The Dan Bongino Show - Ep. 761 Justice Isn’t Blind Any More

Episode Date: July 12, 2018

Summary: In this episode I address the troubling actions of FBI lawyer Lisa Page, who has failed to comply with a congressional subpoena. I also address the incredible “secret sauce” business recipe for an investment firm and a new report on school security from the Secret Service.    News Picks: Does Scandinavian “socialism” work?   Debunking liberal lies about Supreme Court nominee Kavanaugh.    What is Rod Rosenstein doing getting involved in the Supreme Court nomination?   This is a must-read Secret Service report on school security.    Here’s the “secret sauce” for business success.    Copyright CRTV. All rights reserved.     Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Dan Bongino Show. Get ready to hear the truth about America with your host, Dan Bongino. Hi, welcome to the Dan Bongino Show. Producer Joe, how are you today? It's a wonderful day, Dan. I'm glad to be here. Joe's laughing because, you know, after I do Levin, I filled in for Levin last night, I usually get to bed late and I wake up super salty the next day, right? You can always tell. And this morning I woke up up and like the king of salt, salt everywhere, salt spewing from every pore. And it only aggravates me more when I read stories like this Lisa Page story, this FBI lawyer, who's just like, yeah, we're just going to ignore that subpoena. Joe's telling me before the show,

he's like, well, you know, ignore it. What would happen to us if we did that? I'll tell you what happened to you. You'd be in jail. That's exactly what would happen to you. I'm going to get into that in a minute, how there's two systems of justice in this country and you can't have two systems of justice. Folks, you can't have a boxing match where there's two different sets of rules. Okay. You can't, you can't have two sets of rules where one side's like, listen, for you, it's okay to do a groin punch, okay? But the other side, no good. You have to obey the standard above the belt contact.

No punches in the back. When I say break, break. Well, the other guy gets to do whatever? Yeah, the other guy gets to do whatever. The other guy actually is allowed to knife you in the middle of the fight. You'd be like, who the hell wants to play that game? No fair. Ladies and gentlemen, the game is democracy right

in a constitutional republic nobody's going to want to play the game if these two different sets of rules continue to apply to everybody lisa page the fbi lawyer who was subpoenaed to testify in front of congress oh yeah i think we're just going to ignore that subpoena we don't feel like showing up no no no that's not how this works get your butt into butt into the hall and start answering questions up on the hill. Alright. More of that in a second. But yes, the salt is flowing today. Pass the salt, Dan. Big time.

Alright, today's show brought to you by Omaha Steaks. I could use a steak right now. I'm one of those guys, I can't eat enough steak or meat. Somebody throw him some meat. Somebody throw me some meat. And as I said last night on Levin, don't throw me steak tartare. Okay? Cook the meat. Somebody throw him some meat. Somebody throw me some meat. And as I said last night on Levin, don't throw me steak tartare. Okay? Cook the meat. Cook it.

But I am a steak guy. And Omaha Steaks, the steak is delicious, man. I'm not messing with you, man. The steak is delicious. You don't even have to chew it sometimes. Sometimes you're just like, oh, this is so good. Just leave it. Let's savor it. Every bite.

Omaha steaks are one of the few steaks I actually eat slow. Usually, I'm wolfing stuff down my gullet. Well, summer's here. This is me ad-libbing because I love to do that. Summer's here. What better way to kick off grilling season than by buying your own Omaha steaks package? This is a sick deal you're not going to get anywhere else, okay? Omaha Steaks package. This is a sick deal you're not going to get anywhere else.

Grill together and enjoy 24 of the Butcher's Favorites with the Grill Ready Collection for $39.99. You can't beat this. This is great. They sent me some a while ago. Omaha Steaks, some filet mignons, some burgers. Folks, just

mouth-watering good flavor. Just the perfect mix of marbling and the good tender, I mean, so tender. Oh, I'm hungry now. I want one. Omaha, send me some more steaks. You will love this Omaha Steaks package. By the way,

it comes with, it's fresh. It's vacuum sealed. The stuff is delicious. Right out of the pack. Throw that thing on the grill. Get ready to go. It has the dry ice in it. You can't beat it. Why Omaha Steaks, folks? Because they offer everything to satisfy your grilling needs.

They have quality. Highest quality cuts with one-of-a-kind flavor. All beef is USDA inspected for quality and aged for 21 days to unlock the full delicious flavor and tenderness of the cuts. Variety. There's all the best cuts of beef. Bison from Golden Plains. Globally sourced and frozen fresh seafood from Worldport. Seafood, poultry, pork, veal, lamb, vegetables, desserts.

It's all customized, folks. Omaha Steaks gives you the option to customize cuts for your grilling needs. Fine recipes, wine pairings, all that stuff. Ladies and gentlemen, right now Omaha Steaks is giving a limited time offer to our listeners for the summer. Go to, get ready, go to omahasteaks.com and then in the search bar, type Bongino, my last name, omahasteaks.com, type Bongino, B-O-N-G-I-N-O in the search bar and you can get this Omaha Steaks grill ready collection for only $39.99. the search bar and you can get this Omaha Steaks grill ready collection for only $39.99. That's 80% off. Here's what you'll get. Two tender filet mignons, two beefy top sirloins. Those are good. Four juicy boneless pork chops, four boneless chicken breasts, four all beef Omaha Steak

burgers, four traditional kielbasa sausages, four award-winning gourmet jumbo franks, one Omaha Steaks seasoning packet, plus get four made-from-scratch caramel apple tartlets for free. Again, this limited-time package for only $39.99 when you go to omahasteaks.com and type Bongino in the search bar. Get ready for summer. omahasteaks.com, Bongino in the search bar. All right, so this Page thing is really annoying me, folks. It's on my mind because Lisa Page, the FBI lawyer who was intimately involved in the Spygate fiasco,

the FISA operation, the spying operation on the Trump team, along with investigator Peter Stroke. Remember, Page was a lawyer for the FBI. She was not a special agent. Stroke was a special agent. He was also a manager. He was the number two person in the counterintelligence division. This is an important distinction. Page, who was having an affair, as it's alleged, with Stroke at the time, they have these text messages back and forth. These text messages are incredible. They reveal a deep animus towards the Trump team. And folks, this is not irrelevant. They reveal a deep animus towards the Trump team. And folks, this is not irrelevant. Listen, the liberal talking point on this, ladies and gentlemen, has been, well, they're allowed to have their political feelings and they are. No one is saying that people aren't entitled in a constitutional republic to have political feelings, even if you do have a government job, even if it's in law enforcement. But folks, if you are the lead manager, the number two person in the counterintelligence division responsible for investigating Trump and Hillary Clinton, and you're having an affair with a woman and both of you exchange messages about a deep personal hatred for the Trump team, I think that is entirely relevant and the American public should know if that animus motivated some of your decisions. Now, contrary to what liberals want you to believe,

