The Dan Bongino Show - The Purge Continues. The Inside Story. (Ep 1434)

Episode Date: January 13, 2021

In this episode, I give you the inside story about what’s going on with Parler. I also address the real consequences of the ridiculous impeachment of President Trump.  News Picks: Save the Constitution from big tech. Here’s how.  Reporter lays out the case that Facebook played more of a role than Parler in the events at the Capitol.  Glenn Greenwald’s incredible piece about the hit job on Parler. Sixty percent of Americans call impeachment a “waste of time.”  Pelosi silent after tweet declaring the 2016 election “hijacked,” resurfaces.  Here’s what the Twitter hate machine allows. YouTube piles on and suspends Trump's channel. Copyright Bongino Inc 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 let me be crystal clear in case there's any confusion out there at all which there shouldn't be from people who may have uh misinterpreted um the fight left in me parlor is not going anywhere anywhere i've said repeatedly on radio programs and television on my own show and i'll tell you now i will go bankrupt and destitute dead in a box before we before we go down without a fight you have absolutely zero chance of taking the biggest free speech platform we've ever developed to fight back against the totalitarians offline.

I've got that for you today. I've got, of course, the impeachment going on right now. Do not fall into the groupthink trap. They are leveraging weakness right now. And sadly, there are many on Capitol Hill who are falling right into it. I've also got inside scoop on a story I've unfortunately been a part of that is fake. And the real reason this fake story is out there. I've got a loaded show. Today's show brought to you by ExpressVPN. Ladies and gentlemen, get a VPN today. Go to expressvpn.com slash Bongino and protect your online

activity from prying eyeballs. Expressvpn.com slash Bongino. protect your online activity from prying eyeballs. ExpressVPN.com slash Bongino. Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show. Ladies and gentlemen, in the interest of time, I'm going to get right to it. I just want to say thank you for all your questions about my health. We got 99.99% good news yesterday. A little bit of bad news, but we're going to be A-OK. Appreciate all your concern. Can I just say too, I just am tired of getting poked and prodded.

No more needles, please. I can't even take it. I just, I'm tired of getting poked and prodded. No more needles, please. Look at my, I can't even take it. I look like I got tracks in my arms. I can't take it anymore. I really can't. That's just wearing me down and dealing with this parlor fight. It's been tough to sleep. Last night's the first night's sleep I got in a long time. Good night's sleep. All right, let's get right to it. Today's show brought to you by We The People. We're living in uncertain times and millions have come to realize the importance of the Second Amendment. If you're looking for the perfect accessory to go with your firearm, get an American-made

holster from our friends at We The People Holsters. I have two of these. Starting at just $40, We The People Holsters are custom molded to fit your exact firearm. They're not those generic one-size-fits-all in the waistband holsters where everything falls out. You don't need that. They have thousands of options, including an amazing selection of printed holsters. Their proprietary clip design

allows you to adjust the cant and the ride for comfort and security. That's important. The best holsters out there that I've seen, go to wethepeopleholsters.com slash Dan. And while you're there, check out their premium printed hoodies, long sleeve t-shirts,

and their new EDC tactical gun belt, which comes paired with a patented Cobra buckle. Every holster and gun belt comes with a lifetime guarantee. If it's not the perfect fit, send it back for a full refund. WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Dan. Get an additional $10 off. We always like that with the offer code Dan. WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Dan. WeThePeopleHolsters.com slash Dan. Producer Joe, let's get back to normal. Let's go. All right. Thank you, my friend. First, let's get back to normal. Let's go. All right. Thank you, my friend. First, let's get to the most pressing issue

because we have to triage our priorities right now. Number one, folks, do not fall into the group thing trap regarding the impeachment going on right now and election integrity. And to add that so-called the inciting of violence, which is ironic if you've listened to my show, we've only spoken out against this for four years while the liberal media was condoning it. Weird. Weird how all of a sudden we're the targets, not the liberal media who are like, there's room to burn. There's room

to destroy. Those are politicians in the media. Wait till I show you some of the headlines later. And no, it's not whataboutism. And if it is whataboutism, good, because it's whataboutprinciples that matter. Number one, getting back to my headline here. Do not fall into this groupthink trap. This is no time for weakness. I'm not lecturing my audience. I get your emails. You're the strongest ones out there.

I'm talking to the bureaucrats. I'm talking to the people up on the Hill right now. This is not the time for weakness. I will not be bullied, coerced, coaxed at all. I don't listen to what people tell me. When you tell me not to do something, I do more of it as long as it comports with my moral principles.

There's nothing you can do to me, nothing you will ever do to me, nothing you will do. Let me take that back. There are a lot of things you can do to me, nothing you will do to me that will stop me from doing what i'm doing nothing what do i mean by don't fall into the groupthink trap i'm seeing it now on a couple things

don't dare bring up free and fair elections or election integrity i'll talk about whatever i want we are a constitutional republic the way we enact change in a representative democracy in a constitutional republic is we vote for representatives in a constitutional republic who are supposed to represent our interests. If we cannot trust that vote and we don't believe that vote is representative of our interests, then we have nothing. I will not, under any circumstances, stop demanding election integrity and free and fair elections, any. Do not fall into the groupthink trap.

This is why I've seen this a thousand times, where Democrats leverage a moment, a moment of bipartisan condemnation, especially the events of Wednesday, and they leverage a moment to use it to attack other things not related to what happened there, it will be no silencing at all. This would be an issue you would think would concern people in the media who used to talk about this issue before they thought it would damage Donald Trump to not talk about it.

Free and fair elections matter. They're the bedrock of a peaceful constitutional republic. Don't fall into the groupthink trap. Second, I see more groupthink. The president cited violence. Ladies and gentlemen, you can dispute all day the content of President Trump's speech on Wednesday, and if he would have changed it or not, I can guarantee you, he would have gone back and changed some of the wording. The President of the United States

did not incite violence. If you read the speech, which I know is hard for some in the liberal media and others who aren't interested in the facts, the President said, march on the Capitol peacefully and patriotically, something that's been said by probably 20,000 or 30,000 prominent speakers

in the last hundred years so why are the rules different now the rules are different now because it's donald trump do not fall into this trap i'm not going to take it i'm not going to allow myself to do this silly sad virtue signaling i see a lot of Republicans. Well, you know, the president cited violence, but no, no, I don't accept your premise. Let me get to point three, which is important too. And you may not like it and that's fine. If you don't like it, that's a okay, but I will disagree with you. And it's my show and I'm going to take this stand and I have.

Don't fall into the group thing trap on wednesday either what happened there i worked with capitol hill police officers i went to a surveillance course with some of them they were great guys hitting them with a fire extinguisher there's the group thing trap here and but oh well you know what? Maybe we should, you know, it was just a, it was a few people. And those few people have absolutely no place in this movement. None. Zero.

