All Episodes
Previous Next
July 4, 2022 - The Dan Bongino Show
44:03
Independence Day 2022 Special - The Dan Bongino Show

First, Dan rants about the SCOTUS 2A decision from last week, "the left doesn't understand us but we understand them". Then Dan breaking down the left, and their choice of subjectivity vs. objectivity. Finally, Dan breaks down the left's extinction burst, and discusses Stacey Abrams abortion interview Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.
Happy Independence Day, folks.
July 4th.
And thanks for tuning into the podcast today.
I really appreciate it.
Hope everyone's having a good time.
I know I'll be having a pretty good time doing a little bit of traveling, having some fun with the family, celebrating this great, glorious country we live in.
Touched by the hand of God, folks.
I mean that.
We put together a special compilation of some of the best segments from my radio show.
Some pretty epic rants we've had that I think are worth your time.
The radio is a little different than the podcast, so some of you podcast-only listeners may be hearing some of this for the first time.
To find out where you can hear my radio show, go to bongino.com, click on Station Finder, and check it out.
So, huge Second Amendment ruling coming down from the Supreme Court, protecting the Second Amendment, and basically throwing out a lot of New York State's ridiculously, overly unnecessary prescriptions they put forth before you can get a concealed carry permit.
Now, I haven't seen a tweet this good in a long time.
I was just during the break, because it just happened.
I'm going through material.
It's a live show.
Bang, bang.
Want the latest stuff, right?
I'm going through Twitter here, looking for some good takes on this from people who are learned in this space.
And I came across this, at political math.
I'm going to follow this right now, because this is great.
At political math.
Says this.
He says we... I don't know if it's a he or she.
We need a name for the rhetorical phenomenon where someone understands his opponent so poorly that he smugly suggests something he thinks they will hate but that they gleefully endure.
This is great.
This is perfect.
This goes back to my...
I think it was Jonah Goldberg, who I'm not a huge fan of, but wrote actually a pretty good piece a while ago.
I don't remember where it was, hot air or whatever.
He was talking about how the reason the Democrats keep blowing it, this was years ago he wrote this on the Second Amendment, is because they just don't understand gun owners and don't even try to understand us.
In their eyes, we're all killers and murderers.
We want school shootings and death and destruction.
Of course, that's beyond absurd.
I mean, it's offensive.
But they make no effort to understand you at all.
And he made a great pal.
It's a good piece, even though, again, not a huge fan of the guy.
I'm sure the feeling's mutual.
But he used the analogy with smoking.
One of the reasons it was bipartisan action on trying to stop the trend of American smoking was because everybody understood a smoker and knew how to talk to a smoker.
My mom was a smoker.
Hey ma, is that a good idea?
Some tactics work, some tactics don't.
But you knew the people, you tried to understand why they did what they were doing.
Why are you smoking?
Well, it feels good.
Well, other things feel good too, like exercise afterwards.
You get what I'm saying?
The left makes no effort whatsoever to understand us.
We're smellies, Walmart people, deplorables, fascists, thugs, murderers.
You've heard it all.
Homophobes, transaphobes, histophobic, phobophobic, phobophobes.
All of it, they're absurdities.
They're offensive nonsense.
But the left makes no effort to understand us at all.
And because that, we keep winning on a lot of these issues.
So PolitiMath says, he makes his point in this tweet.
So three decisions are expected to come down this week, right?
We had the school choice decision in Maine, out of the Supreme Court, backing up school choice, right?
We had the Second Amendment decision, defending the Second Amendment, comes down today.
And then the abortion decision is expected to come down tomorrow or sometime soon, right?
So PolitiMath tweets this, because these have all been, by the way, responses by the left that they've tweeted out.
I'll just send my kid to a Muslim school with my taxpayer money.
That's been a leftist response.
Yeah, okay, great.
Sounds good to me.
I don't understand.
Who was it?
Was it Wajahat Ali?
Who was it who said that?
It was, right?
Wajahat Ali.
We'll just send kids to Muslim schools with their own money.
Yes!
Great idea!
Fine!
I don't understand.
It goes to show how little you idiots understand us.
That is literally what we've been fighting for.
You want to send your kid to a Muslim school?
A Jewish school?
A Catholic school?
A private school?
A school school?
A school that works?
A homeschool?
That's what school... Here, let me give you a little hint.
That's what school choice means.
It goes to show you the left does not understand you, but you fully understand them.
It's why they will continue to get their asses kicked in the courts.
Here's another one, Politimath notes.
A leftist response to the Second Amendment decision today.
This I've heard a ton of.
From Joy Behar on down.
What do you think about black people owning arsenals of guns?
Sounds great to me!
I don't understand what the problem is.
