All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 23, 2020 - The Ben Shapiro Show
58:01
The Schiff Show, Day 2 | Ep. 938
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Adam Schiff finally gets his moment in the sun, Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders savage each other, and world celebrities fawn over Greta Thunberg and Davos.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
The Ben Shapiro Show is sponsored by ExpressVPN.
Your data is your business.
Protect it at ExpressVPN.com slash Ben.
All his life, Adam Schiff has just wanted to be the center of attention.
That's all he's wanted.
And he was always the geeky guy in school.
I mean, I know, I feel it.
And he...
Always wanted to be the guy in the spotlight who'd sit there at the talent shows and think to himself, but I'm so much smarter than those dolts up there playing guitar.
And now, finally, Adam Schiff has got his moment to shine.
And that's really what a lot of this is about, isn't it?
Adam Schiff, who never could stay away from a television camera.
Not for three years when he was claiming he had secret information that President Trump was in cahoots with the Russians.
Well now Adam Schiff is the House impeachment manager after shepherding through an impeachment process based on insufficient evidence.
Evidence so insufficient that now the Democrats are forced to try and pressure Republicans in the Senate to subpoena new documents and call new witnesses.
Well now Adam Schiff is out there and for hours on end he is talking.
Hours and hours and hours.
Now, unsurprisingly, unsurprisingly, the ratings suck.
And the ratings for this impeachment, they're not good.
And you can tell the American public are extremely bored with it because the ratings are not very good.
Day one, over the course of the entire day, apparently, there were 11 million viewers over the course of an entire day for an actual live impeachment.
And just to put that by way of contrast, like one nightly primetime show on the networks will get like 10 million, 11 million viewers.
That's not even an unbelievable rating.
It's a fairly good rating for one primetime show in like half an hour.
To say that over the course of the entire day, in terms of impeachment, you got like 11 million viewers means that not very many people are watching.
And as Joe Concha from The Hill is reporting, The primetime numbers from the night one impeachment coverage are really not very good.
Total average viewers from 8 to 11.
Total average viewers.
Fox News 3.5 million, MSNBC 2.5 million, CNN 1.5 million.
In other words, basically everybody who was already watching continued to watch and nobody else showed up.
Because guess what?
Those are very similar to the numbers that you get on kind of a normal night from these various networks.
They're not up a significant percentage because the American people just don't care very much.
And I don't blame them because nothing new is happening.
This is all old news.
And the other part of it is that the Democrats obviously do not have the goods.
If they did have the goods, then they wouldn't have to be pounding the table the way that they are.
Senator Ted Cruz really summed it up yesterday.
He said, listen, they don't have the facts.
They don't have the law.
And so they're just going to pound that table.
There's an old saying that if you have the facts, you bang the facts.
If you have the law, you bang the law.
If you don't have either, you bang the table.
Well, this afternoon we've seen a whole lot of table banging.
And at the end of the day, we're in the same spot we were in when we began the day, which is the House articles of impeachment that were passed on a partisan basis.
They don't meet the constitutional standard.
Of course, Senator Cruz is right, although I do think that he should not say the phrase table banging in conjunction with United States senators because you just never know what he's talking about.
We've seen too much Me Too in the Senate to use that sort of phrase.
In any case.
The House Democratic impeachment managers, according to the New York Times, began formal arguments in the Senate on Wednesday, presenting meticulous and scathing case for convicting President Trump.
Don't you love that sort of honest, objective journalism from the New York Times?
Meticulous and scathing, not insufficient, not fact driven, right?
Meticulous and scathing, both at the same time.
Oh, my gosh, this must be the greatest legal presentation since we saw the Scopes trial.
I mean, really, it must be unbelievable.
They made a meticulous and scathing case for convicting President Trump and removing him from office on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress.
Representative Adam Schiff of California, the lead House prosecutor, took the lectern in the chamber as Senators sat silently preparing to weigh Mr. Trump's fate, speaking in an even-measured manner.
I mean, my goodness, this is New York Times coverage.
They may as well just get out the massage oils and just...
Go to town.
He accused the president of a corrupt scheme to pressure Ukraine to help to cheat in the 2020 presidential election, invoking the nation's founders and the fears that a self-interested leader might subvert democracy for his own personal gain.
Wait, wait, wait.
Are you saying that a self-interested leader like Adam Schiff might subvert democracy for his own political gain?
Mr. Schiff argued that the president's conduct was precisely what the framers of the Constitution had in mind when they devised the remedy of impeachment, one he said was, quote, as powerful as the evil it was meant to combat.
We're gonna get to what exactly Adam Schiff had to say, because Adam Schiff accidentally had to let the cat out of the bag last night.
He basically said, we're not gonna allow democracy to weigh in on this because we cannot allow democracy to weigh in on this, which is just spectacular.
Also, he subtly broadened out the case for impeachment to include things that are blatantly unimpeachable.
He actually suggested, for example, that it is an impeachable offense for the president to take any action that might benefit him in an upcoming election.
That's called everything a president does.
The question is whether it is illegitimate, not whether it benefits him in the upcoming election.
When the president passes a tax cut, that is likely to benefit him in the upcoming election.
When President Barack Obama says to the Russians that he can provide them flexibility after the election, that is likely to benefit him during the election.
Presidents spend their entire tenures doing things that benefit them for their re-election processes.
But the notion that that is in and of itself impeachable is, of course, far too broad.
Instead, you have to actually charge something illegitimate, like, say, bribery, which they didn't.
We'll get to more of this in just one second.
You'll see how insufficient Schiff's case is.
The media still playing it up to the hill because Adam Schiff had his moment in the sun, and it was just like a butterfly spreading its wings, glorious and colorful.
We'll get to all of that in just one second.
First, Let us talk about the reality.
As the year progresses, you're tired of schlepping boxes to the post office.
I know you are.
I know that you don't want to take all that stuff and toss it in your car, and then schlep it over to the post office, and then wait in line at the post office.
Post office is great, but do you really want to spend all that time and effort doing all of that?
Wouldn't it be nice if you just take those boxes, like, out to your mailbox with all of the proper postage, and then it would just get picked up from there?
Good news for you, you can do this, and it's cheaper than going to the post office when you use stamps.com.
Stamps.com brings all the services of the U.S.
Postal Service directly to your computer.
Whether you're a small office sending invoices, or an online seller shipping out products, even a warehouse sending thousands of packages a day, Stamps.com can handle it all with ease.
Simply use your computer to print official U.S.
postage 24-7 for any letter, any package, any class of mail, anywhere you want to send it.
Once your mail is ready, you just hand it to your mail carrier or you drop it in a mailbox.
It is indeed that simple.
With Stamps.com, you get five cents off every first class stamp, up to 40% off priority mail.
So you're saving money and you're saving time.
It doesn't get better than that.
There's no reason other than this why 700,000 small businesses already use Stamps.com.
Why are you wasting your time and wasting your money instead?
Head on over to stamps.com right now with my promo code Shapiro.
You get a special offer that includes a four-week trial plus free postage and digital scale, which is a great deal.
No long-term commitments, no contracts.
