The Dan Bongino Show - Ep. 906 Dont Give The Democrats a Pass on Radicalism

Episode Date: January 31, 2019

 In this episode I address the latest revelations, with regard to the DOJ and the Clinton team, in the plot to take down Trump team. I also address the radical policies of the Democrats running for President and why Howard Schultz creates a problem for them.    News Picks: Can liberals do basic math? Apparently not.   Did this Spygate figure use her position to research Trump’s children?   A quick synopsis of why our healthcare system is broken.   Senator Lindsey Graham is demanding answers regarding the unnecessary tactics used in the Roger Stone arrest.   Voter fraud is real, and ignoring it won’t make it go away.    President Trump listens to his base on judicial appointments.   Copyright Dan Bongino All Rights Reserved.     Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

get ready to hear the truth about america on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host dan bongino all right folks as i predicted the democrats have gone full-blown far-left radicalism we saw it during yesterday's show i told you uh welcome back to the dan bongino show producer joe how are you today hanging in there babe Glad to be here as usual. Yeah, we had a left-leaning governor, a far left-leaning governor. He ran as a centrist, by the way, governor of Virginia, Governor Ralph Northam, come out yesterday

on WTOP, a very popular radio station, as Joe knows, in the D.C. metro area. Come out yesterday and try to justify full-blown infanticide. Yes, folks, we have the cut. We'll get to that later. I've got a couple other stories, too,

including another astonishing development from The Daily Caller, which has been doing some great work on some of the background on the Spygate thing, that again, Joe, as these anomalies continue to develop, we get no mainstream media coverage at all. It's largely ignored, and it's just another enormous story upon another enormous story in the Spygate case swept under. It's largely ignored. And it's just another enormous story

upon another enormous story in the Spygate case swept under the rug and entirely ignored. All right, let's get to it. Today's show brought to you by our buddies at Brickhouse Nutrition. Brickhouse is one of my original sponsors. They've been with me from the beginning, and there's a reason. The reason is they make the finest nutritional supplements on the market. No doubt about it in my mind. I've been using them now for about two and a half years. And one of the products I want to tell you about is today's foundation. Foundation does the two things you want most, right? With a nutritional supplement. What do you want it to do for you? You want to look better and you want to feel better. Brickhouse Nutrition does both with

their product foundation. It is a creatine ATP blend. Ladies and gentlemen, if you have any doubt about the effectiveness of this product, I take it. My family uses it. I ask you to do this. Take the mirror test. Look in the mirror. Go buy a bottle of foundation at BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan, and then give yourself another look about seven days later. You're going to be like, damn, that stuff works. It is phenomenal.

You'll look better. You'll feel better. You'll perform better. It is terrific. It's like having two extra gas tanks in the gym. Give it a shot. It's called Foundation. It's available at BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan's available at BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan.

That's BrickHouseNutrition.com slash Dan. So yesterday, Joe, we had the governor of Virginia on WTOP. I wanted to get to this because we've been hitting on this extreme far-left radical lurch of the Democrat Party. Ladies and gentlemen, the party of John F. Kennedy is dead and buried. Those people are now Republicans. It is clear as day. The party is now the party of Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others. It has gone completely out of its mind. Joe, I need you to play this cut. This is the Democrat governor of Virginia, by the way, who ran as a centrist on an interview

with WTOP yesterday. Literally, literally, not figuratively, literally is the literally the most overused word in the English language, but literally advocating and trying to cover up full-blown infanticide. Play the cut. If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that's what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mothers. What?

A discussion? Oh, gosh. Ladies and gentlemen, you know, God help us all. What have we become? I'm getting goosebumps here talking about this. That's not hyperbolic. What have we become? We're on one of the most listened to radio stations in the entire country that broadcasts to the Washington, D.C. power centers in Washington, D.C., Virginia and Maryland.

radio station about keeping a birth child, a birth child comfortable, quote, comfortable while a decision is made. What decision is that? Decision to end that child's life? You know, you need to see this, folks. You need to see it. What do I mean by that? Maybe if the visuals, if the audio isn't impacting you, maybe all of us need to see this. Maybe all of us need to go and look up what a partial birth abortion looks like.

Do you understand what this guy just said? And desperately, desperately tried to walk back yesterday. He exposed the Democrats for what they've become. A party of trying to sweep infanticide under the rug. Folks, if you tried to do this to an earthworm and you put it out on Instagram or Twitter, you would be justifiably so probably taken off Twitter for keeping an earthworm alive while you decided how to terminate its life. For what? What is this? Some kind of science experiment? This is a human being.

being we are talking about a human life keeping it comfortable this child while we have to make a decision dan what's happening between keeping the infant comfortable and resuscitating the infant why do you have to resuscitate a freshly born infant joe the they he's a doctor and he's trying to use medical terminology to gloss over what happens when a partial birth abortion fails and a child is born alive he doesn't have he he's he's trying to science this away what effectively is the murder of a birth child folks this listen i talked about this yesterday how it's key you understand how the democrats need to wipe out any kind of objective truth at all the big r in big R inalienable right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, none of that can matter. When you look at even specific rights, the right to self-defense, the fruits of your own labor, the right to protect yourself and your family, to assemble,

to petition, the left doesn't want big R rights. They don't want that. They need the state. They need the state at all times to be able to intervene between you and your big all rights. And to do that, they have to wipe out any objective truth whatsoever. Even life. Gross, folks is important. This broke yesterday in the Daily Caller and again, received almost no media coverage, almost no media coverage at all. So we found out yesterday that from a Daily Caller piece that Nellie Orr, who is the wife of Bruce Orr, who's a DOJ, the number four official in the Department of Justice, who was working for the company hired by Hillary Clinton to generate this negative information on Trump, Fusion GPS. Nellie Orr was working for Fusion GPS. We find out yesterday that some of her testimony that she gave up in front of Congress had leaked. And in that testimony, there's some deeply troubling information that, again, is being ignored by the mainstream media. But, but, but, folks, there's a lot of commentators on this case that seem to miss the big takeaway here, too. The big takeaway in this whole thing is that we – the big reveal yesterday is that Nellie Orr was assigned to do oppo hits, opposition research hits on who, Joe?

