The Dan Bongino Show - You’re Going to Have to Pick a Side (Ep 1302)

Episode Date: July 22, 2020

In this episode, I address the disturbing avalanche of fake news about the coronavirus and mask usage.  News Picks: This is the definitive piece in the usage of masks. It’s a must read. The body count from the lockdowns continues to build. Why was George Soros so interested in the corrupted St. Louis prosecutor? The hero St. Louis couple that defended their home are being charged by the tyrannical St. Louis prosecutor.  Clueless fake news “journalist” says all Trump supporters are racists. Turns out her mom voted for Trump.  Copyright Bongino Inc All Rights Reserved. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

After decades of shaky hands caused by debilitating tremors, Sunnybrook was the only hospital in Canada who could provide Andy with something special. Three neurosurgeons, two scientists, one movement disorders coordinator, 58 answered questions, two focused ultrasound procedures, one specially developed helmet, thousands of high-intensity focused ultrasound waves, zero incisions, and that very same day, two steady hands. From innovation to action, Sunnybrook is special. Learn more at sunnybrook.ca slash special. Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host,

Dan Bongino. So hat tip to a listener yesterday who pointed out to me that we've been discussing bad data. I don't mean bad data like this is some kind of college physics class where we screwed up like an F equals MA equation. I mean bad data on masks and bad data on lockdowns due to the coronavirus and how bad data leads to bad decisions. Because I'm hearing this a lot. Why are we politicizing masks? What's the downside? Lockdowns? What do you want, people to die?

Ladies and gentlemen, they were at trade-offs and a listener emailed me yesterday and said, Dan, you had the perfect opportunity to bring up the turkey problem. You're going to have to listen to figure this out. And I missed it yesterday. And that listener is right. I got that.

I've also got Major League Baseball totally blowing it, emulating the disastrous policies of the NFL and saying, yes, go ahead and kneel for the national anthem. Disrespect our country, our flag, everybody who fought for it. No big deal. It worked out so great for the NFL. I got that and more.

Today's show brought to you by our friends at ExpressVPN. Protect your online data from prying eyes, ladies and gentlemen. Get a VPN. Go now. ExpressVPN.com slash Bongino.pn.com slash Bongino. Expressvpn.com slash Bongino. Welcome to the Dan Bongino Show. Producer Joe, how are you today? Fine, sir? Well, I'm doing well, my man. How about yourself? You catching up? Yeah, yeah, trying. Yesterday was really busy, folks. We tried to stack as much in one day as humanly possible. We did. It was a multiple state enterprise all in one day that ended with two appearances on

Anity's show last night. One of these days, I'll be able to tell you the story. It's a darn good one. So let's get right to it. Today's show brought to you by our friends at Fitbod. Ladies and gentlemen, whether you're new to the gym or you've been lifting weights for years, it's hard to find the right workout plan and stick to it, right? If you've ever gone to the gym without a plan, it's a little overwhelming. You look around like, what do I do

first? What order am I doing it? How much do I do? How much weight do I use? What if we had the answers for you? We do. Even with a trainer, it can be hard to know if you're pushing yourself too much or not enough. With FitBot, get a personalized fitness program that adapts as you go. Personalized to you. FitBot is a smart fitness app that takes all the guesswork out of planning your workouts. FitBot's algorithm smart fitness app that takes all the guest workout of planning your workouts. FitBot's algorithm factors in your goals, experience level, equipment, workout duration, muscle recovery to craft the perfect total body workout program for you. With each workout, the app learns your abilities and plans workouts designed to maximize your

results. This is our new favorite way to work out. And by cycling new exercises into the mix, FitBot keeps your workouts fun and fresh. Paula, you can see on the screen now, if you're watching on YouTube, this is a screenshot of Paula's workout. Put in the equipment you have access to. If you know, say it gives you an exercise you don't know how to do, it'll show you a video showing you how. You can't screw it up. This thing is great. Get a program tailored to your unique body experience and environment. It's perfect for anyone looking to get better fitness results. It's Paula's new favorite. That's why she's so jacked. She loves it. If you call us general fitness, strength training, muscle tone, bodybuilding, powerlifting,

or Olympic weightlifting, they have the solution for you. It's super easy to use, has HD video tutorials, and makes new exercise learning a breeze. Get personalized fitness plans today to help you work out smarter at fitbod.me slash Bongino. Try Fitbod for free for one month when you sign up today at fitbod.me slash Bongino. That's one month free when you sign up today at fitbod.me. Don't mess that up. Fitbod.me slash Bongino. All right, Joe, let's go. All right, so first let's get to this Major League Baseball story before I get to the bad data thing and the turkey problem and why I'm so bitter about the hysteria out there masquerading as science leading to bad decisions everywhere.

So first, you know, you think everyone would have learned from the NFL alienating hundreds of thousands, if not millions of fans. I've watched maybe two NFL games. I think the two Super Bowls because I had to provide some coverage and commentary for one of my jobs. But I think I've watched two Super Bowls in five years. That's it. Now, keep in mind, I was not a casual NFL watcher. I was a diehard. I was a big Raiders fan as far back as when they were in L.A. L.A. and went back to Oakland.

And now they're headed out to Las Vegas. I could have told you they're starting offensive line, who they drafted in the fourth round in a certain year. I loved the NFL. It has now been fully abandoned. Now, in the radio industry, we call these diehards. We call Joe P ones like your diehard listeners, right? Yeah, yeah. Something like that.

Joe was into something like, yeah, these are your listeners who never go anywhere. It's your core listeners. It's, you know, I don't know, 50% of your audience. And you get 50% that come and go listen to two, three shows a week. When you lose those people, you're in real trouble. When you lose your diehards, right? Oh, yeah. It's over.

Your station's finished. You have basically loosely connected people who tune in real trouble. When you lose your diehards, right? Oh, yeah. It's over. Your station's finished. You have basically loosely connected people who tune in and out. They're not regulars. You can't plan your show. You're screwed. The NFL has alienated huge numbers of those. Yeah, they may have had some spikes here and there and some troughs here and there, but trust me when I tell you, the long-term damage from the policy of allowing people

to disrespect our national anthem in our country and Neil has been catastrophic. Don't listen to any of the blue checkmark brigade that crap on our country and hate America. They want you to believe this is cool and edgy. Yeah. Neil before the national anthem is so good. It's all nonsense. Believe me, real executives in the NFL know what a disaster this has been. Not only have they alienated millions of fans now who now want from their diehard P ones to loosely affiliated, occasionally watch once in a while fans to, you know, now I'm never watching at all. Yeah. They've alienated their kids. As I've said to you before, Joe, the real damage here, Joe has a son. I have i have two daughters obviously ladies and gentlemen

you're all the product of a mother and a father all of you hopefully your mother and your father teach you things mostly good you know some people unfortunately learn bad lessons but these are traditions football watching sunday watching the giants orets game where I was from in New York. They were the only teams on TV typically. Those are traditions handed down. I actually learned about football from my mom. She was a big football fan. Right? Yeah, man.

