Tensions boiled over last night on the Fox set as Geraldo and I sparred over police tactics. In this episode, I discuss the fireworks, and I address the latest radical move by the Democrats to pack the courts and destroy the country.
News Picks:
A recap of the fireworks with Geraldo last night.
Radical democrats move to pack the Supreme Courts.
Senate Republicans call for a national commission to balance the budget.
Coca Cola is panicking because conservatives are turning their backs on their products.
Hypocritical corporate critics of the Georgia voting law are incorporated in Delaware, which has stricter voting laws.
CNN employee caught on tape again, giving up the CNN COVID game plan.
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.
So have you ever heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect?
The Dunning-Kruger effect?
What the hell's that?
Is that some kind of virus we all need to worry about in the After Effects?
No, it's not.
But it is going to be the focus of the intro of my show today.
The Dunning-Kruger effect.
And it's related to the fireworks last night.
Fireworks round two.
Fireworks alert with Geraldo.
Some of you saw it.
Again, I'm sorry.
I hate playing clips of myself, but they're relevant to this debate about police tactics.
Because people talking about police tactics should have some familiarity with police tactics.
I've got that today.
I've also got the Biden versus Biden debate again.
Biden debating Biden.
Who wins?
I don't know.
Maybe they're both losers.
Today's show brought to you by ExpressVPN.
I protect my data with a VPN from ExpressVPN.
Get one today, expressvpn.com slash Bongino.
Welcome to Dan Bongino's show.
I want to get right to it today.
I've got that, got some video from last night's fireworks and why we need people with actual experience to comment on the matter.
Kind of important.
And a note of good news.
You, things are changing a little bit.
I promised you yesterday things were going to change and we spoke up.
I've got some proof today.
All right, today's show brought to you by our friends at My Patriot Supply.
In times of crisis or a natural disaster, is there anything worse than running out of food?
Nope.
I can't think of anything.
You need to prepare in advance.
Don't wait for an emergency.
Get long-term storage food that lasts up to 25 years like I do.
Use My Friends at My Patriot Supply.
They're America's leader in survival food.
I have boatloads of this stuff, no joke.
They could probably send it for free.
I buy it.
I buy tons of it.
Their mission is your survival.
For the last 13 years, they've supplied millions of families like yours.
I've arranged for you to save $50 on their popular four-week of delicious emergency food that gives you 2,000 calories a day.
You ensure everything in your life that matters.
Ensure your food supply.
Get four weeks of food at 2,000 calories per day, and that's the minimum you should have.
This kit makes it easy.
How do you get it?
Go to preparewithdan.com today.
Don't waste any more time.
Make the smartest decision you can make right now.
Get a four-week emergency food kit for each member of your family.
Go to preparewithdan.com, save $50 per kit.
That's preparewithdan.com.
I've got my supply of emergency food.
I've actually got a lot of them.
Be ashamed if you didn't have yours.
Go to preparewithdan.com.
All right, Joe, let's go.
Whoa.
It's so loud today.
Hey, I'm folks.
I'm sorry.
If you hear me yelling during the rest of the show, it's because I can't hear myself talk because I am now deaf from the bell blowing up my, I'll fix that.
We'll fix it afterwards.
Okay.
Have you ever heard of the Dunning-Kruger effect?
Well, if you haven't, you need to know what the Dunning-Kruger effect is because it relates to my, um, segment last night with Geraldo, which just exploded on Fox News on the Hannity Show.
What is the Dunning-Kruger effect?
Well, let's go to a definition of it first.
The Dunning-Kruger effect.
I'd love to read it, but I still see Patriot Supply.
Sorry, you gotta flip that over there.
There we go.
Thanks, buddy.
The Dunning-Kruger effect!
The Dunning-Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people wrongly overestimate their knowledge or ability in a specific area.
This tends to occur because of a lack of self-awareness, which prevents them from accurately assessing their own skills.
It's not a joke, by the way, the Dunning-Kruger effect.
You know, I sent the definition to Guy this morning and I said, hey, can you put this in the show?
And he said, Dan, listen, You can explain the Dunning-Kruger effect, or you can put this awesome graph up, which is spectacular, which explains the Dunning-Kruger effect.
And as Guy knows, I very rarely deviate from my plan for the show.
If someone sends me stuff, I usually just reply, yes, and I never use it.
Guy sent me this, I'm like, this is perfect.
Here's a graph of what the Dunning-Kruger effect looks like.
It graphs your competence versus your confidence.
Competence versus confidence.
And as you can see from the graph you're watching on Rumble.com slash Bungie, and if you're listening, I'll explain it.
People with no competence in a certain area typically have the most confidence about their skills in analyzing a certain area.
People with average competence in an area usually have average confidence.
But people who are experts and expert competence in a certain area have a lot of competence.
But isn't it funny how it's like a big you?
How people with no competence whatsoever in a specific area are the first ones to opine and they have maximum confidence when they opine on a matter they know zero about.
Nothing.
Zilch.
Zippo.
Nada.
That's the Dunning-Kruger effect.
It's a handy dandy little mechanism for defeating your liberal friends in an argument because they always think they have maximum competence in every area.
And they're very confident about it.
Despite having none.
No confidence whatsoever.
How does that relate to what happened last night?
Let me give you a perfect example of Dunning-Kruger.
Here's how this argument with me and Geraldo started last night.
We were talking about the tragic shooting of Dante Wright.
Again, Geraldo decided to bring race into the issue.
Again, he has no evidence to back any of that up.
Trying to, you know, start a race war in the country.
I don't know what he's trying to do.
But he says he has a solution.
For police departments and their training with tasers versus firearms.
I want you to listen to this solution as an example of Dunning-Kruger.
Check this out.
I have the solution to the problem.
Cops wear their main weapon, their 9mm usually these days, on their dominant hand.
Let's say your right hand.
So this is the hand that has the gun.
The taser is on the left hand, your secondary hand.
