The Dan Bongino Sunday Special 04/14/24 - Jim Jordan, Kirk Cameron, Carol Roth and an epic Dan rant

We put a lot of work into the radio show. Check it Out. But before that, let me tell you about our first sponsor, Field of Greens. I take Field of Greens twice a day.

I love it. I had some in green tea today, then I put a little bit in some orange juice and water afterwards. It's delicious. It is a ground up, healthy, wholesome fruit and vegetable powder.

Each organic fruit and vegetable was medically chosen by their team to help support your health. If I showed you my blood work at 49 from Field of Greens, you'd be like, This guy's not messing around. This stuff is the real deal. I promise you're going to love the product for any reason you don't, they'll give you 100 money back guarantee.

Can't beat that. Try Field of Greens today. Look at the back, look at the label, you're going to love it.

I got you 15 off your first order plus free rush shipping. Go to brickhousenutrition.com slash dan use promo code dan that's promo code dan at brickhousenutrition.com slash dan brickhousenutrition.com slash dan love that stuff.

Field of Greens First Up is our first interview with Congressman Jim Jordan. He talked about this controversial FISA. Listen, this thing's controversial for a reason. We have this thing called the Fourth Amendment and this other thing called the Constitution.

It's a pretty easy playbook, we should probably follow it sometime. This is a great interview where he explains the problem with this Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, where they can spy on you. Check this out, you know, folks? We have a no-squish rule on the show, so it's meant to protect you from politicians who will lie to you. But this is one of the good guys.

I've always liked Jim Jordan, he was very genuine to me when I was running for office. A guy who really cares about conservatism. And I enjoy having him on the show, and he's been a real advocate for bringing back this Jim. This thing called the consti, what's it called? the constaliche? Jim says. It's called Constitution.

Yeah, yeah, he's got, he's got a copy at his desk, Jim Jordan, Congressman.

Jim Jordan, Welcome back to the show.

I actually, I think you're working out so hard, I think you could probably step in the ring and have at it with some of those. Yeah, I mean, you're, you're in shape, and I can tell you've been hitting, hitting the weight room and everything else.

Yeah, and then when you come over and talk to, that was this great. Thank you for doing that.

So we had a good time. That's a great crowd. They love Donald Trump there, so, Congressman, I love the press. Oh yeah.

The crowd went crazy for him. So I played your your clip this morning. Defending Americans constitutional rights to not be spied on without a warrant, which should go without saying. I played it on the podcast and I just played it again on the radio before you came on. FISA reauthorizations become very controversial. Congressman if you could just give Americans out there the downsides to this. Because some might not know what's happened with this, how it's been abused to spy on people.

Donald Trump So why is this FISA reauthorization, as it current stands, a big problem?

And there's this database of information, and then they search that database using your name, American name, or your phone number, or your email. And what we're saying is you can do all the stuff you want with foreigners, in fact, we want you to, but when it comes to Americans. And you're going to do a query, which is a fancy name for a search, you're going to search Dan Bongino's phone number, email or name. In this database, this huge haystack of information.

You got to go get a warrant, and here's why, because 200. This is the Inspector general of the Justice Department telling us 278,000 times. They searched that database and didn't even follow their own rules, their own procedures in place. So we're saying, oh, new rules and procedures aren't going to be enough.

We think you should go get a warrant and we even put some exceptions in there, Dan, which says if it's an emergency. If you see that there's a communication that there's an imminent terrorist threat here, you can go ahead and search that and bypass the warrant. But we think otherwise you should get a warrant. And we didn't push back on that. But we think it's consistent with how we always do things in this great country. You don't have just one branch of government be able to search your stuff.

You have to go to a separate and equal branch of government and get a warrant in order to do that. We think it should apply here.

There's an emergency exception, there's a pursuit exception, so this isn't anything new. So asking the federal government, like you just accurately described, to say, well, if you're going to spy on an American because they're on some call with a suspicious foreigner. OK, that may be necessary, but just ask the judge and show us the probable cause.

It's actually in the constitution, sir. This isn't like something we just made up.

We're told now that it's 200,000 searches of U.S. persons done each year, 200 queries of U.S. persons. Well, here's what I want to know. How many of those searches aren't covered by the exceptions that we have in our warrant? Because if it's a big number, still, that aren't emergencies. if it's a big number, well, that should frighten us all. If it's a small number, why are you so opposed to it?

Just go to a judge and get it done for that small number of people who are covered by the exceptions. But no one will give us a number, no one will tell us how many queries, how many searches of U.S. persons are taking place that don't fall under the exceptions in the language in our Warrant Amendment.

That, to me, says a lot.

Here, it's like the swampy right and the police State left. They're all together like, Yeah, let's just keep spying on Americans, and then there's these lefties. But you know, credit where credit's due.

Some Democrats have joined hands with you and said, I just don't accept this. But here's what annoys me about the talking heads. They're lying, they keep saying, well, we can't do that. It would create an unnecessary delay.

Really, I was a federal agent. I did it, they can shut their mouths, I actually did it.

They didn't. Congressman, there is always a magistrate on duty, always. If you have, you can call them literally on the phone. Lay out your PC, probable cause on the phone and in five minutes get a warrant. Anyone telling you otherwise is absolutely categorically lying to you.

That is a fake, fake story.

Thirty five to two. Because you still have some people on the left, and most of the Democrats on their pretty far left who understand that this abuse can happen to them too. In fact, it did that two hundred seventy eight thousand number. I told you about the number of queries that were done. That didn't follow their existing rules, and now we're going to say, oh, we got new rules that they'll follow now.

Well, the two hundred, seventy eight thousand times they didn't follow their rules. It was looking at people who protested in the summer Black Lives Matter protests around the country. It was people that protesters here on January 6th, so it was both sides.

And so people understand, wow, if they can just go search your information in this database without a warrant, that's a frightening thing.

