Get ready to hear the truth about America on a show that's not immune to the facts with your host, Dan Bongino.

You know, folks, we we all think for ourselves, right? You are the smartest audience out there. I know, because I communicate with you. I read your responses on Parler, Facebook, Twitter, elsewhere. I see your emails, brilliant, brilliant responses. Sometimes some of the show content is dictated by what you respond back to me. But we think for ourselves, we don't need media personalities, me or otherwise, telling you how to think my job is to give you the facts, what we know sometimes my opinion about the facts, but it's not designed to in any way tell you to think like automatons.

We're not the Borg from Star Trek. I want you may be saying, where's this coming from? I'm going to cover this on the show today. There was a an opening monologue by Tucker Carlson last night on Fox. And it's just resulted in this just back and forth between, you know, like a team tucker and not Team Tucker and Team Fox and not Team Fox and pro Trump. And we're going to put that we're going to stick with the facts today because the facts, man, I got that.

And I've got the two things out of yesterday's press conference that really you should take away the most important things. Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis and Sidney Powell brought up their critical and they're real and they're not. Conspiracy theories like the left like to say today show by Express FPM. We got a loaded show today. Don't go anywhere. Express RPM. Protect your online activity from prying eyeballs. Get a VPN, go to express VPN Dotcom Bongino today. Welcome to Dan Bongino, show producer.

Joe, in your worst 1960s game show voice. How are you today? Fine, sir.

Well I'm doing doing well Dan, because it's Friday. Yeah, that's no conspiracy theory.

That's that's definitely not. It is most definitely Friday, right. Yeah. I did that once in a while. Feeling good today. Good to see a good sign. Yes sir. Yeah. Yeah that is right. Yeah. No I slept great last night. I was out totally out. Like walking dead zombie like out. Oh pull out of like shake me. She, she took the iPhone, put it under my nose. Yeah. OK, I see, I see a little bit of a wind coming out of your house.

You're OK. That's how tired I was yesterday. All right. Let's get right to it. Today's show brought to you by our friends.

The American mind. American mind. Yeah. You remember them. Remember that article I discussed on the show, The Coming Coup by Michael Anthon, that show that went nuclear leveled. Sixty two viral. Yeah, that was at the American mind. The content over there is absolutely spectacular. I go to it every day. It's my go to when I prepped the show. The information's there. It's absolutely incredible. It's absolutely incredible. Also our spot on Mike O'Lantern, his article was.

It's up to the it's all about the American mind, go check it out today. It's a terrific website. If you're not a reader, you should be. It's a publication of the Claremont Institute, which Trump awarded the National Humanities Medal for its work in educating Americans about our founding principles and how they still provide the answers to the questions driving today's politics. The content is amazing. Again, it's one of my go to is every day. These guys are smart and legit.

They've been leading the debate about the idea of driving the new American right. Remember, our National Review used to claim to be the publication that defined conservatism. Well, now that's these guys over at the American mind. They're the new conservatism. Their articles are hard hitting. They're the real deal. So I use them on the show. The American Mind is publishing a serious publishing a series of articles, tracking it from every angle. This ongoing coup we're seeing from the Democrats here, just search the word coup and you'll see they've got a piece up there right now.

And who are the real winners? I'll give you a hint. It's the tech oligarchy and it's China. There's so much on there. But the best way to take it all is to subscribe to American Minds weekly newsletter, The Roundup. Here's how you do it. You'll receive all the week's top content articles, podcasts, video delivered directly to your inbox. Go to American Mind Dog. That's American Mind Dog and subscribe to the newsletter today. American Mind Dog.

Subscribe to the newsletter today.

All right, Joe, let's go. Is nice.

So. I debated. Deliberated long and strong about how to handle this today, because we have this I don't know, we have this thing on on the right, we tend to fall into sometimes this Borg like mentality where, you know, we have to jump into one camp or another camp rather than just digesting what people say and thinking for ourselves, what we think for ourselves here, because you're the smartest, smartest audience in the business. And I don't care what anybody says, I do what I want because it's my show.

It's not an accident that I found the guy by the name of Dan Bongino to host the Dan Bongino show. It's my show. We do what I want. Is it Vietnam? Sydney pal Rudy Giuliani did a press conference yesterday and there was some really big and bold allegations thrown out there. Of a large conspiracy to overthrow the results of the 2020 election, there was a lot of stuff in there yesterday. Tucker Carlson covered it on his show last night, Sydney Powell was one of the attorneys you're all familiar with Sydney.

I've had her on the show. She was General Mike Flynn's lawyer. She's now working for the Trump team and made a really serious boatload of allegations yesterday. So Tucker Carlson went on last night and said, listen, I invited her on the show. These are some bold claims and we're going to address what happened on both sides, going to give you Cindy Palin's response to a second. But we need to get to the facts here and not get into like who said what?

Who says that about Ms. It's about what happened. It's no time for personality wars. So check out the Tucker coverage of the press conference that generated all kinds of controversy last night.

Here's part one. All of which brings us to the bombshell at the center of today's press conference that was delivered by former prosecutor Sydney Powell was also served as General Mike Flynn's lawyer. For more than a week, Powell has been all over conservative media with the following story. This election was stolen by a collection of international leftists who manipulated vote tabulating software or to flip millions of votes from Donald Trump to Joe Biden. The other day on television, Powell said of Trump that when the fraud is finally uncovered, quote, I think we'll find he had at least 80 million votes.

In other words, rigged software stole about seven million votes in this election. Here's some of what Powell said today about the software. One of its most characteristic features is its ability to flip votes. It can set and run an algorithm that probably ran all over the country to take a certain percentage of votes from President Trump and flip them to President Biden, which we might never have uncovered. Had the votes for President Trump not been so overwhelming in so many of these states that it broke the algorithm that had been plugged into the system and that's what caused them to have to shut down in the States.

They shut down in wall.

Think about that. So Sydney Powell is alleging there at the presser yesterday, there was an algorithm built into the voting system in many states, an algorithm basically preset maybe figuring I'm trying to kind of sum this up and easy to understand way that, you know, Trump may win by one percentage point. So we'll have to flip this many votes. But the Trump turnout and his vote count was so high and he did so well that it broke the algorithm.

