Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 13, 2018 - The Ben Shapiro Show

49:36

The Alt-Right Fizzle | Ep. 601

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	It's Omarosa versus President Trump, plus the alt-right anniversary rally fizzles and Antifa continues to threaten public safety, plus updates from the FBI.
	Lots and lots of stuff going on.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
	It was a really busy weekend filled with joy and also weirdness, People sending me very odd messages about why James Bond shouldn't be a black person, which is a very weird thing.
	But we'll get to all of those things.
	First, I want to mention to you that inflation is a real possibility.
	What we actually have seen is an increase in wages.
	There's been a minimum wage increase across the country.
	Plus, we're seeing rising prices thanks to rising import prices and trade wars.
	Raw materials prices are increasing thanks to tariffs, rising housing prices.
	While the government sometimes solves inflation by printing more money.
	And that is why you should have at least part of your portfolio in precious metals.
	My savings plan is diversified and yours should be, too.
	The company that I trust with precious metal purchases, it's Birch Gold Group.
	And right now, thanks to a little-known IRS tax law, you could even move your IRA or eligible 401k into an IRA backed by physical gold and silver.
	It's perfect for folks who want to protect hard-earned retirement savings from future geopolitical uncertainty.
	When you look back historically, what you see is that when the bottom falls out of everything else, gold tends to safeguard savings.
	That's why Birch Gold Group has thousands of satisfied customers, countless five-star reviews, and A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
	Contact Birch Gold Group right now to request a free information kit on physical precious metals.
	It's a comprehensive 16-page kit that reveals how gold and silver can protect your savings, how you can legally move that IRA or 401k out of stocks and bonds, if you wish, and into a precious metals IRA to get that no-cost, no-obligation kit.
	Go to birchgold.com slash Ben.
	That's birchgold.com slash Ben.
	The slash Ben lets them know who he's saying.
	All right.
	So the fresh controversy of the weekend is Omarosa.
	Omarosa Manigault, the villain from three seasons of Celebrity Apprentice.
	Well, she's back and better than ever.
	The president made the brilliant move of hiring her to the White House for no apparent reason.
	And then he fired her because it turns out she's a crazy person.
	And then it turns out that she was taping people in, like, the Situation Room.
	Which is not good.
	I've been to the White House.
	You're not supposed to tape in the Situation Room.
	In fact, you're probably not supposed to tape anywhere in the White House.
	However, Omarosa was doing just that, and then she goes on national TV to demonstrate how inside she was.
	She's very angry because apparently John Kelly, then the chief of staff, he said that he was firing her, and she got mad, and then she went and talked to Trump, and then Trump, because he is always afraid of actually firing people, so the dirty little secret about Trump, he doesn't like firing people.
	He actually likes his subordinates to fire people, or he likes for them to quit.
	So she went to John Kelly, and John Kelly said, you can leave, and then she went to Trump and Trump said, I don't know anything about this, and she has both of them on tape.
	Well, she was on Meet the Press over the weekend talking about how she was taping inside the Situation Room, which is not great, and here's what she had to say.
	They take me into the Situation Room, the doors are locked, they tell me I can't leave, and they start to threaten me, put fear in me.
	The question is, why not have the meeting in the Chief of Staff's office?
	Why put me in the Situation Room, lock the door, and tell me over and over again, as they'll hear, well, they'll hear his part, that I couldn't leave, that I couldn't consult an attorney, that I couldn't talk to my husband who was sitting outside of the door.
	Yes, I was prepared.
	Okay, so she says, how dare they bring me in there?
	Okay, it wasn't false imprisonment.
	They didn't kidnap her.
	They didn't keep her there locked up.
	She would have a lawsuit if they had, okay?
	This is all wildly overblown.
	Then she says, I don't understand why they fired me.
	And then she plays tape of her secretly taping the chief of staff.
	I can't imagine why they fired Omarosa.
	I just can't imagine.
	This does raise some questions about the White House's staffing choices.
	Like, why would they do this in the first place?
	I had heard repeatedly that the president chooses only the best people, chooses one of his first hires, so not quite the best people.
	The White House released a statement that CNN reported on.
	Here was CNN reporting on the White House response to Omarosa.
	We just got a statement from Sarah Sanders, the White House press secretary, and it reads, the very idea of staff member would sneak a recording device into the White House situation room shows a blatant disregard for our national security.
	And then to brag about it on national television further proves the lack of character and integrity of this disgruntled former White House employee.
	OK, so the White House obviously smacking back hard at Omarosa and then Ronna McDaniel, Romney McDaniel, she came forward.
	She's the GOP chairwoman.
	And she tweeted out who in their right mind thinks it's appropriate to secretly record the White House chief of staff in the situation room.
	And the answer is nobody, which is why she shouldn't have been hired in the first place.
	This is who Omarosa Manigault is.
	Anybody who doesn't know differently has never had any experience with Omarosa Manigault.
	There's a story out today about how Omarosa actually tried, when she was getting married, to invade the White House with her photographer in her wedding dress and go take wedding photos in the Rose Garden.
	At the White House, which is not what the White House is for.
	The president of the United States, of course, would not take this lying down.
	I mean, listen, this is what this is what we bargained for, right?
	I mean, we're getting a lot of the good policy.
	It comes with the downside of this reality TV show.
	So the president tweeted out three things this morning about Omarosa Manigault.
	And basically it is the godfather one, two and three.
	of tweets.
	It's pretty spectacular.
	So, Godfather Part 1, he tweets out, "Wacky Omarosa, who got fired three times on The Apprentice, now got fired for the last time.
	She never made it, never will.
	She begged me for a job, tears in her eyes.
	I said, 'Okay.' People in the White House hated her.
	She was vicious, but not smart.
	I would rarely see her but heard, dot, dot, dot, dot." Okay, so, let's analyze Godfather Part 1.
	It's a great tweet.
	It's a great tweet for a variety of reasons.
	First of all, Wacky Omarosa.
	I do love that his first hires were Sloppy Steve Bannon and Wacky Omarosa.
	It's like the Muppets.
	And he gives them all nicknames.
	Oscar the Grouch was the Secretary of State.
	Got rid of him, too.
	That was Rex Tillerson, who apparently was fired on the toilet.
	I mean, if you didn't bargain for this reality TV show, then I'm not sure what you're bargaining for.
	And then he says she was fired three times on The Apprentice and now got fired for the last time.