They're not committing any crimes and they want to defend themselves and buy some guns.
What's the problem?
You guys and ladies on the left.
It's hilarious.
This is the tweet of the year.
I'm going to retweet this right now.
This is so good.
Jim brings up a good point.
Jim thinks it sounds a little bit racist-y.
Why single out black people?
Are they inherently dangerous?
What is with you lefties?
Why single out Muslim schools?
Are we supposed to be afraid of them?
Right?
I don't understand.
You're the most racist people.
You're conservatives.
You send a kid to a Muslim school.
Okay.
What's wrong?
I don't understand.
What's the problem with a Muslim school?
What are you saying?
What are you saying?
Why not just come out and say it?
Wait, do black people start buying guns?
Yeah!
They are!
What's the problem?
Black people dangerous with guns libs?
Huh?
Because that sounds kind of racist-y to me.
Here's another one.
Another lefty take showing you again how stupid the left is.
If we can't get abortions, we'll make men take care of their pregnant partners.
Yes!
Absolutely!
Please do that!
I will sign on to that bill tomorrow!
Yes!
We have responsibilities, men!
If you get pregnant, if you get a woman pregnant, you have the responsibility.
That is correct.
You guys, you're so hilariously stupid.
You keep tweeting these things.
Send your kid to a Muslim school, man.
Go right ahead, daddy-o.
Knock yourself out.
That's a whole school choice thing.
I hope more black men and women learn to defend themselves and grab a firearm to do so and don't become sheep.
And yes, I do hope we can pass legislation making sure that there's some responsibility on the male side for men who get women pregnant and try to run for the hills.
Tweet of the year right there.
I just followed this guy or woman because that just sums up so beautifully how lost they are on the left.
I don't want to play it a third time, but we had Kathy Hochul we played before.
We played the cut, the governor of New York who just blew it again.
She managed magically to blow it again.
Talking about the second amendment, how every amendment has reasonable restrictions.
Well, you, there are restrictions allowed on constitutional rights, folks.
That's just a fact, but there is a test there.
The test is it has to be a compelling government interest and it has to be through the least restrictive means.
If you have a constitutional right to bear arms, which you do, a God-given right, I should say, protected by the Constitution, precision here matters.
That if the government were to restrict that right by saying something like, if you've been convicted of a violent domestic violence crime, you will not be allowed to own a firearm.
That clearly passes the two prong test.
It's a compelling government interest, obviously, to not have people who've been victims of domestic violence get murdered.
That's pretty clear.
And it's through the least restrictive means.
It's tailored specifically to people who've been convicted and given due process of that specific crime.
Everybody get it?
Kathy Hochul doesn't understand that.
She keeps trotting out the ridiculous fire in a movie theater analogy.
Well, you can restrict speech.
You can't yell fire in a movie theater.
Actually, you can.
You shouldn't.
It's stupid.
You can get someone killed.
But that's not true.
The Brandenburg versus Ohio decision overturned any of the fire in a movie theater nonsense from Oliver Wendell Holmes, and it overturned it 40 years ago.
Now, I'll double down on this.
Even if you're not allowed to yell fire in a movie theater was true.
It isn't.
That is a hoax.
That is not current law.
Kathy Hochul knows that.
She's lying to you.
She's just, the liberals are just bumper sticker people.
That's why I'm going to do my monologue on my Fox show about this this weekend.
The fire in a movie theater thing is just a convenient bumper sticker for them, even though they know it's a lie.
By the way, where's Tom Kircher and Bill D. McCarthy?
Where are they fact checking this?
This is the easiest fact check ever.
Oliver Wendell Holmes used the stupid fire in a movie theater during a case that was thrown out and trashed 40 years ago.
Where are the fact-checkers?
They're wasting their time.
Biden didn't look lost on the stage.
He was looking for his dog, who was in another room, who was whelping for some water.
This is what these two idiots are doing.
There is no fire in a movie theater legal precedent, but I'll double down.
Even if there were, there isn't.
But even if there were, telling New York State Residents that they cannot get a concealed carry permit and exercise their constitutional right because they don't have some compelling need when the government defines what compelling is, is not maybe a compelling government interest, but it's certainly not the least restrictive means.
The government will argue, well, we have a compelling interest in keeping firearms off the street.
I'm sure some liberal judges would agree with that.
I don't.
They have a compelling government interest in keeping illegal firearms off the street.
But you're never going to pass the two-pronged test of restricting a constitution right in the second half, which is a compelling government interest through the least restrictive means.
How is that the least restrictive?
You're telling every single potential gun owner in New York State, you can't have a gun unless we say so.
That's the most restrictive means.
There was no way this was going to pass constitutional muster.
No way.
This case was bound to get thrown out.
