In this episode, I address the Democrats’ complete meltdown on Capitol Hill and the devastating impact their hoax impeachment is having on their election 2020 chances. I also address a bold initiative by the Trump administration which was largely ignored by the liberal media. Finally, I address some key developments relevant to the 2020 election.
News Picks:
The Bongino Report goes live, and prominent conservatives rally.
The silly Democrats are moving forward with their hoax impeachment.
Hilarious! Watch hapless Jerry Nadler fall asleep during the hoax impeachment hearing.
Legal scholar eviscerates the Democrats’ hoax impeachment.
Adam Schiff is engaged in grotesque abuses of power.
The ten most important revelations expected in the IG report.
Voters are furious with the Democrats’ impeachment hoax.
IG expected to find that the FBI omitted key details about the Steele dossier in FISA renewal.
Copyright Bongino Inc 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.
Ladies and gentlemen, how much worse can this impeachment hearing possibly get?
Just when you think Adam Schiff as a representative of the Democrat Party has hit the stupid floor, what happens?
hapless Jerry Nadler who nearly fell asleep during this hearing, I got some video of that later,
blows through the stupid floor and hits the stupid basement.
What a colossal mess. I've got that today.
I've got a great article by John Solomon about some revelations he's getting about the soon-to-be-released-on-Monday IG
report.
I've got a big, bold initiative by the Trump administration that's excellent.
They deserve a pat on the back.
And hopefully we'll get to it in election 2020 update with the new news that Nancy Pelosi is going to proceed with this abomination of an impeachment stack show today.
Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show.
Producer Joe, how are you today?
I'm glad to be here again, Dan.
Yeah, things are going nuts!
Nuts!
Yeah, I know, no kidding.
You got me yesterday with a couple people picked up on what you did.
If you missed it, go watch the YouTube at the beginning of yesterday's show and note the date and you'll figure out what happened.
Very good joke.
I was eating it up, brother.
Paul and I were laughing about it all night.
Good.
And a big, juicy, fat thank you to everybody who supported BonginoReport.com.
We had an enormous day yesterday.
If I told you the numbers, your head would spin.
There were so many people.
It is now the conservative alternative to the Drudge Report.
BonginoReport.com.
It is live.
You all blew it up yesterday.
Thank you so much.
All right, let's get to the show.
Today's show brought to you by our buddies at Genucel.
Genucel, the Chamonix Christmas and Holiday Sale is officially here.
Stock up on the best skin care that money can buy during Chamonix's best promotion of the year.
And during Chamonix's 25 days... It's up there.
During Chamonix's 25 days of Christmas celebration, get the classic GenuCell for eye bags and puffiness absolutely free.
Plus GenuCell's immediate effects for results in 12 hours.
Get rid of that turkey neck and double chin!
Nice!
With the famous GenuCell breakthrough jawline treatment with MDL technology.
Look 10, 15, even 20 years younger right before your eyes guaranteed a 100% of your money back.
But your order today is even more special.
Shamanese partnered with Women Rising to give the same exact package you get to women seeking support and assistance from domestic violence.
Go to genucel.com and enter Dan30 at checkout.
That's G-E-N-U-C-E-L.
Enter Dan30 at checkout.
Your order today includes Genucel XV anti-wrinkle treatment and will be upgraded to priority shipping for free.
Make this holiday season extra special with Chamonix.
Go to genucel.com, enter Dan30, Dan30 at checkout.
That's genucel.com, genucel.com.
All right, Joe, let's get to it.
Okie dokie.
So yesterday's hearing a spectacular implosion by Jerry Nadler.
I want to get to some quick video, move on.
You probably saw a ton of it yesterday on cable news, but I picked some highlights from you, for you, excuse me.
And yesterday I said, given that Adam Schiff is now snooping into congressman's phone records, engaged in another massive spying scandal, after lying about Spygate, you'd think he'd be a little more self-aware.
He got his hands on Devin Nunes' phone records, Trump's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's lawyer.
Adam Schiff is just a disgusting police state tyrant.
I just can't say enough awful things about how this guy is ruining the Constitutional Republic.
He is really an awful human being.
Nobody's spoken out for John Solomon, the reporter Adam Schiff is now spying on.
The ACLU jumped ship.
They're all reporters.
They're all like, no, it's great.
We're all into spying now.
We love the police state.
So I told you yesterday, now is the time to fight back, take the gloves off, and start throwing punches.
Enough BS.
Time to get in the game, get in the fight.
The referee's not gonna save you, the other guy across the ring is rabbit-punching you, and he's biting your ear off, and all of a sudden they want the referee to help.
He's not helping.
Fight back.
Well, that started yesterday.
I've got a couple of clips of Republican congressmen from Florida District 1, Matt Gaetz, who just tore in to one of these highbrow, hoity-toity, elitist law professors they brought up there to condescendingly explain to the great unwashed masses like me and Joe and everyone else in America how important this impeachment proceeding is from our perch at Stanford Law School and elsewhere.
So one of them decided it'd be a good idea to take a shot at the president's son.
We're not going to go too deep into that one, but Matt Gaetz had had enough of this nonsense from this hoity-toity professor.
And let's go to cut one.
Matt Gaetz dropping a tactical nuke on this one.
Check this out.
Professor Carlin, you gave 2,000 bucks, or you gave 1,000 bucks to Elizabeth Warren, right?
I believe so.
You gave 1,200 bucks to Barack Obama?
I have no reason to question that.
And you gave $2,000 to Hillary Clinton?
That's correct.
Why so much more for Hillary than the other two?
Because I've been giving a lot of money to charity recently because of all of the poor people in the United States.
Well, those aren't the only folks you've been given to.
Now, have you ever been on a podcast called Versus Trump?
I think I was on a live panel that the people who ran the podcast called Versus Trump.
On that, do you remember saying the following?
Liberals tend to cluster more.
Conservatives, especially very conservative people, tend to spread out more, perhaps because they don't even want to be around themselves.
Did you say that?
Yes, I did.
Do you understand how that reflects contempt on people who are conservative?
Okay, so you're hoity-toity.
We're supposed to take her seriously.
Law professor, Professor Carlin from her academic perch.
Remember, Joe, she's so much smarter than you and I. The great unbathed, diseased masses like you and I, Joe.
So much smarter.
Remember, Jo, she went to law school, Jo.
She went to law school, so she knows a lot more than us.
Now we find out not only is she a non-ideological, non-partisan actor up there to talk dispassionately about how Trump should be impeached, she's a monstrous Democrat donor writing huge checks to Democrats who thinks that conservatives hate each other and don't even want to live near each other.
Perfect guest!
Perfect.
You're right, folks.
This is exactly what we needed to sell the American public on how dispassionate and nonpartisan this hoax impeachment is.
Really great job.
You know, as I said last night on Laura Ingraham's show with my Wednesday debates with Chris Hahn that I do, On a very serious note, Joe, you and I grew up middle class, right?
