All Episodes
Previous Next
April 25, 2018 - The Ben Shapiro Show
50:19
Kanye Believe It? | Ep. 525
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Kanye West gets labeled alt-right by a Washington Post writer, Pat Buchanan stems for the end of democracy, and the New York Times tells a romantic story about a lesbian and a transgender woman conceiving a child.
So, basically a normal 2018 Newsday.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
Well, one thing you can certainly say is that God has a sense of humor with the news cycle, because every day is an adventure.
We'll get to all of the myriad adventures in just a second.
First, I want to say thanks to our sponsors over at Birch Gold.
So, let's be real about this.
You feel a little bit uncomfortable with the state of politics right now, do you not?
You feel like the economy may be on a knife's edge.
Maybe you feel like it's going strong, or maybe you just want to invest for the future.
Whatever your case may be, you should at least have some of your money in precious metals.
I'm not saying take all your money out of the stock market and stick it in gold.
I'm saying you might want to take some of your money and put it in precious metals because it's a good hedge against inflation, against government interventionism, it's a good hedge against volatility in the market.
If you want to invest in precious metals, there's only one group you should be talking to, and those are my friends over at Birch Gold Group.
They have a long-standing track record of continued success, thousands of satisfied clients, countless five-star reviews, and an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
Contact Birch Gold Group right now to receive a free information kit on physical precious metals.
It's a comprehensive 16-page kit, and it shows how gold and silver can protect your savings and how you can legally move your IRA or 401k out of stocks and bonds and into a precious metals IRA if you so choose.
To get that no-cost-no-obligation kit, go to birchgold.com slash ben.
That's birchgold.com slash ben.
Again, use that slash ben to get that free comprehensive 16-page kit.
Ask all your questions.
Once you get your answers, invest with my friends over at Birch Gold, birchgold.com slash ben.
Use the slash ben so they know that we sent you.
Okay, so there's a serious question to be asked about what it takes to be labeled alt-right these days.
So, as someone who is quite familiar with the alt-right, you may recall all the way back to the 2016 election cycle when the alt-right and I went at it on a routine basis, mainly because they didn't like that I was a cuck Jew and I didn't like that they were a bunch of anti-Semitic mind freaks.
So, I'm not fond of the alt-right.
I find the alt-right despicable.
And when I say alt-right, I don't mean people who like memes.
I think memes are funny.
I don't mean people who voted for Donald Trump, because the vast majority of those people are not alt-right.
I mean people who are actual racists, who believe that there is a white supremacy inherent in the color of your skin, which is stupid and ridiculous and anti-democratic.
Well, the problem is that the left has now broadened out the label alt-right to apply to anyone.
So, they've labeled me alt-right, which is Incredibly insane.
I mean, like, full-on insane, considering I was the number one target of the alt-right in 2016.
According to the Anti-Defamation League, I was the number one recipient of anti-Semitic tweets among Jewish journalists, with a bullet.
I mean, I'm talking 40% of all anti-Semitic tweets directed at journalists, many of these from the alt-right, were directed at me personally.
And yet now I am supposed to believe that I'm a member of the alt-right.
What made me a member of the alt-right?
What made me a member of the alt-right is that I am not on the left.
And the latest beneficiary of this particularly bizarre line of logic is, of course, our future president, Kanye West.
So, a few days ago, I warned you that if you're conservative and you are supremely Just in love with the fact that Kanye West is saying some mildly conservative things on Twitter, you might want to hold off.
You might say, great, I'm glad he said that on Twitter, but before you start declaring that he's a presidential candidate, before you start saying he's a celebrity who knows things, you might want to take a look at his older tweets, which include things like, fur pillows are hard to sleep on.
True, true, I can't argue with that tweet, but not exactly in line with, I would say, the intellectual thinking of the conservative movement, but Because Kanye tweeted these relatively mild things about how victim mentality is not good, and how you have to go out and work for yourself, and how he likes Candace Owens, who is the communications director of Returning Point USA, working with Charlie Kirk, both good folks.
Well now, there's a person who's written for the Washington Post, her name is Molly Roberts, and she says that Kanye West is an alt-right darling.
Which is weird, since the alt-right is not particularly fond of black people.
But again, this is the way that the left shrinks that Overton window.
The left says there is a window of acceptable rhetoric, and if you're not on the left, you are outside that window of acceptable rhetoric.
Sure, Kanye spent most of the 2000s saying that George W. Bush was a vicious racist, but now he's out of the tent because he says that self-victimization is a disease.
And that's, I think, a direct quote.
So here is what this leftist writes over at the Washington Post.
Quote, Kanye West was having a great weekend until he wasn't.
One moment, the rapper-producer-entrepreneur was dispensing pearls of pseudo-philosophy on Twitter to the retweets of adoring observers.
The next, many of those same admirers had turned to denouncing him instead.
Oh, and he had become an alt-right darling.
Whatever West is going through at the moment, the response to his Twitter spree reveals more about the people who have fled from him.
And those who have flocked to him, too.
West's fortunes reversed, writes this writer for the Washington Post, Molly Roberts, when he expressed his admiration on Saturday for red pill YouTuber Candace Owens, an African-American Donald Trump supporter known for, among other things, referring to Black Lives Matter protesters as whiny toddlers pretending to be oppressed for attention.
The following day, he tweeted nine videos from Scott Adams, who gained his fame first for creating the cartoon Dilbert, and second for proclaiming that rape is a natural instinct of men and society a virtual prison for men's desires.
Okay, that is taking Scott Adams wildly out of context.
I believe Scott Adams' actual argument is that natural instincts of human beings are bad and this is why you create civilizations, which I thought was a relatively uncomplicated and uncontroversial In any case, as Molly Roberts continues, it's easy to cast West as just another lost man, seduced by the far-right's promise to provide a sense of purpose.
All that pseudo-philosophy does suggest a preoccupation with the sort of existential problems figures such as psychologist Jordan Peterson, who has become a surprise lifestyle guru, claim they can solve.
It's also possible to connect West's eccentric behavior on Twitter—this isn't the first time his forays into politics have discomfited some fans—to the mental health struggles that led to his 2017 hospitalization.
So let's get this straight.
Kanye West has been tweeting crazy crap for most of his career.
I mean, I read you some of his tweets the other day, okay?
Like, talking about finding antique fish tanks, right?
That he needs an antique fish tank.
