the entire federal budget outside of health spending.
They could engage in 108% of gross domestic product increase in the national debt.
In other words, we could double the national debt now.
We're already a trillion in debt.
You could double that.
Or you could use impossibly high taxes on high earners, corporations, and the financial sector.
Or, Joe, don't worry, you could use a combination of all these awfuls.
Huh.
Well, what you're telling me then, Dan, to be clear, is the free Medicare healthcare, it's not free.
Is that what you're saying?
Joe, can you be Elizabeth Warren?
Put Joe up on the screen.
Can you act as Elizabeth Warren for a minute?
Put him up on there if you don't mind.
Okay.
Give me that money, Dan!
Grab it!
Dang it!
Dang it!
How you gonna live, Dan?
How you gonna get healthcare?
How you gonna live, Dan? How you gonna get healthcare, Danny? Don't put that away!
I don't... I... I... I... Alright, if this is what you want, vote for Liz Warren!
Now you may be saying, no, no, Elizabeth Warren told us.
She did.
That it was only going to affect millionaires and billionaires, these taxes.
Well Bernie, millionaires and billionaires, it is not going to affect the middle class.
Well the Washington Examiner has a great piece up about that.
Is that right?
So it's not going to, none of these taxes that I just told you about are going to affect you?
Philip Klein, Washington Examiner, confiscating the wealth of all billionaires wouldn't even pay for three years of Medicare for all.
Here's an interesting little snippet.
So if you manage to do that, because billionaires will leave the country tomorrow if they knew their wealth was going to be, if you confiscated every single thing billionaires have, Joe, you'll see that they own about $8.7 trillion in collective net worth.
So if you confiscate everything, let's see, the plan's gonna cost 34 trillion over 10 years.
So yeah, that means even if the U.S.
government were to magically vacuum up all the wealth of the billionaires without any economic distortion, it would still only add up to a third of the cost of Elizabeth Warren's plan.
Just because you can't see me doesn't mean that I'm not here, Mr. Bongino!
Get me that money!
I know you're there!
I know you're there!
Get me that money, Mr. Bongino!
And I know you're still creeping in my wallet!
I can feel you!
Get your damn hands out of my pocket!
I'm gonna get that money!
It's creepy!
It's creepy!
You just happy to see me, or is that Elizabeth Warren's hand in your pocket?
Get your hands out of my pocket!
Ouch!
Leave my wallet alone!
Oh, gosh.
Confiscate everything.
Everything.
You would decimate their businesses, their livelihood, they'd move out of the country.
You still don't even have a third of the money.
The real money has always been with the middle class.
And your wallet.
What's that commercial for Capital One?
What's in your wallet?
The answer with Elizabeth Warren is nothing because she took it all.
All right, folks.
Thanks again for tuning in.
Thanks to everyone who picked up my book, Exonerated.
You put us back on the Amazon bestseller list yesterday.
I really appreciate it.
Thank you very much.
Please pick it up if you haven't picked it up yet.
Also, subscribe to our YouTube channel, youtube.com slash Bongino.