So they're taught Use the taser in non-lethal situations.
My suggestion is reverse it.
Make the taser the first weapon of choice for a cop.
Put the taser on the dominant hand and the 9mm on the secondary hand.
I don't even know, and I think I said during the clip, I don't even know how to respond to that.
Again, minimal competence in a certain area, but maximum confidence in your ability to find the solution.
Again, I'm not suggesting here That people shouldn't opine on police matters who are citizens of the United States, whether they're Geraldo or anyone else.
But I'm suggesting that maybe a dose of humility if you have zero competence or experience in police matters.
Now, why is that?
You may be listening to that right now, and you may say to yourself, well, damn, that sounds like a...
A smart idea, why not make the taser, I'm right handed, taser on the gun belt right there, and then make the firearm cross draw on the other side so that you go to a taser first.
Well, I had to explain to Geraldo last night, again Dunning Kruger here, why given my experience in both grappling and policing, two things probably relevant to this, control tactics and that type of thing, why this is one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard in my life.
Check this out.
If you put the firearm on the other side, the firearm, you would probably have to cross-draw it because you'd want to fire with your dominant hand.
Which, if you were ever a cop, you'd know that, but you reported on being policing.
What's the problem with a cross-draw?
The problem is when you're tackled and put on the ground, the weapon's more accessible to the bad guy than it is to you.
But because you've never done policing, never done control tactics, but you've reported on it, you wouldn't know any of that.
So maybe a little bit of humble pie, back off, stop telling everyone about your great reporting, deal with facts, and realize you don't know what you think you know, you just know what you think you reported on.
Hey listen, again, I get for some of you this may be a little harsh.
You know, but Geraldo and I have had a long ongoing beef on Hannity about a lot of issues and it's not personal to me.
Apparently it is to him.
It's really not to me.
Um, but you have to understand, I don't feel any need to default to a defending what happened with the officer in the Dante Wright shooting.
I don't have, I just have the need to tell you the truth.
Clearly appears, appears at this point to be an accident.
And what's really super irritating is people who've never been police officers, their lives have never been on the line, they've never been out there, they've never been in a stressful situation where they've been forced into that dreadful choice, taser or firearm, to propose solutions which, if you had a modicum of experience you would know immediately are stupid, really drives me crazy because we never solve the problem then because we get bogged down in dopey solutions from people who have no idea what they're talking about.
That's not helping, folks.
I'm really sorry.
Maybe if Geraldo sought some input from actual police officers and control tactics people, he would have figured out how dumb of an idea that is.
Think about it, folks.
If you're gonna fire a firearm that has the strong potential to terminate someone's life, We all agree on that, correct?
If you are going to fire a firearm, wouldn't everyone in the audience agree maximum accuracy is a priority?
As we used to say in the Secret Service, you are responsible for every single round.
No missteps.
You miss around the President when you're protecting him, you could knock them off.
So wouldn't you agree that if you are right-handed like me, it is probably a good idea, using an instrument that could kill someone, that you probably use your dominant hand?
So if you're going to put a firearm on the opposite side, meaning, I'm sorry I have to stay on the mic here, so for those watching a video, you would have to cross-draw it.
What's the problem with a cross-draw?
Again, if you just asked people with experience, who are competent and have expertise in this and who are actual police officers, he didn't, he's a reporter.
You would know there are a couple problems.
The first, the minute you go to cross-draw, a bad guy can come in and push your elbow in.
And if he pushes your elbow in, what can you not do?
Grab your firearm.
Watch, folks.
You need a demo?
Let me show her all the... Doesn't work!
Now...
If Guy wasn't busy doing it, I'd have him come over here and demo this for us.
Just push the elbow.
You can't get your gun.
Not as much of a problem when your firearm is on your dominant side.
Second, if God forbid you are attacked and he jumps you, the bad guy, or she, They jump you when you fall on the ground or they get close to you.
A cross-draw firearm has the handle facing this way, away from you.
Meaning it's facing the bad guy.
Meaning it's easy for him to draw your firearm and it's conveniently pointed right towards you when they pull it out of your holster.
And yes, you want to put a firearm on a cross-draw side.
I'm sorry, folks.
Experience matters, okay?
Experience matters.
I'm not, again, for the thousandth time, I'm not suggesting because you in the audience weren't a police officer, Geraldo, that they have no right to comment on these things.
Of course they do!
But when I venture into a space I'm unfamiliar with, whatever, space travel, I ask an astronaut.
I don't comment on what it's like to be in zero gravity because I want on a ride once at Six Flags where they spin you around quick and you feel like you're stuck to the wall.
You may want to ask an astronaut what it feels like because they've actually been there.
And then render your opinion.
But of course, Geraldo wants to Play pretend cop, insulting every cop in America with ridiculous solutions, throwing this female cop under the bus.
We haven't even heard her story yet.
Can we do that?
Is this not a country of due process?
Are we allowed to hear our version of events?
Are we allowed to do that?
Is that okay?
Here's the final clip.
It didn't end well at the end.
I think Corraldo, I don't know what happened.
Trump broke him.
I don't know what happened.
So here's the end of this segment where he just loses his mind and just starts attacking me personally.
Because again, he keeps trying to introduce race into this.
With no evidence at all.
And it's precisely because of comments like that by Geraldo, implying there's some racist motive by the cop, that has black men and black women in America feel like they're being targeted by the police, despite the fact that there's no evidence that's true.
Because there are people like Geraldo who go on TV shows and say that.
So when I called him out on it, it ended poorly.
Here is the ending.
You've got nothing.
All you want to do is see the country burn.
You just want to see the country burn.
That's it.
I want to see the country burn.
You son of a bitch.
I want to see the country burn.
You punk.
You're nothing but a punk.
You're a punk, Bongino.
You're a punk.
You wouldn't tell me that to my face.
Well, that ended well.
Okay.
You're a punk, Bongino, you son of a...
