Bill O’Reilly’s No Spin News and Analysis - Highlights from O'Reilly's No Spin News - March 22, 2024

Episode Date: March 23, 2024

Highlights from BillOReilly.com’s No Spin News. Watch the No Spin News weeknights - become a BillOReilly.com Premium Member to watch. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Remember the old adage, honesty is the best policy. Well, that's gone, not only in America, but all over the world, especially if politics or money is involved. So we're going to prove that. We're going to prove that deceit is ruling in the political arena in the USA. And, you know, money is taken for granted. And I'll get to that some other time when there's a big financial story in play. But today, the Talking Points memo deals with the presidential election and how honest reporting is vanishing right before our eyes.

So, we begin on Saturday, March 16th, all right, Donald Trump, Dayton, Ohio. He gives a rally. He speaks for more than 90 minutes. Now, when you speak that long, that's not a written speech. He's riffing. And whenever Donald Trump rifts, trouble follows. It's, you know, it's very similar. Trump knows what he's saying, but he gets carried away because the MAGA people are in the crowd,

it's like a, I said, a heavy metal concert. Biden doesn't know what he's saying. So when he goes and starts to riff, it gets crazy. But in both cases, it brings grief to both candidates. So the first manufactured controversy has to do with Trump telling the crowd that automobiles are now being heavily manufactured in both China and Mexico, and that is hurting the American vehicle industry.

Roll the table. We're going to put a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line, and you're not going to be able to sell those cars. If I get elected, now if I don't get elected, it's going to be a bloodbath for the whole... That's going to be the least of it. It's going to be a bloodbath for the country.

That'll be the least of it. But they're not going to sell those cars. Okay, so bloodbush. bloodbath, economic bloodbath for the country, all right? That's the context of the remark if you cared to know about the context, which the hate Trumpers don't. And we all know that. But it gets really egregious. So Nancy Pelosi didn't see the speech. I can guarantee you she didn't see the speech. But he told her something. So she goes on CNN. We just have to win this election because he's even predicting a bloodbath. What does that mean?

He's going to exact a bloodbath? There's something wrong here. How respectful I am of the American people and their goodness. But how much more do they have to see from him to understand that this isn't what our country is about? Praising Hitler, praising the Russians. Okay. Praising Hitler? You know, but Pelosi makes no attempt, all right, to know anything. And she's a propagandist. Now, you can make an argument, and there's some validity to it, that the right and the Republican parties do this as well.

But I'm going to tell you something. If they distort a Biden speech, like they just distorted a Trump speech, I will report it to you. I know there are propagandists on both sides, but now this is an industry. The hate Trump movement is an industry, and it is enabled by the networks. So here are the press outlets that took the bloodbath comment out of context. Okay. Mediaite, the Associated Press, Drudge, CNBC, NPR, The Guardian, NBC News, Politico, CNN, the Hill,

The Daily Beast, The Economic Times, CBS News, USA Today, LA Times, New York Times, Newsweek, Rolling Stone, Telegraph, Independent, USA Today, MSNBC, Washington Post. They all took the bloodbath headline and took it out of context to tell the American public, hey, Trump is threatening violence. That's what they did. Okay? So, I mean, it's beyond dishonesty. That wasn't all. All right, same speech, Dayton, Ohio. Trump addresses illegal migrants who commit heinous crimes,

not only in America when they get here, but in their home countries. Roll it. If I had prisons that were teeming with MS-13 and all sorts of people that they've got to take care of for the next 50 years, right? Young people, they're in jail for years. If you call them people, I don't know if you call them people. In some cases, they're not people, in my opinion. But I'm not allowed to say that because the radical left says that's a terrible thing to say. They say, you have to vote against him because did you hear what he said about humanity?

I've seen the humanity, and these humanity, these are bad, these are animals, okay? All right. So I kind of agree with that. MSN 13, the El Salvador and gangs heavily here on Long Island, committing murder, mayhem, drug dealing, you name it, extortion. In their own country, El Salvador, the president there has had to declare martial law and suspend all due process to attack those gangs. These are really, like the Mexican drug cartels. So Trump uses hyperbola, but it's not inaccurate. All right. Former Biden spokesperson Jen Saki now works for MSNBC.

