Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 6, 2019 - The Ben Shapiro Show

53:46

Here Comes The Sondland | Ep. 891

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Trump, EU Ambassador Gordon Sumlin revises his testimony in a big way, Republicans play defense, and we analyze the results of last night's off-year elections.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is sponsored by ExpressVPN.
	Why haven't you gotten a VPN yet?
	Visit ExpressVPN.com.
	Okay, we have a lot to get to on today's show.
	We'll get to the Amazing, incredible revelation surrounding the Trump-EU ambassador, Gordon Sondland, in just a moment.
	First, we have to give you all of the updates with regard to the off-year elections that happened last night.
	So Democrats are in a very celebrative mood, celebratory mood, and they should be.
	I mean, last night was a good night for Democrats.
	It was.
	And Republicans can spin it, as though it wasn't a terrible night for Republicans.
	And in certain ways, it was, I guess, okay.
	If you look at Kentucky, for example, the Kentucky Governor Matt Bevin, who is always an unpopular figure in Kentucky.
	Remember, he ran against Mitch McConnell in the Senate primary and just got destroyed by McConnell a few years back.
	I think it was 2016.
	And then he ran for Kentucky Governor and he won.
	Well, he was a really, really unpopular governor and he lost very, very narrowly to Andy Beshear.
	That's not a huge surprise.
	A bit of a surprise.
	It's not an enormous surprise.
	But it is a bad thing for Republicans.
	Virginia was much worse for Republicans.
	Virginia, the entire state has now turned blue.
	The state legislature in Virginia is now completely run by Democrats.
	It had narrowly divided between Republicans and Democrats before.
	All of this should have Republicans feeling quite nervous because if you're going to take away one message from the election results last night, it is that Republicans continue to do fine in rural areas.
	But if they underperform at all in those rural areas, they are toast.
	In the suburbs, they're experiencing significant Losses.
	And those losses are in large part due to a perception of the Republican Party that is censored on President Trump.
	And it's just an unfortunate truth.
	And I'll prove this to you with some numbers in just a second.
	First, let me explain what exactly happened last night.
	Well, according to the Washington Post, Democrats gained control of both houses of the Virginia General Assembly on Tuesday, tapping strength in the suburbs to consolidate power for the first time in a generation and deliver a rebuke to President Trump.
	Several results were still close after polls closed on the most expensive and most watched Virginia legislative races in years.
	But Democrats flipped at least two seats in the State Senate and at least five in the House of Delegates to take majorities in both of those houses.
	Officials reported unusually high turnout in an election that served as an opening salvo in next year's presidential showdown, a test of Democratic defiance and Republican resolve in the era of Trump.
	Now remember, this should have been a bad year for Democrats.
	It should have been.
	And the economy is good.
	The governor of Virginia, Ralph Northam, was caught up in a scandal in which he was apparently either wearing blackface or a KKK outfit, one of the two, in his medical school yearbook from the 1980s, and had been caught on tape talking about the killing of babies after they are born.
	And then the lieutenant governor had been caught up in a sexual assault scandal.
	And then the third in line, in the Virginia chain of command, had been caught up in his own blackface issue.
	This was supposed to be a bad year for Democrats.
	It was not a bad year for Democrats.
	It was a very bad year for Republicans in Virginia.
	The sweep completed a dramatic political conversion from red to blue of a southern state on Washington's doorstep.
	I'm old enough to remember when Virginia was the very least a purple state.
	Now it has moved blue.
	Both of Virginia's U.S.
	Senators, a majority of its congressional delegation, all three statewide office holders are now Democrats.
	The state was carried by Democrats in the past three presidential elections.
	Republicans have not won a statewide contest in Virginia since 2009.
	The last Republican in the Northern Virginia delegation, Delegate Tim Hugo, lost to Democrat Dan Helmer.
	National Democratic organizations and interest groups, according to the Washington Post, carpeted the state with money, boosting suburban legislative races to the spending level of congressional elections.
	They've been spending out the wazoo, particularly with regard to the suburbs.
	And of course, Democratic Governor Ralph Northam is fine.
	He is poised to be one of the most consequential Virginia governors in recent times, according to the Washington Post.
	He promises to work with the new Democratic majority to enact gun control, push forward LGBTQ agenda, and fight climate change.
	Northam said, Virginia is officially blue.
	Which is interesting because his face is officially white, but apparently it depends on sort of how he decides to dress that day.
	Republicans, who when Trump was elected had a seemingly insurmountable majority in the House of Delegates, lost footholds in several suburban districts.
	They struggled to separate themselves from the unpopular president and to take moderate positions on gun control and a Medicaid expansion after years of voting against them in the General Assembly.
	Terry McAuliffe said they're not only losing Virginia, they're losing America.
	He said, I think Donald Trump was humiliated tonight.
	Trump wasn't on the ballot this year.
	However, his policy, his lunacy was on the ballot.
	I think it energized Democrats.
	Well, it clearly didn't get Republicans out to the polls.
	Now, to be fair...
	To be fair to Trump, to give the full story, the fact is that many of the legislators in Virginia didn't want Trump anywhere nearby.
	Because they said, listen, we don't want Trump here.
	He's just gonna drive out the Democratic base.
	We don't have enough of a Trump base in Virginia to drive our base out.
	So Trump can correctly say, well, I didn't actually bring my weight to bear in Virginia.
	And that's one of the reasons why they had a problem there.
	Now, I think that is unlikely.
	I don't think that if Trump had set foot in Northern Virginia, suddenly Republicans would be winning sweeping victories in the suburbs of Virginia.
	With that said, Trump at least has that defense to offer, right?
	I wasn't called upon, I didn't enter, so how are you going to blame me about all this?
	But it is true that Trump's suburban numbers have been consistently bad since 2016.
	2018 was a wipeout in the suburbs for Republicans.
	We'll give you more on the results of the election in Virginia plus the election in Kentucky.
	And some good news, some sort of bright spots for Republicans, even though this was in fact a very blue night for Democrats nearly across the board.
	We'll get to that in just one second.
	First, when the founders crafted the Constitution of the United States, the first thing they did was make sacred the rights of the individual to share ideas without limitation by the government.
	That's the First Amendment.
	The second right they enumerated was the right of the population to protect that speech and their own persons with force.
	That's the Second Amendment.
	And that's the reason I'm a gun owner.
	Because I believe in the Second Amendment.
	I believe that our rights have to be protected.
	I also believe that you have an innate right to self-defense that pre-exists government.
	So do the folks over at Bravo Company Manufacturing.
	Owning a rifle is an awesome responsibility, and building rifles is no different.
	Started in a garage by a Marine vet more than two decades ago, Bravo Company Manufacturing, BCM for short, Builds a professional-grade product built to combat standards.
	Bravo Company Manufacturing is not a sporting arms company.
	They design, engineer, manufacture life-saving equipment.
	The people at BCM assume that when a rifle leaves their shop, it will be used in a life-or-death situation by a responsible citizen, law enforcement officer, or soldier overseas.
	To learn more about Bravo Company Manufacturing, head on over to BravoCompanyMFG.com You can discover more about their products, special offers, and upcoming news.
	That's BravoCompanyMFG.com.
