All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 6, 2018 - The Ben Shapiro Show
52:17
The Molehunt Is On! | Ep. 618
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
A New York Times op-ed features an anonymous resistance leader inside the White House.
Ooh.
The Brett Kavanaugh hearings continue with Cory Booker and Kamala Harris running for president and Alex Jones invades Capitol Hill.
And it's weird.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
Every day you think we've reached the seventh circle of hell.
You'd be wrong.
You'd be wrong.
There are always further steps down to the seventh circle.
We'll never reach the seventh circle of hell.
There's a story today, actually, that aliens had supposedly landed or hovered over one of President Trump's actual golf courses in Scotland.
All I can say is that that's how this has to end, right?
That President Trump is the president when we actually make first contact with aliens of another planet.
For sure, for sure.
We'll get to all the news, I promise.
But first, we have to talk about your shaving habits.
So you want to be prepped if the aliens do arrive.
You want to look good.
And if you want to look good, you want to smell good, you want to look like a decent human being, you need all the products the Dollar Shave Club has to offer.
They have everything you need to look, feel, smell your best.
They have amazing shower stuff, hair styling products, toothbrushes, toothpaste, and of course, razor and shave supplies.
So, I am particularly fond of their Amber and Lavender Body Cleanser.
It is delightful.
So is their Black Pepper and Sage Shampoo.
Oh my goodness, these things just make me smell wonderful.
I mean, people at the office could attest to it, but it'd be sexual harassment and we'd have to report them to HR.
It's that good.
Okay, that's how good the Dollar Shave Club stuff is.
That's how I get ready, but you're not me.
You might have your own way to get ready.
You might shave your whole body to get ready for a bike race, because you're some sort of weirdo.
Well, Dollar Shave Club's Executive Razor and Shave Butter can help you do even that.
You might do your hair to get ready for your soccer match, because you're one of those weirdos who plays soccer.
But DSE can do that for you as well.
The thing is, no matter what you do to get ready, DSE has everything you need.
And right now, you can get ready with an amazing deal on any one of their starter sets.
I recommend that Daily Essentials starter set because, again, I love that amber lavender body cleanser.
Head over to dollarshaveclub.com slash ben.
Pick your own DSE starter set for just five bucks.
After your starter set, products ship at regular price.
That is dollarshaveclub.com slash ben.
Again, dollarshaveclub.com slash ben for the special deal.
Alright, so we begin today with this anonymous op-ed in the New York Times, which is solely designed to lead to a full-on mole hunt inside the White House.
Basically, there's an op-ed in the New York Times.
It is by an anonymous person.
The New York Times did not reveal the name of the person who wrote this op-ed.
And the essential contention of the op-ed is that President Trump is a crazy person and all the people around him are restraining him from being crazy.
Which...
Okay.
All right.
What do you want from me?
Okay.
We'll talk about the ramifications of this.
It is titled, I am part of the resistance inside the Trump administration, which of course is titled just to piss off President Trump.
I mean, this is almost specifically designed to make President Trump go full Captain Queeg looking for the strawberries.
We're pretty much going to get the entire cane mutiny in real life.
It'll be just spectacular.
Here's what the article says.
President Trump is facing a test to his presidency unlike any faced by a modern American leader.
Sorry, I first have to note, the New York Times ran an editorial note at the top of this piece.
And here's what they write.
I mean, this is just virtue signaling of the highest order.
The Times today is taking the rare step of publishing an anonymous op-ed essay We have done so at the request of the author, a senior official in the Trump administration, whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure.
We believe publishing this essay anonymously is the only way to deliver an important perspective to our readers.
We invite you to submit a question about the essay or our vetting process here.
Well, this does raise a weird question.
Will the New York Times reporters now seek to dig into who actually wrote the anonymous New York Times op-ed?
They could just like walk down the hall and presumably start grilling their own editors, but that gets real weird.
Anyway, here's what the piece says.
President Trump is facing a test to his presidency unlike any faced by a modern American leader.
It's not just that the special counsel looms large, or that the country is bitterly divided over Mr. Trump's leadership, or even that his party might well lose the House to an opposition hell-bent on his downfall.
The dilemma Which he does not fully grasp is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations.
I would know.
I am one of them.
I, QAnon, I, Anonymous, am one of them.
To be clear, ours is not the popular resistance of the left.
We want the administration to succeed and think that many of its policies have already made America safer and more prosperous.
But we believe our first duty is to this country, and the president continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the health of our republic.
So let me just Point out here that this editorial has already gone off the rails for a couple of reasons.
One, if you say that you're part of the resistance to Trump helping him to do the right thing, you just made sure that President Trump is going to go on a mole hunt to oust anyone who is trying to help him do the right thing from your own point of view.
You've ensured that President Trump is going to go full on Bring everybody into a room.
Prisoner's dilemma.
Bring in the rubber pipe.
Beat the crap out of people.
We're going to separate people into rooms and threaten their families until we find out who is thwarting the president's will.
Second, those two sentences are in complete contrast with one another.
One is that they want the administration to succeed and think many of its policies have been great.
And then there's a sentence that says that they believe their first duty is to the country, and the president continues to act in a manner detrimental to the health of our republic.
How do you want the administration to succeed if you think the president is acting in a manner detrimental to the health of the republic?
This is basically justifying everything President Trump ever said about the deep state, but it's actually just the shallow state.
It's a bunch of people working inside his administration, who presumably he appointed, who are working to thwart his will, and then talking about it in the New York Times.
The predictable effect of which will be to lower his approval ratings and ensure that he has a tougher time with re-election in 2020.
So why exactly would you say that you're standing up for the administration?
If you actually believe that your job in the administration is to help the administration succeed, make sure that President Trump doesn't go off the rails, make his policy better, thwart him when necessary, why would you go talk about it?
Why would you then go and talk about it?
That doesn't make any sense at all.
I mean, it's legitimately a member of the criminal conspiracy saying, you know what?
I'm involved in criminality.
I'm going to go talk to the police about how well I'm attempting to make this criminal conspiracy work.
You're talking to the very people who are attempting to make sure that Trump exits office.
So clearly there's something disingenuous about this piece from the outset.
The piece continues.
This is why many Trump appointees have vowed to do what we can to preserve our democratic institutions while thwarting Mr. Trump's more misguided impulses until he's out of office.