If not, like, lower middle class a little bit?
Lower middle class, yeah.
Yeah, Paula, too, grew up as an immigrant from Columbia.
You know, me, grew up above a bar at 64th Place on Myrtle Avenue in Glendale.
You know, I wouldn't say we grew up wealthy.
We do okay now, but I wouldn't say we grew up wealthy.
How do you think this message from a hoity-toity professor making fun of Trump's child, talking about the... When we can read the transcript ourselves, how do you think this sells to a mechanic in Pennsylvania or a coal miner in West Virginia?
Uh, the answer is it doesn't.
They're probably flipping you the double-barreled middle finger and laughing at you imbeciles in this snooze-fest of a hearing with Noah Feldman.
Noah, Professor Emeritus Esquire.
Esquire, like Bradley Moss from yesterday.
And Professor Garland from Stanford.
I'm not sure she's ever had a real job, but yes, she's there to tell you how dumb you all are and how the president committed a high crime she has no actual evidence of.
It gets worse!
Yeah.
Here's Matt Gaetz, number two, who thankfully, again, gloves off, folks.
Nicey-nice time is over.
We gotta be careful we don't offend them.
And by the way, can I just say that Matt did a great job.
Congressman Gaetz did an excellent job.
And a lot of other ones did too.
Louie Gohmert, Jim Jordan, always good.
There's just a bunch of these guys who are really great.
Some of them, though, started with this unnecessary caveat.
You know, I have to say before we start, I thank you for coming and I respect you.
Why do you respect these people?
I don't understand why you respect it.
That lady, as Matt Gaetz just said, the hoity-toity law professor, gave a podcast lecture or speech or whatever on a thing called versus Trump, where she talked about how conservatives don't even like each other and don't want to be near each other.
While she donated to our political opposition, why are we supposed to respect what she says again?
I'm sorry, I missed that.
So thankfully, here's Matt Gaetz, cut number two, just lacing into this professor again for some more idiocy.
Check this out.
No, what I was talking about there was the natural tendency, if you put the quote in context, the natural tendency of a compactness requirement.
To favor a party whose voters are more spread out.
And I do not have contempt for conservatives.
I'm very limited on time, professor.
And so I just have to say, when you talk about how liberals want to be around each other and cluster, and conservatives don't want to be around each other and so they have to spread out, it makes people, you may not see this from, you know, like the ivory towers of your law school, but it makes actual people in this country, You don't get to interrupt me on this time.
Now, let me also suggest that when you invoke the president's son's name here, when you try to make a little joke out of referencing Barron Trump, that does not lend credibility to your argument.
It makes you look mean.
It makes you look like you're attacking someone's family, the minor child of the president of the United States.
So let's see if we can get into the facts.
To all of the witnesses, if you have personal knowledge of a single material fact in the Schiff report, please raise your hand.
And let the record reflect, no personal knowledge of a single fact.
And you know what?
that continues on the tradition that we saw from Adam Schiff.
Go get them Gates.
Oh, there they are.
There it is.
Haven't whipped these out in a while.
Of course, as you watch it on the YouTube, youtube.com/dan.
Our thug life classes here.
(laughing)
Folks, nice job.
Nice job, Matt Gaetz.
Very, very well done.
So not only is she a Democrat donor, not only does she think it's funny to poke fun at the name of the president's teenage child, Barron, not only does she think conservatives, and I'll give her the benefit of the doubt, I shouldn't, she was talking about redistricting, but she said they don't even want to live near themselves.
Not only that, but now we find out also that she is just an avid Trump.
She just can't stand Trump.
Thank God Gates cut her off and shut her down.
We didn't need any more of that garbage.
Now, the most important part of that cut, of course, is the end.
Where he asks these hoity-toity, smarter-than-us I guess bathed in fine wines and oils, lecturers and professors at these highbrow institutions, do you actually have any evidence of any crimes, first-hand knowledge that the president may have committed, or basically are you just here to pontificate about how smart you are and how stupid we all are, the actual voters?
Will you raise your hand if you have any knowledge of any of the facts directly in this case?
How many people raised their hands out of the four?
Well, for those of you not watching on the YouTube, the answer is zero.
A big fat donut.
An egg yolk.
Nothing.
Zero.
None of them did.
So you may be asking to yourself, if you are that mechanic in Pennsylvania or a coal miner in West Virginia or Alabama or whatever you may do, Architect, landscaper, carpenter, truck driver, but you actually work for a living unlike these professoriates.
You maybe ask yourself then what the hell were they doing there?
The answer is, they were blowing up this impeachment probe, even though the Democrats think they're doing themselves a favor.
Folks, so you understand the silly strategery.
The Democrats really believe by getting a bunch of highbrow academics up there to explain the mechanics of impeachment, although they have no direct knowledge of what happened in this actual case.
None.
They really believed this was going to change hearts and minds.
I'll get to more of that later in the election 2020 update, how badly this is imploding in their faces.
Folks, I'm telling you, I used to think the Democrats were smarter than this.
I did.
I've said it on the show many times, how I disagree with them, but I've always, always, ...been concerned about their brilliant tactical strategies to isolate and marginalize Republicans.
That's out the window.
Throw it out.
They have lost it completely.
They are so enraged by Trump that they have lost their lodestar here, their guiding light.
They are off the path completely, and they are absolutely blowing their electoral chances.
And for those of you saying, don't give them advice, folks, believe me, it doesn't matter.
Barack Obama himself has tried to give them advice to get back on the beaten path.
And they are completely ignoring it because they are enraged by Trump, as evidenced by Pelosi this morning.
We're going to move forward.
Damn the torpedoes!
Full steam ahead.
Full speed ahead.
Yeah.
Now, clip number three from Matt Gaetz, who sums it up brilliantly here.
So we're talking about foreign interference in an election and wiretaps and stuff.
Maybe we're dealing with the wrong, maybe we're impeaching the wrong president.
Check this out, this is great.
And you know what?
If wiretapping a political opponent's an impeachable offense, I look forward to that inspector general's report because maybe it's a different president we should be impeaching.
Gentleman's time has expired, Mr. Cicilline.
Oh yeah!
(laughing)
Yippers!
Well, we do know somebody was spied on and that there were wire taps, maybe not in the traditional tapping alligator clip sense, but there was most definitely spying warrants issued on a campaign.
But that campaign was Donald Trump's campaign by the Barack Obama administration.
Maybe we should reverse impeach Barack Obama.
Good job, Congress from Nat Gates.
Nice.
Really well done.
All right, I've got one more here.
This is Louie Gohmert, who was a judge.
The reason I put Gohmert up there is he's another warrior.
And Louie Gohmert, Republican congressman from Texas, was an actual judge who probably has real-world experience in an actual job, unlike the professoriate who was up there yesterday, the three knuckleheads, plus John Turley, who did a great job.
