Bill O’Reilly’s No Spin News and Analysis - No Spin News: Best Of The Week, November 30 - December 3

Episode Date: December 6, 2020

Highlights from BillOReilly.com’s No Spin News. Watch the No Spin News weeknights - become a BillOReilly.com Premium Member to watch with added perks – including a free O’Reilly book. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I was digging into the election. There's a little time on my hands, and I'm as disturbed as anyone, about what happened in the November 3rd vote. I'd like to know the truth, and I think you would too, but a caution here, sometimes the truth hurts. and we're going to give you what we know and then we're going to stair step it each day. We'll add to the facts and by, I don't know, Christmas time, should have a pretty good idea of what did or did not happen, so you'll know.

And that's what we need in our republic. And I'm not fooling around here. I don't care what side is on. I'm going to tell you the truth. Now, pen and paper, always a good thing to have when listening to the no-spin news. So we're going to give you very specific facts. So first of all, you can't get the truth from either side. So the Biden people, the Democrats, they don't want to know if there's election fraud.

The press, which is attached to the Democratic Party now, the American corporate media, they don't want to know, and they're not going to look into it. And in fact, if you look into it or I look into it, they're going to mock us. Oh, it's unverifiable. Oh, this couldn't possibly happen. Why do you know? You know, I watched the interview with 60 Minutes last night with the National Homeland Security guy who was in charge of making sure that foreign nations didn't intrude on the vote. Now, what the guy said was true.

I believe that no nation injected itself into the machinery, the apparatus of our vote. but there was a slight of hand in the whole presentation by 60 minutes. And Scott Pelley, who I used to respect, I no longer do. He's got to know that that report was not upfront and honest. Because the issue isn't whether Putin or China or Indonesia or Albania did something with our voting machines, Venezuela. That's not what the issue is. The issue is the mail-in voting.

And what 60 Minutes did was say, because this guy, this Homeland Security guy, said the election was clean as far as foreign intrusion was concerned. That means the whole election was clean. No, it doesn't. The mail-in votes had nothing to do with foreign nations. And that guy doesn't know anything about the mail-in votes. And there wasn't even a question about them. It was all because there wasn't any foreign intrusion, the election was clean. 60 minutes. And I'm sitting there going, wait a minute. Hold it. Shouldn't you be investigating

charges in Pennsylvania and Michigan and Wisconsin and Georgia? Shouldn't you be doing that? I believe you. I don't think that China or Russia interfered in our election or Venezuela. Okay. So that's just one example of how you and I can't get the truth about this election. And then the other side, the pro-Trump side, and the president himself, wants you to believe there was massive fraud. But when it comes to producing evidence of the massive fraud, we really don't have it yet. Yeah. Okay. I have an open mind on this. But don't expect any of the courts to rule in your favor without overwhelming evidence. Not just the little evidence, not just some people blocking observers at polling places. That's not going to overturn an election.

All right. Analytics is the key to all of this. And I said that from the very, very beginning. Analytics is math. So what are the odds that the President Trump has a 700,000 vote lead in Pennsylvania by mid-dine on election night? and then he loses by 60,000. What are the odds of that happening? I still don't know.

All right, I have information, but I don't know that. I'd like to know that, wouldn't you? What the odds are there? That's called analytics. Now, if you could build a strong analytic case that this vote was off the chart crazy, that goes a long way to convincing we the people that there was fraud.

Let's start with the facts. Here's what we know here at the no-spin news. So Joe Biden received a record number of votes, all right, 15 million more than Barack Obama received in 2012. 15 million more. That's a colossal jump, is it not? The black vote. Barack Obama got 93% of the black vote in 2012, all right? 13% of the title of the entire vote was African-American.