For instance, them spying on Jim Jordan, Donald Trump and Elise Stefanik is going to be, although all abhorrent, probably more damaging to our government functioning than they say. The guy on the corner selling bagels, who they think might have, you know, cheated out of ten dollars in taxes. It's not necessarily the quantity of people, it's the fact that they did this to the president of the United States and a candidate at the time. That's really hard to get your arms around.

Who are we saying? Oh, we put more rules and regulations and reporting requirements, and we enhance penalty if you violate some of this stuff. But this is, this is the FBI that not only spied on the presidential campaign, this is the FBI, it said. If you're a parent going to a school board meeting, we need to investigate you. If you're a pro-life Catholic, you're an extremist. And maybe, most importantly, Dan. This is the FBI that said. To the whistleblowers who came and talked to our committee and gave us information about those two situations, the parents of school board meetings and pro-life Catholics who gave us information about that stuff.

They were retaliated against by the FBI. And so now we say, Oh, we've given them new rules. They'll follow their new rules. They won't search this database, they won't do anything against U.S.

Citizens, Baloney, go get a warrant. That's how it works in our country.

Our intelligence agencies who perceive a threat in the Middle East or Africa, or Europe, or wherever it emanates from this place, is no restrictions on their ability to do the intelligence work. Go ahead and do it. This is for U.s citizens only, this is not for them.

Person name or this u.

S Person U...S. citizen, email address. We're saying you want to search Ahmed, someone from the Middle East who we're spying on, or someone in Europe we're spying on. Fine, do that.

But you're going to use an American citizen's identifier or their name, you got to get a warrant.

President Trump's been getting around the country. We were at the U.FC that night, I mean, you were there, that was electric. I'm always candid with people.

They were screaming, I mean, I looked around, you know, maybe one out of every hundred people, well, you know, wasn't saying. Everyone else was screaming that he was at a chick-fil-a in Georgia today. Everybody erupted around them.

How are you feeling about this election? A lot of Americans are are concerned that they may be impacted by other issues. The abortion issue is obviously hot. We've got a number of issues like inflation as well, but you're in a what used to be a swing state.

It's turned kind of red now. How are you feeling about 2024 and President Trump's chances?

So in our state, he won Ohio by eight and a half and 16, eight and a half and 20.

We feel great, and you're right, the energy that exists when he comes out of the route. He was in a date a few weeks ago, helping our Senate candidate Bernie Marino did a great job. I was in Rome, Georgia, with him the day, that same day that we came to the fight.

And it's amazing, and I would say about President Trump, he has this great line he uses. And you've been to these rallies before. And you know, he will say to the audience, They're coming after me because I'm fighting for you. In fact, in Iowa, he changed a little bit. In Iowa, he said. They're coming after my freedom because I'm fighting for yours.

And the audience knows there's a bond there because he truly is fighting for us and the things that make our country special and great. And people sense that they feel it, and the contrast between that and Joe Biden is so strong. That's why he's up in all the polls, that's why I think he's going to win.

I was at that fundraiser in Palm Beach this weekend and it was a limited group of people, no press. And the gist of his speech was exactly the same congressman, he said, four or five times. Success will be my revenge, success will be my revenge.

So anyone who thinks this is a shtick and you've got some dictator or something, you have totally, completely misread and mischaracterized the situation.

Americans are wimpy, sissy losers, Americans are winners. And he has that attitude and you feel it every time.

I can, I can send you a picture of our phones lighting up, talking about it. Americans are very, very concerned. You guys are absolutely on the moral, legal, and constitutional side of this, and America appreciates it.

Thanks for coming on.

It's not a suggestion, it's the guidebook for how the country is supposed to run. So that a government operates by consent of the governed, and not the other way around. We're not going to start making little carve outs to each one. Well, technically, the Fourth Amendment doesn't apply if the F.B.I. says they found you in a database.

And no, no, no, that's not the way it works. Go get a warrant, there's a process for that. It's not hard, as Congressman Jordan just said, it's only worked for 200 bucks.

Up next, we have another great interview for you, but let's check out our next sponsor first.

So this is a great interview. Check this out.

You know him, you love him. Kirk Cameron, Kirk Cameron, welcome back to the show. How are you my friend?

I want to get to that in a second, but I want to ask you about a couple of things. You know you were? You obviously have experience in this space, we don't have. Growing up. In the whole entertainment community, there's a big drama brewing about this.

Quiet on set, it's a show about kids networks and some alleged child abuse that had taken place over there. And I'm just wondering, Well, you know, when you were acting in the business early on, was this the kind of thing that was kind of quietly known? And or, you know, was it just hush hush? Nobody had heard about it?

I couldn't prove it because I didn't go to the back rooms of those parties. But there were the smarmy characters that are now being outed through the Nickelodeon documentary who actually worked on growing pains. And so I knew it was all around me, and I thank God I got out of there unscathed. I was not a victim of some of these individuals.

But I can tell you that one of the main characters in the documentary, who was molesting Drake Bell, was my dialogue coach. And stand in for six years on growing pains. So he worked with me and Leonardo DiCaprio when he was 14 years old, and Jeremy Miller, who played my little brother Ben on the show. And you know, these are the kinds of guys that ingratiate themselves into your life, they're kind, friendly, charming.

Nobody wants to accuse them of something so wicked. And then this stuff comes out decades later that they're actually pedophiles, child molesters and sex offenders. So it's it's really awful, and it's it's unacceptable. And we need to root this evil out now. Because there are still people working in the children's television industry who are no doubt perpetrating these kinds of things on kids today.

It's it's, you can tell, there's kind of a double meaning to what's going on. It's a little bit gross.

We look back and we go, Wow, that guy was a little. that guy was a little handsy, you know? That's a smarmy look on his face, and now you see it. But often it's difficult to detect, or at least to accuse, when you're right there in the moment.