Go. The full context is that he went on to say some undocumented immigrants are, quote, not people. And of course, the full context is that this is much bigger than one single speech. Well, if you're expecting any

kind of honesty from that woman, then what can I say? You're not going to get it. She's a propagandist, just like Pelosi. But, you know, it just rankles me that NBC News and CNN enable this kind of blatant dishonesty. Here are the media outlets that condemn Trump for condemning violent migrants, NPR, the Guardian, the Atlantic, Bowling Stone, political, CNN, the Hill, the Daily Beast, the New York Times, USA Today, MSNBC, the Washington Post, the Hopping Post. You sense of pattern and behavior here? Jeez. All right, the good news is that most Americans know the fix is in.

They know. So if you are watching MSNBC or CNN or reading the Washington Post in New York Times, you already hate Trump. You want to hate them more? Just watch those vehicles. Now, I'm not in business to stick up for Trump. It's not what this Talking Points memo is all about. This is to just demonstrate, once again,

the blatant dishonesty of the media in America. A media that has special protections under the Constitution is supposed to be delivering honest information to you so you can make informed judgments and decisions. That's gone. Banished. That's why you're here. listening and watching me this evening.

All right, once again, if Biden gets attacked that way by the right or the Republicans or whatever, I'm on it. And that's a memo. Let's face it, the U.S. economy is under stress. National debt rising, trade war, shaking the markets. And meanwhile, China is dumping the dollar and stockpiling gold. That's why I protected my savings with physical gold and silver. through the only dealer I trust, American Hartford Gold.

And you can do this. Get precious metals delivered to your door or place in a tax advantage, gold IRA. They'll even help you roll over your existing IRA or 401K, tax and penalty free. With billions in precious metals delivered thousands of five-star reviews and an A-plus from the Better Business Bureau, you can trust American Hartford Gold as I,

do. Please call 866-326-55-75-76 or text bill to 99-88-99. Again, that's 866-3-2-6-5-7576, or text bill to 9988-99. Hey, I'm Caitlin Becker, the host of the New York Postcast, and I've got exactly what you need to start your weekdays. Every morning, I'll bring you the stories that matter, plus the news people actually talk about the juicy details in the world's politics, business, pop culture, and everything in between. It's what you want from the New York Post wrapped up in one snappy show. Ask your smart speaker to play the NY Postcast podcast. Listen and subscribe on Amazon Music, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. The Biden campaign has amassed $155 million in campaign donations directly and through their political action committees, Trump campaign is 40 million. Now, that'll change. A lot of the money that

are donated to the Trump political action committees went to pay Trump's lawyers. About $100 million that Trump's going to have to pay lawyers to defend them. And you can use political action committee money to pay that. And that's what he's doing at this point. But I think at the end of the campaign in eight months, the donations will be about. even. Now, it's the progressive left that's really funneling the big money into Biden because they know if Trump wins, the progressive movement is done at least for four years, finished. And they have their guy. Okay, Biden does whatever the progressive movement wants him to do. They have them and they want to keep him. They don't care how old he is. He could be dead. Okay, weekend at Bernie's.

Now, one of the key witnesses in this trial will be the former Defense Department chief of staff, Cash Patel. We have had him on the program before. He joins us now from Palm Beach, Florida. So just to bring everybody up to date, you were involved before, during, and after January 6th, directly involved, correct? Yes, sir. I was in the Oval Office with the President days before, and I was involved on January 6th. 6th and after because I was the chief of staff for the Department of Defense. All right.

When the Trump lawyers call you, let me ask this question first. Has Jack Smith or anybody from the Justice Department contacted you? Oh, yeah. I've been subpoenaed. I've appeared before their grand jury multiple times, and I've got no problem with it because I just told it. You have appeared before the grand jury and told your side of the story, correct? Yes, sir. When you are testifying, and you will be one of the main witnesses in the Trump conspiracy trial,

what is the headline? What are you going to tell the jurors? The truth. It's simple. Days before January 6th, I was a percipient witness firsthand in the Oval Office with the President of the United States, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chief of Staff to the President of the United States. And days before, Donald Trump authorized 10 plus thousand. national guards men and women. And Mr. O'Reilly, just think of it this way. How is it factually and

legally possible for Nancy Pelosi, the Capitol Police, and Mayor Bowser, to reject that National Guard authorization if Donald Trump didn't authorize it? We have the written... Let's stop for a minute. Is there a paper that shows the President authorized the National Guard before January 6th? Is there any paper that you can produce? Well, I can't because I'm not a DOD anymore, but there's memorandums mobilizing segments of the National Guard. So there are memorandums before January 6th. That's going to be a very powerful piece of evidence. Now, Smith and the Justice Department say you, Cash Patel, are not credible.