Just go to stamps.com, click on the microphone at the top of the homepage, type in Shapiro.
That is stamps.com, promo code Shapiro, stamps.com.
Never go to the post office again.
So the notion that Adam Schiff is pushing forward, which is that if you do something that benefits you politically, that that is in and of itself impeachable is, of course, Josh Blackman is a constitutional law professor at South Texas College of Law in Houston.
He has a piece in the New York Times.
I'm shocked they printed it.
It's actually quite good today.
It's called Trump Acts Like a Politician.
That's not an impeachable offense.
He says the way things look, President Trump will almost certainly not be removed from office.
The precedents set by the articles of impeachment, however, will endure far longer.
And regrettably, the House of Representatives has transformed presidential impeachment from a constitutional parachute, an emergency measure to save the Republican freefall.
Into a parliamentary vote of no confidence.
The president's lawyers are right.
That behavior does not amount to an abuse of power.
Mr. Trump's lawyers responded, "...elected officials almost always consider the effect that their conduct might have on the next election." The president's lawyers are right.
That behavior does not amount to an abuse of power.
Politicians pursue public policy as they see it, coupled with a concern about their own political future.
Otherwise legal conduct, even when plainly politically motivated, but without moving beyond a threshold of personal political gain, does not amount to an impeachable abuse of power." The House's short-sighted standard will fail to knock out Trump, but if taken seriously, threatens to put virtually every other elected official in peril.
The voters, and not Congress, should decide whether to reward or punish this self-serving feature of our political order.
Josh Blackman writes, The first article of impeachment turns on President Trump's request that President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine announce an investigation of Hunter Biden's role with the energy company Burisma.
Mr. Trump wanted to learn about potential financial corruption concerning Hunter.
Realizing that such an investigation would perhaps yield greater scrutiny of Joe Biden, the House argues this request to potentially harm Trump's political rival was a quote-unquote abusive power.
Mr. Trump's lawyers respond that the call was perfectly normal.
Yes, that phrase actually appears in the brief.
Regrettably, parts of the brief are written in a far too political tone, but the president's lawyers have raised an important threshold issue.
In a representative democracy, they write, elected officials almost always consider the effect their conduct might have on the next election.
Trump did not stand to receive any money or property from the Ukrainian president.
The House didn't even bother to charge bribery.
As a policy matter, I disagree with Trump's decision to ask for an investigation of the Bidens, even if warranted, it should have been avoided at all reasonable costs.
The Republic would have been fine if we never learned more about Burisma, but receiving a personal political benefit does not transform an otherwise legal action into an impeachable conduct.
And this, of course, is exactly right.
This is why I've said all along, if this was all about 2020, then that's impeachable.
If this was about 2016, that is not impeachable.
Because the fact is that the 2016 interest is just the mirror of the Democrats' 2016 interest in Russia.
Now, Trump's interest may be poorly based.
I think that in parts it is, right?
All of his crowd-strike nonsense is a good example of the president believing conspiracy theories that back his pre-existing point of view.
And the president is particularly likely to call it to fall into confirmation bias.
But that does not make it impeachable.
If he in his own mind was like, well, we need to find out what happened in 2016 because the American public has an interest in finding out what happened in 2016.
And that involves looking into Ukrainian corruption and bias toward the Obama administration and precedent of the Obama administration using leverage against the Ukrainians.
Well, then why wouldn't Burisma be relevant in that context?
OK, so with that as backdrop, we get to the arguments by Adam Schiff, who, again, he was it was just Amazing.
It was like Taylor Swift suddenly realizing he was political.
Adam Schiff having his moment on the floor of the Senate.
Those Judge Doom eyes popping out of the head.
Here's Adam Schiff explaining, this is where he lets the cat out of the bag.
He literally says, we cannot let Trump sit for an election or he's going to steal it, which Democrats have been saying all along, but which is extremely dangerous.
If you suggest that the failure of impeachment means that the next election is illegitimate, no matter what else happens, you have now raised the prospect of actual political violence.
I mean, we heard this in 2016 from Democrats.
We kept hearing that Donald Trump would not accept the results of the election, and that because he would not accept the results of the election, that would lead to political chaos.
The Democrats are telegraphing a year in advance that if Donald Trump is not impeached, they're not going to accept the results of the election under any circumstances.
Schiff says we can't let the people vote on this thing.
We cannot let the people vote on this thing.
Here's Adam Schiff explaining why democracy is bad.
The president's misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured That the vote will be fairly won.
Okay, so let's be real about this.
What he is saying right now is that the people of the United States should not be able to vote on whether the president is too corrupt to remain in office.
Instead, if the election goes forward, Trump will cheat.
And the cheating will mean that no matter what happens, the election is illegitimate.
But not only should the American people not sound off, also Adam Schiff says, this matter cannot be decided in courts.
So we also can't have courts adjudicating subpoenas.
We can't have courts adjudicating Executive privilege.
Instead, we just have to rush forward with this thing.
Given the seriousness of the conduct at issue and its persistence, this matter cannot and must not be decided by the courts, which, apart from the presence of the Chief Justice here today, are given no role in impeachments in either the House or the Senate.
Being drawn into litigation taking many months or years to complete would provide the president with an opportunity to continue his misconduct.
He would remain secure in the knowledge that he may tie up the Congress in the courts indefinitely.
Okay, so he says we can't even wait for the courts.
So just to get this straight, Adam Schiff is now saying we can't wait for the people to weigh in.
Because Trump will cheat.
And we cannot wait for the courts to sound off, because then Trump will cheat.
So this means that there's only one branch of government left, right?
The executive can't sound off on itself.
So that means there's only one branch of government, and that branch of government is the legislature.
And that legislature cannot be ruled by the people who elected the legislature.
Instead, it has to be Adam Schiff and his cronies deciding who gets to sit and who gets to go, based on this premonition that Trump is going to cheat in the next election.
I mean, it's hard to think of a greater example of we need to burn the village in order to save it.
So in order to save democracy, we have to say that democracy literally will not be able to function if Donald Trump remains as President of the United States up to the election.
Which is a hell of a way to talk about the most durable democracy in the history of mankind.
I mean, that really is a hell of a way to talk about it.
It's pretty astonishing.
But of course, the entire political agenda here is to suggest that it's the United States Senate that is abdicating its duty if they do not impeach President Trump.
Now, Adam Schiff was not above mischaracterizing things.
It was amazing to watch the media yesterday fact-checking everything that the Trump lawyers said, which is fine, and fact-checking nothing that Adam Schiff said.
So Adam Schiff was saying things that were blatantly untrue.
To take an example, Adam Schiff in the middle of this impeachment hearing, Adam Schiff gets up and he just mischaracterizes the Mick Mulvaney press conference.
So Mick Mulvaney is the head of the Office of Management and Budget, he's also the President's Chief of Staff, and you remember that he did this press conference at which he said that quid pro quos happen all the time, that Americans are constantly attempting to pressure other countries to do things, and that's perfectly fine, that's nothing we should worry about.
Okay, what he did not say is that it would be perfectly fine for the United States to attempt bribery on behalf of the President of the United States, right?