Talking about how he is looking for a marble table, a marble conference table, because he can't actually have a meeting without a marble conference table.
Kanye is the guy who tweeted, I love me some me, right?
I mean, Kanye is famous for not being... Unhinged might be a word that you might use in connection with Kanye.
This is a guy famous for charging on a stage in the middle of a music awards ceremony to yell at Taylor Swift.
And now, only now, does the left discover that Kanye might be a bit unstable.
Why is he unstable?
Because he tweeted that he likes Candace Owens' videos.
All right, well, this is the way this is gonna go.
Also, I love that they link Jordan Peterson, a former professor at Harvard University and now a professor over at University of Toronto, widely understood to be one of the smarter humans alive.
to Kanye West, that West is just another lost man seduced by the far-right's promise to provide a sense of purpose.
It's so funny how the left talks about this.
They never talk about followers of Bernie Sanders this way.
Bernie Sanders promises to provide a sense of purpose also, right?
His sense of purpose lies in the collective, and his sense of purpose is, I will tell you how you can help fix all of the problems of planet Earth by giving me lots of power and by redistributing all wealth.
The left never says, look at all these Bernie bros, right?
These are guys who are lost, looking for something to do, bored, useless, and now they found a sense of purpose in Bernie Sanders.
But when it comes to somebody on the right, then all of a sudden it's lost, angry young man experiencing existential angst.
Welcome to the real world where a lot of people experience existential angst.
The question is, who can cater to that in a healthy way?
Jordan caters to that in a healthy way, but now they're saying that Kanye West is a Jordan Peterson devotee or something?
I wish Kanye West were a Jordan Peterson devotee.
I mean, I think that would be really good for Kanye.
In fact, Kanye, go over and listen to Jordan Peterson's lectures on the Bible, on the Enlightenment.
I think that that'd be great for you.
But the Washington Post says that all of this makes Kanye West crazy.
So he wasn't crazy when he was crazy.
He's crazy when he's conservative.
And the Washington Post continues.
So I love this too.
So, Kanye, who was supremely wealthy during Hurricane Katrina, I mean, the guy was worth tens of millions of dollars by the time of Hurricane Katrina.
like his live declaration on television after Hurricane Katrina, that George Bush doesn't care about black people.
He may be too preoccupied with his image of himself as a truth teller to recognize that the unconventional communication style he finds so attractive in Trump is just a way to cover up lies.
So I love this too.
So Kanye, who was supremely wealthy during Hurricane Katrina, I mean, the guy was worth tens of millions of dollars by the time of Hurricane Katrina.
At that point, he wasn't out of touch.
Now he's out of touch.
And you can tell that he's out of touch because he's saying things that Molly Roberts doesn't like in the Washington Post.
That's how you can tell, right?
I mean, you know he's out of touch now.
You know he's a member of the alt-right because he said that self-victimization is a problem, because he said that you're in control of your own life.
Kanye says these things, and boom, this dude is like Hitler.
He is just like Hitler, and now he's not even a real black person, is what Molly Roberts is really saying, because a real black person would feel an authentic tie to his roots.
And Kanye doesn't feel an authentic tie to his roots anymore because he's become so wealthy and so cloistered.
Weird, I haven't heard the same thing about Snoop Dogg, because Snoop Dogg makes videos about shooting the President of the United States.
Snoop Dogg is woke, so Snoop Dogg obviously has a tie back to the people, but Kanye has no tie back to those people, obviously because he's wealthy.
What happened is Kanye got rich, and then he was on the left, but he still had a tie to his people.
But then he was still rich, and now he is saying things that aren't left-wing, and this means that he has lost all tie to being black.
Kanye West is basically like Bill Nye the Science Guy in blackface.
That's basically what he is right now.
Except if Bill and I were right-wing.
He's just a white guy.
There are people who are saying he's gone to the sunken place, which is a reference to what I thought was the racially polarizing movie Get Out, which was overlooked by all the critics.
The bad racial messaging in Get Out was overlooked by all the critics because obviously it was a left-wing film.
The Washington Post continues, Okay, so here is what Molly Roberts writes in the Washington Post.
is probably as fruitless as finding meaning in the bromides he's been offering up the past few days.
All you have to be is yourself.
The beauty is in the imperfections.
Everything you do in life stems either from fear or love.
It might be more useful to examine what the reaction to West's provocative tweets reveal about the left and right alike.
So how have people reacted to West's tweets?
Okay, so here is what Molly Roberts writes in the Washington Post.
Progressives.
West's more typical fan base greeted his return to Twitter with breathless engagement.
But the moment West expressed his approval of Owens, Eager to signal their lefty credentials, they withdrew their support the moment West went against the party line, which sort of sounds like this writer.
Then there's the right, all's and otherwise.
Most conservatives had less interest in West's work, and they certainly didn't like it when he condemned Bush.
But now, a lineup of luminaries on the right has assembled to defend West against liberal hoards.
Where Alex Jones once called West a microcosm of America's degeneration, He now praises his bold moves against the Thought Police.
Where Bill O'Reilly once described West as a disease, the former Fox host on Sunday decried the attack against him by American Stalinists.
Okay, so first of all, I would just like to point out that Alex Jones is not really particularly representative of the American right.
Right?
You know, like Alex Jones.
Alex Jones!
Like that guy?
Not supremely representative of the American right.
Most people on the American right were like, okay, glad Kanye's saying some nice stuff.
Guy's still Kanye.
He's weird.
What do you have to say?
Like, nothing here.
But you can feel all these same things.
Like, I did an entire segment two days ago about why conservatives should not be over the moon about Kanye West suddenly embracing the right-wing agenda.
At the same time, I'm defending him from American Stalinists like this column.
I mean, this is this sort of thought policing.
Kanye West said something bad.
He must be crazy.
He must be a right-wing racist.
It's all insane.
It's all insane.
So this Molly Roberts concludes, West has hyped up his announced album even further with the publicity he gained from courting controversy.
Liberals have shown off their willingness to enforce ideological purity no matter who the offender is.
And the far right has demonstrated once again they're willing to flip-flop at the slightest sign they might be able to land a mainstream celebrity recruit.
Don't trade your authenticity for approval, West tweeted last week.
Too late.
Okay, well, again, the left would not be complaining because they were talking for years about what a woke guy he was when he was ripping into George W. Bush.
So, before we go any further, I want to say thanks to our sponsors over at Blue Apron.
