Sean Hannity Show - Freedom Caucus 2017 - 12.27

Dec. 28, 2016 - Sean Hannity Show

01:15:31

Freedom Caucus 2017 - 12.27

Dan Bongino fills in for Sean and sits down with Congressman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) who is slated to replace Congressman Jim Jordan as the new chairman of the House Freedom Caucus. What's planned for 2017 and how does the Freedom Caucus seek to work with President Trump? All that and more is discussed with Congressman Meadows. The Sean Hannity Show is live Monday through Friday from 3pm - 6pm ET on iHeart Radio and Hannity.com Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	This is an iHeart Podcast.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	I'm Carol Markovich.
	And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally on the iHeartRadio app Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast.
	This is the Sean Hannity Show podcast.
	All right, welcome to the Sean Hannity show.
	This is not the voice of Sean Hannity.
	It's the voice of Dan Bongino.
	But a big Merry Christmas.
	You know, that reminds me of his uh I was looking through Instagram the other day.
	And have you all seen this?
	It's a pretty it's a pretty popular meme going around.
	It's the Batman slapping Robin meme.
	And of course, you can fill in the text, and it says, Batman's, of course, slapping Robin.
	You've probably seen a few social media savvy cats out there.
	And Batman's saying, we can say Merry Christmas now, the Republicans won.
	So Merry Christmas, happy Hanukkah to our Jewish friends out there.
	Israel's gonna be a big topic on today's show.
	And uh it does feel good to say that.
	It feels even better, apparently.
	I saw a Washington examiner story about something like 57 to 37% of Americans prefer saying Merry Christmas.
	Another example of the absolute futility of the far left trying to institute some kind of silly cultural war against Christmas that blows up in their faces every single time.
	So good job, American leftists.
	Thank you again for uh inspiring a backlash against your utter silliness.
	I am Dan Bongino, I'm at D. Bongino on Twitter.
	Make sure you give Sean a follow to at Sean Hannity.
	If you want to tweet me comments, criticisms, whenever we take them all.
	I'm the contributing editor or a contributing editor over at Conservative Review.
	And uh that's really good to be here.
	I miss you all.
	It's been a while.
	So today's show.
	You know, I wanted to talk about a couple of different things, but Israel, of course, jumped out at me because it's another example of Barack Obama just instituting maximum carnage levels out the door.
	I mean, have you ever seen a lame duck president come out and be as vindictive, petty, small, um I mean, I'm trying to think of the words because what I don't want to do is I don't want to get into nasty personal attacks because you'll lose the you know, you'll lose the argument will be lost in it, right?
	He is George Bush leaves office.
	He loses, right?
	He leaves office and he doesn't say a word about Barack Obama.
	He matter of fact, not only that, I I had some objections to that.
	I felt like George Bush personally should have defended himself and and didn't.
	He let him, he let him do his thing, Barack Obama do his thing.
	Even when Barack Obama's quote thing was crap.
	I mean, when Barack Obama's thing was instituting Obamacare, which hiked your premiums, shrank doctor's networks, I mean, an absolute epic legislative policy disaster like we haven't seen in decades.
	And George George W. stayed really quiet.
	Really quiet.
	Out of respect for the sitting president.
	This guy hasn't even left office yet.
	He's a lame duck.
	We have a president elect.
	And he already can't keep quiet.
	You heard the the clip when we opened the show.
	Michelle Obama, oh, now you know what it feels like to not have any hope.
	Then today taking another shot, which is really, really getting pathetic.
	The shots at Fox News.
	It's it's embarrassing.
	It's embarrassing.
	I mean, can you get over it?
	You lost.
	Like, since you've been in office, Barack Obama, you've been a forest fire to the Democratic Party.
	A forest fire.
	They've lost, what is it, a thousand seats?
	They haven't had this little power.
	Federal st at the federal, state, and local level since 1928.
	Claire, uh, clearly, this was a complete repudiation of the Barack Obama legacy.
	Now, I don't want to I don't really care how he's personally popular.
	Yeah, that's cute.
	Great.
	What is he running for?
	Like kindergarten class president?
	What does he bring in the best cupcakes for his birthday when he was In third grade.
	Hey, we really like him, but his policies really suck.
	I mean, he's been repudiated completely.
	Lost the House, lost the Senate, lost the presidency.
	Barack Obama's been good at one thing.
	He's been good for Barack Obama.
	I'll give him this, ladies and gentlemen.
	He's a rock star candidate.
	That's it.
	He is a great campaigner.
	He campaigns for himself wonderfully.
	As for his policies, and actually doing something positive for America, I think this election proves that that is a bunch of extensive uh garbage, as the old New York Knicks uh broadcast used to say in the fourth quarter when they were losing by 30.
	So he leaves, and then another shot he takes before he.
	I'm gonna get to Israel in a second, but he says, Oh, I could have won.
	I could have beaten Trump if I could run for a third term.
	Ladies and gentlemen, who says that?
	No, no, seriously, to all our liberal friends.
	I know Sean has liberal listeners, I know it.
	Because I I listen to the show myself and I I see what happens on Twitter.
	So there are liberals listening to our liberal friends.
	I'm dead serious.
	Regardless of your beefs with Trump, with George W. Like, what kind of a sitting president talks like that?
	Like, oh, I could have beaten this guy if we went for a third term.
	Yeah, but you can't.
	You can't run for a third term.
	Like you what?
	You could have beaten him if you ran for a third term.
	Well, what are you trying to do?
	I mean, it reminds me.
	Do you remember the Simpsons?
	You remember Nelson Munz?
	I wasn't a big Simpsons fan, but when I was in um one of my the training academies I went to with law enforcement side, I remember this guy was obsessed with Nelson Munz, and he used to make that sound.
	You remember that?
	Like if something bad happened.
	And I think it was Bart, like fell out of a tree, Bart Simpson one time, and he broke his arm.
	And he he said, you know, and he goes, eh.
	And Bart's like, oh, I broke my arm.
	He goes, but I said uh-huh.
	Like this is Barack Obama.
	Like we're playing childish games right now.
	I could have won if I could have run for a third time.
	This is just outrageous.
	This is silly stuff.
	He needs to grow up.
	But that's all petty personal stuff.
	The stuff he's doing out the out the door by edict, legislatively, and through his, you know, his pen and his phone and through the UN is causing real damage, ladies and gentlemen.
	I'm being deadly serious on this.
	This is going to have very severe ramifications going forward.
	This thing on Israel, this stunt on Israel he pulled is quite literally unprecedented.
	We have thrown our only democratic friend in the region under the bus.
	Now, folks, what I want to get into during the show, and we have uh Sebastian Gorka coming up later at four.
	We have Congressman Mark Meadows, a big fan of him, 430, and uh Noah Pollock at five.
	The problem I have with this is it requires a complete rewriting of history, number one, but it acknowledges the fact that there were these two groups of people, because you have to understand the why, where the attack on Israel, the anti-Israel posture comes from.
	If you don't understand the why, you don't understand what's really going on behind the scenes.
	The why matters here.
	The why always matters with the left because there's always a reason for the stuff they do.
	You know, whether it was Obamacare, it wasn't about health care, nothing to do with health care.
	It had everything to do with control.
	Same thing with tax policy.
	You name it, when you get to the hard left, I'm not talking about all Democrats, but when you get to the motivations for the hard left, you can always distill it down to this one point.
	It's always about control.
	And control means freedom being a zero-sum game, means taking away your liberty and forfeiting it, ceding it over to some state entity.
	That's always the goal of the liberal.
	Always.
	Every time.
	Now with the Israeli issue and the Obama's anti-Israel uh posture, and just to give you a little context on what happened, for those of you most of you have probably heard, but in case you haven't, it's been a busy weekend.
	There was a resolution put forth at the United Nations to basically condemn settlements in areas of the West Bank, which is Israeli land, folks.
	It's Israeli land.
	I don't care what the anti-Israeli crew out there says, it is Israeli land, their historical claims to this land going back thousands of years.
	It's Israeli land.
	I'll go into that a little more during the show, but there was a resolution put forth to condemn settlements on that land.
	Basically, Israelis living on Israeli land.
	That that's that's It.
	They want to condemn it.
	And the United Nations put forth this resolution, which the United States could have vetoed, could have blocked, and we didn't.
	We took a pass.
	We did the old, you know, Lucy Charlie Brown thing where we put the football and we pulled the football away at the last minute on the Israelis.
	And they let this resolution pass.
	This is going to have very damaging effects, which we're going to get into here.
	But it's important you understand the why.
	The why matters, man.
	The why matters.