He never said that.
But Adam Schiff, who cannot help but embellish, because here's the thing, he has to embellish beyond the evidence, because the evidence is not sufficient to sustain a conviction in the Senate.
So he simply has to embellish beyond what exactly people are saying.
So here he is completely mischaracterizing the Mick Mulvaney oppressor.
Mulvaney didn't just admit that the President withheld the crucial aid appropriated by Congress to apply pressure on Ukraine to do the President's political dirty work.
He also said that we should just get over it.
Should the Congress just get over it?
Should the American people just come to expect that our Presidents will corruptly abuse their office to seek the help of a foreign power to cheat in our elections?
Should we just get over it?
Is that what we've come to?
I hope and pray that the answer is no.
Okay, so that is not what Mick Mulvaney said.
Mick Mulvaney did not say, the president did a corrupt thing, get over it.
That is not what Mick Mulvaney said.
Adam Schiff just gets up there and he makes up conversations in his own head, conversations that sustain his picture of what exactly went on.
This is, by the way, what was going on when he gave that sort of fake transcript of the Zelensky phone call.
And it was not that he was getting up there and he was doing a parodic reading of the phone call.
He was just filling in the gaps in the phone call with what he hopes Trump was actually doing.
He has this picture.
He's going to mischaracterize the picture and he mischaracterizes all the time.
We had that story from Politico within the last 48 hours that he was completely mischaracterizing inofficial documentations in letters to other members of the House to Jerry Nadler over at the House Judiciary Committee.
He's blatantly mischaracterizing.
Correspondence including Lev Parnas and Rudy Giuliani to suggest that Parnas was setting up a meeting with Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, and that was not what the documents actually said.
So Adam Schiff is a dishonest human being.
He's deeply dishonest.
We'll see the extent of that dishonesty from the Democrats as we continue in just a moment.
Let's talk about getting the best employees.
So let's say that you have this fantastic producer.
He's great with audio.
I mean, really just a professional.
Let's call him Mike, for example.
And let's say that Mike, whenever we do a ZipRecruiter ad, is the first guy in the room to recommend that somebody else be mentioned in the ZipRecruiter ad.
Let's say that this guy has a list, an arm long, just of people that he's looking to clock.
In the ZipRecruiter ad.
And then let's say that Mike, being the perfect employee, let's say that one day he just comes in, waltzes on in and says, you know what you should talk about on the show?
Is you should talk about this topic.
And I say to Mike, well, you know, Mike, I literally talked about that 10 minutes ago.
Were you asleep in the control room?
Like what was happening?
He said, no, no, I'm just focusing on audio.
But he was actually asleep.
And we all know that he was actually asleep or playing Dungeons and Dragons or looking up the bass line on the latest Metallica album.
We don't know.
Let's just say that that's producer Mike.
And finally, you say, you know what?
We need somebody who's not producer Mike.
Then you would look to ZipRecruiter.com.
ZipRecruiter sends your job to over 100 of the web's leading job boards, but they don't stop there.
With their powerful matching technology, ZipRecruiter scans thousands of resumes to find people with the right experience and invite them to apply to your job.
ZipRecruiter is incredibly effective.
There's a reason that four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate through the site.
Within the very first day, it is important to get hiring right so that you don't have sound producers who spend most of their days just compiling enemies lists like Stalin.
Right now, my listeners can try ZipRecruiter for free at this exclusive web address.
ZipRecruiter.com slash dailywire.
That is ZipRecruiter.com slash D-A-I-L-Y-W-I-R-E.
ZipRecruiter.com slash dailywire.
ZipRecruiter is indeed the smartest way to hire.
And they also give me leverage over my own employees, which is pretty fantastic.
ZipRecruiter.com slash dailywire.
Okay, back to, back to, Okay, so back to Adam Schiff.
So Schiff gives this long, meandering explanation of everything that Trump did and he fills in all the gaps with everything that he wishes that he could prove that Trump did without actually proving that Trump did any of those things.
And then Chuck Schumer emerges to sum up the testimony and he says, how could anyone listen to Adam Schiff and not demand more witnesses and documents?
And it's like, well, Hold up a second, dude.
You really, really need to explain why it is that if you thought this was so sufficient in the House, you are now calling for more witnesses and documents in the Senate.
This is the big question that the Democrats will never answer.
They will not answer it.
Because the fact is, they could have done a complete investigation.
And their answer is, in the end, they don't want Trump to stand for election because they believe that Trump was illegitimately elected in 2016, and that if he wins in 2020, it will also be illegitimate.
That's a lot more dangerous to democracy than anything Trump did on that phone call with Vladimir Zelensky.
Having one party, and they do this over and over.
It's not just with Trump, right?
They do this with Stacey Abrams, who's supposedly the legitimate governor of Georgia.
You got Hillary Clinton wandering around the woods of Chappaqua explaining she's the actual president of the United States.
When one party refuses to accept the results of elections, like I really do not remember Republicans in widespread fashion refusing to accept the results of 2008 or 2012 with Barack Obama.
We didn't like the results.
We thought the results sucked.
We wish the American people had thought it through a little better.
A lot better.
But there are very few Americans who are like, you know what?
That election was illegitimate.
It was corrupt.
They stole the election.
But Democrats are doing this with nearly every election at this point.
Here is Chuck Schumer, though, saying we need more witnesses.
We need more documents.
But also this impeachment is on solid footing.
I don't see how any senator, Democrat or Republican, could sit on the floor and hear Adam Schiff and not demand witnesses and documents.
There were so many powerful parts of his speech that demanded witnesses and documents.
So many things.
What did Mulvaney say before and after his speech?
What made him rejected?
What did Bolton really think?
The documents, right before the days of the 24th, 25th, and 26th, which we've requested, July, very, very important.
Okay, if they're so important, then why didn't your buddies in the House just wait for it?
And I am amused by the Democrats claiming that we need all of these documents, but no, under no circumstances should we hear from Hunter Biden, whose conduct was at the center of this entire debacle.
Here's Adam Schiff, while maintaining that Republicans should be open to all witnesses and all documents.
Here's Adam Schiff saying, no, why would we call Hunter Biden, who's at the center of this whole thing?
This isn't like some fantasy football trade, as I said yesterday.
This isn't, we'll offer you this if you'll give us that.
We'll offer you a witness that is irrelevant and immaterial, who has no relevant testimony, but a witness that will allow us to smear a presidential candidate if you want to get a legitimate witness.
That's not a trade.
Trials aren't trades for witnesses.
Um, well, why is it that you get to pick the witnesses?
You got to do that in the House, and then you didn't call the ones you wanted, so now you don't get to determine who the witnesses are who are called.
It's pretty amazing.
The Democrats are so out to protect Hunter Biden and Joe Biden that they're basically willing to watch this impeachment go down in flames simply because they're not willing to do a witness trade.
Now, my feeling is, call whoever you want.
I really don't care.
Like, really, I think the American people Generally have a right to know.
I don't care if Bolton gets called.
I don't care if Hunter Biden gets called.