	He fired her three times on The Apprentice and then rehired her three times.
	So, I mean, there's someone who's sort of missing from this equation.
	He says, she never made it and never will.
	Well, she did get a million dollar advance, apparently, for this book.
	He says, she begged me for a job.
	Tears in her eyes.
	Whenever the president says that sort of stuff, whenever he says, they begged me, they came and they begged me on their knees, that just means that they asked for a job and he said yes.
	And he said, okay.
	And then he says, people in the White House hated her.
	My favorite line from this classic Godfather tweet.
	I mean, this is Godfather part one.
	It is a classic of the tweeting genre.
	I like this part.
	He says, she was vicious, but not smart.
	I like the but there, right?
	That vicious is actually a compliment, right?
	Vicious is an accolade.
	She was vicious, which is awesome, but not very smart.
	So she was stupid, but also vicious.
	So that was her recommending qualities, that she was vicious.
	So Godfather part one of tweets, excellent.
	And then we get to the even better one, Godfather part two of tweets.
	It turns out the sequel is even stronger than the original.
	He says I heard really bad things, nasty to people, and would constantly miss meetings and work.
	When General Kelly came on board, he told me she was a loser and nothing but problems.
	I told him to try working it out, if possible, because she only said great things about me.
	Until she got fired.
	Ugh!
	Ugh!
	The genius!
	The genius of constructing a Godfather 2 tweet like this.
	So spectacular.
	I love it.
	The entire tweet is what a terrible person she was.
	She was nasty to people.
	She would constantly miss meetings and work.
	She was the worst.
	But Trump wanted to keep her around.
	Why?
	Why?
	Because she only said great things about me.
	That was legitimately his hiring criteria.
	She was making, by the way, $180,000 in taxpayer money at the White House for saying nice things about him while he was saying that she was the worst employee ever.
	So fantastic.
	And also, a window into the mind of the commander-in-chief.
	And when people say that Trump is nice to Putin because he's in bed with Putin, or he's nice to Kim Jong-un because he's in bed with Kim Jong-un, No, he's nice to them because when they say nice things about them, he likes them.
	This is not a complicated man.
	It's so funny, when you talk to women and men about relationships, women will always say, oh, men are so complex.
	Men are not complex.
	Men are super, super simple.
	You feed them, ladies, if you're married, feed them, have sex with them, be relatively nice to them, happy marriage, we're done.
	Men are really, really simple.
	President Trump, be nice to him, feed him, depends on who you are.
	With the sex, but in any case, the president is just like any other man, except more so.
	So, it's really not hard to keep the president pleased.
	Like, you say nice things about him, and he is very, very pleased with you.
	So, I love this.
	He says she was nasty to people, missed meetings, missed work, was terrible.
	Kelly wanted to fire her, and he's like, right, but she says awesome stuff about me, and it makes me feel great about myself.
	So that was Godfather part two of tweets.
	Very, very strong entry in the canon.
	And then we get to the slightly disappointing Godfather part three of tweets.
	It has its moments, its highs and its lows, but overall, it doesn't really fit in the series.
	He tweets out, While I know it's not presidential to take on a lowlife like Omarosa, and while I would rather not be doing so, this is a modern-day form of communication, and I know the fake news media will be working overtime to make even wacky Omarosa look legitimate as possible.
	Sorry.
	Now, listen, it's fine for what it is.
	It's a bit of a derivative storyline, is the truth.
	This particular tweet, like, you know, it's just more of the same.
	Yeah, it's not presidential, and I'm not presidential, but I'm communicating with the people.
	Okay, I get it, fine, but it's not his strongest work.
	Godfather, if I had to rank these tweets, Godfather part two tweet, Godfather part one tweet, and then Godfather part three tweet.
	OK, but very strong entries from the president overall on his Twitter account.
	And come on, if we're not going to be amused by this, then what can you be amused by?
	The man hired a doofus and then he's like, I don't know how she even got in here, but I kept her here because she said nice things.
	But then she got fired.
	She won't get a job ever again unless she begs with tears in her eyes.
	Listen, I know a lot of people are going to be frustrated because they say, well, why can't you just focus on the good stuff the president is doing?
	Don't worry.
	We'll get some of the good stuff the president is doing.
	We do that whenever possible.
	But if the president gets credit for all of his staffers doing good stuff, he also gets the blame when his staffer ends up being Omarosa, a person he never should have hired in the first place.
	He does get the blame when he hires Steve Bannon, a person he never should have hired in the first place.
	He does get the blame when he hires Rex Tillerson, a person he never should have hired in the first place.
	When you're the boss, you get the blame and the credit for what your employees do.
	And the president of the United States hired Omarosa Manigault because she was on a reality TV show with him.
	And because, let's face it, the president of the United States wanted more black faces around him because he wanted to be able to say to the media he had a more diverse administration.
	And so he hired Omarosa Manigault.
	There is no chance that if she were not black, she would have been inside the administration.
	She doesn't have the qualifications.
	The president hired her based on an affirmative action calculation.
	I know that's politically incorrect to say, but that is why he hired her in the first place.
	That is what the president was doing here.
	OK, so he gets the blame when it turns out that she is exactly the type of feces storm that everybody knew that she was in the first place.
	And of course, she brought a recording device into the skiff.
	Of course she did.
	Of course she brought into the Situation Room, which is a which is a confidential place.
	Did she violate the law, by the way?
	Is she going to go to jail for this?
	Probably not.
	In order to violate the law, you actually have to show intent to Communicate all of this stuff to outside intelligence agencies or something like that.
	She's not going to go to jail for any of this.
	But the president does have to get better with his staffing.
	Thankfully, I think the president's staff has gotten a lot better.
	I know a lot of folks in the administration, they seem to be an upgrade over the people who were originally in the administration.
	But come on, if we can't have a little bit of lighthearted fun with the fact the president hired Omarosa Manigault to be part of the administration, then tweeted about how terrible she was, except she was nice to him.
	I don't know what we can have fun with these days.
	Okay, in a minute, I'm going to get to the actual alt-right rally that happened over the weekend, Antifa, the media malfeasance.
	We have a lot to get to.
	First, I want to talk to you about making your business better.
	So let's say you don't want to staff up with a bunch of Omarosa Manigaults.
	Let's say that you look around your office and you're like, wow, that person is going to tape me in the Situation Room.
	Let's say you're President Trump and you want to hire better.
