Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 9, 2018 - The Ben Shapiro Show

50:40

Trump’s America | Ep. 449

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	President Trump goes to the college football national championship game.
	Lena Dunham breaks up with her boyfriend.
	What was he thinking for five years?
	And President Trump is called crazy by everyone.
	But is the 25th Amendment really a thing or not so much?
	Ben Shapiro, Ben Shapiro Show.
	Oh yeah, so last night was apparently an amazing national championship football game.
	I will admit that I did not watch one single second of it.
	Number one, because I'm not a big college football fan.
	Number two, because I cut the cord a while ago and I don't have any of the alternatives to actually watch the game.
	But, there was a lot to talk about because of a lot of virtue signaling by some folks on the left and President Trump goes down and sings the national anthem and the whole deal.
	We'll talk about all of it, but before we get to any of that, first, I want to say thank you to our sponsors over at Blinkist.
	Okay, so.
	You have a busy day.
	You have a lot going on.
	You're in the car for maybe 15 minutes, and after you've finished listening to my show at four times speed, you've decided that now it's time for you to get educated about something else.
	So what do you do?
	You turn to Blinkist.
	Blinkist has these 15-minute blinks, this great app.
	They have a 15-minute, what they call blinks, in which you can basically get the main points of a book in 15 minutes or less.
	It is fantastic.
	Instead of you having to wade through 500 pages of a book, spend hours at a time reading these books, you can go through four books in one car ride.
	You're in the car for an hour, suddenly you're going through four books.
	It's just fantastic.
	And the list of books that they have on Blinkist are really top-notch books.
	Things like Why Nations Fail, which is a great book.
	Six hundred pages.
	I remember it took me a few hours to read it.
	It'll take you 15 minutes to get the same amount of information because I don't remember more than 15 minutes of information from that book.
	The same thing is true for books like Flow, which is all about how to make your life happier, particularly your work life.
	They have books like Drive and Rich Dad Poor Dad.
	All of these things in 15-minute little packages, they are smart, but they are not going to be stiff.
	They're not going to be abstruse.
	All of them are tailored just for you so that you are getting all of the information in the most entertaining possible way.
	Right now, Blinkist has a special offer just for our audience.
	Go to Blinkist.com slash Ben right now today to start your free trial or get three months off your yearly plan when you join.
	That's Blinkist, B-L-I-N-K-I-S-T, Blinkist.com slash Ben to start your free trial.
	Or you can get three months off your yearly plan.
	I recommend getting the yearly plan and getting the three months off.
	You're going to want to keep it anyway.
	Blinkist.com slash Ben.
	Again, use slash Ben, and that means that you are going to be letting them know that we sent you, plus you get that discount, right?
	You get the free trial or three months off your yearly plan.
	It's a great informational resource and really entertaining.
	Okay, so we begin with last night's national championship game.
	Apparently the Georgia Bulldogs lost the game in overtime to Alabama, the Crimson Tide.
	And it was apparently a classic game, but I'm not going to talk about the game because I didn't watch a minute of the game.
	What I did see was all of the hubbub surrounding President Trump.
	So President Trump arrives at the game.
	And I think it's important to note something.
	For all the media coverage, which is 95% negative about President Trump, for all the hatred of President Trump among Democrats, for this widespread sentiment that President Trump is deeply unpopular and no one likes him, in places like Alabama, in places like Georgia, Trump is still a deeply popular figure.
	And that was in evidence last night at the Alabama-Georgia game, where, of course, fans of both teams were there, and both of those states are very red states.
	So Trump walks into the stadium, and the way the media covered this, the press pool said there was a mixture of cheers and boos.
	I don't see that.
	What I heard and what I saw from a number of different accounts that were posted was that it was almost entirely cheers with a few scattered boos mixed in.
	Here is what it looked like when President Trump walked into the stadium.
	Welcome to the ROTC units from the University of Georgia and the University of Alabama, joined by our president, Donald J. Trump.
	Okay, so people were pretty enthusiastic about Trump arriving at the time.
	It's a good move for Trump to go to the national championship game.
	Politically speaking, Barack Obama used to do this to every sporting event he could find.
	He went to the baseball all-star game where he threw out the first pitch like a girl.
	He went to the, I believe went to the NCAA championships at one point, or at least he used to go on ESPN every year and talk about the NCAA championships.
	He used to appear before the Super Bowl every year.
	He was in front of every camera he could find.
	So for all the people saying, what is Trump doing at the national championship game?
	The answer is that Obama did a lot of these exact same things.
	It's also, again, smart of Trump to go, considering that the teams that were involved are going to draw fans who are fans of his.
	And it wasn't just Trump showing up and walking with ROTC.
	It was also that he stood for the national anthem.
	So obviously, this has been a major controversy for a long time in the United States, whether he should kneel or stand for the national anthem.
	President Trump has stoked that controversy for political gain for about the last six months.
	And President Trump shows up and he stands for the national anthem.
	If you think that these imagistics don't matter, if you think the image doesn't matter when Trump does that, you're sorely mistaken.
	People care much more about the president signaling patriotism than they do about the latest regulatory policy.
	It's one of the reasons Trump was elected president.
	One of the reasons that Trump was elected is because people perceived that Barack Obama was uncomfortable with the trappings of patriotism.
	Obama was the kind of guy who'd go abroad and talk about how all countries had their patriotism.
	He was a guy who originally, you recall, was ripped for not wearing a flag pin enough until he decided to reverse himself.
	You know, Trump, for all the talk about, you know, the problems with his perspective on America, and I've talked a lot about some of the problems I think his perspective on America holds, Trump has a gut-level patriotism or at least a gut-level nationalism that resonates with people.
	Him standing there for the national anthem on the field with the members of ROTC is smart politics and it plays with a lot of his base.
	Here's what it looks like last night.
	And that reminds me of another image of Trump.
	You remember there was an image where one of the members of his honor guard at the helicopter, the helicopter Air Force One, I'm not sure, I can't remember what they call it, and the guy's hat blew off.
	And you remember that Trump went and grabbed the guy's hat and put the guy's hat back on his head.
	There's a feeling that Trump, at a root level, likes the country.
	And that Trump at a root level doesn't feel scorned for the country.
	And that's the reason for his popularity.
	So Trump actually stands there and he sings along with the National Anthem.
	Now, naturally, the left has to find a way to mock Trump.