	If you need more convincing, find out even more about BCM and the awesome folks who run it over at YouTube.com slash BravoCompanyUSA.
	They really are terrific, terrific Americans, and they make great product.
	Go check them out right now.
	Now, as I say, Virginia shifts in a significantly blue direction.
	It was supposed to be a bad year for Democrats.
	Here's Governor Ralph Northam of Virginia explaining that none of his scandals ended up mattering because presumably Trump.
	Race and equity is something that I have fought for since I've been in public office.
	Even practicing as a pediatrician, you know, I've always been inclusive.
	And we've moved forward from that.
	Certainly race and equity will continue to be a top priority of mine.
	But this was about a bigger picture yesterday.
	And I would also take the opportunity to thank Virginians.
	They stuck with me.
	They elected me to be their governor, their 73rd governor.
	They didn't turn their backs on me.
	They've supported me.
	They appreciate what we've done, what our leadership has done, and I think they look forward to me continuing to do some good work.
	Well, it does show how cynical the sort of cancel culture of the left is, because if it's one of them, they don't get canceled.
	If it is a Republican, of course, that person's career is basically over.
	Meanwhile...
	A cyclist who was fired after flipping the bird at President Trump's motorcade has now been elected to local office in Virginia.
	It was a bad night in Virginia for Republicans.
	Julie Briskman, whose one-handed salute, according to the AFP, was captured in an AFP photograph that went viral, beat the Republican incumbent to a seat on the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors in state elections that saw Trump's Republican Party suffer a series of stinging defeats.
	The single mother of two teens lost her job as a marketing analyst for a U.S.
	government and military subcontractor after the snapshot of her gesture spread across media and the internet in 2017, but she then ran for office.
	She ran for local office on the Democratic ticket, and she celebrated her victory in a tweet that linked to a copy of the image.
	And she said, so proud that we were able to hashtag Flip Loudon.
	So, exciting stuff for the Democrats over in Virginia.
	Meanwhile, over in Kentucky, it was a bad night for Matt Bevin, as I mentioned early on.
	So, Matt Bevin, lost his gubernatorial seat.
	Now, again, that's really not on Trump.
	Okay, this one, like in Virginia, you can say that's sort of on Trump because the suburbs didn't come in for Trump and then they weren't going to come in for Trump.
	In Kentucky, a large part of this was on Matt Bevin himself.
	Matt Bevin was running a 20-point personal popularity deficit as of like three weeks ago.
	He was 20 points underwater.
	For most of his tenure, he has been literally the most unpopular governor in America.
	So him losing is really more on him than it is on Trump.
	Trump came in, rallied the base, and this actually became a much closer election than a lot of people expected it to be maybe three or four weeks ago.
	By the time of the election, because of Trump's intervention, Bevin was favored in the odds to win by like two to one odds, but he ended up losing anyway.
	Is that on Trump?
	So the question is sort of split, honestly.
	On the one hand, it's not on Trump, right?
	Trump got out the base.
	He did what he is supposed to do.
	And down ballot, Republicans did fine.
	So it really was more about Matt Bevin than it was about Republicans generally.
	On the other hand, Bevin was the most Trumpy of all the candidates who were on the ballot in Kentucky.
	He was the guy who was the loudest.
	He was the guy who was the brashest.
	He was the guy who really hugged Trump the tightest.
	And it didn't pay off for him in the way that it was supposed to.
	So is that Trump's fault?
	Or was it Trump trying to save him?
	That data is just unclear.
	According to the New York Times, Democrats in Kentucky, Governor Matt Bevin, a deeply unpopular Republican, refused to concede the election to his Democratic challenger, Attorney General Andy Beshear.
	With 100% of the precincts counted, Beshear was ahead by approximately 5,100 votes.
	Beshear presented himself as the winner, telling supporters he expected Bevin to, quote, honor the election that was held tonight, which is funny.
	Probably Bevin should just walk around for the next several years claiming that he's the actual legitimate governor of Kentucky.
	You know, like Stacey Abrams in Georgia.
	Bashir said tonight, voters in Kentucky sent a message loud and clear for everyone to hear.
	It's a message that says our elections don't have to be about right versus left.
	They're still about right versus wrong.
	Now, Bashir did run on a moderate platform.
	Many of the Democrats in Virginia were running on a more moderate platform.
	So, this should be a lesson to Democrats.
	Don't run as hard left as you can.
	Just run against Trump and be moderate, and you'll probably do okay, particularly in the suburbs.
	Democrats at the national level are taking the wrong lesson.
	So everybody is taking the wrong lesson, I think, as per our usual arrangement.
	Republicans are going to take from this, we need more cowbell, right, more Trump.
	And Democrats are going to take away from this, we need more progressive leftism that is anti-Trump, as opposed to more moderate candidates like Beshear in Kentucky, who was not campaigning as a radical in the same way that the 2020 Democratic presidential candidates are.
	Bevin's troubles, however, were not a drag on other Republicans.
	They captured every other statewide race in Kentucky.
	So Kentucky voters were not really rejecting the Republican Party, per se.
	They were rejecting Bevin personally.
	Daniel Cameron, in a historic win, handily won the Attorney General's race.
	He became the first black Black Americans who claim the office and the first Republican to do so in over 70 years.
	So it's a major victory for Republicans there.
	Republicans also captured the governor's mansion in Mississippi as Lieutenant Governor Tate Reeves defeated Attorney General Jim Hood by about five percentage points in an open seat race that illustrated the enduring conservatism of the Deep South according to the New York Times.
	I do love that they talk about the quote-unquote enduring conservatism of the Deep South.
	Deep South voted Democrat routinely up until maybe the past 25 years.
	The final governorship Up for grabs in these off-year elections is in Louisiana, Governor John Bel Edwards, a Democrat, is facing re-election a week from Saturday.
	In New Jersey, Republicans were actually on the cusp of their first legislative gains in nearly a decade.
	With final results still being tallied late on Tuesday, Republicans looked likely to pick up two seats in the Assembly and one in the Senate, powered largely by a surge along the southern part of the state where Trump won easily in 2016 despite Democrats' local advantage.
	In Pennsylvania, The news is worse for Republicans.
	Democrats are poised to gain control of local government in a bunch of suburban Philadelphia counties that were Republican strongholds.
	In other words, the red areas are getting redder, the blue areas are getting bluer, and the purple areas are getting bluer.
	That is sort of the short answer.
	So, what does that mean?
	Well, again, a little bit of information here suggests that this may be more about President Trump's personality than anything else.
	Right?
	That if you're hoping to win back the suburbs as a Republican, what you really need to be focused in on is more policy, more the Democrats are radical, more their agenda stinks.
	And less on personal loyalty to Trump, for example.
	It doesn't mean that you shouldn't back the president, right?
	It does mean that Trump is not popular in the suburbs and hanging on his coattails on the suburbs was a fail in 2018.
	It's likely to be a fail in 2020 as well.
	Steve Kornacki.
	Who does the national political correspondence for NBC News and MSNBC.
	He was analyzing some of the numbers in Kentucky and what it showed is that Trump in 2016 won about 68% of Boone County, 60% of Kenton County, and 59% of Campbell County.
	Those were Cincinnati suburb counties.
	How exactly did these various candidates fare in those districts?