I won't be condemned to fall into the group think trap. I don't care who's talking about it. Police officer dragged to the ground, beating him up. Nah. Nah. We need absolute moral clarity on this. Absolute.

But we have nothing. It's not a sermon. I'm not your preacher, but it's my show and you deserve to know where I stand on these three things. I will not be baited into third grade peer pressure bully tactics to say,

don't you dare talk about the election. I will talk about what I want. We need free and fair elections. The integrity of our elections is everything, not something. You will not bait me into saying the president condemned incited violence. How marching peacefully and patriotically is inciting violence is beyond me. I'd love to see you wiggle your way around that. But third, we all need absolute moral clarity on Wednesday.

What happened Wednesday? Absolute. We need unity on that. Let me move to this impeachment today ladies and gentlemen this is a collaborative effort by some rhinos with no spines they're not even rhinos they're they're democrats who are pretending to be republican not republicans anymore they're not republic Republicans at all who are falling into the groupthink trap. The president is leaving office in just a few days. This impeachment is a ceremonial, collaborative effort to destroy what they feel is a growing movement by President Trump that's not going to stop of people who are sick of establishment nonsense. And I asked you what

Newt Gingrich asked on Fox the other day. If you really believe President Trump's political influence on the American psyche is nil and he's destroyed because you think he incited violence on Wednesday, which is pretty much universally condemned, then why impeach him? What's the point? Especially with just days to go. The answer is you're doing it because you're afraid

that President Trump's political movement, the political movement, I should say, the Republican movement that aligned with President Trump, to be more precise in my language, is not done and over. Ladies and gentlemen, don't forget, I brought this up the first time and I'll bring it up now. Impeachment is not a criminal trial. It is a political exercise.

There is no jail time imposed by an impeachment or a subsequent conviction in the Senate trial. It is a political damnation. It is not a legal one in the traditional sense of the word. So if impeachment is a political exercise which relies on politics, you would think the politics, which is the power of garnering people to your cause in the very essence, that's what politics is, then you would think you would have the people on your side to move forward with an impeachment, despite the fact that President Trump is leaving office in just days. Is it? You want to know why they're really doing it? Here's why.

They're trying to change the poll. Look at Rasmussen's latest poll, President Trump's approval rating. I polled this. 49%, ladies and gentlemen. Daily presidential tracking poll, Tuesday, January 12th, 2021. Presidential approval, 49%. I just told you we need moral clarity that in no way confers or sanctions what happened on Wednesday as anything other than an abomination. But it clearly says that other people have clarity on this. And don't believe President Trump incited violence like I don't.

and Trump incited violence, like I don't. Second, if this is a political exercise, I'm telling you that, it's an effort to turn the political tide, then why isn't it working? Here's an article by Paul Bedard in the Washington Examiner I'll put in the show notes today. Please subscribe to our newsletter,

ladies and gentlemen, the show notes. It's the same thing, bongino.com slash newsletter. I don't know how long in the future we'll be allowed to communicate. We're living in like, again, speakeasies to talk to each other washington examiner 60 percent of people 60 percent of people call impeachment a quote waste of time big tech backlash for censoring trump washington examiner if this is a political exercise, ladies and gentlemen, it's failing. So what's really happening here? What's really happening is group think spineless people up on

Capitol Hill who have no interest in unity whatsoever. Because as I said to you, and I said on Fox the other day, and I'll say now, and I said on my show, there are no principles at stake. No one I know in any way, even remotely is sanctioned what happened on Wednesday. And if you do, I don't want to know you anymore. Nobody has done that. So what principle are we arguing? You know what? I'm going to get to this in a second, but it's like two kids in a sandbox, not arguing over a toy while one's arguing over a toy. Two kids in a sandbox. Hey, that's my toy. I want to play with it.

The other kid, yeah, that's your toy. You play with it. No, no, I said it's my toy. Yeah, it's your toy. Play with it. No, no, I said it's my toy. No, no, I just said it's your toy. Play with it.

No, no, it's my toy. How many times? We're not arguing here. There's no argument over Wednesday. Not on this show. Or anywhere else I can tell. So what's the argument? The argument's a political one.

We have to stop Donald Trump. What are they scared of? They're scared of the 2022 primary season. Donald Trump can't run for president in 2022. Wouldn't even be available to 2024. That's not what they're worried about. They're worried about Donald Trump and the Trump family endorsing candidates in the 2022 primary season. That's what they're worried about they're worried about donald trump and the trump family endorsing candidates in the 2022 primary season that's what they're worried about

and they're worried about a total route when i say they i'm talking about the republicans let me be clear precision matters they're worried about a total route that'll make the tea party look like a an episode of sesame street And that pretty much every establishment Republican lawmaker will be routed out in exchange for people who support a strong conservative movement. They are terrified. That's why they need Trump politically defenestrated. I'm getting this from everywhere, ladies and gentlemen.

I'm not just making this up. Sorry I didn't shave. It's been a long couple of days of travel. And to all the people I saw in Texas, that's where I were yesterday, even with my mask on, thank you for your kind words. You're unbelievable. And to the hotel manager, it was very nice to me and my wife. Am I going to say what hotel? Liberals will burn it down. Thank you. I'm with you. Let me get to my one and only video on the show today because it's important because I've got another bunch of content. I've got some headlines that are going to scare you up next. I've also got the inside scoop on Parler, which

you need to hear. Obviously, me being an investor in Parler, there's stuff I can tell you, some I can't, but I'll give you what's really going on because it's scarier than you could possibly imagine. Let me get to this video first. On this impeachment fiasco today, this is Alan Dershowitz on CBN with David Brody. Alan Dershowitz brings up three things about this sham impeachment. Number two, number one, impeachments for high crimes and misdemeanors. There's not only not a high crime, there's no crime or misdemeanor. Second, he talks about Brandenburg versus Ohio. I'll get to that in a second. It's important you understand that. Listen, the Constitution does not allow the Senate to try a private citizen.

They try the President of the United States. This is entirely unconstitutional and an absurdity. Here's Dershowitz explaining the first two points about high crimes and misdemeanors and Brandenburg. I'll explain what he means in a second. Check this out. It's unconstitutional. It violates several provisions of the Constitution. Number one, it's not a high crime and misdemeanor.

Number two, it's protected by the Constitution and by the debate and speech clause and by our general traditions of free and open dialogue in the marketplace of ideas. The article of impeachment basically suggests you can impeach a president for a speech that virtually everybody, every constitutional scholar acknowledges is protected by the Constitution. The Brandenburg case is the leading Supreme Court decision, and it says a president or anybody else may advocate violence. You can't incite it, but you can advocate it. And what he did was advocating simply going to the Capitol. You know how many people have stood where he stood

and advocated marching on the Capitol? Union leaders, civil rights leaders, to turn it from good to bad, members of the Ku Klux Klan, members of the Nazi Party, communists, suffragettes. That's a standard tactic. You get up and you say, go to the Capitol, protest, show how strong we are, show that we're not willing to back down. It's right in the Constitution, the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances. It's right in the Constitution. That's right. The right to protect the government for a redress of grievances.