There was a last minute panic to get votes in and mess with the algorithm at the last minute. That panic, that panic caused them to get careless and that's how they discovered it. That's kind of in essence, what she's alleging there. Makes sense. That's a that's an enormous allegation. Yeah. Obviously, that allegation would be, as was described by Tucker in this court. I'm going to play next, probably accurately so as the crime of the century.

I've spoken to Sidney Powell, I know Sidney Powell well, I know Sidney Sidney Powell in a personally and professionally throughout our time, and I've known Sidney for a long time. Sidney hasn't disappointed us yet. Does she have the data to back this up in court? We're going to find that out. The question now is that she owe it to anyone, including people on television. She doesn't owe it to anybody. She owes it to the courts to produce that evidence in court if she can back it up.

But it's not automatically illegitimate because it wasn't produced for a host on any show, this show, Tucker's show or anyone else. Well, apparently Tucker Carlson invited her on the show, Cydney Powell and she want to come on. So, again, this was part two. This is the part that generated that was the allegation part where Tucker put it out there. This is the part of Tucker's show that's generating a whole lot of the social media back and forth today, which candidly, I think is a distraction.

We have to keep our eyes on the prize. Folks, check this out.

We took Sidney Powell seriously. We no intention of fighting with her. We've always respected her work. We simply wanted to see the details. How could you not want to see them? So we invited Sidney Powell on the show. We would have given her the whole hour. We would have given her the entire week, actually, and listened quietly the whole time at rapt attention. That's a big story. But she never sent us any evidence, despite a lot of requests, polite requests, not a page when we kept pressing.

She got angry and told us to stop contacting her. When we checked with others around the Trump campaign, people in positions of authority, they told us Powell was never given them any evidence either in order to provide any today at the press conference. Powell did say that electronic voting is dangerous and she's right. We're with her there. But she never demonstrated that a single actual vote was moved illegitimately by software from one candidate to another. Not one.

Sydney Powell disputes that. We're going to play her side of this in a moment. But, folks, let me add my two cents here. For what it's worth, my opinion, you can choose to run with it, discard it, whatever you choose. But this is my opinion. I just want to be crystal clear. Sydney Powell owes it to us and the court system in Sydney. Powell is good and damn ready if she feels she has a case.

She has no obligation whatsoever to make that case on cable news or elsewhere. None. Not on this show or anyone else's show. And if she doesn't have a case, then it's her reputation on the line, she'll have to live with that. But she doesn't owe it to me, Tucker, Fox News to Dan Bongino, show CNN, MSNBC or anyone else. She owes it to the voters, she owes it to the court system if she's going to file a case.

And if not, and it turns out that information is inaccurate, then she should retracted later. But if it's not inaccurate and she has evidence to back that up. There, maybe we should give her a little bit of space. I know we're running out of time, I get it, December 8th is the safe harbor date where the states are going to have to certify for their December 14th deadline to announce their electors for for whatever whoever won the popular vote within those states and their and their presidential electors.

I get that. But if she has a case, she owes it to the courts to put that case out, that she doesn't owe it to us. I want to be crystal clear on that. Somebody's taking anybody's side. That's me telling you with the damn facts are here and they matter. Let's keep our eyes on what's going on here. These are serious allegations. Now, Sydney Powell appeared this morning, that was from last night, appeared this morning on Maria Bartiromo show on Fox and gave her response to the allegations by Tucker Carlson.

He was with Sydney Powell. Powell told Excuse me, Maria Bartiromo. Check this out.

All right, Sydney, I want you to respond to what Tucker Carlson said last night. Sydney, I don't know if you watched it, but Tucker Carlson said that he had invited you on his show to share evidence of the software flipping votes. And he said you got angry and refused to provide evidence for your claims of voting software flipping votes. How do you respond to Tucker Carlson? Did you get angry with the show because they texted you and asked you to please provide evidence of what you're alleging?

No, I didn't get angry with the request to provide evidence, in fact, I sent an affidavit to Tucker that I had not even attached to a pleading yet to help him understand the situation. And I offered him another witness who could explain the mathematics and statistical evidence far better than I can. I'm not really a numbers person, but he was very insulting, demanding and rude. And I told him not to contact me again in those terms.

Clearly, both of those stories can't be true. Either one side of it that no evidence was presented is true or the other side of it where evidence was presented is true, but those two. They can't exist, coexist at the same time. We'll see where that goes. But I want to encourage you before I move on to, again, more facts and data here, keep your eyes on the prize and let's not get distracted by making stories about what these stories aren't about.

These stories are about the most important election in our lifetime. And if there was significant enough fraud or malfeasance to question the results we have now, that is the question. That is the only question that matters. When she's ready. We're ready to hear it. Now, ladies and gentlemen, these claims that there are no evidence of fraud are utterly absurd. The press conference yesterday with Rudy Giuliani, Sydney and others, Jenna, Alice, there was there were numerous data points of evidence presented yesterday.

Our good friend Amber Athey at The Spectator has an article up which is going to be in the show notes today. Go to Bon China.com newsletter if you'd like to access our newsletters, show notes the same thing. There is evidence, actually, the spectator Rudy Giuliani gave examples of voter fraud during his presser at RNC headquarters by an bhairavi. Folks, again. The tendency by some weak kneed Republicans to immediately fall in line with acceptable media narratives on the left, I have to be honest, is quite pathetic to watch.

It's not you. It's not you and our audience. But you know who exactly who I'm talking about. Rudy Giuliani yesterday, I'll get to a screenshot from this piece in a second, presented piles of sworn affidavits. Now I get it for the media types on the left and the weak kneed jellyfish, no backbone Republicans who don't have an ounce of integrity left here. Sworn affidavits when an affiant signs his or her name and swears under oath the testimony they're giving in that affidavit is true is evidence.

I don't know if you've never been involved with a civil court case, criminal case, if you're just totally unfamiliar with legalese 101. But an affidavit sworn, a statement saying you witnessed some form of malfeasance or criminality is evidence. Please, let's not take the Marie Harf approach. You always go to line for everything is you don't have evidence. She just doesn't know what evidence is. I actually worked in the space when you go to court and you testify as a criminal investigator, if affidavits by affiant and people are evidence.