So, Blue Apron is the leading meal delivery kit in the United States, and many people know what they do, but some people don't.
Okay, here's what they do.
They will send to you These amazing recipes, along with the prepackaged, purely fresh ingredients, and you can cook them with your family in your own home.
It takes like 45 minutes to cook these meals, and they are gourmet.
They're the number one fresh ingredient recipe delivery service in the country, and they offer a bunch of plans.
They offer, first of all, convenience and variety because they deliver all of this to you on a regular basis.
12 new recipes per week.
Customers can pick two, three, or four recipes based on what best fits their schedule.
It's high-quality stuff.
They send only non-GMO ingredients, meat with no added hormones.
Again, everybody at the office is using Blue Apron because you don't have time to go to the grocery store.
You don't have time to figure out what it is you want to cook tonight and then try and parcel out in your mind how much of X you need to buy.
Instead, it all just comes right to you, and you're making fantastic recipes, restaurant-quality stuff.
Check out this week's menu.
Get your first three meals free at BlueApron.com slash Shapiro.
BlueApron.com slash Shapiro.
Again, I mean, I'm looking at some of their recipes.
They're amazing.
It's like steak frites with roasted broccoli and lemon aioli.
It's Kung Pao Chicken with Sir Fried Snow Peas and Sweet Peppers, right?
Stuff that you would be paying a lot of money at a restaurant for.
Instead, you're cooking it in your own home, which is super fun with kids particularly.
Check it out.
Blueaprons.com slash Shapiro.
That's Blueaprons.com slash Shapiro.
And you get your first three meals free.
Okay, so...
Meanwhile, while the West is consumed with the saga of Kanye West, I think that it is important to give an update on the situation regarding Alfie Evans, who's this two-year-old child in Great Britain.
So this two-year-old child in Great Britain, almost two, has been condemned to die by the British courts.
His parents want to remove him from Britain.
The Italian government has sent a plane.
The Italian government has said that they will provide for his medical care in Italy.
And the British government is saying, no, we will not let him out.
This is like Pharaoh.
We will not let him go.
We will not let him go to save his life because he must die with dignity.
And we say that death with dignity means dying in our hospital at our behest.
Now, number one, the idea of dying with dignity is such an insulting term.
Just the very terminology of dying with dignity is really bizarre because Everybody is gonna die, and the suggestion that if you cling to life that somehow you lack dignity, or the suggestion that if you meet your end, being sad about your impending death, that this means that you are somehow lacking in courage, that there is a dignified way to go, and the dignified way to go is in a hospital surrounded by people who are pumping juice into you, or, alternatively, the dignified way to go is for us to unhook a baby and watch that baby suffocate to death because the baby can't breathe properly, doesn't seem super dignified to me.
You know, everybody has to face death.
Your choice as an adult is how to face it.
But as a child, there's no such thing as dying with dignity.
There just isn't.
Because you're not capable of dignity as a two-year-old.
I have a two-year-old boy.
He's not capable of dignity.
He's capable of pooping in his pants and being cute.
This is what my two-year-old is capable of.
He's awesome.
I love him.
Dignity ain't on the menu.
But the idea that you're going to take a two-year-old who's dying of a horrible brain disease and then say, this child has to die with dignity.
It's such a stupid, insulting term.
It's just a ridiculous term.
And beyond that, the arrogance of these folks to say that they know more than the parents about what is best for the child and what's best for the child is to die without this experimental treatment.
Who the hell are they to decide that?
Who are they to decide what sort of life is best worth living?
The medical profession used to be about the Hippocratic Oath, preserving life as long as humanly possible.
Now the medical profession has become the great arbiter of the lives that are worthy.
This is true in Great Britain.
It's true in the United States as well.
You have people like Ezekiel Emanuel saying he wants to die at 80 because he doesn't want to live with disease.
Well, that's his choice.
He can do what he wants.
Free country.
But the idea that his standard for a dignified life should be the standard for everyone, even above the wishes of parents who are the ones who have to spend time with their child.
The father last night was giving mouth-to-mouth to his son because the hospital would not give his son oxygen.
Okay, this is evil what we're watching in Britain.
It's evil.
And that's happening because the bureaucracy, the centralized bureaucracy of great states have decided that they know more than the common man about virtue and vice.
They know more about dignity and death than the common person, including the common person who has to actually visit the gravestone.
None of these doctors are going to be going to Alfie's grave after the kid dies.
I promise you his parents will.
Just horrifying.
Okay, so, meanwhile...
Speaking of foolishness, we in the United States are consumed with the most important issues.
Here's an important issue from the New York Times, from Joanne Spatero.
Ms.
Spatero is a New York-based writer who's engaged to a transgender woman, which is to say, a man.
A biological man.
And here is the piece from the New York Times, because the New York Times only traffics in the most important ideas.
The things that we all have to come to grips with as a society.
No, not like religious freedom or the value of life.
Not stuff about whether the government ought to be involved in your healthcare decisions.
No.
What they have to be involved in is explaining how it is that a woman and a man who's had some hormone treatments can have a baby and it's the same thing as two lesbians magically having a baby.
Which is weird.
Weird.
Okay, so here's what it says.
Our society may have lost its moorings, just a little.
Okay, so here's what the New York Times piece from Joanne Spatero says.
"Over the last several months, I've spent evenings "watching my fiancee, Lara, inject herself "with smaller and smaller doses of estrogen." Lara, again, is a biological man.
I've watched her stand in front of a mirror, singeing each hair out of her face with a secondhand electrolysis machine.
The return of her testosterone hasn't resulted in just the resurgence of facial hair.
Her pants now fit differently, too.
My own skin has been plagued by acne since I got off the pill six months ago, and my default states are angry, hungry, or sleeping.
Such are the perils of trying to have a child the way Lara and I are trying, without in vitro fertilization or cryogenically frozen sperm, the way fertile cisgender people do.
They simply couple up and boom, a child is born.
I'm not sure why there are perils involved with this.
I've done it twice.
It was great.
Okay, let's be real about this.
Maybe it's pretty awesome.
People have been doing it for hundreds of thousands of years.
Not seeing the tough part here.
And not seeing the reason we have to have a, let's look at this, 1200 word essay?
On you having sex with a dude who thinks he's a lady?
Not sure why that is worthy of space in the New York Times, but...