	Bevin underperformed Trump dramatically in every one of those districts.
	underperformed him in radical terms.
	The other Republicans actually performed basically the same as Trump.
	Some of them even outperformed Trump in those in those districts.
	So it's also worthwhile noting that in even more liberal suburban areas, there were some moves to curb the extraordinarily leftward slant of the Democratic Party.
	Daniel Horowitz points out a conservative review That suburban voters electing Democrats aren't actually all that radical.
	And he points to what just happened in Tucson.
	Tucson had a Proposition 205, which was an effort to make the city a sanctuary for illegal aliens.
	It went down in flames last night by a margin of 71% to 29%, despite backing from the ACLU and other special interest groups.
	Horowitz says despite Republicans facing increasing problems in the suburbs, a trend highlighted last night by the GOP slaughter in Virginia's state and local elections, it's clear much of it is a backlash against Trump's personality, the GOP's dysfunction and lack of vision, and the absence of a bold contrast highlighting the radical nature of Democrats.
	It's not Trump's perceived policies that are getting rejected.
	I mean, Tucson is a perfect example.
	That is a very, very blue area.
	It voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton, yet even in that area, more than 70% of voters said they did not want police prevented from inquiring about immigration status so the criminals can be turned over to ICE.
	Corwood says this is the same reason why Montgomery County, Maryland, after much scrutiny of its sanctuary policies, is beginning to change its tune and reverse sanctuary policies despite being a county Hillary won by 55 points.
	Corwood says the moral of the story is that the GOP brand is tarnished for reasons that have nothing to do with the core agenda Democrats are seeking to implement.
	For example, a radical sheriff and prosecutor who opposed ICE won their respective races in Prince William County, Virginia.
	But did they really win because of those views?
	Or did they win despite those views because the GOP brand is so incredibly damaged?
	And that seems correct.
	That seems correct.
	I mean, he points out that there are areas where Republicans are not Seen as off-putting and they're wildly popular.
	For example, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who has governed in very conservative fashion, has a 72% voter approval rating today.
	And that number is 82% among Hispanics, despite the fact that he has aggressively pushed anti-sanctuary legislation and is pushing mandatory e-verify as well.
	Washington state voters last night rejected affirmative action.
	Washington state is about as dark blue as it gets.
	So, this is... Meanwhile, in Texas, by a margin of 75 to 25, Horowitz points out, voters passed a constitutional amendment banning a state income tax, a measure that will now require two-thirds support in both houses of the legislature to even levy a 1% income tax.
	So, is that really about the Republican agenda, or the Democratic agenda, or is it about personality foibles?
	I mean, it seems that it's much more about personality foibles.
	Again, a perfect example, Daniel Cameron, the guy who historically just won the Attorney General slot, the black Attorney General Republican of the state of Kentucky.
	He said that he was willing to work across the lines.
	He said that he has pledged his support to conservative policies, but he does not appear to be a radical.
	He's only 33 years old, so he is a rising star for sure.
	You know, the fact that he wins in very handy fashion suggests that, again, personality matters an awful lot.
	Matters an awful lot when it comes to politics.
	And it suggests that President Trump is gonna have to minimize the Trumpiness of his campaign if he wishes to win a sweeping victory come 2020.
	I'll give you some more evidence of this from Pennsylvania in just one second.
	First, let me tell you about this brand new thing I've got in my house.
	It really is fantastic.
	So there is this brand new portrait, painted portrait, that we have over our enormous fireplace in our entryway.
	It's a portrait of my family, me and my wife and our two kids.
	We have a third on the way, but not born yet, so not in the portrait.
	It's beautifully painted.
	It really looks great.
	And here's the thing.
	Did I spend a bunch of money in order to achieve this?
	Because I'm richy rich.
	Or, did I just spend a minimal amount of money to get an amazing piece of art that now hangs in our house?
	And the answer is the latter, because of Paint Your Life.
	If you want to give a truly meaningful gift, you gotta try PaintYourLife.com.
	It really is fantastic.
	You can have an original painting of yourself, your kids, family, a special place, a cherished pet, at a price you can afford, from PaintYourLife.com.
	It's a true painting.
	It's actually done by hand by a world-class artist created from your very favorite photo.
	It makes a perfect gift for birthdays and anniversaries.
	It makes great decor for your house.
	It's a work of art.
	I mean, it really is.
	And they make it really easy.
	Like, they'll actually send you a photo of the portrait, and then if you don't like how the portrait is turning out, then you can correct it.
	And if it turns out that you don't actually like it, then you don't have to take it.
	It really is incredible.
	Right now, as a limited time offer, get 30% off your painting.
	That is right, 30% off and free shipping.
	To get this special offer, text the word BEN to 64000.
	Again, text MYNAMEBEN to 64000.
	When you support our show, you support our sponsors, and you're really gonna want to get involved in this.
	It's really, really cool.
	Makes a fantastic, fantastic gift.
	Again, no risk.
	If you don't love the final painting, your money is refunded completely.
	Text MYNAMEBEN to 64000.
	And make this the gift for the holiday season.
	For Thanksgiving, it makes a fantastic family gift.
	Go check it out right now.
	Text Ben to 64000paintyourlife.com.
	Truly a very, very cool company.
	Okay.
	Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania, again, bad night for the Republicans.
	According to the Philadelphia Inquirer, Outside Pennsylvania, voter unrest with President Trump and the Republican Party he has taken over helped deliver victories for Democrats in Kentucky, where they narrowly took governorship, and Virginia, where they seized complete control of the state.
	The political forces that shaped last year's midterm elections showed no signs of abating Tuesday.
	Voters turned on Republicans and establishment Democrats alike in races from Philadelphia and Scranton to the suburbs of Delaware and Chester counties.
	Locally, Democrats will now hold all five seats on the Delaware County Council, a Republican stronghold since the Civil War.
	They also assumed a majority on the legislative body in Chester County.
	In Bucks County, Democrats captured the Board of Commissioners for the first time since 1983.
	Now, again, to be fair to President Trump, it is possible that because his name is not on the ballot, a lot of his voters didn't get out.
	I said it's a local election.
	He's not on the ballot.
	I'm not showing up.
	And Democrats continue to be extremely excited about voting because Trump isn't on the ballot until he's on the ballot and the only way they can take their revenge is to get out and vote today.
	So maybe these numbers uptick once Trump is on the ballot.
	However, we've been, we, I mean conservatives, Republicans, have been significantly underperforming in the suburbs since 2018.
	And that should be scary.
	It should be scary for Republicans going into the 2020 election, which means less cowbell, guys.
	I know this is an unpopular view in the Republican Party.
	The fact is, less cowbell is the answer here.
	The shouting, the tweeting, we may love it in the base.
	People in the base may enjoy it.
	And every so often, President Trump really hits the nail on the head and it's fantastic.
	I've praised him when he's done that.
	But overall, Trump is alienating the very voters he needs to bring him victory in the suburbs And he needs to help revive state-level support for him.
	Now, again, a lot of people are going to say, well, you know, Barack Obama lost a bunch of state seats also during his election campaign, right?
	In 2010, Republicans swamped him.
	In 2014, again, bad year for Democrats.
	And that's true.