You can cross-examine them. You can do what you like, but they are in fact, evidence. When I went in to collect counterfeit bills on a counterfeit case, we call them run outs, hey, you got a counterfeit run out, go to that 7-Eleven and have a counterfeit bill. They got you would get a sworn statement from the owner or the guy or the woman who took the bill at the 7-Eleven. I went to a lot of my time, so I bring it up.

They were all over Long Island. That's where the counterfeit appeared a lot, unfortunately. And they would say yes, on such and such a date in a time, this individual came in and had to be this bill that's evidence. If someone in a voting location witnessed this behavior, they deem potential malfeasance, truckloads of ballots appeared at 4:00 in the morning, they were all for Joe Biden. They were pristine. They were not handled. Does that mean those are fraudulent ballots?

Not necessarily. Could it be could is that evidence? It certainly is. From Ambers. So we don't buy into the media. There was no evidence presented yet. There was actually a lot. You're just a media moron who's trying to get who's trying to advance a narrative, not advance the truth. And I'm tired of it. Quote. Giuliani did, in fact, present evidence of voter fraud today, but many people simply didn't want to hear it.

He cited multiple Americans, one by name, who've signed sworn affidavit stating they witnessed some type of fraud, whether it was pro Trump ballots being thrown out without cause, ballots being backdated to before the election, poll workers being told not to ask voters for identification and more. As Giuliani helpfully pointed out, affidavits are considered evidence in a court case. Whether you agree or disagree with them is a different question, and it's reasonable that not all people who sign their names would be willing to go public.

If you want to hear more of the evidence that was presented, just watched the first hour of the press conference. We can't fall into this trap here, where, again, the media starts to dictate the acceptable narrative of the day and anyone not complying with their narrative and their gaslighting is deemed not allowed in. Polite company, double barreled middle finger to you guys. We'll talk about what we want. We'll address these affidavits one by one and determine if they are, in fact, verifiable or not.

Well, tell me there's no evidence. You damn well know if this was evidence of Hillary Clinton votes in 2016 that were thrown out or Donald Trump votes that showed up at four o'clock in the morning in suspicious garbage bags, as Rudy alleged yesterday in the press conference, garbage bags, they had votes in garbage bags. Is that true? If it's true, isn't it worth entertaining? Not if those were if those were Donald Trump votes that showed up that way, not in ballot boxes, but in garbage bags.

I think Democrats would have a bunch of questions and the hack media. But of course, because they think Donald Trump lost its move on big time. Move on, folks. Move on. I'm not moving on. I'm not interested in moving on. And to all the left is trying to intimidate me, attacking my Facebook page, attacking my website, attacking these Outbrain people, canceling our ad, which is trying to get me to stop talking about it.

I will not. I will not comply no matter what. There's nothing you can do to me. Do you understand that there is no price you can put on nothing. Nothing, I will do what I want and talk about what I want. There's nothing you can do the more you try to intimidate the show, I know exactly what you're doing, the more I'll double down. All right. I need to my second sponsor. But on the other side of this, I want to I want to stick to the facts here because this matters because you're not going to get it from the media.

There were two things said it. Yes, we already addressed Sidney Powles, the bigger accusation of some global conspiracy, which if she has the evidence, we need to see it. But when she's ready to present it. She's making a court case, we'll see it. She doesn't owe it to me. She owes it to the court and to us as voters. But I want to get to the two line of inquiries that are super important here that really, I think, jumped out yesterday and that the media's totally ignoring.

Let's get to our second sponsor Today show, also brought to you by podium. Business owners got some critical news for you, you may not have even realized it, but your customers don't want you to call them. They don't. They prefer you send them a text. Times have changed. But now, you know, are you going to say, I text my friends, but I call a business? Well, I'm going to tell you that that's simply not true.

Texting is the better way to communicate with your customers. I prefer text over a call. I hate talking on the phone. I've said that a thousand times and I speak into a microphone for a living of all people. Imagine how your customer feels. Here's why. Texting is better for your business, saves time and saves money it doesn't spend. Don't spend all this effort calling customers about the order appointment texts. Get a load of this. They get open 97 percent of the time so your customers will get the message.

Ninety seven percent of the time you can text back and forth, given you freedom from being tethered to your phone podium works even better now that business is being done. Here are some examples. Car dealers are selling cars only through text. Furniture stores are sending order updates to keep their customers informed. Dentists are booking appointments before the end of the year. I'm teaming up with podium for a special offer for a limited time. Sign up with podium for 20 percent off your plant.

They're so confident that a podium doesn't make your business better within 90 days. Get a load of this. They'll send you one hundred fifty dollars Amazon gift card for the holidays. I can't beat that. Go to podium, dotcom stand to get started. That's 20 percent off if you go to podium o d I you make Dan go to podium dot com Dan today, get with the text revolution. It's a great company podium dot com Dan. All right, thanks, podium, we appreciate you being part of the show.

So there are two lines of inquiry that matter that should really raise your antenna. Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding. Back in the back of your head like America was that guy gazoo from the Jetsons. Remember me? And to us, that was Gazoo, right from the Jetsons. We need a title like that. Here are two things that jumped out to me yesterday. That stand out as bizarre anomalies, not seemingly explainable without more evidence to back it up.

In other words, what the hell is this? Rejection rates being unbelievably low, despite a whole bunch of new first time mail in ballot voters. I'll explain. Hold on. And. These uniform, pristine ballots filled out uniformly perfect circles in every bubble, weird. Let's go to these rejection rates first, ladies and gentlemen, because this makes absolutely no sense. And again, as I said yesterday, folks, I'm all about Occam's razor, right?

Keep it simple, stupid, given all possible explanations for a problem. Low rejection rates. The simplest is most likely, always the answer. Right, because it requires you to assume the least. Let's go to this, just the news article. In key swing states this year, mail in ballot rejections plummeted from twenty sixteen rates, rates are below historical averages and significantly less than the most recent presidential election. Folks, I'm going to get to a screenshot from this in a minute, but this doesn't make any sense.