	There are two groups of people that have aligned here.
	Two groups of people that see this that are passionately embedded with this anti-Israel movement.
	First, it's just the anti-Semite crowd.
	There is a significant swath, uh, sadly, of people out there who just can't stand the existence of Israel.
	I mean, do you need any proof of this?
	I mean, whether it's Al Qaeda, the uh the uh radical Islamist crowd, uh whether it's Hamas, uh Hezbollah, it doesn't matter.
	I mean, you know, regional terrorist groups, you can you can you you can't swing a dead cat within the region without hitting someone who thinks Israel shouldn't exist.
	It's sad, it's sick, it's deranged, but there are people who believe Israel, many people who believe Israel should be wiped off the map.
	That crowd, of course, supports this kind of a thing because they don't want settlements to exist because they don't want Israel to exist.
	There's a big difference.
	It's not about the settlements, it's about Israel.
	They want Israel wiped off the map.
	These quotes are legion, they're everywhere.
	That's the first group of people.
	But they've found kind of a convenient partner, ladies and gentlemen, with another group of people.
	You know, and I've I've read some of this in books and some other people have put these theories out there.
	I'm certainly not the one who invented this by any stretch.
	It's not an original thought, but it is a thought you need to know nonetheless.
	They've combined with the American hard left, not all Democrats, I want to be very clear on that.
	A lot of Democrats are tired of this anti-Semitic nonsense, too.
	But the American hard left that objects to Israel for not specifically because of anti-Semitic reasons, although that may be a part of it, but because they see Israel like they see the United States.
	They see them as a relatively free market economy, a prosperous economy in a section of the world where other people and other groups of people just couldn't make it happen, folks.
	If Israel is allowed to exist, having been given really a patch of sand with relatively few natural resources, and Israel could become one of the world's most prosperous per person uh economies in the entire world.
	If this is allowed to stand as a model of success, then it pretty much destroys all of the hard left redistributionist socialist type thinking out there, if it's allowed to stand.
	Now, again, I'm not suggesting that the people, those type of people, the anti-capitalist crowd and the anti-Semitic crowd, that there's not a little bit of each and both.
	But largely those are two distinct crowds that have found one common cause in the destruction of Israel, and it is disgusting.
	It's pitiful, it's pathetic.
	I've done all kinds of Facebook sessions on this kind of stuff.
	I get tired of it.
	All right, folks, I got more on this ahead.
	Please don't uh don't tune out.
	This is important.
	Explain the why.
	You know, the why matters, how these crowds have come together and found some kind of meeting in the destruction of Israel, which I find pretty much disgusting.
	I'm Dan Bongino at D. Bongino on Twitter, contributing editor over at Conservative Review.
	Fill it in for Sean Hannity.
	If you want to give us a call, 800-941-7326.
	That's 800 nine four-one Sean.
	The contributing editor over a conservative review, happy to be back.
	Love Sean's audience.
	It's a big loyal audience.
	We dig that chili.
	I've been talking Israel because it's a sensitive topic for me, because it's not just about Israel, folks.
	Obama's slap in the face to Israel out the door, this UN resolution condemning settlements, what you and I would basically call houses in Jewish territory in Israel is Israeli territory, uh, is is a disgrace.
	A refusal to block this resolution is a slap at liberty, it's a slap at freedom.
	And understand for all you suckers out there being sucked into the vortex of this boycott, divest uh silly and sanctioned movement against Israel.
	I see this a lot on college campuses.
	Understand that you are on the opposite side of liberty and freedom, and you're embarrassing yourself.
	You you look silly, you have no idea what you're talking about, you have no idea what the idea of liberty or freedom is.
	You're just making it up because what is it?
	I don't know.
	I don't get I haven't been on a college campus in a while.
	Is this like the new cool thing to do to boycott the only democracy in the region?
	Like boycott it in favor of what?
	You want a dictatorship?
	Because there's certainly a lot of options in a lot of Arab countries over there.
	What do you want?
	You want an oligarchy?
	What a monarchy?
	What do you what do you want?
	You have a lot of choices.
	What I thought college kids were all about like freedom, man.
	It's cool, brother, freedom.
	Peace, love, and tyranny.
	Let's boycott the Israelis.
	Why?
	Because they're oppressors.
	How?
	They're occupying land, occupying land.
	How?
	They're occupying their own land?
	How do you do that?
	Like I, you know, I have a radio studio in my house.
	Am I occupying my own house?
	Like I'm an occupier now?
	Banjino is occupying the Bon Gino household.
	Are you that stupid?
	Folks, I'm I'm serious, man, because this is really, and I don't understand, too.
	Listen, I'm largely a conservatarian.
	I have a pretty heavy libertarian bent on a lot of issues, government surveillance, you know, some issues that have to do with drug policy and things like that.
	But I can't understand my libertarian friends either who don't understand that Israel is not a foreign policy issue.
	You may say, wow, that's crazy, Dan.
	How is Israel not a foreign policy issue?
	Well, let me explain it to you.
	If you're if you're not open to an explanation, don't bother.
	But if you're actually open-minded and you want to hear, I'll be happy to explain this.
	When I in my prior life as a federal agent, we did a lot of counterterror investigations.
	Now, we were not, I was a Secret Service agent, not an FBI agent.
	The FBI is the lead agent on terrorism investigations.
	But I was involved in a few of them, especially when I was on the Long Island office, uh, which is a subset of the New York field office and obviously in New York City.
	Well, it's in Brooklyn now, but used to be in Manhattan at Seven World Trade Center.
	And I specifically remember working this really long case with these counterterrorism guys that had some experience in this, and really getting intimately involved in the ideology that motivates a lot of these people, how they finance terror operations.
	You know, these things can be expensive, folks.
	Terrorism is not cheap.
	We'll have Sebastian Gork on at four o'clock.
	We could talk more about that.
	But terrorism isn't cheap.
	Uh it's not.
	It costs money to finance these kind of things.
	It's gotten cheaper with these small target terror assaults.
	But the 9-11 attack, depending on what estimates you see, cost between 500,000 and a million dollars.
	Now, there are a number of ways they do that.
	Untaxed cigarettes, counterfeit credit cards, and that's where I came in, and we had a big case involving counterfeit credit cards.
	And it's fascinating when you talk to some of these people who understand the terrorist mindset and the anti-Israel mindset.
	And what you have to understand, folks, is this is an asymmetric battle.
	And what I mean by that is one side has rules, us, and the other side are savages who have no rules.
	Like we're we're we're we're playing by the rules.
	Like we try not to kill innocent people, just like the Israelis.
	You know, we won't bomb civilian targets intentionally.
	There are always mistakes in war, but we don't target civilians like the Israelis.
	You know, we we try to abide by international rules on war prisoners and and treating them uh, you know, in a in a decent way.
	Have we always done it?
	No.
	Have we punished people who've broken those rules?
	Yes, like the Israelis.
	And then you have the other side, the savages.
	Who put pipe bombs with marbles and screws on public buses to make sure that, you know, nine and ten-year-old kids get shredded by shrapnel from a pipe bomb.
	That's the other side.
	You know, it reminds me of a quote by Gold in Mair, who said, you know, we can she said to the to the Arabs in the region, you know, we can forgive you for killing our children, but we can never forgive you for making us kill yours.
	And another one by Bibi Netanyahu, who was correct.
	You know, if the Palestinians would disarm, they could have a viable state, there'd be a process to peace, there'd be peace.
	But if the Israelis disarm, there'd be no Israel because they'd be slaughtered.
	Folks, the other side in this asymmetric battle where we have rules and they don't dictate the rules of war.
	And this is to get to my point as to why this isn't a foreign policy issue.
	The other side makes no distinction between the United States and Israel.
	They don't care what you think.
	They don't care even a little bit.
	They don't care about, listen, we got to ease up on our farm.
	I get it.
	I I am not a big uh foreign interventionist either.
	I think we've had some pretty poor outcomes based on foreign policy interventions where we didn't have an end game.
	I get it.
	I totally understand.
	I'm very sympathetic to that argument.
	What I'm not sympathetic to is an argument about, hey, listen, Israel, let them handle their own business.
	It's a foreign policy issue when our enemies don't see it that way.
	Their infamous line is first the Saturday people, then the Sunday people.
	The Saturday people, of course, referencing uh people who are Jewish and the Sunday people being us.
	That's what they're talking about.
	First Israel, then the United States.
	They don't care.
	They don't make a distinction.
	To them it's the United States, Israel, who cares?
	We get them both.
	It's not a foreign policy issue for them.
	These people are not negotiating international sediments.
	They're negotiating death and death only.
