Podcast Summary
Harrowing travel experience and importance of private charter services: Despite claims, tax revenue has increased, be cautious of corporate censorship, and Bongino is confident of Democrats' hidden information in Russian collusion investigation
Dan Bongino had a harrowing travel experience and emphasized the need for private charter services due to the unreliability of commercial flights. Another key point was his discussion on tax revenue, stating that it has increased despite liberal claims that tax cuts would decrease government income. He also touched on the topic of corporate censorship and warned listeners to be cautious. Additionally, he mentioned his confidence in what the Democrats are hiding in the Russian collusion investigation. Despite the long introduction, the show will cover WaxRx, a sponsor that Bongino personally endorses due to his own experience with earwax issues.
The Power of the Right Product and Acknowledging Truths: The right product can transform lives and acknowledging truths is crucial for making informed decisions, rather than being misled by false narratives.
The right product can significantly improve one's life, as demonstrated by a listener's nephew, Brandon, who was able to restore his hearing and complete his EMT training with the help of WaxRx. Another important takeaway is the importance of acknowledging the truth, rather than being misled by false narratives. This was exemplified in the discussion about tax cuts and government revenue, where it was emphasized that tax cuts have historically led to increases in government revenue, a fact often obscured by the media and Democrats' gaslighting tactics. It's crucial to recognize these truths and not be swayed by misinformation. Additionally, it's essential to understand the difference between causation and correlation when evaluating the impact of tax cuts on government revenue.
Correlation vs Causation: Tax cuts don't necessarily decrease government revenue, it's important to distinguish correlation from causation to avoid drawing incorrect conclusions.
Correlation does not imply causation. The Democrats' argument that tax cuts lead to decreased government revenue is based on a misunderstanding of this concept. While it's true that tax revenues have increased less than expected following tax cuts, it's not because of the cuts themselves, but rather due to factors like wage growth. It's important to be clear about the difference between correlation and causation to avoid drawing incorrect conclusions. In this case, the Democrats' argument is not only incorrect, but it's also in the opposite direction of reality.
Tax rate cuts don't decrease government revenue: Historically, tax cuts have led to increased gov't revenue due to economic growth and higher wages, despite common misconceptions
Tax rate cuts do not lead to decreased government revenue or deficits, as some may claim. Instead, tax cuts have historically resulted in increased government revenue due to economic growth and higher wages. The evidence from the experiences of presidents like Coolidge, JFK, Reagan, Clinton, and Trump supports this notion. The deficits, on the other hand, are primarily caused by government spending, not tax cuts. The numbers clearly show that government revenue is up while spending is up more, leading to larger deficits. It's essential to understand these facts and separate them from the misinformation that may be spread.
Frustration with NFL, Government Spending, and Omarosa's Actions: The speaker is disillusioned with the NFL, believes government revenue growth is due to spending, not tax cuts, and is outraged by Omarosa's violation of White House recording rules, damaging her credibility.
The speaker is expressing frustration with the NFL, government spending, and the actions of a former White House employee. He is done with the NFL and believes the government revenue increase is due to spending, not tax cuts. He is also outraged by the actions of the former employee, Omarosa Manigault Newman, who recorded conversations in the White House's sensitive compartmentalized information facility, in violation of the rules. He believes her actions make her look sleazy and undermine her credibility. He also rejects offers for financial gain related to his time in the White House.
Discussions on corporate censorship and iTarget Pro system: Omarosa's book sparks debates on corporate censorship, while iTarget Pro system enhances firearm proficiency through dry firing with a laser round and phone app
Omarosa Manigault Newman's book release has sparked discussions about corporate censorship, and it's important to be cautious about falling into debates baited by social media platforms. Meanwhile, the iTarget Pro system is a valuable tool for improving firearm proficiency through dry firing with a laser round and a phone app, making practice more effective and enjoyable. Additionally, last week, the topic of corporate censorship was brought up, and the concern over this issue is understandable. Stay tuned for more insights on these topics. Regarding Omarosa's book, the speaker expressed disgust with her actions and urged listeners not to be swayed by the book's claims without fact-checking. The discussion also warned against getting trapped in debates on social media platforms, which can be manipulated by their owners. Moving on to the iTarget Pro system, the speaker emphasized the importance of proficiency with firearms for self-defense and shared how the iTarget Pro system enhances dry firing practice by using a laser round and a phone app. The system allows users to see where their shots would land, making it an effective and engaging training tool. Lastly, the speaker acknowledged the concerns over corporate censorship and expressed understanding for those affected by it. Stay tuned for more information and insights on these topics.
Senator Mark Warner proposes revisiting Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act: Senator Mark Warner suggests government intervention to regulate online content, raising concerns over free speech and opposing viewpoints.
The debate over censorship in the digital public sphere is heating up, with corporations like Twitter and YouTube wielding significant power to remove voices they deem controversial. This issue raises questions about the role of government intervention in protecting free speech. Senator Mark Warner, a Democrat from Virginia, has recently proposed revisiting Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to give the government more power to regulate online content. However, there are concerns that such intervention could infringe on free speech and potentially be used to silence opposing viewpoints. It's important to stay informed and engaged in this ongoing conversation as the future of online discourse hangs in the balance.
Democrats' push for social media regulation could be a trap for conservatives: Conservatives should avoid treating social media platforms as publishers to prevent potential censorship and government intervention. Creating alternative platforms is a suggested solution.
The push for government regulation of social media platforms like Twitter, YouTube, Google, and Facebook by Democrats could be a trap for conservatives. If these platforms are treated as publishers, they could be subjected to hate speech laws and potentially target conservative content. Instead, creating alternative conservative platforms is suggested as a solution. The Communications Decency Act, specifically Section 230, allows these platforms to host content and block it based on community standards without being sued. Falling into the Democrats' trap of treating these platforms as publishers could lead to more government intervention and potential censorship of conservative voices.