But even using Kathy Hochul's own already debunked discredited argument, I want you to think this through.
Say you weren't allowed to say fire in a movie theater.
Did you notice how that's not a prohibition in advance?
Follow me here.
This is a very important point.
You first tell your friends the fire in a movie theater is not true.
But even if you were right, before you walk into a movie theater, do people put tape on your mouth?
Jim's laughing.
It's a fair question, right?
In other words, the fire in a movie theater, even though it's wrong, is a punishment after the fact for exercising a free speech right and doing so in a way that could potentially cause injury to others.
In other words, they're suggesting you could be arrested for that afterwards.
It's not true.
I gotta keep saying that, but you get the point?
It's a prescription afterwards.
It's not a prohibition in advance.
A New York State law that prevents you from ever even acquiring a gun is the equivalent of putting tape over your mouth because you might yell fire in a movie theater.
And nobody does that.
Come on, am I right or am I right?
It's not even the same thing.
Even the stupid example they use is wrong.
Finally.
One more piece of that.
You know what, Jim?
Play it short.
Play it one more time, because there's another thing Jim brought up I even missed.
So we have the stupid fire in the movie theater line.
The even dumber, there are no restrictions.
Of course there are restrictions.
You ever fill out a form to buy a firearm?
You got to go through a NICS check.
You can't be a prohibited possessor.
That's total bull.
She's making that up.
And then she says this thing about our rights, too.
Here, check this out.
Shocking.
Absolutely shocking.
That they have taken away our right to have reasonable restrictions.
We can have restrictions on speech.
You can't yell fire in a crowded theater.
But somehow there's no restrictions allowed on the Second Amendment.
Okay, again, you notice she says in the middle, this woman, she's just making this up.
Liberals do this all the time.
They are just sociopathic liars.
I mean, why do you think I do this every day?
You think it's fun waking up every single morning?
It's not a hard job.
I love my job.
I don't want to sound like a snowflake.
But it really isn't easy to get up every morning and just rip these people to shreds, but they just make it so easy because they're just so stupid.
They are sociopathic liars.
You notice what she said halfway through?
Jim picked up on it.
Taking away our rights?
She's talking about the government.
The government doesn't have rights.
The government has negative rights in the Constitution.
The Bill of Rights says what the government can't do.
It clearly recognizes our Constitution, God-given rights.
Andy McCarthy made this point, I think brilliantly, on Fox before, a legal analyst, where he was talking about liberals constantly misinterpret the Second Amendment to mean that the government gives you this right and therefore can put a perimeter and a fence around where the right begins and ends.
That's not what the Second Amendment says!
The Second Amendment clearly lays out that these are God-given rights, they are yours, and that the government is stopped from taking that right away.
They get the whole thing wrong.
They're not the government's rights.
They're your rights.
It puts a fence around what the government can do.
Not what you can do.
One more note on this.
Do we have a minute, Jim?
I don't want to take this to what we do.
One more note on this.
Clarence Thomas had a brilliant footnote.
I'll include in the podcast tomorrow too.
In the footnote, he writes, listen, public safety is obviously important.
That's the compelling government interest in that two-pronged test.
Of course, it's a compelling government interest, public safety.
Everybody gets that.
That's not controversial, that point.
That's why you're always gonna pass.
The government always is gonna win on the compelling government interest line.
The question is, is the right being restricted by the least restrictive means?
Clarence Thomas makes a brilliant point.
You have the right against search and seizure.
The government cannot barge into your house.
Now, there are exceptions.
Emergency exceptions, foot pursuit type exceptions, but the exceptions are rare.
If the government thinks they have a case against you for mail fraud and you've been running it out of your house, they have to go and get a warrant.
You have the right against illegal search and seizure.
Right?
Clarence Thomas makes a brilliant point of public safety is just the reason to throw out all the constitutional rights.
He's making a point in the case, what if you have a gang member or something in there?
It's got some kids.
Can you just go into the house randomly and grab the kid?
Hey, it's public safety.
The kid's going to be indoctrinated into a gang.
It's a brilliant point.
You notice how they only talk about public safety with regard to the second amendment, but none of the other rights?
You were kind of weird, right?
Brilliant point again by Clarence Thomas.
You either have a God-given right or you don't.
Liberals want to amend the Constitution?
You're welcome to try.
You're going to get laughed at, but you can try.
You don't want to do that.
You want to use the courts to steal it away.
If you're looking for a firearm, I wholeheartedly recommend Henry Repeating Arms.
They make 200 models of rifles, shotguns, and revolvers in a wide variety of calibers and finishes.
Plus, they have new releases throughout the year.
And trust me, folks, you just can't beat their quality.
The best way to learn about Henry Firearms is to order their free catalog to check out their line at home.