And as far as working protections coming out, I don't know. I mean, since the last election fiasco, do we have more protections now for safe and fair elections? I don't know. Now that we see what's going on with the border, is there more protection for border crossings and security or less, I don't know.

A lot of the people that are behind these things are actually benefiting from the disaster, right?

You know, it's the TikTok era. Kids get lost in 30 second video, they need more wholesome content. Tell us about it. How did you get to this point?

What inspired you to do it? Where can people find it?

The Waltons and the Brady Bunch and all these types, we don't have this kind of stuff anymore. And so what I'm trying to do in in the sector that I'm familiar with is uproot some evil and plant some seeds of truth and goodness. So I'm producing a brand new television program that I think is the cure to the rat of Nickelodeon and Disney. These these networks have forgotten what made them successful, particularly Disney.

The OG of family entertainment has got identity amnesia, and they've, they've been possessed with this twisted, woke stuff. I want to remind them what good, wholesome family programming is like. So we're producing a show with brave books. It's called The Adventures of Iggy and Mr.

KIRK And we're saying that this is our generation's version of Mr. Rogers neighborhood, with wholesome biblical values and lessons. We've got world class, legendary puppeteers from Sesame Street, also great animation. It's hilarious.

And we've got other actors from former Disney shows and other comedians and actors, and it's going to be wonderful. And a great contrast to to to to the woke wickedness that we're seeing damage all these children.

We had some busted up cable stuff going on. So I'm flipping through channels, Does this work? does that work? and I flip across one of these kids channels?

And it's so crazy, like you watch this kid stuff now, and every boy is feminized. There's all of this quiet messaging that you and I know what to look for. But a kid, a kid's not conditioned to look for the signs they're being propagandized.

But you and I can see it right away. There's the latent under the you know what I'm talking about, under the covers kind of messaging, no pun intended. And that we've really, really got to get the kids away from that. That's agenda driven TV of 100 percent.

But now we've got videos of executives at Disney and Cartoon Network and other places that are saying they're just giddy with excitement. I mean, they just look like they're stupid punch drunk with their own excitement about how they're. Quote, you know, throwing as much queerness into everything as they possibly can. They've got little drip campaigns and then they got the flood campaigns. And what I want to say to all of our listeners is, guys, this is all happening on our watch, these are our kids.

These are our grandchildren. We've got to stop being whiners and complainers and have a vision to be winners and creators. Let's be the executive producers of our children's and grandchildren's futures. Let's get off the couch, stop crying in our chick-fil-a soup, and let's start making the headlines. That makes the left tremble and cower and begin to change up their plan because they see how effective we are being.

We've got to stand for truth and goodness. If we don't, who will?

No, I'm serious, like, How do you know? I mean, you were there? you lived it? How do you escape that?

And I mean, this is a compliment, not an insult. But how do you not become a left wing lunatic? I don't understand, like, how you escaped, and almost no one else did. Everyone else is still trapped in that vortex of crazy. What was it?

What was the was there some kind of road to Damascus moment or something?

My, my, my 18 year old kids are like, dad. These pictures in Bebop magazine of you flexing your triceps in some white suspenders is so embarrassed. You should have thought of me before you took this picture. I'm like, Son, you weren't even an idea in my mind. I hadn't even met your mother yet. And he's like, Well, still, it's selfish.

This is really messing up my my, my, my reputation with my friends. So so, uh, you know what? I did have a road to Damascus moment, so to speak. I also had protective parents who were on the set with me all the time. But at the end of the day, I came to the conclusion that this world is a beautiful place made by God. That people have screwed it up with their selfishness and pride and their their twisted ideas. Uh, myself included, until I get on my knees and I say, God help me, uh, I need your, your, your forgiveness.

I need a heart change, I need a I need an overhaul of the way I think. Line me up with what's right and what's true. Uh, the places that I disagree with you. I need to change my mind. And when I began to do that, I found myself, uh, being red pilled, coming out of the matrix and seeing reality for what it really is.

And, uh, God gave our kids and grandkids to moms and dads, not to Hollywood, not to governments and not even the churches. So we we need to do our job, uh, because our kids futures depend on it.

I mean, you, you developed your own reputation outside of that through your books and activism and your tours and the library tour. But do you think anyone else who, like I said, didn't have your level of name ID? You think they just get crushed by that system?

And so I believe that the clouds can part, that the window of heaven can open up and things happen. Because, um, the what's right and what's true is is ultimately unstoppable. And I want to be in that flow. So I would say we need more people of of character and integrity and faith in Hollywood. We need more people who aren't concerned about the big ID, uh, name ID, who get into politics, who get into, uh, sports, who get into everything. Because these are the places that are in desperate need of integrity and faith.

And I think that, uh, God can use you there in unexpected ways.

I wish more people would stand up.

And if God can do that with me, he can do it with anybody.

Com Watch Brave.

Com and help us get this show, uh, into all the different networks, rumble, everything else we want to be on every platform. Go to watch Brave..com. It's called Adventures with Iggy and Mr. Kirk.

I played Mr. Kirk.

Support our own. It's great seeing my family for Easter. But it reminded me that millions of adults every year over the age of 65, they start to lose their hearing. I'm actually starting to lose a bit of mine now. MD Hearing is an F.D.A. registered rechargeable hearing aid that costs a fraction of what typical hearing aids cost. MD Hearings Neo model costs over 90 less than clinic hearing aids.

And the Neo is MD Hearing smallest hearing aid ever. It fits inside your ear. MD Hearing recently cut their price in half. That means you get the high quality, rechargeable digital hearing aids for only $297 a pair. MD Hearing is sold over 1.5 million hearing aids.

They offer a 45 day risk free trial with a 100 money back guarantee. MD Hearing was just selected to be the hearing aid supplier for top Medicare advantage plans. So they're a brand, excuse me, you can trust. Go to shopmdhearing.com shopmdhearing.com. Use promo code Patriot to get their new $297 on your Buy a pair offer.