You gotta make it personal because he just doesn't know again what he's talking about.
There is no evidence whatsoever.
That black men are being hunted down by police officers.
As a matter of fact, the data indicates the opposite.
I've showed you the Bureau of Justice statistics report from the DOJ repeatedly.
There is no evidence of systemic racism in policing.
The Harvard study, police officers are actually more likely to use deadly use of force on people who are white rather than black.
That was a Harvard study conducted by a black researcher.
For all those sites that say you're five times more likely to be shot if you're black.
One, that doesn't take into account interactions with black men or women with police officers.
And secondly, the sample size is so small, because thank the Lord that doesn't happen often, that there's no statistical significance to that whatsoever.
But he's not going to tell you that because he's desperate to insert race into this, which clouds everything.
A conversation about better training, better equipment, advancing police technologies, what went wrong in this situation, that's all been sidelined.
All of it because of a desperation by talking heads on television and elsewhere to make this about race when they have no idea if there were any racist undertones to this at all.
None.
And as I said to him last night, and I will say it again every time I'm on the air with him, all you want to do by doing that is see this country burn.
That's it.
And it's a darn shame.
I'm tired of hearing it.
All right, folks.
Let me take a quick break.
I know it's a little early, but let me get to my second sponsor because I want to get to some good news.
And again, I know a lot of you saw it.
Some of you missed it.
The reason I play it is because I hate playing clips of myself.
I can just say it again the next day.
But this stuff is important.
It's important that we understand that this Dunning-Kruger effect is real.
It's usually meant as a joke, but it's very real.
People with minimal competence opine on things with maximum confidence, which takes the argument and the debate away from where it should be to a debate where it shouldn't be.
About race and ridiculousities, if they just would have asked someone and gotten an opinion from an expert in the first place, you'd know that was a stupid idea.
All right, today's show brought to you by our new friends at Blue Nile.
Hey, check this out.
This is real.
This is a beautiful locket necklace they sent my wife.
I have a picture of my wife wearing this, by the way, with me.
She's a stunner!
Yes, there is a necklace in that photo.
Guy will throw it in in post-production.
You're not supposed to tell people that, but we throw it in after because today's been a loaded show.
You celebrating the special women in your life?
At BlueNile.com, you can easily navigate thousands of fine jewelry options at every price point.
From textured gold to multicolored gemstones and classic pearls, you can shop this season's stunning trends on BlueNile.com.
Blue Nile has over 165,000 ratings and counting with 90% at four stars or higher.
Why?
Because you get beautiful jewelry like that.
Check that out.
Each diamond is GIA graded, which allows you to view the unique quality, carat weight to color or cut and be confident in the quality you are buying.
Blue Nile is different from their competitors.
They don't mark up to mark down.
Meaning, BlueNile.com's everyday prices are competitive to other online retail sale prices.
They offer expert advice 24-7, legendary service with 30-day returns.
When you commit to a piece, so does Blue Nile.
They've guaranteed service and repair for life.
With Blue Nile, you get peace of mind.
If it's not perfect, it's no problem.
100%, it's 100% satisfaction guarantee.
Shop stress-free with guaranteed free shipping and returns.
This Mother's Day, give mom something she'll treasure forever with jewelry from bluenile.com.
Dan Bongino Show listeners get $50 off your purchase over $500.
This podcast exclusive is only good for Dan Bongino Show listeners.
Use code Bongino, B-O-N-G-I-N-O.
That's code Bongino.
Plus, every order is insured, ships free, and arrives in discreet packaging that won't give away what's inside.
Shop stress-free today on Bluenow.com.
Get beautiful jewelry like that.
Can't show you that enough.
You saw the picture of the lovely Paulita with her blue nail.
Check it out.
All right.
So here is some good news, ladies and gentlemen.
You know, yesterday's show was a call to action.
We got a little bit off track yesterday.
Got a lot of great feedback on the show, though.
I do appreciate that.
If we get negative feedback, I tell you.
But it got a little off track and I had to apologize for sounding a little rambly yesterday, but I really needed a call to action yesterday.
I said to you yesterday what I'll say to you again today.
We are the leaders we've been waiting for.
That was said to me by a friend of mine a long time ago and I never forgot it.
No one is coming to save us.
We are it.
We are the on-the-ground freedom and liberty militia every day.
We're it.
Nobody's coming to save us.
It's action.
It's time to do things.
To vote.
To knock on doors.
To go out and attend these rallies.
Join your local conservative groups.
This is time for the do.
The Democrats do a lot.
Sometimes, you know, we have a tendency sometimes to fall back into a comfort zone.
We can't.
And people are waking up.
And a bit of good news, story in the newsletter today.
Washington Examiner, Zachary Halashack.
Remember Coca-Cola?
Coca-Cola, which spoke out against the voter integrity measure in Georgia.
Apparently, they don't like free and fair elections.
Whereas, Guy calls them Woka-Cola.
Well, Woka-Cola now says it's time to, quote, find a common ground on voting measures.
After pressure from the right.
It matters.
It matters.
Action matters.
The do matters.
The talk is great, but it's cheap.
It's super cheap.
You know what's expensive to do?
Because it costs you time.
And it puts you out there on the front lines.
But when you stop, even the little things, the little, the little do's, the little do's.
Not everything has to be a big do.
You don't have to run for president.
Even the little do's.
Like showing up at your local supermarket, you're a Coca-Cola fan and saying, not today.
We're going to take a hard pass on Coca-Cola and buy some orange juice this week instead.
That matters.
You think Coca-Cola has done a U-turn on this?
Not completely, by the way.
And I would strongly encourage you to avoid Coca-Cola products for the coming weeks to make sure you send a message.
Believe me, these people are probably getting sales live time and their sales were like this.
Coca-Cola, Coca-Cola, Coca-Cola sales.
Let's make a statement objecting to free and fair election in Georgia.
All of a sudden, Coca-Cola sales were down in a dumper there.