Trump's kids. Oh. Why does this matter? Folks, this is huge. Because now it explains a whole lot again a lot of people miss this connection i don't think you should i think a lot of the entrepreneurial researchers out there who've been working on this case uh and you know who you are a lot of you are really terrific need to look into this angle now now we find out nelly orr's job at fusion gps the company

hired to hit donald trump for hillary clinton her husband in the DOJ, Joe, and she is an oppo hit guy for Trump's kids. And she's assigned to let me quote here to see whether there they were involved in dealings with people with suspicious past talking about business dealings. Joe, does the Trump Tower meeting now make sense? Who's in the Trump Tower meeting, folks?? Who is in the Trump Tower meeting folks? Put these things together. Put two and two together. I got a lot to get to so I got to motor through this quick. I got a lot of stories about the Democrats today too.

But now it makes sense. I've told you the entire time I will stick to this till the day I go in the grave here because the evidence is all over the place. That the Donald Trump Jr. Trump Tower meeting with these the place that the donald trump jr trump tower meeting with these two russians that the democrats have been pointed to look these russians showed up to talk to trump jr collusion collusion collusion that the two russians that show up are connected

to fusion gps and hillary clinton that's on ladies and gentlemen that's a fact this is a setup from the start don jr was set up this is a setup he was framed that this is a setup from the start. Don Jr. was set up. This is a setup. He was framed. This is a setup. It's clear as day. The people who show up for this Don Jr. meeting are Russians, a Russian lawyer, Veselnitskaya, Natalia Veselnitskaya, who's working on behalf of the Russian government, but is also working with Fusion GPS, where Bruce Ohr's wife is working. also working with Fusion GPS where Bruce Ohr's wife is working. The Russian intelligence connected guy that shows up already admits he has connections to the Clinton sphere. Now we find out

that the woman working for Fusion GPS, the company connected to these people that show up there, now we find out that her primary job was to do oppo research on trump's kids the same the same kid by the way don trump jr that the meeting happens with folks we got to start putting two and two together here joe this is i mean maybe just because we're on this case all the time it

seems so obvious but when i saw this story yesterday it'll be in my show notes today at bongino.com please read it now it's obvious. Looking into business dealings. So she was assigned to looking into Don Trump Jr.'s business dealings. And conveniently, a guy they've done business dealings with in the past, Rob Goldstone, a British publicist, right, knows another

guy they've done business with in the past, the Agalaroff family. The Agalaroff family are the ones in conjunction with Goldstone that, according to the allegations, set up this meeting with the Russians. Who pushed and prodded these people to set this meeting up? Guys, ladies, I'm just asking you to see through the fog of misinformation and disinformation in this case and see what is so transparently

obvious at this point. A company hired by Hillary Clinton to dirty up Donald Trump hires a woman whose husband works in the Department of Justice. The woman's job is to research Trump Jr.'s business dealings. Business associates of Don Trump Jr., right, then set up a meeting with two Russians in Trump Tower connected to the same company hired to look into his business dealings and then the liberals later use that meeting as evidence of russian collusion ladies and gentlemen is is occam's razor slicing through the fog right

now in all possible scenarios except the one that requires the least amount of assumptions. Occam's razor, otherwise known as keep it simple, stupid. This is obvious. Hey, let's hire this company to look at the Trump's business dealings. All of a sudden, business associates of Trump set up a meeting that the liberals are now using as evidence of collusion with two Russians connected to the exact people who set the meeting up. The fog of misinformation. It is so, it's crystal clear.

But very few people are making this connection. And I'm imploring some of the better researchers out there. You all know who you are. You email me daily. I'm imploring you to go and do some digging some digging on this I'm doing my own but the connections here are now clear so read the daily caller piece it all makes sense or was looking at the Trump jr's business deals and conveniently business associates of Trump jr then set up a meeting with two people connected to the Clintons and fusion g GPS where the lady works who's looking into Trump Jr.

Nellie Orr I'm talking about. Here from the piece Nellie Orr a former contractor for Fusion GPS told lawmakers on October 19th during a deposition she recalls that Christopher Steele gave her husband Bruce Orr from the Justice Department materials from the now infamous anti-trump dossier funded by the democrats or said during the testimony that steel who like her was a contractor for fusion gps hoped that her husband would pass the materials to the fbi so now we have an explanation for both the business meeting at trump tower with these russians that the liberals keep using as evidence of collusion. It was a setup the whole time.

There was no discussion of Hillary's emails in that meeting. Only Russian adoption and the Magnitsky Act. That's it. We now know that Orr is admitted on the record, Nellie Orr that is, that she connected Christopher Steele to her husband in the Justice Department. The number four official. This isn't a rank and file guy. With the hopes that he would create this information superhighway joe and i have only been talking about for eight to ten months now to mainline information right into fbi headquarters in other words politically connected hillary operatives found a back channel into the fbi

to pass unvetted information onto the top. They're admitting to this right now. This is in the article. This is in her testimony. She admits she gave the information to her husband with the hopes it would get to the FBI. I'm not making this up. Read the piece yourself. There are quotes in it here. You want to hear the quote? My understanding was that Chris Steele was hoping that Bruce, her husband, the DOJ official, could put in a word with the FBI to follow up in some way. What's hard about this? Are we missing something?

To the mainstream media folks entirely uninterested in the facts and background on this case, are we missing something? Are we missing a connection here? What part of this are you not interested in? here? What part of this are you not interested in? The woman is now on the record talking about an information laundering operation from political operatives through justice into the FBI. At the same time, she admits to researching Trump Jr.'s business dealings while a business deal is being set up to get Russians to go to Trump Tower connected with the same company. What part of this isn't connecting?