You're in a pocket of Trump. You know they're saying that, right? Yep. And you reply? Very simply. put aside my testimony, put aside what I just told you about legal and factual impossibility, and move on to the January 6th committee, which I've also was subpoenaed by the first person, by the way, and testified truthfully there as well. And what do we just learn? That two years ago,

a career secret service officer in Tony Renato, who is an apolitical officer assigned to presidential protection, testified to the January 6th committee that the 10,000-plus National Guard authorization before January 6th was in fact true, happened and he responded to that authorization internally in the White House. Why did Liz Cheney in the January 6th Committee bury that exoneration, that piece of evidence that destroys the insurrection narrative? That's the question that people are asking now, and now the mainstream media and everybody else is pivoting. They're saying the logic doesn't make sense. Donald Trump's guilty of insurrection because he did not order the domestic deployment of the United States military, they've completely lost the logic, the law. By law, he had to get the permission

of the mayor of D.C. Bowser, who said publicly, she turned him down. Pelosi denies even knowing about the request. Do you think you have evidence to prove that Pelosi is lying? Look, we sent the Secretary of the Army immediately after that our authorization days before to the Capitol Police who respond and work for Nancy Pelosi. Again, don't believe me. That conversation happened. The Capitol Police. Well, is it a conversation or is it an in-writing request?

To the Capitol Police or the refusal? To the Capitol Police. We sent the Secretary of the Army immediately in person. Whether he sent a memorandum after that, we'll have to check the Department of- All right. So the Secretary of the Army is going to have to testify to that. But Pelosi is saying, well, somebody told me, but be that as it may. But there's one point.

There's just one thing on the Capitol Police. They published their own memorandum reciting the sequence of events before and on January 6th. And in their own memorandum, they rejected in writing the authorization of the National Guard. Okay, but they don't mention Pelosi in it. I know about that manner. Now, get back to your Liz Cheney question. Clearly, Liz Cheney didn't want a fair hearing. on the January 6th committee.

That's clear. She wanted to condemn Donald Trump, and she knew her media allies would print everything she said, and anything that was exculpatory would be ignored. So Liz Cheney had no, you know, she had covered to do this dishonest thing, which she did, in my opinion.

She did, however, mention your testimony way, way down in the transcript, correct? I think they cited it, but they also precluded the evidentiary documents I've talking to you about, even though they had an agreement to incorporate that into the final report. They excluded Mayor Bouser's written. They didn't put him in. They excluded the documents from the Capitol Police. Now, you wrote a book last September, came out the same time killing witches came out,

my book, called Government Gangsters, the Deep State, the Truth, and the Battle for Our Democracy. So I want to alert people that everything that you're telling me today is in the book. All right, you say that it's pretty much organized crime running the country from Washington. Is that an overstatement by you? Look, again, it's the same MO from Russiagate, which I exposed and talked about in the book as a chief investigator. Instead of the executive branch withholding evidence of innocence, now we have the legislative branch performing the same operation in Liz Cheney and the Jan 6 committee. And we put the receipts in that book, which is why the Joe Biden administration wormholed it for 10 months and blocked its release.

There's got to be a reason I have to take them to federal court to sue. So again, you can believe me, but the truth is in their own written word. And that's the most powerful evidence. And we got it. Well, I do believe you. If I didn't, I would be tearing your throat out right now. I do, but I'm not sure that a jury in Washington, D.C., will examine the evidence in a fair way. I would be surprised if they did. It looks to me like the fixes in on this one from the beginning until the trial. Last word. I think you're absolutely right.

Look, I used to be a national security prosecutor at the Department of Justice. And this is the definition of forum shopping. They could have moved this case to Kansas, Kentucky, even Connecticut, for crying out loud. But they knew they would have the best judges for the radical left agenda to advance this disinformation campaign of insurrection in Washington, D.C. And so they put it right there. It's ironic that the Department of Justice is railroading a two-tier system of justice through Washington. But Donald Trump, I believe, is exposing that corruption every day. Well, we'll see.