That's what he urged people to do. They got out of hand. They committed crimes. They should be prosecuted. But the Speaker should not be prosecuted. Sorry, that was David Brody on Just the News. Not CBN before. So I'm going to get to these three points in a second.

I got to move on after that to other more important points. And an article in the Wall Street Journal, I strongly objected. it's going to be a loaded show let me get to my second sponsor first um listen you know i've been dealing with arthritis my whole life i constantly complain about it on this probably to the detriment of the audience i'm sorry it's just this is dan bongino show and sometimes dan bongino problems creep into the dan bongino show my joints are pretty much always hurting living with chronic pain is terrible. I know. It's more than discomfort. It affects your whole life, working out, sleeping, everything. Stopping me from exercising some days and the soreness afterwards. Not just muscle soreness. I mean, joint soreness that really is unnecessary to live with. Get rid of

the nagging pain while providing long-lasting relief. Do what we do here. Paula has a neck issue. She uses it for her neck. Try the natural breakthrough pain relief solution, CryoFree CBD Roll-On developed by Omax Health. Ladies and gentlemen, this stuff really, really works. It's non-prescription, triple action pain relief. It's a roll-on. It's specially formulated to block pain receptors, reduce inflammation, improve muscle and joint flexibility. It's 100% natural, CBD powered remedy. It works its magic within 10 minutes of application and relief lasts up to eight hours, much longer than over-the-counter products. The minute you roll it on your neck,

me and Paula's case, the shoulders in my case, the cooling, icing feeling with the CBD, it's just great for me. We use it all the time. I use it on my elbows too. I've had to use it on my left knee, which is degenerating too, sadly. This stuff works.

Omax Health is offering a heavy discount, 20% off a full bottle of cryo-free CBD pain relief roll-on. The discount also applies site-wide towards any product. Just go to omaxhealth.com today and enter the promo code Bongino, B-O-N-G-I-N-O. That is Omax, O-M-A-X, health.com, enter code Bongino, get 25% off cryo-free and site-wide. For pro athletes, PGA golfers using cryo-freeze CBD

to recover both on and off the course. Omax has 95% five-star reviews of customers saying they've tried everything and Omax cryo-freeze is so good, they're buying it for their family and friends. Well, I wouldn't recommend it if it didn't work. We don't do that here. Simply roll it over where it hurts and ice out the pain.

No messy creams or horrible fragrances. Go to omaxhealth.com, enter code Bongino to get 20% off cryo-freeze and site-wide. That messy creams or horrible fragrances. Go to OmaxHealth.com. Enter code Bongino to get 20% off. Cryo-freeze and site-wide. That's OmaxHealth.com. Enter code Bongino. Get 20% off site-wide. Thanks, Omax.

We appreciate it. All right, back to Alan Dershowitz's video there, which is profound. He brings up three points. I want to discuss them right now because they're critical to understanding this sham impeachment. Ladies and gentlemen, there was no high crime or misdemeanor. There was no crime at all. Tens of thousands of people with positions of prominence and power

have recommended that people march on the Capitol. When you have people who go there and commit violent acts at the Capitol, those people are held responsible, not the people who are the speakers. No, no, Dan, Dan, that can't be. Dershowitz is wrong. I heard you can't yell fire in a movie theater. Ladies and gentlemen, fire in a movie theater is a sham for people who don't understand Brandenburg versus Ohio.

That is not the standard. I am not an attorney and I don't pretend to be and no, I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night either. But I'm not stupid and sane people can understand the law without having a JD behind their name by simply reading precedent. People who don't know what they're talking about and want to attack free speech every time say, oh, you can't say that. Trump can't say fire in a movie theater, which would endanger people's lives. They trample each other to get out of there. That is not the standard. The legal standard for speech that can be criminalized is speech that speaks of an and speech that incites imminent unlawful actions. Imminent unlawful actions, not abstractions.

I want to be crystal clear. You have to specifically say in your speech to be charged under these standards, saying something that incites an imminent and demands an imminent unlawful action, not an abstraction, not we've got to fight, not we've got to show strength. What President Trump said, obviously not when he said march peacefully and patriotic, how that would incite an imminent unlawful action. I'm not sure. I don't get the legal logic there because there is none. the legal logic there because there is none i'm even maxine waters speech where she said if you see anybody get in their face talking about members of the trump cabinet i've got bad news for people

and that's probably not criminal either because it's an abstraction right if you see anybody, you get in their face. Now, if she would have say at the time, God forbid, Alex Azar, a cabinet member of Trump's, was sitting 20 feet away from Maxine Waters. And she said, go get in the face and attack Alex Azar right now. God forbid. That's different. You're inciting an imminent, unlawful, an attack. Go do it now. Action. Saying get in the face of anybody, you tell anybody, is an abstraction. She likely would not be charged with anything.

Don't mistake what I'm saying for sanctioning her idiocy and her normalizing, sadly, of political violence. That's not what I'm saying. Iing her idiocy and her normalizing, sadly, of political violence. That's not what I'm saying. I'm here to tell you the truth. Dershowitz is right. Trump isn't guilty of any crime at all. And I don't know how urging people to march peacefully and patriotically is inciting unlawful action. I'm not sure. Finally, as I addressed before, the second, we have, there's no high crime and misdemeanor. So this is unconstitutionalist impeachment. Secondly, there's imminent law, unlawful action condition is not satisfied at all. And thirdly, Trump's going to be a private citizen on January 20th at noon.

There's no trial in the Senate for a private citizen, only a president. I don't, I never read that in the constitution elsewhere, but they can just pick a private citizen and charge him. All right, moving on, ladies and gentlemen, you know, again, I asked Joe during the break, how are we doing so far? And he's like, we're doing good under the circumstances. Ladies and gentlemen, we're trying our best here. We're really dealing with a tidal wave of negative information and I have to triage and kind of segregate here and there what's more important.

So let's move on. I don't have any time to waste. Let's get to this topic number two. There is absolutely no time and place for normalizing political violence. We know that. I've said it a thousand times. Why are you repeating yourself, Dan? Because there are some out there who don't get this. You have even people now who have traditionally aligned with conservative and Republican values saying, oh, you know what? This whataboutism where we cite Republican, excuse me, Democrat and media examples of the media sanctioning violence during the Antifa BLM burning down of American cities. That's whataboutism and has no place here.