Flushed down, you know the toilet bowl flushing sound?
So Coca-Cola's sitting around with their shareholders, who are probably losing money by the minute, and they're like, maybe it wasn't such a good idea.
Let's put out another statement saying, we're looking for common ground.
We can play this game too.
We know how to do, just like liberals know how to do.
You want to boycott?
We can boycott too.
The difference between us and liberals is we actually have money and jobs, unlike liberals who sit in mommy's basement with hot pockets all morning.
We actually have jobs.
So when we show up at the supermarket and buy orange juice instead of Coca-Cola, or just drink water for a couple weeks, one, you're probably a little bit healthier, but secondly, Coca-Cola will get the message.
They need more of a message, too.
Should keep this up for a little while.
Because remember, as I've been saying for days, golden rule number 7.62.
I think.
You don't have to outrun the bear.
You just have to outrun the next guy.
We don't have to outrun every company.
Every Bowtie-wearing, elitist, snob, left-leaning, woke corporation in America.
We don't.
We just have to outrun one or two of them.
Punish Major League Baseball.
And boycott Coca-Cola.
Believe me, these other companies will get the message.
Oh, trust me.
I had a long, long day yesterday about this.
If you think I'm just sitting here And recommending that you do.
And while I just sit behind a microphone and talk, Guy, am I right?
Were we doing yesterday?
It was a lot of doing yesterday.
And the doing is still going on!
You'll see the results of it shortly.
I promise, I am not speaking with forked tongue.
I would never ask you to do something I wouldn't do myself.
Again, even at significant cost to me, and in many cases to you too.
One more piece of good news.
Walmart, I heard this morning, I was listening to Fox and Friends first this morning, because I'm up super early now, which is nice.
You get a lot done.
That Walmart is now refusing to sign this petition against voter integrity laws too.
Walmart's saying, yeah, we're going to stay out of politics.
Good job, old Walmart.
Good, good job.
Very smart.
Very smart.
All right, let me get to our special segment today, because I do got a lot to cover.
Leftover stuff from yesterday's show that's very good and I put a lot of time into.
But there was a major revelation last night that came.
I mean, really, this is big stuff.
This is not a joke.
I'm not being sarcastic.
I'm sitting there on my couch again, getting ready for my nightly appearance with Hannity.
Little did I know it would explode into Geraldo calling me a son of a snitch.
And I see breaking news!
The Democrats are about to put forth a bill to pack the Supreme Court.
Folks, they're not even hiding it anymore.
They are not even hiding it anymore.
Now, what is this really about before I get to Joe Biden debating Joe Biden on the issue?
A little bit of humor goes a long way sometimes.
Joe Biden's debated himself on this.
Who won?
I don't know.
They're both losers.
But what is this really about?
You may say, well, it's obviously about Donald Trump appointing three people to the Supreme Court.
Folks, yes.
The Democrats want to pack the courts.
They want to add four seats to the Supreme Court, which would take it from nine to 13.
Of course, Biden would make those appointments and they would be all liberals.
Which would mean seven liberals and six conservatives, meaning we had, what is it?
Since 1869 or something, we've had nine members to the Supreme Court.
We would now have 13 and you'd have a liberal majority for a very long time.
Well, what is this really about?
Folks, it's about more than Donald Trump's three appointments to the Supreme Court.
It's about Donald Trump's 245 appointments to all of the courts.
235 of those appointments being to Article 3 courts.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
It's about the D.C.
Court of Appeals.
It's about the Ninth Circuit.
It's about the district courts.
In one term, to put this in perspective, well, let's give you two terms.
In Barack Obama's two terms, he appointed 334 judges.
In Donald Trump's one term, he appointed 245, and the Democrats are pissed.
So they want to change the rules.
They will not just stop at packing the Supreme Court.
They will pack every court, the Fifth Circuit, the Ninth Circuit, the Fourth Circuit, every circuit, the D.C.
Circuit Court of Appeals, every circuit.
We will never win another court case again if this is allowed to go through.
And if it does, and we win back the presidency, the Senate, and the House, the Republicans should respond, God forbid this passes, which by doubling everything the Democrats did.
The Democrats want to pack the court with four additional Supreme Court judges?
We should add 12.
No, I'm not kidding.
12, maybe 24?
Appoint them all and make them all 18 years old so that they they're on the court forever.
They're on the court for 80 years and we give them like vitamin C and life enhancing compounds.
They'll be alive till they're 120.
That's what we should do.
Now expecting Joe Biden You know, Lunchbucket Joe.
Remember your Democrat friends?
Don't worry, he's a moderate.
Trump's tweets, they bother me.
What a wuss.
Grow up, you wussbags.
I don't like Trump's tweets.
I'm voting for the moderate.
Joe Biden's a moderate?
Joe Biden can't even figure out what Joe Biden's response on court packing is.
Again, if they pack the courts, forget it.
The country's finished, as we know it.
I'm not kidding.
It's finished.
It'll be done.
We would have to vote everybody back into the Republican side and double everything they did, and then they'll double it again when they get in, and it'll be all destroyed.
So, Guy was kind enough to put together the Biden versus Biden debate.
So, here's Joe Biden debating himself.
By the way, note to YouTube and Twitter, because they are censoring communist fascist lunatics.
Warning!
We have to put an asterisk on the screen.
Big E, maybe an asterisk is better.
This is manipulated media!
We're admitting it!
It's... YouTube, get... It's meant to be a joke.
Sarcasm.
Funny.
I know you're communists and humor directed at the regime is never, I know you want to put us in handcuffs and torture us after this, but this is manipulated media.
You got it?
Asterisk.
Now, this was a real question, Herb.
So let's start, Guy, number one, Biden debating himself on the walkout with moderator question number one on court packing, if you would.
I'm not saying others don't, but we should debate our plans.
I think I probably have a much higher IQ than you do, I suspect.