	Well, maybe you ought to head over to ZipRecruiter because ZipRecruiter is going to do you a lot better than your former apprentice hires.
	ZipRecruiter sends your job to over 100 of the web's leading job boards.
	They don't stop there.
	With their powerful matching technology, ZipRecruiter scans thousands of resumes to find people with the right experience and invite them to apply to your job.
	As applications come in, ZipRecruiter analyzes each one.
	They spotlight the top candidates so you never miss a great match.
	ZipRecruiter is so effective that 80% of employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate through the site within the first day.
	We use ZipRecruiter here at DailyWire all the time.
	It is a fantastic service.
	It's no wonder that ZipRecruiter is the highest rated hiring site in the United States.
	And right now, my listeners can try ZipRecruiter for free at this exclusive web address, ziprecruiter.com slash DailyWire.
	That's ziprecruiter.com slash D-A-I-L-Y-W-I-R-E.
	It's ZipRecruiter.com slash dailywire.
	ZipRecruiter is indeed the smartest way to hire.
	Go check it out.
	ZipRecruiter.com slash dailywire.
	Okay, so.
	Putting all the Omarosa stuff aside, it was a weekend of covering stupidity.
	So, does Omarosa deserve all of this media coverage?
	No, of course she doesn't deserve all of this media coverage.
	You know what else didn't deserve a lot of media coverage over the weekend?
	This alt-right rally that started off in Charlottesville, Virginia near the University of Virginia and then transferred its way over to Washington, D.C.
	Now, the reason it got a lot of coverage is because last year, of course, that alt-right rally drew several hundred people And it devolved into violence when Antifa showed up and there were a bunch of pitched battles in the streets between some Antifa members and some members of the alt-right neo-Nazi rally.
	And then that bled over into an alt-right piece of human debris, crashing his car into members of a left-wing rally, some of whom were Antifa, many of whom were not.
	In any case, that became national news, not only because of the killing, but also because the president of the United States then got up there and said that there were good people on both sides, which I think was eminently untrue.
	In any case, The media was there in full force for this anniversary alt-right rally.
	The governor of Virginia declared a state of emergency over this alt-right rally.
	Here's how many people showed up.
	We have video of the rallyers on the way to Washington, D.C.
	This is legitimately all of them.
	All of them.
	They could fit in half a car.
	It was 20 people.
	You can see this.
	Half of the car is members of the media.
	And the rest of it is the actual people.
	The car is half empty.
	It's like 20 people.
	The last time this few losers got this much media attention was the Fyre Festival.
	Really, it was like a Magic the Gathering.
	It was like a Magic the Gathering tournament for racists.
	It was like five people, all of whom took time off from watching pornography, anime pornography, in their grandmother's spare bedroom, and then went over to a rally, and it was like 10 of them, 15 of them.
	And so, it was just absurd.
	Jason Kessler, who is the leader of all of this, he got all the media attention he could possibly want.
	He was confronted at the Unite the Right 2 rally, and he was asked why they were celebrating Heather Heyer's murder, and it did not go particularly well for him.
	Here is what it looked like.
	Why are you celebrating the murder of Heather Heyer?
	Tell me why.
	What are you doing here today?
	Keep this guy back.
	Tell me what you're doing here.
	What'd you come to D.C.
	You know, all over this thing.
	And what's hilarious is that when you take a long shot view of these protesters, what you see is there are 20 of them and 100 members of the media.
	So here's a picture of the ralliers in D.C.
	What you can see in this picture is that's it.
	That's it.
	Right.
	There were legitimately more people at my wife's birthday party over the weekend, and that was just immediate family.
	OK, this was the entirety of the protest.
	Hundreds of police officers show up to protect this thing.
	And the media cover this thing like it's a big deal.
	Like, we are now involved in a cascading wave of white supremacism across the United States and this alt-right thing.
	They're taking over the country.
	Now, I want to talk about what's justified about the media coverage and what's unjustified about the media coverage.
	And on the flip side, what the media did not cover.
	So let's talk a little bit about why this was relevant.
	The reason this was relevant is because the President of the United States, last year and in the last three years, Sort of winked and nodded at the alt-right.
	He did it during the campaign.
	I'm not going to soft-pedal this.
	The president went on national TV, pretended he didn't know who the KKK was, made coochie faces with Steve Bannon over at Breitbart, pretended that folks in the alt-right were wonderful, nice people, and Really emboldened them in 2016.
	However, after that, the president then excised those people from his administration, as he ought to have done in the first place.
	After Charlottesville, the president really attempted to push those people away.
	And that is a good thing.
	And then the media decided that they were going to keep that group of people alive.
	They were going to proclaim that everybody Who, as a Trump supporter, was in league with these alt-right people the president had disassociated from.
	So the president never should have associated with those people in the first place.
	No question.
	And I've ripped this president and I've ripped this administration for not having separated off from those people sooner.
	I was a chief target of the alt-right during the 2016 campaign.
	And beyond.
	I remain a chief target of the alt-right today because I am highly critical of racists no matter what form they come in.
	The alt-right is not actually conservative.
	They're a bunch of idiot racists who believe that a big government that is run to the benefit of white people is the best kind of government.
	It's garbage.
	It is just sheer stupid garbage.
	And the fact the president was pandering to those people during the 2016 campaign was a real negative for the president.
	It was a serious problem for him.
	Then you separate it off and the question becomes why are the media covering it now?
	Well, the reason the media are covering it now is not because they think this is still a relevant part of the Trump base.
	The reason they're covering it now is because they hope that it is a relevant part of the Trump base so they can suggest that the president is still in league with the alt-right.
	That's really what they want here.
	And that's why last week, as I played on the show, CNN did a full report, like a full seven, eight minute report on one neo-Nazi in the middle of a rural town in Pennsylvania, where the rest of the town thought the guy's an idiot, but this guy's a crazy person.
	So they went out and reported on him because he was a neo-Nazi who liked Trump.
	And that made it politically relevant.
	The problem is the media won't cover stuff that actually is politically relevant.
	So the fact is, the left has embraced Antifa more than the right has embraced the alt-right.
	The alt-right has basically become so toxic at this point that 20 people showed up where hundreds of people showed up last year.
	Now, you'd imagine that if the alt-right was a swelling, burgeoning crowd, then you would have seen thousands of people in the streets.
	Instead, what you saw was 25 guys who were losers, and everybody else running scared from those people.
	Everybody wants to disassociate.