Alright, alright, I just, I love that everything, if you could run a scam, right, let's say, it's so funny, folks on the left are constantly thinking that, you know, the Bible thumpers, the people who believe in things like actual biology, that these people, what they're really seeking to do is they want to take lesbians and they want to marry them off to men and force them into a situation where they have to have biological children with a male.
I guess all we have to do now is declare that the man's a woman.
And then, we're good, right?
I mean, this woman's a lesbian, but she's having sex with a full-on man.
Because the man is a woman, but not really.
Because he says he's a woman because he has some sort of mental disorder.
And this is, again, worthy of coverage in the New York Times.
For many young trans people, the question of having babies is likely the last thing on their minds.
Who could blame them?
Like all young people, they're figuring out their future, and matters of diapers and breastfeeding seem abstract and far off.
But unlike all young people, young trans people are often making choices that have long-term consequences for their fertility, which is part of how I, a 32-year-old cisgender lesbian, and Lyra, my 33-year-old trans fiancé, came to be in the situation we're in today, trying to conceive a child even though Lyra transitioned nearly four years ago.
Well, Lyra transitioned, sort of.
Lyra still has the non-Lyra parts, right?
Lyra still has the John parts, or whatever Lyra's previous name was.
Her dead name, as they say.
I didn't even vaguely realize I wanted biological kids until my mid-twenties.
Before then, I'd vaguely imagined that children would simply come to me a la Auntie Mame or Diane Keaton in Baby Boom.
I'd inherit them from a long-lost relative and simply slot them into my independent, modern life.
Little did I know that in just a few years I'd be staying up to read studies in which scientists combined the eggs of two female rats to make a child, hoping for 50 more years on the planet so I'd be around when they began testing on humans.
But you don't need them to combine two female eggs, you're having sex with a dude who has sperm.
So that's... odd.
Again, the reason that I highlight this is just to demonstrate that when you cast out biological distinctions and pretend, That science is something that science is not.
You end up with bizarre notions like the idea that it's some sort of great earth-shaking event when a man and a woman have sex and create a baby because the man has been taking some hormone treatments.
Also, this article is making a case that I'm pretty sure this writer doesn't want to make.
Which is that it may be worthwhile for transgender people not to actually mutilate their own genitals.
That it may be worthwhile for them to keep the genitals that they have so that they can actually procreate when they choose to do so.
This is actually the subtle case that is being made by this article, but it's pretty amazing.
It's pretty amazing.
So, at the very end, Joanne Spatero actually says that.
as she says, the truth is some people know from the beginning, they never want kids, but some, even those who thought they were sure can one day find themselves feeling differently, especially if they meet someone they'd love to blend jeans with.
These people can then find that permanent decisions made early on may have closed doors before they even knew they wanted to open them.
So pretty, pretty interesting stuff actually is that the, the conclusion of the article is the conservative conclusion that you may want to wait to have hormone treatment and mutilate your body because you think that you're a member of the opposite sex, because you may never know what sort of choices you want to make later.
But this is what happens when a society decides to purposely confuse itself about basic concepts like what gender constitutes.
Okay, so before I go any further, first I want to say thank you to our sponsors over at Skillshare.
Skillshare is an online learning platform with over 20,000 classes in business design, technology, and more.
And it is just fantastic.
We've been taking all sorts of new classes over at Skillshare.
Our employees have been taking classes over at Skillshare.
I've been taking classes from Skillshare.
45 minutes.
By people who really know what they're doing.
We're talking about experts in their field.
You can even interact with those experts as well.
So it's not quite the same thing as just going and viewing a YouTube video for seven minutes and you get like a basic concept of what's going on.
You will know what you are doing when you finish a Skillshare class.
This is just the way it works.
You can take classes in social media marketing, illustration, data science.
I've started taking one now in photography because I already took mine in watercolor.
I'm becoming a more artistic individual, okay?
You hear?
Okay, so they're doing all of this.
And whether you're trying to deepen that professional skill set or start a side hustle or just making sure that your resume is better so that if you change jobs you get higher pay, skill set is for you.
Skill set is for you.
Join the millions of students already learning on Skillshare today with my special offer just for my listeners.
Get two months of Skillshare for just $0.99.
That's right, Skillshare is offering my listeners right now two months of unlimited access to over 20,000 classes for just $0.99.
Go to skillshare.com.
That is Skillshare.com slash Shapiro to start those two months right now.
Skillshare.com slash Shapiro.
Once you sign up, you're going to want to continue it because it just is that good.
I know my audience loves to learn and there's no better place to do it than Skillshare.
Skillshare.com slash Shapiro to check it out.
All right.
So speaking of the media's promulgation of particular ideas about gender and transgenderism, it is pretty obvious that this is having a significant impact on the society at large.
Now, I guess the government is going to tell your children how to think about these issues.
So on Monday, there's a feminist writer named Jessica Valenti, and she made pretty clear why a lot of conservatives are looking to homeschool their kids.
Okay.
She tweeted out this.
She tweeted out, to the folks who find LGBT language confusing, if my daughter's second grade class gets it, so can you.
Okay, and here is what the picture that she tweeted out says.
It says, lesbian, a woman who has only romantic feelings about women.
Gay, a man who has only romantic feelings about men.
Bi, a person who has romantic feelings about men and women.
Why would a seven-year-old need to know these things, you ask?
Because we have to indoctrinate them at seven years old, otherwise they'll turn out to be intolerant Americans.
Transgender, a person who is assigned male or female at birth but doesn't identify that way.
Okay, that is so anti-scientific, I cannot even begin to explain it.
Okay, you are not assigned male or female at birth.
It's not like the doctor sits there and flips a coin and goes, you know what?
You're a male.
I've just figured it out, you know, we're gonna assign it to you.
Right, just like you're given an assignment in class.
No, the doctor looks at the peepee, or the juju, and then says, you are a male or a female.
Okay, this is really not difficult.
Seriously, the doctor does not assign sex at birth.
By the way, if you're gonna say the doctor assigned sex, assigns it, then you're gonna have to go back to the ultrasound because by 10 weeks, you know whether your baby's a boy or a girl.
In fact, we can tell even earlier than that in some cases simply by looking at the mother's bloodstream because certain cells from the baby are present in blood tests for the mother and you can tell whether the baby is a boy or a girl.
That's not a sign.
I mean, this notion that sex is some sort of social construct is so insane.
Or that gender is completely untethered from sex.