Plus, you'll get two free decals, a list of dealers in your area, and a great newsletter.
Just go to HenryUSA.com and click on the free catalog button in the top right corner.
Henry Repeating Arms uses old-world craftsmanship combined with cutting-edge technology to deliver reliability and accuracy you can trust.
They're easy to use and maintain, making them an excellent choice for personal and property defense, hunting and the shooting sports, and beginners.
And they're made in America, or they won't be made at all.
Remember to order their free catalog and decals at HenryUSA.com.
Just go to HenryUSA.com and click on the free catalog button in the top right corner.
That's HenryUSA.com and click on the free catalog button in the top right corner.
You're going to love this company.
If you're in the market for a rifle, shotgun, or revolver, you want to go with the best in the business, and as far as I'm concerned, that's Henry Repeating Arms.
You'll be amazed by their quality craftsmanship and buttery smooth action that makes them a pleasure to shoot.
Mine were accurate right out of the box and they've been reliable ever since.
The best way to learn about Henry Repeating Arms 200 models is to go to HenryUSA.com and order their free catalog.
The catalog is a great guide to showcasing their Made in America firearms, plus you'll get free decals, a list of dealers in your area, and a great newsletter.
Henry's are backed with a lifetime warranty for 100% satisfaction.
They're made in America or they won't be made at all.
And if you have questions, you can call the reward winning customer service department to speak with an expert who can help you.
Make sure you go to henryusa.com to order their free catalog and decals.
The best way to learn about Henry Repeating Arms 200 models is to go to henryusa.com and order their free catalog.
That's henryusa.com to order a free catalog and decals and to learn more about this great American company.
So what's behind the left's constant push for us to all engage in mass delusions?
Mass delusions.
Things reasonable sane people not subjected to thee.
Whims of the delusion, no to be false, but that other people quietly suspect to be false but are afraid to speak out again.
It's no more complicated than the emperor's new clothes phenomenon.
Oh look, what a beautiful robe.
He's naked.
He's what he means, a beautiful robe.
And everybody's like, it's so beautiful.
So finally the kid goes, hey, look at that, the guy's naked.
Oh man, he is naked.
It's no different than that.
What is behind this?
These two stories together.
The continuing lack of any hard strong scientific data that these surgical and cloth masks are doing anything at all to stem the tide of COVID transmission and yet people are still on the left in love with the mask.
They get violent over the mask.
Despite the fact they can't prove to you with a single shred of strong scientific data there's any causal link between mask usage and a decrease in virus transmission.
They can't do it.
It is the definition of a delusion.
The other delusion is the left collectively pretending that they don't know what a woman is.
Folks, come on.
Come on.
Can we please stop the bullshit?
Can we stop?
Can we please all grow up on the left?
You all know what a woman is.
Please take the diapers off, take your depends off, whatever you're doing, and go out in the real world like real people with big boy underpants on, and you have to know you're full of crap.
Pun intended.
You gotta know that.
I don't think many of you are dumb, but I don't think all of you are.
A good percentage of you are not stupid.
You know you're living in a delusion and yet you do it anyway.
So why does the left push this?
Gosh, I hope I don't fail you with this segment because it's the most important eye-opening experience I ever had when I figured this all out dealing with them.
You know, I'd read a lot of books from Friedman and Chump Eater and Friedrich Hayek and A ton of books.
God and Man at Yale.
I mean, I really wanted a, I wanted a, I wanted a good, I don't know how to say this right.
I wanted a good literary background in what was behind modern day conservatism.
And you know what's interesting?
After reading all those books, they were great.
And High X specifically, and even Thomas Sowell's Vision of the Anointed.
I talk about it all the time.
But you read those books, but eventually you start to, as you put it all together and you recombine those, you know, the separate ideas into new bigger ideas for you.
Well, not bigger.
I don't want to make it sound like I'm trying to be smarter than them, but other ideas that creativity flows and you start to figure things out.
One of the greatest revelations I ever had is the left hates anything that is in any way objective.
Objective, not open to their interpretation.
And the reason is quite simple.
The whole idea of a totalitarian government, which the left wants, where you shut your mouth and the government tells you what to do, requires subjectivity.
It requires the government to not be restricted by objective rules.
So think about it.
Why does the left hate the constitution and faith so much?
God.
Not all Democrats, but the left, they unquestionably hate God and the constitution.
There's no doubt about that.
They openly talk about it.
They mock God.
They hate the constitution.
They talk about it all the time.
It's not me mischaracterizing them, it's them characterizing themselves.
Think about it.
Because it is an objective standard which restricts what big government can do to you.
If you have a God-given right to protect yourself, and the Second Amendment enshrines that, your right to bear arms, which shall not be infringed, that is objective.