	So what they do instead is they suggest he doesn't know the words to the National Anthem.
	This is all part and parcel of their new pitch that Trump is not just stupid, he's actually crazy.
	He doesn't know the words to the National Anthem because he's mouthing along to the National Anthem.
	Huffington Post made a big deal out of this.
	They suggested that he didn't know the words and that he's a fool, of course.
	Here is video of Trump singing the national anthem.
	OK, so this idea that Trump doesn't know the words Obviously, he's singing the correct words.
	The reason we showed a fair bit of that clip is because one of the things that's been happening is people are taking this out of context and they are suggesting that he is hearing the same music you are hearing.
	That's not the way that it works in arenas like this.
	He's hearing the echo of the music, right?
	He's actually hearing the music on the field, and you, the audience, are hearing the echo that is played through the loudspeakers.
	There's a little bit of a delay.
	I know this because I've spoken in enough big venues that very often when you say something, what the audience hears is actually being heard a second later.
	And that's what's happening here with Trump.
	Doesn't matter.
	The media is jumping on Trump, suggesting he didn't know the words to the anthem.
	That's absolutely asinine.
	Of course Trump knows the words to the national anthem.
	What I'm amazed by constantly is the media's attempt to go out of their way to paint Trump as stupid or crazy.
	If you want to paint Trump as stupid or crazy, all you have to do is look at his Twitter feed and then quote it a lot.
	You don't actually have to go to, he doesn't know the words of the National Anthem, or he's suffering from early stage Alzheimer's.
	This is what they're now arguing.
	We're going to talk in a second about President Trump and the 25th Amendment.
	But this attempt by the media to paint Trump as fully crazy, all it does is it makes people in that stadium, the people from Alabama and Georgia, think the media are out to get Trump.
	The reason being the media are out to get Trump.
	And do you think that it's good for Trump or bad for Trump when Alabama's star running back, Bo Scarborough, no relation to Joe Scarborough, is walking out to the field and very much like Joe Scarborough starts screaming F Trump at the top of his lungs as he walks out onto the field?
	Right.
	So you can hear it sort of there.
	He shouts, F Trump, in the middle of walking out on the field while ESPN cameras are rolling.
	One thing that I think Trump did quite brilliantly last night, apparently, according to Clay Travis, Trump was asked to interview with ESPN on the sidelines, and he turned them down.
	He told ESPN to stuff it.
	Instead, he did a local interview with some local Georgia channel.
	There's some local Georgia radio channel, and he did the interview with them instead of doing the ESPN interview.
	This is where Trump's populism works, right?
	Where Trump's populism works is the feeling that he cares about blue-collar people, that he cares about people who have been traditionally ignored or degraded by the press.
	Trump does have a connection to these folks.
	He does.
	He has a feel of somebody who cares about people, like the people in that stadium, and that's going to benefit him in the 2020 election.
	It's one of the reasons why Democrats would be fools to run anybody who has a white-collar feel as opposed to a blue-collar feel.
	Joe Biden would be a much better pick than, for example, Kirsten Gillibrand.
	Trump still has a solid connection with a lot of people who live in the Rust Belt as well as in the South.
	Well, in one second, I want to discuss with you The real media push here, which is that Team Trump is hiding the fact that Trump is legitimately crazy.
	We're going to show you the extent of the media bias because it truly is astonishing and demonstrative of just why Trump's base is not going to desert him in 2020.
	But first, I want to say thank you to our sponsors over at Upside.com.
	So when you book business travel, there's only one way you should do it.
	That's at Upside.com.
	Why?
	Because when you book At Upside.com, you get the better business travel experience.
	They have concierge service 24-7.
	Their team is hard at work to make sure that your flight, hotel, rental car all go off without a hitch.
	They're available on demand by chat, phone, and email whenever you need them.
	They monitor your business trip around the clock.
	They proactively keep you posted on everything from the weather in the city you're going to to changing your flight home so you can adjust your meeting schedule.
	It is just the best level of service that you can get.
	Plus, When you book through Upside.com, you get a free pair of Bose SoundLink wireless headphones, which is just awesome.
	So, all you have to do for that is book your first business trip with Upside by going to Upside.com slash Ben.
	That's Upside.com slash Ben.
	And you can claim your Bose SoundLink wireless headphones.
	Upside.com, because you do deserve a better business trip.
	The headphones are available while supplies last.
	It must be your first Upside purchase.
	And there's a $600 minimum purchase required, but pretty much any flight you take of any length is going to be $600 anyway.
	You can see the site for complete details.
	Upside.com.
	The best level of service you have ever experienced.
	It's not going to be like the other travel sites where you book your ticket, and then they forget about you, and it turns out it's four days later and you're still in Detroit.
	That's not going to happen with Upside.com.
	Check it out.
	Upside.com slash Ben.
	It lets them know that we sent you.
	Plus, if you spend the minimum amount, then you get this free pair of Bose SoundLink wireless headphones.
	So make sure that you go and check it out.
	The media malpractice about Trump continues to push forward.
	And as I say, you see it in things that are minor, like the national championship game.
	And then you see it in their coverage of the Michael Wolff book.
	So Michael Wolff's book is still making a lot of headlines.
	The media simply will not let it go.
	They were in love with Oprah yesterday, but they're back to Michael Wolff's book today.
	Michael Wolff, of course, is this pseudo-journalist who basically tells anecdotal stories without fact-checking them in any way, shape, or form.
	And he has this book, Fire and Fury, which is no better than an Ed Klein book.
	You know, Ed Klein has written all of these books about Hillary and about Barack Obama.
	Mostly about Hillary has been his sort of focal point.
	And a lot of people on the right will quote Ed Klein or attempt to give credence to rumors that Ed Klein is passing around.
	And people on the left say, well, he's not a real journalist because he's not double sourcing.
	And then they'll go and they'll pass around Michael Wolff's book.
	They'll pretend that Michael Wolff's book is well substantiated, that it's detailed, that it really contains the truth.
	And you can see from how the media is treating this just how much they're lying about it.
	So I want to start here by showing you Katie Turr's interview with Michael Wolff.
	So Katie Turr, of course, over at NBC News.
	And Katie Turr, she demonstrates full-fledged, and so does Wolff, that the media are engaged in complete and total confirmation bias.
	Confirmation bias is the phenomenon where you buy information that already confirms the feelings that you already had.
	So you didn't like Trump, and so you're going to buy the story that Trump actually watches The Gorilla Channel.