It doesn't even make sense according to the advocates of transgenderism.
If gender and sex are completely untethered, then why is it that transgender people want to appear to look like women?
Why is it that transgender people find it important to use female names?
If all this is untethered from sex and completely arbitrary, then wouldn't you just assume you could be transgender without picking up any of those cultural stereotypes that have been created by that patriarchal white cisgender society?
Also, these second graders are learning, a person who is assigned male or female at birth and does identify that way is a cisgender person.
A queer person, it's complex and can mean a lot of things.
A person who doesn't identify as straight or bi or gay or lesbian.
Well, thanks for that clarification.
And straight is a man who only has romantic feelings about women or a woman who only has romantic feelings about men.
Again, I'm so glad that second graders are learning this in Jessica Valenti's second grade child's class.
Very important stuff.
The reason I bring this up is because the same government that says it gets to decide whether your child should live or die in Britain is the same government that gets to decide whether your school teaches you this propaganda or not.
Okay, so there's a Jewish school in Britain It's now, it's been threatened for two years by the British authorities because it is a Jewish school, meaning they do not want to teach propaganda from the LGBT left.
They're not interested in teaching about the moral equivalence between heterosexual sex and homosexual sex.
They're not interested in teaching about the socially approved ideas of transgenderism.
They say that God made men and God made women, and there are some people who are born intersex, but that's not the same thing as transgenderism.
That school is now being threatened with its license revoked, revocation, license revocation in Britain.
Okay, so the same government that's telling you how to raise your child is telling you when your child has to die.
Centralized government is such a nightmare.
This is why it sort of matters when you see these pieces that seem to be on the wild left, because everything that starts off on the wild left ends up on the mainstream left within about five minutes.
The whole goal here is indoctrination of children.
And you can see this even insofar as there's another story that's insane.
Apparently, according to LifeSite News, transgender activists gathered outside a Rhode Island Catholic church last week—it's a Catholic church, for God's sake—to protest a lecture delivered by pediatrician Michelle Crotella, who views affirming transgenderism in kids as a form of child abuse.
Okay, it's a Catholic church.
What do you think she's going to say?
By the way, I tend to agree with this position.
I tend to agree with the position that if my two-year-old came to me and said, Daddy, I'm a girl, and I said to him, you know what, you're right, kid, you're a girl.
Ignore all your biology, you're a girl.
That purposefully confusing children is a form of child abuse, I think that there's a solid case to be made for this.
Michelle, certainly the idea of generally mutilating, or hormonally mutilating children, I think is a form of child abuse, pretty obviously.
In any case, Michelle Critella is president of the American College of Pediatricians, and she's made it her mission to highlight the harmful effects of gender transitioning on children, according to Paul Bois over at Daily Wire.
At the time of her comments, Rhode Island had recently enacted a law stripping parents of their right to object to providing treatment for gender transition to children who showed signs of gender dysphoria.
The Roman Island Catholic explained the law, quote, Last year, the state of Rhode Island made it illegal for a licensed medical professional to counsel a child away from the desire to change his or her gender identity.
Yet it remains legal to inject that same child with hormone blockers and cross-sex hormones.
Currently, Rhode Island public schools are deciding how to implement statewide transgender policies that would open up bathrooms, locker rooms, and sports teams to anyone who claims to be the opposite gender from their biological sex.
It's not that much.
It's one thing to argue that if you are a parent, you should be allowed to make the terrible decision about forwarding your child's transgender feelings.
I said it's a terrible decision because studies show that well over 80% of all children who believe they are transgender when they are children outgrow it by the time they're teenagers.
Very often they end up gay or lesbian.
But the state has now mandated that everyone be indoctrinated with these ideas.
And it's a very short leap from here to the idea that homeschooling itself should be illegal.
So a lot of Christians, a lot of Jews have started taking their kids, Muslims too, have started taking their kids out of public schools and educating their children at home to avoid these social leftist strictures.
Well, the state is not gonna stand for that.
The state is going to say that you are not licensed to do that and your kid is a truant.
And then, they will say next, that if your kid does not learn what the state wants your kid to learn, then they will take your kid away from you and give him up to foster care.
They'll send him Child Protective Services.
I am predicting this right now, okay?
You can mark the date.
I've been predicting this for months now.
You can mark the date.
Today's April 25th.
Within five years, there will be a serious movement in this country to end homeschooling, simply because everyone on the left believes that homeschooling is a threat to their social values.
And the case will be made that you're bringing up kids to be intolerant, that you're bringing up kids to be cruel and nasty.
Parental power will shrink as the power of the state grows.
So anyway, this woman, Critella, Dr. Critella, she was speaking at the St.
Pius V Church in Providence, and 40 LGBT activists showed up outside.
And then they started protesting her.
It's just astonishing.
Again, they're protesting churches.
This is why when people on the left say, why do you feel so threatened by all of this?
You can do what you want.
It's a free country.
Go to whatever lefty church you want to go to.
Don't go to church at all.
I don't care.
Be gay, be lesbian, be transgender.
You're an adult.
Your decision.
As a religious person, I can think your decisions are sinful.
Doesn't matter.
It's a free country.
You can think I'm an idiot.
But I will tell you that once you start going outside churches and protesting traditional churches, suggesting those traditional churches have to change their ways or face your wrath, you're talking about something deeply disturbing and fascistic in the extreme.
Now in just a second I want to discuss the controversy swirling around Joy Reid over at MSNBC because she is now in serious trouble.
Uh, but I'll explain that in just a second.
First, I want to say thanks to our sponsors over at Policy Genius.
So, 71% of Americans say they need life insurance, but only 59% of them have actually gotten coverage.
Well, this is because you're lazy.
Okay?
If you haven't gotten life insurance, it's because you're lazy.
It's not that expensive.
It's worth looking into.
And once you're dead, you can't do it anymore.
Just like many other things.
Except this time, your death actually matters.
Your family may not love you, but if you leave them bereft, they will love you even less.
You want people at your funeral?
Go get some life insurance.
If you've been avoiding getting life insurance, you need to go over to my friends at Policy Genius.
It's the easy way to compare life insurance online.
You can compare quotes in just five minutes, and when it is that easy, then there's no excuse for putting it off other than you're a doof.
Policy Genius has helped over 4 million people shop for insurance They've placed over $20 billion in coverage, and they don't just make life insurance easy.
They also compare disability insurance, renter's insurance, and health insurance.