You know, I read the Wall Street Journal. I appreciate their perspective. I always like it. I don't only read outlets that agree with me, but this is one of the most absurd pieces I've ever heard in the Wall Street Journal in my life. Wall Street Journal. Was it Jerry Baker wrote this? He's suggesting that any discussion we have now of bringing up a leftist and media condemnation

yeah gerald baker or the lack of media condemnation against the antifa blm riots and democrats calling for violence against trump that's what about us and we need that for another time no we need that now here's the piece piece. No excuses for Trump and the Capitol riot. Okay. Who's making them? That sounds to me like a deceptive headline. Here's the subhead. Yes, the left does bad things too.

Conservatives are supposed to believe in objective moral truth. Isn't that what? I'm confused by this piece. He then goes on in the piece to criticize. Joe He then goes on in the piece to criticize Joe. He goes on in a piece to criticize what he calls whataboutism. What we are talking, those you understand how those two things can't possibly align. When you say, well, what about the media calling riots that were burning American cities down, getting police officers

killed and injured and shot at, and businesses burned down by the thousands across America, when you call out the liberal media for calling those peaceful protests, that is a search for objective truth. Gerald or Gerard, what are you talking about? We're asking for a common set of principles moving forward as a country are we is normalizing political violence okay or not sane people all across the aisle saying no it's not therefore asking why it was seemingly okay by the cancel culture elites and everyone else when it happened and the liberal media sanctioned political violence and in some cases condoned it we are asking for an objective truth we're saying why wasn't that okay

and i won't stop talking about it you want to call it whataboutism you're damn right it is it's what about principles that anchor us all and more us in some sense of truth so we're not all wandering at sea wondering what rules apply to one person and what rules apply to the other that's not fidelity to a constitutional republic that's a third world republic rules for thee but not for me condemn what happened in the capital you're darn right but don't condemn what happened to with antifa and blm you're darn wrong that's a third world republic where the rules only apply to one conservatives have an objective moral truth what a ridiculous piece here's what i'm talking about and we will continue to talk about this despite what gerard baker has to say you want to see the media's role in this i'm not going to play any more montages you've heard him a million times

if you see anybody you get up in their face. Maxine Waters. Was it Rashida Tlaib? We're going to impeach the MF-er. AOC. Yeah, peace, you know, sometimes protests, you know, not so bad. Basically, you know, implying it in one of her tweets. Let's go to GQ first.

Again, where's Gerard on this? You want objective truth? Was this objective truth? Searching for a mooring going forward so we're not all out at sea wondering what rules apply to who? GQ. Why violent protests work

by Laura Bassett. By the way, I got to give a hat tip to someone. I forget who I found this on social media. I'm sorry. I'm not trying to steal your work. I really, I just been, I'm to give a hat tip to someone. I forget who I found this on social media. I'm sorry. I'm not trying to steal your work. I really, I just been, I'm drinking from a fire hose. I don't know if it was Greg at the Daily Caller or Logan, but there was GQ.

Here's Time Magazine. When rioting is the answer. Gerard, I thought we were searching for objective truth. Is it objectively horrible to ask when rioting is the answer. Gerard, I thought we were searching for objective truth. Is it objectively horrible to ask when rioting is the answer or to ask when violent protests work? What about ism? You're darn right. What about principles? Common principles in a country where we can be faithful and faithful to our flag and know that flag represents something. What does it represent if you have one set of rules for one and one for the other?

Here's Vox with a V, not Fox. Vox. Riots are destructive, dangerous, and scary. Okay. But, there's a but? Wait, where's the but in there? But can lead to serious social reforms. Huh.

That's fascinating. I thought we were looking for objective truth. Yeah. Weird. Yeah. No, I'm not done, Joe. There's more. Chicago Tribune.

This is fascinating. This piece ran in there. Chicago Tribune. This is fascinating. This piece ran in there. Chicago Tribune. Column. Steve Chapman. May 29, 2020. If riots aren't the answer, what is? I don't know, Steve.

Maybe a fidelity to the cause voting in a constitutional republic where we don't beat the living out of our neighbors. Maybe, maybe that I'm just throwing that out there. What about the Democrats role? I thought we weren't allowed to discuss elections. I thought that this is why I'm not ladies and gentlemen, take your group think and send it somewhere. I'm not interested.

We're not going to talk about election. We're not? No, no, you're not. I'll talk about whatever I want. Let's look at this Fox this time with an F piece. Fox News, which is in the show notes today. Again, Bongino.com slash newsletter. Please subscribe, folks.

I know I've got a lot of ass for you lately, but I need you right now. We have to be unified in this fight. Fox News, Joseph Wolfson. Twitter's, I'll throw strangely in there, strangely silent after Pelosi tweet declaring the 2016 election was, quote, hijacked, resurfaces. Wait, wait. Again, Gerard Baker is searching for an objective truth.

I thought the objective truth is any discussion of election abnormalities is never to be tolerated to be banned immediately weird now look at the tweet this is just strange from the 2016 election pelosi tweeted this on the eve of bob muller's appointment as a special counsel to investigate the pp tape that was fake of course here's Pelosi's actual tweet 12 44 p.m. May 16 2017 our election was hijacked I thought I thought you're not allowed to say that our election was hijacked there is no question she's not even leaving it open for debate show Congress has a duty to protect our democracy and follow the facts.

Still want to fall into that group thing trap? There'll be no discussion of election integrity in free and fair elections. There won't? No, no, I meant, let me be clear. I meant no discussion amongst Republicans actually interested in free and fair. There you go. Thank you, Dan. I mean, I know, Joe, you need it.

As the audience humbuzz me, you were confused. I can see you scratching your head like that doesn't make sense. I don't get it. If you're going to invent a pee-pee hoax and appoint a special counsel to investigate a government-sanctioned hoax by the FBI, which sanctioned this and investigated him. And then you're going to use it to question the election a year after the president's been in office, May of 2017, and still questioning it. That's okay if you're a Democrat.

But daring to question unconstitutional law changes in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. No question they were unconstitutional. No, no, that'll get you banned everywhere. Ban me. You're looking for weakness, find it elsewhere. I'm not interested. I have crystal clear clarity in my life right now. It's never been clearer, ever.

All right, let me get to my parlor segment next. I need, you deserve what I can give you from the inside scoop of what's going on with parlor. I've been getting a lot of questions about that. So it's really important. I'm going to get to that next. Let me get to my third sponsor first, our friends over at GenuCell.