All right, Joe Biden got 87%, 6% less than Barack Obama. All right. No incumbent president has ever lost an election in a century and a half. It's modern times. All right. Gaining more votes in the second run. no president has ever lost when he gained more votes

Donald Trump gained 11 million more votes than he did in 2016 so in modern times he's the only president to lose gaining more votes than he did the first time around 11 million that's substantially more 74 million votes Joe Biden is the first president

in 60 years since John F. Kennedy to lose Ohio and Florida and still win the presidency. Now, that's an anomaly, okay, but it's interesting, and it goes into the analytic category. The Wall Street Journal, and that is one of the few corporate media that I believe is honest. The Journal independently analyzed 19 counties throughout the USA that had been right on their voting records. over the past 19, over the past 40 years. So, for the past 40 years, 19 counties in this country had picked correctly, 19. 18 of them went for Trump.

Only Klalem County in Washington State did not. Again, that's not evidence that overturns, but it's certainly curious. All right, so Donald Trump won 81% of the counties. Eighty-one percent. Joe Biden underperformed Hillary Clinton in every major metro county around the country, except for Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta, and Philadelphia, the counties that are suspect. Again, Joe Biden underperformed Hillary Clinton did worse than she did in losing to Donald Trump, except for Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta, Philadelphia.

That's pretty, wow. Is that a coincidence or what? Okay? Donald Trump earned the highest share of minority votes for Republicans since JFK, since 1960, Richard Nixon. Okay? So Trump outperformed all over the place, all over the place. Biden won only 17% of the counties, as I said, okay, where he won 524 counties, Joe Biden. Barack Obama won 873 counties.

And Donald Trump won 2,534 counties, five times as many as Joe Biden. The reason that Biden won was California. California, massive, massive Biden vote. And Detroit. that's Michigan, Milwaukee, that's Wisconsin, Philadelphia, that's Pennsylvania, and Atlanta, that's Georgia. Now, the circumstantial case I just laid out to you is impressive to say the least. You would think that journalists would say, oh, look into some of this. This isn't really

stack historically or any other way, does it? Now, I'm not a conspiratorialist. You know, that. I'm not going to tell you it was massive fraud even in my presentation of all of these facts. And I'll tell you why. I'm not going to say that. There's something floating around. I get mail on it, all right, that says Pennsylvania mailed out 1.8 million votes ballots, okay, for the mail-ins, 1.8 million, and got back 2.5 million ballots. So they mailed 1.8 out to people who wanted to mail-in. and they got back 2.5. They got back 700,000 more balance and mail down.

Everybody's, oh, my God. Okay? Well, here's the problem with that. That count ended October 19th. The vote was November 3rd. And it did not include Republican mail-in votes, just Democrats. So, right out the window. Now, I can't tell you how many millions of Trump supporters believe that stat.

But that's not true. It doesn't imply anything. You've got to be very, very, very, very careful. Very careful. I was bringing in Charlotte Kucin. I've known it for a long time. It's an excellent, excellent reporter. She's coming to us from Leesford, of Virginia.

A new book, as I mentioned, Just Out, Slanted, how the news media taught us to love censorship and hate journalism. Wow. Shell also hosts a Sunday TV program full measure on Sinclair television. Okay, so were you surprised that the press, the corporate media, almost 100% of it outside of Fox, refused to even consider there might be fraud in this election. Were you surprised about that? I guess I was surprised at the extent to which they displayed the lack of rational journalistic curiosity and skepticism. I thought there might be at least a little more.

But then looking back, I guess maybe we shouldn't be surprised because after they were so wrong in 2016, the media promised to self-correct and reflect, but they seemed to just double down. And they went full-fledged into the 2020 campaign doing the same thing. and I think they've continued along that track post-election. Okay, but not only have they not investigated anything, they marginalize people who do want investigations. They demonize them, isolate them, and treat them with disrespect. So if you were to go on CNN or MSNBC or The Today Show or Good Morning America, Cheryl, for your book,

and I don't know whether you're going on those places, and you said in the course of a conversation, you know, I think, you guys might want to look into these allegations of fraud. They would laugh at you. They would scorn you. So it's an activism to keep these allegations under wrap. That takes it a step farther, does it not? It does. And that's one of the things I've studied and talked about. You talk about seeing changes at CBS News, as I did. At CNN, I worked at CNN back when it was a news organization. There's a lot of talk about that in the book with current and former insiders speaking to the devolution of news, really at all these news organizations where they have crossed over and redefined their role as