	Now, what the left will say is that's because everybody went underground.
	Everybody went underground, and then they are popping up again in the Trump administration.
	Well, I'm not seeing them pop up in the Trump administration.
	There are people who are associated with the alt-right who are popping up in parts of the right.
	And it is incumbent on people on the right to actually go out and call it out when they see it.
	For example, Corey Stewart's staff, right, in Virginia.
	Corey Stewart is the Republican candidate for Senate in Virginia.
	He's going to get scorched by Tim Kaine in this latest election.
	Another purple seat that could have turned red if Republicans hadn't been idiots in that state.
	Corey Stewart's campaign has been staffed by a bunch of alt-righters.
	His campaign spokesperson, I believe, has alt-right connections or has said alt-right things in the past.
	Or allegedly has, in any case.
	This sort of stuff has to be excised by the conservatives, because if we don't excise this stuff, then we will rightly be lumped in with that stuff.
	In the same way that the left is being lumped in with the Democratic Socialists because they've embraced it.
	The difference is that most people on the right, when asked about the alt-right, will condemn the alt-right.
	Most people on the left will not condemn the Democratic Socialists or even Antifa.
	A lot of people on the left will just ignore Antifa.
	And this is a point of real hot-button contention.
	Over the weekend, I was reading a book called Bad News about the situation in Rwanda.
	And it talks a little bit about the Rwandan genocide and, you know, still a much forgotten genocide despite the focus that was brought on it in the 1990s.
	800,000 people murdered within the span of three months by their neighbors.
	And it was seriously, the government just saying to people, go out and kill your neighbor.
	And people would just go get machetes and they would kill their neighbor.
	And it occurred to me that one of the reasons for this, maybe the chief reason, is that institutional loyalty combined with polarization is a very, very dangerous thing.
	If you are loyal to an institution, and then people you feel are attacking that institution, and it becomes more and more polarized, you are more and more likely to embrace terrible things, to say terrible things, and to do terrible things.
	And this is true for both the alt-right and conservatives who embrace the alt-right, and Antifa on the left, which is embraced by the left.
	If you believe that your opponent is the font of all evil and is constantly attacking you, you're more likely to become reactionary and polarized and to engage in immoral behavior.
	And that's why it's incumbent on people on the right to say that we are not going to not only associate with the alt-right, we are going to excise them.
	Yes, they should be excised.
	That doesn't mean censor.
	It doesn't mean use government censorship.
	It does mean that we should not be appearing on alt-right outlets.
	It does mean that conservatives should be excising conspiratorial parts of the movement.
	You know, William F. Buckley did this with the Birch Society.
	And the right should do the same thing with the alt-right.
	They should do the same thing with Alex Jones.
	They should do the same thing with kooks who are inside the tent.
	Those people should be pushed outside of the tent.
	Again, that's not censorship.
	It's not saying Facebook should throw them out.
	It's saying that we should forcefully speak up against those folks and those institutions because they are not us.
	We are not the same.
	And the left should be doing the same with Antifa.
	Now, I think the right, there are people on the right who are attempting to do this.
	And the question is where to draw the line, but there are people on the right who are really attempting to do this.
	People on the left are not.
	And here is the proof.
	So, the same weekend that the alt-right was able to muster a grand total of 20 doofuses, racist pieces of crap, to go rally in Charlottesville and then head over to Washington, D.C., Antifa gathered hundreds of people.
	And these folks were chanting radical stuff, and the media were just not reporting this.
	The mainstream media were just not reporting what Antifa were doing over the weekend.
	There was a little bit of reporting, but not much.
	I'm going to explain what happened.
	But first, let's talk about your coffee.
	You know, the stuff that you are putting in your face right now.
	The reality is that coffee is probably weak, and it's probably from one of those awful corporate brands where they care about bathroom reform policy, and they think you shouldn't have to buy anything if you sit in the restaurant because they've been pressured by left-wingers.
	Well, if you want tough coffee, And great coffee with great people?
	You need Black Rifle Coffee.
	It's founded by former special ops vets, and Black Rifle delivers the best roast-to-order coffee directly to your door.
	I know the guys who run Black Rifle Coffee.
	They are awesome in every way, and the coffee is terrific, too.
	It means that you are guaranteed a fresh, premium coffee with every single order.
	In addition to great coffee and gear, Black Rifle has a coffee club that makes things really easy.
	No lines, no running out, just awesome coffee shipped right to your door every month, hassle-free.
	Plus, When you join that coffee club, you receive discounts, offers not available to other customers.
	Not only does Black Rifle make a hell of a cup of coffee, they also give a portion of their sales to vets and first responder causes.
	Go check it out.
	BlackRifle.com.
	It's BlackRifleCoffee.com slash Ben.
	Receive 15% off your order.
	That's BlackRifleCoffee.com slash Ben for 15% off.
	Again, BlackRifleCoffee.com slash Ben.
	A portion of their sales go to vets and first responders.
	There is no downside to this.
	Go check it out right now.
	BlackRifleCoffee.com slash Ben.
	Okay, so.
	While the media were focused laser-like on Jason Kessler and his band of ne'er-do-wells, Antifa was showing up in the hundreds and actually harassing people.
	So here were protesters and here's what they were chanting.
	You won't see this reported anywhere except for right-wing media.
	Protesters were chanting legitimately, no border, no wall, no USA at all.
	Where is the left condemning this?
	- No USA at all! - No Warrens, no Walls, no USA at all! - No Warrens, no Walls, no USA at all!
	Real class acts, you know, marching around with their red flags and wearing masks.
	It's funny, folks on the left will say, well, you don't need to wear a mask, right?
	The KKK wore masks.
	Right.
	Antifa's wearing masks too.
	And the fact is that these people are garbage and they're spouting garbage, and yet the media treat them as though they're just anti-fascist.
	They actually take them at face value.
	And you wonder why folks don't take the media seriously with all this stuff?
	You wonder why we think the media are a bunch of liars when it comes to their coverage of these issues.
	They'll spend all their time talking about the dangers of the alt-right and none of their time talking about Antifa.
	It's because they are warm toward Antifa's cause in the same way that even today, if you say the word Soviet Union, people don't shudder in the same way that you say Nazi.
	That's because the media in the United States decided to treat the Nazis and the Soviet Union disparately.
	The Nazis should be treated like the sheer human garbage that they were and are.
	Well, so should communists, okay?