Louie Gohmert has actual experience in the real world doing real cases as a judge, and he brings up an interesting point how this isn't a case based on hearsay, Joe.
It's a case of hearsay about hearsay.
Check this out.
The evidence is a bunch of hearsay on hearsay that if anybody here had tried cases before of enough magnitude, you would know you can't rely on hearsay on hearsay, but we have experts who know better than Joe, it was very funny.
I just caught that.
Joe said, I hear you.
Well, Joe, I heard you hear me and Paula heard me hear you hear me.
So Paula's going to be the witness.
is we do not need to receive a report that we don't have a chance to read before this hearing.
Joe, it was very funny. I just caught that. Joe said, I hear you. Well, Joe, I heard you hear me
and Paula heard me hear you hear me. So Paula is going to be the witness. So, uh, well, I just got
that. What'd you do before it's a hearsay about hearsay.
Actually, Louie Gohmert missed about hearsay.
So Paula heard me respond to Joe, who heard someone else say, I hear you.
And Joe said, I hear you based on what he overheard from someone else.
So Paula is going to be the witness.
This case is a joke.
It's a total farce.
And Gohmert, who is an actual judge with real world experience, totally, completely gets it.
Nice job, Louie Gohmert.
Now, Paula, can you play that clip of Nadler?
Now, listen, I hate to do this because I know this will always be an audio show first, but I'm getting a little tired.
I mistakenly took a sleeping pill before the show.
I thought it was a vitamin.
Oh, go-go.
It's tough.
It's getting tough.
Obviously, I'm messing with you.
I did not take a sleeping pill before the show.
I'm deeply sorry.
I hate to do this, but please, youtube.com slash bugina.
We just in the background, we're playing a video of Jerry Nadler, who actually was falling to sleep, courtesy of the Trump war room on Twitter, falling to sleep during yesterday's snooze festivities.
Oh my, somebody get me a, somebody get me a Viverin.
Somebody have an espresso, double shot, quadruple shot.
I heard someone, heard someone who heard someone else tell me there was an espresso machine in the congressional, in the congressional toilet.
Can someone go get me one?
A triple shot, maybe a cappuccino on the side, a triple caramel macchiato.
He can't even stay up during his own snooze fest, folks.
Listen to me.
Please check out the YouTube on this.
It's video.
I don't want it because there's a song in the background.
It would confuse everyone.
Please just check it out.
It's like, it's just 10 seconds or just Google Nadler sleeping and watch him falling asleep.
Folks, listen to me.
I told you in the beginning, I thought Adam Schiff was the absolute floor of incompetence, meaning the incompetence couldn't get any worse.
It is clear now, it almost pains me to say this, that Nadler may be even more incompetent than Schiff.
Joe, This guy had one job, Nadler.
Just one.
You had this day of hearings.
Dude, just stay awake, dude.
You had one job.
Reminds me when I was a secret service agent on Midnight's.
When you're on post outside a hotel door during the UN and the leader of Pakistan is behind that door, you have one job, Joe, for that 20 minutes an hour you're in that door on Midnight's.
What's the job, Joe?
Keep your ass awake!
Thank you!
Joe was on radio at like four o'clock in the morning when they first started, and then they moved to 5 a.m.
Joe was the executive producer for a radio station.
I promise you, if Joe doesn't hit a switch on live radio, it's gonna be really bad.
Armacost had one job.
Stay awake, dude.
And answer the callers when they call in or else the show goes off the air.
It's not hard, folks.
Get yourself a Vivarin.
Get yourself whatever.
Some coffee.
I don't care what you gotta do, Jerry.
Stay awake during your old hearing.
It's embarrassing.
Oh my gosh.
All right, because I don't want to bathe you in this nonsense.
We're all getting dumber for hearing it.
Just one more quick thing.
Tweet from Benny Johnson, which is a good one and worth your time.
Benny Johnson works over at Turning Point there.
There is a congressman now, Jim Banks, who is now asking Senator Lindsey Graham, who remember the Senate's in charge of the trial because we're the majority now.
So Senator Graham's going to have some ability in that committee on that side to dictate what happens in this impeachment trial.
Representative Banks is asking Senator Graham to subpoena the call records for Adam Schiff, former VP Joe Biden, and his son Hunter, as well as the attorney for Ukraine whistleblower Mark Zaid.
Listen, ladies and gentlemen, this has to be done.
I don't ask a lot of favors of you, right?
You know, we put books out.
I ask you to check them out.
I ask you to check out my YouTube, but I don't ask a lot of favors on the side, like side hustles or anything.
I'm asking you for a favor now.
Turn the volume up.
Everybody needs to email Lindsey Graham or call his office.
You know, we'll be cool about it.
We're not liberals, of course.
We're not the Antifa crowd.
Email or call his office, Lindsey Graham, and we need to ask that this happen.
Ask nicely, but ask firmly, if you get what I mean.
You know, you're all adults.
We're not Antifa.
We're conservatives.
We actually have heads on our shoulders.
He needs to do that.
Adam Schiff wants to play.
We're going to spy on the call records of Devin Nunes and Trump's lawyer, President Trump's lawyer.
That's okay.
You do that, Adam.
Let's see how you like it now when we subpoena your call records, buddy.
And what about the whistleblower's attorney?
How about the whistleblower's call records?
Can we throw those in there too?
Oh, we can't do it.
No, we can.
Oh, no, we can.
Stop asking the ref for help.
The other guy's punching you in the nads.
It's time to fight back.
I'm asking you, with the greatest of respect and humility, call Lindsey Graham's office, or email his office, and say, hey, are we on this?
I hope you're doing this, because we need those call records.
We need to see about Adam Schiff's collusion, who he was talking to.
Fair game now, folks.
Schiff said so.
Yeah.
I think.
Right, Joe?
Fair enough.
I would think, yeah.
All's fair in love and war, and the love parts ended a long time ago.
All right, folks, today's show also brought to you by our buddies at NetSuite.
Man, I'll tell you, we would be lost without NetSuite, especially with everything going on.
The unbelievable launch of the Bongino Report.
We've had to bring on employees.
It's just been a huge expansion of Bongino Inc.
over here with me, Paula, Joe, and everybody else involved in our operation.
Thankfully, we have NetSuite.
It helps us marry up all of these different systems, finance, administration, HR, everything.
If you don't know your numbers for your business, folks, you don't know your business.
That's why NetSuite by Oracle has solved this problem.
Most companies don't have a clear picture of their finances.
It's a huge mistake.
And that's why many businesses fail, especially small and mid-sized ones.
The question for any business owner out there, listen up if you are a business owner, are you confident you've got the right numbers at your fingertips right away?
We do with NetSuite.
It has helped us streamline our business and open up new businesses like Bongino Report like that.