So clearly you don't want the administration to succeed, you want him out of office.
The root of the problem is the president's amorality.
Anyone who works with him knows he is not moored to any discernible first principles that guide his decision making.
Which is like...
Forget about people who work with him, like anybody who watches him for any prolonged period of time knows this is true.
The president considers himself a pragmatist.
He has never said that he is a first principles guy.
Although he was elected as a Republican, the president shows little affinity for ideals long espoused by conservatives.
Free minds, free markets, free people.
At best, he has invoked these ideals in scripted settings.
At worst, he has attacked them outright.
In addition to his mass marketing of the notion that the press is the enemy of the people, President Trump's impulses are generally anti-trade and anti-democratic.
Don't get me wrong, there are bright spots that the near-ceaseless negative coverage of the administration fails to capture.
Effective deregulation, historic tax reform, a more robust military, and more.
But these successes have come despite, not because of, the president's leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty, and ineffective.
And it continues along these lines for paragraphs and paragraphs, with the result that they say that there's this anonymous author inside the Trump administration says they have a two-track presidency.
Take foreign policy.
In public and in private, President Trump shows a preference for autocrats and dictators such as Vladimir Putin of Russia and Kim Jong-un, and displays little genuine appreciation for the ties that bind us to allied like-minded nations.
Astute observers have noted, though, that the rest of the administration is operating on another track, one where countries like Russia are called out for meddling and punished accordingly, and where allies around the world are engaged as peers rather than ridiculed as rivals.
Well, we know all of this.
The piece says this isn't the work of the so-called deep state.
It's the work of the steady state.
So yes, we are thwarting the president, but we are doing so because we are the steady state.
And then this author suggests that perhaps we should think about removing the president through the 25th Amendment, invoking the 25th Amendment.
They say that no one wants to precipitate a constitutional crisis.
So instead, they're going to steer the administration in the right direction until one way or another it is over.
And then there is a bunch of references.
There are a bunch of references to John McCain and how wonderful John McCain is and all the rest of it.
So there are a bunch of questions to be asked.
One, who is this person?
OK, it is not a cabinet level official.
It is known with presidential aspirations.
It's the riskiest political move ever.
It is not Mike Pence, despite how much the left would love it to be Mike Pence quietly stabbing President Trump between the shoulder blades with his trademark bland smile.
That is not happening.
Okay, the vice president is not doing that.
It is not Nikki Haley, who is safely ensconced in New York, far away from the silliness of the White House.
This is some second-tier, low-level staffer.
Okay, it's a senior official.
Half the people in the White House have the title senior official in the White House.
This is probably some senior official in like John Kelly's team who doesn't like Trump very much and feels like they might feather bed their exit.
And that's really what the motive here is.
The motive here is that it will be revealed.
Okay, within a week we'll know who this person is.
And this person, because it's not going to stay secret, and this person is going to come out to great applause from the left This was a person who was trying to thwart Trump.
And Trump fired him!
How could Trump fire this person who was trying to just make the administration better?
And this person will become, not an inside the White House resistance leader, but a resistance resistance leader.
They will turn into a full-on Anna Navarro character on MSNBC.
They'll be given a rich TV contract.
They'll be given a rich book contract.
They will be exonerated.
Exculpated for all of their terrible, terrible activity in associating with President Trump.
This is the mea culpa.
It's a preliminary mea culpa, and it allows the person to exit the administration amidst glory and huzzahs.
That's really what this editorial is for.
So if you believe for a second that this editorial is truly designed to either make the administration better, Or to inform the American people, you're wrong.
First of all, we already knew all this stuff.
Legitimately.
Like, everything that this guy says in the editorial, I've been saying for well over a year on this program.
Since legitimately a couple of months into the administration, I said this administration is running along two tracks.
President Trump says stuff, and then the people around him implement stuff.
And those are not the same stuff.
This has been very obvious to anyone who watches At any level.
When I was on Bill Maher's show, I said this.
Bill Maher said, well, he always talks about Vladimir Putin.
And I said, right.
But then if you look at the policy of the administration, it is not what he says.
The policy of the administration is very harsh on Russia.
It's quite obvious that this administration involves the president saying a lot of stuff, being hands-off, delegating power to a lot of folks, and when people say it's a constitutional crisis to have people around the president thwarting his will, I'm not even sure what that means.
It's not as though they are hiding him in a closet, preventing him from doing things he wants to do.
They understand that the president forgets about things and doesn't care that much about other things, and that if they just don't put something on his desk, he's unlikely to ever remember it again, so they just don't put it on his desk.
Like, is the president's will what he wants to do in the moment?
Or is the president's will what he cares about over the long haul?
Because this sort of manipulation does happen at a much lower level in other administrations.
There are people who are slow walking policy all the time.
You do it at your job.
How many times at your job does your boss say, I need something on my desk now?
And you think, you know what?
It'd be better if my boss got this tomorrow.
I'm just going to slow walk it today.
Is that you thwarting the will of your company?
Or is that you using your independent judgment to try and make the company better because maybe your boss is about to make a rash decision?
This sort of stuff happens all the time in your regular job.
If Trump doesn't like it, he still has plenary power over the executive branch.
He can fire whomever he wants.
This person will be uncovered and fired.
Nonetheless, the White House is going to be torn apart by the chaos of now attempting to uncover First, let's talk about the look of your home.
So, you look around your home and it just feels shabby and you're not sure why.
pretty much the worst possible way to this particular op-ed.
And just as I'm sure the op-ed author wanted him to react, which is by acting off the rails.
And that's sort of the entire point of what the author was trying to do here.
We'll talk about that in just a second.
First, let's talk about the look of your home.
So you look around your home and it just feels shabby and you're not sure why.
Well, believe it or not, it might be the window coverings.
In fact, you probably haven't thought about the window coverings for a long time.
Now, you're going to be a little bit Even for me, when I do construction on my house, I don't think about the window coverings.
And then as soon as they're replaced over at Blinds.com, I think, wow, that made a huge difference.
A huge difference.
Well, go over to Blinds.com and make your house look awesome today.
Blinds.com makes it really, really easy for you to change the window coverings.
It means that you're not going to have to spend enormous amounts of time and money buying blinds.
Instead, if you're not sure where to start, Or what you want.