Plus, they're adding a free extra charging case that's a $100 value just for listeners of my show. That's Shopmdhearing.com and use our promo code Patriot and get their new $297 when you buy a pair offer. Check them out shopmdhearing..com up.

Next, we had a first time guest on the radio show and she really blew it out of the water. Carol Roth If you haven't heard of her, you're going to love this interview. She just dissects and annihilates these stupid liberal fairy tales about who pays taxes and some of the lazy bums who don't. Now, those may be my words, not hers, but it's still a great interview.

Check this out. So, I follow Carol Roth on Twitter because I really enjoy her commentary. Because I'm really fascinated by the liberal fairy tales. Especially about the economy and taxes that liberals get away, get away with because people aren't willing to do even a small bit of research, and it's offensive to people who work for a living. You want to argue with me about taxes, argue with me about taxes, but don't you dare tell me I don't pay my fair share? When you don't pay Jack Squat. As a liberal, you can shut your mouth in your pile.

Not interested in your stupid opinion? Sorry, let's get. You can follow her, by the way, on Twitter. She's at Carol with a C Carol J.

S. Roth, R. O. T. h.

I strongly recommend you do, and her latest book is You will Own Nothing, which I think I get the reference there. Carol, welcome to the show.

That's all I ask, but one of the things I also ask which I think offends you is, Don't lie about what I do pay. You know, I wasn't always a one percent guy when I got on radio, I got lucky I got this job.

I was a middle class guy, but don't lie and insist I don't pay my fair share. People in that one percent pay the by far a huge majority of the taxes out there.

And so, you know, I did some digging and I was like, why is it? Like, why do they keep saying things like, you know, billionaires pay an eight percent tax rate? Because I'm with you, Dan, you know, I come from a blue collar family, I work my way up.

I see the American Dream and I'm going, Wow, that sounds amazing because I pay a heck of.

This is how much they should have paid and would have paid in taxes, but they didn't pay in taxes. And that's eight percent. And it's like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. That's not how any of this works. And you cannot take somebody's fantasy wealth number and compare it to what someone else pays as income tax. And then come out and not only say that the president says it, but then, as you know, the corporate press all pick it up.

So if you go on to Google and you say, how much does the millionaire pay in taxes? You're going to get an eight percent. Fictional rates versus the table where we know, the top one percent of earners pay 40 almost 46 percent of the taxes, and the top 10 percent pay almost 76 percent of taxes. So it's are being intentionally fed to us.

No billionaire is paying an eight percent rate on income. It's just stunning, the stupidity. Now. I want you to think this, this through audience, along with what Carol just said, how they got this number. They're saying your unsold stock equities, whatever may be your home value, that that's your wealth, even if they were to do that, Carol. Let's just say, in some liberal, stupid fantasy land, they said, let's tax tomorrow and demand payment immediately on every bit of wealth.

And some liberals will go, that's a great idea. The stock market Carol would collapse instantly as everybody had to liquidate their holdings and sell homes to pay the tax bill. Like, do they ever think this stuff true through?

And then if everybody did that, like you said, it would completely crash the stock market and wipe out everybody's wealth. So they wouldn't actually get that money. But let's just say, let's just let's just take this to the logical conclusion, let's indulge in the fantasy. Let's say we took all of the billionaires, we took all the wealth they had, and we were able somehow to convert it. With not disrupting everything, which we know we can't do.

Do you know how long? That would fund the government for eight months, eight months one time, and then all of that money would be gone on an ongoing basis. So this is clearly not the problem, the revenue issue is clearly not the problem.

It is a spending issue that they refuse to acknowledge.

And the media knows this. But you just sparked something, you know, you're right. If we liquidated every rich person's assets, it would collapse the real estate market. it would also collapse the equities market tomorrow. The frightening thing about the media, Carol, is they know this.

You've probably read the reports I did about true social, right, of course, because it's associated with Donald Trump. They have to attack it and they're like, it's a meme stock, it's all this, whatever they say.

They say, and Donald Trump owns 54, whatever percent he owns of the company, and if he sells the stock, it would crash the value of the stock. Yeah, no kidding, Sherlock, like a wealth tax would do the same thing. You get what I'm saying.

Like, they understand this, and they lie anyway.

And we need to get the government and the Fed out of the way and create an even and fair playing field for middle and working class Americans. So we can acknowledge that and then also acknowledge the fact that the people who are supporting the government are the billionaires. They know that, and they're going to have fancy accountants and fancy lawyers and trusts and loopholes and whatnot. So that if you agree to say we should tax wealth, which is unconstitutional, whose money do you really think they're coming after? Is it those 800 billionaires that are going to fund the government for eight months?

Or is it the middle class wealth? And what happens when the house that your mom bought for a couple hundred grand and now, Zillow says, one day, it's worth a million dollars? Oh, I'm sorry, you have to pay tax on that $800,000 gain. Oh, too bad.

Looks like you're going to have to sell your house and go, oh, you can go live in one that's owned by Wall Street. This is what the plan is. This is how they're trying to make sure you do own nothing, and we don't want that.

We want you to own everything you need, to own assets, to have wealth, and this is the trick. It's why the wealth tax was in Biden's budget proposal. It's why Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have reproposed this.

They are trying to trick people. And as we've been talking about the low information, voters who don't do any research are going. Oh, yeah, that's a great idea.

She also has a book called You Will Own Nothing. I get the implication of that that is the globalist World Economic Forum dystopia. They want us not to own anything. But that kind of the title of your book parlays into something you just said as well.

The great irony of the you know, Coexist bumper sticker, you know, hashtag tolerance left fighting for the so-called little guy is. A wealth tax would probably ironically work for places like BlackRock that loves the real estate business that would come in tomorrow gladly scoop up a bunch of distressed properties like middle class. You know, Joey Bag of Donuts, who now has got to sell the home he inherited from the mom because he can't afford the tax bill. They'd be more than happy to come scoop it up. It'll more than make up for what they'd have to pay in taxes.