Serious entrepreneurs and finance teams run on NetSuite by Oracle, the world's number one cloud business system.
NetSuite offers a full picture of your finances all in one place in real time, right from your phone or desktop.
There's no more guessing, no more worrying that you don't know.
If you don't know something, it could kill your company.
That's why NetSuite customers grow three times faster than the S&P 500, and you can too.
It's easy.
It's because they have better data.
Schedule your free demo right now.
Receive their free guide as well.
Seven key strategies to grow your profits at netsuite.com slash Bongino.
Set up your free demo and get your free guide today at netsuite.com slash Bongino.
B-O-N-G-I-N-O.
That's netsuite.com slash Bongino.
Get on this today.
If you own a business, you will not regret it.
Get that growth up.
Know your numbers.
Netsuite.com slash Bongino.
Okay.
Stack show today.
So much going on.
An excellent piece by John Solomon at John Solomon Reports.
It'll be up at Bongino Reports.
It'll be up at the Show Notes.
And again, I ask that you subscribe to our email list, bongino.com slash newsletter.
We will get you these stories every day.
Links will be on the Bongino Report and elsewhere.
We'd really appreciate that.
This article will be there as well.
John Solomon, the 10 most important revelations to expect from Monday's Russia probe Pfizer report.
We're going to get that on Monday, the IG report by Horowitz.
He's going to testify on Wednesday.
Of course, that's the inspector general looking into all of the malfeasance that happened with the Obama administration spying on the Trump team.
Now, He gives 10 of them.
I'm not going to go through all 10 because it rehashes a lot of what we discussed on the show, uh, repeatedly.
And it's, it's, you know, unfair to listeners who listen every day.
I don't want to beat you up with old content.
Uh, I just want to be sure here.
We hit some of the highlights of this cause it is a very good piece.
It is definitely worth your time.
Please go to the Bongino report or bongino.com.
Check this piece out.
It is definitely worth your time.
Let's go through some of the big ones here about what we can expect because they, I'm going to sum this up.
With kind of a coup de grace at the end about what I think, because I'm hearing this now from multiple people, and Solomon hints at it.
I don't want to tease it too much, but I'm going to get to at the end what I think the FBI did to try and clean up its mess before the election.
It'll make sense in a few.
Let's go through some of the bigger takeaways first.
Here's takeaway number one.
Solomon says could be in this IG report.
Folks, just what was the degree of the misconduct here?
He says here, and I quote, the scope and failure of the misconduct.
Were these FBI mistakes isolated mistakes, systemic cultural and procedural failures, or intentional acts involved in the investigation in the FISA warrant against Carter Page and the renewals for more than a year?
He says, I expect the Horowitz report to identify between 6 and 12 failures, mistakes, and acts of misconduct.
These will range from serious offenses of altering government documents to failures to produce the court's evidence and information required under the FISA process.
The large number of problems, if confirmed, should be a wake-up call to the FBI and those who provide oversight of its activities.
Solomon's being nice here, ladies and gentlemen.
What he's getting at is, we have to understand the difference between misfeasance and malfeasance.
Misfeasance would be, you know, saying, intentionally not doing something when you know it's the right thing to do.
In other words, I'm walking with Joe, Joe falls on the sidewalk and I keep walking.
It's misfeasance.
It's the wrong thing to do, but I didn't cause Joe to fall.
Still wrong, but there are degrees of depravity, right?
Yeah.
Malfeasance would be, I push Joe down on the sidewalk, he goes to get up and I punch him in the face to keep him down.
Obviously a far advanced degree of depravity.
The question Solomon's getting at here is if this IG report is going to point out 6 to 12 major screw-ups by the FBI.
Were these intentional screw-ups?
And I think he's being nice by framing it that way.
Or were these mistakes?
Now, Joe, I think he kind of foreshadows that these are going to be deemed malfeasance, not misfeasance, a higher degree of depravity.
Why?
Because if you read halfway through what I just told you, the quote from the report, he says some of it involved deliberate doctoring of FBI documents used to spy on people.
Ladies and gentlemen, if you deliberately alter an email like has been alleged, We've heard this story about these allegations against FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who was intimately involved in this case.
If that's the case that he deliberately altered evidence, then folks, it's not misfeasance, it's malfeasance, and this dude could be in a whole world of trouble.
We've kind of covered that ground before, but the takeaway from that is, let's see how Horowitz frames it.
Does he frame it as misfeasance?
Oh, the lady fell on the sidewalk and they didn't help.
Or malfeasance?
No, they pushed that lady down.
Why does this matter?
Think about it.
Folks, we're in a political war right now.
I hope you don't think otherwise.
Political wars require to move people politically in your direction.
This IG report, frame it all you want.
Is this an Inspector General agnostic law enforcement?
No, it's not.
It's a political document.
You know why?
Because both sides of this are going to make it one.
Not because Horowitz is political.
This is a political document.
The phrasing of the document is going to matter.
And if we know they pushed the guy on the sidewalk because they deliberately altered emails, malfeasance, and it's framed as misfeasance?
Oh, we don't know how she fell.
Wink and a nod.
No, no, no.
I'm trying to prep you to get ready for this.
We're in a political war.
Nothing's going to be easy here.
Don't expect the Horowitz Report on Monday to drop and the Democrats to go, okay, we confess, we spied.
They won't.
They're liars by trade.
And they have the media behind them.
That's what they do.
They lie.
I'm trying to get you ready for what's coming.
Second takeaway.
Was exculpatory evidence withheld?
Again, it's definition of exculpatory evidence.
Was evidence of Carter Page and George Papadopoulos.
We know Carter Page.
It was a warrant to spy on him because they thought there were probable cause he was acting in violation of U.S.
law on behalf of foreign agents.
That's a serious charge.
But was exculpatory evidence about Carter Page in there?
Quote in Solomon's piece, the issue of whether the FBI failed to tell the FISA court judges, as required folks, about evidence of innocence concerning some of the Americans it targeted has been raised for more than a year by key members of Congress like Nunes and Mark Meadows.
He expects the IG to identify exculpatory statements made by key figures Papadopoulos to an undercover informant that were not properly disclosed to the court.
A second revelation to watch is whether the FBI possessed similar evidence of innocence involving Page that was not disclosed.
Ladies and gentlemen, this will be huge.
Huge.
It is your obligation as a federal agent, I was one, I've explained this to you before, to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense.
If I have evidence Joe was in California on Tuesday, December whatever, third or fourth, And I'm accusing him of robbing a bank on the same day in New York, and I don't tell the defense that?
Oh my gosh, ladies and gentlemen, you have no idea how disqualifying... You'll probably be fired from me, but I'm not kidding.
I'm not being hyperbolic.
It is a big BFD.
Big deal.
If they knew and had evidence Carter Page was not a Russian agent, based on his own statements, and that Papadopoulos was innocent, and failed to tell the judge that?