This is a conspiracy theory. What's a conspiracy theory? She's on the record. It's in the piece. It's her quote, not mine. This was sworn testimony. You think I'm making this up? Read the piece yourself.

It goes on. She talks about at one point, Nellie Orr and her testimony, that there was a meeting on July 30th, 2016, between Christopher Steele, who he's the creator of the Dirty Dossier, a foreign intelligence operative for the United Kingdom. Former MI6 guy. She says there were three topics discussed at this meeting on July 30th, 2016, when Nellie Orr, working for Fusion GPS, Christopher Steele,

working for Fusion GPS and Hillary Clinton, and her husband, Bruce Orr, at the DOJ meet. One, Christopher Steele discusses apparently the fact that he believes the Russians have Donald Trump, quote, over a barrel. Okay, that's nonsense. That's Steele just setting up what he's going to say later.

You get what I'm saying, Joe? Christopher Steele clearly in this meeting is trying to set up the fact that the Russians can bribe Trump because they have stuff on them. Right. Second, she says that she describes some information. Steele, she says at the meeting, Christopher Steele describes Carter Page's meeting with these two Russians. That's the two Russian show that are in the dossier. That meeting has been discredited and debunked.

That meeting never happened. That meeting didn't have, it's a lie. It's in the dossier. It's a lie. Carter Page did not meet with these two Russians. So clearly Steele already has components of this dossier laid out, ready to present on an information superhighway to his new connection, Broussard, to his wife, Nelly.

Third, this is fascinating. On an information superhighway. To his new connection. Bruce Orr to his wife Nellie. Third. This is fascinating. Steel. This is from the Daily Caller piece. Steel a former MI6 officer. Who operates out of London. Listen to this show. Also told Orr.

That a lawyer for Russian oligarch. Oleg Deripaska. Was investigating Trump campaign chairman. Paul Manafort. Over a business deal gone south. Steele reportedly worked at one point for one of Deripaska's companies. The link is ironic given that Deripaska is considered a close ally of Putin. Ladies and gentlemen.

Oh my gosh, Joe. The denseness of the people following this case on the liberal side. Intentional denseness of their skulls is incredible. So now we have on the record Nellie or indicating Joe. That Christopher Steele is getting some of this information from Deripaska, an ally of Putin, who has an interest financially in taking down Paul Manafort on the Trump team. And nobody puts two and two together? Joe, please tell me again as the audience on Budsman, you are picking up what I'm putting down.

Yeah, man. He says Christopher Steele now has this back channel to Bruce Ohr and the DOJ. He meets with him July 30th of 2016. Conveniently, in the following days, the FBI opens up a case against Trump, Crossfire Hurricane, as Ohr relays this information to Andy McCabe over in the FBI. Nellie Orr already says that they were hoping for a back channel to the FBI for this info, even though it was shady. The info she gives him is that she believes Christopher Steele passes this information

to her and her husband at this July 30th meeting saying, the Russians have something on Trump. Second, that Carter Page met with these two Russians. Two things widely debunked. Two nonsense things. And then third, he admits the whole scheme. That he's working with this Russian, Deripaska, connected to Putin,

who doesn't like Manafort because of a bad business deal. And then a lot of this information is coming from them. He basically admits the whole scam. That this is a Russian disinformation operation funneled through Hillary Clinton's team into the FBI. The guy admits that Deripaska has a grudge against Manafort. And that a lawyer is investigating this that works for Deripaska. Guys, ladies, please, please tell me you get this.

Please tell me you get this. Russian guy. Let me, before the liberals out there are having a tough time. Russian guy, Deripaska. Very mad at Trump guy, Manafort. Russian guy. Let me, for the liberals out there having a tough time. Russian guy, Deripaska. Very mad at Trump guy, Manafort. Russian guy has a lawyer investigating Manafort. Russian guy and lawyer don't like Manafort.

Russian guy also working for British spy. British spy being paid by Hillary to generate bad information on Trump. Let's go back to Caveman Joe. We haven't used him in a while. Caveman Joe. Does this make sense. Let's go back to Caveman Joe. We haven't used him in a while. Caveman Joe. Does this make sense? Let me try this, Caveman Joe. Russian guy don't like Trump. You dig?

Don't like Trump. Okay, you get that. Caveman Joe gets it. Russian guy no like Trump. Okay, Russian guy hires lawyer, Caveman Joe, who's looking into Trump guy. Does that make sense? Yeah.

Caveman Joe gets it. Russian guy also has business deal with guy in Trump orbit while simultaneously having business deal with guy doing research to hurt Trump. Make sense, Caveman Joe? business deal with guy doing research to hurt Trump. Make sense, K-Man Joe? Even K-Man Joe gets it. Listen, I got to move on because I got a lot to get to. But when K-Man Joe gets it, you know, count on no coverage of this from the mainstream media at all.

Finally, one more piece from the Daily Call and I want to move on to a couple other things as well. There's a lot of breaking news this week. He hasn't made an appearance always popular with the audience. Caveman Neanderthal Joe. So folks, we were recently told, given the raid on

Roger Stone's house at 6 o'clock in the morning, multiple FBI agents tack gear in an entirely absurd, outrageous, unnecessary display of force for a nonviolent offender with almost no threat to flee at all. We already heard about that. Roger Stone, the arrest. But why am I bringing this up?

Because what was Stone arrested for, Joe? Stone was arrested and is being prosecuted right now for allegations that he lied in front of a congressional committee in sworn testimony. Listen, folks, I don't know Stone. I met the guy at a couple events. We are not friends. We've never corresponded. I have no idea what drives him, what doesn't drive him. And

lying under oath is, in fact, a crime. The problem is, if lying under oath is a crime, let me ask you a simple question, Joe. Why isn't Glenn Simpson from Fusion GPS under arrest? Oh, yeah. I don't know. Yeah, that's another one. From the Daily Caller piece.