I'm just asking media folks for a minute to take their tinfoil cap and blinders off and to look through the lens of just a common sense person, right? So far, we've had this almost unprecedented plague, at least in the last few decades. In modern times, we did this mass mail in ballot election we have not done before. Some in states that have really very little experience with mass mail in balloting like they did write. Meaning what logic, folks, logic was something the media doesn't do.

I voted by mail before down here in Florida, so is my wife. We're experienced in it. We know how it works. There are a lot of ways to mess up mail in ballots. You could forget the security sleeve. You can forget to sign the envelope. There's a there's a number of different ways you can mess up the ballot, marking it the wrong way. Now that I voted down here in Florida by mail, I don't know, in the last three or four elections, primaries and generals.

We're pretty experienced on my ballots have not been rejected. Are you suggesting to me now that although historical rejection rates, when people know what they're doing and mail in balloting, when they know what they're doing, historical rejection rates of one or two percent for the liberals listening, meaning one or two out of every mail in ballots, every hundred mail in ballots that are submitted in a year where people generally know what they're doing are thrown out because people forget stuff.

Don't sign however you get my point right. You're telling me in a year where states with very little experience, with mass mail in ballots and people, voters with even less experience who've never done it before. All mail did in and all nailed it because the rejection rates are a fraction of what they were in the past, folks, is that make any sense? Again, Occam's razor, if you have a simple explanation for it, I would love to hear it.

The Frank Luntz explanation, who has a smartass comment for everything, sounds absurd. It was a public service announcement. What a beauty you're telling me a TV commercial led to rejection rates at historic lows. If that's the case, then let's do some let's check that out. But it doesn't make any sense. He said, only you can prevent forever Smokey the Bandit PSA. All right, if you got maybe a little bit less than in the areas it was shown.

I have seen no data to indicate that at all from John Solomon's piece. Check this out. Be in the show notes again. Historically, mail in ballots are rejected at around a rate of one percent for first time, absentee voters, folks, that rate can go as high as three percent. The higher number reflecting the unfamiliarity first time voters have with the mail in process. I mean. Again, this is the logic here is it's not a leap.

If you're doing something for the first time voting via mail, the error rate is going to be higher because you're doing it for the first time. You know, I've had this conversation with friends of mine in the medical field talking about this nausea stuff like, you know, one of the few episodes in nature that one trial learning works that you notice is food version, right, where you eat a food and it gets you sick because your brain learns right away.

But is it the area, pro stream or whatever it is in the back of your brain learns right away not to eat it again or you'll die. So one trial eat bad, very almost die sick. If you survive it second time, your brain goes, oh, that tastes really gross. You learned at one trial. That never happens anywhere else. Show me another example in nature, you hit a baseball, you don't take one swing and you're like my Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb, Honus Wagner, buddy.

It doesn't happen. You're telling me the first time out of the chute, everybody figured this out and that the rejection rate, which should have been higher, roughly three percent, because there are new people and new people tend to have their ballots rejected, a three percent rate rather than a one percent rate. You're telling me the rate was actually far lower? Here's part two of John Solomon's piece, this is making any sense. Quote, Ballot rejections have thus far been lower across the United States this year than expected, lower, not higher, with battleground states posting strikingly lower numbers relative to both the historical average and even more recent elections.

Let's go to the I'm going to read this one by one. Let's go through Georgia, folks. In Georgia, a state where Biden has eked out a surprise lead of fewer than 20 thousand votes. The rejection rate in twenty sixteen was a whopping six point four percent. However, this year, the rate of rejection, what is it, Joe, six point one? No, it stands at zero point to high. But more than I see where we're going in more than 30 times lower than the last election.

Similar trends have been observed in Pennsylvania, whose rate was zero point zero three this year compared to one percent twenty sixteen oh, it gets worse. In Nevada, the rejection rate was more than halved from one point six in twenty sixteen to around zero point seven five one more. North Carolina's rejection rate fell from two point seven in twenty sixteen to zero point eight this year. Folks obviously keep it simple, stupid, right? Why are rejection rates lower, the simplest explanation right here is either machines were calibrated differently, which they were apparently to reject them at a lower rate or the alternate scenario, which Lunts is providing that some public service announcement led to a mass public education on how to mail in ballots, send them in.

Right. And it resulted in these rate of rejection rates that are lower. I'm open to it. Let me hear the evidence on either side. But you suggesting to me that George in 2016 had a rejection rate of six point four percent. Over six out of a hundred mail in ballots were rejected and now a mass mail in ballot, the people in charge who never actually mail in ballots before and the rejection rate was 30 times lower, despite no experience whatsoever with mail in ballots for a lot for a large majority of these people.

Come on, man. You expect me, I mean, we're pulling a Joe Biden out. Yeah, come on. Come on. You expect me to believe this? And just take it on your word. Now, I'm sorry. Am I going to do it? Your word means nothing to me anymore, media people, you're the same people who told me the tape was real. You expected us to believe for four years President Trump was a Russian traitor, sitting in a smoke filled room with a cigar smoking jacket on with Vladimir Putin plotting the destruction of the world and that ten thousand dollars in Facebook ads in a county in Wisconsin through the whole election by a by a Russian group of trolls overseas.

You wanted us to believe that for four years I just presented to you hard statistical data of a statistical anomaly about rejection rates being 30 times lower, despite mail in ballots being geometrically more this year and experienced with mail in ballots being lower. And you expect us to discard that out of hand because why you said so. Double barrel for you guys. No, thanks. So let's stay focused here, so I said there were two things, number one, these rejection rates, it doesn't make sense.

It is a statistical anomaly. Is it explainable by fraud? I don't know. Is it a fair question to ask? You're damn right it is, and we will continue to ask it. The second take away these sworn affidavits about uniform ballots, ladies and gentlemen, there is nothing in nature that's uniform. I said that to you yesterday. You don't drop an oil droplet in a thing of water and have it uniformly disperse like you're playing a game of like Space Invaders.

Two, two, two, two, two, two, two, two.