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm telling you, it will be a cataclysmic shift if that evidence gets out there.
The Democrats will, you know, they love the police state, it doesn't matter, but it'll be ammunition for us to continue this fight.
It's not going to be easy.
All right, in the interest of time, let's move on.
Another takeaway from Solomon's piece.
Was there derogatory information about Steele?
This is a long one.
I'm not going to go through the whole thing, but this gets interesting.
Solomon keeps hinting at this, and I'm hearing this from someone else too.
Ladies and gentlemen, there may be information out there that as far back as 2015, Christopher Steele's credibility was being questioned about people in the United Kingdom where Christopher Steele was headquartered and worked as an agent of MI6.
Folks, this is a big deal.
If this was not, again, disclosed to the FISA report that the main informant they were using, Christopher Steele, was not credible according to his own people, and according to information they couldn't verify, this is huge.
It again means someone went up in front of a FISA judge, raised their right hand, and swore information was true they knowingly knew was false.
Is it going to be framed as misfeasance or malfeasance?
That's a big deal.
This is a political fight ahead.
Make no mistake.
I get these emails a lot.
Dan, you know, I'm ready to give up.
The Democrats don't want to admit.
You thought they were going to admit it?
They're liars.
So is the media.
They're police state hacks.
You thought they were just going to, oh, let's roll over and admit we finally did what we did.
No.
I'm sorry, but it's not going to be that easy.
All right, here's what I was hinting at before.
Here's kind of the coup de grace of this.
This is what I think is the most important takeaway.
It's kind of why I got through those quickly, but they're important points, the prior three.
Again, you can read the full piece for more.
From John Solomon's report.
And when did the FBI first learn Christopher Steele might be leaking to the media?
The FBI ended its informant relationship with Steele on November 1st, 2016.
A little over a week after using his dossier to support the Pfizer warrant.
And the reason they did so was because agents had concluded he improperly leaked to the news media.
But did the FBI know or have reason to suspect that problem before the first Pfizer warrant?
Stay tuned.
Okay, let me translate that for you.
I can sense Joe may be a little, uh, as well as the audience.
Please do.
Yes.
Translate.
Translate to you what I'm hearing is going on.
Okie dokes.
I'm not sure the FBI really fired Steele on November 1st.
I'm not sure they fired Christopher Steele on November 1st, because as they say, he leaked to the media either.
You know what, let me show this New York Times article first, and this will make my promise.
I'll tie this up for you.
Remember when they said they fired him, Joe?
November 1st, 2016.
Because he was leaking to the media, Christopher Steele.
Our source shouldn't have been talking to the media.
Wow, you guys are so great, the FBI.
Thanks for doing it.
What's the date on this New York Slimes piece?
October 31st, 2016.
Joe, there are 31 days in October, not 32, right?
Just checking.
Yeah, 31.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I get confused.
So November 1st is the day after October 31st, right?
Yeah.
Again, just checking it.
Thank you.
Thank you, Joe.
Joe is like Copernicus here.
That was just awesome.
So this New York Times article the day before the FBI allegedly fires Steele, I'm not so sure that even happened, the headline, investigating Donald Trump, FBI sees no clear link to Russia.
Wait, what?
Hold on, Dan, you're confusing me.
The FBI is saying they fired Steele on November 1st because he was a leaker.
So how does this make them look bad?
He leaked, and they got rid of a source who leaked and did the wrong thing.
Now you're saying that the New York Times themselves, the day before, reported that Russian thing was basically a hoax?
Well, here's a piece from that New York Times article I'm actually going to read to you.
Yeah, they did, actually.
Quote, New York Times, October 31st, 2016.
Law enforcement officials say that none of the investigations so far, none of the investigations so far, to repeat that, have found any conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government.
By the way, folks, it's the same New York Times that just weeks later starts promoting the collusion hoax.
It goes on, wait.
And even the hacking into the DNC emails FBI and intelligence officials now believe was aimed at disrupting the presidential election rather than electing Mr. Trump.
Holy...
That's the Times!
On October 31st, the day before the FBI allegedly fired Steele.
What's going on here, folks?
Well, my sources are telling me this was a cleanup on Aisle 4.
I used to work in Aisle 4 in Kifu.
This is a cleanup on Aisle 4, Operator.
Cleanup, Aisle 4!
October 31st is before or after the election of Donald Trump.
Of course, it's before.
Election day is on Tuesday in November.
Why would the New York Times write a piece right before election day?
Basically, that the collusion hoax is a hoax.
Folks, you read it.
I didn't manipulate that.
That's the New York Times.
There's no link to Russia.
Don't worry about this.
Joe, serious question.
I'm not putting you on the spot.
I want an honest answer.
I'm just asking you to speculate.
Why would the Times basically give Donald Trump and his team a pass on the collusion hoax a week before the election?
Honestly, I got no idea.
No idea.
Because the audience is probably saying the same thing.
Exactly.
That's what I'm saying.
Where are you going, brother?
Well, my source is telling me they did that because the FBI was absolutely crystal clear that Hillary Clinton would win.
and wanted to clean up the whole operation, make pretend none of this happened, and they wanted to
be able to go back after when, remember, Hillary Clinton's going to win, everybody's sure of it,
and when it, because it's going to leak at some point, they investigate in spite of the Trump team,
even though Hillary's pre- you understand that, right?
Somebody was going to leak this. Yeah, yeah.
The FBI leaks to the Times before the election. No, no, no, this is all a hoax.
So that years later, when it leaks that they investigated Trump and Hillary's up for re-election, the FBI can say, no, no, no, we didn't alter the election.
Look, the New York Times even reported Trump was okay right before the election.
Look, we even helped him.
Right, right, right.
Thank you.
Now, does the November 1st firing air quotes, because I'm not even sure they fired steel, make sense?
Hmm.
It's the same strategy.
They wanted to be able to go back after the election and say, no, no, the informant who lied about that dossier two years ago.
Remember, Hillary's president.
She's up for re-election in 2020.
Story.
Holy crap!
Did the 2016 election get altered because they spied on Donald Trump?
President Hillary Clinton.
Can you answer that question?
No, no, no.
Don't worry.
They fired that guy November 1st before the election.
They fired him.
And look, even the New York Times reported on October 31st that this thing was all a hoax.
Trump had a free pass.
It didn't affect the election at all.
Audience on Budget Joe, you picking up what I'm putting down there?
Yeah, preemptive.
Yeah, they were sure of themselves.
Of course they were preempting it!
Because right after election day, they flipped the script right back to the opposite story.
No, no, Trump colluded with the Russians.
The evidence is everywhere.
They just wrote it was a hoax.
Folks, they thought Hillary would win.
Someone at the FBI leaked that story before the election to make sure if it ever got out in the future, the malfeasance, police state spying operation they initiated against the Trump campaign, if that ever got out in the future, nobody could use the argument.