I'm for all of it coming out because I'm always in favor of all of it coming out.
And I don't have a lot of concerns at this point that John Bolton is, and even if I did, I wouldn't care, that John Bolton is going to get up there and say Trump did X, Y, or Z. I think John Bolton is going to say exactly what his aide Fiona Hill said.
But bottom line is that the Democrats want to protect their witnesses and yet they're out there saying that it is utterly corrupt for Republicans not to call the witnesses the Democrats want.
It's pretty astonishing.
Meanwhile, the Republicans are like, OK, this is just this is ridiculous.
Mark Meadows from South Carolina.
He comes out and he was like, guys, it's so ridiculous.
He was on with Sean Hannity.
He said, we're giving out aspirin.
I mean, like we're all falling asleep out here.
Listen, we were giving out aspirin in giant bottles today because, you know, he just kept going on and on and on.
And as Jim Jordan said, it was about lie after lie.
Listen, we quit counting after we had 12 different false statements made by Adam Schiff.
And the fact is he knows better and he continues to try to sell this to the American people.
I can tell you they're not buying it.
We're not buying it.
But more importantly, the senators are not buying it.
Okay, Mark Meadows from North Carolina, not South Carolina, by the way.
And he is correct about this.
Again, the American people have already decided on this, and most of all, they've decided that all this is boring.
Meanwhile, President Trump always his own worst enemy on this sort of stuff.
So Trump is speaking in Davos, and Trump suggests that the Democrats, they don't have the material that they need.
We're doing very well.
I got to watch enough.
I thought our team did a very good job.
But honestly, we have all the material.
means that we have the material.
The Democrats don't have the material.
And so they are speculating about what is in material they don't have.
But this comes off like Trump is trying to hide material, obviously.
We're doing very well.
I got to watch enough.
I thought our team did a very good job.
But honestly, we have all the material.
They don't have the material.
So that came off like he's trying to hide the material.
In reality, he's just saying we have all the material.
We know what's in the material.
They don't.
They're speculating.
But you can certainly read it the way the Democrats are trying to read that.
Val Demings, the House impeachment manager, one of the House impeachment managers for the Democrats, said that's that's real time obstruction.
Well, no, again, you could take him to court.
I'm waiting for it.
But apparently you can't go to the courts and you can't go to the American people.
Only Adam Schiff can save us.
We're going to get to the media just fawning, orgasming over Adam Schiff's performance yesterday.
I mean, it truly is amazing.
They are now Meg Ryan and When Harry Met Sally.
They're at the restaurant and they've ordered the eggs and they are just going to town.
We'll get to that in just one second.
First, let us talk about the inevitability of death.
I know, pretty dark, right?
The fact is that we will all have to pay taxes, unfortunately, and we will all have to die.
And the two may be related.
But the reality is that as you approach your death, every minute of every day, you might be thinking, how can I insure against this on behalf of my family?
Maybe you're not that dark.
Maybe you're just like, you know what?
I need insurance.
Well, the place to go would be PolicyGenius.com.
PolicyGenius makes finding the right life insurance a breeze.
In minutes, you can compare quotes from the top insurers and find your best price.
You could save $1,500 or more a year by using PolicyGenius to compare life insurance policies.
Once you apply, the Policy Genius team will handle all the paperwork and the red tape.
And Policy Genius doesn't just make life insurance easy.
It can also help you find the right home in auto insurance, disability insurance.
Life insurance is a moral obligation.
It is.
It is something that you need to do if you are a responsible adult, if you have a wife, if you have kids, if you have family.
You don't want to deprive them of your income stream if, God forbid, something should happen to you.
It's going to be bad enough if you plot.
Leaving them without any money to deal with it is going to be really rough.
Instead, go to Policy Genius and get the life insurance you need.
Policy Genius.
We will always get the future wrong.
You may not know when you're going to plot, but you can insure against it.
Better get life insurance, right?
Policygenius.com.
Go check them out right now at policygenius.com.
Okay, so the media for their part are over the moon about Adam Schiff.
This is Adam Schiff's moment, guys.
It's his moment.
Here's a slight montage of the media just going hog wild.
Hog wild over Adam Schiff.
Like a teenage boy with his first copy of Hustler.
Here we go.
The media just enjoying the spectacle of manly man, Adam Schiff.
This is really a I am Spartacus moment where, you know, people really need to stand up.
And I do think I wrote the same thing, which was that this was a speech really aimed at the better angels.
And I think Adam Schiff did a really great job.
What I really thought was just amazing about Schiff's presentation is he was speaking not just to the 100 people in the room, he was speaking to 100 years in the future.
This is a speech that kids are going to be given in 2060 at university projects.
There are people in the Senate that call themselves lawyers.
They are admiring him, even if they will never admit it publicly.
A very, very powerful and forceful speech.
Almost two and a half hours, if he was listening, he heard a very, very strong case from Adam Schiff, why he, the President of the United States, should be convicted and removed from office.
Well, I mean, I haven't seen the media.
This says, and Chris Matthews got a tingle up his leg by Barack Obama.
I haven't seen them this excited.
My goodness.
I mean, take a cold shower, guys.
CNN's Jeffrey Toobin was dazzled, dazzled.
He said that Adam Schiff's argument was literally the second best courtroom address he had ever heard in his entire life.
In his entire life, which like, um, no, here's.
Jeffrey Toobin just over the moon about all of this.
Can't calm himself down, Jeffrey Toobin.
Come on, guys.
Let's go.
Let's do this thing.
Go!
I thought it was dazzling.
I thought the way he wove through both the facts of the case and the historical context was really remarkable.
It was the second best courtroom address, since it's like a courtroom, that I ever heard.
The argument that the president extorted, or bribed, or whatever criminal term you want to use, the president of Ukraine to get His political dirt on Joe Biden in return for the $390 million of taxpayer money.
I mean, it's there if you want to see it.
And the question is if you want to see it.
Dazzling, dazzling.
I haven't been this excited since I saw cats for the third time that day, says Jeffrey Toobin.
I haven't been this excited since Dame Judi Dench put on fur and walked around with James Corden.
Oh, my God.
Okay, so just a couple of things about that.
So Jeffrey Toobin, you hear right there, he says he made an absolutely brilliant case that there was extortion and bribery going on.
Well, here's the thing.
Extortion and bribery, as Jeffrey Toobin well knows, are statutory crimes.
You know what's not in any of the impeachment charges?
Extortion or bribery.
Weird.
Weird.
If you can make that strong a case, the most brilliant legal case he's ever heard, as you heard Jeffrey Toobin say, the second most ever, ever.
The first most was the time that Jeffrey Toobin was in third grade and he argued in mock trial.
That time was the best.
But the second best was Adam Schiff.
Well, if he really made that dazzling case, so dazzling.
Jazzy.
It's dazzling.
If it was so dazzling, then why didn't the Democrats include the charges that he talked about?
OK, meanwhile, the other members of the media also going crazy over this.
And I mean, literally crazy.
Joe Lockhart.
Who is an analyst for CNN, tweeted this out.
Overheard a convo between two Republican senators who only watch Fox News.
Is this stuff real?