the Inspector General report did not say there was no political bias. It said they could not prove in any individual decision a political bias, but also concluded, Joe, in the FBI's decision to sideline the Hillary investigation when the Huma Abedin emails came up, and to highlight the Trump Russia investigation despite a paucity of evidence almost none that there was actual collusion they did conclude that this is kind of double triple reverse negatives here so try to follow this that they could not eliminate political bias as a reason for doing that you get what I'm saying Joe

yeah that the FBI they could that the inspector general that was you know kind of the internal affairs for the fbi in this they couldn't eliminate political bias as a reason for their decision to highlight the trump russia investigation over the hillary email investigation folks this is important stuff this you know americans are getting frustrated here. And I bring all that up because Paige, Lisa Paige, is integral to this. She subpoenaed to testify seven months ago in front of Congress.

Now, as Joe and I were talking before the show, and sometimes we carry it onto the air, what's the point, folks? What's the point if there are two, if there's a bifurcated system of justice one for the connected and one for everybody else what are we the great unwashed out there you know throughout human history we've had these monarchies these these uh these tyrannical uh

governments that have the whole essence of their existence show was a bifurcated system of standards the elites the kings the dukes the earls the connected uh the bourgeois whatever they were they always played by a different set of rules political favoritism financial and economic favoritism legal favoritism The rules didn't apply to them. If you challenge them, you would find yourself a political prisoner, bankrupted, your land confiscated, and likely your family and friends enslaved to the government. There were two separate systems of government. Human beings don't work like that. Human beings work based on an equity-based system. I can prove it to you.

If you ever look at a lot of the research on whether it's human beings or even an animal research show, this is interesting. This is not an insignificant point here. Both animals and humans, in some respect, focus more on equity than they do their net benefit in the end in other words if you were to offer joe a system where joe gets say five chits uh and and another guy gets 10 chits joe will accept less chits the chits is like this we just call like you know whatever it's a generic term for like money overseas when we're secret service aid trinkets let's say because some people may hear that wrong especially if you some uh some if you were to get five trinkets uh joe and someone else gets 10 trinkets in some of these animal research and human research studies. Joe says, well, why does he get 10 and I get five?

Joe would rather a system where he gets less trinkets as long as the other guy gets the same amount than a system where he gets actually more trinkets himself, but the other guy gets more. Does that make sense? Human beings will prefer equity and fairness over it's it's a reason sometimes democrat socialist talking points tend to work on young impressionable people they're almost willing to accept less at certain points in some bizarre sense of equity this is what human beings um will strive for they'll strive for equity over net benefit this is important it's important because this is the essence of a constitutional republic. The idea that we're all in the same boat, even if that boat hurts us or benefits us at any point, that we're all subjected to the same rules. Folks, I don't mean to do a long extended monologue on this, but that's not what's happening right now.

You have the Clinton team. You have Huma Abedin. You have Cheryl Mills. Right now, you have the Clinton team, you have Huma Abedin, you have Cheryl Mills, you have almost the entire Democrat apparatus, it seems these days that are living by a different set of legal rules and standards and people who have aligned with liberal ideas than people who live out in the general public. And I don't know how long they expect this, you know, to continue. Again, you can't get involved in a boxing match where one side's allowed to put you know knives and razor blades inside his gloves and you are not no one's going to be willing to play that match anymore to fight in that fight it's frustrating you know yesterday i was driving back from the gym and i'm listening to this and about lisa page refusing this congressional

subpoena and and it's just amazing the game that's played and how the media does not call these people out on it. Because, of course, Paige was a lawyer that hated Trump, went after Trump. So she's a media favorite and they're going to protect her. Here's my suggestion. Let me wrap this up because I've spent too much time on this already. I have like four or five other things I want to get to. Joe, here's what has to happen.

It's me whining about it. It's not going to get anything done. There has to be some enforcement of this. There has to be a referral to the DOJ. There has to be. Lisa Page does not show up, then Lisa Page should go to jail until she does show up because that's what would happen to everybody else. You want to defy a congressional subpoena, it should be referred and it should be prosecuted now joe i'm an absolute believer in the constitution i'm a libertarian at heart if lisa page wants to show up and plead the fifth that's great she's a perfectly entitled in her uh role as a united states citizen to do that that is great and although i wouldn't applaud the decision i would support it that is your right

she is not obligated to testify against herself and if if she doesn't want to, show up and plead the fifth. But I'm sorry, you not showing up and basically gaffing off the justice system while the rest of us would find ourselves in a prison for doing so is entirely unsatisfactory. Not going to happen. You get her hauled off into a... You go to jail.

Now you want to testify? Okay, all you got to do is show up. So it's not complicated. By the way, a little bit of a lighter note, because I know I've been salty today. It's just watching your Trump over in London and at that NATO conference before. Maybe think of the Secret Service when I was in there.

Yeah, it was, when you go over to these overseas conferences, I brought this up on Levin last night. It's interesting because you'll get these logistics people and they always, always want to make it seem like the United States is just an additional player in the event. Let me try to explain this to you. Let's get some inside baseball on this. It's kind of funny, this psychology. When you've done enough of these, you'll get it. So you're a Secret Service agent.

The way these advanced teams work is there's a lead advance for the Secret Service. He coordinates all the security. There's a lead advance for WHAMO, the White House Military Office. They'll go over there, coordinate WACA, the White House Communications Agency, which is also run by the military. They'll coordinate the White House Medical Office. That's the military runs that, do military doctors. They'll also coordinate how the mill aid, the White House military aid, the guy who holds the football, how that's going to work.