	Off-year elections are usually bad for the party in power.
	The problem is that these may be permanent.
	We're not going to know the answers to whether these are permanent shifts, if this is shifting the country in a permanent direction, until President Trump is actually on the ballot again.
	In 2012, the forecast was that Barack Obama was in some trouble, given how many seats he had lost across the country.
	And then he won in 2012, in large part because he ran a very strong and a very concerted campaign.
	He had media support behind him.
	He was running against Mitt Romney, who refused to attack him in a variety of ways.
	Trump is not going to benefit from any of those systemic advantages.
	Plus, Barack Obama had won an overwhelming victory in 2008, and he actually lost votes from 2008 to 2012, right?
	His margin of victory was much smaller in 2012 than it was in 2008.
	Trump can't afford to lose even one vote anywhere in the country.
	So he can't afford to... This did have a drag effect on Barack Obama in 2012.
	It's just that he was so far ahead in 2008 that the drag effect didn't drag him underwater.
	Trump loses like five votes and he's out of office.
	So that means that something has to fundamentally change for Republicans.
	It really does.
	Well, speaking of all of that, this brings us to impeachment gate 2019.
	So the great benefit that President Trump has in 2020 that doesn't appear on the ballot in any of these off-year elections is the fact that Democrats are going to be On the ballot, and those Democrats are insanely radical.
	These Democrats are not popular.
	Again, I think Democrats can easily take the wrong lesson from the elections of 2018-2019.
	They can easily veer off into a radical direction, and that's going to be a major, major mistake.
	You know who's actually saying that today is Joe Biden, which makes sense because he's the one who's saying, listen, I'm default Democrat.
	Just do it for me, right?
	I am default Democrat and pretending that you can elect some sort of radical and that that person is going to sweep to victory is insane.
	Joe Biden put out a statement yesterday about this attacking Elizabeth Warren directly.
	He says, the other day, I was accused by one of my opponents of running in the wrong primary.
	Pretty amazing.
	On one level, it's kind of funny.
	I fought for the Democratic Party my whole career.
	I know what we stand for, who we stand with, what we believe, and it's not just policies or issues.
	It's in my bones.
	That's not something everyone in this primary can say.
	But at another level, these kind of attacks are a serious problem.
	They reflect an angry, unyielding viewpoint that has crept into our politics.
	If someone doesn't agree with you, it's not just that you disagree.
	That person must be a coward, or corrupt, or a small thinker.
	Okay, there's a direct attack on Elizabeth Warren, who has been saying that you have to dream big, and campaign big.
	Biden says, some call it the my way or the highway approach to politics, but it's worse than that.
	It's condescending to millions of Democrats who have a different view.
	It's representative of an elitism that working and middle-class people do not share.
	We know best, you know nothing.
	If only you were as smart as I am, you would agree with me.
	This is no way to get anything done.
	This is no way to bring the country together.
	This is no way for this party to beat Donald Trump.
	He says, there are a lot of ways to fix our healthcare system and to make our tax system fair, to address the challenge of climate change.
	I believe I've proposed the most progressive transformational ideas in the campaign and I can get them done.
	And he talks about all of his various plans.
	He says, I learned a long time ago, if you question someone's motivations rather than your judgment, you get than their judgment, you get nowhere.
	It's hard to get past go if you start off by saying the other person is in the pocket of special interests or is corrupt.
	That's the way democracy works.
	He says he stands with the Democratic Party of Barack Obama and the Democratic Party of Nancy Pelosi.
	And he basically attacks Elizabeth Warren is too radical.
	And he is correct about that.
	He is correct about that.
	And that's Trump's big advantage, is that if Democrats take the wrong lesson and run a radical campaign, Trump could easily win.
	But Trump would actually have to make a campaign about the Democrats' radicalism.
	Now, as we'll see, the Democrats are incredibly vulnerable on the score, which is why they're focusing in, as I've been saying now for weeks, on impeachment centrally.
	Make Trump the issue, Trump loses.
	Make Democratic policies the issues, Democrats lose.
	Okay, we'll get to more of this in just one second.
	First, let's talk about your sleep quality.
	So the fact is that every night you probably climb on this spring mattress that you inherited from a relative, and it's just creaking and it's awful, and you wake up in the morning and you're backwards.
	Well, you are a unique human being.
	Why wouldn't you have a mattress that is made just for you?
	Why would you buy a generic mattress built for just some other rando?
	Helix Sleep has built a sleep quiz.
	It takes two minutes to complete.
	They use the answers to match your body type and sleep preferences to the perfect mattress.
	Whether you're a side sleeper or a hot sleeper, whether you like a plush or firm bed with Helix, there's no more guessing, no more compromising on an average mattress.
	Go to helixsleep.com slash Shapiro.
	Take their two-minute sleep quiz.
	They will match you to a mattress that will give you the best sleep of your life.
	Helix Sleep was even awarded the number one best overall mattress pick I love my Helix Sleep mattress.
	My kids have been waking me up at 4 in the morning.
	10-year warranty.
	You get to try your mattress out for 100 nights risk-free.
	Shipping is completely free.
	They'll even pick it up for you if you don't love it, but you will.
	Right now, Helix is offering up to $125 off all mattress orders.
	Get up to $125 off at helixsleep.com.
	Again, that's helixsleep.com.
	I love my Helix Sleep mattress.
	My kids have been waking me up at 4 in the morning.
	The good news is, at least the sleep I'm getting is quality sleep because of Helix Sleep, and I am Go check it out at helixsleep.com slash Shapiro.
	That's helixsleep.com slash Shapiro.
	Okay, so, speaking of the radicalism of Elizabeth Warren, I just have to bring you this hilarious and ironic and wonderful story about Senator Warren.
	So, Elizabeth Warren is now very, very angry at Twitter.
	Why?
	I mean, weren't we told five seconds ago that she's very happy with Twitter because Twitter banned political ads, right?
	The entire left was celebrating Jack Dorsey, hero of the republic, because Jack Dorsey had banned political ads.
	He said, we don't have the power to fact check political ads, so we're just not going to have political ads.
	We're just going to ban them.
	And I said at the time, that's a crackdown on basic free speech notions.
	Anybody should be able to run any ad that they want, and then we can fact-check those ads, and we can point out that they're wrong and that they're stupid.
	In fact, if you had the policy that every ad had to be fact-checked, half of the most effective political ads in American history would never have run.
	The Daisy ad of 1964, which is complete crap, that Barry Goldwater was going to get us into the nuclear war, never would have run.
	Hey, the ad that came from the anti-Mitt Romney super PAC in 2012, all about how Romney gave some lady cancer, right?
	That ad never would have run.
	It got fact-checked anyway, right?
	All of these ads.
	It's good to have more speech.
	More speech is better speech.
	But Elizabeth Warren doesn't believe that, so she wanted Twitter to shut this all down, until it turns out it hit her speech.
	So this is a perfect, hilarious, wonderful example of Elizabeth Warren learning the lesson of the monkey's paw.
	If you've ever read that short story, it's about a guy who gets three wishes, and then every one of his wishes ends up with precisely the opposite result of what he wanted, because he did not specifically say what he wanted.
	Really took a shot in the grill here from Twitter.