I haven't heard about any of this before.
I thought it was all about a server.
If half the stuff Schiff is saying is true, we're up bleeps creek.
Hope the White House has exculpatory evidence.
Right, so that was at 11.13 a.m.
yesterday.
And he tweets that out, and then about 10 minutes later, he tweets out, okay, maybe I made up the conversation, but you know that's exactly what they're thinking.
Really?
So you're just making up conversations now, in your own mind, about what Republicans are thinking watching this thing?
Truly?
Really, Salazar?
Meanwhile, over at MSNBC, they were enraged that people are not paying closer attention to the impeachment.
Why aren't people watching?
Why?
Rachel Maddow getting very angry.
Chris Hayes wearing Rachel Maddow's glasses, so she can't wear her glasses at the same time.
There's only one pair of glasses over at MSNBC.
And if Rachel Maddow is wearing them, then Chris Hayes cannot be.
They're both on screen at the same time, and thus, only he can wear glasses.
Everyone, very, very upset because senators were leaving.
Senator, like, Dianne Feinstein was like, this is boring, I'm out.
I have to say, old Dianne Feinstein is one of my favorite Democrats.
Like, I'm, Dianne Feinstein's a terrible senator.
She's been a senator nearly as long as I have been alive on this earth in the state of California.
And Dianne Feinstein's been an awful senator forever.
She of the lifeless eyes, doll's eyes.
But, yesterday, Dianne Feinstein was like, this is boring, I'm out.
She's like, I'm old.
I'm done.
And she went home, took a couple of pills, took a nap.
And so people on MSNBC were super mad, like, why can't you guys even stay and listen to the most important impeachment of our lifetime?
Chris, why can't I have my glasses?
Says Rachel Maddow.
There are some sketch artists in the room who are actually drawing some pictures of what senators are doing, including senators who are sleeping.
But it is a little bit weird that we all thought it was within the rules that they had to be there.
These people's jobs is to do this.
I mean, this is literally the job.
If you find it too annoying or frustrating or uncomfortable to sit for eight hours and listen, you can resign tomorrow and go get another job.
Oh, well, I mean, you could get a job on MSNBC like Claire McCaskill after you lose your Senate seat.
I mean, you could do that and sit right next to Chris Hayes.
He was wearing the glasses of outrage.
She wasn't wearing the glasses of outrage, so she was more slightly perturbed, but he was wearing the glasses of MSNBC outrage, so he was very perturbed yesterday.
OK, note to the media.
No one cares.
I'm sorry to break it to you.
People do not care.
Seriously, they don't care.
They're tired of this.
They're bored with it.
Even if people want Trump impeached, they know this is going nowhere.
And so this has become just a foregone conclusion.
And you guys can can You guys can just revel in your own fantasy world where all of this deeply matters, but the reality is that while you are micturating about all of this, while you are just sitting there and you are obsessed with every little detail, most Americans have jobs and lives, and most Americans are not all that interested in any of this.
And that's bad news for the Democrats, because as we move toward 2020, that means that the focus is going to shift from this whole impeachment silliness to the actual 2020 race.
And right now there is an open battle breaking up between Bernie Sanders and Joe Biden.
We're going to get to that in just one second.
First, if you know anything about me, you most likely heard me talk about my ardent support for the pro-life cause.
You may also remember that last year I streamed my podcast live from the March for Life in D.C., gave a speech to the hundreds of thousands of people.
Marching for the cause.
By the way, President Trump will be the first sitting president to speak at the March for Life this year, which is just fantastic.
Well, what you may not be aware of...
It's how much grief this caused The Daily Wire from our political opponents, adversaries, leftist censors.
Our advertisers were targeted by left-wing quote-unquote media watchdogs or left-wing hacks.
We lost a bunch of revenue for no reason because I didn't say anything wrong and I would say every single word that I said at that march over again a thousand times.
That was not the first time nor will it be the last time that we are attacked in an attempt to shut down pro-life voices.
That is why we are teaming up with live action.
So live action This is a wonderful pro-life charity run by my friend Lila Rose.
I give money personally to live action.
They do incredible work in the space from raising awareness and education on the abortion issue to undercover videos that expose Planned Parenthood and other abortion clinics and they have met with the left-wing censorship that you see on social media.
They were banned from advertising on Twitter because they went after Planned Parenthood.
They've been banned from Pinterest altogether for quote-unquote spreading medical misinformation like babies are babies.
And so we are going to help them out, and you should help out the pro-life cause.
Right now, when you become a dailywire.com member, a portion of your membership, not only your whole membership helps keep us on the air giving the pro-life message out there, but also from now until January 31st, a portion of any dailywire.com membership will be donated to live action with promo code liveaction to support awareness and education around the world on this issue.
So join dailywire.com, make your pro-life voice heard.
You are listening to the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast in the nation.
So as we draw nearer to the 2020 election, it becomes obvious that this whole impeachment thing is going absolutely nowhere.
To the great disappointment of many people, both right and left, there's actually a group out there today that had pushed out an ad suggesting that President Pence is gonna be a thing, that Mike Pence is actually going to be President of the United States.
That, of course, is not true.
President Trump will be in office when the election takes place.
Meanwhile, I'm amazed, it is amazing, the sort of Hypocrisy of the media when it comes to who should testify and who should not.
Joe Biden was asked yesterday whether he would testify, whether he would sit as a witness if he was called before the Senate.
And he has said before that he will not, which apparently, according to the Democrats, amounts to obstruction of Congress.
Because Donald Trump has said that he's asserting executive privilege over people and that they cannot testify.
And then he was charged with obstruction of Congress and impeached for it in the House.
Joe Biden is openly saying he will not cooperate if subpoenaed.
That's pretty much the same thing.
Here's Joe Biden repeating that.
This is a constitutional issue, and we're not going to turn it into a farce, into some kind of political theater.
They're trying to turn it into political theater, but I want no part of being any part of that.
And I have no problem, as you'll find out the rest of this campaign, debating Trump, debating the majority leader.
Well, no, they actually did not have any problem debating you, which is why you've been a failed presidential candidate 82 times.
But Joe Biden saying that he will not sit, again, it's not going to look great for him in 2020 when President Trump dumps on the Hunter Biden story, right?
That Hunter Biden thing ain't going away.
It isn't.
His son is a ne'er-do-well, a drug-addled ne'er-do-well, apparently for most of his adult life.
And the fact that he was going around picking up bags of cash for having a last name Biden is not going to look good for old Joe.
Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders has opened up the guns on Joe Biden because he's got two weeks to win Iowa, basically.
If Biden wins Iowa, the sucker is over before it begins.
So that means that Bernie really does have to win Iowa.
His people are now releasing ads targeting Joe Biden for suggesting that he would restructure Social Security.
One of the things that is hilarious about the Democratic Party is that their ads basically rip on people for saying practical things.
The reality is that social security is unsustainable.
It is unsustainable.
It is a giant pyramid scheme by which a bunch of young people are paying into a fund they will never see.
And yet, everybody who is older in the country is being told that we are going to adjust the benefits that you receive by cost of living.
