Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Nov. 25, 2020 - The Ben Shapiro Show

01:10:05

The Media Can’t Wait To Kiss Biden’s Ass | Ep. 1145

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	As Joe Biden prepares his team, the media can't help but drool.
	The culture wars continue and deepen as the left feels its oats and Democrats try to grab control of the U.S.
	Senate.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
	I protect my data with a VPN.
	So should you.
	Visit expressvpn.com.
	Slash, Ben, we're going to get to all the news of the day in just one second.
	First, let's talk about that cell phone bill.
	So you've been spending way too much money on your cell phone bill.
	I know this because I used to spend way too much money on my cell phone bill as well.
	Well, now I use Pure Talk USA, and so should you.
	Pure Talk USA.
	It's a veteran run wireless company.
	Think AT&T, but much better.
	They understand what it means to serve.
	Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile.
	If you're with them, you're overpaying pure and simple.
	Pure Talk can easily save you over $400 a year.
	Listen, here's what you need.
	Unlimited talk, text, and 2 gigs of data.
	Not unlimited data, 2 gigs of data for just $20 a month.
	If you go over on that data usage, they don't charge you for it.
	So why would you be paying for unlimited data when you need 2 gigs?
	And if you go over that, and they still don't charge you.
	Pure Talk is easy.
	It's the easiest decision you will make today.
	You can keep your phone and your number, or get great deals on the latest iPhones and Androids as well.
	Many phone companies will try to intentionally confuse you about what it is that is in your phone package.
	That's so they can upcharge you.
	Instead, grab your mobile phone, dial pound 250, and say, Ben Shapiro.
	When you do, you'll save 50% off your first month.
	Dial pound 250, say keyword Ben Shapiro to get started.
	Pure Talk is simply smarter wireless.
	Dial pound 250, say keyword Ben Shapiro to get started.
	The media just couldn't wait for this moment.
	They couldn't wait for the moment when they could begin treating Joe Biden as the president-elect of the United States.
	Now, as we have said many times, formally he is not president-elect of the United States until December 14th.
	On a legal level, Trump has still lawsuits outgoing.
	The chances that he's gonna win those lawsuits are of course very low right now, given the evidence that we have before us, but the media couldn't wait for this.
	They couldn't wait for it.
	And this is what created Trump in the first place, is the fact that your media, the people who are supposed to bring you truth, the people who are supposed to be objective, All they are good for is cheering on Democrats.
	All they are good for is sneering at you, sneering at your priorities, sneering at your policy preferences, sneering at you personally.
	This is what your objective media do.
	And they made Quan during the Trump administration.
	They made Bank during the Trump administration, playing this little game where they pretended to be objective while characterizing you as deplorable and characterizing Trump As an evil, orange, Hitlerian piece of crap, right?
	This is how they made their money.
	If you look at the subscription numbers on the New York Times and the Washington Post, they skyrocketed.
	Why?
	Because they were doing fan service to a liberal audience.
	That is what they are for.
	And now they're going to go right back to that fan service.
	They're going to go right back to it.
	Okay, so yesterday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average reached 30,000.
	The media immediately began trumpeting this, because this was evidence that the markets love Joe Biden.
	Or alternatively, this is evidence that the markets are kind of happy with status quo, and they understand that Joe Biden is unlikely to be able to do anything, given the fact that Congress is likely to be Republican, or at least the Senate is likely to be Republican.
	So, President Trump came out for about 60 seconds and he announced that the stock market reached $30,000.
	Now, five seconds ago, when Trump talked about the stock market, the entire media laughed at him.
	The entire media suggested the stock market is not a good reflection of how Americans think.
	Kamala Harris said in an open debate, the stock market doesn't matter because 50% of Americans don't have money in the stock market.
	But now, the media were all out there chomping at the bit to try and credit Joe Biden with the increase in the stock market.
	By the way, what worthy of note, when the stock market jumped after the last election, the media tried to credit it to Barack Obama instead of to Donald Trump.
	So you see how the game works.
	When a Republican takes office, any stock market growth is the result of the Democratic predecessor.
	When a Democrat is supposedly elected, then that Democrat immediately is credited with all gains in the stock market.
	When a Republican is in charge and the stock market is going up, the stock market doesn't matter.
	Only rich people care about the stock market.
	Not true, by the way.
	There are plenty of people who have money in 401ks and that 401k is invested in stocks and bonds.
	Okay, but President Trump comes out and he says, look at that, the stock market's over 30,000 and the media mock him mercilessly for it.