journalists, as you know, no longer reporting what's happening on the ground, giving various views, reflecting the facts. They're simply there to produce the narrative, to convince you what to think, to keep off certain viewpoints that counter the powerful interest that they're serving and to controversialize those who aren't on point with the narrative that they're there to further. It's really quite shocking to hear journalists make proclamations such as the day after the election that Trump should give it up and he's not being patriotic and there's nothing to see and so on. These are things that would never have been uttered by legitimate news organizations, maybe by analysts, but not by the reporters 10, 15 years ago. But now it's commonplace. They're rewarded

for giving these viewpoints and pushing them. And it's pretty much all you see when you turn on TV or read these mainstream news articles. In the chapter in Smear about the New York Times, you write, the press is no longer seeking information. It wants a narrative to shape public opinion. It doesn't want the facts. It wants to demonize whoever it may be. And I was subjected to that for more than 20 years myself, so I know it's true.

But the question that everybody asks me is why. So when I worked at CBS under Dan Rather, there was bias, but there were also standards that you had to adhere to, as you just said, if I had gone on after an election and said, all right, hey, hey, any allegations of fraud, we're not even going to take a look at him. Nah, anybody who thinks that's a nut, I would have been fired, all right? I couldn't do that. Now you can't. Why did that happen? Well, I tried to talk about this slow creep over the years in Stonewalled and the smear and now slanted.

For the first two decades of this century, political and corporate interests, in my view, figured out how to get their nose under the tent and news organizations and dictate through influence and connections and nonprofits and propaganda, what we do and don't talk about the terms we use, the narratives we forward, But then they saw people were still independently making up their own minds, and most frighteningly to these interests and to the media, they are one and the same. In 2016, nonetheless, Donald Trump got elected when the people were told not to elect him and all the reasons not to. So they almost went into a panic mode and realized, hey, we kind of control the news, the terms of how things are reported, but people are still getting unfettered access online. So they moved in in a very organized way, in my view, in a very very concerted way, starting in 2016 to figure out how to control the internet information landscape, social media, Google, all of the things we're talking about today. And they had to do that bill by first convincing us that there's a market for it, that we needed our information to be curated and cold through. So we would invite these third parties to come in and get between

us and our information, thus affording them the opportunity to do exactly what they've done and slant and smear and censor. And that's where we are today. I think it's the same interests that have been shaping the news, now stepping in and working very hard to make sure we don't make up our own minds by seeing the things we want to see on the internet.

There's also a financial aspect in this. So when I took over a primetime spot on the Fox News channel and stayed there for more than 20 years, I made the news corporation, which is the corporation that runs Fox News, billions of dollars with a B. All right? I made them that money because my program was so successful. It drove a lot of the other programs on that network.

They all saw that. Disney saw it. Viacom saw it. That's CBS. Comcast saw it, NBC. In fact, Comcast tried to hire me and offer me big. dollars to go over there. They saw what I did, which was opinion journalism, and we made no pretense, but it was fact-based opinion. All my opinions were based on facts, not conspiracies

or anything like that, which they do today. So the profit margin became so high to be ideological, either conservative or liberal, that that, in my opinion, is what happened? That was driving all of this. Am I wrong? Well, that's no doubt a factor, but I think what it did was open the door for these interests that were already working so hard and quite successfully to control the news in more subtle ways. It opened the door in another avenue for them to come in a more heavy-handed way and control the news. And as you probably know, there's a whole industry that trains analysts, pundits, and reporters in a very partisan way, but then sends them out to news organizations where they're either contributors or they're even hired in the newsrooms.

And all they're doing is furthering propaganda. And in this environment that you describe, they're welcome to, even as news reporters, put their opinions in there and put their talking points and propaganda out as if it's news, drowning out really the idea that there are neutral facts and two sides. And in fact, one of the most important accomplishments they do, these propagandists, is make sure certain people and views and scientific studies go down the memory hole and are never seen in places where people would normally see them or want to hear that they don't even make sense. That's what the big internet companies in Silicon Valley are doing.