That chain, which keeps a brand at its peak, what we would call in business here a goodwill, the value in a name alone, Coca-Cola, the NFL, right? There's value in just the name, being associated with the NFL or Coca-Cola. There's goodwill in that. There's value in that because these products have been handed down. Mom drank Coca-Cola. The kids drank Coca-Cola, whatever. You get what I'm saying?

There's goodwill in that. There was goodwill in the NFL. The chain has been broken. There are thousands, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people in the United States who now don't regularly tune in and will not pass this on to their kids, and their model is broken.

This is damaging. So the MLB, the Major League Baseball, has decided, yeah, you know what? We might as well jump on the Black Lives Matter, bigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon. What do we want, dead cops? When do we want them now, bandwagon? And we're going to allow kneeling at our sport too

because it was so great for the NFL. You can see it now. Listen for a moment because that anthem is so great. That anthem is so beautiful for those of you listening on audio. For those of you watching on video, unfortunately, you saw something while that anthem was playing, that beautiful song. You saw members of the San Francisco Giants again kneeling in disrespect of our country, the national anthem, and all of those who fought for it.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, in an effort to clarify my position for the double-digit IQ moron radical leftists who listen to the show, and of course, do nothing but lie and mischaracterize your position, this is not a First Amendment fight. I acknowledge that. Because what they typically respond is, what, you don't believe in free speech? Can I be crystal clear? For the liberals watching this show, the incredibly unintelligent double-digit ones, I'm not talking about Democrats out there in jail. I don't stereotype you. I'm talking about the double-digit IQ Neanderthal liberals who

don't understand basic English. Point stipulated. This is not a First Amendment fight. No one's making that case. You're arguing something no one's... It's not about the First Amendment. Major League Baseball is a private enterprise. They can do whatever they want, Joe. They can mandate you kneel for the national anthem. They can do whatever they want. It's not a First Amendment fight, okay? Do we get that?

The jury's in. The gavel has come down. We get it. Stop creating straw man arguments. Nobody's saying that. No one knows what they're talking about. It's not a First Amendment fight. They're not a government enterprise.

Nobody's forcing you to do anything. I'm addressing this from a business perspective. It's interesting that the people kneeling, the San Francisco Giants members kneeling while our great national anthem plays. It's interesting how they want you to understand their perspective, right, Joe? That's why they do it.

It's the whole essence of a public statement, correct? Right, yeah. Am I missing something? I mean, I'm not asking you a hard question here. The reason someone would kneel in front of cameras during our national anthem is so people will see it. Well, why do they want people to see it? They want people to see it because they want people to either ask them about an issue or

they're trying to make some kind of statement they feel will get across or else they would do it in the locker room, right? This isn't hard to understand. Right. Now, again, liberals will have a tough time, but for the smart people listening, you're doing it to make a statement, to state something. So they want you to understand their perspective. Their perspective is what? By kneeling, we're supporting black lives. Okay. As I've said many times, that's a conversation I really would love to have on this show if you'd be open to it, especially the black lives being destroyed by awful government policies, the black lives being destroyed by terrible schools and largely minority communities, the black lives literally ending due to high crime, due to liberals

that will not enforce public safety rules and let black lives be extinguished every day. You want to talk? No, no, we don't want to talk about that. No, no, I don't want to talk about that. They don't want to talk about that. But they want you to understand their statement. But it's fascinating when we make a counter statement like, hey, it's not a free speech issue. We get that. It's not government. But the counter statement is this, that the act

of kneeling while our national anthem is being played is an act of disrespect. Don't conflate it with genuflecting in church. There's a totally different, that's a ridiculous argument. You know, you kneel when you start a fight in an MMA class too, when you grapple because some people don't want to do takedowns. It's nothing to do with you kneeling for the national anthem. They're two separate motions in two separate contexts. Kneeling, it's not disrespect. It isn't. Really?

Then why are you doing it? Why are you, I don't understand. I noticed when I watched the Ravens game a few, I always tell this story. when this whole thing started, the Baltimore Ravens went over to play a game in the United Kingdom. And it was a fascinating moment where the left's entire argument that we're not kneeling to disrespect the flag. No, you are. That's exactly what you're doing. The fascinating moment was this. Our national anthem played overseas and these disrespectful players kneeled overseas in front of it to show disrespect for our flag. And you know what happened when God Save the Queen was played? United Kingdom's national anthem, you know what happened? They all got up. Why? I thought if it's not

disrespected me i what is it an act of reverence i mean it's is it what what am i missing what am i missing i don't understand something's missing here right you got up when their national anthem played why because you the answer because you didn't want to disrespect them but i thought you weren't disrespecting him the answer answer is, of course you are. So it's fascinating how you want us to understand your statement and argument that's clearly disrespect. You wouldn't do it for anyone else's national anthem, just for ours. But when we ask you to understand our position, patriotic Americans who say, listen, we're

the actual constitutionalists here, conservatives, not your liberal friends, the tyrants. We believe in your right to protest. We believe in your right to free speech. And I believe in free markets, free enterprise, and private businesses' ability to do whatever they want. But I'm suggesting to you that your act of disrespect or our flag has actually hurt, not helped your argument. So if your argument has anything to do with black lives, it doesn't.

You don't want to talk about that. Then why would you start off with an act of disrespect that alienates the people you're trying to convince? What's the point? What's the point? If your point is to save black lives, why are you starting off with a gesture that alienates probably 40 to 50% of America who've now shut you down and are convinced you're not about anything other than disrespecting the flag? Because you're not about having a serious argument

it's about disrespectful shallow gestures sadly meant to insult people you want to have that conversation come on the show let's do it you won't do it because we've been the one advocating for school choice for black families to give them an opportunity for public safety in black communities so we don't have to hear the cries and the tears of another black mother or father who lost their kid in a high crime community. We're the ones talking about good, solid, strong, free market healthcare where patients can choose and aren't forced into government clinics and minority communities where the outcomes are disastrous.

