Podcast Summary
Discovering President Trump's Listening Habits and Promoting Omax 3 Ultra-Pure: The Dan Vongino show discusses President Trump's potential listening habits, promotes Omax 3 Ultra-Pure as the purest Omega-3 supplement, and provides insights on New Jersey's tax hike and the upcoming Rosenstein testimony.
The Dan Vongino show discusses various topics, from politics to health, with a unique perspective from Queens, New York. A recent discovery revealed that President Trump may be a listener, leading to the hosts' amusement. They also promote Omax Health's Omega-3 supplement, Omax 3 Ultra-Pure, which they claim is the purest on the market and can significantly improve health. Listeners are encouraged to visit tryomax.com/Bongino to get a free box. Another topic included New Jersey's plan to hike taxes and a warning for potential voters. The hosts also mentioned an upcoming show about the Rosenstein testimony and a related gem from their book on the Spygate scandal. Overall, the Dan Vongino show offers an entertaining and informative experience, with a focus on facts and high-quality products.
Omax 3: High-Quality Omega-3 Supplement for Inflammation and Joint Pain: Omax 3 is a top-tier Omega-3 supplement with a clinically proven EPA to DHA ratio, no fish burps, and benefits for various demographics. New Jersey's high taxes on high earners and corporations may drive people and businesses away, despite liberal policies intended to create market incentives.
Omax 3 offers a high-quality Omega-3 supplement with a patented EPA to DHA ratio, specifically designed for inflammation and joint pain. It is clinically tested, free of fish burps, and beneficial for various groups of people. On the economic front, New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy, despite being a millionaire himself, has raised taxes on high earners and corporations, potentially driving more people and businesses to leave the state. The liberal policies aim to recreate incentives that already exist in the free market but fail to do so effectively due to high taxes and corporate welfare.
Role of Government in Corporate Taxation and Economy: Speaker argues against increasing corporate taxes, advocates for free market approach, challenges democratic socialism as a myth, and criticizes Democrats for misunderstanding socialism and democratic socialism.
The ongoing debate around corporate taxation and socialism raises questions about the role of government in the economy. The speaker argues against increasing corporate taxes, as it may drive businesses away and result in a net loss for the government. Instead, they advocate for a free market approach. Additionally, they challenge the notion of democratic socialism, stating that it is a myth and that socialism, by definition, involves government ownership of the means of production. The speaker also criticizes Democrats for their perceived lack of understanding of the differences between socialism and democratic socialism.
Distinguishing Socialism from Big Government Programs: It's crucial to clarify the differences between socialism and big government programs to avoid confusion and misrepresentation, as they are not the same.
The terms "socialism" and "big government liberalism" have been conflated in public discourse, causing confusion among voters, particularly millennials. This conflation has put Democratic politicians in a difficult position, as they fear being labeled as endorsing government theft and violence associated with socialism if they openly embrace the label, but also risk losing support from younger generations who believe big government programs are synonymous with socialism. The speakers in the discussion emphasized that socialism and big government programs are not the same, with socialism being a system where the government owns the means of production and people work for the state, while big government programs are poorly designed government initiatives that provide free services like healthcare and college education. The speakers urged for clarity in defining these terms to avoid confusion and misrepresentation.
Misconceptions about Socialism in the Democratic Party: Young people and some Democrats misunderstand socialism due to radicals conflating it with big government policies, leading to confusion and potential electoral losses for the party.
There is a significant disconnect between the meaning of socialism and how it is perceived by some young people and some Democrats. Radicals in the Democratic Party have deliberately conflated socialism with big government policies, leading to confusion and misconceptions. Socialism, in its true form, is not the same as democratic socialism or free stuff. It is the government's confiscation of the means of production and redistribution of assets. This misconception is causing Democrats a problem, as they cannot openly admit to being socialists without appearing radical or promoting ideas that could lead to death and destruction. The historical record clearly shows that socialism is not democratic and that the constant talk of socialism in the Democratic Party is causing concern among those who are focused on winning elections.
Custom-made holsters with lifetime guarantee from Wethepeopleholsters.com: Discover high-quality, adjustable holsters with precise fits for various firearms and a lifetime guarantee from Wethepeopleholsters.com. Uncover intriguing connections between Oleg Deripaska, Adam Waldman, WikiLeaks, Fusion GPS, and Democratic senators.
Wethepeopleholsters.com offers high-quality, custom-made holsters with adjustable features, various designs, and a lifetime guarantee for an affordable price. The company takes great pride in creating precise fits for each firearm, ensuring a secure and perfect hold. Additionally, the host shared intriguing information about a Russian oligarch, Oleg Deripaska, and his lobbyist, Adam Waldman, who seems to have connections to various political figures and organizations, including WikiLeaks, Fusion GPS, and Democratic senators. The host emphasized the importance of remembering names and making connections in investigations, as it can lead to valuable discoveries.
Russian collusion case doubts raised by Assange's claims: Assange's denial of Russian source for DNC emails challenges the foundation of the Trump-Russia collusion case, and new information about Deripaska, Steele, and Waldman adds complexity
The theory of Russian collusion with the Trump campaign over the leak of DNC emails through Wikileaks may be invalid if Julian Assange's claims that the Russians were not his source hold true. The significance of this lies in the fact that the entire Trump-Russia collusion case rests on the assumption that the Russians were responsible for the theft and leak of the DNC emails. Assange's consistent assertion that the Russians were not his source casts doubt on this assumption and potentially renders the collusion case meaningless. Furthermore, the connections between Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, Christopher Steele, and Adam Waldman, as revealed in the text, add complexity to the situation and raise further questions about the origins of the information in the Steele dossier.