Bruce Ohr met with Steel and Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson prior to the 2016 election. Stop. Stop. Full stop. So now we know Nellie Ohr's husband bruce or works with the doj who's got this information laundering operation into the fbi met with british spy christopher steel and fusion gps founder glenn simpson prior to the 2016 election okay fact established why does any of that matter let's go on because that conflicts with testimony given by glenn simpson as well as a memo released by democrats on the house permanent collect select committee on intelligence notably shift day adam ship

glenn simpson joe testified to the intel committee on November 4th, 2017, that he did not meet with anyone from the Justice Department or FBI until after the election. But or testified under oath that he met Simpson on August 22nd, 2016, notably before the election. notably before the election folks god forbid glenn simpson is not under investigation right now for lying under oath this is as clear a violation these two stories cannot possibly coexist in reality either glenn simpson spoke to or before the election on August 22nd, as Orr is stating, or Glenn Simpson spoke to Orr after the election, as Simpson is stating. Those two stories cannot possibly be true. If Glenn Simpson is not under investigation by the Mueller probe or someone else in the Justice Department, ladies and gentlemen, this Justice Department is meaningless because it's not the Justice Department, it and gentlemen, this Justice Department is meaningless because it's not the Justice

Department, it's the Injustice Department then. This would be a scamorama on Wheaties. What a joke. This case has turned into a total farce, an abomination of justice. We should all be embarrassed

by this. And listen, Democrats, you zeros celebrating all this stuff in your new police state, your newfound love affair for the police state, early morning raids, tack gear, tactical weapons in people's houses who are a complete non, a threat matrix of zero. I hope you're proud of yourselves and what you've done to this country. You disgraceful loons. It's disgusting what you've done. this country you disgraceful loons it's disgusting what you've done celebrating the destruction of the constitutional republic celebrating yesterday trying to cover up infanticide on a wtop interview you disgust me and everybody listening every sane person listening

gross all right i want to get to a couple more stories including um kind of a a tie-in to yesterday's show about just how ridiculous now that these democrats are announcing for president their plans are they're not pie in the sky there there's no pie there's no sky there's no nothing it's skyless and pilus there is there's no there is nothing there it's big sky listen there's no there there at all. I want to get that. Before I get to that, I'm glad to have back as a sponsor one of my favorites because I got a sample once from them. And I open up the box.

And ladies and gentlemen, as an adult, sometimes at 44, it's very difficult for me to get excited about anything anymore. It is. It's just true. I'm so cynical about everything these days. But I opened up this box from Battlebox. That's B-A-T-T-L, no E, BattleBox, B-A-T-T-L-B-O-X. I opened up it and the stuff in there just blew my mind. I said to my wife, I'm like, look at this and look at this and look at this. Listen, most subscription boxes are full of samples and junk and crap you'll never use, Let's be honest, but not battle box.

I'm not kidding. Their stuff is a top notch. It's the monthly subscription box for men, full of solid gear for adventure seekers, survivalists, and outdoor enthusiasts. Battle box is your monthly subscription for a handpicked outdoor survival and everyday carry gear.

It introduces you to the best products, gear and companies at a much lower cost than if you were to buy, you could buy these items individually, you're going to get ripped off. You can get them all much cheaper with BattleBox. Plus, who doesn't like to get a package full of mystery adventure gear?

You're going to open it, you're going to be like, damn, this stuff is sweet. Go to trybattlebox.com slash Dan. That's trybattle, B-A-T-T-L, no E. Trybattlebox.com slash Dan. That's trybattle, B-A-T-T-L, no E. Trybattlebox.com slash Dan and pick the box you want. They start at just $25 a month. Plus, they release a video for each new box so you can see what's coming and how to use it.

They've shipped over a half a million boxes and they won best men's subscription box for 2017. Sign up today and be ready for anything try battlebox.com slash dan try battlebox.com slash dan is it pretty awesome you will not be disappointed for the dudes in the audience all right uh let's move on here so ladies and gentlemen why is i didn't get to hit this yesterday in detail, but why is Howard Schultz, the former Starbucks CEO, scaring the hell out of the Democrats right now? They have gone full-bore attack mode on Howard Schultz. If you missed the story, he is the former CEO of Starbucks, and he has announced he is likely going to run for president in 2020 as an independent. Now, I want to get into a couple things about this, and I always try to add some color to the story

you're not going to get on other news outlets. I want to tell you why this is bothering the Democrats right now, and it may not be for the reasons you think. Folks, Schultz candidly may hurt Trump as much as he hurts the Democrats. Remember, he's talking about running as an independent, Joe. So as the audience ombudsman, I need you to track this, and they always stop me if it's not making sense. So he's talking about running his independent show. So as the audience on Budsman, I need you to track this and it always stops me if it's not making sense. So he's talking about running

his independent. Ladies and gentlemen, there's very little chance an independent could win the presidency. I'll get to that too. That's going to be part two of this. But just stipulate that for a moment. So why would the Democrats be afraid? You know, when Ross Perot ran against George H.W.

Bush, an election I know Joe remembers well, and I do as do, it was one of the first elections I was like intimately involved in at the time. I mean, I really followed that closely. It was Perot, Bill Clinton as the governor of Arkansas at the time, and George H.W. Bush as the incumbent Republican president. Perot ran as an independent. Now, I don't know if you remember, but Perot dropped out. Perot was getting in some polls 25, 30% of the vote. Perot drops out

and then jumps back into the race and he wound up getting, what was it, 17, 19% or something like that. And the kind of schoolyard rule of thumb there was that Perot had cost George H.W. Bush the presidency

by splitting the Republican vote. Folks, I've read up a lot on this, and I don't have time today to go into extensive detail because it's almost a show in and of itself. And I'm considering doing an election special on previous elections. That'll be for another day. But let me just tell you this. It's not conclusive that that's the case, that Perot cost H.W. Bush the election, George H.W. It's not. In other words, H.W. may have lost whether Perot was there. And it's impossible to prove a counterfactual. We don't know. All we know is what happened. We can't prove what happened if it didn't happen because it happened.