If you care about it, they cover it.
So go over to PolicyGenius.com right now.
And again, within minutes, you can be comparing quotes.
It is the easy way to compare top insurers and find the best value for you.
No sales pressure, zero hassle.
You can do it all in the comfort of your own home while you're watching Netflix.
PolicyGenius.com.
When it's this easy to compare life insurance, there's no reason to put it off.
Again, PolicyGenius.com.
Okay.
Well, in just a second, I'm going to discuss the situation with Joy Reid.
But first, you're going to have to go over to dailywire.com and subscribe.
So dailywire.com, $9.99 a month.
You get the rest of this show live today.
We're from Liberty University.
It's an amazing, amazing setup.
I mean, I spoke at the convocation this morning.
It was incredible.
Incredible group of people.
We'll put that speech up on our YouTube page where you should subscribe as well.
But if you just want to watch the rest of the show live, be part of our mailbag on Friday, then go over to dailywire.com, subscribe, $9.99 a month.
The rest of my show live, the rest of Clavin's show live, the rest of Noel's show live.
Plenty more goodies coming in the very, very near future.
Also, if you want to just follow us and watch for free, then go over to YouTube, subscribe, leave us a review.
Go over to iTunes, do the same thing.
We always appreciate it.
We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast in the nation.
All righty.
So a leading LGBT advocacy group has now rescinded its Straight for Equality in Media award from MSNBC host Joy Reid on Tuesday.
Now, it would be easier for me to follow this controversy if Joy Reid had not, in fact, blocked me on Twitter years ago.
But it turns out that Joy Reid, years ago, ran a blog.
And on that blog, she posted stuff that was supposedly homophobic.
I went back and I read the comments.
And they're not great for a leftist, but they're also not particularly over the top.
Like, she says things in—to give you some context, she says things like, the sight of two men kissing makes her uncomfortable.
I'm not sure why that's homophobic.
Like, really, I'm not sure why that's homophobic.
I would assume that for gay people, watching straight people kiss is not something that they enjoy particularly much.
She says that she didn't want to watch Brokeback Mountain because it made her uncomfortable.
Again, I think the whole— predicate of our sexual freedom society is that whatever floats your boat, which means by necessity certain things do not float your boat, which means that you have to leave people alone if things don't float their boat.
But apparently Joy Reid committed some sort of grave sin here, and now she must be cast out like a leper from the leftist group thing.
So Liz Owen, director of communications for PFLAG National, said the group had invited Reid to honor her at their 45th anniversary celebration.
Joy Reid's been pro same-sex marriage for years.
knowing about some posts she'd already apologized for, but there were new posts that had caused it to rescind the invitation.
Owen said, we appreciated how she stepped up, took ownership, apologized for them, and did better.
This is the behavior and approach we ask of any ally.
However, in light of new information and the ongoing investigation of that information, we must at this time rescind our award to Ms. Reid.
So these newly uncovered posts were uncovered by Mediaite, and she responded that she had been hacked, that this was all the result of hacking, which is real weird.
This is her big mistake.
She suggested that she came out and she said that...
That these were fake, right?
She made the Anthony Weiner mistake.
You're not allowed to make the Anthony Weiner mistake.
It's one thing to post a bunch of weird stuff and then apologize for it later, but Joy Reid instead said that she'd been hacked, which led to this entire controversy about whether, in fact, she'd been hacked.
The answer is probably not, right?
All this stuff had been discovered by looking at the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine.
The Wayback Machine captures websites, old websites and old posts, and there's no indicator that the Wayback Machine itself had been hacked.
But the point here is simply that the left is so intolerant that no matter how much Joy Reid may believe that she is an ally, she is in fact not an ally, right?
She cannot be an ally because she said something that people don't like 15 years ago, 12, 15 years ago, even though she has recanted all of those particular posts.
Right, so it's, this is, I think, a really bad, a lot of people on the right are jumping on this and saying Joy Reid should lose her career, Joy Reid should be fired, and listen, I understand the satanic temptation to stomp on Joy Reid's grave, I get it.
Like, I understand that there are a bunch of people on the left who say a really nasty thing about the right, and if this were someone on the right, I don't think Joy Reid would be defending them, but I'm gonna say, for the record, that I think that somebody who had positions that they then recanted, and clearly recanted, I don't see why bringing up their old posts and then destroying their career over it is a worthwhile thing, because the truth is you can do this about pretty much anything.
Anybody who's had a long career in public is going to have said some stuff that they're embarrassed of.
Anybody in public is going to have said some things that they wish they hadn't said.
Some of them have changed positions.
I've changed some of my positions over the years.
There's a column I wrote in 2007 about what I termed traitorous Democrats talking about the Iraq War that I probably wouldn't write now.
That was 11 years ago.
There's a column I wrote very early in my career about the Israeli-Palestinian issue, in which I suggested transfer as a possibility for Arab populations.
I openly recounted that.
I think this is true for pretty much everybody in public life, that if you go back far enough, you can find something they said that they no longer believe, and destroying them over that is a really dangerous game.
Because if we're going to do that, then people are just going to hide what they believe.
What you actually want from your public persona, what you actually want from opinion makers, are their thoughts.
You don't want them hiding their thoughts.
You don't want them hiding the ball.
You want to know what they think.
Because that's how we can engage with these ideas.
That's how we as a society can call out the bad ideas and garner the good ones.
That's the whole goal.
And again, I find the whole attack on Joy Reid to be wildly, wildly silly, particularly from the left.
So I'm looking at some of these posts right now.
So, uh, she, she wrote a post called, uh, Charlie Crist is not gay.
Uh, she wrote a post, apparently, or this was on her website, uh, it was called Harriet Meyers and the Lesbian Hair Check, talking about Harriet Meyers' lesbian hair.
Like, really?
That's the kind of stuff that you're gonna ruin her career over?
Again, I'm not sure why any of this is particularly homophobic.
Most straight people had a hard time being convinced to watch Brokeback Mountain.
I admit that I couldn't go see the movie either, despite my sister's ringing endorsement, because I didn't want to watch the two male characters having sex.
Does that make me homophobic?
Probably.
Well, the truth is, it doesn't make you homophobic, because again, being a homophobe just means that you are scared of gay people, or scared of homosexual activity, or presumably that you're bigoted against homosexuals.
Not being into the activity does not mean you're homophobic.