So there's basically a threefer, right? There's the White House Staff Secret Service and the military that go over and do that. And if you've been involved in any of these, you'll know what I'm talking about. Whenever you go over to like NATO, even within the UN, even though it's on US soil, you go over to any of these ASEAN conferences or these big conferences where multiple countries attend, the logistics people on the ground always want to make it appear that, you know, listen, you guys are just another, you know, foreign dignitary here and you're going to follow the rules of everybody else. And it was always a trip because listen it's the secret service we don't like to cause a lot of controversy but as i said last night we'll come in and we'll be like listen here's how this is going to roll

the president of the united states is not like everyone else okay so you can get in our way if you'd like but we it's a freight train coming into town. When air force one lands, we're doing what we want. And we're not really asking your permission. This would happen every single time. I can't even tell you. And one of the, one of the defining moments I thought the secret service is when someone tried to put their foot down on a trip once it's still on YouTube. There's a video of president Bush in Chile, Chile. I'll be getting, I'm sorry. I said, I said last night for you, uh, people, Chile, President Bush in Chile. Chile.

Again, I'm sorry. I said it last night for you people. Chile. He's in Chile. And Nick Trotta, who was the SAC at the time, the special agent in charge of Bush's detail. Sorry. Let me put my – this is so annoying. I forget to put my phone on do not disturb.

You leave that in. Sometimes people call me that. And it rings in my new iMac, which is really irritating. So I can hear it in my ear. So Nick Trotta, who is the special agent in charge of the detail, he's walking in with President Bush to this big conference in Chile with all these international leaders. And the Chilean Secret Service guys go to stop the Secret Service boss.

And he's like, what are you doing? And then Bush makes a U-turn, turns around, Joe, grabs him. And the guy's name is Nicky. Nicky! Nicky! Nicky! It's up, ladies and gentlemen. It's on YouTube.

But President Bush, Chile, whatever, Chilean Secret Service stops President Bush. You can see it yourself. It's hysterical what happens. Because the Chilean Secret Service dudes are like, wait, what? What, was this the chilean secret service dudes are like wait what what was this the president and man they part like moses part in the red sea because that you don't want to you know you don't want to go hands-on with the u.s president but we warned them we're like listen daddy oh this ain't the way this is going down the president's not leaving without his secret service guys and we're not going anywhere without him but the problem was

you may be saying why the secret service Secret Service guys allow themselves to be stopped? Watch the video. You'll see they create like a human wall in front of them. What's he going to do? Like burst through six, seven guys? And Bush sees it right away and just reaches over them. They don't even see him coming. Nick, hey!

Nick, hey! That's the best thing. We warned you. We warned you. Don't get in the way from us. We're just gonna steamroll you okay uh moving on a lot of news to cover i am beginning to think that the selection of kavanaugh over other candidates may have been a brilliant tactical

move by trump again you know me i don't golden calf anyone, Trump included. There's a screw up. We're happy to highlight it in the interest of the audience getting the information out there, right? But I think President Trump is frequently attacked by his critics, even some in the conservative movement,

under the illusion that he is, he's basically impulsive and doesn't doesn't think decisions out and i disagree i explained to you yesterday what i thought the significance of the executive order on immigration was how he just smoked him on that one completely beat his critics down on that one and i think the selection of cavanaugh was was genius i'm going to explain some of it now you know where i stand my My personal favorite was Mike Lee. I know there's some disagreement amongst you out there, but I'm sorry. I'm behind him 100%. I think he was the best choice, hands down, but it didn't work out. Now, given the final four, it was Kethledge, Hardeman, Coney Barrett, and Kavanaugh.

I thought of that group, Amy Coney Barrett, I thought was the best selection for conservatism. Yeah, me too. Yeah, I know you did. We chatted about this. Now, now I'm starting to think Trump, again, even got me on this one. Listen, I'm a humble cat, folks. I am. I'm always honored to be here, but when I'm wrong, I think I was wrong. And let me explain why.

done pretty thorough vetting and analyses of these candidates for the Supreme Court. I thought Coney Barrett, based on her answers on prior vetting process, I thought she was the most conservative, especially on some of the social issues. I'm not saying Kavanaugh's not. I want to be clear on this, and I'm not saying I won't support it. It doesn't matter. I don't get a vote on it anyway, but you listen to my show. I owe you an opinion. But it was brilliant. Why? Here's the thing, folks. The Senate polling for the midterm 2018 elections coming up in November is turning dramatically in the Republicans' direction. Now, right now, we have 51.

And really, effectively, Joe, we only have 50. Because John McCain is ill. We only have 50, which would mean Pence. You know, we would need Pence here to vote as the vice president, the tiebreaker in here. We would need we need we would need me, especially if one of them if one of them defects. And depending on what happens with the Democrats, we may need Pence to produce. You have Collins and Murkowski who are always, you know, the rhinos who are always up in the air with these votes. They're alleged Republicans, but you can never really trust them. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski. So what I'm trying to get at is the vote's going he sees the polling going in the opposite direction. What does it have to do with this?

I will bet you he's figuring, okay, Anthony Kennedy, he understands the leftist game, okay, Joe? The leftist game is always going to be identity politics, right? Oh, yeah. Anthony Kennedy is not a woman, nor is Anthony Kennedy black or Hispanic. He is a white male. Now, again, I don't give a hoot about any of that crap. And neither should any Republican. But I think tactically speaking, Trump understands the identity politics game and understands that Kennedy being a white male, that he will face far less flack if he replaces a white male with another white male than if he were to replace say ruth bader ginsburg

with a white male i'm not sanctioning any i'm just saying it is it's it's political savvy based on the left's a preemptive counter of what he knows the left strike is going to be they're always going to strike on identity politics so he says to to himself, and if I'm confusing anybody, Joe, please stop me. But this is important, folks. Trump is a savvy cat. Again, everybody plays him for a dope. He is not. He's figuring right now, I probably have at least one more Supreme Court pick, and that's for Bader Ginsburg.