To remember that the younger kids are like, what the hell space it is. Me and Joe are like, we love that game. It was awesome. Osserman pong, space invaders. That's not how the oil comes down uniformly. It just randomly disperses because nature loves disorder. So if people are swearing in affidavits that a bunch of pristine ballots seemingly not handled by people, people, I thought people voted so people would have to handle their votes of them just checking seemingly pristine ballots not handled, all filled out the exact same way, just like oil droplets coming down, like Space Invaders do.

You're suggesting to me that that's no big deal either. We should just throw that out to our. No, thanks. So here's another piece by John. Some ALBE in the show notes today's episode where I say just the news. That's John Solomon's website. But check it out about these uniform ballots because it's interesting, the allegations being leveled there. Again, it'll be up in the show notes today. Folks, there are numerous sworn affidavit by people suggesting they witnessed ballots being delivered in pristine condition.

Pristine condition uniformly filled out. Georgia recount witnesses swear to have seen votes for Trump counted for Biden, Trump campaign attorneys are attempting to block the certification of the Georgia recount. Kind of interesting allegations now. More inside the piece talking about this uniformity, again, that exists nowhere in nature, nowhere. But seemingly exists in the Georgia vote count, where these pristine ballots always seemingly filled out at the same way, ladies and gentlemen, it makes absolutely no sense.

Here's a quote from the piece. Nine individual sites in the affidavit swore to have seen suspicious mail in ballots almost uniformly cast for Joe Biden. The ballots were in pristine condition, had no creases on them. How is that, folks? How is that? According to the sworn affidavits, which seem to appear unusual, considering mail in ballots must be folded to fit in the envelope in which the mail. We got one hundred wide receiver uses about, ladies and gentlemen, you got to fold these things liberalisers.

This is the this is the demonstration. We're going to paint a little tree. Baburova This is what I have to show you how it's done. I see like, what are you doing, Lucy, with the dogs looking at me like I'm crazy for one more time?

That's your own little happy birthday. And what is that?

Yeah, OK. Put it a little stream. I love that. I loved Bob. I've seen every one of them, but it wasn't great. Peter Fox. It leaves a crease. You see that? It's Chris. You see a bunch of ballots without creases, it means they weren't folded, which means they didn't go in envelopes, which means they weren't mailed in. Joe, put on your shocked face, huh? Everybody said, I know, I know, it's stunning envelope's you have to stuff them in the envelopes, meaning you have to follow them.

Oh, man. Maybe we should look into that. Move on. Move on. I'm not moving on. I'm not interested in moving on. Is there an Occam's Razor explanation that simple where they collected by some election official who was authorized to collect them, who signed for them? Show us show us the data. We'll cover it on the show. The last thing I want to tell you is that we lost this election due to fraud. If we lost fair and square, we lost, we will dust off and live to fight another day.

I'm not willing to give up anything at all, and I never will. It's our country and damn it is worth fighting for. I'm going to dance every day with you, no doubt about it. Nothing would make me happier to discover that was an innocent explanation. I don't want to think I live in a country where mail fraud is rampant. I don't want that mail in voter fraud is any kind of voter fraud. Show us. Show us there's an explanation for this.

Please, if there is a simple one, I would love to see. All right, I want to move on, I got some video coming up a little bit, a kind of relief from the very serious nature of the show today. Forgive me, but Jesse Waters had a great piece on the five year show I want to get to. And I want to get through and say I can't even describe this. It defies explanation. The song, Joe, you've seen already, you have to just watch this.

You're not going to want to miss this video. You know what I'm talking about. Right.

We're together for our future and we'll never do you wrong or whatever this is like. I know your eardrums are bursting all over America.

They're going to burst even worse coming up next.

All right. I want to welcome back our friends, ladies and gentlemen, firearm enthusiasts have a great gift idea for the firearm owner in your life when it comes to training a personal defense. Magazines are just as important as a firearm, ammo you carry. You know that. You know how difficult it can be to find durable, reliable, lightweight magazines for everyday use. So I want to tell you about a friend's etes for the past six years of my go to magazines every single time, ladies and function.

Right, function right. Look, good work. While the best in the business, its manufacture, the toughest poller magazines, their impact resistant, they won't crack or break when exposed to harsh environments, chemicals or extreme cold bluster. Clear see right through those bad boys. Which means you could see how many rounds you have loaded. Brilliant idea. It's magazines come with a lifetime warranty. You could see they connect as well. Really cool. They come with lifetime warranty are available right now for Glock Smith and Wesson.

Excuse me, MP and Sheila Sig, P3 20, Hechler and VPE nine plus MP five er 15 and new for this year, Escorpion. Even in these tumultuous times, you need durability and reliability for every situation. Stock up at the URL e t. S Mags dot com. These are terrific. They take a licking and big time drop them whatever you need. These are great. Those are mine. That's etes mags dot com. While you're there, don't forget to check out their lineup of speed loaders to the fastest in the world.

I've showed you those before. Stack those babies. Right. And that's etes mags dot com promo code, Dan for fifteen percent off your entire order etes mags dotcom use promo code. Dan Dan for 15 percent off your entire order. OK, back to the show. So Jesse did a great segment yesterday on the five. Jesse Watters, good man. And you know, again, fighting back against these. We're not going to succumb to your liberal pressure to genuflect before your golden calf narrative's.

It's time to move on, folks. It's time to move on. There may be for their new narrative, by the way, is there may be fraud, but it's not enough to overturn the election. All right. Well, I want to know about the fraud then. And we will keep going until we discover it, because even if that narrative is true. Because we have an election coming up January 5th for two senators in Georgia at some point.

So here's Jesse on the five yesterday saying, hey, time out there, ladies and gents, we had to tolerate your B.S., your Bolton for years about your stupid, dopey conspiracy theories. Let's take some time and let this stuff get litigated through court. Just as I said when I opened up the show, let Sidney Powell make her case when she has the time in which she's ready to do it in the right way. On the timeline, we need to check this out.

Remember, during this whole Russia collusion thing, they had zero eyewitness testimony to say that I saw the Trump campaign collude with Russia. Rudy Giuliani says he has hundreds of sworn affidavits that say they witnessed corruption. So you got to let this play out. What I saw the case to be is this. They're saying do not certify the fraudulent votes until we present our case in court and then let a judge rule on that perfectly normal. The case consists of two pillars.