And Michael J. Fox and the crazy scientists from Back to the Future are not going to appear and allow us to go back to Biff and change time. It's not going to work. All we know is Perot was in it, and Clinton won. But based on some exit polling and everything, it's not clear Perot cost H.W. the presidency. Why am I bringing this up now? Because now we're going to have a well-funded, potentially even more well-funded than Perot,

a well-funded, potentially even more well-funded than Perot, candidate who's willing to dump about $500 million of his own money into this race to get on the ballot in 50 states and run a more than credible campaign and add dollars, and he's probably going to get on a debate stage with these three. Now, I brought up that in the beginning about H. and uh and and the fact that it may hurt Trump because you may be saying he may folks he may strip away a lot of Trump voters who you know just looking are looking for a different option so why are the Democrats so scared it's not Trump who's been going after Schultz I mean not, not in any kind of consistent, organized way like the Democrats. He doesn't like Schultz being in there.

He's clearly taking some shots at him. But not in an organized way like the Democrats. The Republicans have largely steered clear. Folks, it's not that the Democrats don't think Schultz could peel away some Trump voters. It's that the Democrats are worried Schultz is going to expose them for the mathematical idiots they are. I'm serious, Joe. Schultz has gotten and will continue to get because he's well-funded and incredible just by his name and his money alone. He is going to continue to get media appearances on cable news networks and network outlets, ABC, NBC, CBS.

And he has continued to take a centrist approach on these far left radical policies when it comes to things like Medicare for all and taxes and expose the idiocy of them, Joe. And the problem the Democrats are having now is they can't explain away, as I said yesterday, how five plus five is supposed to equal 26. Schultz has gone on the air about two specific things and has put the Democrats in a really big hole, even though they know Schultz can potentially hurt Trump. They want him out of the race because he, let me explain this better. I'm sorry. Schultz may hurt Trump in the election, but he hurts the Democrats' ideas. The ideas they want to get out there to specifically Medicare for all and elevated tax rates, 70 upwards of 70 to 90 percent on on on what we would consider on what we would consider wealthy folks in the United States.

He has already come out and challenged those ideas as un-American and absurd. The Democrats don't want that. They want the anti-Trump animus to be so profound, Joe, and fog-inducing in the election that they can push through economically, mathematically unworkable ideas and never have anyone challenge him on it. I'm a little worried I'm not getting this across to you the right way. The Democrats were hoping for a clear path on the Democrat side for far left radicalism. The Democrat, not a clear path for one candidate.

There's no anointed one in this election. But what the Democrats do have is the more prominent figures on their side running, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, even Joe Biden with his far-left lurch into Obamanomics. Do you see where I'm going with this, Joe? They were hoping to have a clear path for high taxes and government-run healthcare because they know who won't question

him on it joe the media won't question him no the media will give him a free pass the whole time you'll see some light questions but there'll be no follow-up there'll be nothing the media will largely give him a pass on radicalism right now you got schultz in here who isn't isn't doesn't need the primary process he can basically use his own wealth to get himself on the ballot to run as an independent. And even though he may ding up Trump and take some Trump voters from some rhinos or some people who don't like Trump,

he will destroy the Democrats' ideas and it'll be a two against one. You digging me? Imagine a debate stage, an independent and Schultz, Donald trump and say kamala harris for for for giggles here kamala harris wins the democrat nomination for the presidency now on a debate stage what are you going to have you're going to have kamala harris i think we should have medicare for all you're going to have howard schultz who is a liberal by the way but is trying

to be an economic centrist laughing at this uh mr harris listen i've been a business owner i started so much your ideas are ridiculous there's no math for that at all it doesn't work then you're gonna have trump coming out dropping neutron bombs on the stage miss harris that's quite simply the dumbest idea i've ever heard senator harris and what is she gonna do it's gonna be a two-on-one there's gonna be nobody be nobody to save her. You get what I'm... And finally in front of a national audience, the Democrats who thought they were going to get a free pass on far-left radicalism and a

straight runway right to the general election with no serious pushback on their ridiculous, economically unworkable tax and healthcare plans now have to deal with Schultz and Trump out there during the entire election cycle, exposing Democrats for the insane ideas, the certifiably insane ideas they have.

Is this making sense, Producer Joe? Big time, dude. It's now a two on one. Yeah. It's a two on one. They didn't expect this. Schultz is already out there calling them out. Now, a couple more things.

I want to just double down on something I covered yesterday. Matt Palumbo has a great piece on my site. By the way, we have a new logo on the site. I want to thank Blair and Linda and Paula for doing a great job on it. Check out our new logo up on Gino.com. We put out where everything's being redone. So go check that out. It looks really nice. They did a really wonderful job. But Paula's mad at me right now, folks, by the way, because I'm like losing my marbles before the show because we're desperately trying to get this video thing up and running the right way. And it's like, it's such a complicated studio

now. So, you know, we always break down the fourth wall. So I'm sorry, Paula. Do you hear me out there? Can you hear me? She's laughing. I love my wife to death. I just get frustrated. She thinks I'm mad at her. I'm not. I'm just mad at the technology because it's very complicated, right? We're going to try to get a video clip up today, even though I'm all sweaty now from like, I love my audience. I don't want to give you second rate stuff. And Paula's working hard. Joe's working hard. I'm working hard. And you know, it's not up to the standards I want to keep for you. So we'll try and get you a video clip as soon as possible. But Matt has a really cool piece up at the website today about can liberals do math? And it's a follow up of the yesterday's piece. Let me read to you a quote.