With Blinds.com you get a free online design consultation.
You send them pictures of your house, they send back custom recommendations from a professional for what will work with your color scheme, furniture, and specific rooms.
They'll even send you free samples to make sure everything looks as good in person as it does online.
Every order gets free shipping.
Here's the best part.
If you mismeasure, you pick the wrong color, you screw up, Blinds.com makes it right for you.
For free, right?
They will remake your blinds for free if you screw it up.
They've really made it easy.
For a limited time, get 20% off everything at Blinds.com when you use promo code Ben.
That's Blinds.com promo code Ben for 20% off everything.
Faux wood blinds, cellular shades, roller shades, and more.
Blinds.com promo code Ben.
Rules and restrictions do apply.
Okay, so the President of the United States reacts as you would expect him to react to an op-ed from inside his administration.
The killer's in the house!
Ah!
Calling from upstairs on the phone!
Oh my God!
Okay, so, President Trump reacts in typical Trumpian fashion.
He is in front of a crowd of sheriffs, who are some of his closest allies because he's very pro-law enforcement.
And here's President Trump ripping into the filling New York Times.
The New York Times and CNN and all of these phony media outlets will be out of business, folks.
They'll be out of business because there'll be nothing to write and there'll be nothing of interest.
So if the failing New York Times has an anonymous editorial, can you believe it?
Anonymous.
Meaning gutless.
A gutless editorial.
We're doing a great job.
Okay, and the truth is, he's not wrong about it being gutless.
Like, if the person actually wants to take a stand against the administration publicly, quit.
Quit and talk about how terrible it was.
Or, alternatively, if you actually want to work inside the administration and make it a better place, shut your face.
Why are you going to the New York Times to brag about how you anonymously are helping the administration from the inside, except to provide yourself cover later?
This is very obviously self-interested.
Do you really think anybody at the New York Times would have printed an anonymous op-ed from somebody inside the Obama administration making the same claims?
Highly, highly, highly doubtful.
Because printing anonymous op-eds is kind of frowned upon.
It's kind of frowned upon for pretty good reason, which is that there's no way to vet the claims of the person who's actually making those claims.
Like, we don't know who the senior official is.
It could be some low-level person who's met Trump once.
There are hundreds of people working in the White House.
Hundreds of them.
So, that is quite plausible.
But, President Trump then goes to Twitter and he decides that he is going to lose it.
So, President Trump had a couple of tweets.
He tweeted out, Does the so-called senior administration official really exist?
Or is it just the failing New York Times with another phony source?
If the gutless, anonymous person does indeed exist, the Times must, for national security purposes, turn him or her So, no.
The New York Times isn't going to do that.
That's not a thing.
The press doesn't have to turn people over to the federal government for writing an op-ed that rips on the administration.
That's not an actual thing.
And then the president had one more tweet.
All caps.
Treason, question mark.
So I guess now we're going to execute this person.
We're going to find them.
The prescribed penalty in the Constitution for treason is death.
So presumably we will find this person, take them out back, and trample them.
He'll take his tie off and then he will strangle him with the oversized red tie.
It'll be quite amusing.
But...
Here's the problem with President Trump's response.
Basically the op-ed says, and it is, it's a terrible, stupid, backwards, outrageously dumb op-ed.
But the central contention is President Trump is a crazy man and we have to restrain him.
And President Trump's response is, I'm not crazy.
You're crazy.
You're so crazy.
I'm going to take your head off.
I'm going to rip it off your neck.
And then I'm going to defecate down your throat hole.
That's what I'm going to do to you.
I'm going to rip your legs off and beat you to death with them.
You're calling me crazy and out of control.
How dare you?
Unbelievable.
Unreal.
Mr. President.
If you wanted to react in, you know, the fashion that is most likely to put this to bed, what you would say is, ah, there they are talking again.
Ah, of course the New York Times is going to print this sort of stuff.
Not, not, they should turn over this bastard to me so I can blow a hole in him with this drill.
I'll just take this, this, I have a screwdriver right here.
I will stab him in the face 100 times.
I will shoot him on Fifth Avenue and I will lose no support.
At this point, you have to laugh so you don't cry because it is pretty wild stuff.
But it is also true that this op-ed does no good.
It is actually deeply counterproductive because all it does in the end is drive President Trump to throw out anyone who may be actually trying to curb those worst excesses.
And now we get to spend months trying to Okay, meanwhile, speaking of stupidity, awfulness, counterproductive nonsense, we need to stop these judicial hearings.
These judicial hearings are a waste of time.
These Senate Judiciary Committee hearings are just a place for prospective presidential candidates to grandstand.
Now, Brett Kavanaugh is doing, you know, a fine job at what his job is here in these judicial hearings, which is to obfuscate how he feels on every particular issue.
The way this works, thanks to Ruth Bader Ginsburg, is that Ruth Bader Ginsburg, when she was questioned about specific cases, she said, I'm not going to answer any questions about prospective cases or cases in the past.
I'm going to sit here and look at you weird.
And that was basically how every... That's now how we do judicial hearings.
People ask questions that are designed to elicit a response from the cheering throng on either side of the aisle, and then the judge sits there, and the judge basically stares weirdly at them.
Well, that's basically what happened yesterday.
And Kavanaugh's a pro at it.
I mean, here's Kavanaugh, for example, giving an answer on Roe vs. Wade.
This is clip 11.
Here's Kavanaugh answering on Roe vs. Wade, giving about the vaguest answer you could possibly give.
Senator, I said that it's settled as a precedent of the Supreme Court entitled to respect under principles of stare decisis.
And I understand your point of view on that, Senator, and I understand how passionate and how deeply people feel about this issue.
I understand the importance of the issue.
I understand the importance that people attach That's a big way of saying nothing.
And he says that it's precedent based on precedent?
Right.
And the Supreme Court is not bound by precedent.
So what are you going to do on the case?
The answer is we have no idea.
That's not stopping the New York Times from printing leaked Kavanaugh documents about abortion and affirmative action.
And they're calling it a bombshell.
A bombshell.
Is it really a bombshell?
No, of course it's not a bombshell.
Of course, it's not a bombshell.
Judge Kavanaugh, when he was working for the Bush administration, was considering a draft opinion piece that supporters of one of Mr. Bush's conservatives' appeals court nominees hoped they could persuade anti-abortion women to submit under their names.