Do you ever talk to Trump, by the way? frequently i'm as senior advisor so we have some channel conversation if you're the senior advisor that would that would mean you would talk to all right cash we really appreciate you time thanks very much for uh your uh your work and um we'll have you back i hope thanks again thank you sir all right here's an interesting media story again i'm obsessed with the media and i hope it's not boring you don lemon who i know a little bit i ran to him a couple of times, but I don't know really who he is, and Elon Musk, who I ran in one time. All right. So Elon Musk is the head of X. He hires Don Lemon, who left CNN, and it looks

like they're going to be buddies, but they're not. And here's why. This is a fascinating story to me. So on January 8, 2024, Elon Musk tweeted, quote, the airline industry can't find find enough qualified pilots even without insane DEI requirements. So Musk is against the forced hiring of people based on skin color. Two days later, he tweets this, quote, do you want to fly in an airplane where they prioritize DEI hiring over your safety? That is actually happening. So must opinion is that DEI drop stance.

from a meritocracy where pilots would be judged upon their flight hours or safety records and what they did on the job. Remember, you've got to have a lot of flight hours to become commercial airline pilot. He says, he believes, Elon Musk believes, that if you add skin color preference, you're putting people at risk. That's his belief. Okay? You can take it or leave it. Lemon interviews Musk, a major mistake for Lemon and Musk, and picks up on the DEI stuff. Lemon apparently believes that if you don't support diversity, equity, inclusion, that you're a racist or a misogynist. That's what Lemon believes. Roll the tape. Okay, but do you understand how by saying just that standards are being lowered, that you're

implying that they're being lowered because people are less skilled and less intelligent and you're talking about people of color and or women? Look, I'm saying we should not lower standards. But do you don't... That's it. I think everyone can agree that you can't, you shouldn't lower standards. Right. But you're implying that they're lowering standards because...

of people of color or women because someone is not a white male you're saying that they're less skilled and less intelligent that's not what he's saying that's what lemon wants to believe he's saying but that's not what must said must wants a meritocracy where the most skilled people are hired in a life death situation and to pilot i'm agreeing with musk and i bet you do too I bet you do too. It doesn't have anything to do. If the African-American pilot is the best candidate, you hire him like that. I had a pilot when I went down to Florida who's a woman.

Great. Fabulous. But you don't factor the hiring of an airline pilot in based on skin color. It's, how good are you? How is your record? So, Musk was faced with a guy who's trying to tell him he's a racist and a misogynist. If I ran X, I would have fired Lemon 2. That's disrespectful.

And you can't interview on your idea of an implication. I get letters once in a while and I read them to you. Oh, Riley, you're implying. I never imply. ever i tell you hey it's sean spicer from the sean spicer show podcast reminding you to turn into my show every day to get your daily dose inside the world of politics president trump and his team are shaking up washington like never before and we're here to cover it from all sides especially on the topics the mainstream media won't so if you're a political junkie on a late lunch or getting

ready for the drive home new episodes of the sean spicer show podcast drop at two p m east coast every day. Make sure you tune in. You can find us at Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcast. Power, politics, and the people behind the headlines. I'm Miranda Devine, New York Post columnist and the host of the brand new podcast, Podforce One. Every week, I'll sit down for candid conversations with Washington's most powerful disruptors, lawmakers, newsmakers, and even the president of the United States. States. These are the leaders shaping the future of America and the world. Listen to Podforce

One with me, Miranda Devine, every week on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcast. You don't want to miss an episode. I joining us now as a man who may know. His name is Kurt Mills. He's the executive director of the American Conservative coming out from Washington, D.C. all of the people on this list are conservative. Assume it has something to do with Ukraine, but I don't know. Do you know why they voted against it? Yeah, I mean, I think it was potentially a bit of a throwaway resolution, and it is possible that some of the members overlooked the details here.