One, these sworn affidavits signed under the penalty of perjury that say they witnessed fraud and to circumstantial evidence and whistleblowers. Remember, we used to like whistle blowers and whistle blowers saying that some of the software was manipulated to add Biden votes.

I'll take Jessie's statement there and his word. Over the word of all of these deejayed holding liberal dopy blue checkmark talking heads who just lie to you every day and told you the hoax was real because Jesse's right. We'll make our case when we're darn ready to make our case on the timeline prescribed and at the deadlines we need to, if there is a case, we'll see it. If there's not a case, we will see it. But you will hear us out and we will not back down.

All right, now, this is called the. I have this doubt as the Lowell block, I don't even know how else to describe it, because it's I don't know who's worse here, the screaming lunatic Banshee's in the media for Paula to know what she'd even know what I was giving her, I gave her that. I don't even if Joe did either. I sent this video clip over. So what's worse, screaming media Banshee's or where'd you get it for the future?

You'll see what I mean. I don't know who's worse. AOC or the media. Banshee's. This is hilarious. First, let's go to the media. Bansi. So here's what happened yesterday. Vice President Pence and the task force went out and gave a presser in the Brady Press Room at the White House announcing some just amazing news that they have a vaccine. It's apparently ready to rock and roll. Pfizer's looking for clearance today, ladies and gentlemen, literally, not figuratively.

By December, if you choose to get a vaccine, it may be available for frontline health workers, then hopefully teachers, military police officers and enough for the rest of us. They need them first, no doubt about that. That's great news, right? Not for the media, because the media is obsessed with already declaring Joe Biden the de facto president and not letting any of these fraud allegations has themselves out. The media has already decided you should all shut up.

And despite it being a press conference about the vaccine and the good news, the media's decided be a good idea to scream. I'm not kidding. Like a bunch of pouting five year old kids whose ice pops are being offered. Quite a nice pop. Just kidding. You want a nice pop? Just getting listen to these total losers pout like a bunch of zeros, screaming and yelling like the dip wads they are. Check this out.

Thank you. Sorry. Sorry for the loss of your. We are working hard to see why you're undermining the democratic elections, every one of you fly and you know when the transition chief.

Activist met again. Do you think I came out? We always have to go to rehab. Remember The Hangover, Joe, the cousin, the weird cousin, when he's trying to punish China, we're supposed to take these buffoons seriously. Jonathan Karl, whoever it is in the front row, rip it off as righteous indignation. You're undermining we're undermining democracy. How how exactly? Just to be clear, Joe, we're undermining democracy by asking for very simple explanations towards potential voter fraud, potential for to see if it's fraud that's undermining democracy because you buffoons want to undermined.

Now, you may be saying, yeah, that is tragically hilarious, tragically, because we can't believe these utter buffoons are actually considered a source of it for I mean, some people actually listen, this is what I'm getting in. This may take the cake. This reminds me, by the way, remember Josie and the Pussycats, Josie and the Pussycats, I've been singing way too much and that I've been a rough I gotta say, I'm feelin OK today.

So, I mean, I you whenever I get in a good mood, but AOC yesterday is trying to see what she's trying to do is she's trying to gather a group of green New Deal activists that trying she did. But what they're trying to do is they're trying to pressure who they perceive to be the next president, Joe Biden. If this all hashes out, they're trying to pressure him to move farther left than accept the Green New Deal. So AOC thought it would be a good idea to hold a press conference with these green deal proponents so they get up to the mike.

It's not a joke. They start talking about the green deal and they just randomly break out into song. Ladies and gentlemen, if there is a cringe scale of one to 10, one to 10. Like an a 10 being, you're having a volcanic gastrointestinal episode at a party and someone opens the door and everybody sees you, if that's a 10 on the current scale. This is like a nine point seven. Watch what happens at this watch. If you're watching on Rumble, Rumble, Dotcom, Bongino, watch.

You see in the background, she's like, what do I do, too? I say. So she says, klap. It's the most uncomfortable thing I've ever seen. Check this out. Tell me later who's worst screaming media Banshee's or Josie and the Pussycats. Josie. Check this out.

I'm about to sing a song called We Are Standing for a Futures. If you know the song, sing along. If you don't know it, listen. And then singing when you figure it out. All right. We are standing for our future. We are hearing what is wrong. We are standing for our futures. And together, we are strong. We are standing for futures. We are hearing what is wrong. We are standing for futures. And together, everyone we are standing for you are in the gong.

We are standing by chanting Paul and I, Paul, against the watch of we're picking out who's more uncomfortable here. So AOC tries to get into a little rhythm, zonal, hip, shake it. Whatever you're doing next to Aoki's. I think that's Ed Markey. Ed Markey doesn't know what to do. The guy's got the rhythm of a fire hydrant. He's like he's not even like clapping like you. They like to gather for future. And Ed Markey, like, when everyone else claps, Ed's like.

He said he can't get the rhythm down because Ed's got the rhythm of a of a stop sign and then there's another do. I don't know who that guy is. There's another dude to the right of Marky who doesn't even know how to clap. Watch that again. It's the guy next to him on. Right. Like he doesn't know if he's golf clapping or is it like, you know, like in church someone sings a song, they do Amazing Grace or you're like, yeah, yeah.

And then a golf clap you like. He doesn't know what to do. He's like, oh the song. They say, look, we watch you watch. It wrecks Ed Markey right here. This guy's hilarious. I don't know who the hell you see him. He doesn't know what to look at him. You don't know what to do. He's like, this is great. It looks like he's like rolling play dough. He's like. Like he's playing with his kids or something with the play, don't they?

Well, OK, we're going to make spaghetti with the potato. He doesn't know what to do. And then there's one more. Can he put that little thing? It's a slow roll again. There's a this is a security person to the right. You can see I can see the pin. I must be Capitol Hill Police. It's a woman right next to the woman in pink. She's just sitting there. Listen, I know the Capitol Hill, but they really got I'm pretty sure she's Capitol Hill Police.