He's thinking ahead, whereas a lot of people are thinking right now in the moment only. Trump's saying, OK, I've got two. I don't have one. I know we probably have Bader Ginsburg, too. Ruth Bader Ginsburg's getting older. You know, obviously, God forbid, not wishing ill on anybody. I'm just unlike the left who would probably do that, you know, which is disgusting. But she is getting old. And he's probably figuring, I have one more pick. Not only that, Joe, in that one more pick, the Senate polling is turning dramatically in the Republicans' direction right now. It looks like Florida, it stands a damn good chance that they can oust Bill Nelson, who's a Democrat down here in my state. That would be a

flip. Joe Manchin, Donnelly, Heitkamp are in a little bit of trouble, meaning they could pad their lead. Meaning, after January, if Bader Ginsburg, Ruth Bader Ginsburg were to step aside, that he has a larger leeway to lose the RINO class and nominate a more staunch conservative that joe he doesn't have now also you know the less identity politics game the the left is saying to themselves oh ruth bader again there better be a woman in there you know that so what does he do he takes a pass

on coney barrett now knowing that he has Coney Barrett in the judicial bullpen in case Ruth Bader Ginsburg steps down, and also knowing, Joe, also it's important that he may have a larger Senate lead to pad so he can lose the RINOs, therefore he can nominate a more staunchly conservative candidate

for that position in Coney Barrett and not have to worry about losing the Rhinos like Collins and McAllister. Don't make me scream like a white lady. What the hell was that? That was Little Richard. Was it? Are you kidding me? Dude, I have no idea where you get these. This is... I think he

sits there before the show and goes through the internet for new and interesting drops to insert into my monologues here. I see your face. I was like, what the? You know what I thought you were going to? I know, you can see.

You know what I thought? You know what I thought? I thought you were going to the Trump one that you love so much. What is that one again? Sometimes you got to pat yourself on the back. Sometimes you got to toot your own horn, yeah. Sometimes you got to toot your own horn. I swear, that's his go-to.

But that's it. You know the identity politics game, and Trump knows it too. And shame on me for not, for again, falling into a bit of the trap here that Trump was playing in the present. I really think that Kavanaugh picked, because a lot of people are slamming him. And this is the only reason I'm bringing this up, folks, to give you kind of an inside baseball about what i think is going on because there are some people who are slamming trump even on our side saying well kavanaugh's an establishment guy he's an insider guy folks right now i'll take what we can get not what we want if in the future we get what we want

knowing worst case scenario i i know that this is not a losing attitude it's a we don't have any leeway here to lose anyone if cavanaugh yes he has some establishment connections i get it but his legal briefings are solid on the second amendment solid on chevron solid on separation of powers if at worst joe cavanaugh turns into a swing voter we've lost nothing we've lost nothing because it was kennedy who was a swing voter anyway right we've lost nothing at this point we're at the status quo but if he did it knowing that bader ginsburg that we're going to get coney barrett later on and he can get Kavanaugh right now locked in he's basically altered the Supreme Court for a generation because he's already anticipating

that Coney Barrett will definitely swing the Supreme Court in our direction because she is 100% no Ruth Bader Ginsburg you copying folks worst case scenario you got another semi-swing voter with Kavanaugh you lose nothing because that's what Anthony Kennedy was. He was with us on some things, not with us on others. But that was probably the only guy he could get pushed through right now. But he's following the polling. So do you get this? He's following the polling. He's following the likely padding in the Senate coming up after January

where he has some leeway with someone more conservative. He also understands and is going to preempt the left's identity politics game if he were to nominate them in reverse. A woman for a man, a man for a woman. Again, I'm not sanctioning any of this stuff. I hate the identity politics game. But Trump is not dumb. He understands that the ramifications of the identity politics game are very real.

They can move public opinion because the left owns the media and by the way i don't think kavanaugh is going to be a swing vote i get it there are some issues mark levin has brought them up and he's right there are some significant issues on metadata um you know justin amash who's a house members brought this up as well the connect the collection of metadata um I get it. There are some issues there. But I think this was the pick for the time. And I think we have to understand in the political game, you know, it's like Reagan, was Reagan's line, Joe? I'll take 80% of what we can get.

We'll come back for the other 20% later. That other 20% later is probably Trump anticipating another Supreme court pick knowing he's got an ace in the hole and Coney Barrett. I'm telling you folks, don't, don't downplay that. By the way, speaking of that, there's an attack on Kavanaugh that's been materializing. That is just entirely disingenuous and ridiculous. I'm going to debunk this for you right now with your liberal friends, because it's so ridiculous. Andy McCarthy has a great piece on it. National Review. It's up in the show notes today.

And it will eviscerate stupid liberal arguments about how Kavanaugh, the new argument, Joe, is Kavanaugh was appointed by Trump because he believes Trump is immune to prosecution. No, it's so dumb. So I'm going to get to that in a second. Today's show also brought to you by our buddies at OMAX. I love this product. I'm a big believer, ladies and gentlemen, in fish oil. But not just fish oil. High quality fish oil.

You don't want contaminants in it. I love fish oil. I need it for my arthritis. It sounds so old, don't it? Cholesterol levels. I've been taking fish oil since I'm a kid, but I've always had a tough time finding the cleanest product out there. And when they came along, Omax, I said, send me a box of that stuff.

They said, hey, Dan, we're going to send you a box of our fish oil. Try this test out. They said, throw the box in the freezer and watch what happens. And I said, what's going to happen? They said, nothing. That's the point. They said, put your other fish oil in the freezer and look what happens. You get this little crystallization of all the contaminants that come out.

And I was like, man, these guys are right. This stuff is great. The fact is taking care of your health is a commitment. It can feel overwhelming. That's why I've been loving Omax 3 ultra pure supplements are great. Give them to my kids too. Because with Omax 3, you just need to do one little thing to experience big health benefits. You don't even have to think about it. Here on the Dan Bongino Show podcast, we often discuss ways to be healthier and happier, especially in our Rough Cuts episodes. So of course, when tons of studies have shown that some things improve your health, we've got to talk about it.

You probably heard about the many benefits of getting in your daily dose of omega-3 fatty acids. So now I want to tell you about the purest, the purest way to get them with Omax-3 Ultra Pure. Because if you're going to do something, do it right. Omax 3 Ultra Pure is the purest omega-3 supplement on the market, containing nearly 94% high quality omega-3s. The purest option. None of those fish burps. We hate those. There are many omega-3s on the market, but this is the purest, most concentrated one.

It's optimal health made easy, folks. Various health benefits in just one supplement, this fish oil, but they are terrific. Omega-3s are amazing at alleviating joint pain and muscle soreness, a big thing for me. It makes you feel your best post-workout. They can also improve focus and memory, boost cardiovascular health, and more. It just makes sense to take a daily omega-3 supplement. You've probably seen some of these supplements at the store, but many of the top sellers simply don't contain enough omega-3s to give you results. That's why you're not getting it. You're probably not getting a pure product. Omax 3 Ultra Pure is almost 94% pure omega-3 fatty acids. It's the purest concentration on the market. Like I told you, they even have this thing called the Freezer Test challenge. Try it. You think I'm messing with you? Try it. If you freeze any other omega-3

supplement, it'll get cloudy. That's all the filler and junk. But an Omax 3 soft gel remains clear. It's that pure. But it's not about how Omax 3 looks. It's about how it makes you feel. So give it a try for yourself. Omax 3 comes with a 60-day money-back guarantee. So you'll have plenty of time to try it and really feel the Omax difference. You won't need it, though, because you won't return it. It's that good. Go to tryomax.com slash Bongino, and you'll get a box of Omax 3 Ultra Pure for free with your first purchase. That's right.