It stated it is widely accepted by legal scholars across the board that Roe v. Wade and its progeny are the settled law of the land.
And Kavanaugh proposed deleting that line, writing, I am not sure that all legal scholars refer to Roe as the settled law of the land at the Supreme Court level, since the court can always overrule its precedent, and three current justices on the court would do so.
That doesn't mean he would do so.
That is an apt and accurate description of the state of the law.
The Supreme Court can overrule anything.
When people say settled law of the land, what they really mean is we don't want people to reopen it.
And it's an inaccurate description.
There's no such thing as the settled law of the land in Supreme Court jurisprudence.
Stare decisis does not always apply.
Precedent does not always apply.
If it did, then Plessy versus Ferguson would still be on the books and people would still be segregating bus cars at the behest of the state.
So that's not a thing.
But again, Brett Kavanaugh is being run through the ringer specifically for political purposes.
Here, for example, is Kavanaugh being asked about presidential pardons.
Again, he's not going to answer this question, but we're going to pretend like these hearings matter.
The question of self-pardons is something I've never analyzed.
It's a question that I've not written about.
It's a question, therefore, that's a hypothetical question that I can't begin to answer in this context as a sitting judge and as a nominee to the Supreme Court.
And the other half of that is...
Okay, so again, he's got no answer on that because he doesn't have to answer any of that.
This entire hearing is just designed for Democrats to grandstand for 2020.
They are basically just standing there shouting, just shouting.
That's it, right?
They're my son when he wakes up in the morning and he screams from his crib, Dada, come get me!
Okay, these are the Democrats.
Pay attention to me!
Attention!
Now!
Please!
Ah!
I just saved you, like, 35 hours of watching Senate Judiciary Committee hearings.
That's all Senate Democrats are doing.
And right now, the two who are best at it are Kamala Harris, who is being taken seriously, and Cory Booker, who is a parody of a parody.
Cory Booker is a muppet.
He's a human muppet.
And all he does as a human muppet is just make weird faces at people.
And, I mean, he literally called himself Spartacus in a hearing this morning.
I am not kidding you.
Cory fricking Booker just called himself Spartacus at a hearing this morning.
I'll have to explain why he calls himself Spartacus at a hearing this morning, because he really is astonishing and hilarious, and also he doesn't understand how Spartacus worked.
Like, Spartacus ended up crucified, so there's that.
But it's all good times for Cory Booker and the Senate Judiciary Committee.
We'll talk about all that in just a second.
First, let's talk about the fact that time is moving slowly.
That means you're checking your watch more often.
And when you check your watch, shouldn't you have something nice like this?
Shouldn't you have a watch that you like looking at, because it's classy, and it's simple, and it's minimalist, and it looks nice?
Well, that is where movement comes in.
We've talked about MVMT before on the program, obviously.
You know, there are these two college dropouts.
They started their own watch company, and the company has grown like crazy.
They've now sold 2 million watches in 160-plus countries, and they continue to revolutionize fashion in the belief that style shouldn't break the bank.
MVMT has come pretty far.
In the past year, they've not only introduced a bunch of new watch collections for men and women, they've also expanded to sunglasses, fashion for bracelets, for her.
I've got the sunglasses.
My wife has the sunglasses, too.
They have all these great options, and as I say, they're really durable.
So this makes a difference to young parents like me, because my kids will grab my watch and just chuck them against the wall.
Movement watches stand up to the beating.
Movement watches are about looking good, keeping it simple.
They don't tell you how many steps you've taken.
They don't blow up your wrist with text messages.
Instead, they just tell you the time in the classiest way.
Movement watches start at $95 at a department store.
They're like $400, $500.
They cut out the middleman.
Right now, get 15% off today with free shipping and free returns by going to MVMT.com slash Shapiro.
That's MVMT.com slash Shapiro.
See why the movement keeps growing.
MVMT.com slash Shapiro.
Join the movement.
Go check it out right now.
Okay, so Cory Booker, as I say, he calls himself Spartacus.
Why?
Because he decided today that he was going to violate the rules of the Senate by simply releasing a bunch of classified documents.
Now the way this works is that there are a bunch of documents that are shown to the various senators on the Judiciary Committee that are Held closely by executive privilege.
If you're working for the Bush administration, the Bush administration has the right to say that the legislative branch does not get to see things because that is executive privilege.
The executive is not subject to the dictates of the legislature.
So the legislature can't just say, we want every document, everything Bush ever said to all of his advocates, we want all of that in front of us.
Now, that's not a thing in constitutional jurisprudence.
So there's basically a deal that was made with the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is they get to see all these Kavanaugh documents on the condition that they are not asked about publicly.
So it can decide the votes of the people on the committee.
But it is not meant to undercut the executive power.
So Cory Booker, being a grandstanding idiot, he decides, you know what?
It's a great idea.
I'm just going to release these documents.
I'm just going to come out and release these documents.
I'm going to violate Senate rules.
I'm just going to state it up front.
And then, if you want to expel me from the Senate for violation of Senate rules, if you want to, If you want to expel me from the Senate, please, please do it.
I need a headline.
If you want to expel me, then do it!
I'm just like Spartacus, except I'm begging you to crucify me!
See, the thing about Spartacus is that he didn't actually want to be identified as Spartacus, because then they would kill him.
Which is why everyone identified as Spartacus.
But Cory Booker doesn't know anything.
Because he's stupid.
So instead, he says that he is like Spartacus in basically begging to be crucified.
Please, please expel me.
Please do it.
Because if you do it, maybe I can run for president.
Because I'll show how much Republicans hate me.
And then I can make weird googly eyes.
And I can do my weird jazz fingers.
It'll be all weird!
But I'll be president because it's weird!
So here's Cory Booker being all weird.
I will say that I did willingly violate the chair's rule on the committee confidential process.
I take full responsibility for violating that, sir.
And I violate it because I sincerely believe that the public deserves to know this nominee's record, in this particular case, his record on issues of race and the law.
And I could not understand, and I violated this rule knowingly, why these issues should be withheld from the public.
Now I appreciate the comments of my colleagues.
This is about the closest I'll probably ever have in my life to an I Am Spartacus moment.
Oh.
My.
God.