But I do think it shows more than anything the sort of headwinds that Speaker Johnson is facing in trying to get new Ukrainian funding here. The level of skepticism of the narrative around the Ukraine-Russia war, at least among the Republican rank and file, and this is Aiden abetted, frankly, by the presumptive Republican nominee, is so dramatic at this point that they doubt things like fatality totals or narratives around alleged Russian kidnapping. Okay, but no sane person could doubt that the Russians have committed atrocities and war crimes in Ukraine. The evidence is overwhelming.

they have why do you think if these people are proud of their stance not to fund ukraine why wouldn't they answer and explain i think they would just submit that it feeds into the narrative that that puts us on this hawkish doom loop um i think it's a fair critique that they should have answered your your criticisms or at least answered your inquiry um and i think that you're at a point where the muscle memory is that, you know, they have certain members of Congress who are just automatically voting no on anything that is seen as furthering this war. If you were in the House, you wouldn't have voted no on this.

I know you wouldn't have. I'm not elected member of Congress, but no, I don't see the point. And indeed, there are, there were members of Congress, such as Congressman Gates, who either, I don't know if he voted yes or he did not, he was not part of your list. Yeah, basically. So I don't, yeah, Matt Gates, I meant, yeah, Matt Gates, I meant Florida. Oh, Big Gates, no, he didn't. He didn't. Look. Yeah, my point was that essentially there are Ukraine skeptical members of Congress who did not vote for this, and that seems to be most prudent.

Yeah. People should be skeptical of Ukraine, but the Republican Party and conservative movements divided on the issue. Yeah. And, you know, historically, conservatives have supported blunting, totalitarian, like Putin. Historically, if you go all the way back to World War I, the isolationist movement in the conservative community has always been less than the isolationate movement in the liberal community, always, all throughout history. But now it's emerging in 2024 that the isolationist movement is more prominent in conservatives circles than liberal. And that's a change, a big change. Well, I don't want to debate the essential nature of the facts set there,

but I do think there, I don't really like the term isolationist myself. I think there have been skeptical voices throughout the last hundred years of American foreign policy that have transcended partisan alliances on both sides. And so, I mean, there was conservative opposition to World War I and even World War II up until Pearl Harbor, effectively. And so this is, in some senses, a recrudescence or a restoration of the old party of the 1920s. Okay. So we got to deal with reality here.

And the Democratic Party is united. They vote en masse and block. No dissenters. We've explained why on this broadcast that if you are a Democrat in the House and you go against what the Democrats want, they cut off your money. That's Nancy Pelosi, did it for years. So whatever Biden wants, the Democrats are going to vote for it, almost 100% down the line. Republicans are not like that.

They have different factions, and they're not united. How big an advantage is that, in your opinion, for the Democrats? Well, I think it's a healthier political party when the dialogue is in essentially North Korean. like you described, I do think there is some advantage for the Democrats, maybe in the short to medium term. But let's say if the Ukraine war actually becomes quite unpopular as the year goes round. I mean, I think this is quite similar to 2004 in some ways in which you have a war that does have some bipartisan support, but it's clearly, clearly championed by a partisan White House.

And if it gets pretty bad in September, October, November, this could become a net liability for Biden. And the fact that they don't have an open dialogue about it means that they actually can't course correct us quickly. But right now, all the polls show that most American voters support blunting Putin. This isn't about Ukraine. This is about Putin and letting Putin win. And Putin is relying upon the fractious nature of our democratic government to wear us down. That's obviously his strategy. And he believes that he will.

And then he'll march into whatever he wants in Ukraine. Moldova will be next or Lithuania or whoever. Putin's not going to stop. And then China will be emboldened to go into Taiwan. That theory, and it is a theory, is pretty. pretty well borne out by history. I mean, and the sort of question is, does the United States want to leave the defense of Ukraine at this point? I mean, I would vote for continuing to give military arms to Ukraine.

That's what I would vote for. Not forever. You'd have to see progress on the battlefield. But at this point, if you let Putin win, it's going to cost us much, much more money down the road. My own personal view is I think we needed an armist yesterday. I mean, Crimea has effectively been under de facto Russian control for 10 years. It looks like Russia is going to successfully annex these territories. The risks of Russia actually going into further territories like Odessa, which they are increasingly attacking,

I think is something that the Biden administration needs to take very seriously. I think everybody should cut their losses here and call it a day. In terms of prioritization, I mean, look, I think you have to look. I think you have to look at why candidates like Trump, Biden, and Obama, who have all urged for the U.S. to be less engaged in the world, more or less, over the last 15 years, have been the successful winners at the ballot box, which is that Americans look around at their relatively deteriorating neighborhoods at their home states and don't see why we should pick winners and losers in every theater in the world.