That's tryomax.com slash Bongino. Tryomax.com slash Bongino to get your free box of OMAX 3 with your first purchase. Try omax.com slash Bongino. Terms and conditions apply. Okie dokie. So, Andy McCarthy in another spectacular piece. This guy is my go-to legal genius for debunking stupid legal arguments made by ideologically bankrupt leftists desperate to take people down through pseudo-intellectual arguments.

The new argument, again, is Kavanaugh was appointed because he believes that the president is immune from any kind of criminal prosecution whatsoever. Sometimes, Joe, I wish this was a video program. It may be. It may be. It may be. Joe and I are working on some things. You may get to watch this thing live with me and Armacost, which would be hysterical watching us actually.

Some people think that the audio of me and him interacting, the video, I promise you, is a thousand times better. This is when Joe almost falls off the chair when I say something he thinks is funny. So this is funny because McCarthy writes in the piece that the Minnesota Law Review piece written by Kavanaugh that they're using to state that potential Justice Kavanaugh now thinks that the president is above the law is entitled, Joe. Joe, I'm not making this up. Ladies and gentlemen, this is not a joke.

This is the actual title of the piece. No one is above the law in our system of government. I strongly agree with that principle. This is not a joke. That's the title of the piece, Kavanaugh wrote, that the left is saying. Kavanaugh thinks President Trump is above the law. Let me read this to you again in case the stupid has widely infected our society and you need to be immune to this. This is your injection right now. Brett Kavanaugh, Minnesota Law Review.

Title, no one is above the law in our system of government. I strongly agree with that principle. Oh, my gosh. The mob! The meatloaf! I strongly agree with that principle. Oh, my gosh. Mom! The meatloaf! What is she doing back there? What is she doing? Ma!

Liberals, I don't get it. This is the piece now. McCarthy, in his always eloquent way of writing, writes a nice 800, 900-word piece at National Review. It'll be in the show notes today at Bongino.com. Please subscribe to my email list if you don't mind. Helps us get these great articles out there. I'd like you to read it because it so thoroughly eviscerates your liberal friend's stupid arguments that they will have nowhere to go. Kavanaugh's take in the piece is exactly that. The president is not above the law. Kavanaugh's piece simply makes a very simple

point that I thought was understood amongst reasonable, non-emotionally involved people. That doesn't include liberals, of course. All their arguments are emotion. And right now, it's emotion based on hatred of Trump. Kavanaugh's argument is this, folks, that the president has to be impeached first through the process before he is subjected to the criminal system. That's it. By the way, that's what the Constitution says. This is not a controversial point of view. The Office of Legal Counsel has already established that the president, while in office, council has already established that the president while in office cannot be indicted joe while in office got it it did of course you joe you're not a lawyer i'm not a lawyer dan okay joe i have to

ask joe this all the time because i know liberals listening to this who are so you just hate the president so much you're're not, you're saying things that are, do you understand you're making yourselves look silly? Because it's not that your arguments even require any kind of a detailed analysis to break. They just require a simple reading of the headline of an article to break. You don't even have to read the Kavanaugh piece.

Just read the title of it. The title of the piece is the exact opposite of what you're saying Kavanaugh supports. He is making the point, Kavanaugh, that the Constitution has a process for the potential criminal prosecution of the President of the United States. The process is this. He cannot be indicted by the criminal process while he is. This is an office of legal. This is not in the Constitution. This is an office of legal counsel is not in the constitution this is an office of legal council interpretation of that that applies to democrats and republicans the constitution lays out the impeachment process but you cannot be indicted while you're in office that doesn't mean if the president is credibly accused of a crime a significant crime by the way i'm not talking

about like jaywalking i mean obviously that would probably be laughed out but if the president in office they were videotape of the president engaged in a bank heist somewhere i mean i'm being ridiculous but joe with liberals unfortunately you have to do this best yeah i don't the process works like this he has to be impeached from office first when he is impeached from office, he has none of the pardoning power. He has no insulation whatsoever from the criminal judicial system. He is not above the law. Kavanaugh was making that point, that he is not above the law at all. There are remedies to get of uh presidents engaged in malfeasance

the resident the remedies are uh are delineated and laid out in the constitution and subsequent office of legal counsel analysis of the constitution which says no the president can be indicted just not while he's in office he has to be impeached first now joe we're not talking about if now right if the president could be that i just told you he can he just has to be impeached first so that question is out liberals want to keep it from the president what is kavanaugh saying he's he's above the law no no no no no no no we're not talking about if the president is subjected to the law yes he is we just laid out how it happens we're only talking about the timing if the president is impeached or joe i didn't even include this

i should for liberals who have a tough time with this kind of stuff if he leaves office a president out of office after two terms is subjected to the exact same judicial process you and i are so even if he somehow gets off on the impeachment he is still subjected when he leaves office to the exact same criminal justice system so are we clear here joe that it's just a matter of timing it's not a matter of if yeah so do your liberal and i'm trying to make this point because your liberal friends who are who are sadly not very bright are going to now hit kavanaugh and say kavanaugh is saying the president's not subjected to the law you should respond immediately no no that's not what kavanaugh said he did not say the

president was not subjected to the law he just argued about what the timing of his being subject to the law is that's the only argument here timing of his being subject to the law is. That's the only argument here. What you're saying is factually incorrect and false. Do we understand? Are we both, can we both agree what you're saying is now false? Now we can have a reasonable argument. You can disagree. Okay. You're free to disagree about the timing, but you're not free to make up facts and say Kavanaugh said the president's not subjected to the law. It is not the case at all. Kavanaugh's argument and the argument of a lot of legal scholars and people who've interpreted the Constitution, read the Constitution, understand the law, it's just the timing of the president being subjected to the criminal process.