	This is a thing that happened last week.
	There was a guy on Twitter who calls himself Pixelated Boat.
	He's a parody account.
	And he tweeted out a fake portion of Michael Wolff's book in which he suggested that the White House staff had been told by President Trump that he wanted to watch gorillas all day.
	And so the White House staff went and produced a gorilla channel, which they then had locally streamed into his TV alone.
	And then Trump suggested that he didn't want to watch the gorillas eating and mating.
	He only wanted to watch them fighting.
	So they cut out all the non-fighting parts.
	It's just 24 hours a day of gorillas fighting each other and Trump standing next to the TV for 17 hours a day watching the gorilla channel and yelling at the TV and urging the gorillas to fight one another, thinking that he could control them.
	So this fake parody went out and a bunch of people on left thought it was real.
	Like people on left started tweeting out about how Trump actually had constructed a gorilla channel.
	It had something like 15,000.
	A bunch of people on the left thought that the Gorilla Channel was a real thing, which, I mean, let's be real.
	There is only one Gorilla Channel.
	It's in heaven and Harambe runs it.
	But the idea that this could pass around, it could only pass around really because there were so many people who wanted it to be true.
	They wanted to believe that there was a guerrilla channel that President Trump had mandated and that he sat scratching his head and beating his chest and whooping to the sounds of the guerrillas fighting.
	Well, this is what the entire media are now engaged in, this vast-scale confirmation bias.
	So watch this interview with Katie Turr on NBC, because this is just an exercise in confirmation bias and how the media are exacerbating it.
	Because that's not what—I'm not in your business.
	My evidence is the book.
	Read the book.
	If it makes sense to you, if it strikes a chord, if it rings true, it is true.
	Congratulations on the book, and congratulations on the president hating it.
	Thank you.
	Appreciate your time, sir.
	Okay, so a couple of things there that are just insane.
	First of all, when he says, if it rings true, it is true, that is the definition of bad journalism.
	The definition of bad journalism is, if it rings true, it is true.
	When President Trump, when he was then not even candidate Trump, was talking about how Barack Obama was born in Kenya, and a lot of people said, you know what, that rings true, because Barack Obama, kind of a weird guy, doesn't seem to hold a lot of American principles.
	If Trump had just said, if it rings true, if it rings true, it is true.
	You know what the media would have said?
	They would have said alternative facts.
	They would have said fake news.
	They would have said that he's lying, that he's dissembling.
	But Michael Wolff goes out there and says if it rings true, it is true.
	That is not a journalistic standard.
	You've got to be kidding me.
	If it rings true, it is true?
	Okay.
	Michael Wolff is a joke and a pedophile.
	Does it ring true?
	I have no evidence that any of that is real.
	I may have some evidence that he's not a really good journalist, but I have no evidence he's a pedophile.
	But does it ring true?
	What if I just suggested that Michael Wolff likes to kill puppies in his backyard?
	I mean, look at the guy.
	Just look at his face.
	Does that ring true?
	It doesn't mean it is true.
	What if I suggested that Michael Wolff is actually Michael Myers, Mike Myers, playing Michael Wolff?
	He just shaved his head, stuck on that pair of glasses, and now he's playing an extra from Austin Powers.
	Does it ring true?
	Is it true?
	What stupidity?
	And then for Katie Turd to finish the interview by congratulating him on Trump hating the book.
	If that doesn't demonstrate how the media are a bunch of trolls, I don't know what does.
	I mean, that is just the essence of trollery.
	Congratulations on the president hating you because he's such a bad guy.
	If he hates you, that's really a compliment.
	Like, if you're going to congratulate somebody on somebody hating you, then what you do is you congratulate Me on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad hating me.
	It's like someone evil.
	You want to use that?
	You say, like, Hitler hates you.
	Congratulations.
	You don't say Donald Trump hates you.
	Congratulations on your book.
	Maybe he hates you because your book's full of crap.
	Maybe that's a possibility.
	And it turns out that the book largely is full of crap.
	And I'm not the only one saying so.
	But again, this media bias is insane.
	Brian Stelter, who's supposed to be the sort of CNN ombudsman, Brian Stelter tweeted this out the other day.
	He tweeted out, I stand corrected.
	I thought the RNC ad misquoted me, but the quote came from a CNN International TV hit because the GOP had tweeted out, An ad in which it quoted Brian Stelter saying there were holes in the book.
	Stelter says, I've deleted my previous tweet about this.
	Big picture point.
	Wolf's errors are sloppy, but many Trump experts say the book rings true overall.
	My advice, read it skeptically.
	Rings true overall?
	Brian Stelter is the supposed upholder of truth.
	What is this rings true nonsense?
	By the way, you don't have to go to Michael Wolff's book to find stories that have been confirmed by more than two sources about President Trump acting crazy sometimes.
	You can use your eyes, your eyeballs that are in your head.
	You don't require Michael Wolff's ridiculous anecdotes, courtesy of Steve Bannon.
	I mean, the whole book is basically as told to Steve Bannon, as told by Steve Bannon.
	It's really silly.
	So Brian Stelter gets hammered by Jake Tapper.
	This is one of the reasons why I respect Tapper as a journalist a lot of the time.
	So here is Tapper yesterday, suggesting that this book is basically just nonsense.
	Wolf's reporting should be met with skepticism.
	The book is riddled with errors and rumors.
	And in his marketing of the book, Wolf made the unbelievable assertion that 100% of the president's family members and top advisors have concerns about his mental fitness for the job.
	100%.
	That's simply not true.
	And there's this.
	Three errors in just this one paragraph on page 78, a misspelling of Democratic strategist Hillary Rosen's name.
	Wilbur Ross is identified as the Labor Secretary when he's actually the Commerce Secretary, and Wolf has reporter Mark Berman at a restaurant which Berman says he's never been to.
	OK, so good for Tapper for going through this.
	Ringing true is not true.
	This is why I have more respect for Tapper than I do for some of the other CNN journalists.
	Speaking of bias at CNN, CNN announced today that Jim Acosta, the grandstanding, ridiculous White House correspondent who spends all of his time asking asinine questions of the president's of the president's spokespeople.
	He's the guy who tried to go after Stephen Miller on illegal immigration, and Miller basically just clocked him.
	He's the guy who goes after Sarah Huckabee Sanders pretty much every day with hisire and his fury.