We're the ones talking about that. Not you. Sorry, but topic really bothers me. That flag matters to people. And if your goal is a serious dialogue to fix problems, your first act shouldn't be one of total disrespect, which alienates the audience who wants to fix these problems too. I'm done with baseball. You do whatever you want, ladies and gentlemen. Your viewing habits are your own.

But it's time for us to fight back against this nonsense. You want to kneel, you kneel, but I don't have to watch it and neither do you. All right, let's move on. Let me get to my second story. And I want to hat tip Tom, who sent an email yesterday to our account. And he was right. You know, folks, the mask hysteria

and the lockdown hysteria over the coronavirus, there is a misperception out there, and we need to correct, and it's typically levied by people who sadly either don't know what they're talking about or do know what they're talking about and are lying to you. And the misperception around masks and lockdowns both is that there are not trade-offs. Now, these, follow me here. Joe, if I lose the audience as the referee for our great, you must stop me. It is your obligation.

These arguments that there aren't trade-offs, that this is, you know, black or white, masks and lockdowns, right? Because that's how liberals don't, they don't understand nuance or they ignore it. The arguments are framed differently. The mask argument and the lockdown, economic lockdown argument, but they're both framed incorrectly by liberals and many others who don't understand how actual science works. Let's go with the mask argument first. These mask mandates that you have to wear a mask and government should be the one to tell you to do it. The arguments typically framed by the left and others not willing to look at the actual science is this, Joe. Well, why wouldn't you do it?

What's the downside? As if there is no tradeoff. Again, conservatives, libertarians and others understand that there's always, always a tradeoff. There's always a tradeoff when we promote bad data on anything, including masks. I'm going to get to that in a second. What the tradeoff actually, ladies and gentlemen, there is a downside to government misinformation and media misinformation on masks. And it's a significant one. Anyone telling you, what's the downside? Just put it on. government misinformation and media misinformation on mass and it's a significant one anyone telling

you what's the downside just put it on not willing to entertain the fact that there's always a trade-off doesn't know what they're talking about or isn't familiar with how actual science works the lockdown argument is typically phrased differently it's phrased as well what do you want people to die right right if you don't lock it down, Joe, people die. Yeah. Ladies and gentlemen, before I get back to the mask one and the big data problem and the turkey problem, which I think you're going to like,

some of you older listeners have heard it before, the what do you want people to die argument is amateurish, childish, and really you're advertising your own ignorance. You are. I'm very sorry, but you are. Folks, it's not us putting a value on human life. It's you. In other words, people who say, you don't want to lock the economy down again.

You want people to die. What are you going to put a value to stock market on human life? I was putting a value in the stock market on human life. You're doing it. Oh my gosh, Dan, you can't say that. People put a value on human life. Yes, you do it every day. You're going to deny that. Ladies and gentlemen, this part is only for serious listeners. If you're not a serious person and you don't want to analyze this rationally, and you're just embedded in the emotion that conservatives want people to die. Conservatives who don't believe in economic lockdowns or the science front,

which I'm going to give you the actual numbers in a bit too. Stop listening now because none of this is for you. This is for rational, sane people. You take risks in your life every single day. You go out in flu season, do you not? Ladies and gentlemen, the flu is a very, very serious virus. I'm not even comparing the flu to coronavirus. I'm comparing the flu with your analysis of risk. They're two separate viruses that do two separate things and affect people differently, obviously. Why do you do that? Why do you not get a flu shot during flu season?

You know, 50% of America doesn't. Why? Some of you are going to email me back, Dan, how dare you promote vaccines? I'm not promoting anything. I'm asking a question. You emailing me that you don't like vaccines, which I get a lot.

Some people don't like vaccines. i get a lot some people don't like vaccines makes my point not yours you've judged the risk you've done your homework you don't like them you take the risk you put a value on your own life. I didn't do it. You getting my point here? Yes. The arguments they use are emotional. They're not based on any real world reason. If you don't support lockdowns, you want people to die. I don't want people.

I'm not putting a price on people's lives. You do it. You put a price on your own. You get in your car every day and I'll bet 5-10% of the population doesn't wear seatbelts. Why not? Data on seatbelts is pretty crystal clear,

is it not? Why not? Why don't you do it? You get on a plane. I was on one yesterday. There's a risk. It's small, but there's a risk. Why do you do that? Because you've judged the trade-offs and the trade-offs to sitting in your house all day, not getting in your car, not going out when flu season is, and not getting on a plane because you're afraid it might crash.

The risks you've deemed acceptable to your own life. You put a value on your life. You've gauged the value of both activities. I need to travel because I enjoy it for work or whatever it may be, and it makes my life more productive. And I'm willing to accept the risk to my life, which is very real. Maybe small, but real. Why are we not doing that anymore?

Well, I don't understand. I thought the left was all about tolerance and science and data and weighing scientific trade-offs based on the value of two different scenarios. Because you're living in a hysteria campaign, ladies and gentlemen. I'm getting goosebumps right now talking about that. I'm not even messing with you. I don't know if you could see that, but the hair stand, because one of the most profound revelations I had in my life, the journey I've had with academics and intellectual curiosity,

which never ends, the most profound revelation, I'm not kidding about it, I pinned down one thing, was the revelation, and it's not a small one, it sounds like a small one, but it's not, that there are really no good answers in a world of scarce resources. There are bad answers and worse answers in the overwhelming majority of cases when it comes to choices you have to make. And we're all rational maximizers. We try to maximize rationally our own benefit by making choices we think are better than the other one, bad and worse. We're all going to die. We're all going to get hungry. We're all going to get tired. And we make choices to alleviate those things. The left doesn't talk about the real world like that.

They talk about the real world like it's somehow perfectible, that we're not going to age. We're not going to die. We're not going to get hungry. Resources aren't scared. They talk about the world. Thomas Sowell talks about this in Conflict Divisions, as if there aren't scared. They talk about the world, you know, Thomas Sowell talks about this in conflict divisions as if there aren't limitations on human behavior and there are just perfect choices versus evil choices. Lock it down or you want people to die. I heard this about the mask thing. Let's go to that first. Again, the mask thing, which is like, well, what's the downside? Well, the downside, number one, is you're empowering the government to make decisions for you, risk decisions you're perfectly capable to make yourself. Wear the mask or we're going to put you in jail or fine you. You can take that risk yourself.

And they're doing it in order to get you to believe this is some productive fail safe against spread of the virus. They're propagandizing you with hysteria, not facts. There's a downside to that. Let's go to this study that I have in the show notes today. That is a must read, please. I've had it up a few days in the show notes now. This is from the Center for Infectious Disease and Respiratory Research and Policy. This is all they do at the University of Minnesota.