He would have to leave office or be impeached. It is not if he's subjected to it. That is not the argument. I'm sorry for being repetitive, but again, liberals just make stuff up. And unless you have in your head a firm, quick answer, they will continue to rhetorically dominate the conversation by spinning this. Now, this is important because your liberal friends will likely come back once you've beaten them on the first one about the if question. It's not a matter of if. It's only a matter of when.

And they'll come back, well, what do you mean the justice delayed is justice denied so we got to wait for the president to leave office right joe this will be their next argument we got to wait for him to leave what we got to wait for him to be impeached trump colluded with the russians he's a spy we got to get him out now he should be indicted this is what liberals do nobody else gets that really you sure about that because andy mccarthy lays out again because he's just the best in his national review piece uh that's actually not the case joe that when you look at these statute of limitations in the government the speedy trial act that the government is constantly delaying cases remember not it's not a matter of if they're going to prosecute someone but a matter of when and the speedy trial act lays out a number of

conditions where you can delay justice just like you would delay justice for the president united states because he's the president he's dealing with global affairs the domestic economy all kinds of things and the founders thought it thought it pertinent and important that he not be subjected to standard judicial processes while he's in office, that he should either be impeached for criminality or these other items that would bog down his time should be handled when he leaves office. It's as simple as that. The statute of the Speedy Trial Act provides a number of conditions

where people can be, where justice is delayed. Now, putting a cap on that, there's also a statute of limitations as well. In other words, Joe, what McCarthy gets at, and please make sure you understand this, this is all important stuff,

because I want you to leave this with a deep understanding of what's going on here. There's a statute of limitations as well, meaning the government can't delay justice forever. Because that's a denial of justice, too. In other words, Joe, let's say you get an FBI agent who just doesn't like you. And he knows you having to hire a lawyer is going to bankrupt you. So what does he do he thinks he's got a loose but not great case so this fbi agent this prosecutor they just want to hammer you joe so what do they do they say joe i think we've got you on felonious mopery in the

umpteenth degree uh we'll interview you and then you keep calling guys what's up with this case hold just hold, buddy. You've got to keep this lawyer on retainer. Five, seven years later, Joe's lost all his hair. He's lost 50 pounds. He's stressed out. He's bankrupt. There's a statute of limitation that's imposed on the government to ensure justice is, in fact, done within a certain timeline. Or else the statute of limitations expires and you can't charge that person with that charge anymore.

else the statute of limitations expires and you can't charge that person with that charge anymore in other words folks the founders our our cons our constitutionalists and some of our excellent uh you know conservatives out there through the history of writing laws and understanding this understood that justice delayed is justice denied but justice can't you know air quotes justice cannot go on forever either that there has to be a limitation on that. This is not new. And I bring this up again because this argument by liberals that the when question about the president, not if, there's no question the president subjected to criminal justice at some point if he was a criminal and they can prove it. No question. It's not an if question. But the when question about when that justice should happen and under what conditions is not even unique to the president. So even the when question about when that justice should happen and under what conditions is not even unique to the president.

So even the liberal argument about what the president special. No, no. There's statute of limitation laws. There's speedy trial act, which lays out conditions for a number of folks and conditions where trial would be or a prosecution would be delayed. Folks. a trial would be uh or a prosecution would be delayed folks you know i i tweeted out the other day like socialism is for stupid people don't be a stupid person i'm sorry but i got an email the other day and just yesterday and if you're listening to my show today you know who you are and he's like dan listen i am a liberal and i listen to your show and on levin and you got to

stop you know ragging on liberals listen brother i'm, I'm sorry. I can't, I'm sorry. It's just not my, I'm cool with this not being the show for you. I'm sorry. I'm not ragging on Democrats. I've only said that a thousand times because I have a lot of friends who are Democrats who frankly, are kind of tired of what's going on too. And they are, they're reasonable people. We have some disagreements on some stuff, but they're pretty reasonable folks, men and i do i'm not making that up but it's not a it's not like virtue signaling i do have a lot of friends who are democrats i you know i'm from new york and maryland's and joe i mean joe's surrounded by him right and they're good they're good dudes and you know we just disagree i have found liberals the 10 to 20 percent of the country and probably

50 to 60 percent of the democrat party sadly now to be entirely unreasonable and i'm sorry if you're going to make dumb arguments expect to be called dumb if you want to make intelligent reasonable arguments you can expect to be called intelligent and reasonable but i can still disagree but dumb arguments like the president kavanaugh's arguing the president's above the law is just dumb all you had to do was read the headline of his piece. But you're not even willing to do that. And you expect me to get into, oh, gosh, you don't want to hurt their feelings. Sorry.

I'm sorry, but it's the wrong show. Maybe not for you. All right. I've got a lot of stuff to get to. All right. Last one today. We the people holsters. Got to try them out.

This month, they got to show some love to the female listeners. We the people holsters have some great designs. We the people holsters, excuse to try them out this month. They got to show some love to the female listeners. We the people holsters have some great designs. We the people holsters, excuse me, for the ladies. Ladies, it's truly sad and unfair that you have to be vigilant 24-7 in regards to your personal safety. Conservative women are facing unique obstacles lately in defense of their beliefs alongside their right to self-defense. Ladies, don't let your experiences go discounted due to the political climate or because of leftist identity politics. As a husband and a father, I want all the women in my family to be properly armed and prepared for if and when scenarios. We the People holsters are custom-made holsters made right here in the USA.

They design their own holsters in-house. They don't use third-party molds. They make them right here in the great old USA, in Las Vegas, as a matter of fact. And they cut every mold to fit each firearm perfectly. They update their designs all the time. Designs change. They add new designs every month. Their designs are so incredibly perfect.

You get that click when the firearm goes in there every time. It creates that, I need to hear that. I need to know it's snug in there. You don't want that thing, God forbid, falling out. They have a 3D design team that measures these things to perfection. It has an adjustable can and adjustable ride for comfort. They have four holes on the clip that match up with the four on the holster, so you can adjust the can and the ride for that perfect comfort fit there. Adjustable tension. You just turn one screw, you get a little more tension for the firearm,

more retention. You want a little less retention, you loosen the screw. It's super simple, not hard to figure out. They have custom printed designs, a thin blue line, a thin red line, a constitution, camo, an American flag, designs for the ladies too. They have more coming out each month. These are really great holsters. They sent me one and it's terrific. I use it all the time. I love that click, by the way. I need that security. You don't want that thing falling out. Their holsters start at just $34, but every holster one comes with a lifetime guarantee and they ship free. Not only that, if it's not a perfect fit, send it back for a refund. You won't need to though, because it will be a perfect fit. I have, I actually have two. Go to wethepeopleholsters.com slash Dan. That's wethepeopleholsters.com slash Dan. And listeners of this show, Dan Bongino Show, use code Dan, my first name, D-A-N, and you'll get $10 off.