	Elizabeth Warren is proving to be an equal opportunist when it comes to taking on social media companies, says CNBC.
	I love that spin.
	So Elizabeth Warren calls for Twitter to ban political ads, and then they do.
	And then she's like, but they banned the ads I like!
	And then CNBC says, she's an equal opportunist.
	She's willing to attack anyone.
	Mm-hmm.
	Or she's just a flaming hot hypocrite.
	On Tuesday, Warren, who's running for president, slammed Twitter's new ad policy that bans political ads, which is weird since she's been ripping on Facebook, suggesting they should ban political ads.
	In a series of tweets on Tuesday, the Massachusetts Democrat attacked the company for blocking organizations that are fighting climate change from running ads on the social network, while allowing ads from companies like Exxon on the same topic.
	Oh, you mean that when you ban political ads, you end up banning ads that you like, Elizabeth Warren?
	Who could have predicted such a thing?
	Aside from every sentient human being with a working prefrontal cortex, who could have possibly imagined that something like this would happen?
	Her criticism comes a week after Twitter said it would no longer allow ads on its service, a policy that blocks ads from politicians, ads that refer to an election or candidate, or ads related to politically sensitive issues.
	Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey then responded to Warren with a tweet, basically kowtowing to her.
	He said, we haven't announced our new rules yet.
	They come out November 15th.
	Taking all this into consideration.
	He's like, please leave me alone!
	Stop!
	More beatings, sir!
	Please, more beatings!
	The media is playing this as Elizabeth Warren being mad at big tech.
	No, this is Elizabeth Warren wanting a different standard for her and her favorite causes than she wants for everybody else.
	In other words, she doesn't want Trump to be able to run ads, but she wants to be able to run ads.
	She doesn't want Exxon to be able to run ads, but she does want her favorite climate change activists to be able to run ads.
	It's pretty hilarious and pretty wonderful, and she deserves every bit of the blowback that she is going to get over all of this.
	Okay, so with the Democrats, and by the way, Pete Buttigieg is slamming Warren.
	It is good for him.
	He's campaigning as a moderate.
	People think he's cutting into Biden's numbers.
	That's not really obvious.
	It seems more that he's actually cutting into Warren's and Sanders's numbers because Biden is not actually fading in the national polling.
	Buttigieg is just rising in the national polling.
	Pete Buttigieg went after Elizabeth Warren yesterday again.
	It's not the only issue, but it's certainly a major issue.
	I get questions about it everywhere I go.
	And what I'm hearing from Iowans and from voters across the country is there really is a desire to do much more to build way past what we were able to do with the Affordable Care Act.
	But people also want to be able to make their own decision on whether to leave their private plan or not.
	Okay, so Buttigieg, again, getting a bit of a boost from attacking Elizabeth Warren.
	And look, the entire American business Establishment is afraid of Elizabeth Warren for good reason, because she does demonize success, because she does see America's successful businesses as targets for her rapacious tax schemes.
	So Jamie Dimon, who is the JP Morgan chairman and CEO, he launched into Elizabeth Warren yesterday saying that she vilifies successful people, which of course is true.
	She uses some pretty harsh words.
	You know, some would say vilifies successful people.
	I don't like vilifying anybody.
	You know, I think we should applaud successful people.
	You know, a lot of people come to this company for opportunity and choice and success.
	We want that for everybody.
	Now, that's a little bit different than paying your fair share and how the taxation system should work.
	That I completely understand.
	You know, successful companies have lifted up society.
	It doesn't mean they can't do more.
	It doesn't mean they didn't make mistakes.
	So, I think we should applaud that.
	And if people have very specific things that we should do different, then we should think about doing them different.
	Okay, so again, these Democratic candidates are vulnerable on a variety of scores because they've taken too much away from these state and local elections over the past few years.
	They think that Animus for Trump means that people are willing to embrace the most radical policies at the national level, and that simply isn't true.
	But!
	The smarter Democrats are saying, OK, well, that means that what we really should be doing is not focusing on our policies, which kind of suck and nobody likes.
	Instead, we should focus in on Trump.
	And that's why impeachment gate matters to the Democrats.
	That's the real reason why impeachment gate is a thing.
	Now, what that means is that impeachment gate is going to be front and center for months here at a time.
	OK, this thing is not going to stop.
	The Democrats are not going to do this fast and dirty.
	They're not.
	Everybody keeps saying the Democrats are going to speed this thing through.
	There is no reason for them to speed this thing through.
	Instead, they are now going to drag this out.
	They're going to subpoena everybody.
	Originally, they said they were going to get this done by late October was the original estimate.
	Now there's estimates they may get it done by Thanksgiving.
	Unlikely.
	Unlikely.
	My guess is that they probably bring it over into the new year.
	Why?
	Because they think that the publicity is bad for Trump.
	And that is exacerbated by the fact that Team Trump doesn't have any good defenses, right?
	Their defenses that they've put out there so far are really Kind of garbage-y.
	Because they refuse to embrace the only defense that actually makes any sense.
	The only defense that is actually true, which is always the best defense.
	We'll get to that in just one second.
	First, let's talk about the fact that at this time of year, it's open enrollment season.
	So you're probably looking at all your various insurances that you can get through your company.
	And one of those insurances is presumably life insurance.
	There's only one problem.
	The life insurance you get through your company, it's probably like one-tenth of what you actually need.
	So you should be looking for a private life insurance plan as well.
	I mean, this is a responsible thing to do as a responsible adult.
	This is where Policy Genius can help.
	Policy Genius is the easy way to shop for a life insurance plan that is not tied to your job.
	In minutes, you can compare quotes from top insurers and find your best price.
	Once you apply, the Policy Genius team will handle all the paperwork and the red tape.
	The life insurance you buy through PolicyGenius stays with you even if you leave your job.
	PolicyGenius doesn't just make it easy to get life insurance, they can also help you find the right home and auto insurance and disability insurance too.
	It really does make it super easy.
	The app is beautifully laid out.
	When you're looking at your workplace benefits this month, make sure to double check those life insurance options and then Check out PolicyGenius.com to get quotes and apply in minutes.
	PolicyGenius is your one-stop shop for all sorts of insurance.
	Go check them out right now.
	PolicyGenius, the easy way to compare and buy life insurance.
	Why not shop competitively, get the best price and the best policy?
	PolicyGenius.com, go check them out right now.
	Okay, we're gonna get to...
	The big breaking news and impeachment game 2019 in just moments.
	But first, if you're not already a subscriber, you are missing out.
	Head on over to dailywire.com slash subscribe for as little as 10 bucks a month.
	You get our articles and free access to all of our live broadcasts, our full show library, select bonus content, our exclusive Daily Wire app, which is pretty fantastic if you haven't checked it out yet.
	I mean, the fact is that the app is just it.
	I mean, really, we invested serious quan in the app and it looks great.
	And you get to interact with us.
	If you choose the new all access plan, you get all of that plus the legendary Leftist Tears Tumblr.
	And our brand new Ask Me Anything style discussion feature that allows you to engage our hosts, writers, and special guests on a weekly basis.
	I've done a couple of them already.
	It actually is a blast.
	Stop depriving yourself.
	Come join the fun.
	Especially because when you help us out, you're helping to insulate us from a left that wants to de-platform everybody it doesn't like.