This guy's like the Nick Cage of the Senate.
Every scene that he acts in, it's like, what?
Have you ever seen Chewing of the Scenery like this?
Here's the thing, Kamala Harris is good at playing the prosecutor on TV, and she's actually good at this.
Cory Booker is just, he's the worst kid in your high school drama class.
The kid who watched Who at one point watched movies in like the 1980s and thought that Arnold Schwarzenegger's performance in Kindergarten Cop was the apotheosis of good acting.
I was like, you know what I'm going to do?
I'm just going to shout a lot.
Who thinks that William Shatner is a great actor?
And he's like, William Shatner, everything he says is GONE!
Every single thing.
So there's Cory Booker doing that.
And then Cory Booker, uh, he's just, he's just the worst.
The knowingly violating the rules.
Like, he's been, when he says, I knowingly violated the rules, I am giving you every motivation that you can for it.
Please, I need the attention.
No one's paying attention to me.
Pay attention to me!
Please!
There's Cory Booker again.
Pay attention to him, people.
Pay attention.
He needs your attention.
He wants your attention.
Why don't you love him?
Why don't you pay attention?
You can't just ignore me.
He's gonna boil a rabbit.
Here's Cory Booker.
Senator Cornyn actually made a very good point.
I knowingly violated the rules that were put forth, and I'm told that the committee confidential rules have knowing consequences.
And so, sir, I come from a long line, as all of us do as Americans, and understand what that kind of civil disobedience is, and I understand the consequences.
So I am right now, before your Before your process is finished, I'm going to release the email about racial profiling.
And I understand that the penalty comes with potential ousting from the Senate.
Please oust me.
Please!
Please!
Show the Democrats that I'm really committed to this.
Show all the base that I'm really committed to this by ousting me.
Make me a martyr.
Martyr me!
Martyr me!
It's like, oh my god, he's just terrible at this.
So it actually makes you appreciate Kamala Harris, who is better at this, right?
I mean, at least if you're gonna watch this sort of thing.
You hope that they're pretty good at it.
Kamala Harris is better at it, or at least she's being taken more seriously by the media.
She's decided that she is now going to go after Brett Kavanaugh.
Based on what?
Based on, like, the stupidest crap you've ever heard.
So here's Kamala Harris completely getting wrong the law about abortion.
Well done, Kamala.
Can you think of any laws that give government the power to make decisions about the male body?
I'm happy to answer a more specific question.
Male versus female?
There are medical procedures.
That the government has the power to make a decision about a man's body?
I'm not thinking of any right now, Senator.
Okay, what she's trying to go for is, when it comes, I mean, she's obviously phrasing this in the dumbest possible way, so that it looks as though the law is unequal when it comes to abortion.
Because all we're talking about is a female body, whereas there are no restrictions on what a male can do to his own body.
Except for we actually do have laws against suicide.
Like, we can actually put you in jail for, well, not jail, but we can actually forcibly What's the word I'm looking for?
We can put you on a psychiatric hold for 48 hours if you're suicidal.
So, if you are a man, we can call the cops on you and do that.
Also, we do have laws on the books that allow male bodies to be harmed.
They're actually called pro-abortion laws.
Those pro-abortion laws allow male bodies to be harmed because they're inside female bodies.
So, there's that.
There's Kamala Harris grandstanding.
I do love Brett Kavanaugh just looking blankly at her like, what are you saying now?
Say what in the world?
And then this is the best one.
So Kamala Harris has decided she's got the goods.
What are the goods?
She thinks that Brett Kavanaugh has talked to someone from the firm of Kasowitz.
Kasowitz is a firm that is used by the President of the United States with regard to his defense.
And so she asks Brett Kavanaugh if he's ever had a conversation with anyone who worked for Kasowitz, which is a firm that legitimately has hundreds and hundreds of lawyers, about the Mueller investigation.
The implication being that Brett Kavanaugh somehow talked to Trump's lawyers about how he would handle the Mueller investigation, with which he is not involved in any way.
But she's going to suggest the reason Trump is picking Kavanaugh is because Kavanaugh is somehow going to allow Trump to escape the Mueller investigation.
This was ranking real high.
On sort of the leftist pornography list yesterday.
So this one is running up the pornography list.
People were really just self-flagellating over it, really enjoying themselves.
Here was Kamala Harris making a fool of herself.
And then Michael Avenatti got involved, and Michael Avenatti basically shredded her, so it's pretty funny.
Kasowitz, Benson, and Torres, which is the law firm founded by Mark Kasowitz, who is President Trump's personal lawyer.
Have you had any conversation about Robert Mueller or his investigation with anyone at that firm.
Yes or no?
Is there a person you're talking about?
I'm asking you a very direct question.
Yes or no?
I need to know the... I'm not sure I know everyone who works at that law firm.
I don't think you need to.
I think you need to know who you talked with.
Who'd you talk to?
Okay.
And then it continued like this for like seven and a half minutes.
Okay.
Cass Waspenson has 266 attorneys.
Do you think that he's racking his brains right now going, who have I talked to?
Did they once work at Kasowitz?
I don't want to perjure myself by saying I've never talked to anybody about the Mueller investigation.
Like, I don't remember every conversation I've ever had about the Mueller investigation.
I've talked to thousands of people, it turns out, about the Mueller investigation.
But I'm not sure who worked for Kasowitz at the time.
But this was supposed to be, you know, the great uncovering.
Of course, there's nothing there.
Michael Avenatti basically said, this is a big mistake.
Prosecutors are not supposed to ask questions to which they don't already know the answers.
So if it turns out that Kamala Harris has nothing here, then she was just grandstanding.
And speaking of grandstanding, you just heard Cory Booker talking about how he was going to uncover all of the evils of Brett Kavanaugh by revealing all this classified information.
Well, it turns out that Cory Booker, he played himself.
Cory Booker played himself.
Congratulations!
He played himself.
Cory Booker.
The emails, what do they show?
There's an email titled Racial Profiling.
And then, it turns out that in these emails titled Racial Profiling, Brett Kavanaugh openly says that we are not going to allow people to use race or national origin in airport screening and law enforcement generally in the immediate aftermath of 9-11.
He says, My own view is that, as required by the traditional equal protection standards, we must at least consider how to construct a race-neutral system.