It doesn't matter what the left thinks about it.
All that matters is there's nothing they can do about it.
You have the right to defend yourself, and the left hates that because then they're not in charge.
It's one big nanny state.
That's what they are.
They're a bunch of Karens.
Think about it, right?
Why are they so in love with big tech censoring?
Because they hate free speech.
Because if you have an objective right, not a subjective right, to speak freely and openly, that is a right granted to you by God, that the Constitution only enshrines in federal law, but doesn't give you, you get it from God, then there's nothing the left can do about it.
It's why they hate God.
And it's why the left, again not all Democrats, but the left, it's why they hate objective values like God and our Constitution because it prevents them from taking over and shrinking your individual sphere of choices and making their choices with government over your life maximum.
That's why they hate things like categorizing people as a man and a woman.
The trans lobby, which has power in victimization, convincing people they're victims and the lobby is going to protect you against those evil, terrible Republicans, that lobby needs that division and it needs to be subjective in order to expand the category big enough so it's politically powerful.
Folks, the category of people in the 50s and 60s and 70s and 80s who considered themselves a woman when they were a man was very small.
But if you look at the numbers, now you see there's this lobby and all of a sudden the numbers expand and expand and expand.
You think that's some just mass biological shift that happened in a few years that all these people just woke up one day convinced that they're women when they're men or vice versa?
Folks, the answer is of course not.
It's nothing to do with biology and everything to do with a cultural shift and the power of a left that wants to wipe out any objective standard.
Here is what a woman is.
If you're defined by that and your biology, there's nothing they can do to expand the category where their lobbying power is and expand the division.
And if they can't expand the division, they can't create victims.
And if they can't create victims, they don't have power because then they can't tell victims, we're here to protect you against these people who are victimizing you.
You get it?
It is one of the most powerful revelations I ever had.
And you see it everywhere.
You're going to see it over and over and over again.
Once you get it, you will not unsee it ever.
The war on language.
Things you were, you know, air quotes, allowed to say a few years ago, you're no longer allowed to say.
Why?
Because it was an objective term.
Years ago, the gay community, and I forget the order, I remember sitting there at a radio station, I was guest hosting, and it was a story, you're not allowed to say gay, or you're not allowed to say homosexual anymore, it was one or the other, that they consider one offensive.
And they just declared it like that, why?
Because it's an objective standard, it's language.
Pronouns.
The war on pronouns.
Come on, folks.
This is the kind of thing 30 years ago you would have openly mocked.
The war on pronouns?
What kind of an idiot has a war on pronouns?
Now it's accepted on the left in this mass delusion they live in as common.
Yeah, yeah.
Some people can call themselves they.
There is no they.
They is multiple people.
It's plural.
No, no.
That's the person.
They.
There's no they.
It's a he.
No, it's a they.
It's just like Abbot and Costello.
Who's on first?
Language is objective, right?
He is a single male.
He.
Look, he's over there.
Not they's over there.
You see how it pops up everywhere?
Faith.
Why do they hate faith?
They hate faith because it's an objective standard.
Thou shalt not murder.
Thou shalt not steal.
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife.
There were objective standards in religion.
They hate it because there were objective standards and there's no subjectivity and they just can't take your rights away randomly because you don't get them from government.
That is where all of this fits in.
All of it.
Division and subjectivity.
You'll see it over and over again.
We even see it in the mask debate, where it wasn't good enough.
If they really believe the mask worked, then why are you worried about what the other guy does?
Why do you care?
If the mask protects you, why do you care what I do?
Just stay away from me because you bizarrely believe in social distancing, even though the evidence for that is not strong either.
Stay away from me and put your own mask on, right?
No, it wasn't good enough.
They had to attack you.
Why?
Because the left is obsessed with subjectivity.
There was no objective standard for the mask.
There was never any science backing the mass use of masks.
Never.
Ever, folks.
Never.
Anyone who tells you that is lying.
Period.
Public health professionals, please, please sit in the corner and shut your mouth.
You don't know what you're talking about.
The data was never there.
But did you notice it wasn't good enough?
They had to divide us.
If you don't wear a mask, you want people dead.
Therefore, you are a murderer.
And by the way, you're definitely a racist, too.
What does that have to do with anything?
I don't know.
We just call everyone a racist, so we figured we'd throw that in.
But you're definitely a murderer first and a racist second.
Depends on the day.
Maybe we'll flip those.
Did you notice it?
There's no objective standard for this at all.
It was totally subjective.
They figured out that Republicans and conservatives read the science on the masks and didn't like them.
So their take was, okay, what do we do?
Do we point to science?
Because then the conservatives will be right.
No, no.
Let's just tell them they're all murderers and they want to kill people if they don't wear masks.