	So I what I can't understand is how people constantly get suckered into defending this silly, stupid argument like, oh Israel Israel, it's an apartheid state.
	It is?
	Really?
	Because it would be peace tomorrow if they would just stop inflicting massive carnage on the civilian population of Israel.
	There would literally be peace tomorrow.
	But they don't even want to recognize their right to exist.
	It's absurd.
	All right, let me take a call.
	I love when people you want to disagree?
	I'm telling you, bring it.
	800 941 7326, 800 941 Sean, if you want to call in.
	Let's take uh Tom in Miami.
	Tom, you're on with Dan Bon Gino.
	How are you doing?
	Uh I disagree with your argument.
	The idea that anyone that disagrees is automatically anti Semitic is like the liberals playing the race card all the time.
	They call Israel our best friend, but they hadn't shed a drop of blood or spent a penny in any of our wars or for their benefit.
	And uh we can't do that.
	Wait, Tom, hold on, time out.
	Tom, Tom, time out.
	You this is not the Tom from Miami show.
	You say something, I'm I'm gonna rebut it.
	So when the Iraq war happened and they were scud missiles were being lobbed into Israel, are you saying we didn't ask the Israelis not to respond?
	You're showing a real ignorance of history there.
	Well, why don't they shed their blood?
	No, no, no.
	Tom, answer the friend you claim.
	Tom, Tom, quiet down now.
	Answer the question.
	Did we or did we not tell the Israelis in the Iraq wars they were being bombed by scud missiles to not respond to not inflame the situation?
	Yes or no?
	I I doubt it.
	I really doubt that we're not.
	Okay, goodbye.
	See you later.
	Goodbye.
	Adios.
	There you go.
	Another liberal goofball calling it.
	Doesn't even know his history.
	He wants to call the the second biggest radio show in the country and spout off about Israel, and he doesn't even understand the history of what happened.
	They haven't shed any blood.
	No, you're right.
	There's been no blood shed in Israel for liberty and freedom at all, Tom.
	Are you crying?
	Are you insane?
	Are you nuts?
	Seriously, how crazy do you have to be to humiliate yourself on a national radio show like that?
	We asked the Israelis in the Gulf War not to get involved, even though they were being bombed by scud missiles.
	He doesn't remember that.
	They wanted to keep the coalition together.
	But no, let me call in a radio show and just you know shred the Israelis.
	I'm sorry, I can't take people like that.
	I just can't.
	I have no patience for them at all.
	So let's get back to some basic points about what's going on with our Israeli foreign policy.
	So everybody understands, even the liberals.
	Again, for the libs, take the cotton out of your ears for a minute and just stick it in your mouth.
	Liberals love to talk.
	They never listen to anybody.
	Dispute this point for me that I brought up before the break.
	I got more of these, but dispute this for me.
	Where can an Israeli Arab go and have more freedoms than they have in Israel?
	Israel.
	Tell me another Arab country.
	I I dare you.
	Watch what they'll do.
	I put this on my Facebook the other day.
	I put a couple arguments for uh why I I'm always passionately pro Israel in this case, because I'm pro freedom.
	Because I believe in this crazy thing, folks called liberty.
	And the liberal knuckleheads that responded, they'll I that was point number one.
	They put number one, that's that's irrelevant.
	It's irrelevant.
	What do you mean it's irrelevant?
	If you're saying that the Israelis are some occupying evil force in the world, yet the same people you claim are being, quote, occupied and oppressed, have more freedoms in Israel than they do in countries where they're they're they're heritage, where they're from, where their heritage is from.
	Does that make any sense?
	Only to a liberal who lives in like liberal kooky fantasy land.
	Does that make any sense at all?
	They live in a fairyland.
	Okay, here's number two.
	And again, liberals, this is for you.
	So you're welcome to call again and tell me another Arab country.
	I'm still open to it.
	800 9417326.
	That's the number, Libs.
	You're more than welcome to call it.
	I love arguing about this topic.
	It is my favorite thing to do on talk radio.
	Here's number two.
	Whenever has there been a state of Palestine?
	Do you anyone have the Jeopardy?
	Answer, Alex.
	Uh never.
	As in never, ever, ever, ever.
	Jason, you're good.
	You are good.
	Oh, you're it reminds me of Bobby De Niro in De Niro's movies.
	Oh, you're good.
	You're good.
	I do a terrible Bob De Niro, but I didn't know you had that on.
	I did not plan that, folks.
	Jason's just that good.
	That is Alex for a thousand?
	There has never been a Palestine.
	Ever.
	Now, let's if I'm on the Jeopardy panel and I'm writing on that like teleprompter thing, I would put question.
	There has been a state of Palestine when?
	Because they put it in reverse.
	Answer on the teleprompter.
	Never ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever.
	And I would fill it up until the end until you had to squeeze in a little.
	Remember when you were a kid and you wanted to squeeze a note on one page and like the last line you were writing so small no one could see it?
	Ever, ever, ever, ever.
	There has never been a state of Palestine.
	It has never existed.
	There have been references to Palestine.
	But that is that is largely to do with the Romans, uh sometimes the British, uh using the word Philistines and it being turned into Palestine.
	There has never been a state of Palestine.
	Who was there, who was their king?
	Who was the Palestinian king?
	Who was the Palestinian president?
	I'm talking about the state of Palestine.
	Where has it been?
	If they have such a claim to the area and the Israelis are this quote, occupying force, because you're just making that up.
	Where was the state of Palestine?
	Oh, never ever did it exist.
	It never existed.
	There's no such thing.
	Do you understand that?
	There's no such thing.
	Tell me who it was.
	Tell me who their leader was.
	I don't want to hear about the PLO.
	I'm talking about the state.
	You can't.
	Just like you can't tell me what Arab country an Arab from Israel can move to to have more freedoms than they have in Israel.
	Just answer the question.
	Don't divert.
	Don't call in like Tom from Miami and start a whole different topic.
	Because, folks, this is what liberals do.
	Liberals will never answer the question.
	They'll be like, the rich did it.
	Reagan stinks.
	You're a racist.
	You clearly hate women.
	Grandma too.
	Maybe puppies.
	Have you slayed a puppy lately?
	This is what they'll do.
	It's sickening.
	It makes me sick.
	Alright, folks, I'm Dan Bongino at D.Bongino on Twitter.
	Infoshawn.
	Give Sean a follow at Sean Hannity on Twitter.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	All right, welcome back to the Sean Hannity show.
	Dan Bongino, contributing editor over at Conservative Review.
	In for Sean and at D.Bon Gino on Twitter.
	If you want to send me comments, criticisms, whatever, I take them all.
	And make sure you give Sean a follow at Sean Hannity as well.
	By the way, before we get to our guests, Sebastian Gorka, who I think is the best.
	He's on the terrorism issue.
	He's terrific.
	They played a song, Jason and Lauren during the break.
	It was amazing.
	Shout out to this Coulter Wall.
	It's called Sleeping on the Blacktop.
	I was literally going to go get a drink during the break.
	I kid you not.
	And Jason pumped it into my headphones.
	And I'm like, who was that?
	Sounded like Johnny Cash.
	So Coulter, I know you must be a Hannity fan.
	Nice job there.
	Really solid.
	All right, let's get to our guest.
	Love this guy, my friend Sebastian Gorka, vice president, professor of strategy at the Irregular War of and irregular warfare, excuse me, at the Institute of World Politics and at Seb Gorka on Twitter.
	Sebastian, how are you, my friend?
	Very well.
	Merry Christmas.
	Merry Christmas to you too.
	It's it's safe to say that again now that we've got a new administration coming in.
	So hallelujah to that.
	So whenever I think um terrorism, I think uh you know about Sebastian Gorka on the show.
	I mean, you you you really I can't get away from you between Fox and Talk Radio.
	I see you're in my house all the time.
	You're a welcome guest.
	But one of the things I wanted to ask you about is you know, given my prior line of work in law enforcement, and having worked some of these counter terror cases before as well.
	I've heard you discuss this topic often.
	This change in his paradigm shift from the large, more spectacular attacks to these more isolated trucks, small kind of tactical, you know, small arms tactical assault types things.
	And you you had an interesting phrase I saw on cable news.
	You said there's no front line anymore.
	What do you mean by that?
	Right, then so um, you know, when you use the word war, I think a lot of Americans think of, you know, World War II saving Private Lion, maybe the first Gulf War.
	Uh and in that, you know, you knew who the good guys were, you knew who the bad guys were, people wore uniforms, and and there was a front line, whether it was you know, a trench in the uh den, or whether it was, you know, a a line of tanks on their way to liberate Kuwait.