	We'll get to that in just a little bit.
	But come help us out.
	Come join the team.
	We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
	Okay, so let's get to the latest breaking news in impeachment gate 2019 and the Republican defenses to it.
	So, as I say, this 2020 race, Democrats think that Trump is vulnerable because Trump is Trump.
	And that is the truth.
	But if they run on their own platform, they're going to lose.
	So instead, what they're going to do is they're going to run on Trump is the worst.
	And that's why Impeachmentgate is really more about election 2020 than it is about impeaching Trump right now, right?
	The chances that the Senate is going to actually get rid of Trump are incredibly, incredibly low.
	Mitch McConnell basically said this yesterday.
	He said, listen, the Democrats are not getting the process right.
	Nobody's going to vote for this thing.
	This whole effort is going nowhere.
	I'm not going to start commenting on all of these episodes that occur on a daily basis that are unfolding over in the House, but to say that it seems to me they still are not providing the same kind of basic due process rights that were provided both Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton.
	They can't even get the process right.
	So beyond that, we'll wait until we get it here.
	It looks to me like they're hell-bent to do it and that we will end up in an impeachment trial at some point.
	Okay, so, you know, again, I think that the Democrats are doing this for political reasons, but every bad headline is another brick in the wall they're building against President Trump.
	So, the latest bad headline for the Trump team is Gordon Sondland, who is Trump's EU ambassador, who basically, look, the ambassador positions are basically Kush patronage jobs that you get for being an ally with the president.
	That's not unique to Trump.
	It was true for Obama, too.
	Basically, you give a lot of money, and you end up as, like, ambassador to Morocco, right?
	You get to kind of sort of pick which country you wish to live in for the next four years and hang out in for the next four years.
	They actually put real political experts in some of these positions, but in a lot of them, it's like, you're the ambassador to the EU.
	You get to live in Brussels and hang out in Europe all the time.
	Seems kind of awesome.
	That's what happened with Gordon Sondland.
	Give a bunch of money to the Trump campaign, and then he ends up with no experience being the EU ambassador and gets roped into this thing Where he is now worried about having committed perjury in front of Congress.
	So yesterday, he revised his testimony.
	He had testified before that he did not think there was a quid pro quo that went on between the Trump administration and the Ukrainian government for Ukraine to pursue investigations into a variety of topics, including the 2016 elections, Burisma, and Hunter and Joe Biden.
	Well, Gordon Sondland came back yesterday and he revised his testimony.
	So according to the Washington Post, in a significant revision to his testimony, the U.S.
	ambassador to the EU, Gordon Sondland, now says he told a Ukrainian official that security assistance to the country would be likely to resume only if the authorities in Kiev opened investigations requested by President Trump that could be damaging to former Vice President Joe Biden.
	In a supplemental declaration, Sunlin wrote, I now recall speaking individually with a Ukrainian individual and in that conversation saying that resumption of U.S.
	aid would likely not occur until Ukraine provided the public anti-corruption statement that we had been discussing for many weeks.
	So he suddenly remembers all of this happening.
	Sunlin's new statement adds to testimony by other national security officials that described an effort directed by Trump No, that was just me quoting Trump.
	He said that was just me quoting Trump.
	nearly $400 million in security assistance to investigations that could politically benefit President Trump.
	Sondland, a Trump donor turned diplomat, had been seen as a loyalist, and he had said originally that Trump was just trying to combat corruption.
	He had asserted in a previously released text message that Trump didn't seek quid pro quos of any kind.
	Sondland said, well, no, that was just me quoting Trump.
	And he said, that was just me quoting Trump.
	Really, I think it was kind of a quid pro quo.
	Now, the White House released a statement on this They said that the transcripts of Sondland's new testimony show there's even less evidence for this illegitimate impeachment sham than previously thought.
	White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham says, quote, Ambassador Sondland squarely states he did not know and still does not know when, why, or by whom the aid was suspended.
	He said he presumed there was a link to the aid, but cannot identify any solid source for that assumption.
	So the White House continues to trot out a defense saying there was no quid pro quo.
	The problem is, saying there was no quid pro quo is now in direct contravention of testimony from Ambassador Sondland, Kurt Volker, the special envoy, Bill Taylor, the charge d'affaires in Ukraine.
	Marie Yovanovitch the ambassador to Ukraine and there's a widespread perception inside the State Department and virtually throughout the diplomatic corps that there was a quid pro quo that happened between the White House and Ukraine and Trump keeps saying there was no there was no Quid pro quo, you know I could say there was a quid pro quo and the quid pro quo is fine but I'm going to say there's no quid pro quo.
	The problem is that's a bad defense tactic because the fact is it's pretty obvious from the transcript and it's also pretty obvious now from everybody's testimony that there was in fact some sort of quid pro quo going on.
	The question as always was going to be was the quid pro quo illegal?
	Now, it could be based on false information, the quid pro quo.
	It could be based on the president receiving bad information from Rudy Giuliani and people feeding bad information to Rudy Giuliani.
	And it could still be not impeachable, or it could be dumb.
	It could be bad policy.
	That is not the same thing as he committed a crime.
	This is the president's final defense.
	I've been saying this for literally weeks.
	I'm not the only one.
	Andy McCarthy, who's been very pro-Trump throughout the administration.
	Andy McCarthy, the lawyer who writes over at National Review, former prosecutor at the Southern District of New York.
	He said also, you know, relying on this no-quid-pro-quo defense is a fool's errand.
	What Trump should just say is, okay, yes, of course, I was pressuring Ukraine.
	I was pressuring Ukraine for legitimate investigations into what happened in 2016, and that includes any sort of corruption that occurred in Ukraine with regard to Hunter Biden.
	And frankly, that would be a basically fine argument.
	It's hard.
	It's very, very difficult to prove intent.
	Right.
	The fact is that then the Democrats would have to prove not that a quid pro quo happened, but that the intent for the quid pro quo was to get Biden looking forward to 2020 as opposed to looking into everything Trump associated with corruption circa 2016.
	That's hard to prove.
	It really is difficult to prove.
	And the fact that the White House refuses to rely on that defense is supremely bizarre.
	It's really, really weird.
	Instead, you end up with weird defenses like this from Lindsey Graham.
	I mean, Lindsey Graham just looks like a shill now because he won't say the obvious, right?
	Lindsey Graham, the senator from South Carolina.
	Here he is yesterday saying, I'm not even going to read the transcript, right?
	Apparently, there's a reporter who tweeted out Reporter, do you plan on reading these transcripts that were released?
	Graham, no.
	And the reporter asked why.
	I said because it's a sham process.
	Okay, that just sounds like you have no defense.
	Right?
	That sounds like you are covering your eyes and your ears and pretending that you don't know what's going on, but we all know sort of what was going on.
	The fact is, again, that there is an actual response to all of this.
	It is the response that I have been laying out for weeks at this point.
	And, by the way, there's also a good response that says, yeah, of course we asked Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden because there's some pretty good information that Hunter Biden was involved in something nefarious.
	Ed Morrissey reporting over at Hot Air.
	Does the appearance of Hunter Biden's name in State Department email traffic show corrupt influence on U.S.
	policy?