Sir, I've got to ask you about packing the courts. And I know that you said yesterday you aren't
going to answer the question until after the election. But this is the number one thing that
I've been asked about from viewers in the past couple of days. Okay, so thank you to the KNTV
You see the walkout.
If you're not watching the video, by the way, it is priceless.
Thank you to producer Joe as well for producing the audio component of this.
But the moderator, Joe Biden, walks out.
Joe Biden walks out again, debating himself after all.
And our KNTV moderator asked the question, Joe Biden, how do you feel about packing the courts?
So, Here's Joe Biden's response.
I have not been a fan of court packing because I think it just generates what will happen
every whoever wins it just keeps moving in a way that is inconsistent with what is going
to be manageable. So you're still not a fan? Well I'm not a fan.
Oh, all right.
He's not a fan, folks.
He just said it.
Joe Biden, you're like, damn, this is great.
Moderate Lunchbucket Joe.
The Scranton kid.
Scranton kid.
The Scranton kid has said he is not a fan of Korpach.
Wow, what a moderate.
What a great guy.
Very level-headed.
Sister-soldier moment right there, right?
So just to be sure, I want to check.
Moderator asks again, you know, hey, Joe, are you really sure that this isn't some boneheaded idea, you know, to pack the courts?
And here was Joe Biden's answer in the Biden versus Biden debate to the follow up.
Are you sure this isn't a dumb idea, Joe Biden?
President Roosevelt clearly had the right to send to the United States Senate and the United States Congress a proposal to pack the court.
It was totally within his right to do that.
He violated no law.
He was legalistically absolutely correct.
But it was a bonehead idea.
Folks!
Here it is!
Biden's debating himself and Joe Biden 1 has taken a stand, folks!
Scranton kid!
Scranton kid!
He has taken a stand.
It's a boneheaded idea, and he is definitely not for court packing.
Wow.
Thank God we got a moderate in that White House.
Really?
What would we do without the Scranton kid?
Lunchbucket Joe!
So the moderator comes back, the KNTV moderator, asks Joe Biden number two, hey, Joe, you know, we're asking you this because, you know, people deserve to know where you stand on destroying the country and court packing.
Check this out.
Don't the voters deserve to know?
No, they don't.
I'm not going to play his game.
He'd love me to talk about, and I've already said something on court packing.
He'd love that to be the discussion instead of what he's doing now.
Wait.
Who?
Biden's?
Is it?
Was that Biden one?
Biden?
He's unsure now.
So Biden's debating himself again.
He's on now.
He's unsure.
First, he was sure that it was a boneheaded idea, and he was sure that this was really stupid.
He was not going to support court packing.
But now he's not sure all of a sudden.
Very weird.
So we follow up, we ask him again, we're like, Joe, listen, are you really sure?
Can you clear this up for us on court packing?
Because first you said no.
Now you don't want to answer the question.
Where do you really stand on court packing, Joe Biden?
So you're telling us you're going to study this issue about whether to pack If elected, what I will do is I'll put together a national commission of, bipartisan commission of scholars, constitutional scholars, Democrats, Republicans, Liberal, Conservative, and I will ask them to over 180 days come back to me with recommendations as to how to reform the court system because it's getting out of whack.
So who won that debate, Biden or Biden?
Which Biden is right there?
The Biden who says court packing is a boneheaded idea, that Biden, or other Joe Biden?
Biden 2, Bizarro Biden, I don't know what you want to call him.
Who won?
The Biden who says it's a boneheaded idea, or the Biden who says I want to appoint a commission to study a boneheaded idea I said was a boneheaded idea?
Who won that debate?
The answer is neither, they're both losers.
Those are real clips, by the way.
Yes, they are edited in a way to use sarcasm for effect.
Obviously.
Remember, communists at YouTube, please don't put us in prison.
Joke, comedy.
I know you don't make fun of the regime.
Remember, I told you, Alinsky's rules work, right?
What's Alinsky's rule?
What is it?
Number seven or eight?
Ridicule is a powerful weapon.
I'm not kidding.
It's a powerful weapon.
That's why the communists at YouTube hate it so much.
They'll have this show labeled with a big thing.
Manipulated media!
Well, manipulated only in the sense that we cut Joe Biden's actual answers.
We didn't put any words in his mouth.
It's a boneheaded idea.
I don't support it.
I'm going to appoint a commission to study an idea I just said was boneheaded.
Given everything going on right now, however, with policing, I thought it would be a good idea to show question number two of the Biden debate.
Because he debates himself.
Again, both being losers.
So, of course, there's an ongoing plague on the left, this defund the police movement, which America would burn to the ground, of course, which is what leftists want and race baiters out there.
So let's pose them a question by our new debate moderator.
Thank you, KNTV guy.
Our new debate moderator will be Robin Roberts, I believe, of ABC.
Here's Robin Roberts asking Joe Biden the question about defunding the police.
President Trump says that you want to defund the police.
Do you?
Thank you, Ms.
Roberts, we appreciate that.
Audience, please, applause, everything, you know, this is a debate, it's very serious.
So, it's Joe Biden won, non-bizarro Joe Biden.
Here's his answer, pretty straightforward about defunding the police.
No, I don't.
Oh, okay, thanks, Joe, very clear.
Of course, Democrats in the audience, liberals in the audience, like, boo, defund the police, police suck, that's the liberals in the audience, of course.
Robin Roberts, everybody calm down, calm down.
So, you know, we ask him again, debate moderator, are you really sure you don't want to defund the police?
He gives a pretty strong answer, I believe, to this.
So again, non-bizarro Joe Biden, how do you really feel?
And are you sure you don't want to defund the police?
I not only don't want to defund the police, I'm the one calling for $300 million more for local police, for community policing.
I also think we should add social workers and psychologists to help police on 911 calls.
Pretty clear, right folks?
Non-bizarro Joe Biden.
Joe Biden 1 is crystal clear.
He definitely does not want to defund the police.
And liberals believe it.
That's a Scranton kid.