	Hardcore communists killed more people than the Nazis, and yet we treat communism as though it is still a valued way of life, something that we ought to think about.
	We treat people who are communists, like Antifa, as though they are purporting to speak for something worthwhile.
	They're not.
	or not.
	Okay, here are these protests over the weekend again, shouting all cops are racist while being protected by cops, by the way.
	So there they are marching down the street, hundreds of them, shouting all cops are racist while being protected hundreds of them, shouting all cops are racist while being protected by the All cops are racist.
	All class acts, according to the media.
	These are just anti-fascist protesters, don't you understand?
	These are like the young men storming the beaches of Normandy.
	Literally, over the last year, we've seen that argument in the pages of the Washington Post, that these are the young people.
	It's just like Normandy, because anti-fascists were the people storming the beaches of Normandy, and anti-fascists now are, like, storming the beaches of Normandy, except what they're actually doing is attacking all the police officers protecting them from the predations of alt-right idiots.
	The cops standing around them, they are all racist.
	This is what we have learned.
	And then the protesters actually attacked reporters.
	So imagine if the Tea Party had attacked reporters.
	We never hear the end of it, right?
	They spent, in 2010, members of the Democratic Party, their actual hierarchy, called the Tea Party terrorists.
	They said they were like domestic terrorists.
	Legitimately, they said this over and over and over again.
	I was a Tea Partier.
	You might have been a Tea Partier, too.
	There was not a single act of violence by the Tea Party toward anyone, and yet they were treated as terrorists.
	Meanwhile, Occupy Wall Street was protesting in criminal fashion.
	They were shutting down freeways.
	There were rapes going on at Occupy Wall Street camps.
	And the media didn't cover it at all.
	Well, the same thing is happening now with the alt-right and Antifa.
	The alt-right is disgusting and awful.
	Antifa is similarly disgusting and awful and violent.
	Here are protesters from Antifa attacking NBC reporters over the weekend.
	You see there's an NBC reporter carrying a camera.
	And then somebody comes up, slaps the camera out of the NBC reporter's hand.
	And start shouting at them.
	And then Antifa cut an ABC News cable.
	So ABC News was filming, and these Antifa members slapped down the camera, and then they proceeded to cut the sound cable, right, which is actual property damage.
	Don't be shoving on people.
	What's wrong with you?
	Yeah, and get that out of my face.
	I got it.
	I'm his size.
	Hi guys, I'm his size.
	- I got it.
	- I got it.
	- Come here, come here.
	- Okay.
	- I'm this side.
	Hi guys, I'm this side.
	- That's good, man. - Struggling with the camera and then they actually cut the sound cord on this thing.
	And these, The idea that progressives deserve more kudos from the media simply because of their political point of view is just disgusting.
	Benny Johnson over at Daily Caller, he went out in the middle of a progressive protest in one of these Antifa protests in front of the White House, and he started asking these folks what they would do to Trump if Trump were in front of them.
	And here are some of their answers.
	I would murder him for the people.
	We'd have to do him like Qaddafi.
	I would murder him for the people.
	We'd have to do him like Qaddafi.
	That's a guy wearing a mask.
	All these people talking about killing the president of the United States, torturing the president of the United States.
	Don't worry, media, this isn't worth covering.
	The stuff that's really worth covering is those 20 idiots led by Jason Kessler who couldn't even fill a train car from Charlottesville to Washington, D.C.
	That's where you need to put all of your attention.
	And now look at how the Washington Post covered this, okay?
	So the Washington Post did cover all of the conflict between Antifa and the police, but here's how they covered it.
	This is legitimately what they tweeted.
	Confusion over an enormous police presence turned into anger Saturday night in Charlottesville, as hundreds of protesters marched through the streets, growing angry at police and calling for an end to white supremacy.
	Okay, that's not what happened.
	The police were there to protect all of the protesters, and then the protesters started shouting about how all the cops were racist.
	But listen to how the Washington Post frames this.
	They framed it as these evil fascist police trying to shut down the protest, and then it turned into anger because the police were the aggressors.
	That's what that tweet actually says.
	Confusion over an enormous police presence turned into anger Saturday.
	It wasn't confusion.
	They hate cops and they were ripping on cops and trying to hurt cops.
	That's all.
	That's all.
	And the Washington Post continued along these lines, right?
	I mean, the Washington Post had an entire tweet thread talking about exactly this.
	And they also added protesters gathered where a year ago, white supremacists had shouted anti-Semitic slogans and carried torches and chanted slogans against the police, against white supremacy and the University of Virginia.
	Look what change they were bringing just a year ago.
	Those those outright fascists were there being terrible people.
	But now you have these peaceful Antifa crowds who all they do is attack cops and try to attack media members.
	That's all.
	Many protesters called the police's actions on Saturday a provocation, another symbol of the over policing of America, and started chanting at the officers who were holding shields and wearing helmets.
	How dare they?
	How dare they, the police?
	And then people wonder why we don't take the media seriously?
	They wonder why we think the media are a joke?
	Okay, in just a second, I'm going to show you how much of a joke the media are.
	But first, you're going to have to go over to dailywire.com and subscribe.
	For $9.99 a month, you get to subscribe at dailywire.com.
	When you do, you get the rest of this show live, you get the rest of Clavin's show live, the rest of Michael Knowles' show live.
	You also get the benefit with an annual subscription of this, the very greatest in beverage vessels.
	Check this little baby out right here.
	This Leftist Tears hot or cold tumbler.
	You will love it.
	You will enjoy it.
	You will be refreshed by the tears themselves.
	It is fantastic.
	Also, go check us out at YouTube or iTunes.
	Please subscribe.
	Please leave us a review.
	When you become a member, by the way, you also get first crack at VIP tickets.
	We have events coming up this week.
	Live events in Dallas and Phoenix.
	Those are only the beginning.
	We will take the United States by storm.
	And you can have a VIP ticket, or at least first crack at a VIP ticket, when you get a membership.
	Over at dailywear.com.
	It also helps us bring you the show.
	It helps us keep all of our folks employed and all the rest of it.
	So go check that out.
	Please subscribe to YouTube or iTunes.
	We have a Sunday special out with Tai Lopez last Sunday.
	We have a big one coming up next Sunday as well.
	Big guest that I will not name now, but is awesome.
	Go check that out.
	We're the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast in the nation.
	All righty.
	So Bill de Blasio, right, who is the who is the mayor of New York, he has been ripping into the media.