	Emails dug up by John Solomon in his reporting on influence peddling then and now suggest that the timing of Joe Biden's infamous intervention in Ukraine might be even more suspect than in his look before.
	Biden insists, nay brag, that he threatened to withhold a billion dollars in aid in March 2016 unless Petro Poroshenko fired Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin.
	Biden claims he did that because Shokin had not aggressively prosecuted corruption, including that at Burisma.
	However, the new emails show that Hunter's name was being tossed around the State Department a month earlier as the firm pled that Shokin was being too tough.
	According to Solomon's reporting, during that February 2016 contact, a U.S.
	Representative for Burisma Holdings sought a meeting with Undersecretary of State Catherine Novelli to discuss ending the corruption allegations against the Ukrainian firm where Hunter Biden worked as a board member, according to memos obtained under a FOIA lawsuit.
	Just three weeks before Burisma's overture to state, Ukrainian authorities raided the home of the oligarch who owned the gas firm and employed Hunter Biden, a signal the long-running corruption probe was escalating in the middle of the U.S.
	presidential election.
	Hunter Biden's name, in fact, was specifically invoked by the Burisma representative as a reason the State Department should help, according to a series of email exchanges among U.S.
	officials trying to arrange the meeting.
	The subject line for the email exchanges read simply, Burisma.
	According to Ed Morrissey at Hot Air, the email shows that the meeting was for the purpose of getting Ukraine to back off on its corruption probe of Burisma.
	The email argued that Burisma had been unfairly targeted by Shokin without evidence and outside of due process.
	It also noted very pointedly that two high-profile U.S.
	citizens worked with Burisma and named Hunter Biden explicitly.
	As Morrissey points out, he says that last sentence sounds like the meeting was a fait accompli, as well it might since it concerned the VP's son.
	However, whether and when the meeting took place has not been established, but clearly State was informed that Hunter's name was in play and that Burisma was unhappy with Shoken.
	This was no low-level contact either, the people involved were senior officials in the Obama administration.
	That discussion took place February 24, 2016.
	Exactly one week later, Hunter Biden's business partner and fellow Burisma board member Devon Archer dropped by to see Secretary of State John Kerry at the State Department's C Street offices.
	Archer was a college roommate of Kerry's stepson, so it could have been a coincidence, but it's never been explored.
	Less than a month later, Biden went to Ukraine and demanded Shokin's firing.
	So, that looks kind of bad, right?
	right?
	I mean, this is what Ed Morrissey is saying.
	He says, that certainly looks like the kind of corruption of which the House Democrats are accusing Donald Trump.
	Does it not?
	At the very least, these emails undermine the idea that Shokin wasn't being tough enough on Burisma and that no one in the Obama administration connected the dots between Hunter Biden, his dad, and Burisma.
	It stinks of corruption and interference for personal or familial gain, although one didn't need to go to Ukraine to find evidence for it.
	Okay, so in other words, Trump has a pretty solid defense here.
	I I was targeting corruption.
	I was suspicious of corruption.
	The reason I was suspicious of corruption is because there might have been corruption.
	And that's why I asked them to investigate corruption and said that they're not doing a good job of investigating corruption.
	So Trump keeps putting out the worst defense.
	There was no quid pro quo instead of the best defense.
	Of course there was a quid pro quo, right?
	This was Mulvaney, right?
	Mulvaney actually tried to put out this defense.
	He said, yes, quid pro quos happen in foreign policy all the time.
	And this wasn't a bad quid pro quo.
	And people went nuts.
	And then Trump backtracked it.
	And now people just keep saying, no quid pro quo.
	It's a dumb defense.
	It's a very dumb defense.
	And there's no reason to focus in on a bad defense when an actual good defense and probably a true defense is actually available.
	Meanwhile, controversy has broken out as Republicans are trying to out the whistleblower.
	Now, the Democrats are claiming that the whistleblower is irrelevant, that at this point we've moved beyond the whistleblower's complaint.
	There's truth to that.
	There is.
	I mean, the fact is that we now know what the whistleblower had to say.
	We have the transcript of the call.
	The whistleblower complaint really didn't add anything.
	Now, I'm being consistent on this.
	I said that the whistleblower complaint originally was less important than the transcript of the call.
	So, but that's not what Democrats said.
	Democrats were like, we need the entire whistleblower complaint or its obstruction of justice and a cover-up.
	Like, we need to interview the whistleblower.
	We need his thoughts.
	And then as soon as it became clear that the whistleblower was probably a partisan hack on behalf of Joe Biden, then it was, oh, we don't need to hear from the whistleblower anymore.
	So I'm of the opinion that the whistleblower is basically irrelevant once the claims of his complaint are made public.
	But, is it fair for Republicans to point out Democratic hypocrisy right here?
	Yeah, that's totally fair.
	And as far as the idea that it is a violation of law to release the name of the whistleblower?
	No, it isn't.
	Whistleblower laws are designed to prevent the firing of a whistleblower.
	Keeping a whistleblower's name confidential is usually designed to prevent their firing in the private sector.
	Or a private contractor with the United States government.
	There are regulations in place that prevent the firing of a whistleblower.
	The Inspector General of a particular department is prevented from speaking the name aloud of the whistleblower, but there's nothing that prevents Rand Paul from doing it.
	This is the point that Rand Paul, who's been pushing to out the whistleblower, made yesterday when he was in a tête-à-tête with the media.
	I know it's illegal to out a whistleblower.
	Actually, you see, you got that wrong too.
	No, we don't.
	You should work on the facts.
	Here's the thing is, the whistleblower statute protects the whistleblower from having his name revealed by the Inspector General.
	Even the New York Times admits that no one else is under any legal obligation.
	The other point, and you need to be very careful if you really are interested in the news, is that the whistleblower actually is a material witness Completely separate from being the whistleblower because he worked for Joe Biden.
	He worked for Joe Biden at the same time Hunter Biden was receiving $50,000 a month.
	Okay, so Rand Paul is actually making...
	A pretty solid case as to why we ought to know who the whistleblower is, which is why I covered it on the show.
	I mean, that is newsworthy stuff.
	The fact is that if the situation were reversed and this were a Republican whistleblower in a Democratic administration, this would have been plastered all over the front pages of every newspaper immediately if it turned out that the person was a partisan hack on behalf of the Republicans.
	I mean, the media are so invested in Trump being pushed out of office.
	They're so invested in hatred of Trump.
	It's pretty astonishing.
	The best example today is that the Washington Post came out with a full Illustrated Mueller Report.
	It's embarrassing.
	I mean, it really is.
	Democracy dies in crappy cartoons.
	They drew all of these pictures, like Paul Manafort and James Comey, with thought bubbles.
	It's absurd.
	They're publishing a graphic, non-fiction book centered on special counsel Robert Mueller's obstruction of justice inquiry.
	I mean, I suppose they couldn't do it on the Kenneth Starr Report, because then it just would have been pornography.
	The Mueller Report illustrated is drawn directly from Volume 2 of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report.
	Of course, they're not going to do it on Volume 1 because Volume 1 didn't uncover anything.
	Volume 1 was about the Trump-Russia collusion nonsense.
	Volume 2 is about the so-called obstruction of justice.