That way we can divide them and tell the mask people, yes, we're going to protect you against those Republicans who want to kill you.
Listen, if I explain that wrong, my sincere apologies, because I kid you not, it is the single most powerful revelation I ever had after putting together all of those books.
I had read and studied and run for office and gone to all these symposiums and lectures.
I was so fascinated by economics, conservatism, and the power of liberty that I thought to myself, this is it.
The left is in love with the subjective.
And anytime you see any category that doesn't work for them, Like, you're a woman.
You can't be a man.
You were born a woman.
That doesn't work for them.
Their trans lobby needed that idea to get flushed down the drain.
To create a new class of victims.
And that's exactly what they did.
And they made the term entirely subjective.
They hate objective categories.
What is a woman?
It's whatever you say it is.
The language changes.
I mean, they called the Washington Redskins the Redskins for years.
Now it's the, what are they now?
The Washington Commanders?
They're the Redskins.
Okay, folks.
Because all of a sudden they declared mass numbers of people were offended, which was really weird.
Because when you actually went and polled the American Indian community, they were like, yeah, we're not offended at all.
I don't know what you're talking about.
Weird, right?
How they, 90%, Jim, 90%.
I don't even know what you're talking about.
We're not offended.
90.
That's not 51.
And yet, billions of dollars in goodwill and that name, that name was worth billions of dollars.
Up there with the New York Yankees, the Boston Red Sox.
The Oilers, iconic names in sports, switched because some liberal in his basement told you that his friend's uncle's cousin, who had a dog walker, who knew a guy who sold him ice cream, who met Corn Pop, who heard from another guy on the corner, told him that a dude's uncle's neighbor was offended one time by the Redskins.
And they were like, we gotta change it.
We definitely gotta change it.
You see how they do it?
Subjective.
Nothing objective about it.
The objective numbers are in the polling.
90% of people polled who are actually Indian said, no, we're not offended.
But subjectively, the left told you, no, no, no, everybody's offended.
The Republicans are doing this.
They hate you.
We're going to defend you against these awful evil people.
Jim, cue up that voicemail.
This is to show you, by the way, when I bring these things up, I get these all the time.
These people do when they find my phone number and my address is they do a wink and a nod threat.
See, they know I'm likely going to find them because we have a really good sheriff down here.
So they don't leave their names directly and they don't threaten you directly.
They hint and nod at it.
I, you're going to hear a blank part in the middle of this.
It's my address.
Obviously I don't want it out there in the middle of the show, but I want you to listen to this.
This is these people on the other side because I called them out for this and I've got these people totally diagnosed.
We get these about once every 10 days or so and more often on, uh, on Facebook.
This one just came over today as a matter of fact.
Here, listen to this.
Hey, is this Dan Bongino, homeboy dress?
There's a Facebook page summoning all Patriots to meet at your home and to come on.
So just go ahead and make sure to review.
Thanks.
Bye.
Yeah.
There's no Facebook page, folks.
What he's doing is he's reading me my address and letting me know that a bunch of armed people know where we live.
That's what he's doing.
I get these all the time.
Oh, you notice what they do?
They send it like, hey, we have your address, winking it up.
It'd be a real shame if something happened.
There's a group out there saying they should show up armed.
I get these all the time.
Not in those exact words.
Trust me, that is not one of our guys calling to tell me about a Facebook group showing up my house armed.
That's not what that is.
We get them all the time.
I'm not a victim.
It's not, you know, this is one of those, don't cry for me, Argentina.
I'll be fine.
Don't even worry about that.
I just put it out there, I rarely do that, to show you the kind of people we're dealing with on the other side.
Keep your head on a swivel around these people.
I'm telling you they are not kidding.
There's nothing they want more than to wipe away any element of truth, make us an entirely subjective society, subject to their rules, and they want to make you a subject to them.
And they'll do anything to do it.
Make no mistake.
When George W. Bush got re-elected, I was so happy that he... Do you remember this, guys?
His initial thing was going to be entitlement reform.
He was like, I have the political capital, and I'm going to spend it.
Remember that?
By the way, that is the single worst George W. Bush.
I do a good Bernie Sanders, not a good George W. Bush.
But George W., not so much.
Maybe it's because I work with him.
Yeah, Jim didn't know what that was either.
Bernie, I'm OK.
George W. and Bill Clinton, I'm OK.
But not George W. But he wanted to spend this political capital.
And the left, of course, lost their minds.
You're going to throw seniors off the cliff.
You know, we've heard all the nonsense.
It's, you know, you're going to bankruptcy.
So stupid.
It was just dumb.
And they gave up.
The left knows how to turn the narrative heat up and they did it.
Trump wasn't like that.
On some issues he backed down, but on most issues, if you went after him, he just went after you harder.