	You wonder about the media malfeasance, the dishonesty of the media.
	Brian Stelter at Reliable Sources.
	I've been on his show several times.
	He's supposed to be the media watchdog, the guy who stands up for the media, right?
	This is somebody who deeply cares about the freedom of the press.
	These are the same members of the press who think Antifa is okay, but the alt-right is terrible.
	Because the alt-right is terrible, but Antifa is not okay.
	Brian Stelter has on de Blasio, and de Blasio starts ripping into the press.
	The press critical of him, of course.
	The New York Post, and Rupert Murdoch, and the New York Daily News.
	He's been terrible for local news, Bill de Blasio.
	Brian Stelter says nothing as Bill de Blasio goes off on how terrible Rupert Murdoch is.
	We would be a more unified country.
	There would be less overt hate.
	There would be less appeal to racial division.
	I guarantee it, because what Murdoch did through Fox News and the New York Post, among others, is to create a dynamic where that stuff could come out in the open.
	We saw it in New York City for years and years, where race was infused into the dialogue in a very negative way, and it was a sort of an apocalyptic vision was created of the notion of Going back to a time of crime and decay and always putting that through a lens of people of color as the villains.
	Okay, look at these firefighters like Brian Stelter rushing to the defense of the media right there.
	Did you see how angry Brian Stelter was as a government official basically suggested that the press was responsible for everything bad happening in America?
	Did you see the feel the anger rolling off of Brian Stelter's bald head?
	Did you feel it?
	I didn't.
	Because it didn't happen.
	Because Brian Stelter is holding the media to a double standard.
	When it's Rupert Murdoch or Fox News, then it's okay for politicians to bash them.
	But when it's CNN, CNN must never, ever be bashed.
	It is very bad when the President of the United States says CNN sucks and CNN is fake news.
	But it is fine when Bill de Blasio, who's an awful, awful commie mayor of New York, when he comes forward and he says that the New York Post is terrible for America, Rupert Murdoch is terrible for America, then, of course, not a problem at all.
	And then you wonder why Trump's anti-media message resonates.
	It resonates because for legitimately my entire life, the media have been this bad.
	The same media that cover for Antifa, the same media that suggest that we ought not be worried in the slightest about left-wing violence, we should only be worried about right-wing violence, even though left-wing violence happens against police officers at these rallies from Antifa on a routine basis.
	Those same media members are fine with attacks from politicians on right-wing media sources, or even mildly moderate media sources.
	Yeah, maybe we shouldn't trust the media.
	Maybe we shouldn't trust the media.
	And this goes to a real question.
	The infiltration of both parties by the extremes of the parties, is it growing or is it shrinking?
	Is it growing or is it shrinking?
	It's hard to tell at this point.
	So I mentioned a little bit earlier, Corey Stewart and the fact that Corey Stewart is the Senate candidate in Virginia.
	And that Corey Stewart, his campaign has been deeply ensconced with the alt-right.
	And that's really gross.
	And then I've talked about the fact that Antifa has infiltrated the left.
	Is Corey Stewart the future of the GOP and is Al Sharpton the future of the left?
	It sort of seems like that could be the future of both parties, unless reasonable people stand up and say no.
	I'm going to explain that in just a second, but here is Corey Stewart versus Al Sharpton.
	Is this the future of American politics right here on MSNBC?
	There are Americans of every single race, of every single religion, of every single ethnicity, that are struggling with the same things.
	And as long as we continue to divide Americans by race, and you've made a career out of dividing people by race, you've been a race hustler your entire career, you've made a lot of money at it, you haven't even bothered to pay your taxes at it, and all you do is divide Americans by race, and frankly people are tired of it.
	Okay, what Corey Stewart is saying about Al Sharpton is 100% correct.
	But Al Sharpton could say the same thing about Corey Stewart, right?
	Corey Stewart, who's from Minnesota, has proclaimed that he is for the Southern legacy and these Confederate memorials have to be maintained.
	Now, there's a case for maintaining Confederate memorials as a lesson from the past.
	I think it's Condoleezza Rice's case, which is that we shouldn't obliterate history just because history is uncomfortable for us.
	When we see statues of people who are controversial or bad, we should look at them and we should remember.
	We should teach our kids based on this fact that those statues were erected in the first place.
	Corey Stewart, his campaign has been a real problem.
	Rick Shafton, who runs communications for Stewart, has said really terrible stuff in the past about black folks and black neighborhoods and all the rest.
	He still works for Corey Stewart.
	Corey Stewart has suggested that the South's legacy is fighting the Civil War, which is just awful.
	The Civil War was a very, very bad war fought on behalf of slavery.
	OK, but the fact that the right some people on the right have embraced Corey Stewart because they hate the left so much and a lot of people on the left have embraced Al Sharpton because they hate the right so much.
	That is a recipe for disaster in the country.
	The left should be called on to disavow people like Al Sharpton, who's continuously been a major player in the Democratic Party.
	for 30 years after claiming race hoax after race hoax and people on the right should be disavowing Corey Stewart and that whole wing of the Republican Party because this cannot be the future of the two-party system.
	If it is, then what we are going to see is going to be a nation that gets uglier and uglier.
	And I understand people want to vote for one side to stop the other side.
	But if we don't have some intellectual honesty from both sides, then this is the future.
	The future is going to be an increased polarization due to loyalty to institutions, and then those institutions become even more polarized, even more reactionary, and even more dangerous.
	This stuff has got to stop.
	We have to start drawing lines.
	The left must draw lines against Antifa.
	It must draw lines against intersectional politics and identity politics.
	And the right must draw lines against identity politics on its own side.
	And conspiracy theorizing, by the way.
	This crap has to stop.
	Okay, now.
	Speaking of crap that has to stop, and just did.
	It turns out that today, the FBI fired Peter Strzok.
	That only took 97 years.
	Okay, Peter Strzok, you'll recall, is the FBI counterintelligence agent who came under withering criticism because he had been texting with his lover, Lisa Page, about how terrible President Trump was, and then he texted that he was going to stop President Trump from becoming president, and it only took 1,000 years for him to be fired.
	According to Strzok's lawyer, Eitan Goldman, An internal disciplinary review had recommended Strzok's demotion and a 60-day suspension, but Goldman said Monday the deputy director of the FBI overruled that determination and decided to fire him.
	The decision to fire Special Agent Strzok is not only a departure from typical bureau practice, but also contradicts Director Wray's testimony to Congress and his assurances that the FBI intended to follow its regular process.