Proposed social media regulations could suppress conservative voices: Government intervention in social media regulations could inadvertently lead to the suppression of conservative voices, potentially resulting in the removal of conservative outlets. Instead, consider selling stock, canceling accounts, and waiting for alternative platforms to emerge.
Attempting to regulate social media platforms through new laws could inadvertently lead to the suppression of conservative voices. Mark Warner's proposal to treat social media companies like publishers and make them liable for state law torts could result in liberal activist groups suing these platforms for hate speech violations, potentially leading to the removal of conservative outlets. Instead of relying on government intervention, it's recommended to sell stock in these companies, cancel accounts, and wait for alternative platforms to emerge. The Commerce Clause, which was intended to prevent states from creating new laws, should not be used as justification for new internet regulations. The economic damage caused by liberal boycotts of conservative outlets will not harm conservatives as much as it will harm the companies involved. Remember, conservatives have a long memory and will remember which companies have boycotted them.
Boost your health with green powders: Consuming green powders can enhance cognitive and physical health. Try it for increased energy levels.
Consuming color enhancing compounds from fruits and vegetables, either through whole foods or powdered supplements like "Field of Greens," can significantly enhance both cognitive and physical health. The speaker emphasizes the convenience of the powdered supplement, which provides a full serving of fruits and vegetables with just one scoop. He encourages listeners to try it and notice the difference in their energy levels. Separately, the speaker discusses the developing story of the Clinton team's connection to Russian oligarch Oleg Derapaska, and how the collusion narrative against Trump is now being exposed as a Democratic scandal. He emphasizes the importance of understanding this context as the full story comes to light. In summary, incorporating green powders into your diet can improve your health, and the collusion narrative against Trump is being debunked as a Democratic scandal involving the Clinton team and a Russian oligarch.
DNC Subpoenas WikiLeaks Amidst Clinton-Deripaska Connection Allegations: The DNC served a subpoena to WikiLeaks while allegations emerged about Hillary Clinton's campaign having ties to a Russian oligarch, Oleg Deripaska, who sought to influence her campaign to avoid being on the Magnitsky List.
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) served a subpoena to WikiLeaks over tweeted leak information about DNC emails. This distraction comes as damaging information emerges about a Clinton team's connection to a Russian oligarch, Oleg Deripaska, who is connected to Putin. Deripaska, a wealthy man requiring international business dealings, needs to stay off the Magnitsky List, a US blacklist of Russians connected to the death of a Russian lawyer. With Hillary Clinton's potential presidency, Deripaska sought to influence her campaign through his lobbyist and Christopher Steele, who was working for the Clintons. The question remains if Deripaska paid Steele and provided information for the infamous Steele dossier. Senators Tom Cotton and Chuck Grassley have raised concerns about this potential connection, adding intrigue to the ongoing investigation.
Oligarch Oleg Deripaska's connections to Democrats and the Steele dossier: Oligarch Oleg Deripaska, linked to Putin, had potential ties to Democrats through the Steele dossier, and may have tried to influence the 2016 election to avoid sanctions.
The relationship between Oleg Deripaska, a Putin-connected oligarch, and key figures in the Democratic Party, including those involved in the creation of the Steele dossier, raises significant questions about potential collusion and information sharing. Deripaska, who was a target for sanctions due to his business dealings with Putin, may have sought to stay off the Magnitsky list by attempting to influence the election in Hillary Clinton's favor. Christopher Steele, the author of the dossier, was reportedly paid by both Deripaska and the Clinton campaign at the same time, and Deripaska may have been a source of information for Steele. Bob Mueller, who led the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, had a past relationship with Deripaska through the FBI. These connections and potential collusion raise critical questions about the origins of the collusion narrative and the motivations of those involved.
Russian Oligarch Deripaska's Precarious Position During 2016 U.S. Election and His Attempts to Cover Tracks: During the 2016 U.S. election, Russian oligarch Deripaska, with no interest in helping the U.S., leaked stories and wrote op-eds to cover his tracks, hinting at involvement with Clinton team and info laundering ops. He attempted to appeal to conservatives and offer info, while lobbyists leaked positive stories.
During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, Deripaska, a Russian oligarch with zero interest in helping the United States, found himself in a precarious position when it became clear that Hillary Clinton was not going to win. To cover his tracks, he began leaking stories and writing op-eds, dropping hints about his involvement with the Clinton team and allegations of information laundering operations between the Russians, the State Department, and Clinton team members. He mentioned names like Victoria Nuland and Adam Jones, and even suggested the existence of multiple dossiers. Deripaska's actions indicate that there may have been an ongoing information operation between these parties for an extended period of time. Despite his unsavory past, Deripaska attempted to appeal to conservative America and offer to talk about what he knew in an effort to get off the sanctions list. His lobbyists also leaked stories to conservative outlets to paint him in a positive light. Deripaska's actions suggest that there may be more information to come to light regarding the relationship between these parties during the election.
Democrats colluding with Russian oligarchs: New evidence suggests Democrats may have colluded with Russian oligarchs, overshadowing the Trump collusion narrative
The so-called Trump collusion story is being overshadowed by a real collusion situation involving Putin-connected oligarchs and individuals within the Democrat Party. A specific oligarch is reportedly trying to cover his tracks or make amends to avoid sanctions. The evidence for this collusion is substantial, and the entire situation is being labeled as a scam or a "collusion fairy tale." The speaker encourages listeners to read his book "Spygate" for more information and to subscribe to his show for updates. In essence, the real collusion may not involve Trump, but rather Democrats and Russian oligarchs.