Well, it impacted the election.
No, it didn't.
The New York Times cleared them before the election.
We're all good.
And we even fired Steele the next day.
Really?
Because that's funny.
He was talking to Bruce Soar, who was passing the information to FBI agent Joe Bianca after they fired him.
Must be the greatest job in the world, Joe.
You get fired, you get to return the next day.
Amazing how that works out.
Joe, you're fired.
I'll see you tomorrow.
See you tomorrow, Dano.
See you tomorrow, buddy.
You're fired.
I'm giving you a raise tomorrow.
You're fired.
Raise tomorrow.
See you tomorrow.
I thought I was fired.
Yeah, fired in FBI terms.
I bring you back the next day.
Get ready.
Get ready.
I'm telling you that's the story here.
We'll see how much Horowitz digs into that.
That New York Times article is a clean-up on aisle 4 so that the FBI had a story for President Hillary Clinton as to why their spying operation on Trump didn't alter the election and give her the White House so she wouldn't have this stain on her presidency.
And that's also why Christopher Steele was fired on November 1st, allegedly.
And I believe that's why Solomon, who is well-sourced in this, says, stay tuned at the end of that tidbit.
That was great.
I love that cut.
We gotta cut that.
This is one of my favorite cuts.
I know self-praise stinks, but I love that because people are telling me that, and I've been itching to get that out.
Solomon gave us an opening.
All right, I've got more to get to.
Election 2020 update, more including another bold initiative by the Trump administration and the presidency.
They're doing a great job.
But today's show, finally brought to you by our buddies at Bravo Company Manufacturing.
Ladies and gentlemen.
Are you in the market for a rifle?
If you are, these are the finest products out there.
Bravo Company Manufacturing.
Now, in advertising, one of the golden rules I say of it is you're not supposed to tell the consumer or potential consumer what a company doesn't do.
But in this case, this is important.
I have Bravo Company rifles.
They are the finest out there.
When I went to pick mine up at the local FFL firearms dealer, right?
Yeah, that's how you do it.
We're doing this the right way here.
I go over there, I pick them up.
I'm not kidding.
The guy behind the counter is like, man, you're really lucky to get these.
These are really, really fantastic, well-built, top-notch rifles.
Now, what are they not?
This is not a sporting arms company.
That matters.
If you want sporting arms for hunting rifles, those are great.
There are a lot of great companies do it.
That's not Bravo Company Manufacturing or BCM for short.
They build a professional grade product built to combat standards.
BCM believes the same level of protection should be provided to every American.
Private citizens, law enforcement, or military professionals.
They design, engineer, and manufacture life-saving equipment.
This is not a sporting arms company.
These are the finest rifles out there.
Bravo Company Manufacturing assumes that when a rifle leaves their shop, it will be used, God forbid, in a life or death situation by a responsible citizen, law enforcement officer, or a soldier overseas.
Quality is all that matters to them.
They manufacture right here in the great old USA, in Heartland, Wisconsin, to a life-saving standard.
BCM understands these products cannot fail when it's not a paper target, and God forbid there's a life-saving scenario you need to engage in.
Their rifles are the best.
I have fired these.
They are precise.
This is precision, high quality, top-notch equipment.
If you are in the market for a rifle, please, Bravo Company Manufacturing, you need to go there first.
Go to Bravo Company.
M like Mary, F like Frank, G as in George.com.
Bravo company, MFG.com.
Bravo company, MFG.com.
Check out their products.
They have special offers and some more upcoming news.
You want to check out more about their products?
Go to their YouTube account.
YouTube.com slash Bravo company USA.
Check them out today.
Great, great products.
Okay.
Moving on.
So, quick story.
You know, we haven't been updating on a lot of policy stuff because there's so much going on with the impeachment hoax and the IG report coming out.
But there are important things the Trump administration is doing, like their commitment to get NATO to spend more money on our collective global defense, which Trump successfully did overseas.
And the Trump administration, while the Democrats are doing their silly, dopey impeachment hoax based on false information and a fake quid pro quo that didn't happen, the Trump administration's reforming the entire food stamp snap process.
All while the Democrats are doing their silly Jerry Nadler sleeping act on their impeachment hoax.
Check this out.
Great story by the Wall Street Journal.
Hat tip to the Trump administration on this.
Election 2020 update coming next, by the way.
So Journal has this piece up.
The Trump administration basically is tired of, you know, the United States government paying out food stamps, SNAP benefits, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, to people who can work!
The piece is titled, Food Stamps and Good Times.
The jobless rate is 3.6%.
What better time to review work requirements?
Folks, listen.
I am not against, not against helping people out of struggle.
I'm not.
I prefer it be done through charity.
The government is grotesquely inefficient.
Anything the government touches, it wrecks.
The government actually creates poverty.
It destroys, it really does.
It destroys it.
My wife and I donate to charity.
It's not a pattern of, hey, look at me.
Everybody does, you all do, great.
Charity can handle it better.
But, put up this piece in a journal, there is no, no excuse whatsoever to take money from hardworking people, Joe, Matt at the website, me or Paula, to give it to able-bodied people who just don't want to work.
So the Trump administration said, no thanks, we're not going to do that.
They're changing the work requirements for able-bodied adults.
From the Journal, these changes will take effect in April.
By 2021, the Ag Department expects that nearly 1.1 million additional people will face these new work requirements, and 259,000 will meet the standards.
About 85,000 will be pregnant or deemed unfit for work, so it doesn't apply to them.
State discretionary exemptions will cover another 54,000.
That leaves 688,000 people projected to lose food stamps, less than 2% of the program's 36 million beneficiaries as of August.
Remember that the changes won't affect parents.
Let me read this again because liberals have a tough time with this because they're liars.
Remember that the changes will not affect parents, the disabled, or anyone over 50.
Folks, if you are an able-bodied adult with no kids who's not disabled or pregnant under the age of 50, get off your ass and go to work!
What the hell am I paying you for?
Seriously!
Joe, I mean... I know what you do.
Joe's at the dump.
I gotta send him cuts.
Poor guy doesn't even get a weekend off.
I send him stuff on Sunday night for Monday's show.
Why aren't you working?
No, it's a serious question!
All right, we should be helping people out who are struggling.
Disabled folks.
Again, I believe it should be done through charity, but help in general.
Maybe people who are injured.
Fine, you want to work that out.
People who lost their jobs.
You want to work it out through charity and private organizations, local government.
Yes, good idea.
Under 50, able-bodied adults who are not disabled or pregnant and don't have kids?
What the hell's your excuse, dude?
Get to work!
Get to work!
Go drive a truck!
Learn carpentry!
Go back to school and learn how to be an electrician!
Retool yourself like Joe did from terrestrial radio to digital podcasting using these fine tools we have.
Get to work.
Go to work.
Off the couch.
The verdict is in.
Get off your ass.
Go to work.