	He tries to do the old Dan Rather part.
	He tries to go in there and act with umbrage and indignation about everything Trump does.
	Well, now Jim Acosta has been elevated to chief White House correspondent, which is just fantastic.
	Well done, CNN.
	Take the guy who's obviously lobbying against the Trump administration.
	Make him your chief White House correspondent.
	and try to turn him into a star and then suggest there's no media bias, Yeah, sure.
	And again, you can tell the media bias from exactly how Michael Wolff is pitching this, right?
	Michael Wolff is pitching this as the book that's going to end Trump's presidency.
	And the left is buying into that because they want to see Trump's presidency end.
	They are interested in seeing Wolff's book take down Trump.
	They're suggesting this is like a bomb went off in the White House.
	It's like a bomb went off in the White House.
	The book doesn't say anything new except Steve Bannon mentally masturbating about how he doesn't like Jared and Ivanka and how Trump doesn't fulfill his purposes as a grand nationalist populist.
	Here's Michael Wolff, though, fulfilling all leftist fantasies that this book is going to somehow result in a 29th amendment.
	There are not 29 amendments to the Constitution.
	A 29th amendment removal of the president due to literary wounds.
	Here's Michael Wolff going after Trump.
	You know, I think one of the interesting effects of the book so far is a very clear emperor has no clothes effect.
	That the story that I've told seems to present this presidency in such a way that it says he can't do this job.
	The emperor has no clothes.
	And suddenly, everywhere, people are going, oh my God, it's true.
	He has no clothes.
	OK, and you can see Wolf is really excited about this.
	And that's the point.
	Wolf is really excited about this.
	And so is the left.
	They've been talking about the 25th Amendment.
	So in a minute, I'm going to explain to you what the 25th Amendment says and why people who are talking about removing Trump through the 25th Amendment process are totally crazy.
	OK?
	It's never going to happen.
	It's not a real thing.
	It's not a real thing.
	But before I talk about any of that, first I want to say thank you to our sponsors over at MVMT.
	So, do you see this magnificent piece of timeware?
	Do you see this watch?
	It is spectacular.
	I wear it every day.
	You can see it on the show here.
	Every day.
	I actually have two MVMT watches.
	My wife has an MVMT watch.
	My mother has an MVMT watch.
	And I have bought The vast majority of those watches.
	MVMT watches are just fantastic.
	They really are top-notch.
	They are clean.
	They are sleek.
	They are professional.
	They can take a beating.
	I mean, my son, as I've mentioned before, steals my watches and then likes to hide them and or beat them against the walls.
	And this watch has been ticking no problem.
	It really holds up under pressure.
	And my son is about as good a test as you're going to get for watches under pressure.
	MVMT watches are really fantastic, and they're less expensive than their equivalents in department stores, because they're cutting out the middleman.
	Movement watches start at just $95.
	At a department store, you're talking $400 to $500 for a watch like this.
	MVMT figured out by selling online, they can sell to you for a much better price.
	Classic design, quality construction, styled minimalism.
	Check them out at MVMT.com.
	I've turned into a watch junkie, really, since I started using MVMT watches because they have so many cool looks and really a wide variety of looks.
	Like my watch is very different.
	My dad has an MVMT watch, and it looks very different from my watch.
	Klavan has an MVMT watch.
	So does Knowles.
	They all look really different, and they're all really cool looking.
	They have everything from kind of sporty watches to sort of more classic looking watches.
	MVMT.com slash Shapiro.
	When you use slash Shapiro, you get 15% off today with free shipping and free returns in case it turns out you don't like it.
	Again, my watch has a really clean design.
	I really like this one.
	I have this one.
	It's silver with the blue face, and I think it's really cool looking.
	And then I also have a black one with the black face, which is also very cool looking.
	mvmt.com slash Shapiro.
	Check it out.
	Use that slash Shapiro so that they know that we sent you.
	Couldn't speak more highly of mvmt.
	Really, really like the people there as well.
	So...
	Everybody has been talking about Michael Wolff and the 25th Amendment.
	So, Trump's crazy.
	He's so crazy.
	He's a nut.
	He's incapable of fulfilling his office, his oath of office.
	Therefore, we have to call in the 25th Amendment.
	Yeah, OK, so let's go through briefly what's exactly in the 25th Amendment.
	So you understand how insane this is, the suggestion that the 25th Amendment is going to be used to oust President Trump.
	It would indeed be a coup.
	You know, people have been overusing the term coup.
	When they say that there are leaks inside the White House, that that's a coup.
	Or when they suggest that there's a bad news story, that's a coup.
	No, a coup is when somebody is illegitimately removed from office through nefarious means.
	To declare the President of the United States crazy without an actual diagnosis that he has severe Alzheimer's or something is ridiculous.
	The 25th Amendment was put in place after the assassination of JFK because people were worried, what do you do if the President's in a coma or something?
	And also, with regard to Woodrow Wilson, because Woodrow Wilson was basically in a coma for the last nine months of his administration, and his wife was essentially president.
	So, I guess you could have President Melania, but people didn't want to do that, so they changed the Constitution.
	So instead, they went to the 25th Amendment.
	Here is what the 25th Amendment says.
	It says whenever the vice president and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide transmit to the president pro tempore of the Senate.
	And the speaker of the House of Representatives, their written declaration that the president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.
	The vice president shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as acting presidents.
	So basically, the VP and the cabinet have to go to the speaker of the House and the Senate president pro tempore, and they have to tell him, they have to tell those guys, fellas, president's out of it, I'm taking over.
	So Pence would have to go with the rest of the cabinet.
	Do you think that's going to happen?
	Of course that's not going to happen.
	But let's assume that it did, right?
	Let's assume that Mike Pence suddenly got it in his head that he was going to take Trump out through the 25th Amendment.
	So what happens then?
	That's not the end of the story, okay?
	OK, here's the rest of the story.
	Thereafter, when the president transmits to the president pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, So Trump writes a letter back and he says, I'm not crazy, I'm taking back the office.
	He gets back the office unless the VP and a majority of the executive department, so the VP and the cabinet, or the VP and some other body set up by Congress, go back to the president pro tempore and the Speaker of the House and says, no, the president really is crazy, don't give him back the power.
	So what happens then?
	Now you have a battle between the VP and the president.
	So, thereupon, Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within 48 hours for that purpose, if not in session.