I mean, the great irony of the left is through regulation, and this new form of tax and regulatory socialism is. They've really empowered the people with the legal ability and connections to deal with it while screwing over the middle guy.

And I think it is critically important for Republicans to seize this opportunity. But they got to get out of their own way. I mean, you see what's going on in Congress with these omnibus bills and the spending and the numbers that you quoted through the first several months of the year. Need to get on top of this.

That's the problem, no matter who does it. No, that's not what I'm saying. I said, you just said it, you know? It's just weird how I'm not making that case to you that Republicans are innocent here. What you just said is correct.

Like, we do have to get out of our own way and be honest with the American people. One last thing, and I'll let you go. We're talking to Carol Roth. Her book is called You Will Own Nothing. I read another piece in the Wall Street Journal yesterday.

It's still up there now. In their opinion section, it's about the I.R.S. Remember they were going to hire these 80,000 new agents? Turns out they've hired like 300 or whatever. And remember what they told us, Carol, don't worry, we're only going after the billionaires and those evil millionaires with the monocle and the big top hat.

Well, it turns out, if you read the report, that the overwhelming majority of new audits, Carol unsurprisingly, were for people making under $200,000 a year. Why? Because same reason people rob banks, because that's where the money is.

Yes.

I don't care. And so, of course, they're going to do that. Just like when they decided to lower the reporting threshold on Venmo and Etsy transactions to $600. And they're like, Oh, we're doing this to go after the billionaires? Yes, all of the billionaires with their $600 VenMo accounts.

That's another great example. I'm going to incorporate that in the repertoire. Unfortunately, I'm running out of time. I want to get one more plug in for your book. She's Carol Roth on Twitter.

Carol J.

S. Roth, and the book is called You will own nothing about this whole globalist push to get you to be a sucker for big business where they can rent you stuff, so you will own absolutely nothing. Carol, we'd love to have you back.

You were terrific just like you are in your Twitter account. Thanks for coming on. we appreciate it.

And if you read the tweet, there is no way, if you have a functioning neuron in your brain, that you would believe Joe Biden was telling you the truth. They just made it up, they just did no, yet, they just made it up.

There is no one paying that rate, no one they made that up up. Next, a much requested rant.

Most of you seem to like, I got a lot of feedback on this one, so stay tuned. We'll get to the next sponsor then you hear that.

Gen you sell Let me tell you about Gen 90, the latest breakthrough in skin care from our friends at Gen You Sell Skin care. Well, you know, can also help work on those annoying bags and puffiness under your eyes instantly. Yes, those bags under your eyes. From lack of sleep, being overworked, stress, and even those seasonal allergies that come with spring weather instantly help reduce the appearance of looking older.

Anywhere you use it, around the eyes, look young, forehead, crow's feet, laugh, lines, even the chin. It can start working in seconds. Now Get Gen. You sell skin cares, classic under eye bags and puffiness serum will make you look all those bags and get rid of those order and their luxurious.

Gen You sell XV Collagen Builder moisturizer with vitamin C and hyaluronic acid, a pure base for stunning results day after day. Check it out. Paula loves it. Go to Gen You Sell.com right now for incredible packages over 50 off during Gen You Sell Spring sale results guaranteed or your money back.

Let's get an extra 10 off automatically. Apply to checkout when you go to Gen You Sell.com Slash Dan G E N U C e L.com Slash Dan. Order now, get a free spa box gift and free shipping Gen You Sell.com Slash Dan.

Gen you sell.

Com slash Dan. Thanks Jenny, so we appreciate it. I started the show last week talking about the abortion issue from an angle that I hope helps you talk about it. This is really important.

The messaging we've been losing on abortion for a long time, but life should matter. If it doesn't, there's no purpose to our party. Check this out. Folks do not get into a debate with a leftist about abortion until this criteria is met.

You ready?

Coming out, firing today. If the leftist is not willing to state what their position is, do not debate them, don't do it.

Why would you, you know, if we're going to get into a debate, correct? Let's say, let's make it. Pull the abortion issue out for a second, because I get it. Emotions and antenna go up, right. Ding ding, ding, ding ding.

And people that all of a sudden, the emotions cloud everyone's judgment. Let me ask you a question divorce from the abortion topic. For a moment, say we want to debate a sports thing. Who was a better center?

A Hakeem Olajuwon or David Robinson, right? If I'm going to get into that debate with you, then you have to tell me what your position is. Who was the best center, right? If we're going to debate who the best center was, and I tell you in advance, well, I think Hakeem Olajuwon was the best I've ever seen. The debate can't end with well, and your opinion is, Oh, I don't have one.

Well, then we're not debating over who the best center is correct. I stated an opinion and you said, absolutely nothing, Jim. Why are you laughing? It's true, but it's weird with abortion. How Republicans?

The only reason I'm bringing this up is I want to start in a different spot. But someone sent me a Facebook message Dan, what would you do if your daughter was raped? Oh, that's a really awful question, but I understand.

I understand it's a really awful thing to send my way because I know what you're doing, but OK, fine, let me ask, let's just start first.

So you've started with obviously a crisis pregnancy and the most horrific example around, so let's just turn around on you. So you're suggesting you're you're willing to accept what? You're willing to accept that you don't want abortion, but you're only you'll make an exception for what rape, incest and life of the mother.

Is that what you're saying? I can almost guarantee you, the people debating this with me, we'll say, No, no, no, no, that's. I don't want any limits on OK. Well, if you don't want any limits on abortion and you're the radical, not me. Now to the lady who sent it to me, I don't think that's her position.

She sounds to me like a Republican who supports basically what Trump's position is for exceptions, and a lot of people have those exceptions. I personally don't.

But that's a horrible example to send my way. It's a crisis pregnancy, and unfortunately, there's no easy way out of hard decisions. But if you believe in a principle, the principle should matter, and life matters to me.