Thanks for sponsoring the show today. GenuCell, very popular product in show today. GenuCell, very popular product in my household. GenuCell.com, GenuCell.com. The promotional code, we love them, is DAN40, DAN40. Ladies and gentlemen, Chamonix New Year's clearance sale is on for a limited time. Right now, you can look 5, 10, even 15 years younger easily,

safely, and naturally with Chamonix's new Zotique deep correcting serum, free with your order of GenuCell for under eye bags and puffiness. Zotique's Deep Correcting Serum, the Zotique Deep Correcting Serum, excuse me, uses liposomal technology to get the most effective proven levels of pure vitamin C down to the deepest layers of your skin for brighter, healthier, and more vibrant looking appearance. Leave those embarrassing dark marks and scars back in 2020. And Zotique increases firmness, smoothness, diminishes adult acne, redness, and stress

breakouts. Even say goodbye to those dreaded crow's feet and laugh lines. Plus with its immediate effects, see results in 12 hours or less. Again, a very popular product, my mother-in-law especially. Results guaranteed or 100% of your money back. That's the Chamonix promise. Visit GenuCell.com, GenuCell.com. Enter my special promo code, Dan40. That's Dan40 at checkout. Order now. Get the classic GenuCell jawline treatment and legendary GenuCell XV anti-wrinkle moisturizer. Order now at 800-525-6553 or go to GenuCell.com. That's G-E-N-U-C-E-L.com genucel.com genucel.com promo code dan40 thanks genucel okay um a lot of you have been the emails on parlor wouldn't you say paula are just non-stop

and i want to thank you from the bottom of my heart, I'm going to get emotional, but this has probably been, I don't know, Paula, you've been with me most of my adult life. Is this some of the toughest week? You think so? After we were talking last night, about five significant negative events that have happened in our lives. I've been with Paula a very long time. events that have happened in our life and i've been with paula a very long time um and uh we were last night like in this like weird exercise trying to grade how awful they were and i think this has to be the worst we i finally got some sleep again last night traveled i was yesterday was just an insane day you know two states and seven medical appointments and

two states and seven medical appointments and shows and everything all on the same day. But the war on parlor behind the scenes, ladies and gentlemen, is even worse. Let me give you first just a quick inside scoop, and I want to get to the general war on big tech is waging on free speech in America. Folks, the fear being imposed behind the scenes by liberal hate groups and anti-free speech advocates on anyone doing business with Parler is downright frightening. We've had an attack on websites, some associated with us. I'm not going to go into details, but ladies and gentlemen, this is really serious. You may say to yourself, gosh, the situation with Parler where we were banned from Apple's app store, a trillion dollar company, banned from Google's app store, another trillion

dollar company, and wiped out from Amazon AWS servers where they effectively took us down from the internet. Basically, $3 trillion or close to it companies at war with parlor which is not a trillion dollar company how can it get worse folks behind the scenes is brutal now we're fighting back we have sued amazon with a temporary uh we've uh we're going to be suing amazon we've applied for a temporary restraining order in court. Amazon is going to be forced to comply and produce some evidence in court. Amazon, I believe in this, could be in real trouble.

I'm not sure if we're going to win or we're not. I'm not the lawyer on the case. I'm an investor in Parler. I am not their legal department. Speaking now as my show, as a opinion journalist, but I am an investor in Parler, but I'm trying to give you unbiased news given that I know what's happening behind the scenes. Folks, the pressure campaign from everyone down the entire value-added chain to disavow

Parler will come for you next. You're already seeing it with Telegram and others. Once they wipe one out and they've got the business model down, they will go right back down to the next one. If you think, if you are under some insane belief that this is going to end with Parler and your site's safe, don't worry. We cater to conservatives who will be okay. Let's let those guys at Parler take all the incoming. Good luck. Just go to any search engine today and put in telegram. You'll see what I'm talking about.

You're next. You're running a conservative blog? Wait till someone in your neighborhood finds out. You have no idea the pressure being waged behind the scenes by everyone up and down the value-added chain to wipe parlor from the face of the earth today. We will be back. We will absolutely be back. I can't give you an absolute timeline, but I can tell you this, it will be soon, sooner than you think. I need you to check every day, parler.com. And the minute we come back,

I need you to send one big collective. You know what I'm talking about. To the left, they're totalitarian media friends and they're totalitarian tech tyrant friends. And please stand up for us and we will stand up for you. We are being bombarded with legal costs. We are being overwhelmed. I may have some news on that for those of you who want to help. I't have it today but I'm hoping to get something I'm trying my best we are being bombarded from every direction as I said it's not just us

ladies and gentlemen remember Trish Regan used to be on Fox she has a website Trish Intel we'll have this article up in the show notes today YouTube suspends President Trump's account. Now you know why I'm involved with Rumble. We don't discriminate based on political ideology at Rumble. Thank you, by the way, for getting us over 1 million subscribers at Rumble. Rumble.com slash Bongino. slash Bongino. Article number two.

You think it ended with Apple, Amazon, YouTube, YouTube, which is owned by Google, Apple, PayPal. Nope. Here's Stripe and Salesforce, Red State, Nick Arena. Is it Arena? Now Stripe and Salesforce are cutting off Trump and restricting the RNC. Oh, the RNC. Wait, you you had you know joe this is what bothers me man and just kind of segwaying into like not a new set but the old segment don't let weak-kneed republicans now take over this party because they're the same weak-kneed republicans some of them not all of them

in the rnc who are like listen we condemn Trump, we'll be safe. Really? You just got shut down by a major tech company. Oh, no, no. Oh, no, no, that's not us. We're on your side. There's a side? What side is that? What side is that exactly?

As I said the last few weeks when I've been talking about unprincipled revolutions, like the revolution the tech people are in the middle of conducting against our Republican, their war on free speech. Unprincipled revolutions always end badly because there are no sides, because there are no principles. And famous last words when they come for you are, I'm on your side.

Cowards in the Republican Party, some of them thought, oh, if we just condemn Trump we'll be safe good luck good luck oh if we just call out parlor we'll be crazy parlor people we'll be safe good luck Deutsche Bank

now won't do business with Trump strange Joey said that last week right it was only a matter of time before you all be debunked wait till they find out in your neighborhood, your local bank gets wind that you're the owner of a business that supported President Trump and you sell maybe MAGA hats in your shop. Wait till you're next.

Listen, folks, I'm not warning you to scare you. I'm warning you because it's real. Maybe some on the left who openly mocked my call four years ago, openly mocked my call four years ago, openly mocked, and said, oh, Dan Bogino, conspiracy theory, talking about the need for a parallel economy. There's no war on conservatives. Maybe now I don't think they're laughing anymore. All right, let me just get back to Parler quick and a quick update. I'm telling you behind the scenes, I have been on the phone about Parler.

I have probably burned into my skull. I can't even imagine how many, what are they measured in, grays or whatever, RF into my skull. I've been on the phone nonstop about Parler with lawyers, co-owners, the COO of the company. It is brutal behind the scenes. the totalitarians are in full force Fox Business so we're fighting back folks and Amazon we're fighting back against Amazon specifically and Amazon is not telling the truth Fox Business Amazon hits back at Parler lawsuit claims they are that Parler was unwilling and unable to remove violent content. Ladies and gentlemen, that is a lie.