Again, if that were the case, then gay people would be straight-phobic, because that logic doesn't hold at all.
Here's another one of the posts that supposedly has to finish Joy Reid's career.
Some people use the word immoral when they really mean distasteful.
I think a lot of heterosexuals, especially men, find the idea of homosexual sex to be well-gross, and they lump it in with immorality.
And then there are the concerns that adult gay men tend to be attracted to very young, post-pubescent types, bringing them into the lifestyle in a way that many people consider to be immoral.
So that last sentence is the one that borders on the controversial, right?
That last sentence where she says that there are adult gay men who prey on younger men.
Yeah, that's the only section here that I find to be, you know, truly, truly controversial.
But again, Joy Reid has apologized for all this stuff in the past.
As a society we're going to have to be a little bit more forgiving of people, I mean right and left, people who have recanted prior views because otherwise I think you just end up in a position where nobody will give their views openly at all about virtually anything.
Okay, so meanwhile the controversy has broken out about President Trump's nominee to fill the VA.
So he was nominating Ronny Jackson.
Ronny Jackson of course was the White House physician and there are a lot of bad stories that have been breaking about Ronny Jackson.
Apparently Ronny Jackson, there's a report that he was drunk on duty at one point, And the Democrats are immediately jumping on this.
Here is one Democratic senator unloading on Ronny Jackson yesterday.
Well, they fall in three different areas.
Improper dispensing of prescription drugs, repeatedly drunk while on duty while traveling, and creating a toxic work environment.
By the way, we had 20 military folks and retired military folks tell us these stories.
And in the previous administration, we were told of stories where he was repeatedly drunk while on duty, where his main job was to take care of the most powerful man in the world.
That's not acceptable.
Yeah, so I mean, there are a lot of people who are testifying this wasn't a great pick.
Now, I don't know that much about Ronnie Jackson.
The White House is sort of standing by him, sort of not.
Trump yesterday did a real weird thing where he urged his own nominee to bow out during a press conference, which is kind of wild.
Here's what President Trump had to say about Ronnie Jackson, the White House physician, being considered for VA secretary.
I told Admiral Jackson just a little while ago, I said, what do you need this for?
This is a vicious group of people that malign and they do.
And I live through it.
We all live through it.
You people are getting record ratings because of it.
So congratulations.
But I said, what do you need it for?
He's an admiral.
He's a great leader.
And they question him about every little thing.
Okay, so kind of weird that Trump was urging his own nominee to bail out.
I will say that the vetting of the nominees has to be better from the White House.
You actually have to go back and look at the record.
Picking people that Trump personally knows for positions doesn't seem to be working out all that well.
And the administration has been getting steadily better.
I mean, the staffing at the administration has been getting better.
We've gotten rid of a bad VA Secretary.
We've gotten rid of a bad Secretary of State.
We've gotten rid of a national security advisor in favor of a better national security advisor.
I think the staff on the whole today is much better than the staff was on the whole a year ago.
That said, the kind of fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants vetting of nominees has to stop from the Trump administration.
It continues to Promulgate the idea that there is a lot of chaos inside the administration, which unfortunately there is.
That said, the media bias on all of this stuff is insane.
Trump is not wrong when he says that the media are just wild about everything.
Chris Chilesa over at CNN spent an entire segment, an entire segment of TV, analyzing an awkward handshake photo of Donald Trump and Emmanuel Macron, the president of France.
Like an entire segment.
Here's what it actually looked like.
It's so bizarre.
So, obviously, lots of people talking about Melania Trump's hat.
That's the buzz of the picture.
But I just want to point one thing out.
People will say, oh, I find the political theatrics fascinating.
What is going on here and here?
Why is Macron doing the hook'em horns song?
Hook'em horns.
It's very, it's either that or the Gene Simmons kiss guitarist thing.
But either way, it's super weird.
Okay, and what's super weird is that the media are fascinated with presidential handshakes.
Yeah, I made fun of them for like five seconds yesterday, but the media spent full-on segments yesterday analyzing the weird dynamics between Trump and Macron as though this has any sort of relevance to anyone.
Basically, the media have become TMZ.
So there's a movie that's out called I, Tonya, and there's a scene in the movie where there's a guy who was working for a National Enquirer-like publication, and he says that we were staking out Tonya Harding's house and we were covering this thing.
In an insane fashion, providing the model for the mainstream media.
And he's not wrong.
It's a joke in the movie, but it's not a joke, okay?
This is covered the same way that you'd cover it on The Soup.
This is covered the same exact way that you would cover it if you were watching TMZ, and TMZ were covering this handshake.
And it's happening on CNN.
And then people wonder why there's significant credibility problems with the media.
Speaking of credibility problems with the media, there was a piece that came out from the Washington Post yesterday, and it was a picture of three reporters.
It was Ashley Parker, April Ryan, who's the black reporter from the African American News Network, whose name I can't recall, and the third person was Jim Acosta, the insufferable Jim Acosta from CNN.
And they're all standing there and doing a hero shot, looking off into the distance.
The entire article is about how heroic these members of the media are in the face of the Trump administration.
They're not Solzhenitsyn.
They're literally getting front page photo spreads in mainstream American newspapers.
I'm supposed to believe that these people are victims?
The media are so enthralled with themselves over their own behavior under the Trump administration, no wonder Trump is tempted to just spit in their eye on a regular basis.
I can't blame him for that.
I can blame him for picking people without betting them, but I can't blame him for spitting in the eye of the media because the media really are wild.
Okay, time for a thing I like, and then we'll do a thing that I hate.
So, first the thing I like.
So, yesterday on the plane I had the chance to watch Only the Brave.
I really have chances to watch movies only when my wife is working late at the hospital, or when I'm on a plane.
So I watched Only the Brave, or at least some of it, on the plane yesterday.
It's really good.
The movie was first recommended to me, actually, by my friend Dana Perino, and she raved about it.
It's worth the rave.
It's really solid.
Here is a little bit of the trailer from Only the Brave.
I worked this blaze near Montana.
In the blink of an eye, there's fire everywhere.
And then, charging out of these flames, comes this bear on fire.
It was the most beautiful and terrible thing I've ever seen.
I heard you guys had some slots available.
You lost her.
We got one slot open.
You know what we're training for?
Hot shots get to engage the fire directly.
We're still team six of firefighters.
If you give me a chance, I won't let you down.