But it's really unfair to get into an asymmetric debate with liberals who aren't willing to stake out a position. You know what? I may play this again later. Jim, I'm sorry I got to go here because this is on my mind now.

Cut seven for me Tarloff thing Jessica Tarloff, who's a leftist, she's a liberal. She was on last night on Fox News with Brett Baier. Brett's a journalist.

He's not an opinion guy, he has opinions, but he's not an opinion guy, he does the news. So Brett has Jessica Tarloff on a panel. And I want you to watch again how they always frame these arguments in terms of crisis pregnancies in the worst case scenario. And yet when you ask them, OK, I'm willing to discuss that.

I will stake a position out on incest, rape, life of the mother, life of the mother, I think, is pretty. Which is, by the way, exceedingly, exceedingly rare, but if it's a legitimate medical case, I think a lot of people understand that a horrible decision is going to have to be made. OK, it's exceedingly rare.

And ectopic pregnancies are not abortions. the baby and the mother would die in an ectopic pregnancy. So don't even bring that up. That's a red herring. That's not a real argument.

There's no state where an ectopic pregnancy you'd be dead.

But it's amazing to me how again, when you say, OK, I'm willing to discuss that with you. I've already staked my position out, and why? What is your position? Watch what happens when Tarloff is put back on her heels and asked, basically to defend the position because she doesn't have their position.

Basically, is abortion up until and including after birth. Some of these folks here listen to this.

The position now, which ironically, they're trying to pin the radical label on you in this sick, perverse word association game.

The position with the Democrat Party now, which is mainstream, is no limitations on abortion at all.

But the odd thing is, this isn't even about abortion anymore, this is about straight up killing babies that have been born.

Jim Cuddy, If you would remember this back in 2019.

Former Governor of Virginia Ralph Northam. He was the guy either in the Ku Klux Klan hood or the Blackface. We still haven't determined which one. I'd love for him to clear that up. No, no, I was the Ku Klux Klan guy.

By the way, if you think I'm making this up in some kind of sick, perverse joke, sadly, tragically, I am not. You can actually look that up yourself. Here's Ralph Northam, on a D...C. area radio station back in 2019, having a conversation about this. This really happened, in case some of you missed this.

Having a conversation about a fully born infant on a table and how the doctor and the woman should have a discussion about about what, what to do with it.

What's? I don't know, what's the discussion?

You notice how they don't want to talk about what the discussion is. It should be kill that baby, what else would you be talking about? But watch how he talks about this so cavalierly, like this is not an insane thing to be discussing.

Check this out.

It's not a clump of cells, it's not a pile of hair and nails, it's a baby on a table. What exactly is the discussion?

What any of you lefties in the and by the way, I know you're peeing in your diapers, lefties clawing at your faces. I know you're obsessed with killing babies, like, I get it, I know that's your thing, so I know you're all upset right now.

I know you're scratching at your own faces, clawing at your skin, scratching yourselves, howling like I could already sense it because you're all maniacs. I'm just. I've staked my position out on abortion, have I not? I believe in protecting life from conception to a natural death.

Because I believe life is important, that's my clear as day. You don't have to agree with it. That's the beautiful. Part of a constitutional republic is you are absolutely free to make a political, and you can even try a moral case against that. I'm willing to entertain it.

I'm just asking you, what's your position? What discussion is Ralph Northam and the Democrats talking about? What discussion are they talking about? When? A fully formed third trimester baby?

You're just killing the baby and, like, sucking them out. What discussion is that?

It's amazing how they paint us as the radicals, right?

They paint us as the radicals. Now, the Republican Party has a fairly.

Broad view on certain abortion issues. Not all, which obviously, I mean, the President Trump, I'm a I'm a supporter, have been. I think he's done more for the pro-life cause than a lot of talkers. But we do disagree on certain bedrock principles on it. We just we don't disagree on the end game, we just disagree, disagree on the path together, but that's OK.

We're allowed to disagree, Where is the disagreement on the Democrat side? Where are the Democrats? I'm asking, folks, rumble, folks, Facebook chatsters, everyone send me a mainstream Democrat. I'm not talking about some like Wackadoodle or send me a mainstream Democrat up on Capitol Hill.

And what their reasonable limits on abortion are? I'd love to see it. Are there any?

Folks do not engage, do not lose this debate, this is the one debate. Remember, back to the Senate campaigns I'm not even going to get into, but you know what I'm talking about. Where Republican candidates have been destroyed on this issue over and over again, and why? It's because they debate on leftist terms.

That is a huge mistake. You are always playing in a way game every single time, you are playing like a basketball game in Duke's Arena. Like, your chances of winning go down just because you're playing on their court and the students are screaming.

You should never do that, you don't have to do it. When a leftist wants to debate you on abortion, your first question should be a simple one What are we debating? I will state for you my stance.

No, no, zip it, shut your piehole sandwich holster, shut it up.

Soup cooler, so it shut. I'm going to tell you my position, you tell me your position, and then we can debate everything in between. The leftists never do that.

We fall in the trap all the time. They start with the most horrendous example in the away field, and you're expected to then start from there and work your way back. We're not doing that, we're not doing that.

They start with a rape and incest example that's going to horrify any sane human being. Keep in mind, these are extremely limited cases. Your first question should be, Well, OK, what's your position then on limits? That's your exception. So, just to be clear, you're against abortion, except for the example you just stated.

You just gave me a horrible example of an incestual rape. horrible, horrendous, unspeakably horrible. you gave me that.

I accept your example, even though you haven't put a name on it or anything. I'm not saying that, but you've given me this example. OK, what is your take on that? So you're against abortion outside of that?

So just to be clear, if I had agreed on that, I don't believe in exceptions to life, but if I had agreed and said, OK, I believe in exceptions. For rape and incest, a legitimate life of the mother, I think, is pretty standard, but it's very, again, exceedingly rare. So the rape and incest example. If I concede that point, do you agree with me that abortion is a bad thing? No, I don't.