Respiratory diseases, infectious disease. This is all they do at the University of Minnesota. Respiratory diseases, infectious diseases, this is what they study. Here's their article here, which will be in the show notes today, bongino.com slash newsletter. Sign up, we'll send you these every day. Commentary,

masks for all for COVID-19 is not based on sound data. I'm not going to go through the whole article because I've discussed it multiple times. Again, because liberals have a tough time digesting information, I'm not telling you not to wear a mask.

I'm not telling you masks are evil. I'm not politicizing masks. I'm simply interested in the data, the hysterical media data suggesting that somehow these masks are going to be some kind of cure-all we can wipe out the problem in just uh four to six weeks if we don't want we can is there data on that there is because promoting hysteria leading people to believe that this is some kind

of cure oil a cure-all snake oil mix the two terms up has an actual downside, which we can see in this article when we don't do real science, I'm going to read every bit of this. Cause you need to read it from the minister, the university of Minnesota center for infectious disease research and policy. You've heard it from the left Joe, right? Well,

what's the downsides better than doing nothing? Well, is it, they actually asked that question. You know, Joe, science. Yeah. Quote, wearing a cloth mask or face covering could be better than doing nothing, but we simply don't know at this point.

Joe Data, I know leftists, you're cringing in horror. This is actual science here. It goes on. We've observed an evolution in the messaging around cloth masks from an initial understanding that they should not be seen as a replacement for physical distancing to more recent messaging, by the way, that's code for media hysteria, that suggests cloth masks are equivalent to physical distancing. And while everyone appears to understand that this messaging suggests that a cloth mask is appropriate only for source control. In other words, to protect an infected person from protecting others.

Recent CDC and other guidance recommending their use by workers seems to imply that they offer some type of personal protection. You understand now why we do facts on this show? You want to wear a mask. You're in a business that wants to mandate masks. You go right ahead. Period. I have nothing else to add.

I'm not kidding. Do what you deem is best for you and your family. But media hysteria about masks, because the president was initially skeptical about some national mask mandate, and it still is, initially skeptical about some national mask mandate, and it still is, has led people to believe, Joe, follow me here, buddy, that it is some kind of replacement because they're so master it now because, you know, Trump wasn't in on the mask mandate, that it was somehow a replacement for physically distancing yourself from other people.

It's not. It's not. In other words, they're giving you advice that is not. In other words, they're giving you advice that is not only not helping you, wear a mask. What's the downside? The downside is when we propagandize people

about masks other than telling the truth, you're actually creating more risk. Bad choice, worst choice. You're giving them the worst choice by insisting to them because you're into propaganda, not facts, that somehow a mask is some kind of impenetrable barrier to this virus,

then people get a false sense of security. You create moral hazard. Look it up, libs. And what happens? People forego physical distancing, which is more effective because they've been told by media folks and others that the mask is the solution. You've created more danger, not less. In a trade-off, you've given people the worst scenario, not the bad one.

Which is telling them, what's the bad one? The bad one is saying, listen, this virus is very contagious. A mask may help you if you're contagious from infecting others. It may not be a bad idea for some if you know how to fit it and you don't touch your face a lot, especially if it's a quality mask. But it's definitely not a cure-all, folks. And maybe we should consider physical distancing first before we take away people's liberties and start making demands.

That would be a fair, reasonable message. That's not what you've heard. Because people want, of course, beat back Trump. Look at Trump. He hates Matt Massowell. Massa-rit. That's it, man. That's the impenetrable barrier.

You know, you're actually getting people sick. This is the very essence, as the listener sent me in an email yesterday of what the turkey problem is the turkey problem is this ladies and gentlemen when you feed people bad data repeatedly and the data can spread like it does now virally on social media and on the internet and over 24 hour cable news and elsewhere and you embarrass them and humiliate them for asking questions like we're asking here like hey do these masks really provide the barrier we've been told they do? And you provide that bad data and you silence any opposing voices, that bad data now can spread virally. The example used in the turkey problem is, again, if you had a farm and you had a few

turkeys on a farm and those turkeys were living 100 years ago, those turkeys are living a good life, right, Joe? They're being fed by the farmer every day. You don't realize in a year from the date of their birth, they're going to be killed for food or whatever it may be. But those turkeys back 100 years ago, before information and bad data could spread virally, it wasn't really a problem. Say there were three or four turkeys.

They got fed for a year. They're all talking to each other. Hey, turkey bag of donuts. This is great. Farmer Joe's feeding us. Isn't this terrific? We get other. Hey, turkey bag of donuts. This is great. Farmer Joe's feeding us. Isn't this terrific? We get to scratch the dirt, do our thing. This is great.

Off with your heads a year later. Doesn't affect anyone else other than those three turkeys, right? The problem with bad data now, like you're getting on masks and elsewhere and lockdowns, it's spreading virally, is now we live in the internet age where those turkeys can go on Twitter and social media and the internet and start to tell thousands of their friends on Facebook and elsewhere how great this farmer is. Oh my gosh, this farmer is awesome. Feeds us every single day, lets us play out in the dirt pit. Come on over and join us. The turkeys start flooding into the farm thousands at a time.

They want to take part in this year-long scratching dirt fest where they get fed and they get nice and fat every year. And what happens on day 365 when these thousands of turkeys joining every single day think they're joining a party? They're joining a bloodbath because the viral spread of bad data about how great the farmer was led to their decapitation and serving on the tables of thousands of Americans who were eating them for dinner. You're being spread through media propaganda, bad data, and that bad data is putting you at significant risk. Do your own homework. When the turkey sends you a Facebook message telling you, hey, join me on the farm.

It's great over here. You may want to do some homework on Farmer Jones first, and you'd find out that Farmer Jones' farm is the leading provider locally of turkeys for dinner every year. And you may say, I'm going to do a hard pass on the turkey farm. We're seeing that with lockdowns too. Before I get to lockdowns, let me just get to my second sponsor, My Patriot Supply.

Paula's not happy with me today. I can tell she's not happy at all. I can tell right now she's giving me the big oh no not happy i'll have to tell you that story when i tell you the story yesterday some other time my patriot supply every day we aren't just witnessing the spread of coronavirus we're seeing the spread of fear it's driving markets down and demand for basic necessities through the roof according to my patriot supply they have older customers with health conditions petrified to go out living off their emergency food supply.