I can imagine such a system that could be effective, perhaps even more effective than the one based on racial classifications.
This sort of system would require airlines and governmental authorities to obtain more personal information from the flying public, and there is some resistance to that within the group on the grounds that that would be too burdensome, invasive of privacy, and so forth.
The people who favor some use of race or national origin obviously do not need to grapple with the interim questions, but the people who generally favor effective security measures that are race-neutral in fact do need to grapple, and grapple now, with the interim question of what to do before a truly effective and comprehensive race-neutral system is developed and implemented.
So in other words, Cory Booker wanted to show how Kavanaugh was a racist and instead showed how Kavanaugh was not, in fact, a racist.
So, well done, Cory Booker.
You complete and utter douchebag.
In just one second, we'll get to more from the Senate Judiciary hearing.
We'll also get to other hearings that were happening on the Hill yesterday, which were similarly bizarre because we live in a parallel universe in which nothing makes sense anymore.
But first, Let's talk about your coffee.
If you've ever found yourself wincing at the weak taste of coffee from one of those left-leaning corporate brands, you probably thought, I wish they spent less time on that meaningless bias training and deciding who can use their bathroom and more time on making good coffee.
Well, this is why you need Black Rifle Coffee.
It is first-rate coffee.
I've tried it myself.
It is excellent coffee.
We have it here at the office.
Founded by former special ops vets, Black Rifle delivers the best roast-to-order coffee right to your door.
And by the way, the guys who run it, they're awesome.
This guarantees you are getting fresh premium coffee with every order.
And Black Rifle has a coffee club that makes things Everything's easy.
No lines, no running out, just great coffee shipped right to your door every month, hassle free.
And when you join their coffee club, you'll receive discounts and offers not available to other customers.
Not only does Black Rifle make awesome, awesome coffee, they also give a portion of their sales to veterans and first responder causes as well.
When you choose Black Rifle, you are choosing a company that supports our vets, loves, serves coffee and culture to people who love America.
Visit BlackRifleCoffee.com slash Ben.
Get 15% off your order right now.
That's BlackRifleCoffee.com slash Ben.
These guys are hardcore and so is their coffee.
It's awesome.
BlackRifleCoffee.com slash Ben for 15% off again.
BlackRifleCoffee.com slash Ben.
So just spectacular performance by all the members of the left in this judicial hearing.
But that wasn't the only hearing where things were going wildly wrong in the Senate.
They were also going wildly wrong in the Senate at tech hearings.
So yesterday, there was a Senate committee hearing with Facebook and Twitter and the leadership of those companies talking about the level of social media censorship that occurs on a regular basis.
We'll talk about that in just a second.
But first, you're actually going to have to sign off of Facebook.
So go over to dailywire.com right now and subscribe.
$9.99 a month means that you get the rest of this show live, the rest of Klavan's show live, the rest of Knoll's show live.
Plus, you also get to be part of our mailbag, which we are doing tomorrow, so you'll want to check that out.
Also, for $99 a year, in abeyance of the, instead of the $9.99 a month subscription, you get it cheaper.
Plus, you get the Leftist Tears hot or cold tumbler when you spend $99 a year.
Get the annual because it's better and because you are helping us out, so please check that out as well.
Also, make sure you subscribe over YouTube or iTunes because that will ensure that you get our Sunday special.
This week, it is Christina Hoff Summers in a fascinating conversation about Me Too and everything else.
She's broken the glass ceiling on our Sunday special, by the way.
She's the first female that we've had on the Sunday special.
That was not, in fact, a conscious decision.
I don't sit here going, I will not allow a female here until Christina Hoff Sommers enters.
It's just hard to find conservative women who are based on the West Coast, honestly.
But we are hoping to have more females in the very near future, including Steven Crowder.
Well, sorry, I wouldn't want to actually discuss Steven Crowder's gender, but we'll talk about all that later.
Go check us out right now.
We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast in the nation.
So big tech hearings on the Hill yesterday and things got weird even before the tech Alex Jones arrives.
That's not — if you saw him holding his phone, that was not trans porn on his phone.
Stop thinking that.
It was not.
It was not.
But he arrives, and he accosts Marco Rubio.
Now, Rubio is one of the more polished politicians on the Hill, obviously.
Rubio happens to be a nice guy.
I know Senator Rubio.
Alex Jones is not a nice guy.
Alex Jones is a crazy person who says crazy things, and then he just sort of randomly takes off his shirt and starts yelling about Satan!
But Satan just goes wild all the time!
So he brings that brand to the halls of the Senate and he accosts Marco Rubio about the fact that he's been banned from social media.
Now, as I say, I oppose Alex Jones' ban from social media unless there's an articulable standard, an articulable standard of why he was banned.
Was he banned because he threatens violence?
Was he banned because he promotes Libelous conspiracy theories?
Like legally libelous conspiracy theories?
Why exactly was he banned?
If it's just because you don't like him, that's not a good reason.
So I had sympathy for the argument that all these social media companies that say he was engaged in hate speech, so ban him.
That's a problem because hate speech has no actual definition with any sort of distinguishing principle involved.
There's no limiting principle to hate speech.
That said, Alex Jones arrives and he starts harassing Marco Rubio about this.
Why he's not going and harassing the Democrats about this, I'm not really sure.
But he goes and he harasses Marco Rubio and things go wildly wrong.
Yeah, yeah.
Who are you, man?
Yeah, sure.
I swear to God, I don't know who you are, man.
You better hope you're de-platforming.
Tens of millions of views?
InfoWars.
Bigger than Rex Limbaugh?
He knows who InfoWars is.
Playing this joke over here.
That's why, hey, the de-platforming didn't work.
Here's the question, here's the question.
Wait, don't touch me again, man.
I'm asking you not to touch me.
Sure, I'm just patting you nicely.
I know, but I don't want to be, I don't know who you are.
You want me to get arrested?
It's not just good to take my first amendment.
I can't get arrested, man.
It's not just enough to take my first amendment.
I can't take care of myself.
Oh, oh, he'll beat me up.
Did you?
I didn't say that.
I know I am, but he's so mad.
You're Okay, so it's just amazing.
So first of all, the first rule of engaging with trolls is don't engage with trolls because there's really no way that it works out well.
