It is sarcasm. He is trying to make a point that Boortz's math is as suspect as his.
But the point fails as he doesn't show what math Boortz is using.
For all I know Boortz *may* be correct. If he's using raw book sales and the book market has increased then he could be accurate. So although it's not #1...it could still be the biggest opening day/week in book sales in raw # of books sold. Or if Boortz is doing retail sales and taking out bulk buys (you know that's how Hillary had high book sales...just got some liberal book owners to do massive book buys).
Of course I really don't know what Boortz has said as I typically don't listen.
It is sarcasm. He is trying to make a point that Boortz's math is as suspect as his.It's not Boortz's math, Boortz is the profiting messenger for the Fairtax math.