And again, this is just so you understand the, Oh, I like to keep my show simple. Let me read to you a quote. And again, this is just so you understand. I like to keep my show simple. The takeaway from this is Schultz is dangerous as an independent to the left because he exposes their ideas as mathematically unworkable. And he's not Trump. You get it, Joe? So they can't just say, oh, it's Trump.

He's crazy. We all hate Trump. Don't listen to him. He's not Trump. Schultz doesn't like Trump either. But he also doesn't like these Looney Tunes kooky Democrat ideas. Here's up from Matt Palumbo's piece about why the liberals can't do basic math. She's talking about Ocasio-Cortez and Julian Castro's proposal to tax people who make $10 million at rates of 70% or higher.

And basically Elizabeth Warren's nonsensical plan to take away your assets if you're wealthy. He says there simply aren't enough wealthy people to fund what Representative Cortez desires. Her 70% tax would only raise between $16 billion and $38 billion a year. Her new programs, ladies and gentlemen, would cost trillions a year. The math doesn't work. But he goes on. Matt says, certainly those like Rep Cortez must know better. In one breath, she and others such as Bernie Sanders cite Scandinavian countries as successful examples of socialism, but never mentioned that the middle class, and Matt has links in the piece, folks, in case you need the citations and the sources, excuse me, the sortations, making up words every day, that the middle class pay a 50% plus tax rates. Ladies and gentlemen, I'm not asking Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to change her far left liberal idea. I'm not.

I know I have no hope of breaking through. And frankly, candidly, she doesn't care what I have to say. She doesn't. What does she care what my show has to say? We're on opposite sides of the ideological spectrum. I'm not asking that. I'm just asking her to be honest about what she's proposing so the American people can make a decision.

You want Scandinavian social welfare? You can get it, but it will cost you a doubling of the tax rate you're paying now if you are a middle-class individual. Just vote on it, Joe. Fair deal? Yeah, too much money sven or macost a sven's in scandinavia he doesn't care he likes good you like you like 50 plus tax rates oh but i pay it anyway yeah just be honest about it that's all we're

asking matt goes on. She knows, just as well as every other politician, that they can't sell this kind of a tax hike to the American public. Because the American public wants to believe this doesn't apply to them. Personally. Oh no, that tax hike only applies to people making $10 million

or more. It doesn't. Listen to me. We don't have a VAT here. I'll get to that in a value-added tax. It doesn't. Listen to me. We don't have a VAT here. I'll get to that in a value-added tax. It doesn't. That tax will apply to you. That's where all the money is. I just gave you the math. There is not even close to enough money in the millionaire sphere in the United States of economic earners to generate the social welfare programs, Ocasio-Cortez, Sanders and Elizabeth Warren won, Kamala Harris too. None.

The money is with you. You will pay double the taxes you're paying now. Here's the kicker in the piece. I didn't coordinate this with Matt at all, by the way. The only liberals who seem to be aware of this are the ones that Democrats would rather not run for president, such as Howard Schultz and Michael Bloomberg. I told you, Matt's a smart kid. He's my resident fact checker. He really is. He's super bright. I found him at an early age. I've been working

with him now for, gosh, six years, seven years. It's a brilliant point. Schultz scares the Dems because he exposes what smart people already know. These ideas are economically unworkable. They're not pie in the sky. I can't say this enough. There's no pie. There's no sky. There's no money there.

The money is with the middle class. Now, Tim Warstall has a really good piece of the Washington Examiner today talking about exactly this, how he just wishes people would be honest in this debate. Oh, wait, let me wrap that, as I don't like to lose my place. That's why I'm glad I take notes.

On the Howard Schultz thing, yeah. So he scares them again because he's speaking the truth. But I said to you in the beginning, I was going to explain to you why there's very little, if any, path for victory for an independent. Just quickly here. Folks, you have to understand the mechanics of how these presidential elections work when they can't be decided in the Electoral College. Schultz has almost no chance of getting 270 electoral votes. Which you need to win the presidential election.

You all know that's a smart audience. Why? Schultz won't get it because there are reliably red states, large pockets of them that, depending on what states you factor in or out, are roughly 150 to 180 electoral votes, Joe. They will vote red no matter what. The chances of Schultz, an independent who's pro-abortion and otherwise, getting those red states, Wyoming,

Utah, is non-existent. Joe, you're picking up what I'm putting down? Schultz has no chance of winning those. Those states that are reliably red will garner between 150 and 170 electoral votes. There are other states that Schultz has no chance of winning on the left they will vote for medicare for for space aliens tax rates as high as 152 percent they yeah yeah i said i didn't mess that up california new y, Illinois, that's about another 100, 120 or so electoral votes.

In other words, you can't get to, there's not enough electoral votes there for Schultz to get to 270. So what would you have? Even if he does Ross Perot-like numbers, folks, and gets 30% of the electoral vote as an independent, that would mean nobody gets the electoral votes, 270. You digging me, Armacost? So what happens next? It gets kicked over to the House of Representatives, where each state issues a vote for one of them.

Folks, do you really believe a bunch of swampy politicians who are Democrat? There are no independents in a real independence, at least in the Senate side. There's, you know, fake independents like Angus King and Bernie Sanders. But there are no real independents left. Do you really believe in the House of Representatives? A bunch of swamp rodents from both sides are going to vote for an independent who's threatening to come in there and and and scuttle their entire operation schultz has no chance he can't win the electoral college and he cannot win in the house of representatives i'm telling you he has no chance unless some miraculous thing happens where where

every word i mean i can't even think of a miraculous i really can't it will get it will unquestionably get kicked to the House of Representatives where partisans will vote their party. It's as simple as that. But he is doing significant damage to the Democrats because he's exposing their ideas. It's ridiculous. All right, let me get this final read and I'll wrap up that thought because I didn't forget where I was there. I just want to make sure I get all the info in today. It's important.