That is inaccurate. Violent content clearly violates our terms of service. We had a process. We were not unwilling to remove it, nor were we unable to do it. And I'm just curious why you're not concerned about the violent content on Twitter. I'll get to the New York Post headline in a minute. You know what?

Let me get to my last sponsor because I want to get into two things here. A Wall Street Journal article that is absolutely fantastic. I'm going to motor through that talks about how I'm still hearing this, which is candidly bizarre. I am still hearing out there that, Dan, this is not a First Amendment issue. These are private companies. You sure about that? Talk about this Wall Street Journal article in a second, even though I'm mad at you or Gerard Baker. This piece is amazing. All right, let me get to my

last sponsor, our friends at Patriot Mobile. Ladies and gentlemen, if there was ever, ever a time to convert from your cell phone provider now to Patriot Mobile, today is the day. You want to talk about a parallel economy? Patriot Mobile is taking on the mobile provider swamp. They have exciting news to share, just like I'm taking on the big tech tyrants. Patriot Mobile just expanded their coverage. It'll make it easier for even more Americans to dump the big name carriers who charge way too much anyway and then donate the money to leftists.

I'm proud to partner with Patriot Mobile because they never sent a penny to the left. They are America's only proud Christian conservative wireless provider. Switch with confidence today because they use the same network as the larger providers but charge you much less switching is easy keep your phone number bring your own phone or buy a new one

build your own bundle with multi-line discounts and save even more here's how you do this and i ask you do it today go to patriot mobile.com slash dan or call their u.s based customer service team at 972 patriot that's 972 patriot That's 972-PATRIOT. Veterans and first responders save even more. This month, get free premier activation where they set up the phone for you and a special gift with the offer code DAN. That's patriotmobile.com slash DAN.

Go today. Patriotmobile.com slash DAN. Go today or call 972-PATRIOT. Thanks, Patriot Mobile. Folks, with regard to the war on Parler by the big tech trillion dollar titans, there are two questions. I like to sum things up easily. I want to get the headline out up front. There are two questions at stake here for those of you arguing, ah, it's a free market, Dan. These are free market companies. They can do what they want. Really? So free market companies are not allowed to engage in monopolistic behavior where they

coordinate with each other to squelch trade. That is not the free market. Just checking, Joe, if big companies are coordinating to stop other entrants from getting into the market, it's not a free market, is it? It's a coordinated anti-free market. Just checking. Yeah, you're good. Thank you. Again, audience on Buzzman, Joe always has to ground us. A free market means entrants and competitors are free to compete. If you're not free to compete because big companies are acting in coordination with each other to shut you out, that is the very antithesis of a free market.

It's a corrupt market. So question one, which we're going to answer now, was this a coordinated hit on Parler? Question two, are these really private companies or are these companies acting on behalf of the government, which legal precedent is everywhere, says it's totally illegal? If the government can't do something, it can't force and coerce a private company into doing it for it. Do you understand that? I'll get to that in a minute. I want to start with question number one. Was this hit on Parler? Amazon, Apple, and Google, and it was a hit.

Was this hit on Parler coordinated? Seems like Twitter may have gotten itself in a bit of hot water yesterday. Hat tip Mike Cernovich, by the way, for these highlights on these tweets. This is from Twitter's actual account on Twitter. Talking about Twitter being shut out of the Ugandan national election. Not a joke, folks. Twitter, earlier this week,

in close coordination with our peers, we suspended a number of accounts targeting the election in Uganda. If we can attribute any of this activity to state-backed actors, we will disclose to our archive of information operations. Close coordination with our peers. Joe, you know what would be really weird? What, Dan? If in a lawsuit against Twitter and elsewhere,

and in the discovery stage, we found out there was close coordination with their peers to make sure Parler went away. Did that happen? I don't know. But it just seems kind of weird that Twitter put out on their own public platform that they closely coordinate with their peers. Let's go to ironic tweet number two, the gold medal in the irony awards for 2021. I think this will be the gold medal for the rest of the year, even though we're still in January. Here's another screenshot. Again, hat tip Mike Cernovich for the highlights here of Twitter acknowledging some basic human rights.

Wow. They say the second part of this, we strongly condemn internet shutdown. Folks, this is not the onion. This is real. Twitter, we strongly condemn internet shutdowns. Just keep this up. This is the Twitter that shut down on the internet distribution on their portion of the internet of the Hunter Biden laptop story. Twitter now strongly condemns internet shutdowns.

This must be an attempt at humor. They are hugely harmful and violate basic human rights and the principles of the open Internet. Ladies and gentlemen, this is not a joke. This is a real tweet by Twitter. So Twitter acknowledges two things. Was this a coordinated monopoly acting together these trillion and billion dollar companies to crush the competition? Twitter seems to be acknowledging in their own tweet that they closely coordinate with their peers.

Their words, not mine. Oh, damn, but that was just about the Ugandan election. Was it? We'll have to see about that. And they acknowledge that access to the open Internet they've shut down in their portion of the Internet is a violation of basic human rights. Really weird how that happens. Human rights, really weird how that happens. Now, again, some of you out there who may still be under the delusion, especially on the left,

Paul is still laughing about that tweet. Yeah, exactly, but they blocked the president. That's not a violation of basic human rights, yeah. Some of you still, maybe, a small part, I don't think there's many left at this point, even the libertarians like Ken Buck and Congress are starting to come around to the fact that we answered the first question. This could be coordinated. Could be. We'll see. Second, was this a de facto government action? In other words, oh, it's a private company. It can do what they want. It's not a private company. If they were acting on behalf of the government, there's precedent for that. Let's go to this Wall

Street Journal article, which again, to be fair to the journal, this is an amazing article. This one, even though Wall Street Journal subscription only, I got it. I don't think it's behind the paywall. It's in the show notes today. You need to read this, print it and thumbtack it to your door. Save the constitution from big tech. Constitutional threats and inducements make Twitter and Facebook censorship, a free speech violation. They are government actors. Let's go through these screenshots one at a time because they are absolute magic. From the Wall Street Journal piece. Conventional wisdom holds that tech companies are free to regulate content because they're private.