There he is.
Scranton kid.
Lunchbucket Joe.
Real moderate.
Sister soldier moment.
Liberals might want to look that up.
The conservatives already know what that is.
So then you go to bizarro Joe Biden, who's actually the same Joe Biden.
And you have an interviewer on a show called, what is this, Now This.
And the interviewer, he's speaking through a voice simulator.
We didn't edit that at all.
But asks him the question about redirecting funds away from the police.
Which in English, I know liberals have an issue with English, in English means defunding the police.
Okay, here are the funds in one bucket.
When you redirect funds to another bucket that are not police, because liberals love euphemisms, that's defunding the police.
So we have a new moderator who asked Joe Biden again.
Joe Biden 2, Bizarro Joe.
How do you feel about defunding the police, otherwise known as redirecting funds away from the police?
Do you actually support that?
Check this out.
Do we agree that we can redirect some of the funding?
Yes, absolutely.
So which Joe Biden in the Biden v. Biden debate is correct?
The answer is neither.
They're both liars.
Joe Biden will lick his finger, see where the wind is blowing, and he will say anything to anyone at any time to build some form of political momentum.
He has no guts, no backbone.
He is not a good guy.
He is not a decent guy.
Joe Biden is an awful human being who has ascribed the most awful motives to Americans just looking for free and fair elections, calling them Jim Crow.
Jim Crow, can you imagine that?
Can you imagine how offensive it is to Georgia Republicans who just want a free and fair election where it's easy to vote and extremely difficult to cheat?
Imagine being lumped in with segregationists in the South from the Jim Crow era.
Imagine that.
That's what your president thinks of you.
And you want us to sit back and say, oh, Lunchbucket Joe's such a good guy.
He's such a decent human being.
He is?
You sure about that?
Not only is he a liar, he's an unrepentant liar who debates himself, and he'll debate himself again.
He will change his mind on defunding the police.
He will change his mind on open borders.
He will change his mind on court packing, depending on what the latest poll says, because he has no spine.
All right, let me get to my third sponsor.
And here's what I got coming up.
I got these two stories I've been holding for a couple of days because they're good ones.
They're important.
These are extremely newsworthy things.
I've got three stories in a nutshell that are related.
One on inflation exploding right now, two on the debt exploding, and three on Bitcoin.
How would those things have to do with one another?
It'll make sense in a minute.
And I have to get to this Second Amendment article, Real Clear Politics.
I've been pushing it for days.
It's very good.
Let me get to my last sponsor first.
Listen, I can't say enough about them.
I use them all the time.
Teeter, their inversion table uses gravity and your own body weight to decompress.
I feel something I like talking about.
Decompress your spine and relieve pressure on your discs and surrounding nerves.
Listen, I sit a lot.
I get that really tight hip group in the front.
What is it?
The iliopsoas or something up front that I have to decompress on the Teeter or my back starts to hurt.
Decompressing on a teeter inversion table for a few minutes a day is an absolutely terrific addition to anyone's daily routine.
It maintains a healthy spine and active lifestyle without the pain.
If you have back pain, even if you don't, get a teeter, invert every day, and keep your back and joints feeling supple, healthy, great, and young.
I feel like a new man when I get off it.
It decompresses my spine, but more importantly for me, I do have back issues, it's my shoulders.
Just hang, they just hang.
They hang, they open up, I love it.
Some products I use regularly, some I don't.
This I use twice a day.
It's the best inversion table on the market.
Over 3 million people have put their trust in Teeter.
They've been the best known name in inversion tables since 1981.
For Bongino Show listeners only, you can get the latest Teeter Fitspine inversion table.
You get the bonus accessories, the Stretch Max handles.
They help you lengthen out that spine even more.
And the Easy Reach Ankle System makes it easy to get in for $100 off.
Teeter Inversion Tables have thousands of reviews on Amazon with a 4.7 star rating.
With this exclusive deal, you'll get $100 off when you go to teeter.com slash Dan.
That's teeter.com slash Dan.
teeter.com slash Dan.
Go today.
You're going to love this product.
All right.
Getting back to the show.
So how are these three stories related?
It's a story about inflation, a story about our national debt absolutely exploding.
And to be fair, under President Trump, President Bush, it wasn't just Obama and Joe Biden.
Fairness matters if your integrity matters.
And a story about Bitcoin.
Well, they all share one big thing in common.
Let's get to story number one first in this headline, and I'll explain.
CNBC.
Consumer prices rise more than expected, pushed by a 9.1% jump in gasoline.
Ladies and gentlemen, consumer prices are blowing up.
Have you seen the home prices down here in Florida and other hot markets?
We're looking for a new house, folks.
We need a bigger studio.
The home market down here in Florida, listen to me, is insane.
If you've tried to move down here, you know exactly what I'm talking about.
The price of homes down here is, it's not even insane.
It's beyond insane.
It's like Joaquin Phoenix Joker insane.
It's not like Bob, what's Jack Nicholson Joker.
It's totally Joaquin Phoenix insane.
Consumer prices are through the roof.
The price of food.
The price of gas.
The price of commodities.
The price of gold.
Folks, you can't print a boatload of money every single day.
Billions and billions of dollars being printed and digitally created out of thin air, chasing the same amount of products and not expect the prices to go up.
Let me get to headline number two.
Again, I'll explain why these are related in a minute.
U.S.
budget deficit, CNBC.
U.S.
budget deficit jumps to a record $1.7 trillion this year.
By the way, I read a story the GOP is putting together a commission to study the budget deficit.
I got an idea!
We don't need a commission!
We're in a lot of debt!
Just stop spending money!
How does that sound?
How is the debt exploding?
Debt and deficits.
Deficits are annual.
The national debt is cumulative.
How is it that we keep spending money we don't have?
Where are we getting the money from, folks?
If we don't have the money, the federal government, because they haven't taken it in in tax revenue, then how are we spending 1.7 trillion dollars more than we actually have?