All right, today's show also brought to you by our buddies at G-Code, G-Code Holsters. I am a big supporter of the Second Amendment. I bear arms myself. I carry a SIG 365, a Glock 43, two of my favorite firearms out there. And depending on the state you live in and the concealed carry laws, you'll want to protect your family when you go out, which is why you'll need a great holster. You can't go cheap on the holster to properly and safely carry your firearm. For more than 20 years, G-Code has produced what many consider to be the finest holsters in the industry. They're beautiful, very well made too. Today, they clearly lead the pack. They are 100% American made holsters, all materials,

all components sourced right here in the United States. The owners of G-Code holsters are military veterans, and they are meticulous about quality, innovation, and workmanship. Excellence drives everything they do, and every product comes with a lifetime warranty. You won't need it. Whether you're military, law enforcement, or civilian, G-Code has a holster just for you. Check this one out, though. The all-new G-Code Phenom in the waistband holster. It's being hailed as a game changer for comfort and concealability. This is a must have. Yeah, I could have beat the prices

either. Order online at range5.com. That's range, the number five.com, range5.com. Here's a promo code. Everybody loves promo codes. For 15% off, punch my name in. Use promo code Bongino. Bongino for 15% off at range5.com. Go check it out. Okay, so just getting back to the mathematical unworkability of this, and I discussed how Matt wrote in the piece about it. There's no money there.

There's only money with the middle class. That's where the pool of money to fund these expansive government programs is. The Democrats just need to be honest. Warstall has this piece of the Washington Examiner today and just kind of hammering home what I said yesterday. He's just wishing and hoping people would be honest about the 1950s. The 50s and the 60s tax rates were high. The top marginal tax rate in the 50s and 60s was between the 70 and in some cases 90%. But Warstall says when we look at the percentage of GDP raised by the income tax,

in other words, ladies and gentlemen, the money that came in, those high personal income tax rates topped out at raising 7.8% of GDP. We get 8.4% of GDP now at the lower rates. The rates now, the top rate is 37%. This isn't, this is from more stall. This isn't telling us that higher rates give the politicians more money to play with.

He says, I'm not, I'm being, am I being picky here? He goes, I expect the historian to know these things before they confidently pronounce upon them. But then what do I know?

My training was an economics, not history. Great line by Warstall. In other words, ladies and gentlemen, we're just asking the Democrats to be honest. If you're a college kid listening to this and you're a liberal, one of your friends turned you on to my show and you're listening, I'm not mad at you.

I'm not. I really not. I'm not angry at you. I'm angry at liberal ideas. I'm not. I really not. I'm not angry at you. I'm angry at liberal ideas. I'm angry that liberals have managed to somehow smoke you up into making you believe this stuff is true. I'm just asking you to open your mind and analyze the facts and data yourself. If those facts and data then comport with what you want, fine.

If you understand that history and the economics history, history in of itself and the numbers don't comport with the idea that higher tax rates will raise additional revenue, but you want to do it anyway, fine, justify it. But the numbers don't say that. We have had high tax rates. They did not raise significant tax revenue. They raised less than we're raising now at half of those tax rates. Literally half. It's 37% now. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants 70 or more at the top end.

They did not do that. Those rates raised less money. The evidence is not working for you. If you just want to raise them because you like the look of bigger numbers, because you think it sounds cool, fine, and just be honest about that. But stop pretending it's going to get you the money you need

to do these expansive government programs you want when you know the data doesn't say that. But what will get you the money you want? Oh, something will. But the Democrats don't want to you want? Oh, something will. But the Democrats don't want to tell you where they're really going. Let me give you the dirty little secret of the Democrat Party.

What they really want, ladies and gentlemen, is a VAT. A value-added tax. A value-added tax. When you look around the world, you know, my audience, you're very bright, and I get a lot of great feedback from you. You're probably putting two and two together here. You're saying, Dan, I don't get it. You're saying higher taxes won't raise additional revenue. But when you look at the data about countries around the world that have big social safety nets, including the Scandinavian ones you just mentioned, you clearly indicated that they do raise the money for these social safety nets.

Oh, they do. But they don't do it through an income tax. They don't do it through a corporate tax. And they don't do it through a capital gains tax either. In other words, hiking the income tax, corporate tax, and capital gains tax will do none of this. I just like, do you understand that, Joe? I just made that case.

But there is a tax that will no doubt raise that money. And it is called a VAT. Now, you may be saying, well, if they have a VAT in the United Kingdom and elsewhere, and places over in Europe, excuse me, in places over in Europe, the VAT, and they're raising upwards of 40 to 45% of GDP, almost double what we're raising here, Why won't the Democrats do that here? Oh, they will, but they're trying to be real quiet about how a VAT works. And why is that, Joe? Because a value-added tax is a regressive tax, folks. It's not progressive. In other words, who does it impact the worst economically? The poor and the middle class. What I just told you, that is where the money is.

The money to tax is not with the millionaires. Ladies and gentlemen, I know that sounds counterintuitive, especially to liberals that have a tough time with this kind of stuff. I get that. How is it that the millionaires and 10 millionaires don't have the money to tax? Because there's not enough of them. It and 10 millionaires don't have the money to tax? Because there's not enough of them. It's not that they don't have the money. They don't have the money you need to expand government as rapidly as you want.

There's not enough of them. Yeah, I mean, do I need to prove this point, Joe? How many millionaires do you know? Two. Two? I know maybe, personally, maybe four or five yeah um now maybe more four or five joe how many middle class people do you know ah tons right it's not even worth talking so stupid a 500 a thousand folks you see my point i mean i wasn't asking joe to be silly i'm here how many

and am i listening how many millionaires do you know? How many 10 millionaires do you know? How many 100 millionaires do you know? Some of you who are wealthy, you may know two or three, five, maybe 10. When I ask you how many middle class people you know, you're like, I don't know. I know my entire neighborhood. There's 500 people. That's where the money is.