So it's not dependent on what you contributed.
It's a defined benefits plan.
It is not a defined contribution plan, which means that my grandmother paid in like 50 bucks a month 40 years ago, and she's receiving a couple thousand dollars a month from Social Security.
Good for her.
The problem is that everybody else is paying for it.
That's going to have to be restructured.
Everybody knows it's going to have to be restructured.
Everybody knows that we're going to have to either raise the retirement age or we're going to have to lower the benefits.
That's not for people who are current retirees.
That's for future retirees.
Everybody knows that.
Joe Biden once said it.
And now Bernie Sanders is going after him, because in Bernie Sanders' world, anytime you say you're going to lower benefits, this means that you are evil, because money grows on trees, and Bernie Sanders can simply pull it directly out of his rather elderly posterior.
Here is Bernie Sanders going after Joe Biden.
When I argued if we should freeze federal spending, I meant Social Security as well.
I meant Medicare and Medicaid.
I meant veterans benefits.
I meant every single solitary thing in the government.
And I not only tried it once, I tried it twice, I tried it a third time, and I tried it a fourth time!
Well, we've got some bad news for them!
We are not gonna cut Social Security, we're gonna expand it!
Pretty brutal.
Now, what Biden is saying is he's saying that particular quote is taken out of context.
But the reality is that Biden has said in the past that he would be interested in revising Social Security because this is what any practical politician in history has said.
Okay, that is a reality.
Now, Joe Biden is firing back and he is saying that Bernie Sanders is basically a liar.
So this thing is starting to get ugly.
Here is Joe Biden going after Bernie.
They've even accused Joe Biden of supporting Paul Ryan's cuts to Social Security.
Bernie's campaign is not telling the truth.
Joe Biden has repeatedly voted to save Social Security.
He and President Obama beat back Republican attempts to privatize it.
And in 2012, Joe Biden even said he didn't support those cuts to Paul Ryan.
We will be no part of a voucher program or the privatization of Social Security.
Biden's plan protects Social Security and will increase benefits.
Bernie's negative attacks won't change the truth.
OK, so the fact is that he is correct that Bernie Sanders is lying about his record.
But Bernie Sanders is also correct.
In the past, Joe Biden has made statements talking about how we do need to restructure Social Security because he is not a completely insane human being.
Bernie happens to be completely insane.
And so he can just keep saying that we are going to sign endless checks to people without any source of funding for those endless checks.
But all of this is beginning to get to old Joe's.
So old Joe yesterday was on the campaign trail and he was approached by a reporter, not sure for which outlet, and this reporter started asking about Joe Biden, about Bernie Sanders.
And Joe Biden turns around and basically goes nuts on the reporter.
Now, if this had been Donald Trump, it would have been, look at his attack on the press.
Look at his attack on the press.
But it's Joe Biden.
And so we just say it's OK.
Why wasn't his apology enough, Mr. Vice President?
He apologized for saying that I was corrupt.
You're getting nervous, man.
Calm down.
It's OK.
He apologized for saying that I was corrupt.
He didn't say anything about whether or not I was telling the truth about Social Security.
OK, and then he kind of pounds and thumps the guy in the chest and walks away.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.
Old Joe kind of losing it out there.
Old Joe kind of losing it out there.
Meanwhile, Joe Biden is sort of half attacking Bernie.
Bernie is sort of half attacking Biden.
But it's obvious that they are not fond of one another at this point.
Joe Biden was on MSNBC's Morning Joe, and he explained that he will not call Bernie a liar over the Social Security smear.
He said sometimes the staff gets ahead of the candidate trying to give Bernie a way out.
Bernie is not taking that way out, by the way.
Did Bernie Sanders lie about you? - I don't know.
I don't know.
Look, sometimes campaign staff gets a little ahead of the candidate.
You know, it's the same thing.
Bernie, someone on the staff wrote and said Joe Biden is corrupt, and Bernie personally apologized to me.
I accept the apology.
But the facts are that I have 100% rating from the groups that rate Social Security, those who support Social Security.
I think at a minimum it was taken out of context what they did.
And that, of course, is his way of attempting to lower the tension because he feels like he's winning in Iowa.
Meanwhile, Bernie is ramping it up.
The New York Times is reporting that Sanders has opened up the guns.
Mr. Sanders' newly combative posture has been met with some relief inside his campaign.
With the two men competing for an overlapping slice of working-class voters, some top aides have been quietly urging Mr. Sanders to draw more explicit contrast with the former vice president.
Not only was such an offensive help Mr. Sanders whittle away at Mr. Biden's support, some advisors believe, it would also satisfy supporters and donors to Mr. Sanders who crave a fight.
Some also think he pulled punches against Hillary Clinton in 2016 to his detriment.
Since the fall, they've encouraged him to go after Biden aggressively on the debate stage, a strategy Sanders followed tepidly.
During the debate last week in Des Moines, some advisors had prodded Sanders to confront Biden on social security and were frustrated the topic did not come up.
Sanders seemed to telegraph his willingness to engage in rougher campaigning during a question and answer session with reporters this month in Iowa City.
He said, we will contrast records.
Nothing wrong with that.
That is what a serious campaign is about.
And his aides are saying that he's beginning to open up the guns.
As I say, right now, the polling in Iowa does have Joe Biden significantly ahead.
There are two polls with Joe Biden, six points ahead.
The minute that Joe Biden wins Iowa, this thing is over for Bernie Sanders and Bernie Sanders knows it.
Again, his entire campaign is based on pie-in-the-sky kind of nonsense, so why the hell would he not attack Joe Biden over restructuring Social Security, which is a thing that everybody knows has to get done at some point.
Okay, meanwhile, President Trump is over in Davos, and he is not the celebrated voiceover in Davos.
The celebrated voiceover in Davos is 17-year-old Greta Thunberg.
I know, she's 17.
I didn't know she was 17.
I mean, the way the media portray her, it's like she's 14, but she's actually a 17-year-old.
That does not mean she's an adult.
It means she's a public figure, and she is due for any sort of criticism any other public figure would receive.
I know.
I was writing a syndicated column when I was 17, 18 years old.
Wrote a lot of dumb stuff.
Being 17 and 18 means that sometimes you say dumb stuff.
So that's not on Greta Thunberg.
It's on everybody who takes her seriously.
And the fact that Greta Thunberg is propped up there as some sort of great intellectual force is truly astonishing because, again, her entire spiel is, I'm a child and I'm very angry.
Sir, that's her entire thing.
She's a child and she's angry.
And she says this, right?
She's not hiding the ball.
She's a child who's angry and she goes around yelling at adults.
And the adults, who wish to use that anger as a sort of club with which to beat people who disagree, they say, look at this child.
Look at this child.
This is an angry child.
Why don't you listen to this angry child?
My answer is, I generally don't listen to angry children.
I have two of them.
There's no reason for me to listen to angry children that I don't actually love.
I like my own kids.
I don't know Greta Thunberg.
Maybe she's wonderful.
No clue.
But I'm not sure why I would listen to her yell about global warming when she proposes solutions that are patently insane.