And the First Amendment protects only against government censorship. That view is wrong. Google, Facebook, and Twitter should be treated as state actors under existing legal doctrines. Using a combination of statutory inducements and regulatory threats, Congress has co-opted Silicon Valley to do through the back door what government cannot directly accomplish under the Constitution. Bingo. This is not a private actor free speech argument in that Twitter has free speech because they're

a private act. They can do what they want. They are acting and others on behalf of government inducements and threats. Dan, you said there's legal precedent for this. This is a show for people with triple digit IQs. Let's hear it. We're ready for it. Let's lay it out. Norwood versus Harrison. Screenshot number one from Twitter. Sorry, number two. two quote from the wall street journal piece it is axiomatic the supreme court held the norwood versus harrison in 1973 that the government quote liberals this is a quote meaning the supreme court said this for

those of you confused may not induce encourage or promote private persons to accomplish what it is constitutionally forbidden to accomplish itself. That's what Congress did by enacting Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which not only permits tech companies to censor constitutionally protected speech, but immunizes them from liability if they do so. So the government immunizes them from liability if they do so. So the government can't violate the First Amendment and stop your constitutionally protected free speech unless you induce, going back to the beginning, imminent unlawful action, not abstractions.

But Twitter can do it for them? That's not what the Supreme Court said. Wonder how Twitter, Facebook, Amazon, Apple, and Google are going to answer for that one. Damn, Amazon and them were acting on behalf of the government? Certainly appears that way. You don't believe me? Let's look at screenshot number three

from the Wall Street Journal piece where they actually lay it out. Quote, Section 230 is the carrot, but there's also a stick. Congressional Democrats have repeatedly made explicit threats to social media giants. If they fail to censor speech, those lawmakers disfavored.

In April of 2019, Louisiana representative Cedric Richmond, excuse me, warned Facebook and Google that they had quote better restrict what he and his colleagues saw as harmful content or face or face regulation another quote from richmond we're going to make it swift we're going to make it strong we're going to hold them very accountable end quote new. New York Rep Jerry Nadler added, quote, let's see what happens by just pressuring them. Joe, sounds to me like United States government representatives with a whole lot of power using a, air quotes, private company to do what they can't do themselves.

Doesn't it sound that way to you? Yeah, yeah. Like a proxy or something. It's weird. Yeah, yeah yeah by proxy by very good you know like munchausen by proxy it's very strange now for those liberals having a tough time understanding why government coercing private companies to engage in illegal unconstconstitutional actions. Liberals have a tough time understanding that because liberals don't have principles. Liberals are only interested in attacking conservatives because of the golden rule of what I told you. We think liberals are people with bad

ideas. Liberals think conservatives are bad people with ideas, so should be wiped from the public space forever. So let's give an example and let's do, let's play what I like to, let's go, let's do a little role play. Let's go to this last screenshot here where we flip the script a little bit and see if liberals are okay with coercing private actors to engage in government actions when it doesn't meet your ideological totalitarian goals. So let's check this out. This is genius from the wall street journal piece. goals. So let's check this out. This is genius from the Wall Street Journal piece. Either Section 230 or congressional pressure alone might be sufficient to create state action.

The combination surely is. But let's suppose a Republican Congress enacted a statute. This is interesting, Joe. Listen to this closely. So Republicans say they enacted a statute giving legal immunity to any private party that obstructs access to abortion clinics. Oh, oh, we didn't think of that. Suppose further that Republican congressmen explicitly threatened private companies with punitive laws if they fail to act against abortion clinics. If those companies did as Congress demands, then got an attaboy from lawmakers, progressives would see a constitutional problem. You think they would? Think. So with the Constitution, what would Republican lawmakers say they can't do themselves?

Block abortion clinics. Can't do themselves now, right? Because they don't have the votes for it. So let's say they do get it and they pass a law saying, oh yeah, no, no. If Joey bag of donuts does it, you're immune from any lawsuits from abortion. You see how all of a sudden liberals

who think abortion's a sacrament, all of a sudden they're like, no, no, I'm uncomfortable with that. But I'm totally comfortable with Twitter wiping out the president of the United States after being threatened by lawmakers who couldn't do it themselves and wiping out the president's voice on one of the largest social media platforms in the world,

Twitter and Facebook. I'm totally cool with that. Oh, Dan, Cedric Richmond, that's just one lawmaker. How does that relate to what happened with Parler and the full-fledged assault on Parler? Oh, look at this tweet from Democratic radical liberal congressman Ro Khanna, who put on his own Twitter account, I believe is yet to delete this. Quote, Parler is hosted by Amazon Web Services. Amazon should deny Parler services until January 21st unless they commit to removing all posts related to incitement of violence concerning the inauguration. This will help prevent further violence and save lives. Strange. After a Democratic congressman incited Twitter to squelch free speech, that's exactly what

they did. Wow. Wow. Oh, Dan, that's only now two examples. Actually, three, Jerry Nadler. That's it. No, actually, they's only now two examples. Actually, three, Jerry Nadler. That's it. There's no, no, actually, they're all over the place. But in the interest of time, we're only going to get through a few.

Let me give you one more. The noted anti-civil liberties advocate, AOC, who absolutely hates civil liberties, freedom and stuff. Here's AOC's Twitter account. Blue checkmark, so we know it's her, of course. She wants to know what Apple and Google Play are doing about this. And there's a tweet, uh, sleeping giants. It's unavailable to me because they blocked me a long time ago.

Uh, sleeping giants, which of course was, was trying to call out and get parlor the platform. Cause that's what they do because they're anti-civil liberties advocates too. She says, what's Apple and Google play Joe, uh,

be a real shame if your store burned down, there you go. She said, what are they doing about parlor? And she follows it up with another one. Good to see this development from Apple and Google play. if your store burned down. There you go. She said, what are they doing about Parler? And she follows it up with another one. Good to see this development from Apple and Google Play. What are you going to do about apps being used to organize violence on your platform?

What does she say is good to see? An article about Apple threatening Parler. Tell me again how these are private companies? Tell me. What's interesting is AOC didn't have much to say about Twitter, where she's a blue checkmark. This is on the cover of the New York Post today. Well, the New York Post has a story about what Twitter won't censor. Big tech's purge of hate and parlor is pure hypocrisy.

It's a bunch of tweets on the front cover of the New York Post today, pure hypocrisy. It's a bunch of tweets on the front cover of the New York Post today, basically calling for the death and arrest of Donald Trump, including a trending hashtag on Twitter, Kill Trump. I thought this was about violence, Joe,

on social platforms. You and I talk a lot with friends and people who kind of work on stuff together uh that was that's what i'm i'm confused i i am too we were told by i know i profoundly if i'm trying to unkill was that live from my was it my cousin i'm gonna unconfuse you yeah let me try to unconfuse you it was my cousin thank you joe pesci thing yeah please do um joe and i've been talking a lot.