I take your point that Russia is very important, But if that logic held absolutely, I mean, should the U.S. were just, we apparently got the boot this week from Niger, should we really be contesting the Russians in Niger? Where do we draw the line? Well, you draw the line on countries that don't matter, like Niger. But Taiwan matters. The chip industry there alone would cripple the United States for at least a year if the Chinese went in and took it over. TikTok aside, I mean, that's way more important. So I think you don't take the risk.

You don't embolden the totalitarians. You fight them as much as you can without being ridiculous. The deterioration of American neighborhoods is because of corruption in the state and local governments, not the federal government. So anyway, that's where I stand on it, and I think I'm right. Final question. Donald Trump's not a conservative. You know that. And if you don't, read my book, The United States of Trump.

He's never been a conservative. He couldn't even tell you what the conservative philosophy is. He's a dealmaker, but his supporters are largely right and ultra-right. They love him. Does it bother you as the director of the American conservative that Trump really isn't conservative? Do you think he's not nationalist or populist or center-right, though? No, I think he's populist. I think he's center-right for practically.

reasons. Best thing that Trump did in his four years outside of running the economy efficiently was the appointments to the Supreme Court. If Hillary Clinton had won the election, she would have loaded it up with liberal judges and you think it's bad now in the neighborhoods, what's happening to New York City right as we speak, because I'm here, would be happening all over the country if Hillary Clinton had won and appointed those Supreme Court justices. But Trump didn't. He appointed traditional right-leaning judges, and they're saving the country right now.

But as a doctrinaire, Trump couldn't care less about conservative thought. I think it's a fair point. I do think he is instinctually conservative, though, and I always think the Trump years have to be juxtaposed with the years that he succeeded in the conservative

movement, which was the Bush years. And I think Trump looks at the open borders, free trade, you know, sort of imperial foreign policy and he sees that as an approach that does not preserve the way of life that he came up in in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and even early 90s. Do you think the thought goes that deep, because Trump despises the Bush family, the Romney's of the world, the McCain's of the world, the so-called moderate Republicans, but they're all

conservative. Bush, Romney, McLean, they're all conservative. Trump has no use for them at all. Agreed. Agreed. I mean, I do think the thought goes deep enough. If you go back to when he was originally floating for running for president in 1987 or 1988, he appears on Oprah Winfrey's show, and he was just saying the exact same thing then. And that was juxtaposed with the Reagan administration. The jobs were going over she's were getting ripped off in trade. He was wondering about Japan, not China, then. I do think there's more ideological consistency there that he gets credit for. All right. We appreciate a good discussion. Kurt, thanks for helping us out. And we'll talk again, I hope.

All right, American credit card fees. That's the vigorous, the interest they charge you and other fees. Surged 50% since Biden became president. Why? Gas prices are up 48%. Most people buy gas on the credit. Grocery stores up 23%. I mean, it's incredible numbers here.

Again, you buy gas, you're paying 48% more than with Trump. You buy groceries, you're paying 23% in the grocery store, in a restaurant, more than Trump. Okay, people use their credit cards. So boom, boom, boom. And their salaries have not gone up, at least that close to that level. So 50% more credit card expenses. Last year, Americans paid $157 billion in interest to the credit card companies. 157 billion, okay?

Americans charged 1.13 trillion as of the final quarter of 13. So it'll be more than that. And people are getting a hammer, they can't pay. So there are forfeitures on a car, they're this, they're going on. And most people say 80% cited the higher prices as why they're in trouble with their credit cards. Now, with that fact, you would think Biden would lose by a landslide, just like Jimmy Carter lost. But remember, when Carter was running against Reagan in 1980, and this is another thing we have in confronting the president, it was tight eight months before the vote,

even though Carter was failing miserably in what he was doing in the Oval Office. The polls were tight. It wasn't like Reagan surged and was way ahead. he wasn't. It got after the debates, and again, we'll take you all through that campaign in the book, then it started to widen for Reagan. But with these numbers here, Biden should be way behind Trump. Smart life. So very frustrating go to the airlines. And you know it, I know it. You're on a hole for three days. They lose your bags. Nobody knows and nobody cares, whatever it may be, and you can't even get a seat. A friend of mine flew down to Florida, came back from Panama City, late at night, packed,

packed Delta flight. So, smart life. There are places that you can track how much to pay. Google flights or Hopper, H-O-P-P-R. I've never been on either of them. Google flights are hopper, monitor costs, kayak, K-A-Y-A-K, and Expedia also tell you how much it's going to cost. But the key is when you book. So international travel, you have to book at least two months ahead.