Your first holster at WeThePeopleHolsters.com would just be $24. Come on, 24 bucks. That's like a stake at Outback. $24 for your holster. WeThePeopleHolsters.com. Go check it out. It's really great. Okay.

I love this story love love love love love this story triple love lots of love some people are this is crazy people call me all the time they're on my show and it drives me nuts they leave these weirdo messages too it's like hey this is bobby bag of donuts i got your number from so and so and they said you're like who what by the way one more thing this one guy mike who emails me a lot i love you just email me again you're a great guy but guys i get my email out for a reason because i love to hear from you but i'm a pretty hard-headed cat telling me like oh it's an order what to talk about on my show is not a good thing. Those emails go right to the circular file.

I'm sorry. I love you to death, but Joe, you know me, right? I told you not to talk about it. Okay, thanks, and start your own show. I don't know what to tell you. I mean, I provide my email for a read. I sincerely enjoy your feedback. It's great, but I wouldn't talk to you like that.

I mean, I'm only a human being. I told you not to talk about that subject. Circular file. No, thanks. See you. Okay. This story is great. Wall Street Journal today, piece by James Freeman. Joe, there's this investment company out there and they buy up these companies and they're super successful. The company goes out, they scoop up these companies and they're very they're super successful the company goes out they scoop up a lot of these technology companies and i mean i can't prove any of this it's in the piece this is according to some of their you know business insiders that have spoken about this company supposedly they bought over 300 companies and they've turned all these companies around and managed to make money on all of them which is a tremendous success rate oh man yeah i mean 300 for 300 in business would

be now again i don't have their quarterly filings on each company i'm just telling you what's in the journal either way we know the company's a success who knows if it was 290 or 300 or what but people in the business world have been wondering forever what the secret sauce is for this company. It's called Vista, V-I-S-T-A. What is the secret sauce? How are they buying all these companies

that when other companies buy them, if you get a 51% success rate, it's a score. All of them, that doesn't make sense. How are they buying these companies, Joe, and turning them into super successful ones without at least one of them going down So everybody's hunting for the secret sauce for vista. I read this piece. I was like dug in like a tick It was so good So industry insiders have been desperately trying to get the secret formula

Apparently this company vista anytime you go into the secret formula, I'm not making this up, it's not a joke, their secret formula database, they can track any person who either downloads it or looks at it because they're so paranoid about someone getting their formula. Now, the formula has leaked. And it's the greatest thing ever.

Apparently, some insiders from from vista are now speaking out let me read to you the secret sauce which by the way will be shocking to liberals but to conservatives listening you're going to be like that's the secret sauce no i'm not kidding this but it's great because it makes my point how dopey liberalism is. Okay. From the James Freeman piece in the Wall Street Journal, former employees talking about Vista say cost cutting is critical to Vista's model. Oh, that's the secret sauce.

Some of the companies Vista takes over are located in markets with a high cost of living, such as Southern California or New York City. To tamp down wages, Joe, and other costs, Vista will relocate part or all of their company to less expensive cities such as Dallas. Many employees won't make the move, allowing Vista to hire cheaper replacements. Vista often keeps a company's headquarters in place and encourages it to expand in lower cost markets. That's the secret sauce.

I read this whole article, like waiting for some net present value analysis, some different variable they found, some kind of way to recalculate a hurdle rate. I did go to business school. I loved it. I had a great time. I can't recommend an MBA enough.

I learned so much. That's the secret sauce. Now, if you're a conservative, you're probably listening and going, duh, but the duh is the argument. Like, that's, this is not complicated.

Dear liberals, you want your state to be successful? Lower tax rates, reduce the burden of government, make the cost of living lower so that you can pay wages that are more competitive in other words you don't have to pay an employee seven hundred thousand dollars a year whatever like you have to pay them in san francisco so they can afford a house you pay an employee 70 or 80 they got a nice house they got a nice car they can live

comfortably in low-cost areas because the cost of living isn't as high this the secret sauce the secret sauce is not secret that's the secret sauce all this company does is it buys up companies and moves them from crappy liberal locations to business competitive states and you know how much i love this argument joe because I'm passionate about it. Because having grown up in both New York and Maryland, deeply blue states, some of the deepest blue states in the country. I know Joe is still up there in Maryland. You look around and you say, and I know, Joe, you and I have discussed this often. You look around and you say, why? Why? It doesn't have to be this way.

Why? I'm telling you, folks, i cannot say enough about maryland it is awesome you want mountains they got it you want coastline they got it they got some of the most coastline most gorgeous coastline in the country you want beaches they got that you want access to other states you're you're in Western Maryland, you can travel like 8, 10 miles. You can be in three different states. It's amazing. Maryland is beautiful. You want a big city?

They got that. You want baseball teams, football teams? They got that. You want small cities, Annapolis, Frederick? They got that too. You want crabs? You want crabs? They got the best in the country.

That could have broken bad. That could have broken bad quickly. You want crabs? They got the best in the country. That could have broken bad. That could have broken bad quickly. You want crab cakes? They definitely got the best in the country. Good food. Good everything. It's an awesome state. You look around and if you're a conservative and you understand the absolute power of entrepreneurialism and the power of money in people's pockets and not of government you say to yourself why why does this state have to be struggling constantly with high

taxes overwhelming government now maryland's actually not doing that bad right now because they got larry hogan in there and although he's not a conservative i'm sorry i mean i like larry but let's not mistake larry hogan the Republican governor for a conservative there. He's definitely better than the alternative. No question about it. And should be reelected. The alternative is far worse. You can't, you know, the 80%, 20% Reagan thing I said before applies there. is a mess. I grew up there too. And you look around again and you say, why? Why does it have to be this way? When you read the piece on Vista, it all makes sense. The secret sauce is very simple. You take a company in a high tax state with a high tax burden, a high cost of living, a high cost of living means what, Joe? You have to pay employees more to live there, which ups your wage costs. You move them to low cost states and all of a sudden they're successful. there, which ups your wage costs.