You have no excuse.
What's your excuse?
You don't feel like it?
My toenails are too long, I have to clip them today?
What's your st- I don't understand what your excuse is!
That I should pay you!
I'm not interested!
Oh, man, that's harsh!
Uh, okay!
Too bad!
You're darn right!
Go find your work boots, clap them together to get the dirt out of it, if you even have that, and get to work!
Oh, man, you can't say that.
No, I can!
And will!
And why?
Because I want to be mean, and I want to be harsh, and this is very un-Christian.
No.
It is Christian.
Teach a man to fish.
Remember that one?
Yeah.
Folks, there is nothing benevolent, kind, or philanthropic about teaching a man that other people will work for him while he sits on his rump and watches reruns of Beachfront Mansion on HGTV.
Get off your butt and go to work.
But he'll starve!
He'll find a job.
There are 7 million job openings in the United States.
There are only 6 million people unemployed and able to work right now.
There are more openings than people.
You'll find a job, dude.
Get off your butt and get to work.
Good for the Trump administration.
688,000 people who are able-bodied but no kids and not disabled.
You're paying them?
You're paying for their McDonald's every night?
Give me a break, man.
Get to work.
Pauly, you getting nervous over there or what?
Okay.
Sometimes my wife gets nervous when I go on these little ranty things.
I can see it over there.
Yeah.
Oh, is that it?
Is that your sign?
She's got a turtleneck on.
She's like, go like this.
Which is true.
She does do that.
All right.
Finally, our election 2020 update, a lot going on.
Hey, quick cut, Nancy Pelosi this morning, just a disaster.
She wants to move forward in this impeachment, but I want you to hear the way she frames this.
She is just, she has to know she is walking off a political, this is political suicide.
I don't know what she's doing.
Here's Nancy Pelosi this morning, right before we got in the air, check this out.
Because he is trying to corrupt once again, The President has engaged in abuse of power, undermining our national security, and jeopardizing the integrity of our elections.
His actions are in defiance of the vision of our Founders and the oath of office that he takes to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.
But with confidence and humility, with allegiance to our founders, and a heart full of love for America, today I am asking our Chairman to proceed with Articles of Impeachment.
Joe, with love and humility.
Nancy Pelosi, in humility, should never, ever be in the same sentence, ever.
Under no circumstances, those two words should ever be co-joined in the same sentence.
Maybe even the same book, paragraph, or even in a lifetime of speaking.
Having said that, did you catch what she said?
Some of you caught it, some of you may not.
She's moving forward with impeachment.
Isn't actually the shocker in that clip.
The reason I cut that clip the way it did, I did and sent it to Joe.
Joe doesn't know this either.
I just send them timestamps.
She said something in the beginning.
What did she say?
Did you catch it?
She said, we have to do this because...
We don't want him to impact the upcoming election.
Oh, new narrative alert!
New narrative alert!
New narrative alert!
Get ready!
I told you about the turkey thing.
That's coming soon.
Not gobble gobble turkey.
The next thing will be Trump colluded with Turkey.
I told you about that last week.
Here's the Democrats new narrative.
Pelosi is not stupid.
She is being politically stupid, but she's not dumb.
Make no mistake.
Don't underestimate your political opponents.
Pelosi knows that this is going to go to the Senate and they are going to get crushed.
There's a good chance they will even, the Senate trial, impeachment is just, impeachment is an article gets forward to the Senate.
The Senate actually conducts the trial to remove the president.
There is zero chance Donald Trump will be removed from office.
There is a damn good chance that Democrats will vote in the trial in the Senate against removing him.
Remember, they need upwards of 10 Republicans or more to agree to impeach the president.
They need 67.
It is never going to happen.
They need 13 to be precise.
It's never going to happen.
I guarantee you they will lose probably even one Democrat, maybe one, maybe more.
This will be a humiliating faceplant for Pelosi.
Well, Dan, how does this tie into the this is going to impact 2020 thing?
They're already setting it up.
Once they lose, they will seamlessly move.
New narrative alert.
They will say what, Joe?
Well, Donald Trump's interference in Ukraine means he's probably doing this with other countries, too.
So we need call records from his other countries, too, to make sure he's not asking them for help in the election.
Mark it.
Remember Pretty Woman?
Work it.
Own it.
Work it.
Own it.
Own this one.
She's laughing back there.
That one of my favorite, like, yeah, I watched that movie.
It's okay.
I grapple.
You want to take me on?
Question?
Let's go.
We'll do it.
Kidding, folks.
I'm not that much of an egomaniac.
Work it!
Own it!
This is 100% where they're going.
They're gonna lose.
Trump is not being removed.
Forget it.
So their new narrative is going to be, well, we can't be sure he's not trying to steal the 2020 election, folks.
We're going to need these other call records.
Turkey, Kyrgyzstan, we're going to need all of these call records because we can't trust the president.
He's obviously using foreign governments to impact the upcoming election too.
Mark it!
Time stamp 5251.
Moving on in the election 2020 update showing you how brutally unpopular this impeachment thing is.
Good piece of Washington Examiner by Eddie Scarry.
Again, up in the show notes, subscribe to my newsletter, bongino.com slash newsletter.
I'll send you these great stories every day.
Washington Examiner, Eddie Scarry.
This impeachment is too complicated to win over independent voters.
That should worry Democrats.
Yeah.
As Eddie shows at the end, ladies and gentlemen, this impeachment is bombing on them exactly where they need it to succeed.
Joe, simple question.
Do you think having this impeachment go over big in New York or California is going to sway the election?
Not a trick.
No, I don't.
Of course it won't, because Joe knows, as a savvy consumer of political content on this show every day, that New York and California are going to vote Democrat in this Electoral College election, and nobody cares.
That's right.
You need impeachment to go the right way in the swing states.
Well, quoting Eddie Scarry in his piece today, impeachment isn't going the way the Democrats had hoped for.
Support for it is eroding among independent voters in swing states.
In Wisconsin, support for it among independents was at just 44% in October.
That's before the main witnesses began.
After those hearings, support fell.
Fell.
Down.
For liberals who have a tough time with directional things.
Support fell by four points.
That was after their best shot, folks.
Support for impeachment has been, at best, anemic in every other swing state according to the Washington Post.
Uh, again, I love being ahead of the news cycle.
We have great sources here.
Tying it back to Pelosi.
Pelosi knows this thing is a disaster.
She's not stupid.
But why is she doing it, Dan?
Because her caucus is crazy and she wants to stay speaker and they're all nuts.
Apparently she went in front of him yesterday, this is what I'm hearing, and said, ladies and gentlemen, if you're going to go forward with this impeachment and you have anything to say to speak out against it, you better say it now because tomorrow I'm giving this presser, which was this morning, what you just heard.
And they all said, yes!
Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead.
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
I declare my right to prima nocte.
This is like political suicide.