Possible Russian involvement in feeding false info to Dems during 2016 US election: Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska may have provided false info to Democrats via Steele dossier, possibly laundered through British intel agent and London law firm, authenticity questioned due to lack of verification, adds to election chaos
There is a possibility that Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska, who is close to Russian President Vladimir Putin, may have played a role in feeding false information to the Democratic Party during the 2016 U.S. election. This information, which was contained in the infamous Steele dossier, was reportedly provided by a source believed to be Sergei Million, who was present with Deripaska at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum around the time the allegations against Donald Trump emerged. The information was possibly laundered through a British intelligence agent and a London law firm with ties to both Deripaska and Trump's campaign. The lack of third-party verification of the information raises questions about its authenticity, and the mysterious behavior of a lobbyist connected to the Democrats and Deripaska in relation to WikiLeaks adds to the intrigue. Overall, the situation suggests that the Russians may have intentionally sowed chaos in the election by providing false information to the Democrats.
Russia investigation may have been a scam or entrapment: The Russia investigation into the 2016 election may have been manipulated or fabricated by Democrats, with key information potentially falsified to frame the Trump campaign.
The discussion suggests that the Russia investigation into the 2016 election may have been a scam or an entrapment operation orchestrated by the Democrats, rather than an investigation into collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. The speaker believes that key information, such as the source of the DNC emails and the identity of Christopher Steele, may have been fabricated or manipulated to frame the Trump team. Furthermore, Mitt Romney's behavior in the Senate race in Utah is criticized for not endorsing Trump despite previously doing so. The speaker expresses disappointment in Romney and fears that he may cause problems for pro-Trump senators in the future. Overall, the speaker is conveying a message of distrust towards the Russia investigation and those involved in it, and a belief that the truth has been obscured.
Immigration policies don't hurt Trump's approval among Dems, Hispanics: Trump's approval rating remains steady among Democrats and Hispanics due to their support for strong immigration policies and enforcement. Potential problems for US-Mexico border arise from Mexican election, and Trump's personal dealings are under investigation.
Despite media predictions, Trump's approval rating among Democrats and Hispanic voters has not been negatively affected by immigration policies. Trump supporters among these groups value strong immigration policies and enforcement. Additionally, the upcoming Mexican presidential election could bring significant problems for the US-Mexico border if the candidate, who is a self-proclaimed socialist, implements policies similar to Venezuela's. Furthermore, the investigation led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, initially focused on Russian collusion, has expanded to Trump's personal and business dealings. Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, is reportedly considering cooperating with Mueller, which could lead to potential legal issues for Trump. The left's call for justice in the Trump investigation contrasts with their previous blindness to potential criminality in Clinton-related investigations.
Political Turmoil: Mueller Probe, Rod Rosenstein, and FISA Warrants: The Mueller probe continues to cause political turmoil, with calls for the firing of Rod Rosenstein due to perceived arrogance and the handling of the Michael Cohen case. FISA warrant discoveries targeting Trump team members add to the controversy, while the importance of insect control was emphasized.
The ongoing Mueller probe is causing significant political turmoil, with calls for the firing of key figures like Rod Rosenstein. The probe, which was initially focused on Russian collusion, has turned into a debacle with the handling of the Michael Cohen case. Rosenstein's testimony last week was criticized for coming off as arrogant and cocky, leading some to call for his dismissal. Meanwhile, the discovery of multiple FISA warrants targeting members of the Trump team adds to the controversy. In a lighter note, the importance of insect control was emphasized, with the endorsement of the Dynatrap indoor fly light as an effective solution. Overall, the discussion highlights the complex and volatile political landscape, with ongoing investigations and debates over socialism adding to the uncertainty.
Rod Rosenstein clarified he was not the affiant in the Pfizer FISA warrant case: Rosenstein, who reviewed the Pfizer FISA warrant, clarified he was not the one who investigated or gathered facts for the application, expressing concern about potential misinformation in it.
During a discussion about the Pfizer application for a FISA warrant, former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein emphasized that he was not the "affiant," or the person who swore to the truth of the information in the application. Rosenstein expressed concern that the public information about the application did not align with his understanding of it. He urged the inspector general to complete their investigation into the matter, as he believed it was unlikely that he had done anything wrong. The affiant is the person who investigates and gathers facts for a prosecutor, and in this case, it was not Rosenstein. He was simply the prosecutor who reviewed the facts presented to him. Some interpret Rosenstein's statements as him throwing the FBI under the bus, but it's important to note that he was not accusing the FBI of lying outright. Instead, he may have been expressing concern about potential misinformation in the application.
Rosenstein's Testimony on FISA Warrants Questioned: Conservative commentator Dan Bongino suspects someone deceived former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein, potentially leading him to approve false info for FISA warrants. This could result in investigations and possible perjury charges.
Former Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein's testimony regarding the validity of the information used to obtain warrants, such as the one against Carter Page, is being questioned. Dan Bongino, a conservative commentator, believes that someone from the FBI misled Rosenstein, leading him to sign off on potentially false information. This means that someone may have lied under oath in front of a FISA judge, which could lead to investigations being launched. Bongino also expressed his doubts about the accuracy of the information used in the warrants and the lack of arrests related to the alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. He encourages readers to read through the transcripts of Rosenstein's testimony and his own piece on his website for more information. Additionally, Bongino debunks the myth of a Muslim ban during the Trump administration, stating that only a small percentage of Muslims are affected and that the ban was not targeting Muslims as a whole.