And the left, because just like I opened the show with an explanation of the psychological behavior learning implications of extinction bursts, when you're used to a reward over and over, put a dollar in the Coke machine, you get a Coke and you don't get the reward, you shake the Coke machine in this violent burst of behavior.
It's got a name in psychology called an extinction burst.
That's what happened to the left.
It kind of ties the show together today.
When Trump got in office, they flipped the narrative.
They said, you know, they flipped the narrative game that did the Trump Republican Party.
They said, build, you know, build the wall.
That's racist.
And typically, you know, a Bush type Republican would back down.
Well, Trump didn't.
He kept trying to fight for the wall.
One point, even pulling funds, military funds to do it.
He didn't back down.
And the left engaged in this massive extinction burst because they were so used to getting what they wanted.
Respond, get reinforced.
They didn't know what to do.
So what they did in response is they engaged in this irrational double down type behavior.
I'm going to play for you some audio of what I mean coming up in a second of Stacey Abrams and others who now have a practical path moving forward now that the battle over abortion has been turned over to the appropriate place back to the states.
The left has a path, even in liberal states, to sound reasonable.
You would think they would take it.
I do not believe in abortion.
Let me be clear.
I believe in life from conception to natural death.
I just want to be clear on that.
But there are states full of liberals that don't believe that.
But they don't believe either, many of them, I would argue large swaths of the population in California, that partial birth abortion and abortion at nine months is even sane.
Forget about legal.
So why does the left do it?
Because it's the Dan Bongino show your ass theory.
That the left was used to the narrative.
Trump broke them.
Switching the narrative.
Republicans apologizing and winning.
Now that they're not winning, they don't know what to do.
They're shaking the coke machine because they put in a dollar in the past and got a coke.
They don't get the coke, so they beat the hell out of the machine.
This is what they're doing.
This is not rational.
It's not.
Not being able to answer a question about where you stand on limits on abortion, where I would argue 80 to 90% of America is like, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
I'm probably underselling it.
Abortion minutes before birth?
That's called infanticide.
Why wouldn't a politician looking to get votes just come out and say, hey, listen, yeah, that's not a good idea, but I still support abortion.
Why wouldn't they do that?
Because of the show your ass theory.
They lost their mind.
They're shaking the coke machine because they don't know what to do because for years they've been used to pushing the courts and getting their way.
Now they're losing and they're shaking the machine hoping the coke comes out.
Here's what I mean.
Cue up Abrams.
Here's cut five.
Stacey Abrams, who I don't know how you feel about this Jim, but I would say absent Pete Buttigieg, who is the king of BSers.
There isn't a better BS, again, absent Buttigieg in the Democrat party than Stacey Abrams.
I was a law enforcement guy for years.
One of the best assets you have, I put this on Truth this weekend and on Twitter as well.
One of the best assets you can develop in law enforcement is learning how to detect BS.
There's a lot of different cues, looking up and to the right, fidgeting.
There's a million different ways to be kind of a human lie detector.
Stacey Abrams is the queen of BS.
She never, ever answers a question.
She's given a ground ball, a bunt.
You know Big Fat Greek Wedding?
It's a bunt.
It's a bunt.
A bunt, like a baseball bunt, not the cake.
She's given a bunt of a question by Martha McCallum.
Do you support any restrictions on abortion at all?
The answer, of course, if you weren't a crazy person and you're trying to win votes, would be, well, you know, I'm pro-choice or whatever language they use, but there are some things we really should consider limiting.
Nope, she couldn't do it.
Here, watch her try to dance her way out of it.
Queen of BS right here.
Check this out.
Do you support any limitation on abortion?
Or do you think that women should have the right to have an abortion all the way up to nine months?
I believe an abortion is a medical decision.
And I believe that that should be a choice made between a doctor and a woman and in consultation with her family.
This is crazy.
Jim, this is Stacey Abrams and the Democrats who are calling for federal laws now to pull the decision out of the medical space, into the political space, to codify abortion in national law, simultaneously claiming, no, no, no, no, if you're not a doctor, you have no right to comment on this.
She's not, trust me, she is not a doctor.
You see how they speak with forked tongue right in front of you?
They just lie to you.
Okay, you want it to be a medical decision, so why are you pushing for new political decisions involving abortion if it's only a medical decision?
Well, yeah, I didn't quite think of that.
Nine months.
You can't just answer to Martha McCallum.
And good for Martha for asking that question.
You can't answer that question, no.
You're talking about a fully formed human being.
Nine months of development.
Could be minutes or even hours from birth.
And you're talking about killing it?
And you think this is sane?
This is what an extinction burst looks like.
When Democrats for years were used to winning in the courts and having the courts justify the termination of life in the womb so they didn't have to answer these questions.