Others are under self-quarantine and some just don't want to face the mob for a loaf of bread. Folks, go to preparewithdan.com and reserve your two or four week emergency food kit today. These meals include breakfast, lunch, and dinner and last up to 25 years in storage. So you're prepared. I have boxes of this in my house. Not a joke. Happy to put out on social media my own receipts from purchasing their products. My Patriot Supply has been a trusted partner for years, and they've been working around

the clock to keep up with your orders. The current wait is now 8 to 12 weeks because demand has been 80 times normal. We have no idea how long this crisis will last. Stock up now. Be self-reliant. Do not get caught without a food supply. It is a huge mistake. We ensure everything in our lives do not get caught without a food supply it is a huge mistake we ensure everything in our lives that matter ensure your food supply today go to preparewithdan.com

that's preparewithdan.com do not wait go today ensure your food supply it matters preparewithdan.com okay um back to my you know my piece here about bad data. It's just very frustrating to live in a time where we talk about actual science and data from accredited institutions of higher learning that actually study this stuff, respiratory diseases, and it's all ignored. I didn't get to the second screenshot on that piece. So before I get to the lockdowns, again, why bad data on masks and the whole world? What's the downside? What's the downside?

What's the downside? I don't know. Well, let's research the downside. That's the answer to that question. I'm asking you. You're asking me what the downside is. If you're in the media asking people, why wouldn't you wear a mask? What's the downside?

Isn't it your responsibility to know the downside before you ask that question? All right? We're weighing trade-offs, correct? Here's another piece from that University of Minnesota piece. Quote, the downside to this, giving people bad data on masks. They say, quote, we know of workplaces in which employees are being told they cannot wear respirators for their hazardous environments they work in, but instead they need to wear a cloth mask or face covering.

These are dangerous and inappropriate applications that greatly exceed the initial purpose of a cloth mask. We're concerned that many people do not understand the very limited degree of protection a cloth mask or face covering likely offers as a source control for people located nearby yeah yeah um is right joe joe doesn't say um often unless i think that really dings him and hits him in the chops yeah yep so now we're pushing to the public so much bad data on masks that we're leading people to forego more effective measures for infection control,

like physical distancing that actually work. Don't do that. Don't worry. You have a mask giving them again in the trade-off, the worst scenario. Don't worry about physical distancing, folks, masks. And then also they're telling people in workplaces, eh, don't do a respirator. Don't worry, put a face mask on, which will do nothing. Keep it up. Maybe in the media, if you're going to ask people, well, what's the downside? Maybe you should answer that question first and research the downsides before you ask the question. You know, journalism-ing, that kind of thing.

I mean, this show is too loaded. I go back and forth between pages today. On the lockdowns. What's the downside? What do you want, people to die? Let's go to this tweet by Tammy Bruce. She's citing an article in the Telegraph. I put in the show notes that it may be subscription only.

I put it in there anyway. Article in the Telegraph about the lockdowns. Tammy Bruce, you may know her from Fox. Shocking report on projected deaths in the United Kingdom due to COVID lockdown. Am I reading that right? Could I possibly be? I am, it turns out. Shocking report on deaths due to the lockdowns?

Not COVID, folks. These are the deaths due to the lockdowns. You know, folks. These are the deaths due to the lockdowns. You know, the lockdowns that if you don't want them, you want people to die. COVID. 50,000 deaths. Excuse me. Okay, so there we have a baseline there. So COVID caused roughly 50,000 deaths in the UK.

Delayed healthcare in the short term from the lockdowns caused 12,000 roughly 50,000 deaths in the UK. Delayed healthcare in the short term from the lockdowns caused 12 to 25,000 deaths. Interesting. Delayed healthcare long-term deaths are estimated to be about 185,000. From the recession, 600 to 12,000 deaths, 500 deaths from suicide. Domestic violence, around around 20 deaths, accidents at home, low tens. So again, for the foolish non-tradeoff morons in the media and elsewhere who say, lockdowns, what do you want people to die? No, people are dying because of your lockdowns and in far greater numbers than those who have actually died or perished from COVID. But because you're a fool and ignoramus,

Dan, you're being rough on these people. No, ladies and gentlemen, excuse me. It was a long day yesterday. I'm not. I actually care about human life. Deeply. I know we can be sarcastic and rough around the edges on the show sometimes. That's not a joke.

My faith matters to me. From conception to natural death, all life matters to me. All of it. Regardless of race, color, creed, country of origin, whatever it may be. And the fact that you're not willing to accept that and you're engaged in political pandering using silly talking points like, what do you want people to die? When you look at the data, the trade-offs you impose on other people, it's actually you who want people to die, not us. Because you're not willing to understand the turkey problem. It's a real problem.

How faulty data can spread virally. Faulty information. Information is data. Talking points by the media. You don't want lockdown. You want people to die. It spreads. And numbskulls pick it up and put it out on Twitter. Oh, Dan Pancino, he wants people to die. And what does it do? Not in my case, because I don't have been talking about this forever, but it intimidates some people into silence. And then they learn to support lockdowns, despite the fact that the data shows

they're actually killing more people than the virus itself. Again, it's you who actually wants people to die, you know, if you believe in data and facts and stuff. All right, moving on, because I got a packed show. I got to flip back and forth today because it's loaded. Another interesting article I saw today in the Wall Street Journal by William McGurn, who does some really quality work over there, but I have to vehemently and strongly disagree.

He has a piece up at the Wall Street Journal in their op-ed column today. Portland's pottery barn rule. You know the pottery barn rule, folks? You ever heard it? No. If the mayor won't stop violence in the city, why should Trump let him off the hook? You know what that is, Joe? The pottery barn rule no man it was um colin powell when uh he was working with

the bush administration and the uh the the initial one about the iraq uh invasion he apparently said listen you go in there and you take over ira you break it. The Pottery Barn rule, you break it, you own it. You get it? So his take was, you know, you break Iraq, you go into it, you own it. So McGurn's piece today, I'm going to just cover this quickly because it's important, is wrong. And it's wrong for a number of reasons. He's making an analogy between that you break it, you own it rule.

And President Trump's, I think, incredibly brave and terrific decision to send federal agents into Portland to make arrests for the riots and chaos there that the local police under the direction of the communist mayor are not willing to do. He has sent federal agents into these collapsing cities because, and thank God for this president of the United States, he understands that not every single resident of Portland is a radical leftist lunatic. Just not like every citizen of California is a radical leftist lunatic. And there are people there, Joe, who unsurprising to the common sense folks listening to my show are American citizens too.