Google and Twitter and all that, if you put something up and they don't like it, then they take it down. And that's becoming a huge problem as well. What about the country club factor? You are a long time Washington, D.C. person. I'm in New York person. We both know people in Los Angeles in the entertainment industry. It's a mindset of liberalism in all three places.

There's no question about that, all right? Cocktail party circuit, invitations to parties, invitations to openings to openings, to the Kennedy Center honors, all of that centers around a liberal social world. How powerful is that in the presentation of the new. Well, that definitely impacts what you see and why there aren't more independent voices in journalism today, for example, in Washington, D.C. going into the newsrooms and saying, what are we doing? You know, shouldn't somebody be looking at other views or investigating these obvious questions we should be looking at? It's because when they do the opposite, when they squelch those views or when they ask questions a certain way, perhaps they're interviewing President Trump and they conduct the interview with a certain last, of decorum or journalistic even standards or integrity, but they're patted on the back for that. They finish the interview and they're told by their bosses and their colleagues and I suppose at the parties, what a great job they did. So it feeds upon itself. And there's nobody standing up

and saying, this is wrong. We should provide alternatives as well. One mystery of the universe, and maybe you can help me with this, but Cheryl and I both worked at CBS, Cheryl, much longer than I. You were there more than 20 years, right? right? Yes. Yeah, I wasn't even there 20 months. I got out of there. But I worked at ABC News for two years and was quite successful on the Peter Jennings broadcast. Ted Cople was a guy at ABC who was considered a very straight shooter. And I never, ever was on his program not one time because the executive producer was a far left guy and didn't like me, although I had no politics at the time at all. I was a straight reporter. But Cople told me on the air that I ruined

television news and my opinion program was so successful that it skewed everything out, which is what we just talked about. But Ted Cople, when I asked him point blank, do you think that network news now is fair and really looking for the truth? He said yes. and he apparently believes that. I mean, I'm going to send him a copy of your book, but I don't think there's anything going to dissuade him from that. He believes that there's no problem with the New York Times and the Washington Post, CBS, NBC, ABC, there's no problem at all.

And I'm sitting here, is that delusional? What do you think? I think he's an outlier, if that's what he thinks, because you'll note that in Slanted, I spoke to, to, I don't think anybody else has done this, a large number of executives, reporters, producers that ran network news divisions or are working inside these places now at ABC, CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times.

There was nobody that I spoke to. And by the way, if they described their politics at all, they said they were left-leaning or progressive. There's nobody that I spoke to among them who thought, we don't have a problem. They agree that the death of the news, as we once knew, it is a very real thing. And furthermore, I asked them, was it murder or suicide? What I'm getting at is did Donald Trump call this lack of confidence and caused this lack of confidence in the news and

where we are today? Or did we do it to ourselves? And I don't think anybody, even those who are not Trump fans to say the least, these insiders, I don't think anybody blamed Trump. They all said we've done this to ourselves. And they're quite appalled at the turn that news has taken, particularly the last four years. But if you try from the inside it corrected, you're fired. You're done. Right. You have to be willing to be marginalized, bullied, shouted down, controversialized, and probably lose your job. There are people... Yeah, you'll lose your job. There's no doubt about it. Yeah. Working inside news organizations. They're just having trouble, you know, getting the outlet among the bullies. All right. The book is slanted. How the News Media

taught us to love censorship and hate journalism. Sherlock Cassin, I recommend. I recommend in the book very highly. In fact, I read it almost in one sitting because I know everybody that Cheryl's talking about, but you're going to like it too. And we appreciate it, Cheryl. Always nice to see you. Thanks for coming on. All right. So because of all this that Cheryl and I just talked about, in the next year, and this is a prediction, you're going to see a tremendous change in the way news is delivered on television. And that change is the people speaking to you, you each night are not going to be speaking to very many people, all right? So I've said this before and I don't want to be redundant or repetitive, but ESPN is the best example once

the colossal sports network in the world is now barely on the air. And they killed themselves by bringing in people like Jamel Hill and others who were far left, who took sports and just turned it into a left-wing jihad, Holy War, and people who like sports didn't want it and tuned it out. That's going to happen to all the news agencies on television. The newspapers, they're going to survive on the Internet, but the only people going to be reading the New York Times, and I think that's the case now, are far-left people.