	Here was President Trump yesterday.
	The stock market's just broken 30,000.
	Never been broken, that number.
	That's a sacred number, 30,000.
	Nobody thought they'd ever see it.
	That's the ninth time since the beginning of 2020.
	And it's the 48th time that we've broken records during the Trump administration.
	And I just want to congratulate all the people within the administration that work so hard.
	And most importantly, I want to congratulate the people of our country because there are no people like you.
	Okay, now let's be very, very clear.
	What exactly happened with the stock market here?
	What happened is that the stock market does not like uncertainty.
	The stock market hates new information.
	When there's a vast change upon the land, the stock market absolutely hates it.
	Okay, so if Democrats had taken the Senate, the stock market would not have jumped at the same way.
	If there had been no coronavirus vaccine being developed, the stock market would still be in the doldrums.
	In the last three weeks, we've had news that Republicans are likely to keep the Senate, and we've had news that the Biden administration, when it comes in, if it comes in in January, is likely to pick Janet Yellen, who's a longtime Federal Reserve insider.
	Jerome Powell was not really very different from Janet Yellen in terms of governance.
	And we also know that these vaccines are on their way, so the stock market is pricing that in.
	It's not that the stock market loves Joe Biden, and it's not that the stock market dislikes Donald Trump.
	After all, the stock market continues to rise radically under President Trump.
	Doesn't matter.
	The media credit Biden with this thing because the media cannot wait to attribute every good thing to a Democrat and every bad thing to a Republican.
	Here's how the New York Times reported this.
	Stocks on Wall Street rallied to records on Tuesday as key states certified Joe Biden's victory in the presidential election.
	And news that Janet Yellen will be the next treasury secretary raised expectations for a big push of government spending to aid the economy.
	Now, do you think it's more about Biden or do you think it's more about him not selecting, say, Elizabeth Warren for his secretary of the treasury, which is a real possibility?
	you The growth expectations were bolstered by news late on Monday that Yellen, the former chair of the Federal Reserve and a proponent of government intervention in the economy, is Biden's pick for Treasury Secretary.
	Yellen said in October the economy needed extraordinary fiscal support during the pandemic after two decades at the central bank, analysts say, should be able to foster a close relationship between the two institutions.
	OK, now again, this has very little to do with Biden because Jerome Powell, who is running the Federal Reserve, pretty similar to Janet Yellen, and Steve Mnuchin, who's the Treasury Secretary, is basically a Democrat.
	I mean, Steve Mnuchin was a lifelong Democrat, actually, until Trump selected him for his cabinet.
	And Steve Mnuchin was happy to spend oodles and oodles of money.
	So nothing really changed.
	It doesn't matter.
	The media have to pretend that this is Joe Biden's stock market rally.
	And that the stock market matters again, right?
	So the media are just on board with all this.
	They're here for it, man.
	They are so excited.
	They're also excited about Joe Biden's cabinet picks.
	We're going to get to those crappy cabinet picks in just one second, because they really are pretty garbage.
	First, we hear the stories in the news all the time.
	You hear somebody has to defend their family.
	God forbid they have to use a firearm.
	And then they get arrested because they didn't know the law well.
	They end up in the middle of the legal process.
	Well, this is why it's important that if you own a firearm, or if you intend on owning a firearm, you know how to use it, you know when to use it, and you have the legal defense necessary in case, God forbid, you have to use it in your own defense.
	This is why you need the U.S.
	Concealed Carry Association.
	The U.S.
	Concealed Carry Association will give you the complete Concealed Carry and Family Defense Guide, and it is 100% free.
	In it, you will learn how to detect attackers before they see you, how to survive a mass shooting, the safest and most dangerous places to sit in a restaurant, how to responsibly own and store a gun, especially if you have little kids, and a whole lot more.
	It's a 164-page guide.
	It is loaded with valuable information.
	Just text my name, Ben, to 87222 and you get instant access and a chance to win a thousand bucks so you can buy a gun to protect your family.
	Text Ben to 87222 right now.
	Join my friends over at the USCCA.
	They have indispensable resources for gun owners and would be gun owners.
	Get instant access to that complete concealed carry and family defense guide for free and a chance to win a thousand bucks by texting Ben to 87222, 87222.
	Okay, so Joe Biden's picks for his cabinet are indeed all part of the foreign policy blob as it is called in Washington, D.C.