And I say that advisedly.
Her solutions to global warming are patently insane, and yet they are propped up by everybody in the media.
She's a great heroine.
We put her on the cover of magazines because her entire agenda is to go around and scream at adults about how terrible the adults are because they are not doing what she wants them to do.
So this sort of raises the question, what exactly does she want them to do?
Right, because after all, if she is screaming at the adults aren't doing it, it would be good to know what exactly she wants them to do.
So here's what Greta Thunberg wants the adults to do.
And this has been again, the adult Al Gore shows up and he's like, I'm here.
The earth has a fever.
And Greta Thunberg is the only thing that can cure this fever, the Al Gore fever.
So he was there praising her.
She's so important.
It's deeply important.
So Greta Thunberg, 17 year old.
We don't need a low carbon economy.
We don't need to lower emissions.
Her solution to the problem of global warming.
And it is crazy, guys.
We don't need a low carbon economy.
We don't need to lower emissions.
Our emissions have to stop if we are to have a chance to stay below the 1.5 degree target.
And until we have the technologies that at scale can put our emissions to minus, that we must forget about net zero We need real zero.
Not net zero?
So net zero means that we sort of don't produce any additional emissions beyond the rate at which we are currently producing.
Real zero?
So real zero means that you actually shut down the entire economy of the world.
Of the world.
And lest you think that I'm exaggerating, what exactly she's calling for, here's Greta Thunberg, what she actually said at Davos, and she was praised by the media for this.
The real reason she's getting praised, of course, is because she yells at the adults, and what the left loves to do is prop up children who yell at adults, and that way, if you attack what the children are saying, if you say, listen, seems like a nice enough young woman, like, I'm not arguing with her passion, that's fine, she has an agenda, that's fine too.
I'm arguing with her agenda.
That way the left can say, you're attacking a child, don't you see?
They do the same thing with regard to gun control.
They love trotting out children so that they can say, you are attacking this poor victimized child?
And it's like, well, no, I think that the argument's bad.
I'm not attacking the kid.
But the reason that the left props her up is that she says crazy things, but then she also says that she's mad at the adults.
Why won't you listen to the children?
The children are the wisest among us.
Here's Greta Thunberg ripping on the adults.
And this is what, of course, has made her a media phenomenon.
I've been warned that telling people to panic about the climate crisis is a very dangerous thing to do.
But don't worry, it's fine.
Trust me, I've done this before and I can assure you it doesn't lead to anything.
And for the record, when we children tell you to panic, we're not telling you to go on like before.
We're not telling you to rely on technologies that don't even exist today at scale and that science says perhaps never will.
We're telling you to panic.
We're telling you to panic.
I'm telling you to panic.
I said I wanted you to panic.
She said this one year ago.
I came to Davos and told you our house is on fire.
I said I wanted you to panic.
Now, normally, when anybody tells you to panic, that's a bad idea.
When a child tells you to panic, you're like, no, you're a child.
I'm not going to panic over the possible increase in global temperature of, at maximum, 4 degrees Celsius, according to the IPCC, over the course of the next century.
In fact, what we should be attempting is mitigation, right?
We should be attempting is adaptation.
This is not to say that we can't take measures that would lower carbon emissions.
In fact, the United States fracking for natural gas has lowered our carbon emissions dramatically.
Nuclear power lowers emissions dramatically.
But her actual proposal, the one that's being praised, quote, We demand, at this year's World Economic Forum, participants from all companies, banks, institutions, and governments immediately halt all investments in fossil fuel exploration and extraction, immediately end all fossil fuel subsidies, and immediately and completely divest from fossil fuels.
Every company is supposed to stop using fossil fuels.
Every government is supposed to stop using fossil fuels.
Every institution is supposed to stop using fossil fuels.
She says, we don't want these things done by 2050, 2030, even 2021.
We want this done now.
It may seem like we're asking for a lot.
And you will, of course, say that we are naive.
But this is just the very minimum amounts of effort that is needed to start the rapid, sustainable transition.
Um, well, since you are talking about the end of civilization as it currently exists, yeah, that seems like a lot.
I'm just gonna put it out there that that seems like a lot and it does not seem justified by the available evidence.
It is always easier to get people to rally around a problem than it is to get them to rally around a solution.
When it comes to big problems, you should actually be providing real solutions, not nonsense, and then trotting out children to claim that if you don't embrace solutions that literally no one is willing to embrace, right?
Al Gore would not implement that.
He would not.
If you were president of the United States, he would not.
The Paris Accords were not this.
There's not an adult on the planet who sees this proposal as anything other than patently insane.
And yet they're all out there like Greta Thunberg, hero of the Republic.
It's so, it's so irritating and so silly.
Okay, time for a quick thing that I like, and then we'll get to some things that I hate.
So, things that I like today.
So I put this in things I hate originally, but it's actually a thing that I love.
So Taylor Swift has a new Netflix documentary.
And they released the trailer for this thing.
And it is spectacular.
It is spectacularly awful.
It is wonderful in every way.
It's a parody of itself.
Sort of like the Cats trailer.
Like you watch it and you're like, this can't be real.
This can't be real.
Like this isn't real, right?
Like she's making fun of herself, right?
No.
Wrong!
It is completely sincere.
It is completely and utterly sincere.
Now listen, I'm no Taylor Swift fan.
I used to have this argument with my producer, Senya, many a day.
We would argue about the merits of Taylor Swift, and I would say she's overrated, and Senya would say, no, she's the greatest songwriter of the last 190 years!
Well, I think we can both agree.
Senya, wherever you are today, I think we can both agree.
That this particular documentary trailer is one of the greatest things in history and also one of the worst things in history.
So Taylor Swift, you have to recognize that Taylor Swift's whole spiel is that she was the young girl who wrote her own songs and was charming and somewhat innocent.
And then she had to feminist it up, gang, because she got pressure from the media.
And the media said, where is Taylor Swift?
Why won't Taylor Swift sound off about same-sex marriage?
Taylor Swift's silence is deafening on transgender bathrooms.
Why won't Taylor Swift comment on whether Fallon Fox should be able to fight women?
Where is Taylor Swift when you need her discussing climate change?
And Taylor Swift, after a few years of this and saying nothing, she decided, you know what?
They're right.
I gotta get woke or go broke, baby!
So now, they've cut this Netflix documentary trailer.
And it is so good that I'm gonna play it for you.
I'm going to stop and start it because I must comment on it.
Every element of this is glorious.
From the background music, to the cues, to the language that she uses, it is all so manipulative.
It is all so mechanistic.
You can see all the years moving in real time.
She's trying to show that this is the authentic Taylor Swift.
All it shows is that she was always a media creation, and it is wonderful in every way.
There's a movie, if you haven't seen it, and you don't mind like R-rated humor, like very R-rated humor.
There's a movie called Pop Star, Never Stop, Never Stopping.
And the basic plot of the movie is that there is a person who is a pop star played by Andy Samberg, and he cuts an album, becomes a big hit, and then he starts to lose popularity and he realizes that he has to go political.