And they are just walking off the... Here's the cliff for the gavel thingy.
You don't see the gavel thingy.
Here's the cliff.
She doesn't care!
She wants to stay speaker.
She knows this is political suicide.
So she's already setting up narrative two.
Well, if we can't beat him in the swing states on these polls on impeachment, we'll lose the removal, we'll face plant on impeachment because he won't be removed and we'll lose humiliatingly in the Senate.
So at least Joe, we can say, well, the president may be still colluding.
I told you before, we're going to need those phone records too.
That's next.
Election 2020 update number three!
Wall Street Journal, really great piece.
Excellent, well done.
Listen, Trump's approval may not be the highest of any president up for re-elect, but hey, as James Freeman says in the Journal today, there is the Reagan standard.
Pieces entitled Trump and the Reagan standard.
Well, what is the Reagan standard, folks?
Remember that famous commercial Ronald Reagan ran?
Are you better off now?
Yeah.
Remember that?
Yeah.
Well, when you ask people that question, are you better off now than you were four years ago?
The journal has some interesting results because when you answer that question, yes, ladies and gentlemen, there's a pretty good chance you're going to get reelected and reelected handily.
We'll see.
I'm trying to stay out of the predictions business.
But from this piece, you should smile a little bit on this one.
A new Economist YouGov poll Asked Americans this question, are you better off now than you were four years ago?
The Reagan standard, the famous question he asked.
Among registered voters, 50% folks say yes, and just 32% say no.
While 17% say they're not sure.
Not looking good for the Democrats, folks.
Your impeachment's collapsing and face-planting in swing states.
Swing states you need to win to win the electoral college.
You ask voters how they're feeling about how their lives are better off than they were four years ago, 50% of them say yes.
And by the way, 70% are still persuadable.
Only 32% say no.
You think Pelosi doesn't know?
You think... Honest to God, I mean, if I can be self-deprecating, I love my show, but this isn't cryptic, hidden information.
It's in the Wall Street Journal today.
You think Pelosi and her strategists don't know this?
That's why they're setting up narrative number 7,426.
Trump's impacting the next election, too!
Because they know they're going to faceplant massively on this thing.
This is shocking.
We're going to get through all this.
Nice!
Final election 2020 update story.
This is important.
There's been so much Spygate stuff going on, we missed out on some of it.
Folks, the Democrats, this is going to get very chaotic.
Karl Rove.
Good piece.
Get ready for a contested convention.
Today's Wall Street Journal.
What is he talking about?
Let me just sum this up.
It's a little bit of a complicated piece, so let me give it to you in a nutshell.
The Democrats in the Obama-Hillary primary.
Remember that one?
Yeah.
Not the re-elect.
Obama didn't have a primary in the re-elect.
Not a serious one, at least.
We're talking about the Obama-Hillary primary when he's running against John McCain.
Do you remember the chaos that erupted?
Remember, that went right to the end, before Hillary bowed out.
And there was this chaos at the Democrat convention about the superdelegates.
It's a little complicated.
Rove does a good job explaining it.
I'll put a snippet up from the piece in a moment.
But the controversy was this.
The Democrats have these party elders, these scions of the Democrat party.
That they're not beholden to the primary vote.
In other words, whether Obama or Hillary won a primary in their state, the superdelegates show, these party elders, they can do whatever they want.
So the Democrats freaked out in 2008 because they were like, listen, neither one of these guys or ladies, Obama or Hillary, is running away from this.
There's going to be a brokered convention, meaning there isn't a nominee yet at the convention, which we're not used to seeing, folks.
They haven't had one in the Democrat Party since, what, 1952, I think, for overrides?
That's a long time.
Talk about 70 years.
Usually you go to the convention with a nominee.
John Kerry, Barack Obama, you get it.
Michael Dukakis.
If you go to a brokered convention and these superdelegates aren't beholden to the primary voters and can do whatever they want, the fear was that they were going to snub Obama because the Clinton machine had already kind of like greased the skids, you know what I mean?
So the Democrats instituted to prevent a rebellion.
Are you following me, Joe?
To prevent a rebellion because the voters, you know, the voters want to believe they picked the nominee, not the super delicate Scions.
The Democrats in response to this, they said, this also affected Bernie too, by the way.
They said, we're going to institute a new rule that the superdelegates cannot vote at the convention on the first ballot.
They don't jump into the second one.
Well, as Rove points out in this piece, well, you may get to a second ballot where the superdelegate problem is going to come back again.
Quote Karl Rove.
It could even get more splintered.
He's talking about the convention.
If the major candidates lurking right below the 15% threshold in New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina get a little wind in their sails, unless someone gets huge momentum with big early wins, the Democratic race could remain fractured through March, making it mathematically impossible for any candidate to waltz into Milwaukee, where their convention is, with a first ballot majority.
Listen, I know shouting fraud's awful.
We're not supposed to celebrate other people's failures, but this is a Nelson Muntz moment if I ever saw one.
These numbskulls who just got over this scandal about superdelegates picking the Democrat nominee rather than voters are now going to run into the same superdelegate problem because the field is too clogged and none of these horrible candidates can run away on a first ballot vote, and the superdelegates are going to pick them again.
What does that mean for you?
It means deliciously that if this happens, that the Democrat activists, I'm telling you, will revolt again.
The Sandinistas and all the other ones, they're going to go crazy when the superdelegate scions pick the nominee and shelve them.
and there's a strong likelihood they're gonna pass on the general election.
You guys don't want our votes in the primary?
We're good in the general.
Nice job, Democrats.
We should all nominate you for the Trump 2020 War Room Election Board.
Could they screw this up any worse?
My gosh.
You think Hillary messed it up in the last- Blinded by scions.
Oh, by scions.
Blinded by scions, like that song.
What about a song?
Who sang that?
Do you know?
Quick.
Yeah, Thomas Dolby.
Yeah.
Joe, he's always good with the music.
There you go, folks.
The most comprehensive election 2020 update you're going to hear anywhere.
Hey, thanks again for tuning in and a very sincere, I know we kind of were sarcastic a little bit today.
I like to make it lighter once in a while.
But I really want to thank you for your support of the Bongino Report.
We put a lot of work into it.
I want to thank Paula, who worked long hours into the night.
Joe, for putting up with us.
Matt, who's been aggregating non-stop.
All the web people, including our web company.
And most importantly, you, our traffic.
I'm not kidding.
It's not hyperbolic.
Was probably 10 times what we expected yesterday.
We knew it was going to be good.
We didn't think it'd be this good.
So if you're tired of the left-leaning Drudge Report and other left-leaning news aggregators out there...
Go to the Bongino Report.
And one more thing.
Thank you very much, by the way, to the guys at Rantingly who do another aggregator.
We're not our competitor.
We don't view it that way.
They were very classy.
They're another great site, too.
We really appreciate the classy tweet welcoming us.