	If the Congress, within 21 days after the sheet of the latter written declaration, or if Congress is not in session within 21 days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two-thirds vote of both houses that the president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the VP shall continue to discharge the same as the acting president.
	Otherwise, the president shall resume his duties.
	Okay, so what are they saying here?
	They're saying that you would have to have two-thirds of both the House and the Senate.
	Okay, two-thirds of both the House and the Senate.
	Okay, that is actually stricter than the impeachment process.
	Okay, the impeachment process, under the Constitution of the United States, the House of Representatives passes by simple majority the articles of impeachment.
	That's what happened to Bill Clinton.
	Bill Clinton was impeached by the House.
	But then he has to be convicted by, I believe it's two-thirds of the Senate in the United States.
	So this idea that the 25th Amendment is somehow an end around the impeachment process is just crazy.
	That's not what happens.
	The process is, and I'm just checking my work here, that yes, that's right, two-thirds of the members present have to vote for conviction in the Senate.
	So, under the 25th Amendment, two-thirds of both houses have to vote to get rid of Trump.
	Under the impeachment process, only two-thirds of one house and a majority of the other have to vote to get rid of Trump.
	So, everyone who's talking about the 25th Amendment is totally crazy.
	It's not going to happen.
	The only way that it would ever happen is if Trump were legitimately in a coma, had a heart attack or something, God forbid, and then he were in a long-term situation where he could not actually discharge his duties.
	That's legitimately the only way this happens.
	So for all those people who are fantasizing about the 25th Amendment, try reading the Constitution for a change.
	It may throw some cold water on your stupid, because it's really absurd.
	It's really absurd.
	Okay, so meanwhile, speaking of really absurd, President Trump has been successful in passing a lot of Republican priorities in his first year.
	But looking forward to 2018, the polls look pretty terrible for Republicans in 2018.
	If you look at the generic congressional ballot, the last time that I checked the generic congressional ballot, we'll check RealClearPolitics right now, the average on the generic congressional vote on RealClearPolitics is D plus 11.
	Which is just brutal.
	Now, the gap has been closing a little bit.
	So, both The Economist, YouGov, and Reuters-Ipsos have it Democrats plus 6, Democrats plus 7.
	That's still a major gap, though.
	Before that, it was Democrats plus 15, according to Quinnipiac, and Democrats plus 18, according to CNN.
	So, in any case, it looks like Republicans have some trouble.
	One of the ways you can tell that Republicans have some trouble is a lot of the members of the House have been stepping down in districts that were won by Democrats.
	So Hillary Clinton won, for example, Ed Royce's district.
	House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce from California.
	I know Representative Royce.
	I like Representative Royce.
	He stepped down.
	He said that he's not going to run for re-election.
	So he still hasn't stepped down formally.
	He's not going to run for re-election, which boosts the chances Democrats win that seat.
	If Royce were running, it would lean R.
	According to Cook's political report, it now leans D.
	So he's the first of his California colleagues to announce his retirement.
	The party was surprised by this, apparently, according to the LA Times.
	They were surprised.
	He's a 13-term congressperson.
	He published his announcement on Twitter.
	He said he wanted to concentrate on his final year as committee chairman.
	So that is not good news for Republicans.
	And again, if you look at those polls, there have been a bunch of Republican retirements.
	The list of Republican retirements in the House for this term is really substantial.
	Here's a list of the Republicans who are currently talking about retiring after 2018.
	This is just the list right now.
	It's probably going to get longer.
	Includes, let's see, Representative Sam Johnson, Republican of Texas.
	He joined in 1991.
	Ileana Ross-Lennon of Florida.
	John Duncan of Tennessee.
	The list is Diane Black.
	of Tennessee, who says she's going to run for governor in Tennessee.
	Jeff Flake, obviously, in the Senate.
	Bob Corker in the Senate.
	Charlie Dent from Pennsylvania announced that he is not going to be running anymore.
	Jeb Hensarling, the Republican from Texas, is not going to be running.
	Dave Reichert from Washington is not going to be running.
	Dave Trott from Michigan is not going to be running.
	Ted Poe from Texas is not going to be running.
	Frank Labiando from New Jersey is not going to be running.
	Jason Chaffetz from Utah is not going to be—he resigned already.
	Tim Murphy from Pennsylvania.
	Pat Tiberi from Ohio.
	So, yee-yee-yee-yee-yee.
	Okay, that's a long list.
	You're talking right there about 13 House Republicans who have resigned or will resign, and you're talking about two sitting Republican senators who are already stepping down.
	Who are already stepping down, right?
	And then if you look at the House Republicans running for another office, so they leave their seat vacant, which puts them up for grabs, it's another five.
	So you're already talking about 18 House Republicans who are leaving their seats, either just leaving them absolutely, or leaving them to run for another office.
	That does not spell anything good for Republicans.
	That is not a good opening gambit for Republicans in 2018.
	If they lose 23 seats, they lose the House of Representatives outright.
	That may look like a soft, it may look a little bit like Okay, so we're going to continue in just a second with a big announcement from the Arizona Senate race.
	I just suggested that Jeff Flake in Arizona is not running for re-election.
	Someone else, though, wants to fill his seat.
	Someone whose name you will know.
	But before we get to that, First, you're going to have to subscribe.
	So for $9.99 a month, you can get your subscription to dailywire.com.
	You get the rest of this show live.
	You get the rest of Andrew Klavan's show live.
	The rest of Michael Knowles' show live.
	You get to be part of my mailbag on Fridays.
	You're going to get discounts when the inevitable Shapiro store finally arrives.
	And if you get the annual subscription, then you get this.
	For $99, the greatest in all beverage vessels is the annual subscription, so that means it's cheaper than the monthly subscription.
	You get all of those aforementioned glories, plus the leftist here is Hot or Cold Tumblr, the greatest of all beverage vessels.
	Plus, it's time to get your wheels turning and the keyboards humming because Tuesday, January 16th, 5 p.m. Eastern, 2 p.m. Pacific, we're doing our fifth episode of The Conversation.
	That features The Daily Wire's own Andrew Klavan.
	It is moderated by Alicia Krauss.
	If you subscribe now, you can be part of The Conversation.
	You can ask Drew live questions, which she will answer for everyone to hear.
	Drew's Conversation streams live on The Daily Wire Facebook page and The Daily Wire YouTube channel.
	It's free for everybody to watch, but only subscribers can actually ask the questions.
	To ask questions as a subscriber, log in to our website at dailywire.com.