She is sitting here. Look, she's got a mask on. I can tell you right now, she's thinking in her head, what the hell am I doing here right now with these buffoons? Look at you. Can you see the poor woman? She's like, what? She's sitting in her hands out here like, oh, my gosh, do I clap to what the heck am I stuck here with these securities? All right. Quick vote in a room.

Personally, I think the media benches are worse. I'm going to go with number one, Joe Media, Banshee's worse or Josiane a Pussycat Pussycats, Josie and the Pussycats for me do that. I said I could read your freakin mind. I knew Paula. What do you think? You take the media, Banshee's or Josiane, a pussycat, jeez, Paul is going, Josiane, a pussy gets to have overruled two out of three. As Meatloaf's said, two out of three ain't bad.

So you guys went, yeah, hilarious to watch the video. Robocop slash pajarito. Check it out. You'll see there's all the characters in the back. Aoki's the only one who kind of gets into it. The rest of them are like, what am I doing here? I didn't know we were going to be breaking out of the song here. All right. I got to get back to some serious stuff. Let me get to my last sponsor.

And finally, the famous or the infamous now Guardian segment. My wife is put together and we've put off now five days in a row. But it's worth your time here. I'll give you a little hint when we come back on the other side of this. They're already totally misreading the 2020 election, the Libs, I'm going to tell you why and what the problem is. This is an important segment of our final sponsor, our friends, who I have really come to rely on pretty much every day.

Now at Teater, inversion tables, teeter inversion tables, use gravity in your own body weight to decompress your spine and relieve pressure on your desks and surrounding nerves. For me, it helps with my shoulders, my hips, everything. Decompressing on a teeter inversion table for just a few minutes a day is a fantastic addition to anyone's daily routine. This is important if you don't have back pain to maintain a healthy spine and active lifestyle without the pain, you have back pain or you don't.

You need a teacher to invert every day and keep your back in joints feeling great. I feel like a new guy when I get off it. I love it. It helps me a lot. I've been using it after every workout I get. It helps me wake up in the morning too. Don't ask me why. Just does it decompresses my spine. It's good for my shoulders, which are terrible. I've done my homework. It's the best inversion table in the market.

Three million people have put their trust in Teater, the best known name in inversion table since nineteen eighty one. They've been around. They know what they're doing for a limited time. Get titers. New upgraded model. The inversion table. The Teater fits fine with bonus accessories, stretchmarks handles and an easy reach ankle system, plus a free inversion program at for the ultimate conversion experience. Teater inversion tables have thousands of reviews on Amazon. Check it out.

The rate at four point nine stars. That's hard to do. And with this deal you'll get one hundred fifty dollars off when you go to Teater Dotcom, then you get free shipping, free returns and a 60 day money back guarantee. So there's absolutely no risk for you to try it out. Remember, you can only get the new Teater fits fine inversion table plus free inversion program that by going to Teater Dotcom, then that's tehy TTR dotcom again.

Check this thing out. It's terrific. Love it. Use it, use it twice a day sometimes. All right, so I've been putting this block off all week, but I put it together earlier, it's important and I wanted to give it its due time because it matters. Folks, listen to the libs are totally misreading what happened at the 2020 election. I saw this Guardian article. I've only teased like 30 times already. I want to show you what's going on here.

I want to show you one. Why? Because it says before we get to it. It says two seemingly contradictory things, he nails it, the author of this piece nails it in the opening about why Trump is such a threat to the Democrats. Hold that in your head. OK, so his premise is the assertions about why Trump is such a threat, even though they think he lost, why he's such a threat to them. They now but then in the second party totally misreads what actually happened in the election, which is weird because it's, again, two seemingly contradictory thoughts.

Let's go to the piece first. It's an important one. It's worth your time. Joe Biden's coalition is whiter, wealthier and will not stick around. Biden's win dependent on suburbanites tired of Trump who voted Republican down ballot and will certainly vote Republican in future elections. That's his assertion, whether you agree with that or not. So he throws it, but he is not he's not incorrect that Joe Biden's coalition was whiter and wealthier. That's not wrong. The data backs that up and data matters with you.

Facts here. His first takeaway, he nails it, why Trump is an existential threat at this point to the national Democrat Party if he stays on the political scene, if it doesn't work out his way. Check this out. This first takeaway is very, very important. Ladies and gentlemen, don't forget this. Most concerningly, it's a quote, Democrats hemorrhaged votes amongst non-white working class voters. Exit polls show Trump winning more non-white voters than any Republican in a generation.

This was most apparent with Cuban-American voters in Miami-Dade who, of course, have their own idiosyncratic politics. But losses among Latino voters could also be seen, listen to this, in huge margins in the Rio Grande Valley, one of the most impoverished regions in the country, in Osceola County, Florida. That's true. And up and down the map from El Paso, from El Centro, California, to Lawrence, Massachusetts. Early returns also show consistent gains for Republicans amongst black voters across the board.

Even in the crucial states, Biden was able to flip, Trump reduced Democratic margins in Detroit, Milwaukee and Philadelphia. These results should be setting off alarm bells among Democrats. You're damn right. Nails it, which is weird because what I'm going to get you next, he completely blows it. The author of this piece that he or she I'm sorry, I even look at that, who wrote it? Folks. If President Trump follow me here. Was the spark that lit the fuse in the black and Hispanic community for people to find the Republican Party for the first time, which all the data seems to indicate historic turnout amongst Latino voters for President Trump, historic turnout amongst black voters for President Trump.

Think about it. How many follow me here, think about how many of these black and Hispanic voters voted GOP for the first time. How many are going to find themselves on GOP email lists now? Find themselves liking GOP parlor accounts, Facebook accounts, Twitter accounts. How many of them are now going to go to a GOP meeting for the first time and feel welcome? Think about that. Then talk to their kids and start to talk to others and evangelize the cause.

Folks, it's not about one election. It's about generational mine changing. It's about people for the first time discovering that the party of values big our God given rights, economic freedom, life in the womb, from conception to natural death, the right to self-protection, the right to school choice. It's about black and Hispanic voters, some for the very first time finding that those are their values to. And that they've been misled by the media about what the Republican Party is for a very long time.