And are entitled to the dignity of being an American citizen in some semblance of public safety. I don't believe McGurn's suggestion here, invoking the Pottery Barn rule, and with all due respect, Bill does a lot of great work. It's not a personal knock. We just disagree here. His suggestion is, if President Trump sends federal agents, as he has into Portland, to quell the mass violence. The mayor there, Ted Wheeler, the disaster there, mayor. Disastrous mayor. He's not willing to do. That if he expands this model, Joe, and brings it into Chicago and New York, like I am strongly supporting, and some friends of mine in law enforcement too, that then he'll be held responsible for what happens there.

No. No, no. No. I'm sorry, Bill. That is an inaccurate evaluation of what's going on. Now, let me give you the reasons why. You understand his reasoning? His reasoning is, well, if we're there, the mayor's there, again, the disastrous Lori Lightfoot, communist de Blasio, and Ted Wheeler, who's forfeited his city completely to criminals and chaos in Portland. The logic McGurn is using Joe.

Well, when feds there, when the feds are there, it gives light foot and others a reason to say, look, they did it. There are Trump's guys. Whereas Nancy Pelosi calls them the storm troopers.

You get it. Yeah, I gotcha. I don't buy that. Yeah. I don't buy any of that. And let me tell you why. Let me go through my reasoning.

Number one, ladies and gentlemen, this is a very small cadre, a small presence of federal agents. We just don't have enough federal agents to go and act as a surrogate police department. There's not. We're talking about 100 to 150 men and women, probably tops. There's just not enough of them. They're not going to be running around the city serving warrants on every block. They're there to defend federal property. I wish they could do that. I would recommend they do that. So the small presence means that

the people in that city, they're not dumb enough to believe this, that somehow there's an invasion of, as Nancy Pelosi calls our brave federal agent, stormtroopers. Those are Nancy Pelosi's own words, by the way, because she's a disgrace to humankind. No one's actually going to believe Donald Trump has taken over their cities. By the way, it's the same reason I recommend that he not bring in the National Guard to these cities, because they have larger units they can use, which would lead to an overt presence, which the Democrats will then use to jeopardize public safety, not help it.

We don't want them armed. We don't want them with shields. It's a bad idea, the National Guard. I think so. Federal agents are not. They're law enforcement officers. They're not military folks. The presence is too small for these people in the neighborhoods that deserve

that to say, Oh, look, you know, it's the federal agents taking over our city. This is nonsense. It's not the siege. Okay.

That Denzel Washington movie, everybody, you know, stand down a bit. Secondly, why I think McGurn is totally wrong on this. And the president is right. Ladies and gentlemen, life is about contrast.

I can't say this enough. Human beings understand contrast. Motion looks more profound when nothing's moving. When you're sitting on a flat plain in a desert with nothing moving, if someone jumps up and starts running, you'll see them. Because there's a contrast. When someone jumps up and starts running in a crowd of people who are jumping up

and starting running, you won't see them because they blend right in. The whole essence of camouflage, to reduce contrast, Digicam and all of that, to make your appearance appear just like what your background does and to not create a contrast.

Life is about contrast. Elections are about contrast. You versus the other guy. They're binary choices. What a contrast, right? From Lightfoot, Ted Wheeler, and Bill de Blasio, allowing their cities to be taken over totally by criminality and chaos, and then federal agents locking people up.

I've heard a few people say, Dan, they're throwing them in Mark Carr's. This is unprecedented. Ladies and gentlemen, listen, I am a liberty-loving patriot like anyone else. I have not supported the Patriot Act. I am all for the oversight of law enforcement and always have been. They have a serious responsibility.

They can take life or freedom. No one should be able to operate willy-nilly without oversight. That's not what I'm suggesting. But suggesting that because federal agents are arresting people

and putting them in unmarked cars as if it's some kind of unprecedented stormtrooper-like Gestapo activity is so ridiculous. You're embarrassing yourself. I was a secret service agent. We didn't have any marked cars for our field offices. They have them in the uniform division in DC.

We were federal agents. We arrested people and put them in unmarked cars all the time. What are you talking about we didn't have cars that said there's a united states secret service agent in here that's just a scare tactic everyone arrested should be treated with dignity even though these people have no dignity being arrested these people are they don't they're assaulting cops spitting on them trying to burn down buildings. But that doesn't matter. This is professional law enforcement.

People need to be treated with dignity, even if they refuse to do the same, which many of them will. That's a fact. We're professionals. We're not bouncers in law enforcement. People have to be read their rights if it's custody plus interrogation. People have to be brought in front of a court. Habeas corpus still matters.

None of that's gone away. Stop pretending this is some kind of unprecedented, you know, oh my gosh, the president's doing something crazy and everybody's going to run against the president, make him look sad. No, no. The president's the law and order guy. And now you're starting to see it. And that contrast now is evident. His guys are locking people up. The other guys are not. Third, creates another contrast. The blamers versus the solvers. One of McGurn's points is that,

well, if the president intervenes in these cities, they're going to be able to blame him. Okay. No one's going to believe it, but what's the problem? So you have the president doing something, actually arresting people, right? The solver, the problem solver, just so we're clear, right? That's what you're complaining about, that the feds are arresting people, right?

So you have a guy actually doing something, people under his control, federal agents going and arresting people. And then you have Lightfoot, communist de Blasio, and communist Ted Wheeler on TV, crying and blaming the president about it, doing nothing, not actually solving anything, watching their cities burn. Then you have Trump saying,

yeah, you got my guys in there locking people up. Contrasts. Blamer solvers, blamer solvers. Throw the Pottery Barn rule out the window. I'll say finally,

people on the ground will see what's going on, ladies and gentlemen. Don't treat voters like idiots. They know exactly what's happening. They're watching their city burn to the ground. You think they don't know who's doing something and who's blaming? They're not stupid. I don't believe in the Pottery Barn rule's blaming they're not stupid i don't believe in the pottery pottery barn at all or rule at all and i think the president's absolutely doing the

right thing all right let me get to my final sponsor today let me just tell you what's going on because i got um i got an important story here i maybe should have covered this first but i'm gonna video from tucker carlson it's very a warning, again, you are going to have to pick a side soon. I wish it weren't the case, but it is. I'm sad we're at this point. Great country. I hate to see us in this spot. It's devastating to watch.