You don't, so why'd you bring up the rape and incest example? I don't understand.

Why'd you bring that up? Oh, to stir people's emotions, because this really isn't about rape and incest. You just want to terminate babies lives in the womb because you just said you have no limitations at all.

You see how you're back on the home court then.

Leftists know abortion's an abomination. Folks, they're not stupid, they know it. They do, trust me, they know it.

They just look for justifications, that's why they put those examples out there. But when you turn it around on them and you say, OK, well, if I were to concede that point and I don't would, then you support any limits on abortion. Watch what they do.

Spitting, clawing, screaming, foaming, tearing, pulling their own hair out. What is that trichotillomania or something? Because they know you've got them pinned down, that they just want to terminate babies lives in the womb.

The exceptions to that mean nothing, they're just emotional examples for them, doesn't mean anything to them. there's no red line for them whatsoever.

We're not going to win anything in the debate space on any issue if we're constantly doing it on the left's terms.

Wait, digest that a second. I'll give you an example of what I mean. The opening segment, I was talking about how this abortion debate is never discussed on a level playing field, it's discussed on a tilted playing field. Where the running backs for the left are running downhill at like a 50-degree angle, and you're expected to stop them.

I don't care, it can be a 150-pound running back and a 300-pound lineman. I'm really sorry, it doesn't matter. The running back is still going to win because it's running downhill at a lineman who's not going to be able to get their footing.

But it's a 300-pound lineman. It doesn't matter. It's not about who has more power or force, it's the mechanic of force vectors on a tilted playing field. The outcome has already been determined.

The only question is, how far does the lineman fall over?

Every single debate on an issue of prominence in America is discussed on the left's tilted playing field, where they're the running back running downhill. Why? Because the media are goon hack garbage activists who tilt the playing field with euphemistic language that we incorporate into our debate. A perfect example, which I'm going to get to today, is the argument over canceling student loans. You see what I just did.

Some of you got that. Joe Biden keeps talking about canceling student loans, and I'm listening to even some conservative outlets, and they're like, Joe Biden has canceled more loans he has.

Really, he's canceled loans.

Yeah, but I thought Biden canceled it. Oh, no, the bank's going to get their money back. how? oh, you're going to pay for it?

Oh, so, it wasn't canceled, it was transferred.

Oh, come on, come on, boy. No, no, I'm asking you as a matter of reason and logic. The debt was not canceled, correct? somebody paid the debt off to the bank that loaned the money to the student, right?

Who paid it off? Oh, we did the taxpayers, so it wasn't canceled, it was transferred.

But did you notice how the left and the media goon hack garbage people? They tilt the playing field so that the lefty running back is running downhill. And it doesn't matter if it's a competent argument or not, the outcome is already predetermined. You ask someone if they want their student debt canceled.

People are like, Yeah, that sounds great, and then you say to them. Or do you want your debt transferred to other people who are going to pay for you to go to school? Maybe the person who's getting the benefits of that money will say yes, but everyone else will be like, Oh, no, no, I didn't sign up for that. What do you mean? Transferred to me? Oh, I thought canceled meant canceled.

I got enough to pay. No, you're paying, no, you're going to pay for their school. You see how the abortion debate is the exact same thing.

They start with a tilted playing field. Oh, what do you want? A 12-year-old who's raped by a family member? You want to force birth? And everybody's like, I don't know what to say, How do I?

The first words out of your mouth, one should be calm.

You should say it's a horrible example you just gave unimaginable, but it's interesting you started there, so let's start there. So you're talking about rape and incest, OK?

Those are horrible examples. If I were to capitulate on that, I'm not suggesting I am, but I'm just curious because we need to get a starting point. Where you are? You asked me, I'm going to ask you. If I were to capitulate on. That's an awful example. And I say, I did capitulate and said, Kill, you can kill that baby, right?

Would you say, OK, all other abortions are definitely not? You know, it's not a good idea. We shouldn't be killing babies in the womb. No, I wouldn't. So why did you bring up that example?

Because it's horrible. we agreed. It's horrible. I just said, I just told you that. Unimaginably horrible. I agree with you.

But why did you bring up that example? If that's not an exception? You just support abortion, I understand why you brought that up.

I'm missing your point, your point is what rape and incest are horrible. We agree, that's not a that's a universally agreed upon point.

I don't understand what point you think you're making that's not already made. That's horrible, awful, unspeakably tragic. We get it, but you brought that up in terms of abortion.

But you support all abortions, not just that, so why did you bring that up? You see how all of a sudden look, all of a sudden, they're running back down 50 degrees, 45 degrees, 40, 35, 20. Oh, all of a sudden he's on flat ground.

Folks, listen, I don't do a lot good, OK? I wanted to be a doctor, I didn't get into medical school, I ran for office, I lost.

I wrote a whole book about failures.

I wanted to be the center fielder for the Yankees, I didn't even make it to A-ball.

There's not a lot of things I can do well, but I'm going to tell you something after I don't know what it is now. 15 14 years doing talk radio, fill-ins, talk radio, podcasting, 20-plus hours a week of content. A Fox News show, Fox News guest appearances, debating people on my own show. We had a segment on my show on Fox called The Rebuttal, where we brought lefties on unscripted. We didn't bring them on with some script.

Oh, we're going to talk about this, this, and then we gave them the general topic, but unscripted. Why? Because I'm not afraid of lefties.

Why? Because folks, when you know their tricks and you understand how they do what they do, and you understand how they try to predetermine the outcome of the debate. By playing word games in the beginning, when you learn to dismantle that trick, I promise you, you have my word, you will never lose a debate again. They do it everywhere. Oh, what, you don't want to cancel student debt?