Because we're printing it, folks.
The Federal Reserve, under all kinds of names, quantitative easing, all kinds of BS names for things, are essentially printing money like it's a Monopoly game.
If you did this, it would be called counterfeiting.
Our debt is exploding because we are trying to monetize it right now.
Let me get to my third story because I want to explain how these are related.
CoinDesk.
Bitcoin and Ether are steady and near record highs as all eyes are on the Coinbase listing.
Coinbase just went public at an IPO and it exploded.
The value of Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies are exploding everywhere.
Why would that be?
Why would the value Of a not easily reproducible currency.
Gold, you have to go mine it, right?
You can't just... When the United States government wants to create money, the Federal Reserve just does it for them.
You know how they do it, folks?
They type it up on a computer and they digitally create new money.
It's really that simple for them.
When you want to create other forms of value storage, like gold or bitcoin, you have to mine a bitcoin, which takes a very long time and a lot of computing power.
If you want to create new money in gold, you have to go mine it, which is really hard.
That's why gold and Bitcoin have maintained their value and have gone up in value while U.S.
dollars have plunged.
How do we know that?
Because it takes a whole lot more U.S.
dollars to buy a Bitcoin now than it did 10 years ago.
Why is that?
Because we are printing a lot of money, which makes what?
Which makes the money in circulation worth less.
Folks, This is not hard to figure out.
How liberals and some rhino big spending conservatives don't get this, I don't understand.
If when you worked back in the, say, 70s or 80s, say you're retired.
Say when you worked, there was $100 in circulation.
There were trillions, but just for sake of even numbers.
It was $100 in circulation.
You worked and got one of those dollars.
That dollar out of the $100 in circulation was worth a lot.
It was worth one out of a hundred.
If you now print the hell out of money and we now have a thousand dollars in circulation, you have 10 times the money in circulation because you just printed or created more on a computer.
That same dollar you owe now is only one of a thousand, not one of a hundred.
So the dollar you earned back in the day was worth one out of a hundred is now only worth one out of a thousand.
But what if that dollar you earned back in the day has been sitting in your bank account earning almost no interest whatsoever because of the low interest environment?
You probably should have spent it when it was worth one out of a hundred.
Probably should have bought some gold or something a little more stable.
Or some real estate or something.
Because that dollar's worthless now.
And as that dollar's value goes down, The value of everything that's not printed as much as a dollar, bitcoin, gold, real estate, hard to build houses, goes up and up and up.
Folks, this is only going to get worse.
This inflation problem, as we start printing more money, and your dollar used to be one of a hundred, now it's one of a thousand, soon it'll be one of ten thousand, then one of a million, when it's really worthless, everything you worked for is going to be gone.
Because you can't just print new money at home.
That dollar you earned in the 70s, which is one of a hundred, is the same dollar sitting in your bank account now, worth one out of a thousand, soon to be one out of a million.
Everything you worked for is being whittled away.
Because they're trying to monetize our debt.
The federal government's realized a long time ago, federal governments around the world, they will never pay back the money they owe their citizens.
The United States will never, listen to me, they will never pay back our national debt, closing in on $27 trillion.
We don't have the money.
So what do they do?
They just print the whole bunch of money and monetize it.
In other words, they make the debt we owe worth a lot less.
Because if your money's worth less, because they print it a lot more, So is the money the federal government owes.
That's the dirty little secret about government debt.
They want this to happen.
The more they print, the less they have to pay back later.
Because the money's worth less, and so is the debt.
And that's why things that are hard to create, like Bitcoin and gold, are going to continue in the future to be worth more, and more, and more.
All right, good.
I got some time.
I got to move on.
I wanted to cover this story all week.
It's one of the best.
There's a lot going on, folks.
We're all drinking from fire hoses right now.
I get it.
Exploding national debt, Supreme Court packing.
We have the Chauvin-George Floyd trial.
It's going to break soon.
We had the Daunte Wright incident.
His death the other day.
There's a lot going on right now, and it's a lot to keep track of, but I don't want to forget about the Biden gun grab either.
We could have added a Biden versus Biden debate on gun control too, but you know, listen, there are limits to even my sarcasm.
Things are funny sometimes in small bits, right?
Even though the communists at YouTube hate humor.
Again, if the YouTube police show up at my door today and you don't hear from me tomorrow, call YouTube, okay?
They'll have me in like those little Those little zip tie bracelets put me in a YouTube prison or whatever it may be.
Probably only a few months from that happening, by the way.
But this is one of the best articles I've read about the Second Amendment in a long time.
It's very short.
It's in the show notes from earlier in the week.
If you want to get our show notes, go to Bongino.com slash newsletter.
It's from Real Clear Politics.
Headline, putting Biden's gun control claims to the test.
It's by John Lott and Tom Massey, a great congressman.
And John Lott does a lot of research on the Second Amendment issue.
And they address three talking points by the left on the gun control issue that are garbage.
They're just made up.
I told you nothing the left tells you on just about any issue has a shred of evidence to back it up.
You just have to know how to pick apart the nonsense.
Like Geraldo using the left's new talking point last night, that you're five times more likely if you're black to be Well, what are the debunked talking points the left's trying to use to grab your guns and to get universal background checks?
Which, by the way, is a backdoor way to creating a national inventory of gun owners so they can take your guns later.
points because they think nobody will look it up. Well, what are the debunked talking points the
left's trying to use to grab your guns and to get universal background checks, which by the way is
a backdoor way to creating a national inventory of gun owners so they could take your guns later.
Believe me, that's all universal background checks is about.
They don't want you to be able to transfer your gun private to private because they
want to be able to keep track of it to keep you on the list.
If you can transfer it without letting them know, you have an excuse when they come to your house to try to take your gun.
I don't have it.
I gave it to my son or something.
They can't have that.
That's what universal background checks are really about to the left.
So one of the talking points they've been using to push this through is, From the Real Clear piece, you can see it here.