At least. Now, you can get a ticket before that, but you can pay more. right if you book out but then you have to look at the cancellation policies and if because things happen might have to buy trip insurance whatever complicated but if you're going abroad um two months if you haven't booked it you're going to pay more here um summer flights should be booked six months in advance that means January and we're in March now end of March so if you haven't booked your summer flights you can pay more Because what the airline companies do is they look at the C chart, and if the flight is, you know, almost full, they're going to charge you top dollar.

If there's not a lot of people going, the price will come down. That's why these websites are valuable. So you've got to plan ahead. And you're flying over Christmas next year or Thanksgiving, you got to book now. Now, smart life. Ice cream. So this is good news. We told you yesterday that Unilever dumping Ben and Jerry's because Ben and Jerry's communists.

They're communists. Even though they're as wealthy as you could possibly be up there in Vermont, you know, they're still way, way, way out there. Bernie Sanders and Ben and Jerry are buds. So in 1986, Americans ate 18 pounds a year of ice cream. A lot of ice cream, okay, 1986. Today, 12 pounds per person. This is the average ice cream.

And the reason is all the diabetes and pre-diabetes and blood sugar and all of that, boom, and it's going to hurt you. So more and more people are hearing this from their physicians, you've cut down the ice cream. But the ice cream ministry is going, whoop, and we'll continue. And they can't make a substitute. So if you eat the ice cream, that's not really ice cream, it's like,

but worse than the ice cream are the sugar drinks. So if you cut down the ice cream, I have two quarts of Hagen-Daz in my refrigerator. And Hagen-Daz is the best ice cream, in my opinion. I have not touched those quarts since Christmas. I discipline myself, so I'm not going to eat them. I will eat them. Someday I'll have a craving for agendas, and I'll go in and I'll eat them.

But every day I don't eat them is a better day for my body. The sugar drinks, though, are really killing Americans. So, and I hope they start to come down. I mean, I really do. It's horrible. Here is the final thought of the day. So I got tons of mail going. It's hopeless.

If Biden wins in November, we're all going to move to Costa Rica, whatever it may be. Okay. So I'm not an optimist so much as a realist. And when you read confronting the presidents, you'll see that we have had some very hard times in America. We have low, terrible leaders, population at each other's throats. This isn't new. But we've always emerged, all right, as the noble nation we set out to be. Always.

And, you know, when you start in 1776, and it's now 2024, that's a pretty good track record. All right? We don't have any violent revolutions here. We don't have any of this. nations, yeah. But I know that this country is never going to go down a drain. Now, I can't say that about my state, New York. I can't because that's tottering right now. And if it goes any further left, the state will collapse. But the good people are going to try to get out if they can economically. But the federal government, it's bad now. It's corrupt all over the place.

It needs a reformer. It needs somebody come in. It needs a Ronald Reagan, some charismatic person who can rally most of the folks. You know, I think it'll happen. Not going to happen like that, but I think it will. And believe me, I know more about the history of this country than most people. No, 13 killing books. One of them was outside the country, Jesus, which, by the way, if you haven't read it, I got a letter out, how can I see the movie? It's on paper view. Just put, well, you know, it was Google killing Jesus the movie, and boom, there it is, and you press a button, and you got it. It can't be any easier. But with Easter coming up, Holy Week next week, I mean, you might want to zero in on that.

And it's not boring and it's not religious. So you want to learn about it. But anyway, I know a lot about history. And when you read confronting the presidents, you're going to compliment me. Because Dugard and I, Martin Dugard, the co-author, I mean, we just, right down, boom, no ideology at all, none.

Republican and Democratic presidents are treated the same. The good, the bad, and the ugly. All right? I couldn't get Clint Eastwood in the president. book, but the overarching is that. Thank you for watching the No Spin News, and we'll see you again on Monday.