	You head over to The Conversation page, and you can watch the live stream, and then you just start typing into The Daily Wire chat box.
	And Alicia will funnel your questions to Drew as they come in for an entire hour.
	Again, subscribe.
	You get your questions answered by Drew on Tuesday, January 16th at 5 p.m.
	Eastern, 2 p.m.
	Pacific, and join the conversation.
	Okay, if you also want to just check out the show later and listen, go over to SoundCloud or iTunes, Google Play, Stitcher, subscribe to our channel over at YouTube, and please leave a comment.
	That always helps us.
	We are the largest, fastest-growing conservative podcast in the nation.
	So in other news, it appears that the seat in Arizona that is now being vacated by Jeff Flake has a few contenders.
	Kelly Ward, obviously, is running.
	She is a somewhat kooky person, I would say.
	She has suggested that chemtrails are poisoning the air.
	OK, and so she's running.
	And then you have Joe Arpaio.
	So Joe Arpaio announced today that he is going to run for Senate, which is just spectacular.
	He, of course, was recently pardoned by President Trump.
	He had been sentenced for corruption because he was basically using his office apparently to target Hispanics.
	This was at least the allegation.
	There are a lot of people who suggested that that was politically motivated.
	But Arpaio's office in the past had targeted Publications in Arizona that reported on his corruption inside the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office.
	He gained popularity among some immigration hardliners and anti-criminal hardliners.
	I remember the first time I heard of Sheriff Joe was when there were all those stories about how he was making his inmates wear pink uniforms.
	But he was convicted and lost his elected sheriff's office last year after more than two decades.
	Now he says that he's a big supporter of President Trump and he has a lot to offer.
	Trump needs to stay out of this race.
	He'd be making a very large mistake to endorse Sheriff Arpaio in the same way that he endorsed Roy Moore.
	I promise you there is more dirt on Arpaio, at least clearly beforehand, than there was even on Moore during the primaries.
	Remember, all of the child molestation allegations about Moore dropped during the general, not during the primaries.
	There's a lot of stuff on Moore that made him unfit for office.
	But Arpaio has a lot of those same issues.
	Arpaio says, I'm going to have to work hard.
	You don't take anything for granted.
	But I would not be doing this if I thought I could not win.
	I'm not here to get my name in the paper.
	I get that every day anyway.
	I mean, to be fair, he is here to get his name a little bit in the paper.
	So Senator Kelly Ward, state Senator Kelly Ward, She is running.
	Arpaio is running.
	Representative Martha McSally is also expected to jump in soon.
	She's a more mainstream Republican.
	And if you're going to support someone in primary, McSally seems like the best available option.
	Because remember, Arizona is not a red state.
	Arizona is a purple state.
	Hey, if you want to lose another Senate seat and put the Senate in jeopardy, if you want to ensure that if another justice steps down, Trump is not able to fill that seat with a good justice, then you can always make sure that that seat goes Democrat.
	Remember, Republicans only have a 51-seat majority right now.
	If they lose two more seats, they are toast in the Senate.
	And then you have a fully Democratic Congress and President Trump, a dangerous prescription for conservatives.
	Not just because Democrats in Congress are extreme, but also because President Trump wants to win, and by win, Trump means that he wants to get things done.
	Not necessarily conservative things, but anything.
	So we've been lucky so far that he has basically signed whatever comes across his desk.
	He hasn't used his veto pen at all, so far as I'm aware.
	It would be questionable as to whether he would actually use his veto pen if Democrats started passing legislation, or if he would do what Bill Clinton did in his second term and start working with Republicans.
	Remember, after Bill Clinton lost his midterm election in 1994, he started working with Republicans on welfare reform and then won re-election.
	You could see a similar move from the right to the left.
	by President Trump if Democrats were to actually win control of Congress.
	Right now, the woman who's running on the Democratic side is a woman named Kirsten Sinema, and she is the heavy favorite in the Democratic primary.
	She's also relatively popular in state.
	So, you know, Republicans have to be very careful in Arizona, which means that McSally is probably their best candidate there.
	Now, with all that said, One of the major issues that's going to occupy the Trump administration in the very near future is, of course, the issue of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program.
	So, to recapitulate what has happened so far, if you recall, in 2016, President Obama announced that he would be essentially commuting the Dreamers.
	I'm sorry, when was DACA?
	DACA was not 2016.
	DACA took place in 2012.
	Sorry, it was during the election cycle, of course.
	Obama did it to pander to Hispanic voters.
	So Obama signed an executive amnesty that essentially allowed everyone who arrived between 1981 and 2010 to stay in the country if they came in as children.
	And so they would get to stay forever was the basic idea here.
	So that was illegal.
	Obama didn't have the authority to do that.
	He was essentially giving people legal status without Congress approving of it.
	So Trump comes into office and he says DACA has now been revoked.
	But he also says, I want to make sure that the Dreamers get to stay, so Congress should do something about this.
	They should cut some sort of a deal.
	We'll make a grand, beautiful deal.
	And if we don't make a deal, then maybe I'll just reinstate DACA in March.
	That was a very, very foolish negotiating stance.
	I mean, if you are going to negotiate a salary with somebody, what you don't do is say, listen, boss, I need a $1,000 raise.
	And you know what's going to happen if you don't give me that $1,000 raise?
	I'm going to go right back to work.
	Like, just like it was before.
	That's what I'm gonna do.
	So, boom.
	Mic drop.
	Right?
	That's not exactly how you negotiate.
	For a great negotiator, Trump really has botched the negotiation on DACA.
	So, he started off by essentially admitting that he was not going to let DACA die.
	DACA was going to survive no matter what.
	And Democrats are playing that for all they're worth.
	Because right now, Republicans are saying to Democrats, let's make a deal, right?
	If you want DACA reinstated, we do too.
	We also want funding for the border wall.
	We want to end chain migration.
	That's a deal that I would make, by the way, if there were a deal for border wall and ending chain migration in exchange for re-enshrining DACA.
	Would I be happy with that deal?
	I would not.
	I would not be thrilled with that deal.
	But that is definitely a deal that you would make because the reality is that the vast majority of these dreamers are going to end up staying no matter what.
	And according to Trump, all of them are going to end up staying no matter what.
	So you may as well get the wall and get chain migration ended.
	Chain migration is much more of a danger to America's immigration program than keeping people who have already been here for 15, 20 years.