The background check system, quote, has kept more than three million firearms out of the hands of dangerous people.
You read that, you're like, whoa!
Man, is that strong!
Solid!
Three million deadly criminal Joaquin Phoenix Joker characters were gonna get guns, and the background check system kept them out of their hands?
Amazing!
Well, here's the reality.
Quote from the Real Clear piece.
Since the Brady background checks began in 1994, there have been 3.5 million initial denials.
Okay, well, there's some evidence of that.
However, it's one thing to stop a felon from buying a gun.
That's what they want you to believe they're doing, by the way.
And it's quite another to stop a law-abiding citizen from buying a gun because his name is similar to a felon's.
Oh wait, there's more to this story?
Of course!
In 2017, for example, there were 112,000 initial denials for supposedly attempted prohibited purchase.
In other words, people shouldn't have been buying a gun.
Well, how many of those were federally prosecuted?
Just 12.
Why?
The real reason is that these weren't real cases.
The background check system is a mess, with mistakes primarily borne by minorities through no fault of their own.
The error rate for black males is three times their share of the population.
You know, Yeah, I hate cliches.
The facts are stubborn things.
But they are!
They're stubborn because they're facts.
They don't move.
They're immovable.
Facts?
Facts?
You're gonna move?
They're not gonna move!
It's like pushing on a fire hydrant.
It's not gonna move unless you run it over.
The background check system has not blocked 3 million deadly felons from getting firearms.
It's more like 12.
Most people they've blocked are minority males whose names match someone who's a felon, but who's not them!
Can you just tell the truth?
If your goal is a universal background check system because you want a list, just say it!
Do you have to lie about everything all the time?
Here's the second garbage discredited talking point the Biden team's using.
They said, gosh, that horrible incident in Charleston.
There's a Charleston loophole.
Remember that situation, that deadly situation with Dylann Roof?
Well, Biden said if there's only been, if there were only three more days to check Dylann Roof's background, Roof would have been stopped from buying a gun, I'm quoting from the Real Clear piece, thereby preventing the horrible Charleston, South Carolina church shooting.
So Biden's team is saying, just to be clear, if we just had a few more days, we could have kept this firearm out of Dylann Roof's hands.
Ladies and gentlemen, that's a lie.
Quote.
You can't buy a gun if you have a felony or certain misdemeanor convictions, or if you're arrested but not yet convicted of a crime with a possible prison sentence of at least one year.
Since Dylann Roof's arrest was for a misdemeanor drug offense, which had a maximum possible sentence of six months, a longer waiting period would have done nothing to block this gun purchase.
There was no Charleston loophole.
They're just making this up.
This was a horrible, horrific tragedy.
If you've seen the video, everybody's heard the story.
It's tough to even go, I don't even want to re-go back there.
But that doesn't entitle you to a separate set of non-existent air quotes facts.
There's no Charleston loophole.
You could have waited a hundred days for Roof to buy the gun.
He was not a prohibited possessor.
If your goal is that you, again, just like your first, if your goal is for a universal background check system because you want a national list of firearm owners, then just say it.
Just come out, be honest, and say it.
Let us make our own decisions.
If your goal is to create a 30-day waiting period for firearms purchases, then just say it so we can debate it.
Stop making things up like it was the Charleston loophole.
Here's the last one.
Biden said, quote, gun makers are exempt from being sued.
This is the only outfit that is exempt from being sued.
Folks, this is just made up.
Biden just pulled, this is again, Biden debating himself.
He just pulls this stuff, the Scranton kid, out of thin air.
He just makes it up.
Here's from the piece.
Here's the real answer here.
The president claims this is the top change he wants.
In fact, however, if gunmakers make defective guns, you can sue them.
Likewise, if they break the law, like selling a firearm without a background check, you can sue them.
Gunmakers are sued all the time, folks.
Biden's proposal is very different from current law.
He wants gun manufacturers held civilly liable for misuse of guns they sell.
This would allow lawsuits against manufacturers and sellers whenever a crime accident or suicide occurs with a gun.
The straightforward result would be to put gun makers out of business.
Of course it would!
Again, if that's the Biden agenda, open up to litigious legal firms, lawsuits for every firearm, and misuse of a firearm by a user where the firearm was sold legally, Of course gun makers, their entire operating expense would be legal fees.
They'd be in court every day.
Can you imagine suing car makers, not due to negligence, but because someone buys a car that functions perfectly, no problems, no deceit, no nothing.
Sell you a car, you then take that car, go out, intentionally run someone over, and the car maker can be sued for that?
Folks, there are thousands of car accidents a day.
There'd be no car makers anymore.
But because it's a firearm, which is a lightning rod to the left, that wants you to suckle on the teat of government for your public safety requirements, and doesn't want you to be able to defend yourself, they have to make things up.
And create fictitious categories like legal immunity they say exists for gun manufacturers, which is not true!
Gun manufacturers are sued all the time.
Folks, if you just please go to your phone or your computer and just put in a search engine, gun manufacturer lawsuits, it happens all the time.
It's not complicated, any of this.
If you just deal in facts, please read the whole piece.
It's very informative.
It's up in my newsletter this week.
Again, to get my newsletter, go to bonginoreport.com.
Of course, it's free.
We will not spam your inbox, I promise you, but it's some of the best articles I pick off the internet every day.
You can also find a lot of them at bonginoreport.com, where we're running the story right now about the court packing.
I encourage you to read it.
Folks, thanks again for tuning in.
I really appreciate it.
And again, I deeply appreciate your support of my upcoming radio show.
Be launching nationally, 12 noon Eastern time to 3 p.m.
every day.
It'll be right after the podcast.
We'll run right into it.
Please call your local radio station, email them.
Tweet to them, parlor to them, whatever you gotta do, ask them if they're gonna carry the show.
We'd really appreciate your support.
Thanks again.
Check out the video version of the show, Rumble.com slash Bongino.