	Uh that's that's you know, that's old.
	That's that's behind us.
	In today's war, the front line exists when you leave your house in the morning.
	The front line is a Christmas party at an office in San Bernardino, it's a marathon in Boston, it's a Christmas fair in Berlin.
	And that's why every American needs to know that you are responsible for the safety of yourself and your loved ones.
	Don't expect the feds uh to be able to save you if there's a jihadi attack occurring, and that's why everybody, you know, you're uh a national security professional.
	Uh we use codes of awareness, uh tactical levels of awareness, and everybody needs to be in what people call the the phase yellow.
	So, you know, you see everybody walking down the street staring at their iPhones, staring at their androids.
	Uh that is not how you can live your life today.
	You have to be aware.
	And as as the law enforcement officers say, you need to have your head on a swivel.
	Yeah, you know, you do, and there are so many little things you can do.
	I uh you know, you this nobody's panicking.
	I mean, there's no need to be uh, you know, at at a at a you know in the red zone all the time, but I agree with you a hundred percent that a heightened state of awareness is the new um reality.
	And you know, even little things like every time I go to a restaurant, I'm sure to sit in a seat where I can see the door, and I just remember these little things haven't been in law enforcement, and I think you highlighting this new threat should kind of put antenna on people's heads that yeah, you you you are the sadly you are the frontline targets now for these siccos out there looking to do us harm.
	Yeah, I mean I used to play this game with my my children when they were small.
	I used to go to you know a mall shopping, we used to sit down at a restaurant or go to a movie theater, and I just used to ask them before they got comfortable.
	Tell me, how many ways in and out of this room are there?
	If if something bad should happen, uh is there a good place to hide?
	Is the thing you're hiding behind gonna stop bullets?
	It it's like playing, you know, a hide and go seek.
	But you know what?
	That can save lives, and that's what we have to think about today.
	The the enemy ISIS, Al Qaeda has said it in their English language magazines.
	You must take the war to the infidel.
	You must kill them on their own territory.
	And that's exactly what we're seeing today.
	We have arrested or killed a hundred and twenty-five ISIS terrorists in America in s in the last two and a half years.
	That's all you need to know.
	Yeah, you know, I was in um sadly, I was in church for Christmas Eve at a late night, it wasn't a midnight mass, but pretty late night.
	And I don't tell my wife this, although you know, it's on public radio, so she'll probably hear it now.
	I know she's listening.
	But I always sit in the back in church because sadly that's where the door is.
	And it and it is sad that in this new, you know, modern world with this new evolving threat that that's the kind of things we have to do, but I really appreciate you highlighting that.
	Hey, a couple other things I wanted to get to, though.
	Um excuse me, Lauren just sent over a report from the Washington Times, and it had some uh just a it was like a uh a a lengthy piece on some of the criminal cases they've been working in Northern Virginia, right outside the nation's capital.
	And one of the common threads you see in there is some of the people they've arrested or investigating for this are people who are army officers, um cops, and with this assassination in Turkey, where a police officer in Turkey was the actual assassin screaming Allah Wakbar.
	I mean, you think this is the next push for them to try to co-op people who have access, those army people, military people, and cops?
	Is this something that you've read in your research?
	Well, this isn't new.
	It's disturbing, I think, because we had this, you know, on video.
	We're going to see that assassination of the Russian ambassador for decades now.
	We have the whole thing captured.
	Um, but this is an old problem.
	This is the insider threat.
	During the Cold War, it was uh agents of influence, it was uh double agents inside our security services, whether it's Aldrich Ames or whether it's uh somebody uh in the FBI like uh Hansen.
	Now it's it's about jihadis, not people that are going to steal our secrets and give them to the KGB, but people who are going to execute an attack on as as you know, as we say, inside the wire.
	And this has been a problem since well, let's look at Fort Hood.
	I mean, Fort Hood is the first real serious example of this.
	It's thirteen servicemen and an unborn uh child massacred on the largest US army base in America, not by somebody who infiltrated the base, but by a fellow major, Nidal Hassan.
	So so this is this isn't something new.
	It's something that we need to be prepared with because it is perhaps one of the most insidious forms of jihadism today.
	One of the conversations I've had with you is to use the really horrible DC term, I kind of offline, you know, everybody wants to sound edgy.
	Let's talk offline.
	But you've always kind of piqued my interest when you talk about the importance of you know the the language, how we discuss terrorism, that it's not simply a rhetorical matter.
	You know, if we're gonna call Nidal Hassan, you know, you brought it up, we're gonna call it workplace violence.
	You know, this has a real, you know, tangible material ramification to our counterterror efforts.
	But one of the things you've discussed with me that I really was fascinated by is this term, and I'm hoping you can give the audience uh the importance of of of what this term means to some on the left.
	This countering violent extremism narrative, and how this is meant to kind of you lump everybody in, you know, the the the returning soldier with the radical Islamist, and how there, you know, there is a distinction.
	You're you're always a better explainer.
	You do it more elegantly than I do.
	Yeah, so CVE, the bumper sticker of the Obama administration, countering violent extremism, is their very sneaky way to make you think that it's just extremism in general that's the problem.
	It's nothing to do with religion.
	And in fact, some people inside the DOJ, especially the civil rights division and elements of the Department of Homeland Security would have you believe, and I've had this said to my face, that the real threat to America is right-wing extremists and militia members.
	That's the real threat.
	Um, you know, eleven law enforcement officers assassinated by people following the Black Lives Matter verbiage, and uh we have jihadis killing Americans, but it's the conservatives that are the threat.
	CVE is political correctness run amok, and really I hope it's uh a concept or a phrase that's going to be spiked come January the twentieth, because it is an effort that really makes you not understand the danger to America.
	It makes uh Americans disconnect the dots, and as a result, it makes us all more endangered.
	Yeah, I mean, I agree.
	I think most of the audience agrees, but I I've had liberals come back at me and say, Oh, why you you know wh why are you getting all hung up on the they're just words, they're just words, and what they don't understand is they're not just words.
	Like this is this C V E thing has had real policy ramifications.
	I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, Sebastian, but we're talking to Sebastian Gorka, by the way, vice president and professor of strategy and irregular warfare at the Institute of World Politics.
	Give him a follow on Twitter at Seb Gorka.
	But Sebastian, they have actually stricken terms from law enforcement and military training manuals.
	That I mean, that has a r i was an instructor at a law enforcement academy in Maryland when I was a Secret Service agent.
	If you can't even teach our law enforcement people that radical Islamic terrorism exists, then of course that's gonna have a real world ramification on how they investigate the cases.
	Am I wrong?
	Absolutely.
	Absolutely.
	So so you know, th this is incredibly dangerous.
	This is one of the reasons Why I wrote uh the book Defeating Jihad.
	Uh uh look, here's the simplest analogy, Dan.
	Imagine uh you're a very sick patient and you go to the hospital, and the hospital administrator has banned use of the word cancer.
	We don't believe in cancer, cancer doesn't exist, so you're not allowed to use it.
	And you roll up and you've got third stage pancreatic cancer, and the doctor for political reasons has to say, um you've got the flu.
	Why don't you just go home, hydrate and take some aspirin?
	What's gonna happen to that patient?
	They're gonna die.
	You cannot solve a problem, let alone let alone um cure an ill if you're not allowed to diagnose it accurately.
	And when the White House in 2011 sent an unclassified memo to the then attorney general and the then chairman of the joint chief saying all mention of religion, specifically Islam, will be banned from law enforcement and military training.
	And when they said you cannot use the word jihad to describe people who call themselves jihadis, then we just entered the rubber room.
	It was like a bad SNL skit, and that kind of political correctness costs people their lives.
	Amen, brother.
	Hey, Sebastian, thank you so much for joining us.
	Sebastian Folkes is the author of Defeating Jihad, the winnable war, a New York Times bestseller, and I can assure you a must uh read if you have any interest in terrorism counterterrorism, understanding the ideology.
	Again, it's called Defeating Jihad, the winnable war.
	I'm looking at it on Amazon right now.
	Go and buy it by Sebastian Gorka at Seb Gorka on Twitter.
	Sebastian, thank you so much.
	Really appreciate you.
	God bless.
	Happy New Year.
	God bless.
	Happy New Year.
	All right, folks.
	Like I said, man, he he that guy's probably forgotten more stuff about terrorism than most people know.
	And I I was a law enforcement guy, and I'm always uh always taken aback by his depth of knowledge.
	So I appreciate him coming on.
	I'm Dan Bongino at D. Bongino on Twitter, filling in for Sean Hattie.