	A group of supposed intellectuals and pseudo-intellectuals who've been wrong about every major foreign policy issue of their lifetimes, but speak in honeyed tones.
	You've got Tony Blinken over at Secretary of State, who has spent the last couple of decades being wrong about everything from injecting American troops into Syria to the Iran deal, which he says was just a godsend, a wonderful godsend.
	Jake Sullivan, Over at National Security Advisor, Spott, who spent the last few years talking about the evils of Trump pulling out of the Iran deal.
	By the way, a move that precipitated the rise of an alliance in the Middle East that spans now all the way from India to Greece, essentially, against the Iranian threat.
	You've got the foreign policy blob of John Kerry, the former Secretary of State under Barack Obama, worst Secretary of State in American history.
	He will be back as a climate envoy, which means that Joe Biden is serious about climate change and the media are there for that as well.
	So yesterday, Kamala Harris did a did a presentation.
	Biden and Kamala Harris did a presentation of all of the members of the new cabinet, and it was like a bizarre awards show for career bureaucrats who suck at their jobs.
	It was really incredible.
	It's like the Oscars for foreign policy mush minds. Here is Kamala Harris talking about, we selected a cabinet that looks like America, and then you look behind her, it's just a bunch of white dudes. Here's Kamala Harris.
	When Joe asked me to be his running mate, he told me about his commitment to making sure we selected a cabinet that looks like America.
	That reflects the best of our nation.
	And that's what we have done.
	Today's nominees and appointees come from different places.
	They bring a range of different life and professional experiences and perspectives.
	And they also share something else in common.
	An unwavering belief.
	In America's ideals.
	What?
	An unshakable commitment to democracy, human rights, No, no, actually.
	They all share experience in the Obama administration where they drone civilians.
	They also share an unshakable commitment to priorities on foreign policy, including the cutting of the American military.
	They also share... I love when she's like, they have such different backgrounds.
	They all went to Ivy League schools.
	They all think exactly the same on foreign policy.
	And there is very little dissent in that particular room.
	So that's okay.
	I went to Ivy League schools too.
	I don't mind people who go to Ivy League schools.
	That's fine.
	My problem is, when she suggests it's diversity of viewpoints, what she actually means is, behind me, I have a person who's Hispanic, and I also have, like, one person, maybe, who's black, and everybody else is a white dude who knew Joe Biden since, like, 1980.
	Isn't that exciting, guys?
	Super, super exciting stuff.
	Among them, John Kerry.
	So, John Kerry gets up, and he says he's gonna work on climate change.
	After his wonderful work in ensuring that the Iranian government was strengthened in pursuit of regional terrorism, he is now going to work on climate.
	Which is a pretty good guarantee that we're all gonna boil to death as the world heats.
	Because John Kerry has been unsuccessful at everything he has ever tried because he is a garbage person.
	He's a garbage person, and a garbage politician, and here he is, now being brought back, again, for another role, this time to presumably quash American economic growth in the name of ridiculous solutions that are not solutions so he can pretend to have solved climate change, when in fact he will not have solved climate change.
	Fracking, a thing the Democrats hate, has done more to reduce carbon emissions in the United States than any single policy any of these Democrats will ever propose, bar none.
	Anyway, here is John Kerry talking about how he believes in science and God.
	No, no, he does not.
	John Kerry, go.
	Fifty seven years ago this week.
	Joe Biden and I were college kids when we lost the president who inspired both of us to try to make a difference.
	A president who reminded us that here on Earth, God's work must truly be our own.
	President Joe Biden will trust in God, and he will also trust in science to guide our work on Earth to protect God's creation.
	Okay, I'm sorry, but John Kerry invoking God, does anyone believe that John Kerry is like a deeply religious thinker, that this is how he thinks of politics?
	I mean, John Kerry's been in politics for years and years and years and years.
	This is trying to paper over radical leftism with a veneer of kind of sort of soft, general Wonderful Americanism.
	That's all this is.
	What he really means is now I'm going to get to go over to Paris and hang out with all my really close buddies and talk in my terrible French accent.
	And maybe I'll have some nice wine and then I'll sign away half of America's economic freedom.
	Sound good, guys?
	Sound good?
	According to the Washington Post, everybody's excited.
	Dino Grandoni with Alexa Ellerbeck.
	The president-elect is tapping John Kerry, the former Secretary of State and the Democratic Party's 2004 presidential nominee, to be his presidential climate envoy, the campaign announced on Monday.
	Ooh, gravitas!