Let's talk about that. Um, I don't want to cancel student debt because debt's never canceled. You're making an argument that doesn't exist, right? Can we agree that the money doesn't go away? Somebody paid it.

You notice how right away they're like. But the oatmeal God took a break from sniffing kids to tell us the debt was canceled. He may have said that I'm sorry you're dumb enough to have fallen for that. But what happens to the money? Student takes money from bank, pays for college to better life, makes more money?

Bank gets money back, Bank gets money back from who, oh, us, the taxpayer, so it's not canceled, it's transferred to us.

So the word you want is transferred, correct? Now, let's debate now. Here goes the battlefield 50 inclined 45 40, 35 20. Look, now we're back to a flat plane.

So we're arguing about transferring student loans that benefit a person to other taxpayers. Correct? Now, tell me your position, you're for that, you're for. Taxpayers paying for students to go to college, who will benefit from said college, yet the taxpayers have to pay for it. Correct, That's your, I'm just saying, that's your, you know? You see how easy it is to debate the moron class.

Folks, everything they say and do in a one-on-one debate scenario is based on a false premise. When you dissect the initial false premise, there is no argument going forward. I'll give you, I mean, just throw a topic at me, taxes. They're always like, folks, it's about fundamental fairness.

It is here, 50 degrees, running backs running down already. Who doesn't, folks? Who doesn't like fairness? Argument's over, argument's over before it started.

Because if you accept the premise, this is about fairness, who the hell argues against fairness? Jim, am I crazy? No one was fair to you? I'm arguing for. what unfairness?

You cannot accept the premise.

Really, it's about fairness. What's a fair tax rate for someone who's relatively well? Give me, give me the rate. What do you think they should pay?

Stossel's like, Well, they already paid 35.

Well, we're talking about it. You see how the arguments automatically it immediately fails, because no leftist argument, and I mean, none, is based on logic or reason.

It is based on a faulty, pretextual premise that when you dismantle the premise, the entire argument falls apart.

There is not a single topic. The left doesn't do this on debate. Your leftist friends use the trick I'm showing you, folks, I promise you on my reputation, you will never lose an argument.

They are morons, everything they say is based on a faulty health care. We should have government run, everybody should have health care, right? Who's going to argue against that?

Folks, who's going to argue against giving sick people health care? The answer is no one.

So you just ask a simple question. We're not debating that a moral society should take care of the sick. You just made that up, We're debating how to do it. Correct. You're suggesting a system of rationing and price controls, while I'm suggesting a system that is health care freedom, correct?

All of a sudden. I'm not going to say rationing, but the government's going to control it. So there's no price mechanism. So when there's no price mechanism to allocate these resources, there's only one other mechanism to use rationing, correct?

You understand basic economics, right? You can either price a doctor's time or you can ration. Is there a third way? Explain to us the third way so I can grant you the Nobel Prize in economics.

Oh, you can't. Sorry, you're a lib. I get it, you're a lib. You didn't really think any of this through.

You thought you were going to be debating an idiot today? I understand you're just a moron. You're some dumb jock. It's fascinating.

I've been on the air 14 years, I've never lost a debate to liberals on the air. They come in with P.h.Ds and all this other stuff. The only debate. It was one time. Austin Goolsbee Because I made a mistake on this immigration tax thing, which no one even caught, which is bizarre, but I'm always fair.

It's the only time I even made a mistake debating liberals because they're all so dumb. And believe me, folks, it's not because I've got some gift. They're just morons. When you understand every single thing they do is built around what Jim says. Common sense is a gift. Clearly by the lack of it on the left.

I think you may be right, Jim. But when you understand that everything they do is based on a faulty premise, and you dissect the premise before proceeding into the debate, they collapse. Like Tarloff did with Bret Baier, she didn't know what to say, she was expecting Bret Baier to get in some. Oh my gosh.

Late term raping is horrible. Does it got to make sense? Yeah, it's all hard, we get it.

We all agree.

Oh, none. So it's not about rape or incest, just to be clear, you just want abortion, whatever. You just brought that up to emotionally rile people up, why else would you bring it up if it's not an exception to you?

You don't want exception.

The student loan thing is no different once you accept the leftist premise that debt can be canceled, when you know it is mathematically impossible to cancel debt. If I lend Jim money and Jim doesn't pay me back, the debt wasn't canceled, I paid it.

If I lend Jim money and he pays me back, the debt wasn't canceled either. Jim paid it. There is no cancellation, there's no money fairy.

Why in left and right wing media are people talking about debt cancellation? Because the media dominates the national narrative, the left wing goons right wing media. Then picks it up, sadly, and runs with the euphemistic talk, and the argument's already over. When you talk about debt transferring to taxpayers, which is the accurate, logical, reasonable way to talk about exactly what this program is.

All of a sudden, it takes on a different tone. Transfer, transfer to who? To you, the taxpayer, I don't want to pay this guy student loans.

I thought they were canceled. No, no, there's no such thing, that's not a real thing.

You notice how they are paying it anyway, but Jim says, Aren't they paying it? Of course, they're paying it anyway, but remember, they're then paying a fraction, They're then paying pennies on it.

So it mathematically works out great for them.

But it doesn't matter, what matters is that you alter the premise. And once you change the premise to logic and reason, and you steal away from them the pretextual argument, they never have anywhere to go. Folks, I'm telling you, tell me a topic, tell me a topic, and I'll tell you how the left just owns the debate before it even starts.

The school choice thing, Are you going to steal money from public schools? What do you mean? steal it? who's taking it? Well, they're taking money out of public schools.

They are, how are they? One, the money to public schools has been relatively consistent, if not going up, since the 70s. You know that, right, you're a liberal.

You're supposed to be a smart guy, but even assuming your dopey premise was right, who's stealing it? The parents who are taking their kids out of schools they paid for, because the schools are failing their kids and sending them to schools that work. You call that stealing. They're stealing their own money.

Explain, explain to me. The argument instantly falls apart right there.