May I say that I think these voters aren't going anywhere? I think these new black and Hispanic voters are going to evangelize to their kids and their friends the cause of liberty and are going to cause a downward spiral for the Democrat Party. They're going to have a really tough time recovering from if we can keep it up and not alienate people. He nailed it there. And don't ever forget Trump did that, not Mitt Romney, not John McCain and not George W.

Bush, it was Trump who brought in those Hispanic and black voters. Now, you may say, how could a writer who got it so right get it so wrong next? Well, they did screwed it up next. This is the next part of the article where it totally blows it. Now, in this part of the article, the writer here, Ben Davis, is trying to say, no, no, no, no. And by the way, the down ballot losses where the Republican Congress, congressional representatives and senators did great.

That's not an indictment of socialism. Wrong quote. He says, Where the agenda was on the ballot, it was triumphant, even as moderation obsessed Democrats lost up and down the ballot. In Florida, where the Dems distanced themselves from a ballot measure to raise the minimum wage, the result was a huge win for the fifteen dollars an hour minimum wage and a bloodbath for Democratic candidates. For many voters, the Democratic Party isn't associated with raising the minimum wage and with the Democrats message messaging strategy.

Why should it be? What is he saying here? Let me translate that for you, because I've seen this talking point bandied about in the media, and you need to just thoroughly discarded. Florida, unfortunately, did pass a fifteen dollars an hour minimum wage on a constitutional question was put on the ballot. You have to get 60 percent of the vote. How it passed, I have no idea, because the amount of economic research on the destructive effects of wage floors is overwhelming.

But the left, which got crushed down ballot, is saying, no, no, because minimum wage law, that law passed in Florida with 60 percent of socialism and the leftist agenda won across the country. Let me first explain what happened with minimum wage and what typically happens with minimum wage. Ladies and gentlemen, the minimum wage is difficult to explain. It just is. It's the whole broken windows. You know, when you break a window, you know, the broken windows, economic theory, when you break a window, and yet people who don't know anything about economics say, oh, that's great, because it gives business to the glassmaker who goes in and rebuilds your window.

But it doesn't because you now have the same window you had before with less money because you gave it to the glassmaker, that's not a net benefit. This is that kind of thinking, well, if we're paying people more, they have more money to spend. No, no, they don't have more money to spend because the people paying you have less money to spend because they paid you more. Makes sense, Joe, it's not hard, right?

It's just checking right now. I what I'm trying to get is it's difficult to explain to people the unseen. All they see because the media machine wants to believe is, well, we're going to pay people, 50 thousand people don't associate that with a liberal idea. They associated with work and they voted for it. They don't understand this can actually cost people jobs and cost people money. The economic research on it is irrefutable. It's not even arguable minimum wage cost jobs.

It just does. And it costs low income workers the worst. But it's not that it passed an indictment of conservatism, people associated with work and getting paid where actual liberal policies were on the ballot, because remember the guy's assertions, so I don't lose. You know, no liberalism didn't lose even though they lost all the way down the ballot. Liberalism won because minimum wage I've seen this over and over when actual liberal policies were on the ballot in liberal states.

They got racked. Ari racked. When I thought liberalism didn't lose. Minimum wage. Let's look at this piece in The Wall Street Journal. California. Had a whole boatload of stuff on their agenda, ballot initiatives on the agenda that got absolutely crushed. Identity politics, tax hikes, EB five here, this is from a while ago by Mike Gonzalez, The Wall Street Journal, Tuesday's big loser, identity politics. Affirmative action, racial preferences, that's a liberal thing, right?

Conservatives have a very simple policy on that judge. People by their character, not the color of their skin. Not complicated, right? Not liberals. They want people judged by where they're from, color of their skin, everything but their character. Well, that was on the ballot, racial preferences in California, which are inherently racist because you're judging people and preferring them by their race. I don't have to do the slow, folks. I'm sorry.

Are liberals listening? That's inherently racist. That was on the ballot. It failed miserably in California, I thought liberalism didn't lose minimum wage. There were also tax hikes on the ballot, one in Illinois, as a matter of fact. Illinois, you know, that bastion of right wing conservatism, Illinois that was on the ballot to. Wall Street Journal, Illinois tax repudiation voters may force needed reform by rejecting governor preschooler's tax hike, which was on the ballot, and they did reject it roundly.

In Illinois. So, ladies and gentlemen, again, we do data research, facts and common sense here. Yes, Trump is an existential threat, existential threat to the Democrat Party. He's correct, but number two, that liberalism didn't get smoked up and down the ballot. You're insane. Minimum wage is not associated with liberalism associated with work. And it only won because it's hard to explain the unseen. That's why wherever liberal policies in liberal states were on the ballot, liberal policies like tax hikes and racial preferences, they got crushed in liberal states, along with the congressional representatives.

On the liberal side, that got wiped out because the Republicans picked up 10 seats. So please don't tell me that. Don't tell me liberalism didn't get smoked to try and save your narrative. All right, folks, I've got a National Review article I'd like you to read at the end of the show notes today. It's a great article. It's a little wonky, but at the banks tax and spending mess I want to get to that is going to have a rough time.

I'll get to it next week sometimes. Really good stuff in there. That'll give us a lot of good ammo going going forward to make these intellectual arguments, you know, facts and stuff that matter stuff. Liberals have a tough time, but thanks again for tuning in. It's been a. It's been a great week, thank you all for hanging in there with me this week. You know, it's been a real challenge, but it's a pleasure and an honor to speak to you every day.

Our audience has grown substantially, and that's due to you. We really appreciate we were number 11 this month on that Triton and all of the country for podcast. Thanks to you. So please subscribe on Rumble, Rumble, Dotcom Slash Bongino. It's free. That's the video version of our show, All free to you. And please subscribe and Apple podcast. Google podcast, SoundCloud Ihara. Wherever you shove Spotify, wherever you go, stitcher. The subscriptions really matter.

We appreciate it. Thanks a lot. We'll see you all on Monday. Good day, sir.

You just heard Dan Bongino.