And one of the songs that he cuts is a song called Equal Rights, I'm Not Gay, and the entire song is about same-sex marriage and how wonderful it is, but he keeps having to interject and explain that he's not gay because he's uncomfortable with the fact that anybody might think he's gay, so he keeps talking about people should be able to marry each other.
Sports!
Right?
It's fantastic.
And the entire movie is basically that.
Okay, this trailer is the trailer for Popstar, Never Stop Never Stopping 2, Taylor Swift edition.
Let's play this thing, gang.
It's fantastic.
Just gonna go have fun.
No one out there that I know of in the audience actively hates me.
Not get dead face.
Ready to do this?
Ready.
Totally ready.
She's a victim, guys.
She's such a victim.
Throughout my whole career, label executives would just say, a nice girl doesn't force their opinions on people.
A nice girl smiles and waves and says thank you.
I became the person everyone wanted me to be.
Pause it, please.
It's spectacular.
It's so spectacular.
The sad background piano music.
Oh my god, it's so sad.
It was the label executives, guys.
It wasn't her.
It wasn't that she was working in order to have a big career by not offending people.
Label executives said crazy things like, don't be mean to people and say thank you and please.
And eat with a fork and knife and keep your elbows off the table and don't jump into politics because you're just a musician.
But they were holding me back.
You know, they were enshrouding me.
If you actually could see this, this is why I should subscribe so you can see this nonsense.
They actually have in the footage her putting on like a black cloak because it's just showing how they were enshrouding her.
Enshrouding her.
In the cloak of patriarchy!
But don't worry, guys.
The music will rise.
And as the music rises, you will see that Taylor Swift is, in fact, a woke political feminist.
Let the music rise!
Taylor, free yourself, Taylor!
Go, Taylor, go!
I think that Taylor Swift, she is annoying.
All her model friends.
Going through guys like a truck.
She's too skinny.
Nobody physically saw me for a year.
And that was what I thought they wanted.
I had to deconstruct an entire belief system.
Toss it out and reject it.
It woke me up from constantly feeling like I was fighting for people's respect.
It was happiness without anyone else's input.
Yes.
I want to do this.
I need to be on the right side of history.
She needs to be on the right side of history, guys.
It feels awesome.
The music grows, guys.
Did you hear it rise?
My favorite part?
Okay, there's so many good things about this trailer.
So many good things.
Stop it for a second, please.
So many great things about this trailer.
So, I love the part where they're like, I disappeared for a year.
There's footage of her.
No one saw her for a year, except the camera that was following her for a year, apparently.
And then, every element of this is so wonderful.
Every element of it is so glorious.
And then she realized that she wasn't living for herself, guys.
The hundreds of millions of dollars that she was worth, and the throngs of admiring young women, it was not for her.
She wasn't living for She was living for herself.
She was living for the label executives, guys.
And then she realized it was time to use her voice in a new way.
To say the most hackneyed, trite, politically leftist garbage you could possibly think of.
To cut a song about gay marriage 10 years after it was legalized.
I mean, that was what was necessary.
And that is when the music started to rise and she became a feminist hero.
And oh my God.
And then the little cutaway to show that she's authentic.
That these songs are not produced by other people.
A little cutaway of her, with like her friend, on the couch.
Like, me, he, he!
Like, oh my god, guys!
We just came up with it!
We just came up with Sgt.
Pepper, guys!
It's unbelievable!
This is, ah!
The genius!
The workings of the mind!
Ah!
Okay, the re- We have to finish the trailer.
Because we have to.
Because it is obligated by law for us to finish this trailer.
Because if we do not, then we will have misserved our own constituents.
But, play the end of this trailer.
It's so good.
It's so good!
I feel really good about not feeling muzzled anymore.
She's not muzzled, guys!
It's beyond everything I think I know.
What are you doing?
I'm turning on my party shoes for vocals.
Good.
We've never really gotten a good take without them, have we?
No.
Wow!
It's beyond everything I thought I knew.
Well, see, what's weird about that is what I thought I knew is that she was a complete media creation and creation by her managers.
And now what I think I know is that she's a complete media creation and a creation by her managers, except now they told her that she better get woke.
And so she got woke, and now they produced an entire sop piece documentary about her to explain that she was always woke, it's just she was muzzled.
Because nothing says muzzled quite like being a hundred million dollar singer.
Who can say anything she wants at any time and say, like, literally anything.
That's muscling, guys.
It was just, I mean, it was like the Soviet Union in her life.
And then she broke free.
She broke free of the shackles and she became a fierce, independent, fierce, fierce, with an S at the end, fierce, independent woman.
OK, this is what.
This is why Donald Trump is president.
I'm sorry to tell you this, this is why Donald Trump is president.
Because everyone who watches this thing, who has a semi-functional prefrontal cortex, understands how produced and stupid this is, and the fact that these are our cultural betters lecturing us all, and that we're supposed to take this seriously?
And now when Taylor Swift says, I think Donald Trump is a sexist, we're supposed to be like, oh my god, you know what?
She was muzzled before, but now she speaks only truth, Taylor Swift!
She speaks only truth!
She's a feminist hero!
I love it so much.
I want to take that.
I want to frame the entire trailer.
I want that entire trailer on my wall so I can just hit that button and revel in the sophistry and the production value and the over-the-top self-congratulation of the celebrity class.
Where is Ricky Gervais when you need him?
That is spectacular stuff.
And anybody who buys into the myth of Taylor Swift at this point, my goodness, guys, that is one of the most produced human beings.
On Planet Earth, and it just shows, and the attempts at authenticity are so rich and rewarding and wonderful.
Alrighty, I've run out of time for things I hate because I just loved that trailer too much.
I'm sorry, I loved it too much.
But, I wish to remind you, there's actually a pretty cool thing out there that I should recommend.
We sent our own Michael Knowles away from the office, so that in and of itself is excellent.
We sent him to DC, and he's doing a brand new podcast co-hosted by Senator Ted Cruz, titled Verdict.
It is actually like a review of the trial.
They're doing the impeachment trial.
They're doing it like in real time as the thing ends.
They're putting together this podcast.
So you get like this real time update on what's going on from Senator Cruz, who, of course, is watching this thing firsthand and is involved in everything.
Michael Knowles being useful for once.
Go check out Verdict on Apple podcast, Spotify, anywhere else you get your podcast is pretty cool and it is worth.
It is indeed worth the listen.
Alrighty, we'll be back here later today with two additional hours of content.
Otherwise, we'll see you here tomorrow for much, much more.
I'm Ben Shapiro.
Shapiro, this is The Ben Shapiro Show.
The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Colton Haas.
Directed by Mike Joyner.
Executive producer Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer Jonathan Hay.
Supervising producer Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Assistant director Pavel Lydowsky.
Technical producer Austin Stevens.
Playback and media operated by Nick Sheehan.
Associate producer Katie Swinnerton.
Edited by Adam Siovitz.
Audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.
Hair and makeup is by Nika Geneva.
The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.
Copyright Daily Wire 2020.
On The Matt Walsh Show, we're not just discussing politics.
We're talking culture, faith, family, all of the things that are really important to you.
▲
Export Selection