All right, folks, today's show also brought to you by friends at Magic Spoon. Listen, growing up, cereal was one of the best parts of being a kid. Come on, you know that. But I had to give it up because I looked on the nutrition label and found out there wasn't much nutrition at all other than sugar and junk in a lot of these breakfast cereals. A lot of it's just plain, straight up junk. Not now, because now we have Magic Spoon. Zero sugar, 11 grams of protein, and only three net grams of carbs in each serving. This stuff is

delicious. Only downside is I can't keep it in my house that fast and I never get to eat it because my daughters eat it all. They have four flavors, cocoa, fruity, frosted, and blueberry. You see it on the screen right there? Nice. No YouTube account? It tastes amazing. You're going to think when you eat it, this can't possibly. This is too good to be true. It can't be. No, no, it is. That's why the boxes disappear so quickly in my house. It's keto-friendly, gluten-free, grain-free, soy-free, low-carbon, GMO-free.

Go to magicspoon.com slash Bongino and grab a variety pack and try it today. You'll be addicted. This stuff's amazing. And be sure to use our promo code bongino at checkout. Get yourself some free shipping there. Magic Spoon's so confident in their product, it's backed with a 100% happiness guarantee. So if you don't like it for any reason, they'll refund your money.

No questions asked. Go to magicspoon.com slash bongino. Use promo code bongino for free shipping. Thanks, Magic Spoon, for sponsoring the show. Try this stuff out. You're going to love it. Send me your pictures. Eat it.

You'll get a big smile on your face. This stuff is delicious. It's my new go-to. Sometimes I throw a little protein powder in there, too. I'm like, yeah, my little secret there. Don't tell anyone. All right. So last night I was watching Tucker's show on Fox News

before I went on on Sean Hannity's show, and I heard something really disturbing, ladies and gentlemen, and it kind of goes back to the point I've been trying to drill into you for weeks now that sadly and unfortunately this fight is coming to your door what do i mean this fight i mean it in both macro and micro ways the macro fight is i mean the fight for the future of the country we have a tyrannical group of leftists who believe in cancel culture attacking free speech calling everybody they don't agree with racists locking up their opponents discriminating against people that That's the left.

Antifa, street violence. Then you have the right. Respect for human life. Respect for God-given big R rights. Respect for voter integrity. Respect for things like patient-directed health care, school choice, economic growth and prosperity. This is a real fight. This wasn't always the fight. We had democrats like jfk and even

bill clinton who said you're a big government's over those democrats are gone we're now in a legitimate unlegitimate binary choice do you want the country to survive or not that fight is coming to your door you won't be able to avoid it the left will never ever ever leave you alone but on the micro fight too, little things, like I told you the amount of stories about my daughter's schools, where things are going on in these schools and stuff, these little micro fights about little things. Oh, you know, we need masks.

Well, what are you basing that? I don't understand. Like you ask my eight-year-old to wear a mask that doesn't even fit her right. Does that make any sense? I'm just asking you to evaluate the kind of pros and cons. Those fights are coming to your door too. Ladies and gentlemen, your opponents are very, very dangerous people. And by dangerous, I mean dangerous to you.

Listen to Tucker Carlson last night on Fox about what the New York Slimes, the dreadful conspiracy theory blog, what they're doing to him to try to intimidate him and his family to get him off the air. Listen to every single second of this. The last thing this country needs is more narcissism. It's not very interesting anyway. People who use the word I a lot tend to bore everyone but themselves. But tonight we're going to make an exception to that rule. We don't have much choice. Last week, the New York Times began working on a story about where my family and I live. As a matter of journalism, there is no conceivable justification for a story like that. The paper is not alleging we've done anything wrong, and we haven't.

We pay our taxes. We like our neighbors. We've never had a dispute with anyone. So why is the New York Times doing a story on the location of my family's house? Well, you know why. To hurt us. To injure my wife and kids so that I will shut up and stop disagreeing with them. They believe in force. We've learned that. Two years ago, a left-wing journalist publicized our home address in Washington. A group of screaming Antifa lunatics showed up while I was at work.

They vandalized our home. They threatened my wife. She called 911 while hiding in a closet. A few weeks later, they showed up again at our house. For the next year, they sent letters to our home threatening to kill us. We tried to ignore it. It felt cowardly to sell our home and leave. We raised our kids there in the neighborhood, and we loved it. But in the end, that's what we did. We have four children. It just wasn't worth it. But the New York Times followed us. You believe this? You have an American alleged newspaper. It's not. It's a Pravda-like leaflet that functions only as an activist arm for the far left radical anti-American leftists. You have a far left leaflet formerly known as the New York Times running a doxing story

on Tucker Carlson. Why would you do what? Joe, is this a serious question? Paula, feel free to chime in too if you have an answer I'm missing. Because if I'm missing it, I really want to know. It's not a joke. Think about it. Act like a leftist for a minute, Joe,

and try to find a reason. It's important. I'll try. What legitimate news purpose, journalism purpose, does publishing, if not his direct address, Tucker, but enough information about where he lives,

what legitimate news purpose would that be? I'm serious. Act as a leftist. I'm open to it. And to my audience, can you think of any? I can't. I mean, the only legitimate purpose

would be to cause him harm. And that I could think of, as thinking as a leftist, is to hurt him and his family. You'd be correct. Now, if you were writing a story about. Tucker Carlson's history of successful real estate transactions. As I was, I'm legitimately trying to think of a reason.

I'm not messing with you. Okay. Then that would probably be relevant, right? Tucker bought in whatever the exclusive Malibu community 30 years ago and on this street and he's either he's good or bad at real estate because he's so good he made all this money or he's so bad he lost all this. I mean, that would be relevant, right? Possibly, yeah.

You know. Thank you. What would a story about Tucker Carlson show, his politics and his positioning on the show, what does his home address have anything to do with it? Paula, can you think of any? Please, I'm still opening up the floor here. No.

Paula's not interested today. She's like done with me today. Now she's giving me the wave off too. It's all right. It's okay. It's okay. Deal with that. We're kidding, folks.

There is no purpose. The purpose is exactly how Joe just described it. The purpose is to intimidate Tucker, to make sure that the people who chased him because he has children out of his other house, which I don't blame him one bit, his kids matter. The only purpose is to make sure those same people show up at his new location to intimidate him into silence,

which he will not do. Ladies and gentlemen, this fight is coming to your door. You better get ready for it. I'm not kidding. There's an article I saw that talks about this very fight today, how you're going to have to pick a side and quickly. You're not going to have a choice. There's an article I saw yesterday by a friend of mine, Jesse Kelly.