Nobody else. But the newspapers can survive on that. They can survive. But it used to be the Good Morning America, the Today Show, CBS Morning News, those shows, they try to get everybody to watch. That's not going to happen anymore because people don't trust them. And on cable, because it's so polarized, it's what do you want to hear tonight? Whatever you want to hear, I'm going to tell you. Well, it gets a little boring.

So Joe Biden, what are they going to cover on Joe Biden? That he chased his dog and broke his leg or whatever happened? What are you going to do? Joe Biden's not going to be Donald Trump tweeting provocative things every day or running around a rally saying stuff or attacking the press or he's not going to do any of that. He's going to sit in the White House

and, you know, work a few hours a day and that's all, you know, his press people run out and oh, well, we did this. And then the news agencies are going to go, Joe's great. Whatever Joe does is the best. And if Joe screws up, Mr. Biden, President-elect Biden, whatever you want to describe as, if he screws up, guess his fault it's going to be?

Trump's. If the economy goes south, Trump did it. All right? If COVID sweeps over despite the vaccine, Trump did it. Whatever bad happens in America the next three years, because then the presidential campaign will start again. going to be Trump's fault. Well, how much of that can you watch? And the other networks that don't like Biden, well, Joe's terrible every day, you never can see him. He's not even going to be around. So people are going to search and look for alternatives. And this is absolutely going to

happen. I can see it. I'm not going to bore you with numbers, but the first two weeks after the election, people were engaged because they thought that maybe Trump could hold his job because of all his controversy about the mail-in ballots. Maybe that could happen. So people still watched. But starting last week, now it's a holiday week. Maybe they'll bounce back this week. I don't, I think it's going to be like this. So when that happens, when there are millions and millions of people looking for information, but can't get it from the networks and cables, they're going to go other places. So therefore, they're going to be a rise.

And leading that rise is going to be Donald Trump. He has to do it. Number one, he's addicted to the spotlight. he can't not have attention, has to have it. And that's part of what his problem was because he was overexposed saying too much and people got exhausted. So Donald Trump's going to latch on someplace

in the media. And he's going to bring 70 million Americans with him. I mean, that is clout. I have no blank an idea. I have not talked to the president recently. I talked to him before the first debate. And he totally ignored what I told him. I don't ever take it personally.

I don't know what he's going to do. But he's going to do something. I know that because he wants to run again. It's only three years. And if the economy dips, yeah, the press will tell you it's Trump's fault, but nobody's going to believe that. It's going to be Biden. trouble. The economy is everything. Biden's not going to do anything overseas. He's going to say

global warming, not going to do anything global warming. Mitch McConnell's going to block the far left stuff in the Senate. It's like, all right. Now, maybe the nation needs a little relief from the frenetic pace of Donald Trump. But you're going to see them someplace in the media. Mark my words. COVID. All right, so the vaccines are tracked. It looks to me like they'll be a arriving in December, and the medical people will get them first, good, and then the older people and everything like that. But there will be plenty of availability of medicine, and by March, most Americans will have access to it. So what happens after that? Well, the Biden administration is not going to tell you what happens after that, but Great Britain is going to tell you.

Listen to this. So, UK restaurants, bars, cinemas, and sporting venues, that's foot to bowl, may require proof that people have been vaccinated. Don't want to get a restaurant, a movie, see a soccer match to show your card. Definitely going to happen in schools. It's going to be like the measles. The kid's not vaccinated. The kid ain't coming in.