Although I will say that if there would be a physical altercation between Alex Jones and Marco Rubio, and Marco Rubio, who's considered beta-cuck number one by the Alex Jones crowd, were to knock Alex Jones and his mega-steroidal coffee crop of garbage, if you were to knock him on his ass, I'm not in favor of physical violence.
I think law enforcement is useful.
We live in a civilized society for a reason.
But if they were to get into physical altercation and Marco Rubio were to undercut Alex Jones' entire brand by knocking out Alex Jones, I would laugh a little.
And when I say a little, I mean I would never stop laughing.
I'd miss the show the next day because the laughter would be so great.
So, that's how it went.
Marco Rubio then did an interview in which he said, you know, I know you guys have to cover it, but you guys give these crazy people way too much attention.
We're making crazy people superstars, so you're gonna get crazier people.
And of course, Rubio is right.
All the coverage on Alex Jones is designed for that.
It is also, also true, that the President of the United States happens to be one of the people giving Alex Jones inordinate attention.
Alex Jones has been known as a crazy person for many, many, many years.
The President of the United States decided that he was afriendly and therefore he sort of legitimized him.
In any case, let's talk a little bit more about these tech hearings.
So these tech hearings, they were demonstrative of the fact that these social media companies really have no clue as to what their actual goal is.
Is their goal to, quote unquote, better the public discourse?
Because if their goal is to better the public discourse, then they need to be held accountable for all the material that appears on their pages.
Over at Daily Wire, We can be sued for libel, we can be sued for copyright violation, we can be sued for a variety of causes because we are a private company that is engaged in the business of editorial oversight.
If you are basically just a platform and you're not involved in editorial oversight like Reddit or 4chan or presumably Facebook, then you can't be sued on the same grounds.
So an article that we could be sued for, if we post it on Facebook, Facebook could not be sued for.
But if Facebook is policing everything and deciding what comes down and what stays up, well now they look a lot more like the Daily Wire than they look like the phone line, than they look like just AT&T.
They now look like a publisher.
So if you're a publisher and not a platform, then you have to be held to the same standard, and we have to have an articulable standard so that we know exactly what's going on at your company.
And that was made pretty clear when Representative Mark Wayne read tweets to the, I guess his name is Mark Wayne Mullen.
He read tweets to the Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey about race from Sarah Zhang.
You remember Sarah Zhang, who's now on the New York Times editorial board because only certain types of racism are okay.
Here is Representative Mullen grilling Dorsey on why it is that Sarah Zhang is still on the platform, but other people have been banned for similarly racist talk.
Let me read what Ms.
Jong wrote.
Hashtag, cancel white people.
White people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants.
Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like graveling goblins?
Oh man, it's kind of sick how much I enjoy Or how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.
And you can sort of see the Twitter CEO in the cutaway shot.
You can see him feeling pretty uncomfortable.
He should feel pretty uncomfortable because it's ridiculous, frankly, that Twitter and all of these social media companies are run the way they are, where they pretend that they're policing things when they really are only policing one side.
And that side is really perceived to be sort of the pro-Trump side.
And meanwhile, speaking of stupidity, Nike has now released its new ad involving Colin Kaepernick.
It's designed to obviously draw all sorts of media scrutiny, so we'll give them what they want here.
Here is the Nike ad.
It's a voiceover from Colin Kaepernick, who obviously is not in uniform since he doesn't play football anymore.
He stands around and talks about cops being bad from his multi-million dollar mansion, presumably.
And they juxtapose Colin Kaepernick's heroism with, like, actual heroes in sports.
I mean, they actually show video of, like, small kids who have Who have genetic conditions trying to play sports, and they're comparing that to Colin Kaepernick, whose great sacrifice was kneeling after he'd already become a useless backup quarterback for the San Francisco 49ers.
If you're born a refugee, don't let it stop you from playing soccer for the national team at age 16.
Don't become the best basketball player on the planet.
Be bigger than basketball.
Believe in something.
Even if it means sacrificing everything.
When they talk about the greatest team in the history of the sport, make sure it's your team.
If you have only one hand, don't just watch football.
Play it.
At the highest level.
And if you're a girl from Compton, don't just become a tennis player.
Become the greatest athlete ever.
You have to sacrifice everything like Colin Kaepernick did by being signed to a multi-million dollar contract and being treated as a civil rights hero despite having lived in a Tony White suburb for most of his upbringing and then playing for millions of dollars badly.
So thank you for that, Nike.
What's amazing about this is all of these success stories, or at least a huge number of these success stories that are being shown here, Our American success stories.
Venus Williams and Serena Williams are American success stories.
The U.S.
women's soccer team is an American success story.
These are stories that happen in America because America is a great country, but we are going to be presented with this theme by a corporation attempting to make money in America off American citizens that really America is a place that presents nothing but endless obstacles and challenges, and you have to be a self-sacrificial character like Colin Kaepernick to truly sacrifice everything.
The whole thing is ridiculous and insulting, but I guess if Nike thinks they can make money off it, more power to them.
If they lose some sneaker sales off of it, I would not be heartbroken over any of that.
Okay, time for some things I like and then some things that I hate.
So, things that I like.
I've been re-watching Rome on HBO.
It's early HBO, which means early HBO is even more porny than sort of later HBO.
Yeah, you can see this with Game of Thrones, where Game of Thrones started and every two scenes there was some graphic sex scene because it was like, we know, we're pay cable.
If you want to watch pay cable, at least you'll get some boobies.
That's really how the programming goes at HBO.
So there's some of that in Rome.
If you can ignore all of that.
The series is actually really, really good.
Here's some of the preview for Rome, which is worth re-watching.
And especially now, you can get it on Amazon Prime, and that means that if you are apt to do as I am, you can just fast forward right through those scenes and get to the good stuff, the actual politics.
Make way for the pro-consul Gaius Julius Caesar! - Go!
You've entered the city under arms.
The gods know my intentions are peaceful.
Rome has fallen into the hands of a corrupt monster.
What do you do?
By the spirits of my ancestors, I curse Caesar.
It's good.
It's really well done.
It's entertaining.
It's got some of the best characters.
One character named Titus Pillow is one of the better characters in TV history.
And TV aficionados are big fans.
So, check it out.
It's available via Amazon Prime on HBO or if you're an HBO subscriber.
So, that's worth watching.