There's not enough millionaires to pay for this stuff. The money's in the middle class. That's what a VAT does. How does a VAT work? Well, how it works is what they want to keep quiet. This is what the Democrats really want. That's how they raise the money in Europe for all this and how they bankrupt their people. A value-added tax builds a tax in at every level of production.

It's very simply explained this way my wife and i used to own a mixed martial arts company a while ago before we went into politics and started doing other things and we would pay for it was like a yoga sock type product that we use for grappling so we would pay a supplier to buy thread, some silicone spray they put on the bottom, some elastic, some rubber that would be used from the elastic, and they would compose this sock and this footwear. Now, the composite materials that the supplier buys, the thread and that other stuff, Joe, may have cost him 50 cents. It wasn't expensive.

The sock he puts together with labor probably all in total costs him $3. He may sell it to us for whatever, $5, which we sell to an audience. I don't know if we sold them for $10 or whatever. Do you see how value is added at every level? Every level. The producer of the sock takes thread, rubber, and silicone, adds value to his labor, and creates the sock. So he buys it for 50 cents.

He sells it to us for three, adds roughly 250 in value. We then sell it to our website and other things and our marketing abilities and our business abilities for say $10. We add another $5 in value. You have to pay tax on the difference between what you paid, what the inputs are and what you're putting out basically. It's a simple way to say it, but it's built in at every layer of production. Why does this matter though? Because the fact that it's built in at every level of production and not just with the end buyer, like a sales tax.

Joe, when you see a sales tax, you look at your receipt and you know exactly what you paid in tax. Joe goes out and buys a pack of t-shirts at, at whatever at the store on the corner, he pays maybe $10 and he pays depending on the tax. I don't know, a dollar, $2 in sales tax.

He can look on the receipt. That's not the way a VAT works. You can see a VAT on a receipt, but being built in at every level, it's hidden because you only see the end receipt where you pay, but you don't see what everybody else paid before that boot shoe or grapple sock got to you it's hidden and the hidden part of the tax is the beauty of it for big government hacks because when people actually see

what they're paying in taxes they freak out and they don't want to pay more that's the very genesis of hauser's law the idea that no matter what we tax on the income corporate or capital gain side the government cannot is just incapable of getting more money because people hide their money tax avoidance accountants because what happens what happens, Joe, they see it. You see your pay stub and you're like, wait, what? I made $1,000 this week and I'm paying 600 in taxes? This is insane. People refuse to do it.

They find fancy accountants. They vote people out of office. Capital gains, the same thing. You sell your stocks. Wait, I got to give this amount of money to the government? I'm holding those stocks. On the business side, wait, we got to pay 21% in corporate tax? We're just going to pass it on to the consumer.

But the beauty of the VAT is you can't see it. It's built into so many levels of production that by the time you buy the product and you're paying $500 for a pair of boots, you just think that by the time you buy the product and you're paying $500 for a pair of boots, you just think that's the price of the boots. You don't realize, Joe, that 250 of it is taxes and you just pay it anyway. It's the fact that it's hidden. This is what they want. This is the tragic elegance of the VAT and this is what they're going to push for. Because you will never, ever suck from the US.S. economy via the tax system now. Income, corporate, capital gains, excise, imposes, duties.

You will never, ever get that much money out of the economy as you need. And Ocasio-Cortez and everyone else, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, and others know that is absolutely true. Harris and others know that is absolutely true. They'll get elected and all of a sudden you'll start seeing the VAT conversation creep up. One more note on this because I didn't explain that portion well enough. Why is a VAT, Joe, regressive? In other words, why does it impact the poor and the middle class more than it does the rich? Folks, it's obvious. Consumption as a percentage of people's income and wealth,

consumption, food, gas, car bills, clothing, things you would pay a VAT on, this tax, which would be substantial, be built in at every layer. That is a far higher percentage of your wealth and your income if you're middle class. Folks, if you're wealthy and you're worth $10 million, honestly, let's just be honest with each other. Does a $4 or $5 gas price matter to you? What do you care? You're probably driving a Bentley or a Maserati. What do you, you don't even care. You put it on a credit card and it just pay the credit card bill every month. If gas is $100 a gallon, it's a consumption-based tax. And people in the middle class and in the poor, consumption, what they spend to survive, food, clothing, gas, car bills, repairs, the healthcare, is a far, far greater percentage

of their daily expenses and income than it is for the rich. The rich have so much money, ladies and gentlemen, at some point that healthcare, food, all that stuff, that's great. They need that to survive, but it's an infinitesimally small portion of their income. The rest they can cut back on. A vat, they don't want to pay a vat on buying another boat. They just don't buy it. They don't care.

They'll still be alive. But it'll affect every single component of your life. Alright, folks, I just want to give a quick shout out to my buddy, Dion Baia. He works over at Fox. He's a great guy. And I'd really appreciate if you take a look at his book.

This is not an ad. This is simply for Dion. I like Dion a lot, and the book is really good. It's available on Amazon. It's called Blood in the Streets. Dion's a good man, a good friend, and he's a young up and coming writer. It's a fiction piece. It's really, really good. Again, it's called Blood in the Streets, available on Amazon. I really appreciate if you take a look at it. Dion's a good guy, and now that I have a really good, cool audience, and I love you all, I wanted to do him that favor. A lot of people did me favors coming up as well, but it's a good book.

I wouldn't recommend it if it wasn't. It's a fiction book. It's hard to put down when you start. Blood in the Streets on Amazon by my buddy Dion Baia. Good luck with the book, Dion. God bless you with that. All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in. Please check out our website today. Check out Matt's piece in the show notes. You can always get our show notes delivered to your email box by subscribing to our email list on our website, Bongino.com. And please subscribe to the podcast on iTunes, on iHeart if you have Android or SoundCloud. It is free. It's not going to cost you anything, but it's the actual subscriptions that help us out

a lot. Really appreciate it, folks. Thanks a lot. See you all soon. You just heard the Dan Bongino Show. Thanks a lot. See you all soon.