	I mean, they've already been here for 15 or 20 years and the country is operating just fine.
	In any case, the Democrats are refusing to allow that sort of deal because they know that they've got Trump over a barrel a little bit here.
	Julian Castro, the Democratic representative from Texas, he comes out and he says the Democrats will vote down a border fix if it contains wall funding.
	I think that Democrats should withhold votes from a bill to help DREAMers if it includes funding for the wall.
	I will certainly vote against it, and I know most Democrats will vote against it.
	I can only speak for the House of Representatives, of course.
	In the Senate, they have different rules and it's a different matter.
	But I would suspect that you will have the overwhelming majority of Democrats vote against it, yes.
	OK, so if Democrats vote that down, that means it's going to be hard for Republicans to pass it, because there are a lot of Republicans who don't actually want to pass anything that enshrines DACA in law.
	So it would be hard to pass it in the House.
	It would be particularly hard to pass in the Senate.
	You lose one or two votes, and you're basically done.
	You could certainly see some of the hardliners in the Senate taking this stance, that they're not going to vote for any of these deals.
	Now, should they vote for?
	The answer is yes, of course they should.
	If Republicans have a majority, they should just vote this thing through with no Democratic support, and then they'll be seen as fixing DACA and fixing the illegal immigration system.
	It'll be interesting to see what a vote count looks like, what a whip count looks like.
	Pat Buchanan, however, who is the most anti-immigration, legal and illegal, advocate in maybe the United States, he suggested on the McLaughlin group, which I didn't even know still existed, Pat, will and should President Trump agree to a DACA deal with Democrats?
	Well, my view is no.
	on amnesty and that DACA will happen and there will be no wall and there will be no end-of-chain migration. -Pat, will and should President Trump agree to a DACA deal with Democrats?
	-Well, I...
	My view is, uh, is no.
	But I do think this.
	I think that, uh, Trump will agree to the deal.
	I don't think he'll get the wall.
	I think he'll get a security fence on the border and other things, protections like that.
	And I think the pressure from the public elsewhere on the DACA thing, because it is publicly popular, I think ultimately Trump will concede on that and he will be charged with amnesty.
	OK, so, you know, I think that Pat Buchanan is likely right.
	He has his ear to the ground on these immigration issues.
	One of the things that's worth noting is that Trump's break with Jeff Sessions, his attorney general, is not just about DOJ.
	That break actually has implications for immigration, because the reality is that the Immigration plans that Trump espoused during his run were very much connected to Jeff Sessions' immigration plans.
	Jeff Sessions' immigration plans were very strict.
	Those were the ones that were mirrored.
	Stephen Miller was Jeff Sessions' chief of staff.
	So, that's where all of this information was coming from.
	The fact that Trump and Sessions are at odds is not good for those of us on the right who would like to see illegal immigration curbed, even if we would like to see some sort of process Okay, time for some things I like and some things I hate, and then we'll deconstruct the culture briefly because I have some more notes about the Golden Globes.
	So, we begin with some things I like.
	So, I'm about to do something I've never done before.
	I'm going to recommend a movie with Chris Evans in it.
	Yes, that's right.
	There's a movie out called Gifted.
	I watched it on a plane.
	The movie is not amazing.
	It is okay.
	I think it's gotten more plaudits than it deserves.
	The basic notion of the movie is that Chris Evans is essentially the uncle of a little girl who is a genius genius in math.
	Her mom was also a genius in math, but the mom committed suicide after solving a famous equation.
	And the mom's mother, so this little girl's grandmother, was the one who had been sort of steamrolling the daughter who committed suicide into being in math.
	And so the uncle essentially took the kid away and doesn't want her to shine.
	And so that's sort of the conflict of the film, that he wants her to live a regular life, but he also has taken her away from a lot of the resources that would be necessary for her to be the most educated that she can be in terms of math.
	That's the central conflict of the film.
	Here's a little bit of the trailer.
	Please don't make me go.
	You can keep homeschooling me.
	I'll tell you everything I know.
	No more argument, okay?
	We've discussed this ad nauseam.
	What's ad nauseam?
	You don't know?
	Well, it looks like someone needs school.
	Good morning, Miss Stevenson!
	Who can tell me what 3 plus 3 is?
	Everyone knows it's 6.
	Mary, can you stand up, please?
	Can you tell me what 57 multiplied by 135 is?
	Okay.
	7,695.
	The square root is 87.7.
	And change.
	695. The square root is 87.7 and change.
	Now what does ad nauseam mean? - The film is well done.
	It is a well done film.
	I will say that the part of Chris Evans that he plays in this film is not... Like, he's good in the film.
	He actually is.
	I didn't know Chris Evans could act.
	That was a surprise to me.
	I've never liked him as Captain America.
	I thought he was awful in Fantastic Four.
	And that was the extent of my Chris Evans knowledge.
	I didn't think that he's like, I don't think he's the greatest actor ever, but he's pretty, he's decent in this film.
	He just has a sort of weird part to play where he's supposed to be a college professor who decides to go and like fix boats or something, which is such a Hollywood conceit, by the way.
	There's not one college professor in America who has ever decided they're just going to go scrub boats down for a living.
	Like that's not a thing.
	Okay, so other things that I like.
	So I have to show you this.
	This was going around the internet.
	I'd never seen it.
	Apparently it's like nine years old, but it's just one of my favorite things.
	It is a local ad for a furniture store in North Carolina called Red House.
	And it is spectacular.
	It is just so good.
	Here is the commercial.
	Can't we all just get along at the Red House Furniture?
	We can!
	At the Red House!
	I'm Richard, a.k.a.
	Big Head.
	I work at the Red House, and I'm black.
	I like pumping iron and pumping furniture into people's homes.
	And it's a picture of you shaking hands with a white woman.
	I'm Johnny, a.k.a.
	Tin Gage.
	I work at the Red House, and I'm white.
	I like deer hunting, bass fishing, and extending credit to all people.
	I'm black, and I love the Red House.
	I'm white, and I love the Red House.
	I'm a black woman, and I love the Red House.
	I am white and the red house is for me.
	At the red house.
	That's pretty spectacular stuff.
	You can watch the whole commercial, but it's just...
	It is magic.
	Only in America.
	That's a real American commercial.
	And this is the thing, right?
	The fact is, when it comes to race relations, most of us feel like the red house, right?
	We're all, who cares?
	Like, who cares?