	If you want to give us a call, 800-941-7326.
	All right, let me get through our guests here.
	We got a great guest, big fan of this guy.
	Uh Mark Meadows, Congressman from uh the Republican Congressman from North Carolina's 11th district.
	Uh Congressman Meadows, thanks so much for joining us.
	Really appreciate what you're doing down there.
	And Dan, it's great to be with you, and thanks so much for standing for freedom as you always do, and you always have.
	Well, you're a good man.
	And uh, you know, it's Lauren and Linda and Jason, they got a great team up there.
	And when they said, hey, you want to fill in on the 27th?
	He said, You got an idea for guests, and I said, of course.
	I said, We gotta have Congressman Meadows.
	He's actually one of the straight shooters up there, and that you that those are sadly, you know, few and far between.
	That's uh, you know, I'll leave that one for another day, but between you and Mike Lee, there are I just want the listeners to know that there are some good guys left, that this is a really good man, and I really appreciate you taking the time to join us on the show.
	It means a lot to me.
	So it means a lot to me to be with you again and uh look forward to discussing the important things that are affecting not only our country but the the world in general with this most recent UN vote.
	I can't believe that uh we abstained and turned our back on Israel, Dan.
	It's just unbelievable.
	Well, well, I I know where you stand on Israel, uh, but uh I'm just kind of curious from just from a personal perspective.
	When did you see this coming?
	I mean, was there kind of some whispers up on the hill?
	Because I I obviously I'm not a uh you know, I I lost my race.
	I'm not a member of Congress.
	I you know I wish I were at times, but I'm not.
	But I don't have the access you do.
	Were there whispers on the hill that he was gonna do this and break you know decades of standing U.S. policies is crazy.
	Well, not not really.
	I mean, when you really look at this, is when the vote was taken, the fact that it was taken on a Friday before Christmas.
	Uh there's a whole lot that went into it, uh, Dan, that really was concerning to me.
	But more importantly than that is is when you see the the people on the Security Council that actually pushed it forward, New Zealand.
	Ukraine, you know, some of these people that voted for it, we've we've had their back, and yet it seems like there was a wink and a nod coming from the administration, and it's not it hadn't just stopped.
	You know, you you see that Secretary Kerry is going to do uh another big speech, and I think what he's gonna try to do is poison the well for the incoming Secretary of State uh in terms of Palestinian-Israeli relationships.
	So there wasn't a whole lot of advanced warning, but I can tell you hitting the ground running in January.
	I've talked to some of the the senators in the upper chamber, I know in the House we're going to be ready to really apply some real pressure to see if we can get them to reverse course.
	And and I think uh we're talking to Congressman Mark Meadows from North Carolina's 11th district, a real uh champion for conservative values.
	Uh you know, Congressman, the the cabinet selections by President elect Trump so far, um, I've been very excited about.
	I was an early Ted Cruz supporter when uh President elect Trump, of course, uh the GOP nominee at the time won the nomination.
	You know, I I saw him as a far, far better option to Hillary Clinton, and I I think on the Israel issue, I mean, we could talk about a thousand different issues, but specifically on the Israel issue, now we are seeing the ramifications of what a Hillary Clinton presidency in in in contrast to a Barack excuse me, a president-elect Trump, a soon to be President Trump presidency.
	These cabinet selections, I I think, you know, we can start to turn the tide a bit.
	I mean, what tangibly though, can we do?
	I mean, let me just sum it up with this.
	A caller before it said, can we undo this?
	And I said, Well, I'm not sure.
	I mean, we can stop implementing it, but we can't reverse it because the Russians and the Chinese will probably block it.
	Am I correct?
	Well, you're correct.
	I mean, uh, to reverse course on a resolution would be extremely difficult to do, primarily because of the five permanent members of the Security Council, any one of those could veto it.
	And so really the damage from a resolution standpoint is done.
	Now there are follow-up things that that uh have to be done and could be done, and I can tell you that there's going to be real pressure to bear.
	I I got calls from uh some of my Senate colleagues uh right after it happened uh asking about uh foreign uh assistance that we actually send to some of these countries.
	You know, it's amazing that we have uh 177 countries that get foreign aid from the United States, and yet they vote against the United States at the UN uh well over sixty percent of the time.
	And that's that's on critical issues.
	And so uh we have to start making sure that not only our vote matters, but really uh that that a vote against the United States and our uh best ally in the Middle East, Israel, has consequences.
	I believe President elect Trump is willing to do that.
	I think he'll be the most pro-Israel uh president that we've had in decades.
	And so uh it is encouraging to me to see him take such a strong stand uh for our friend and ally Israel.
	You know, Congressman, uh, I'm really glad you brought this idea of funding the UN when they're voting against us, not all the time, but a good portion of the time, because this is one of those issues you and I are both knocked on doors again.
	You won, you know, I I I lost my race, but we still talk to people.
	I get this question from people all the time giving speeches.
	You know, in what the Liberals would call flyover country, you know, what you and I call home, uh when you talk to uh you know, working Americans, they just don't get it.
	They're scratching their heads like let me get this straight.
	We've got a UN that, again, not all the time, but a good portion of the time votes against American interests, and yet we're funding what, 20 plus percent of their operational budget, and we give them uh, you know, bucket loads of money.
	It just does not resonate with the average working American.
	They don't get it.
	Well, and they shouldn't get it.
	I mean, because here here's the interesting thing, is when you have that soft diplomacy and and you're actually giving aid to a particular country, you you typically expect that at least on those areas that are critically important to a nation, that there would be a hesitation, but there was no hesitation.
	We saw a 14 uh to one abstention vote on this particular vote as it relates to Israel.
	That's why you you have to start to question uh was there a complicit nature with with regards to the Obama administration.
	You know, was there a wink and a nod?
	Do you see that uh they were behind the scenes?
	Uh my understanding is is that there is proof that will uh be given to uh the incoming administration as it relates to some of the uh behind the the scenes negotiations that went on.
	But but it's important for us to know that it is not our money, it's not the government's money, it's the American taxpayers' money, and we need to be responsible.
	And when they don't see a direct result with the money that we spend, then shame on us.
	We need to be held accountable, and so should the UN representatives.
	And I have to tell you from a political perspective, and we're talking to Representative Mark Meadows, uh Congressman from North Carolina's 11th district.
	There's no way President Obama leaves without egg on his face on this Congressman.
	I mean you have Debbie Wasserman Schultz, no bastion of hard right values down here in Florida with me coming out and condemning this thing.
	I mean you've even had Chuck Schumer, maybe not as strong a terms, but you know, it's kind of suggesting like, hey, maybe this wasn't such a good idea.
	I mean I don't see how he leaves office without this being a stain on his administration, especially in conjunction with what I think we can all recognize now is a disastrous Iran deal paving a path for them to have nuclear weapons.
	This is crazy.
	Well it is uh a disastrous Iran deal and you it's interesting you mentioned people like Debbie Washman Schultz and Ted Deutsch of Florida.
	I mean when you get some of these it is a bipartisan issue when we start to look at at Israel and standing up for our ally there, it can be bipartisan.
	So I applaud them for coming out and and denouncing this but you're right that the damage is done it will be a stain on his uh abysmal foreign policy record already.
	I mean when you really look at it to have Secretary Kerry anticipate and say that he's going to give a major speech on how you can affect uh Palestinian Israeli relationships going forward would have to be to ignore the track record of what they've had on foreign policy which is mean they have been really a foreign policy in abstention already.
	They don't leave they don't see results and what we have is chaos in the Middle East and around the world and so it will be something that uh is part of an Obama legacy that will not be something that most people will applaud.
	Well I'm glad you don't pull punches because it really has been it's been a foreign policy forest fire and it's been terrible and there's a whole lot of messes around the world to clean up and really it's it's it's shameful.
	But in the in the couple minutes I have left with you I wanted to hit one final topic.
	So everybody always focuses on the first hundred days because human beings like to think in round numbers because we have five digits on each hand.
	I mean why not 101 right?
	But what do you see the chances of a big bold tax reform package?
	And I'm talking 1986 Ronald Reagan scrapping the brackets big cuts in the tax rates which you know the Liberals will tell you that's a cut in tax revenue but you and I both know that's not always the case.
	Reagan actually generated more tax revenue from his tax rate cuts.
	But what I mean g give us a give us your take from the inside what what's the the the murmurs up there on the hill is this going to happen or is this another they're dangling a carrot in front of our face to get rid of this horrible tax code and then nothing's going to happen.
	What's your take on it?
	Well Dan, you know there's two ways things get done in Washington DC and that's slow and never and uh but I will say that I'm more optimistic about real comprehensive tax reform.