Teachers unions in America are going to demand that. Okay? Flying, you're going to have to have that card stamped onto your passport in order to go anywhere. So there are a significant number of Americans who are not going to take the vaccine, and that is their constitutional right. I would never in a million years tell anybody to take a vaccine or not take a vaccine. That is your personal decision. However, you are going to be banned by private business. from going a lot of places. And that's what's going to happen, just so you can prepare yourself.

Again, our government's not going to tell you that, but it's absolutely going to happen. Now, will it be a law passed by Congress? No. This is all going to be in a private sector. Okay? And the only thing that will be public is schools, because there is a

precedent for that. Okay, the media is going to try to help the Democrats in Georgia any way the media can. You'll hear smear articles against Republican candidates all day long. Everybody knows that's going to happen. But here's something that we didn't know until today, and this is really fascinating. So you know this guy, James O'Keefe, the head of Project Veritas. James O'Keeve is a conservative guy. He runs around the country trying to uncover left and far left corruption.

I think that's a fair word. Mr. O'Keefe has been arrested. He's been, you know, everything can happen, somebody's happened to him. So he gets on the phone on the party call, all right, with CNN. So I told you, the way it works in both political parties is that every morning, political action groups representing Republicans and Democrats, they fax, email, text, talking points to their media supporters. All right, that comes out of Washington. Then CNN, Fox, NBC, all of the news organizations have a conference call where the president. The president of the news organization gets on with his lieutenants and they speak about what they're going to cover that day.

That's how it works from the inside. So O'Keefe gets on the CNN call secretly. Somebody, there's a traitor at CNN who allowed him, you know, to tape the call. So the first soundbite that O'Keefe releases is Jeff Zucker, who's the president of CNN. and a Trump hater. Now, Zucker, it's been reported, is going to be out in January as AT&T knows that CNN is no longer a news agency and has hurt itself almost beyond repair. Here's Jeff Zucker on October 9th of this year. Go. Okay, I just want to re-emphasize that, you know, I think we cannot normalize what has happened.

here in the last week with Trump and his behavior. And I go back to what David said, David Chalien said, that this is a president who knows he's losing, who knows he's in trouble, is sick, maybe is on the after effects of steroids or not. I don't know. But he's acting erratically and desperately. And we need to,

we need to we need to not normalize that you know this is what we've come to expect for the last three and a half years four years all right and he goes on to say you know this is what we've come to expect and it's exacerbated by the issues that he's dealing with which means COVID. Okay. So Zucker is basically telling his people, don't feel sorry for Donald Trump in anyway. Okay, point out that this COVID that he is acquired is making him mental. Now, if you're a CNN producer or a talent and you don't do that, you're in trouble. Okay, the next soundbite is the CNN vice president, Marcus Mabry. This was recorded September 8th of this year.

Go. I was just going to say, if you're going to talk about the story, I think it's unavoidable that you have to talk about the naked racism of Tucker Carl's. Because that's really what drove this anti-diversity push on Trump watching Tucker Carlson show and then react. And just as sort of the white supremacy hour they have on Fox News every night, I think it's you can't disconnect it to. Okay, so now when you hear the CNN, primetime hosts attacking Fox News, you know they have been ordered to do that.

And if they don't do it, again, they are called in, and they're all making a lot of money. Third Soundbite is from a reporter named Jamie Gangel. Ms. Gangel's been around. She was with NBC for a while. This was recorded on November 9th. Go. We have to be, you know, news organizations have to be very careful and very responsible about not giving Trump too much of a platform on his not conceding because they feel the transition

can go forward and, you know, other than the national security meetings, which are critical to start now. We just don't want us to exaggerate that Trump isn't leaving office. And I'm going to have a lot of specific reporting on that

later today. All right, so she's basically saying, and she doesn't have any power. She's just saying, I'm going to report that Trump's out of there. Okay, so we can reassure our viewers, all of whom