	In this and all other personnel matters, said Strzok's lawyer.
	The reality is that Strzok should have been fired long ago, obviously.
	In the Inspector General review, Michael Horowitz's review over at the Department of Justice found that Peter Strzok could not have been trusted to actually handle the Hillary Clinton investigation or the Russia investigation, and that his decisions may have been biased by his bias against President Trump.
	And that had real ramifications for both investigations.
	Strzok should have been fired long ago.
	The fact that he continued to maintain his innocence throughout all of this was always seriously questionable.
	Now, we are still awaiting the Inspector General report on the Russia investigation and how much personal bias impacted the procedure in the investigation.
	But there are serious questions to be asked.
	Another one of those serious questions comes courtesy of John Solomon over at The Hill.
	Who has a long piece today talking about the relationship between Fusion GPS and a guy named Bruce Orr, who was working for the FBI at the time.
	Here's what John Solomon writes.
	He says, In a memory stick quietly exchanged in a coffee shop, an admission of a Hail Mary leak, an unmistakable effort to push the Russia investigation closer to Donald Trump's inner circle with uncorroborated tales, these are just some of the highlights from the day that Fusion GPS founder Glenn Simpson, paid for by Hillary Clinton's campaign, met secretly with a top Justice Department official right after Trump won the 2016 election.
	All of it was captured in the official's handwritten notes, a contemporaneous record that intelligence professionals tell me exposes the flaws plaguing the early Russia collusion case.
	For example, Glenn Simpson, who you'll recall was working for Fusion GPS, that was the firm that was hired to do OPPO on Trump, by Hillary Clinton, told then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr during a December 10, 2016 meeting in a Washington coffee shop that he believed Trump's longtime lawyer, Michael Cohen, was a go-between from Russia to the Trump campaign.
	Now, Bruce Ohr's wife actually worked for the Fusion GPS firm.
	Simpson allegedly acknowledged most of the information from Fusion GPS and British intelligence operative Christopher Steele did not come from sources inside Moscow.
	They said there was a Russian source in the United States who'd been providing them the information.
	That makes it very suspect as to whether that information was reliable in any way.
	Still, Fusion GPS was funneling all of this information over to Bruce Ohr over at the FBI.
	Congressional investigators, according to John Solomon, are now scouring all of Bruce Ohr's notes for evidence that Simpson and Steele had influence over the Russia probe even after Steele was dismissed as an FBI informant in November 2016.
	Investigators want to know if any players in the Russia probe gave Congress false testimony.
	One notation that stands out is Simpson's account that he asked Steele to talk with Mother Jones reporter David Korn about the muckraking on Trump and Russia in the final days of the election.
	At the time, Steele was still working as an FBI source.
	So, apparently, the idea here is that Fusion GPS leaked all this information to David Corn, and that story was intended to blow Trump up before the election.
	Now, that's not illegal, right?
	It was an OPPO research hit.
	But, if they were leaking secret inside information from the FBI, then that is illegal, obviously.
	Simpson's lawyer is not returning call, seeking comment.
	The question is, what was Bruce Ohr doing?
	When was he doing it?
	And this is still the open question in all of this.
	What exactly was the impact of the bias against President Trump inside the FBI as they pursued their investigation in the Russia investigation?
	We still don't know.
	The Russia investigation allegedly, even according to Devin Nunes, was the House Intelligence Committee chairman.
	Even that was initiated based on George Papadopoulos, but it is unclear how much that investigation was infiltrated by people who did not like Trump and were attempting to use that investigation to quote-unquote get Trump either before or after the election.
	There are serious questions that still have to be asked about all of that and President Trump isn't wrong to be deeply frustrated with all of that.
	He just tweeted out this morning, Agent Peter Strzok was just fired from the FBI.
	Finally, the list of bad players in the FBI and DOJ gets longer and longer.
	Based on the fact that Strzok was in charge of the witch hunt, will it be dropped?
	It is a total hoax.
	No collusion.
	No obstruction.
	I just fight back.
	Just fired Agent Strzok, formerly of the FBI, was in charge of the crooked Hillary Clinton sham investigation.
	It was a total fraud on the American public and should be properly redone.
	So now he's calling on his DOJ to re-prosecute Hillary Clinton.
	We'll see how that plays out.
	I mean, I'm not sure that that's a wise move.
	That said, the president ought to be very frustrated with his DOJ and FBI.
	He has every right to do so.
	Okay.
	Time for some things I like and then some things that I hate.
	So...
	Things I like today.
	So I referenced this book I was reading on Rwanda over the weekend, recommended to me by my friend Jane Koston.
	I asked her for some books that she would recommend on politics in Africa, because I really don't know that much about it.
	The book is called Bad News, Last Journalist in a Dictatorship by Anjan Sundaram.
	Now, it's a very good book.
	The qualification I have is that it's endorsed by Noam Chomsky, which always makes me think twice about the book.
	I think what the book does really well is it does show you how dictatorships run.
	It does show you the threat to journalists, particularly in dictatorships, and the danger of dictatorships in turning a population into a subject population willing to do the will of the dictator.
	That said, I don't know enough about Rwandan politics, to be honest with you, to tell you whether there are any viable alternatives to the Kagame regime in Rwanda, which has been highly successful at boosting the economy while at the same time suppressing public dissent.
	In the aftermath of the Rwandan genocide, there are a lot of folks who think maybe dictatorship is almost necessary because democracy would break down immediately into civil war again.
	I don't know enough about Rwanda to give you a straight answer on that.
	All I can tell you is the book does provide a window into how people think.
	The most interesting part of this book Because there's a section where Kagame basically orders a bunch of people inside Rwanda to take down the thatched roof huts that they have.
	They don't have modern roofing in Rwanda because it's a very poor country still.
	And all these people basically dismantle the roofs on their own homes without any sort of replacement for them.
	And when asked about it by Sundaram, the author of this book, they say, listen, we were told to do so and we have to modernize the country, so of course we would take down our own roofs.
	Once you have people who are willing to do stuff that does not benefit them, and actually is highly damaging, simply because someone told them to do it, you have a population that is in serious danger of reverting to violence at the drop of a hat.
	And that's a serious problem.
	It's why I said earlier on the show, institutional loyalty combined with radical polarization is a serious danger of violence.
	That's what creates a serious danger of violence.
	Don't be a follower.