	I've talked to Chairman Brady on ways and means I've talked to uh Stephen Moore about their plan.
	I think that there is a sweet spot for us to really simplify uh the tax code.
	Chairman Brady wants to get it down to a postcard.
	I'm supportive of that so he has support among moderates and those uh conservatives in the Freedom caucus in general terms and uh for tax reform so uh it's going to be going on a parallel track with the repeal of Obamacare so I think you see both of those things happen uh very quickly I'm going to push for the first hundred days but certainly within the first two hundred days we get that done and uh we are we're able to create a a lot of job growth that comes out of that as you said stated earlier.
	Oh yeah I mean we hit uh what is it in eighty four we hit six percent GDP growth.
	I mean Barack Obama hasn't hit three percent in any year.
	I mean it's it's the evidence of the success of big bold tax reform is everywhere if you will in a look at it.
	Hey one quick thing and I'll let you run um on the Senate side we have a number of very very vulnerable Democratic senators up for reelection in states Trump won some he won quite handily.
	Now I mean I'm asking you an obvious question but don't you think we can use this as kind of a political you know tactic to get some of these people if we were to campaign in their states so let's say you get Democratic Senator so and so and state so and so that went for Trump I mean we should set up rallies there all the time If they go against this tax package and say, hey, here's your senator.
	He's on the wrong side of this folks.
	We're looking to put more money, take home pay in your wallet.
	Why is Senator so and so not with us?
	I mean, this could be a real strategic weapon for us.
	You're right.
	And if we can't make them see the light, we need to make them feel the heat.
	And the only thing that a politician understands is getting voted out of office.
	So I think I'll be all in for that to make sure that that message gets out there, and I know that you will do as well, Dan.
	Yeah, I you know, that this is F this is all I got, Congressman.
	This effort means a lot to me.
	I mean, I'm the first president I remember, you know, was Ronald Reagan, and I just remember everybody feeling great about the country, and it's really sad.
	I mean, I'm a conservative, it's not a secret, but it's just really sad how divided we've become.
	I mean, I I was listening earlier to another guy talking about how we don't even share a common culture anymore.
	There's like the far left Lena Dunham crowd, and then there's, you know, asked we listen to like kid rock and country music.
	It's a shame.
	There's no unified, you know, John Wayne anymore.
	And it's really really sad.
	It doesn't have to be that way, and I'm really hoping there's a better tomorrow ahead.
	I'm always optimistic though, as I know you are.
	So I am, and I believe that there is a better, uh better tomorrow ahead.
	We'll together make uh sure that America is great again.
	Congressman, I really, really appreciate it.
	And I can't say enough and speak about your character enough to the audience here.
	I I know what kind of guy you are and what you're willing to do for people who need help who aren't, you know, show boats and anything.
	And you're one of those guys.
	So thank you again for coming on.
	I really appreciate it.
	Thanks a lot.
	Well, it's great to have been with you.
	Take care and happy new year to you, Dan.
	Happy New Year, sir.
	All right, folks.
	That was Congressman Mark Meadows representing North Carolina's 11th district.
	I promise you.
	I can't go into the details, but a really, really good guy who actually gives a damn about the conservative cause.
	I promise you.
	I'll put my name behind that.
	All right, folks, I'm Dan Bongino at D. Bongino on Twitter.
	Make sure you give Sean a follow at Sean Hannity.
	We'll be right back.
	We'll be right back.
	All right, welcome back to the Sean Hannity show.
	Dan Bongino filling in for Sean at Debon Gino on Twitter.
	If you want to sense comments, criticisms, whatever, make sure you give Sean a follow as well at Sean Hannity.
	All right, I got Noah Paula coming up in a minute here, but uh just a little quick update on a breaking news story.
	It's on some of the cable news channels now.
	Uh it says Trump Tower, the bottom floor is some video out there.
	Looks like it was evacuated due to a suspicious package.
	Um that's all we have.
	There's really nothing else.
	This is sadly a I wish it weren't so, but a pretty common occurrence in New York City.
	Having been both a police officer and a federal agent, I know they have I was with the NYPD for uh for a while.
	They have a pretty good procedure for rendering these things uh safe or the scene safe.
	So hopefully it is safe, and hopefully we'll find out um soon, you know.
	But there's really nothing else to report.
	Couple channels have picked it up, a couple haven't uh yet uh broken it yet.
	But there's some video of the ground floor, you know, people uh people evacuating the building, let's say in an expeditious uh fashion.
	So again, we'll keep you updated if we hear anything.
	All right, let's get to our guests.
	We've been talking about this disgraceful UN vote on Israel, which frankly disgusts me.
	Uh really the the D words, right?
	Disgraceful, I mean it deliberate, sadly, by the Obama administration.
	Uh we have this now, Noah Pollock, director of the emergency committee to Israel and contributor to Free Beacon, and uh just commentary at the weekly standard as well.
	Noah, how are you?
	I'm great.
	How are you?
	Good.
	And listen, it's great to have you on.
	I really wanted to discuss this today, and and Lauren's a big supporter of yours.
	Oh, he'd be great to have on about this topic.
	This is a really hot topic for me personally, the Israel uh the the issue of us supporting Israel.
	Because as I said in an earlier segment, our enemies make almost no distinction between us and Israel.
	In other words, I'm sure you've heard this line before that, you know, first we get the Saturday people and then we get the Sunday people.
	Like it's not really a foreign policy issue in the eyes of our enemies.
	And sadly, it's become that.
	I mean, I get it from a practical perspective.
	I understand.
	But you you get what I'm saying here, like our enemies don't make the distinction.
	I wish more people would get that.
	Does that make sense?
	Right.
	I mean, it's the idea is like we can feed Israel to the wolves and uh, you know, appease people who hate us too.
	And it's it's a very, I think, delusional type of foreign policy, the idea that you're gonna basically uh throw Israel to the wolves and they'll be they'll be happy with that, and they're not these are the same people who'd like to come after us.
	And one of the reasons they go after Israel first is because Israel is smaller and it's in the Middle East and uh it's more vulnerable.
	And it's easier to go after and pick on the little guy than it is to pick on the big guy.
	And so what we do is we become complicit, or I should say not we, but Obama becomes complicit in essentially helping other people bully uh a smaller and more vulnerable country.
	Now, what's your take on this kind of um this I've I've heard this from a couple of people, not just one, and these are more than credible sources.
	Uh Ambassador Ron Dermers put it out there.
	I mean, these are not fringe people, these are mainstream people who have put it out there that not only did we abstain from voting on this resolution by and de facto letting it pass, because we could have vetoed it, this shameful resolution.
	I mean, I really I can't think of enough adjectives to describe this disaster.
	But that the Obama administration, that the rumor out there now is that they actually push this initiative.
	And if that's the case, Noah, if you agree with that, I'm not gonna answer for you, but isn't that pretty shameful that push it behind the scenes?
	And if if listen, if you're gonna be if you're gonna push it, then at least vote for it and have some guts.
	I mean, it would still be wrong, but at least you'd have there's but there's both betrayal and cowardice here.
	Um of course the administration promoted this behind the scenes.
	Um this is there's nothing too complicated about this.
	I mean, uh various diplomats who were involved in this told the Israelis this is what's going on.
	Uh the administration is making a a fairly feeble attempt uh to deny it.
	Um but the idea that you know the United States of America, the most powerful country in the world, was like powerless sitting there at the UN to do anything to stop this is ludicrous.
	I mean, this thing was promoted by New Zealand, you know, a tiny country, and we know that that various uh Obama administration officials had contact with the with officials from these countries and they're discussing this.
	And the idea that like somehow the Obama administration was caught off guard by this and didn't know what to say.
	I mean, it doesn't pass the last test.
	And then to add kind of insult to injury, they come forward and they they lie to everyone.
	I mean, they lie about so many things in the foreign policy, whether it's the Iran deal or any uh many other issues, and they they think we're also stupid, and they come forward and say, Oh, geez, you know, we didn't know this was going on.
	I mean, how you know, we didn't have anything to do with this.
	We just abstained from the vote.
	I mean, it's preposterous.
	Well, Noah, it's it's not just that they lie, it's that they they don't even lie about lying.
	Like in other words, you had Ben Rhodes, who's become like the bagdad Bob of this administration.
	They trot out Ben Rhodes on Israel channel number two, I think it was.
	I gotta get to that clip eventually.
	They have they trot out Ben Rhodes to defend this thing on Israeli TV.
	Keep in mind, this is the same guy who gave an interview to a magazine where he said in his own words, basically, yeah, we lie to the American people all the time about the Iran deal, and you people in the press are a bunch of idiots.