	That's the thing about the commercial that's really funny, is that you look at this, you're like, this is how you act around black friends if you're a white person, or how you act around white friends if you're a black person.
	It's just not that big a deal.
	And the fact that people make a huge deal out of it is an irritant, and that's why the commercial is so darn funny.
	It's really, really funny.
	Okay.
	In other news, I do want to issue a hearty congratulations to Jack Antonoff.
	Jack Antonoff, of course, is the fellow who was dating Lena Dunham for five years, and he finally broke up with her, which means that either he awoke from his coma and realized that he was in bed next to Lena Dunham, or it took him five years to chew through his own arm and escape the basement.
	But congratulations to Jack Antonoff for escaping a lifetime of that horror show.
	All I can think of when I think of Jack Antonoff is that shot of Tim Robbins at the end of Shawshank Redemption with his hands up in the air as the rain pours down on him after crawling through a mile of stinking sewage, three football fields.
	Good day for Jack Antonoff.
	Good day for Jack Antonoff.
	Okay, time for one quick thing that I hate, and then I want to deconstruct culture for a second.
	So here is the quick thing that I hate.
	So, the quick thing that I hate today comes courtesy of some Australian show, I guess, where there's a guy named Genuine.
	Are you aware who this Genuine fellow is?
	So I guess Genuine is some sort of singer.
	I guess that he is famous for... What song did he do?
	Okay, thank you.
	Say it louder, because I missed it.
	Ride My Pony.
	Okay, from Genuine.
	He's an American singer, songwriter, and dancer.
	Whenever I do a pop culture reference like this, I immediately have to check Wikipedia, because I have no idea who these people are.
	But he apparently did a show in Australia where he was seated next to a transgender woman, meaning a man who says that he is a woman, and this ridiculousness ensued.
	You know, guys have chatted me up not knowing my past, but then as soon as they find out, whoa.
	I'm a woman, right?
	Forget about any tease or anything in front of it.
	I'm just a woman, OK?
	So, on that score, you would date me, wouldn't you?
	Not if you tell me you was trans.
	No, no, I'm not telling you I'm trans.
	I'm a woman.
	A woman, yeah!
	A woman, a woman, yeah.
	Let's have a kiss.
	LAUGHTER Okay, so he was getting all sorts of flack for this because he wouldn't date a transgender woman and then she asked for, and then he asked for a kiss, right?
	There's a guy.
	The guy asked for a kiss and Ginuwine says no.
	Oh, how dare he?
	He's not, he's saying trans women aren't real women.
	Because they're not?
	Because that person may indeed have the junk downstairs?
	This idea that you get to kiss whoever you want and foist your perspective.
	First of all, can we start with this premise?
	You don't have to kiss anyone you don't want to in life.
	How about that?
	Let's just start from there.
	Even if this person were a real woman, this is not a particularly attractive woman from the normal standards of feminine beauty.
	If genuine does not want to be into that, genuine does not have to be into that.
	Beyond that, are we now suggesting that a man is only a real man if he kisses a man?
	Like, that is a genetic man.
	That is a biological man sitting next to him, suggesting that now Genuine is some sort of sexist for not kissing a man.
	So that's weird.
	We had one of these instances earlier today.
	If this becomes the new line in the transgender rights movement, good luck with that one.
	Try selling people on that one.
	And you want to gain support?
	It turns out the best way to gain support for the transgender community is not saying that we have to have sex with transgender people.
	Like, that turns out, that is not a strong play.
	Not a strong play.
	Okay, quick deconstruction of the culture.
	So, a couple of things worth noting about the Golden Globes that have not really been noted enough so far.
	Okay, this comes courtesy of the New York Post for all of the talk about Me Too and Time's Up, and now we're standing up against sexual harassment and abuse in Hollywood.
	Okay, here is the problem.
	Rose McGowan and Asia Argento accused Harvey Weinstein of rape.
	Neither were invited to the Golden Globes.
	Argento tweeted, I can only speak for myself, but not only was I not invited to the Golden Globes, nobody asked my opinion about Time's Up or to sign the letter.
	McGowan said, Not one of these fancy people wearing black to honor our rapes would have lifted a finger had it not been so.
	I have no time for Hollywood fakery.
	And Rosanna Arquette, who accused Weinstein of sexual misconduct, tweeted to a follower, No, we weren't invited.
	Annabella Sciarro, Daryl Hanna, Mira Sorvino, none of us were.
	Patricia Arquette replied, that's not cool.
	All of you should have been included.
	I wasn't asked either, but who cares?
	It's great they're doing it, and we will too.
	Well, no, actually, it's not great that they're a bunch of hypocrites who won't even invite the victims.
	It just shows you that all of this is for show.
	And speaking of for show, all these people virtue signaling after doing pretty much nothing on politics for their entire careers, but they have to show how wonderful they are.
	So all of these women decided they were going to bring female activists to the Golden Globes as their partners.
	So Rosa Clemente joined Susan Sarandon.
	Who is Rosa Clemente?
	Yeah, that's not virtue signaling to bring that lady to the Golden Globes, and then, like, the only way you hear about this is because there's a piece at Huffington Post.
	I mean, you want to talk about tokenism?
	This is the essence of tokenism.
	And then you have Meryl Streep, who brought along Ai-jen Poo, who is an advocate for domestic workers and those involved in family care.
	Yeah, I'm sure that that's high on Meryl Streep's priority list.
	I mean, because this is the first I've heard of it.
	My favorite, personally, was Sarah Jayaraman, who attended the Golden Globes as a guest of Amy Poehler.
	She is best known for organizing low-wage restaurant workers and fighting for fair pay.
	How about Amy Poehler sells her jewelry and gives it to the restaurant workers for fair pay?
	Emma Stone, Burr Long, Billie Jean King, because lesbianism at Wimbledon is a major issue in today's America.
	It's something that we definitely have to press for.
	All of the virtue signaling is just a high level, it just generates a high level of irritation, as well it should.
	It's really silly, and the idea that this is making any sort of difference other than alienating people is really dumb.
	Okay, so, we will be back here tomorrow with all of the latest news.
	I'm Ben Shapiro, this is The Ben Shapiro Show.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Mathis Glover.
	Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
	Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
	Our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
	Edited by Alex Zingaro.
	Audio is mixed by Mike Cormina.
	Hair and makeup is by Jesua Olvera.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire Forward Publishing production.

▲