	According to the Washington Post pumping this thing, the book provides a unique graphic depiction of the report's most scrutinized passages and pivotal moments, all contextualized with the Post's original reporting.
	The Mueller Report Illustrated offers a fly-on-the-wall account of life in the White House, told through the accounts of men and women who at one time served the president.
	Wow, just how magical.
	So we need a graphic novel of an incredibly boring report.
	The media.
	Mediating all over the place.
	So much journalism.
	The journalism is just getting everywhere!
	It's everywhere!
	By the way, I'm not sure which is more journalism-ing.
	The Washington Post printing this insane cartoon version of all of this?
	Or a piece by Frank Bruni in the New York Times called, Why Donald Trump Hates Your Dog.
	I'm not kidding.
	Because Donald Trump is constantly saying that people died like a dog.
	Or acted like a dog.
	So apparently, according to Frank Bruni of the New York Times, Trump hates dogs.
	And according to a columnist named Gia Corliss, Sean Spicer, the former White House press secretary, dances in militaristic fashion.
	And his body is dishonest.
	Yes, I certainly trust the media with all of this.
	We'll get to more of... I have to read you some of that piece in just one second.
	First, a thing I like, and then a thing I hate.
	So, things I like today.
	I was on a 16-hour flight from Israel to the United States over the weekend.
	That meant that I watched one million movies because, I mean, what else am I going to do?
	My kids are kicking me.
	And you're stuck in one place for a very long time.
	And I got to see a movie that I really enjoyed.
	I thought it's actually pretty fantastic.
	It's called In the Heart of the Sea.
	It's a Ron Howard film.
	Now, I tend to think that Ron Howard's a bit of a paint-by-numbers director.
	I've never seen anything of his where I thought this is just overwhelmingly good.
	But that's fine.
	I mean, it's very straightforward.
	It's sort of classic cinema.
	It's called In the Heart of the Sea with Chris Hemsworth and Benjamin Walker and Cillian Murphy, who is fantastic, and Tom Holland.
	Big, big cast.
	Brendan Gleeson.
	And the movie is about the sort of source material for Moby Dick.
	It starts off with Herman Melville meeting with this sailor about what happened at sea on this boat called the Essex.
	And it's a true story.
	And it is a pretty astonishing story.
	I mean, what didn't make it into Moby Dick is actually creepier and more terrifying than what did make it into Moby Dick.
	It's, for example, after the Essex was, it was, in fact, stoven by a white whale, a giant white whale, that's the basis of Moby Dick, but then the men were basically stranded at sea for like three months, and they had to resort to, as you would think, some pretty awful, awful things.
	It's a good movie.
	It's worth seeing.
	Check it out.
	Didn't get the kind of press that it should have.
	The reviewers didn't like it because it was too straightforward.
	Because how dare you make a straightforward film?
	It didn't have any gender identity politics.
	We don't know the gender of the whale in the film.
	But the movie is really good.
	It's called In the Heart of the Sea.
	Again, wildly underrated by critics and well worth watching.
	Okay, time for a quick thing that I hate.
	So YouTube, a lot of the big tech companies are now censoring content, and it's pretty obvious that they're censoring content on the basis of political persuasion.
	The latest and creepiest example is that YouTube has now banned a video from Dr. Michelle Critella, a pediatrician with many years of experience, the executive director of the American College of Pediatricians.
	There was a video that Daily Signal published in 2017, so it's two years old.
	It was up for like two years.
	And now, YouTube has pulled the video.
	The video has been removed from YouTube.
	In its place, YouTube has displayed the message, the video has been removed for violating YouTube's policy on hate speech.
	So what exactly was so hateful?
	What was the hate speech that this evil doctor had to say?
	And here's what she had to say that got it banned from YouTube.
	According to most mainstream medical organizations, if you want to cut off a healthy arm or a healthy leg, you're mentally ill.
	But, if you want to cut off healthy breasts or a penis, you're transgender.
	Okay, well, sorry, that happens to be a true statement.
	Okay, now it may be stated in a way that's very blunt, but that happens to be a true statement.
	Okay, if you if you according to most mainstream medical organizations again It's the text of what she says according to most mainstream medical Organizations if you want to cut off a healthy arm or a healthy leg You're mentally ill if you want to cut off healthy breasts or penis is what she says you are transgender And they don't classify transgender as a mental illness which is what the juxtaposition means this is Again, I fail to see what is non-factual about this statement.
	Now, you may not like that statement.
	You may think that there is a moral difference between cutting off your genitals and cutting off your arm.
	You're gonna have to explain why that is, but the statement itself is not non-factual.
	But apparently, this is now hate speech.
	So, according to the Daily Signal, which is a Heritage Foundation outlet, over the past few months, the Daily Signal worked with YouTube to try to reach a resolution.
	Ultimately, we were told the only way we could get the video back on YouTube was to delete the previously mentioned sentence.
	In other words, we had two choices.
	Censor the doctor's words or have no video on the world's biggest video platform.
	This should horrify every YouTube user and anyone who values the importance of a public square featuring a variety of perspectives.
	Critella's words are no doubt controversial, says the Daily Signal.
	She's no stranger to criticism, neither is the Daily Signal.
	We welcome debate, but we don't want to be censored.
	They say, we believe transgender individuals, any individuals struggling with gender identity issues, should be treated with love and respect, but we also believe that on a topic where medical treatments have such serious ramifications, from infertility to permanent alteration of body parts, it's worth having a robust, fact-driven discussion.
	She's making a point in that sentence that may be not popular, but remains true.
	There is no society-wide push right now to allow patients suffering from body integrity identity disorder to amputate limbs.
	Furthermore, just this May, the World Health Organization removed transgenderism from its list of mental disorders, moving it to a section about sexual health.
	But as of July, Critella's sentence, amputation of body parts is different depending on the body parts in question, is apparently so outrageous YouTube can't even allow it on the platform.
	That's pretty astonishing.
	Like, if YouTube doesn't like it, then you know what?
	There are a thousand videos on YouTube of people trying to explain why it is more beneficial to people to cut off their genitals than it is for them to cut off a different body part.
	I mean, there are lots of videos from the left about this sort of thing.
	The fact that YouTube is banning it outright demonstrates that they're putting their thumb On the scales when it comes to contentious social issues that are very much open for debate.
	And by the way, where the science tends not to favor the left very much.
	Okay, we'll be back here a little bit later today with two additional hours of content.
	So we will see you then.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Robert Sterling.
	Directed by Mike Joyner.
	Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
	Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
	Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover.
	And our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
	Assistant director, Pavel Wydowski.
	Edited by Adam Siavitz.
	Audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.
	Hair and makeup is by Jesua Olvera.
	Production assistant, Nick Sheehan.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.
	Copyright Daily Wire 2019.
	Bad news, fellas.
	Emma Watson is self-partnered.
	That's the new PC term for Signal.
	We will examine the left's cult of self-love.
	Then, Kentucky goes blue, kind of.
	The real election results are more complicated, so don't expect to hear about that in the mainstream media.
	We will examine what they mean for 2020.
	Rand Paul sheds light on impeachment.
	A new study shows politicized scholarship makes bad politics.
	And ABC News covers up its cover-up Of the suicide of Jeffrey Epstein, who definitely didn't kill himself.

▲