	I mean, it's like it's not just that the Obama administration does the wrong thing, it's that they do it, they're proud of it, and then they like they stick a fork in you just to make sure it hurts a little extra.
	And the press never the amazing thing is there's never really outrage from the press.
	Like, I feel like if a Republican president or a conservative president was this bald faced in lying to the American people, in lying to the media, that there would be all manner of curiosity in the press, and there'd be teams of investigative reporters assigned to dig up what really happened.
	And here you have numerous instances of Biden's people, Kerry's people, Ben Rhodes, all claiming that they had that there was no coordination of this, yet there is so much ample evidence to the contrary.
	And this gets a big yawn from the press.
	No one's curious, no one's interested.
	It's like, oh, okay, whatever, you know, not a story.
	Well, well, the one I think big positive, there are many, but I think the one big positive we can take from the uh election of Trump and his cabinet selections is uh Noah, let's be honest, nobody gives a crap what the press.
	They just don't.
	I mean, uh the the press is influence from the days of the great gray lady, Walter Cronkite, you know, even in into the early days of Tom Brokaw, where if they didn't say it, it didn't happen.
	It's over.
	I mean, it's over.
	You have even outlets.
	You write for Weekly Standard.
	And they're so bitter and frustrated about the fact that they spent six months attacking Trump, thinking that they were the arbiters of what was acceptable in America, and And that that by by coming out against him once he became the Republican nominee, they would deny him the presidency.
	And then they didn't.
	And now you Get just the endless uh, you know, their tears have tears, and you get this passive aggressive attitude on the part of the media.
	Um, and it's I mean, in some ways it's like a wonderful spectacle to watch because I think these guys all all realize now that they're not nearly as powerful as they thought they were.
	Um, and instead of looking inward, you know, they're always telling everyone else to be accountable and to be introspective and everything, and they refuse to do that for themselves.
	And so instead they just have these temperature tantrums, or they just continue ignoring stories like this one, um, where you know, the average person who's following this is thinking to himself, you know, why you know the the New York Times had like a week straight of wall-to-wall coverage condemning uh uh Trump's pick to be ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, and yet on something like this, on a very important story that's actually substantively important, the administration is lying, and nobody cares in the press.
	It's just like and Noah, they have zero the the media, the the today's media has zero sense of context or history whatsoever.
	I mean, they have a sense of it, they just ignore it.
	I'll give you a perfect example.
	I mean, uh you we think about things like the you know, the the so-called mythical right of return.
	It's like Israel is always held to a standard that no other country in the history of humankind has ever been held to.
	I mean, just common sense questions like, oh, there's a right of return, really?
	Like, do the do the British get to come back here?
	Or what about the French in Indochina?
	I mean, it's like Israel is held to a standard.
	They've had a historical attachment to this land, literally thousands of years old.
	And all of a sudden, yes, no, people get to go back and lay claim to Israeli land because allegedly at some point someone may have lived there.
	This is insanity.
	They're making this up.
	There's the there's the the media is they don't they they have amnesia about things that happened just just very recently.
	I mean, on this particular instance, the Obama administration for seven years said over and over again that it would never support this type of UN anti-Israel resolution.
	They always said, and you can go and look at speeches from Obama, from Susan Rice, from John Kerry saying that that the the that any uh negotiat the that the that the peace process has to be negotiated directly by the parties.
	That the the UN is the wrong forum for this, the UN is hostile to Israel.
	You know, when they when he when Obama was running for re-election uh and wanted support of mainstream people and wanted, you know, Jewish donors, um, they were very happy to say all these nice things about how how bad the UN was and how they would never support um a UN attempt to impose terms on Israel.
	And then, you know, speaking of cowardice, now that now that the election's over, uh in the 11th hour, Obama is gonna leave office and you know, stick a knife in Israel's chest.
	Well, no, let me wrap you with this question.
	You know, they're like, no problem.
	They I haven't seen many New York Times stories when, you know, uh digging up all those quotes of the administration saying they'd never do something like this.
	No, and you won't, so don't hold your breath.
	You will be resuscitating you.
	But this let me ask wrap you with this question.
	This is an important one.
	I think a lot of people out there, they they're just puzzled by this.
	And I mean, I I don't want to talk about Jewish voters like liberals talk about, you know, the black voter.
	This my wife's Hispanic.
	She's not a Hispanic voter, she's an American, she doesn't really care about anything other than being a mom and you know, she doesn't really but for play the liberal game for a moment.
	Jewish voters based on exit polling tend to vote largely democratic.
	That's not a you know, it's not a mystery to anybody.
	I I don't get it.
	I mean, you have an unbelievably again, I hate to do this to block a group of people.
	You have lazy people and hard workers who are Hispanic, black, or whatever, but you have it in a largely industrious group of people who work super hard, have largely conservative values, and whose country, home country, some, not all.
	I mean, they're you know, Israeli uh Jewish voters have no attachment to Israel at all in the United States, but their home country is under full-fledged assault by international institutions being led by a president, and they they still vote Democrats.
	Yeah, I know.
	It's it's I'll I'll tell you what I think the the answer is, and this is this is a very common question, and it is very maddening, especially if you're a conservative Jew like me and you can't believe that your co-religionists would do this.
	Um American Jews came to the United States, most of them are descendants from immigrants who came over a hundred years ago to the United States.
	They're highly assimilated.
	Um they tend to be very liberal, they're successful, um, but they're they're a very liberal and they tend to be quite secular.
	And we know that typically across all religions, the more secular you are, typically the more liberal you are.
	And this is very true of the Jewish vote.
	Um the reality is is that you know the overwhelming majority of American Jews um are very secular now, and secular people tend to be liberal.
	Um it's changing though because there's such a high rate of intermarriage and of kind of people just sort of dropping the face among Jews that um the the share of the orthodox section of the Jewish community is growing because the Orthodox don't assimilate and they have more children.
	Um secular Jews tend to also, like other secular people have very, very few children.
	Um I think actually you will see the Jewish vote start trending more towards the Republicans in the coming decades as the demographics shift.
	From your mouth uh to God's ears.
	I mean, literally.
	Hey, Noah, thanks so much for joining us.
	I really appreciate me on.
	Yeah, you were great.
	That was Noah Pollock, folks.
	I really uh appreciate him coming on.
	This is really issue, as you can tell for me covering it for the last two plus hours is really hot on my mind.
	I mean, it's just an absolute abomination what's going on with this administration and the throwing under the bus of literally our only democratic ally, strong ally in the region.
	It's an absolute disgrace, should be condemned by every American, regardless of your political stress.
	I want to just quickly discuss another topic because this is another thing that's really like kind of getting under my skin and baking my bagels, man, big time, right?
	The rewriting of the Obama administration legacy is already happening, folks, and I want you to be really, really careful about what's going on.
	They're already pulling this dipsydo flipperoo right in front of your eyes, and they're expecting to make idiots out of all of you.
	Now, I saw it, I was looking at a piece in The Guardian the other day now.
	In fairness, the the article was from April, but all of these you know papers right now, liberal and conservative, the Guardians like left wing, pretty far left.
	They're all doing their hey, here's our most read piece of you know 2016.
	You know, it's the end of the year, everybody does that.
	But the piece I was reading, I had read before at The Guardian, is a clear rewriting, and it's about neo-liberalism or the the idea of you know supporting these crazy things like liberty and freedom.
	I say that sarcastically.
	And the author is it tries to debunk this whole conservative agenda, and it's just a nonsensical piece.
	But in the piece is some very clear signs of what's going to happen going forward when the media tries to rewrite the Obama years for people.
	There, and it's clear as day on the economic front what they're going to do when Trump pushes for tax cuts is number one, they're going to lie about what happened in the Reagan years, and number two, they're going to lie about what got us into the recession.
	Ladies and gentlemen, I'm telling you with 100% absolute certainty, I will risk my reputation on this.
	This is not a small show.
	You don't say this to people if you can't back it up.
	If you go and do your homework about what got us into the housing recession, the financial recession, whatever the heck you want to call it.
	If you go and actually do your homework, and I know the liberals won't do this, but if you really want to educate yourself, go look back on YouTube or any other video format for all of the quotes of Treasury Secretary John Snow, the Bush administration officials, Republicans up on the hill, warning repeatedly in 2003, 2004, 2005, warning repeatedly about the devastating accumulation of assets in the housing sector that was about to bust.
	Now, liberals, I know that's hard for you to digest.
	Because your your narrative and what I'm seeing now, this rewriting of the Obama agenda is going to be this.