It's an interesting article. I'll put it up in the show notes and you should read it because it describes the contours of something we've talked about quite a bit on this show. Joe and I have referred to it as the new rules. Here's Jesse's piece. It'll be up in the show notes today. It's short, but I encourage you to read it. Jesse's a military veteran

who's been around the block. He has his own show as well. And in Jesse's piece, he talks about how the traditional war here has been lost. The headline of the Byway is, it's time to go offensive. We've lost this war, but don't go home and suck your thumb.

It's in American consequences. What he means by the traditional war is lost is, ladies and gentlemen, the cultural institutions and media institutions have fallen. Like that movie, Olympus has fallen. They've fallen. The data is evident. Doesn't mean we don't fight back, try to reclaim them.

But those skirmishes have been lost. The media is dominated exclusively by leftist activists. College institutions are no longer institutions of higher learning. They're propaganda institutions where your kids learn nothing but how to become a radical leftist activist. The media has been entirely corrupted on messaging. Science has been corrupted. Pressure to silence yourself in the face of bad data.

So Jesse makes an interesting point. Again, we kind of phrased it as new rules, but he phrases it a little differently. How maybe it's time to turn to guerrilla tactics now. If we can't beat them, well, let's join them. Quote, Jesse Kelly's piece. Do not waste your fighting against this modern social justice warrior insanity. Distasteful as it may be, you need to embrace it.

This is our way forward. This is our only option now. Feed them heaping helpings of their own medicine until a truce is called. The famous new rules show we did where I declared that we will now be using the leftist rules against them until a truce is called, which we recorded a couple of years ago, received a lot of interesting backlash from maybe about 20% of users.

They said, Dan, we can't do that. The leftist rules are immoral, and we shouldn't embrace immoral rules. What's your option? Remember that, Joe? I'm serious. What's your option? Your option is what? I'm serious. What's your option? Your option is what? To allow your kids' lives to be destroyed? That's not immoral? Ladies and gentlemen, keep in mind, I'm not talking about violating the sanctity of big R God-given rights or anything like that.

That's a leftist thing. Violence and all that stuff, that's their thing. thing, you know, violence and all that stuff. That's their thing. I'm talking about a simple set of rules, the new rules they've declared, that they've declared are rules. In other words, they've declared that boycotts are an effective way to silence people who have opposing voices. The right, including me, my friend Sean Hannity, have always said boycotts really suck. Pardon my language.

Hasn't stopped the left one bit, Joe, right? They're bankrupting just about anybody they can get their hands on who happens to profess not a conservative thought, a non-radical leftist thought. Anyone they can get their hands on, they'll bankrupt. So if boycotts suck, well, let's show them. Let's show them how much boycotts suck. I don't like boycotts suck, well, let's show them. Let's show them how much boycotts suck. I don't like boycotts. I hate boycotts. But if Major League Baseball and others want to take a stand, we can take a stand too. And maybe when enough people fight back,

guerrilla warfare style, and start taking the left's own tactics and shoving them down the left's throats, maybe then they'll get the hint that this is probably not effective. And what the right was warning us about a long time ago, that boycotts are really stupid and that businesses should be allowed, Joe, shocker, to do business and not politics. Maybe that was a good idea and we should declare a rapprochement here. Leftist rule. So leftist rule number one, boycotts are great. We think boycotts suck. Let's embrace the new rules and show them how much boycotts suck.

Leftist rule number two, Twitter audits are a great thing. You know, Twitter audits show, you know what I mean? Let's go back 57 years, find someone, of course, Twitter didn't exist 57 years ago, but you get the point. And find the tweet Joe Armacost sent out when he was seven and a half

and said, gosh, I don't like this kid next door to me. He's a meanie. New York Times finds out the kid next door, Joe, happened to be Asian. Joe's anti-Asian. Oh, no. He said something when he was seven. Fire Armacost right now.

Oh, man. Twitter. Yeah. Now, Joe, it sounds like I'm interested in Twitter. Folks, Twitter, just kidding. We love Joe. Twitter audits suck, and they're really stupid. So let's show them.

It's time to Twitter audit every single leftist out there. Find out what they wrote in their past. Let's make sure those boycotts we know suck, that the people who sponsor these folks as well, the Lenin Project, you know, the Lincoln Project, it's really the Lenin Project, you know, the never Trump grifters out there that are one of them who has some contracts with the Russians or had them, you know, those guys really the Lenin Project. The never Trump grifters out there that are one of them who has some contracts with the Russians or had them. Those guys, the Lenin Project.

Let's check out their Twitter history because I've seen it and it's not pretty. It's really ugly. They want to Twitter audit everyone who's not a liberal? Let's Twitter audit them too. You want to get into historical grievances with no context? No context for change at all? Anyone in history who's made a mistake, however catastrophic it may be, wipe that history clean.

Let's not talk about it, Joe. Let's stigmatize and rip down statues and let's everybody who didn't agree by what today's historical standards are or today's standards in contrast to historical standards, they're all evil. Okay, fine. Well, let's do that. If that's your new rule, it's a new rule for us too. When do we start talking about the Democrats' history

of racism in the South? The Democrats, remember the Dixiecrats, Democrats? Can we talk? No, no, you can't talk about that. You can't talk about that. No, no, no. We're only talking about the Civil War statute. Not the Democrats' profound history with racism. you can't talk about that no no we're only talking about the civil war statue not not the democrats

profound history with racism when we get talking about fdr and his internment of the japanese during world war ii fdr you know the green new excuse me new deal democrat you know fdr their hero who they've lionized you said historical grievances without context are a good thing. Okay, well, let's do it. Let's do that too. Finally, one more. There's no room for resolution, redemption, or anything like that in people's lives when it comes to a leftist. They find something you did that's wrong. You are to be publicly stoned and humiliated. Folks, I believe in forgiveness and redemption, but only if you do too. If you don't as a leftist,

I'm sorry, but you can't be forgiven either. New rules. You wanted them. Now you can chew on them. All right, folks, thanks again for tuning in. I really appreciate it. Please subscribe to my YouTube channel, youtube.com slash Bongino.

It's those subscriptions that help us move up the charts on Apple Podcasts as well. They're all free. We really appreciate it. Please subscribe to my YouTube channel, youtube.com slash Bongino. It's those subscriptions that help us move up the charts on Apple Podcasts as well. They're all free. We really appreciate it though. It helps us keep our marketing budget low. We like to keep the money in the show right here to keep everything tight and strong. So youtube.com slash Bongino.

We really appreciate it. We'd like to get to 600,000 subscribers now. We're getting there soon. I'll see you all tomorrow. Thanks for your support. You just heard Dan Bongino.