Okay, time for some things that I hate.
And now every corporation feels the necessity to get involved in politics.
Levi's is now pledging more than a million dollars to gun control organizations in an effort to curb the gun violence in the, quote, very communities where we live and work.
One of the reasons why this is happening is because Nielsen numbers show that there are large numbers of people on the left who want their corporations to be socially conscious.
People on the right, we basically just go and buy what we want.
And most people buy what they want.
But there are a lot of people on the left who are like, well, I'm not going to buy those jeans unless I feel good about it.
It's conspicuous consumption.
There are actual studies that show that people only buy Priuses because they look strange.
Really, if you go up to San Francisco, there's a study, it's probably five years ago, there's this study and what it showed was that the Toyota Prius, which looks like a weird bubble, it's a very ugly car, and the Honda Hybrid Civic, which looks exactly like a normal car, but gets exactly the same kind of electric gas mileage as the Toyota Prius, The hybrid Civic did not sell at all.
The Prius sold a lot.
Why?
Because the real reason people were buying a Prius was not because it was energy efficient, because they didn't actually care what it did.
They just wanted to signal to all of their friends they cared about the environment.
It's like slapping a bumper sticker on your car.
Well, it's the same thing now with corporate brands.
So you're going to see more and more of this preening from these various companies.
And then if the companies don't preen, then they are going to be considered just awful, terrible, You know, how dare they not kowtow to the social justice warriors?
Everything's gonna get more political, not less political.
It's gonna get uglier before it gets better.
Okay, other things that I hate.
So the President of the United States made some comments about the current controversy in the Catholic Church.
And it is... These comments are just foolish.
He made these comments to the Daily Caller.
Do we have audio of it?
Okay, so here's what he said.
He said, it's so sad to watch.
To me, it's one of the sadder stories because I respect so much the Catholic Church.
And to me, it's a very sad story.
Which is correct.
But then he says that he was surprised at Cardinal McCarrick.
And then he was asked about the Pope.
And he said, the Pope is handling the crisis the best anyone can handle it.
The Pope is handling, I get the best anyone can handle it.
How is he going to handle it?
Okay, well, no, the Pope is not actually.
It's funny because you remember that Trump has attacked the Pope in the past, right?
He actually went to war with the Pope over illegal immigration.
But when it comes to child molestation, he's not willing to make a couple of comments about the Pope.
That seems sort of strange to me.
I don't understand why exactly he would not.
You know, why he would not be calling for more from the Pope, except that he just doesn't want that controversy.
If you're, I understand not wanting the controversy, but if you're going to engage with every political controversy under the sun, it seems to me this would be a good place to put a little bit of weight.
Okay, final thing that I hate, and then we'll do a quick psalm for a little bit of uplift.
So Beto O'Rourke, who is not in fact Hispanic, is a Texas senatorial candidate.
He's running against Ted Cruz, and he's being upheld by the media as some sort of wunderkind.
He's going to bring decency and grace back to the national stage.
He's like white Barack Obama.
He actually is more like white, young John Kerry.
If you watch him, he looks more like John Kerry.
His mannerisms are more like John Kerry.
He doesn't have the Boston accent.
Otherwise, he resembles John Kerry in a lot of ways.
He was on Ellen, because this is what we do now.
Ellen, she's a nonpartisan guy.
Stop it.
She's nonpartisan.
She just wants humor.
She just wants everybody to get along.
Which is why she's going to host a bunch of Republicans next thing you know.
Except she never will.
She's going to host Beto O'Rourke.
So here's Beto O'Rourke talking about the National Anthem protests and, of course, coming down on the side of people who protest the National Anthem.
If this guy wins in Texas, man, the Republicans are in serious trouble.
But it's hard to think of a major or important or significant change that we've made as a country that wasn't painful, that didn't require these difficult conversations, these unguarded moments with one another that ultimately produced change and progress in the right direction.
He is so exciting.
I understand what all the buzz is about.
Oh, the excitement.
But this idea, well, we'll have these conversations and they'll generate change in the right direction.
No, they won't.
They won't.
I'm sorry.
People who are kneeling for the national anthem are generally not interested in a conversation, which is why they are kneeling for the national anthem.
If they wanted to have an intelligent conversation about police regulations and police implementation of rules, we could have that conversation in an intelligent way.
Or, theoretically, we could just kneel for the anthem and pretend the entire country is in favor of police malfeasance.
Okay, time for a quick psalm.
So we have been going through a psalm a week.
We are up to psalm number eight.
For the director of music.
Lord, oh Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth.
You have set your glory in the heavens.
Through the praise of children and infants, you have established a stronghold against your enemies to silence the foe and the avenger.
And this is the part that's, that's, there are a couple of, of what we call Pesukim in, in Judaism, in Hebrew, which means verses.
When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars, which you have set in place, what is mankind that you are mindful of them?
Human beings that you care for them.
You have made them a little lower than the angels and crowned them with honor and glory.
You have made them rulers over the works of your hands and you put everything under their feet.
This is why when people say that Judeo-Christian religion is all about kind of crushing mankind in the face of God, that's really not what Judeo-Christian religion is about at all.
The Psalms glorify man.
They say that God made us just a little bit lower than the angels, which comes with a tremendous responsibility.
The creator of heaven and earth, the force that stands behind the logic of the universe, That force made you.
And that force expects something of you.
God expects something of you.
He made us a little lower than the angels.
And in some ways, in our creative capacity, He made us higher than the angels because the angels don't create.
The angels are just emissaries.
When God suggests that we are a little lower than the angels and that we've been crowned with glory and honor and has made us rulers over the works, that comes with a responsibility.
It's not just about... I think in Western civilization we've erred too much on the side of man is glorious and therefore he should feel free to do whatever he wants.
And in guilt cultures, shame cultures, there's a difference.
I think that we are a guilt culture.
I think shame cultures have basically said that man is mud and can be ground under people's feet for the sake of the collective.
We're somewhere in between, right?
What we say is that man is capable of being an angel, and man is capable of being a worm.
But we have to make that decision, and God has expectations of us.
One of the more beautiful of all the psalms, Psalm number 8.
God, how majestic is your name in all the earth.
Alrighty, we will be back here tomorrow with more of the absurdities of our daily politics, plus the mailbag.
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.
▲
Export Selection