	Obama saved us from a devastating recession brought on by the Republicans.
	Uh number one, no, Obama didn't save us.
	This is the worst recovery from a recession based on GDP growth in American history in modern America, at least post-World War II.
	That's a fact.
	And secondly, the Republicans did not do this.
	Now, granted, were there some bad Republicans who who had strayed from conservative and liberty-based values?
	Absolutely.
	But the Republican Party was repeatedly over and over and over again, warning people in the media, warning people up on the hill that there was an accumulation of assets in the housing sector that were not value that didn't have the value they said they had.
	This is anyone can go and watch this stuff.
	Again, now, to be fair, some of their prescriptions, I don't think were good ones.
	I mean, Snow was up on the hill and saying we need another regulatory agency to watch the quote prudential activities of Fanny and Freddie, basically warning Fanny and Freddie was in trouble, but they were proposing another regulator, which in my mind was crazy.
	But the point I'm trying to make, folks, is claiming that the Republicans somehow caused this recession and the almighty to be sainted Barack Obama, who should be out be beatified because he saved us from the devastating Republican caused recession is complete garbage.
	It's completely fabricated.
	It's 100% made up.
	I'm not a Bush acolyte.
	I'm not a George W. Bush defender.
	I think a lot of the policies in his administration were terrible.
	I think some were very good, the income tax cuts.
	I think TARP was a terrible idea.
	I think the expansion of Medicaid was an even worse idea.
	We had no funding mechanism to pay for this kind of stuff.
	I think the debt accumulated was a bad idea as well.
	But pretending that it was George W. Bush that caused this recession when his administration warned repeatedly about what was going to happen is just that's just straight up junk that's crap, that's garbage, that's that's that's bunk, that's made up.
	You're just living in a fantasy land.
	I mean, this is not cryptic top secret skiff level material where if you go to YouTube, it says, please imprint your fingerprint.
	You must have a GS 67.2 clearance.
	This is a DEF CON 3.62 material.
	This is like available for any knucklehead to go to the interweb and put in YouTube, Jon Snow, housing crisis.
	I mean, the stuff comes up like that.
	It's not even hard to find.
	Folks, they are going to rewrite this now.
	And the problem is, you know, we had it, we were talking with Noah Pollock before about the media and how the media.
	I I've told this story probably a thousand times, but it just bears repeating how how bought and sold the media isn't the ideology.
	That simple facts like reporting that, yes, you know, uh Bon Gino's right.
	Matter of fact, the Republicans did repeatedly warn about the uncoming housing crisis, and it was Barney Frank on tape, by the way, folks, who repeatedly defended Fanny and Freddie.
	A matter of fact, not only did he defend Fanny and uh Fannie and Freddie, Barney Frank, liberal congressman from Massachusetts, he was warning Republicans not to say anything about it.
	He was like, No, you guys are exaggerating and you're causing a problem.
	You know, they're fine.
	They're fine.
	Oh, yeah, they were finer, right?
	Nearly took down the entire global economy.
	But you understand, like if the media doesn't do this, they will if they don't, they have to find a way to apologize for the god awful Barack Obama economy, which has averaged 2% growth, which is pathetic compared to just about every modern president, even including Jimmy Carter.
	This has been awful.
	So what did they say?
	Oh, the Republicans did it.
	Now, again, just to show you how how bought and sold these people are in the media, how facts mean nothing to them.
	Again, that's a fact.
	They can look it up.
	I gave this interview once when I was running for office to this Washington Post editorial board member.
	I'm not even going to give his name because he I don't want to embarrass the guy because he really was so he was so dumb.
	Like, I don't I don't I don't feel the need to cause a bad situation for him psychologically.
	He he has to live with himself and his ignorance.
	But he calls me on the phone, he's arguing about the George W. Bush tax cuts.
	I was running for office, they were debating uh who to endorse, which really wasn't a debate.
	Of course, they were going to endorse the Democrat.
	But he says to me, uh, you know, Mr. Barnard, you know you talk about tax cuts, and you know, we all know tax cuts cost us money.
	And I was like, which ones?
	And he says, well, you know, the George W. Bush tax cuts, of course, cost the government a lot of money.
	I said, uh they did.
	I said, that's actually factually incorrect.
	Not only is it incorrect after George W. Bush cut the tax rates in 2003, tax revenue went up for the following four years, went up dramatically.
	Like, you're just making that up.
	Like any idiot can go online and figure that out.
	Like, yeah, you're you understand, all right.
	This folks, this guy insisted to me, insisted to me repeatedly that I was making this up.
	That it's not only was he not lying, that I was lying.
	When, again, anyone can go look this up.
	Just go to the Treasury's website, go to what is it, Tax Foundation, any of these places that have tables, very easy to read.
	It's not complicated, and look at the tax revenue after the Bush tax cuts.
	Look at the tax revenue after the Reagan tax cuts.
	And you're gonna find out, shockingly to some liberals, that tax revenue went up, not down.
	Again, you're just making it up.
	You're lying to yourself.
	Inflation adjusted tax revenue still went up.
	There's no argument you have to make you seem rational.
	You're just a liar.
	And the media is doing this now, and that Guardian article reminded me of this of this narrative.
	Because the author of the Guardian article, this guy, David, I think it's Monbiata, maybe saying it wrong, but I'm I don't know at the French accent, right?
	He starts off his whole piece by blaming everything on basically conservative values, like oh, the housing crisis, the economic disaster, the financial crisis, the rise of Donald Trump, it's all conservatism, neoliberalism did this.
	Except for one thing.
	The story's not true.
	The story's completely made up.
	And you wonder again how someone at The Guardian, I mean, I guess a semi-reputable paper, how someone didn't confront this guy and say, hey, listen, um, that's not exactly true.
	This story about Republicans causing the housing crisis is totally made up.
	Like there's videos out there of Republicans warning repeatedly, the Bush administration trying to stop it.
	You're just making this up.
	But not only don't they not do that, they print it and they celebrate it.
	Because liberalism is a lie, folks.
	It's a lie.
	It's a crap sandwich being fed to you.
	It is all a myth.
	It is the relentless pursuit of power by hook or by crook.
	By lie, by creating mythical fairy tales, the Republicans caused the housing disaster.
	Reagan, the tax cuts caused massive deficits.
	Wow, that's shocking.
	They did because tax revenue went up.
	Oh, yeah, but don't mention that government spending did it.
	That makes Democrats look bad.
	Let's blame it on the tax cuts.
	They're doing the same thing now.
	This is why I cannot encourage you in strong enough terms to ignore what these people say.
	They're mainstream media folks have completely sold out.
	They are just making it up.
	It is one big like Teddy Ruxpin's story.
	Remember Teddy, you put a little like coin in the back, and he was like, hello, I'm here to tell you a fairy tale.
	Like that's the New York Times and the Washington Post.
	You drop a quarter in the newspaper box and you're just reading a myth.
	A fairy tale.
	They make this stuff up.
	And it's all made up for one big fat reason.
	To make conservatives look bad, to advance the liberal agenda, which is agendaless.
	It is just the acquisition of power.
	Whether again, it's Obamacare or taking your money, taking your freedoms away.
	I saw this story the other day at the Breitbart, I think it was AWR Hawkins, put up a story about how the Social Security Administration now, if you have someone handling your financial, uh your financial situation with Social Security, they're going to take away your gun rights.
	Oh, yeah, that's reasonable.
	So, you know, got a gentleman who's a little older, maybe have a little bit of trouble with his eyesight, doesn't like balancing his checkbook, has his daughter taking care of his finances.
	Yeah, of course he shouldn't have a gun if you're a liberal.
	I mean, this is insane.
	This is insane.
	Liberalism is a myth.
	It's a it's a stinking fairy tale that you wouldn't read to your dog if you had nothing to do.
	It's a myth.
	And the media keeps it alive.
	I'm telling you, watch for it.
	You will see the rewriting of the Obama agenda now.
	Blame it on the Republicans, and if any tax cuts happen, that's gonna be an epic disaster.
	Watch.
	I'm telling you, mark my words.
	All right, folks, I'm Dan Bongino at D. Bongino on Twitter.
	Make sure you give Sean a follow at Sean Hannity.
	be right back.
	You want smart political talk without the meltdowns?
	We got you.
	I'm Carol Markovich.
	And I'm Mary Catherine Hamm.
	We've been around the block in media, and we're doing things differently.
	Normally is about real conversations.
	Thoughtful, try to be funny, grounded, and no panic.
	We'll keep you informed and entertained without ruining your day.
	Join us every Tuesday and Thursday, normally on the iHeartRadio app Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcast.

▲