You move them to low-cost states, and all of a sudden they're successful. Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding. Folks, you understand, this is what liberals don't get, and this is why I can't recommend a good, strong business school enough. When you go to business school, and I'm not

trying to tell you that that's a replacement for real-world experience. It's not. I'd personally rather have a, if you gave me the choice, one or the other, a business school graduate or a person in business, I'll take the person in business. But in a perfect world, I'll take someone in business who's been to business school because you do learn a lot. And one of the key takeaways is they teach you how to work simple things like spreadsheets and do a net present value analysis. A net present value analysis, Joe, meaning what? What is the value of a project today? A future project in today's, is it positive or negative?

Now, obviously, some of them require predictions. So let's say you're putting out a T-shirt line, right? Like we did. And that T-shirt line is going to cost you X amount of money. You have to buy t-shirt equipment. You have to buy ink. You have to pay employees. The way net present value works is you anticipate a number of sales,

say, based on market demand, Joe, and some research, you think you're going to sell 10,000 t-shirts. You put this all in a spreadsheet. You calculate all of your costs, all your expenses, your expected sales, and you get a net present value. If that present value is positive, that means the project's a go, meaning you're probably going to make money on this project. If the net present value is negative because the expenses outweigh the cost,

you're obviously not going to do the product. It's not, a lot of it, some of it's guesswork, but a lot of it isn't. Now, this is where it gets a little bit complicated some of its guesswork what what parts guesswork the expected sales it happens all the time i mean people remember new coke joe they thought new coke was going to sell off the shelves it was a total disaster sometimes expected sales surprise you you know you make a movie you think uh it's a niche market movie, and all of a sudden the movie explodes and there's a hundred million at the box office.

But you can make reasonable predictions based on market demand about things like socks and t-shirts and computers. But that's a guess. There are other things, ladies and gentlemen, expenses and costs that are not a guess. What are they? Cost of living in the area, that are not a guess. What are they? Cost of living in the area, taxes, business taxes, regulatory expenses, getting lawyers to get the requirements you need for the t-shirt to meet the labeling requirements. These are all factored in expenses that don't have to be so high. If you lower the cost of the business taxes and the regulatory requirements in a state, and you make those costs less, the value of the project goes up. It's simple math. There's no prediction in that at all. None. Because the tax rates are written in stone. It's not an anticipated number of t-shirt sales.

It's the tax rate. If you live in a state with super high cost of living, you're going to have to pay your employees more because they can't afford anything there unless you pay them more. If the cost of living goes down, you can afford to pay them less, but a more competitive wage nonetheless. And then also if the tax rates go down, that's more money for the project and less money for the government. This is not hard. But Vista seems to have made a lot of money figuring out that liberal states generally stink for business. Gosh, if I only would have thought of that sooner. It's a great piece. It's a great piece because it's so simple and that they hide this secret sauce tells me that some companies are so ideologically motivated and whatever, we got to commit to this social

justice and all this other stuff that they've forgotten basic tenets of business like if you don't make money none of this matters your commitment to social justice and all these other things is irrelevant because you don't have any money all right uh just a couple more quick stories to get to it's really good though um uh you know what i'll put it in the show notes today. It's probably subscriber only. Forgive me. But some of you may have subscriptions to the journal. And it's really good because you should show it to your liberal friends. Hey, here's the secret sauce.

What's that? Liberal states suck. That's the secret sauce. Right? All right. A couple more quick stories. Rod Rosenstein. What is going on with this guy?

I'll put his story from Law and Crime in the show notes today as well up on Gino.com. Rosenstein is, it's a blog by the way, Law and Crime, is requesting his United States attorneys to review potential Justice Brett Kavanaugh's paper trail. Why is Rod Rosenstein injecting himself in the vetting process for a Supreme Court justice? Folks, listen, I am not a Supreme Court legal scholar, but I've never heard anything like this. And the Law and Crime blog, which is not a right-leaning blog by any stretch, even has some questions about this, too. Wait, what? Does Rosenstein have a God complex?

This reminds me of that movie Malice with Alec Baldwin. I mean, is this guy serious? What does Rosenstein have a God complex? This reminds me of that movie Malice with Alec Baldwin. I mean, is this guy serious? What does Rosenstein do? Why is he injecting himself in this process? I get it that Kavanaugh has an extensive legal trail, but we're allocating United States attorneys and assistant United States attorneys to assist in the vetting of a Supreme Court justice.

Potentially, this doesn't make any sense, folks. I know my limitations on this. Read the piece, though, because I've never heard of this before. And if I'm wrong and you have some information, you know my email, email me. But this is very suspicious to me. And I really, Rosenstein is a complete train wreck. I don't know where this guy's going with this stuff sometimes. One final story.

This is important. In the show notes today, if you have a child in school, if you work in a school, if you know someone in a school, if you know someone who knows someone in a school, you know I extol the virtues of the Secret Services study in the past about the motivations behind people involved in targeted school violence, the NTAC, National Threat Assessment Center survey. Regular listeners to the show, you know what I'm talking about. It's an older study.

I found out yesterday that the Secret Service is launching a new study this morning. I have a nice sneak peek for you. It's in the show notes. I'm going to give you the two-page PDF. There's a longer, more extended version of it. The two-page PDF sums up some excellent research they have done on school safety and school security. The link will be in the show notes. Please give it a read. It talks about things like how to do an analysis beforehand of the threat. It uses some of the Secret Service principles. Things like capacity, planning.

In other words, yes, you may get a lot of threats. What's the capacity for the person to carry that out? What's the planning capabilities of that person? This is really, really important stuff. If you work in a school, download it, print it. It's a two-pager. It's super simple. If you have kids in a school, download it, print it. It's a two-pager. It's super simple. If you have kids in a school, print it up.

See if your school administrator is interested in looking at it. It has some great suggestions on threat assessment, on how to ask questions of these kids, what to do with the information. It is a really, really good report. I tweeted it out. The link will be in the show notes. I'm going to bring it up later on my NRA TV show as well, 5.30 p.m. Eastern time at NRATV.com. Thanks a lot, folks, for tuning in. I really appreciate it.

Please check out the show notes today. These are really important stories. Bongino.com. If you subscribe to my email list, we'll send them right to you. Hey, thanks for tuning in. I will see you all tomorrow. You just heard the Dan Bongino Show. Get more of Dan online anytime at conservativereview.com.

You can also get Dan's podcasts on iTunes or SoundCloud and follow Dan on Twitter 24-7 at DBongino.