hey Trump. All right. So this is so instructive because it just confirms what I've been telling you for years that these people, these corporate people, order their producers and their talent to say stuff and they better follow the orders. So when you see blatant bias in any of the news organizations on television, you know where it comes from. All right, COVID. Welcome to a very COVID Christmas. I remember a long time ago there was a program a very Brady Christmas since I never once in my life watched the Brady Bunch I miss that special. But now it's a very COVID Christmas. Now tonight is the Christmas tree lighting in Rockefeller Center, New York. It'll be on TV, my pal Al Roker, who I like, and I've known for many years. He's a really

good talent, and I didn't wish him the best. He had some health problems earlier. this fall and he seems to overcome that and Al's a good guy. But anyway, he's the driver of the tree and all of that. So if you want to go see it in person, you can only spend five minutes looking at the tree and getting your picture taken in front of it or whatever you do. Now, I don't know how their New York City police are going to regulate that. See, in New York, you can steal a car and they won't prosecute you. All right? So they're going to haul you in if you spend five and a half minutes in front of the tree? It would charge you with loitering in front of a Christmas tree?

I mean, you can do literally anything. Punch people. You can push people in front of trains in New York. They won't hold you. I mean, so I don't know how that's going to work. I love the Rockefeller Christmas tree. I should have showed you a picture of maybe tomorrow I will of me last year in front of the tree. I don't think the Times Square thing's going to happen in the COVID holiday spirit.

They'll drop the ball on TV and you'll have the dopey people out, you know, saying stupid things for five hours. I never did that in my entire life. I was offered it. You know, once you go to New Year's Eve, Times Square and kind of be a host. And I went, no, because you can't be intelligent doing that for five years. values. It's impossible. He can't be intelligent to do it for 20 minutes. Anyway, I don't think you're going to let the folks, because it's a COVID spreader. Okay, let's hit the mail here. Raymond Johnson, I am skeptical when it comes to the idea that there may have been fraud

associated with mail-in voting. The Democrats encourage its voters to utilize the mail-in voting system, whereas the Republicans did not. Okay, but you have to compare, Raymond. What the mail-in ratio was, 10 to 1 for Biden, against what the poor precincts that showed up were. That's the analytics you need to do. I believe there was fraud. David Rosenberg, Brooklyn, New York, what are the chances that some of the electors will switch their votes toward President Trump? Once the vote is certified in the states, the electors go for the certification. Sean Ryan, Wisconsin Rapids. Billy said states that have their own laws regarding extending mail-in-ballot deadlines

in most state constitutions, only the legislatures can change election law. So a judge can't change the deadline. That is the key in Pennsylvania. That is why the Supreme Court could hear that case. But I'm not optimistic it's going to get turned around there. Dave Reynolds, Rochester, Washington. Though I believe President Trump will lose because he won't be able to prove. massive fraud in time. That's the key. I mean, they just don't have enough time to do it.

Andrew Lepira, Appleton, Wisconsin. There's any chance of getting a stimulus check? Yes, I think that'll be the first thing on board when Congress comes back in January. You'll get your stimulus check. All right, let's see. David, that 8 by 10 of you and Holly is great. Throw that up there. All right, Holly and me. These are flying out of here. Look at that. Now, I know Holly of stages me. I hand sign these. Okay, I hand sign them. You see up there, my fingers are falling off. If you become a concierge member or give a concierge membership, you get that free. Oh, Holly. Holly is cutest dog in the world. Quick break back with the final thought. quick today. Christmas is going to be different. It's a COVID Christmas. So here's what I'm doing.

I'm personalizing everything. So I got Christmas cards. I'm going to send them to the people that I know, my friends, and then I'm writing a little note. Not an extensive, little note. Okay? And then I'm putting a picture, a couple of pictures in they might like, but I'm doing it personal, personal, personal, personal. Then I'm going to send gifts to three, four times as many people as I usually do just because I want everybody to be happy on Christmas so I have the means to do it some people don't but everybody can write a little note but I'm going to kind of spread the little Christmas cheer this year all right and I'm making it personal because I know we all know not a real happy Christmas time next year will be

better I promise and I'll see you again tomorrow