He's been trying to, you know, get me through the chaos of the few days. Paula, too. I was told as an investor in Parler that Amazon, Apple, and Google had removed us because this was all about violence on their platforms. Strangely enough, Twitter is allowed to exist. And you have hashtags, kill Trump, arrest Trump, assassinate Trump. Really, really, really weird how we haven't heard much. Strange. Okay, I have to get this last story. I know it's going to be a bit of a longer show today,

but this story is important. Ladies and gentlemen, I have tried now for three days. I know you get it because you listen to my show, but unfortunately, to discredit a fake news story that is a thousand percent fake, but that's never stopped the media before once I tell them it's fake from continuing to run with this story

because liberal media lunatics are liars. They hate my guts and they hate Parler because they're liberal activists. CNN again, titled this segment and my little notes here, evolution of a fake news hit. This story was designed for suckers and suckers are eating it up

This is opinion piece by Nicole Hemmer who apparently is not smart enough to have watched my show the other day the story's already been discredited

Not coincidentally if you're not smart you write at CNN Headline This is the right wing media platform in a microcosm. What is she referencing? Again, a story for suckers because it's been discredited six different ways from Sunday. The fake news story that Cumulus Media told me, Mark Levin, and Ben Shapiro,

you better stop talking about the election or you will be terminated immediately. I sadly have to do this again, that there was an internal memo sent around from Cumulus Media and that they imply me, Mark Levin, and Ben Shapiro were ordered what to say on our show about the election. Now, Joe, you work with us on these audio items. Did you get that memo? You'd think they'd send it to me, but no. I didn't. Joe is a producer.

I know you would have. It's not in his spam folder. I asked him to check that. Drew didn't get it. Paula, Paula's getting a big no. Yeah, Paula runs the, believe me, Bongino Enterprise, the Paula operation. That's awfully strange how the Washington Post, the New York Times, and CNN all seemingly have a coordinated story that Dan Bongino, Mark Levin, and Ben Shapiro were ordered to stop talking about election integrity. The story's fake.

So to prove to you it's fake, I'm going to put a proposition out there because unlike people on the left, I tell you the truth and I've got the cojones to put my mouth and put my illegal and financial muscle where my mouth is. Number one, I don't work for Cumulus. Cumulus is nothing more than a sales rep for my show. So that's fake. Anyone telling you I work for Cumulus is lying. If you can send me that employment agreement

with Cumulus that doesn't exist, I'd love to hear it. Joe, do you work for Cumulus? Not that I know of, Dan. Okay, Joe would know. Joe owns his own company. Paula? Paula has no employment agreement either. Either do I.

Weird how that was implied in these stories. It's fake. It's fake. Doesn't matter. It's the Washington Post, New York Times, and CNN. Of course it's fake number two the guy at Cumulus who supposedly sent this memo that me Levin and Shapiro supposedly received or as I used to say when I was a kid supposedly

Biscotti's I said that too I don't know who the hell Brian Phillips is I've never heard of this guy in my entire life. I have no idea who this man is. It's not personal. I don't know Brian Phillips. How could Brian Phillips? Let's do this little exercise here on the air. Let's see.

So here's my inbox. Let's put in the search function here. Brian Phillips. Let's spell his name right. Let's search. Search for emails from Brian Phillips. Oh, there are none. That's really strange. Brian Phillips from Cumulus supposedly sent me and our team here an order what we were supposed to talk about or not talk about on our show from Cumulus. That's really strange because I never got the email, but that's the whole core of the story. Exactly.

It's fake. So let me put a wager out there, and I am dead serious about this. I am as serious as a heart attack, and I will write this check myself. I'm offering today, this is not a joke, offering today, this is not a joke, $100,000 of my own money to a journalist who can produce that exact internal memo referenced in that Washington Post story from Brian Phillips and show my email address on that, that specific email. You wrote about it. You implied I was on it. Now grow some cojones and let's see you back your story up or about it. You implied I was on it. Now grow some cojones and let's see you back your story up or retract it. I will pay you $100,000. I am not kidding. If you can produce that internal email with my email address on it. If not, your story's fake, right? It's not a joke. I will write you the, I am so confident. But it's funny, Paul and I,

I said, Paul, it doesn't matter. It could be a million dollars because it's not a joke. I will write you the, I am so confident, but it's funny, Paul and I, I said, Paul, it doesn't matter, it could be a million dollars because it's not going to happen because we never got the email. But if you're Paul Farhe from the Washington Post, Tiffany Hsu at the New York Times

and the guy who wrote, the woman who wrote that opinion piece, Hemmer at the CNN piece, if you can produce that email, I will give you personally, I'll write you a check for $100,000.

I'll write it off as a business expense. Back it up. Or admit you just made up the story. Now, why did they make up the story? I'm not going to do the screenshots, Paul. I'm not even going to give them anymore. They wrote the story for one reason, to put a target on my back, Levin's back and Shapiro's back.

And secondly, because they want to see the Fairness Doctrine, which if you, I wouldn't even click on it, but if you read the dreadful, misinformed, lying CNN piece by Ms. Hemmer, which is a lie, we were not sent this email, any implication is a lie. They want to bring back the fairness doctrine, which would effectively cancel conservative radio. That's why. So lie, let the lie evolve. The lie is called out by me as a lie. It doesn't matter. Write a new piece anyway, and then use a tragedy to magnify a lie to get conservative silence on public airwaves too, to bring back the dreaded fairness doctrine, which Joe knows well will crush conservative radio forever. Let me add one more thing about the phantom cumulus email that never happened. And I know Joe can attest to this too. Even if we had received it, which we didn't,

you can produce it. A hundred K is yours or the memo, whatever they call it. Even if we had received it, we would have ignored it. 100K is yours. Or the memo, whatever they call it. Even if we had received it, we would have ignored it. Period. A lot of how from you too over there? We get an aha from Joe. That's three for three. Don't tell me what to say on my show. Ever.

You don't like it what to say on my show ever you don't like it beat it I believe in free speech you don't like my show don't listen I don't like liberal shows I don't like listening to Moscow Maddo so you know what I do I don't watch MSNBC

I don't even like watching the movie Deep Impact because it's about NBC. And I love that movie. I have to turn it off now. Freedom, you know, kind of a cool thing. Should probably preserve it. Thanks again for tuning in. I have a few asks and I'm sorry if they sound aggressive, but I need your help. Please again, parler.com, P-A-R-L-E-R, parler.com. Please keep checking in. We will be back shortly. Hopefully by this weekend, maybe by Monday.

And please, not only you, open up accounts. You have your friends open up accounts, everyone. Everyone, please. We need these alternative platforms to succeed. If they take down Parler, it's over. Second, please go to my Rumble account, where again, it's all free. It is a free speech alternative to YouTube. Rumble.com slash Bongino.

Thank you. We are over 1 million subscribers now. Rumble.com slash Bongino. Please do not watch any more videos on YouTube. Watch them there. Thank you for your support. I read your emails. It means the world to me.

You've gotten me through a serious crisis in the last week. Thank you. I'll see you all tomorrow.