Sooner or later, the fire's gonna come knocking in our hometown.
We've been training for over four years.
We've got all our hours, all our qualifications.
But until we're certified hot shots, my crew won't even be able to set foot on the line.
I told you it wouldn't be easy.
You want to talk about it?
Okay, so the movie is quite good.
It's really effective.
I think it's quite moving.
So check it out if you haven't had a chance to yet.
Check out Only the Brave.
Okay, time for a thing that I hate.
So yesterday I didn't have time to pay tribute to the Armenian Genocide, simply because we ran out of time on the show, but I want to do it today.
So yesterday marked the opening of the Armenian Genocide.
The Armenian Genocide was actually a series of genocides, and they were basically religious wars by Muslims against Christians.
Okay, let's be real about this.
The Armenian Genocide had to do with ethnicity, but it also had a large component to do with religion.
On yesterday's date, in 1915, hundreds of Armenians, intellectuals, Christians for the most part, were forcibly deported from the Turkish capital of Constantinople.
The number soon escalated into the thousands.
Most were eventually murdered.
That kicked off the Armenian Genocide, the persecution of Christian Armenians by Muslim young Turks who wanted to cleanse the new country of the troublesome non-co-religionists in preparation for the new regime in Turkey in the aftermath of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire.
By the time the genocide was over, it lasted from 1915 all the way to 1923, Hundreds of thousands of Armenians were dead.
Top range estimates put the number at 1.5 million.
And there were massive atrocities.
We're talking about putting Armenian children on boats and then sinking them in lakes.
We're talking about forced death marches.
We're talking about mass shootings.
CNN reports, the death toll is in dispute.
A photograph from the era documents some mass killings.
Some show Ottoman soldiers posing with severed heads, others with them standing amid skulls in the dirt.
The victims are reported to have died in mass burnings by drowning, torture, gas, poison, disease, and starvation.
Children reported to have been loaded onto boats, taken out to sea, and thrown overboard.
And of course, rape was frequently reported.
Now, what's amazing is that so many countries still refuse to use the term Armenian Genocide.
The United States and Israel among them, both of those countries should immediately use the term Armenian Genocide.
It is absurd not to recognize the truth of the Armenian Genocide and not to recognize also that the Armenian Genocide was the predecessor for the Holocaust.
The current dictator of Turkey, who is an Islamist himself, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, a terrorist supporter and a radical Muslim, has threatened multiple foreign countries if they use that.
In 2010, Erdogan openly warned he could throw 100,000 Armenian immigrants out of Turkey.
He said there are currently 170,000 Armenians living in our country.
Only 70,000 of them are Turkish citizens, but we are tolerating the remaining 100,000.
If necessary, I may have to tell these 100,000 to go back to their country because they are not my citizens.
I don't have to keep them in my country.
So when I say that the Armenian genocide was the predecessor for the Holocaust, there were German staffers.
I mean, the Germans were allied with the Ottomans in World War I. There were German staffers in the army who were present at the happening of the Armenian Genocide.
Hitler's confidants, as Shmueli Boteach points out, learned from Turkey's genocidal playbook.
His lead political advisor, Hitler's lead political advisor, was Max Erwin von Schubner Richter, who was a young German consular office in Erzurum during World War I, which was a region of Turkey populated with Armenians.
Turkey's ethnic cleansing in World War I was well-known and admired by Nazi ideologues in 1923.
Journalist Hans Tropst wrote in the Nazi newspaper Heimatland, these bloodsuckers and parasites, Greeks and Armenians, have been eradicated by the Turks.
And of course, in one of his speeches, Hitler apparently, this is sort of controversial, but he apparently made reference to the Armenian genocide.
If the world didn't care when the Turks were slaughtering the Armenians, they're not going to care when we go after all of our enemies.
So, it is important to recognize genocides when they are occurring.
It is important, particularly in an era of continued religious conflict, to recognize the religious components of the Armenian Genocide as well.
Okay, I want to take one second here and analyze a Federalist paper.
We missed it this week.
So, Federalist 25.
We're all the way up to Federalist 25.
This one is written by Alexander Hamilton.
And in this Federalist paper...
Hamilton is still talking about the necessity for common defense.
He's still talking about why we ought to have a standing army at the national level.
He makes a couple of arguments that are really interesting.
So his first argument makes some sense.
He says we need a standing army because if somebody attacks us and we don't have a standing army, we're screwed.
Okay, that's pretty obvious.
But then he makes another argument that I think we'd be welted to take in mind.
He says that a national standing army would be better than standing armies on behalf of the state.
Why?
He says the liberty of the people would be less safe in this state of things than in that in which the national forces were left in the hands of the national government.
As far as an army may be considered as a dangerous weapon of power, it had better be in those hands of which the people are most likely to be jealous than in those of which they are least likely to be jealous.
For it is a truth which the experience of ages has attested that the people are always most in danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the possession of those of whom they entertain the least suspicion.
There's a really deep point, you know, obfuscated by some of the language here, but what Hamilton is actually saying is that you should distrust the national government.
He's saying the reason that you can trust the national government to have a standing army is because you distrust the national government to do the right thing, which means that if they do the wrong thing, people will leave the army or people in the states will rise up and resist them.
Furthermore, he says, people are always in the most danger when the means of injuring their rights are in the hands of friends.
This is 100% true.
It's one of the reasons why I think even my own political viewpoint has changed over the years.
I was much more kind of traditionally conservative and less libertarian when I was 19 than I am now.
One of the reasons is because when you're a young conservative growing up under the Bush administration, you figure, okay, I like George W. Bush.
I don't mind that the government has more power.
And then Obama becomes president.
You say, well, this kind of sucks.
I don't like that the government has this much power.
And then the question becomes, okay, when you have a Republican again, are you going to go back to the idea that power is only a matter of who uses it?
Or are you going to say that there's an inherent risk to the national government having the kind of power that can be wielded by your political enemies?
And therefore we should minimize that amount of power.
That's what Hamilton is really saying underneath the surface there.
Okay, so we'll be back here tomorrow with more.
Again, it's been just an honor to be here at Liberty University.
What an incredible institution it is.
The kids here are just amazing and I can't speak highly enough about what the students here are doing for their community and for the world.
Just a terrific, terrific university.
I will be back here tomorrow.
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 Carmina.
Hair and makeup is by Jesua Alvera.
The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire Forward Publishing production.
▲
Export Selection