Put the dollar in the court coke machine, get the coke.
Now the coke doesn't come out.
They don't know what to do.
So they respond with rage and anger.
They can't control it.
I'm telling you my explanation is real.
Stacey Abrams knows full well.
That this position is radical and will not win her any votes in what still is a red-leaning state in Georgia.
She knows that.
The people who would have voted for her before because they believe in partial birth, abortion, and infanticide are not voting Republican no matter what.
She is not winning any votes with this, but she does it anyway for the same reason you destroy the coke machine.
It's not rational.
The same reason you hit the elevator button.
Oh, multiple times thinking the elevator is going to come faster.
You know, it won't work, but you do it anyway because you can't control it.
You thought you'd be rewarded.
The elevator never came.
So you bought the body, the mind just takes over and you have another ridiculous, irrational response.
You know, I, again, when I, when I was in, um, Gosh, I shouldn't, when I was in graduate school.
Strike that, I hate when people say that.
Just pretend I didn't say that.
But when I was in graduate school, and we would do these research, the research with thirsty rats.
If you dip or train a rat to get water, who's super thirsty, and then all of a sudden, after a dipper train, right, you make them thirsty, and then they hit the dipper and no water comes out, they go crazy.
Folks, I've said, they will hit that dipper like there's no tomorrow.
They will, like, their little rat arms will fall off slamming that dipper so hard.
It's an extinction burst.
They're engaging in irrational behaviors because their brains can't stop them.
They expected a reward they never got.
That's the Democrats right now.
That's the Democrats.
No limits on abortion up to 9 months.
That is crazy!
Let me get to one.
Oh, I didn't give out the number.
Darn it.
I always forget.
844-484-3872.
If you want to call and join the show, 844-484-3872, 844 for the USA.
I take your calls in the next segment.
See, if you give it out too late, it's not enough time for people to call.
I do that all the time.
Jim, I need a reminder, like a Chiron.
What's that?
Oh, the board's full?
Oh, good.
Well, you called pretty quick.
Good job, folks.
Let me get to this one last point about my Democrats showing their rumps theory.
That's what they do.
They don't know what to do.
They're so used to winning.
Trump changed everything.
It's not deification of Donald Trump.
I'm not, you know, I don't golden calf anyone.
It's just he unquestionably changed the operating principles of how the traditional conservative movement worked.
They were used to apologizing and moving on when the left did a narrative shift.
But there's going to be a big narrative push going forward.
It's a war on Christianity.
War on Christians, and I'll add people of faith.
I don't want to limit it to just Christians.
Folks, with Roe v. Wade going down in flames, these attacks are going to get worse.
I've been covering this story about the war on Christianity intensely because it is the next narrative coming in our direction.
I want you to be prepared for something.
I'm a sinner.
I say it all the time because it's true.
We all are.
Or none of us who have the ability to fully and wholly strike temptation from our lives.
In that, we share that in common with the people attacking us.
What we don't share in common as Christians and people of faith is, although we acknowledge sin, We also recognize that what makes us people of faith is a striving to be better, a striving to not repeat the same mistakes, to stay on that path where you believe redemption, genuine redemption, is possible when you recognize a sin and do your best to not repeat it.
That makes us different from them.
The reason this war on Christianity, especially in light of the road decision and the Dobbs case, is going to get uglier.
As the left quietly knows, I say quietly because in their heads they won't say it, but they quietly know what they're doing is wrong.
They don't actually believe that infanticide is a moral good.
They don't believe that the termination of human life is some ethical high ground we should all strive to reach.
I can prove it to you.
You ever see those people on the corner that show pictures of, or on college campuses, pictures of what an abortion looks like?
Well, you see what the left does?
They violently, violently go and rip them down.
Why?
Why?
If this is some kind of moral virtue, terminating lives in the womb, why would you want to rip down the pictures of your work?
It's because they know it's wrong.
And whereas we're all sinners and we're sinners striving to do better.
They're sinners looking for permission to continue their sins.
And they don't want the foil.
They don't want the foil of having people out there who recognize the immorality of this and strive to be better because it makes them feel worse.
And by making them feel worse, they start to hate themselves.
And this rage develops.
They're really angry at themselves.
They're not angry at you.
You're the vehicle.
They're angry about who they are.
I'm telling you, believe me, I'm telling you this.
Please, trust me on this one.
They are angry and they rage at themselves.
They take it out on you.
They'll scream and throw things at you and rip your signs out, but they're really angry at themselves because that sign reminds them of who they are, not who you are.
Don't ever forget that.
Thanks for sticking around and listening to this special podcast episode.
We really hope you enjoyed it and you have a great July 4th.
▲
Export Selection