	Be an individual.
	When you start thinking of yourself as a member of a collective as opposed to a member of an individual, you start to say OK to things you never would have said OK to before.
	OK.
	Other things that I like.
	So this video, which is from November 2017, is really pretty amazing.
	This is a video of a Brazilian surfer setting the world's record for surfing the largest wave.
	His name is Rodrigo Coxa.
	Look at this video.
	This wave is 80 feet tall.
	Look at this.
	There's no there's no sound on it.
	But you can it's unbelievable.
	I mean, it looks like he's surfing a tsunami, basically.
	It's just ridiculous.
	And I have to say.
	You know, the fact that this guy is willing to undertake that, I mean, good for him, but holy moly, sometimes you just have to admire the skill.
	Look at that, that's real speed right there.
	How you survive that is beyond me, but professionals are professionals.
	I mean, Bodhi from Point Break signals his approval.
	So, amazing stuff there.
	Okay, time for a quick thing that I hate and then we'll do a Federalist Paper.
	Okay, so today's thing that I hate.
	So Nancy Pelosi, I think, really spills the beans here.
	She wants to be Speaker of the House again, and she basically says to Democratic candidates, go ahead and lie to the American public.
	Lie to them that you don't like me.
	Lie to them you won't make me Speaker.
	Do whatever you have to do to win.
	And then you wonder why people don't trust politicians.
	You wonder why Trump is President.
	One of the reasons Trump is President is because there is a baseline level of dishonesty that is baked into our politics.
	The reality is that if the Democrats regain the House, they will make Nancy Pelosi speaker again.
	That is a talking point for Republicans.
	But Democrats are disabusing their voters of the idea that they're going to back Pelosi, even though they're lying.
	And she says, fine, if you have to lie, lie.
	Lie to get in power.
	OK, well, if that's our politics, then no wonder that President Trump, who is routinely dishonest about things, no wonder that the American public just discount the dishonesty.
	They say he's honest about the big things.
	Who cares if he's dishonest about the small things?
	Nancy Pelosi is certainly no better.
	I do believe that none of us is indispensable, but I think I'm the best person for the job.
	And I won't let the Republican ads, which are just flooding these districts, and I say to the candidates, do whatever you have to do.
	Just win, baby.
	I know.
	One in five children in America lives in poverty.
	We must win this.
	Okay, so basically lie as much as you can to get power.
	I wonder why we don't trust our politicians and we're willing to elect anybody who even has the slightest semblance of a non-politician.
	I can't imagine.
	Okay, time for a quick Federalist Paper.
	So, we're all the way up to Federalist 41, making steady progress through the Federalist Papers.
	Federalist 41, written by James Madison, and he talks about the powers necessary for the government to function properly.
	So this particular Federalist Paper asks two questions.
	The first question is whether Any of the powers transferred to the general government are unnecessary or improper, meaning is the government grabbing more power than it needs?
	And second, whether it could be dangerous to give this kind of power to the federal government.
	He says it's pretty clear that all the powers delegated to the federal government Under the Constitution are necessary.
	And then he answers, yes, of course, the government could misuse the powers.
	He says, in every political institution, a power to advance the public happiness involves a discretion which may be misapplied and abused.
	Right?
	Of course, anytime you give the government the power to cure a problem, it could also make the problem twice as bad by...
	Usurping to itself additional power.
	He says this is the reason why the Constitution has checks and balances and it is why the Constitution is a document of enumerated powers.
	Now this is deeply important.
	There are a lot of folks on the left who think that the Constitution is important because of the Bill of Rights.
	The Bill of Rights is the least important part of the Constitution.
	The most important part of the Constitution is the structural Constitution.
	The part of the Constitution that says how the government works.
	The government is only supposed to have a certain number of enumerated powers.
	Right?
	Powers that are spelled out that the government has.
	All other powers do not belong to the government.
	According to Madison, the government has six types of powers.
	Security against foreign danger.
	Regulation of intercourse with foreign nations.
	That would be trade.
	Maintenance of harmony and proper intercourse among the states.
	That would be preventing the states from tariffing each other, basically.
	Certain miscellaneous objects of general utility, which is like post offices and stuff.
	Restraint of the states from certain injurious acts so you can prevent the state from usurping power from the feds.
	And provisions for giving due efficacy to all these powers.
	So that's what the Necessary and Proper Clause is.
	The Constitution allows the government to do what it needs to do in order to effectuate those clauses.
	But he also points out a principle of interpretation.
	So he says what you can't do is look at the Constitution, see a power, and then expand the actual scope of the government to everything.
	He gives an example.
	He says, a power to destroy the freedom of the press, the trial by jury, or even to regulate the course of dissents or the forms of conveyances must be very singularly expressed by the terms to raise money for the general welfare.
	He explicitly points out an argument people on the left use.
	They say, well, look, the Constitution says the government has the power to provide for the general welfare.
	That means income tax.
	It means socialized health care.
	No, says Madison.
	What color can this objection have when a specification of the objects alluded to by these general terms immediately follows and is not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon?
	In other words, when it says to raise money for the general welfare and then it lists All of the things you can do with that clause, that is a comprehensive list.
	It doesn't mean that the general rule overrides the specifics.
	It means the specifics govern the general.
	And this is true in its basic principle of constitutional interpretation.
	The specific governs the general.
	The general does not govern the specific.
	If I say to you, I want you to go to the supermarket and here's a list of objects I want you to pick up at the supermarket.
	I don't mean go to the supermarket and buy anything you want.
	The specifics govern the general.
	The same thing is true in contractual negotiation and contractual interpretation, and it's true when it comes to the Constitution.
	If the Constitution says the government has the power to provide for the general welfare, and then lists for pages all the stuff the government can do, it's all the stuff the government can do that matters, it is not that motivating clause to provide for the general welfare.
	As Madison says, for what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted If these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power.
	And that, of course, is exactly right.
	And this is why originalism is correct when it comes to constitutional interpretation.
	Just as you would read a contract literally by looking at the specific terms, you have to look at the Constitution and read it literally by looking at the specific terms.
	Okay, we'll be back here tomorrow with all the latest.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Senya Villareal, executive producer Jeremy Boring, senior producer Jonathan Hay.
	Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover, and our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
	Edited by Alex Zingaro.
	Audio is mixed by Mike Caramina.
	Hair and makeup is by Jesua Alvera.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire Ford Publishing production.

▲