	Selling the senior statesman into the newly created position gives it gravitas.
	Ooh, gravitas.
	We're back to gravitas.
	I don't know if you remember all the way back to 2000.
	In 2000, the rip on George W. Bush is that he lacked gravitas.
	But Al Gore, Al Gore, Captain Chakra's over here, right?
	The guy who is with the masseuse with the shot.
	In any case, that may be old news for all of you.
	But Man Bear Pig, Al Gore, Al Gore, he was just, he was weighted down with all of his gravitas.
	John Kerry has gravitas, which If you believe that, then I have a Ponzi scheme I'd like to talk to you about.
	So apparently, according to the Washington Post, installing the senior statesman into the newly created position gives it gravitas at a time when U.S.
	credibility abroad on global warming and other issues has waned under President Trump.
	The move also marks the first time the National Security Council, the main White House body for setting foreign policy, will include someone dedicated to climate change.
	Kerry tweeted on Monday, The work we begin with the Paris Agreement is far from done.
	I'm returning to government to get America back on track to address the biggest challenge of this generation and those that will follow.
	And then his face collapsed in on himself.
	Like a mudslide in the Beverly Hills.
	In the Hollywood Hills.
	Let's just point out here that the Paris Accords were a complete sham from the beginning.
	They were a non-binding commitment made by various nations who did not keep up to those commitments.
	They laid forth a series of steps that would not have radically lowered the climate over the course of the century anyway, but they gave Democrats something to talk about having done when in fact they actually did nothing.
	As the Washington Post sort of quasi-admits, under that 2015 accord, nearly 200 nations agreed to set their own non-binding targets.
	Non-binding, non-binding, that would be the word there.
	Okay, I now make a non-binding pledge to you.
	I'm gonna give away all my money.
	Hey, guess what?
	I'm not gonna do that, because it was non-binding.
	Isn't that funny?
	See how that worked?
	It was non-binding.
	They had their own non-binding targets for cutting emissions.
	The success of the agreement relies on how well U.S.
	diplomats such as Kerry can wield soft power to convince China, India, and other nations to curtail emissions as they grow their economies.
	Given John Kerry's record on soft power, the answer is really, really poorly.
	Really poorly.
	Okay, so.
	But they're really happy again.
	John Kerry is back, guys.
	And everybody is so excited.
	I mean, AOC is excited.
	Bernie Sanders is super excited.
	The folks over at the Sunrise Movement are really, really excited.
	Those are the crazy people who approached Dianne Feinstein and tried to lecture her about climate legislation.
	And she was like, who are these stupid kids and why are they in my office?
	And so that's exciting stuff.
	Meanwhile, the supposedly incoming Biden administration What other sort of policy can we expect from a Biden administration?
	racist policy as well, which is to say, in an overt attempt to twist American law in order to violate basic American precepts in the name of equality of outcome. What other sort of policy can we expect from a Biden administration? According to Politico, Politico is now pushing in Politico magazine, a piece by Cheryl Cashin, she's a law professor at Georgetown, and she suggests it's time for new anti-racist policy. Now, as we've discussed before on the program, anti-racist
	does not mean against racism in the parlance of the left.
	Anti-racist policy means that you get rid of any policy that does not result in equal outcome.
	Not equal opportunity, not equal access to rights, equal outcome for various racial groups.
	And what this actually means is discrimination under American law and badly formed policy designed to subsidize particular people of particular races at the expense of other people of particular races.
	And Cheryl Cashin is eager to push forward the notion that a new Democratic coalition is on the rise.
	What's that coalition look like?
	Well, it is the Obama coalition, of course.
	That Obama coalition was not a broadcasting coalition attempting to appeal to people across the spectrum.
	It was a coalition specifically designed to go at woke white women College students and minorities.
	That was Obama's entire 2012 pitch.
	It's the reason why he lost three and a half million votes from 2008 to 2012.
	He lost with virtually every demographic group vote in 2012.
	He still won the election because he was able to turn out the base and because he was able to motivate a sort of intersectional coalition to win.
	Democrats think that is the future, and so they want to double down on that in policy.
	Cheryl Cashin says, A sizable majority of blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and other minority groups still vote Democratic.
	A sizable majority of white Americans vote Republican.
	While no racial or ethnic group is a monolith, partisan identity still has much to do with attitudes about race.
	White Democrats are more likely than white Republicans to acknowledge systemic racial discrimination against black people, while white conservatives are more likely to perceive discrimination against themselves than to acknowledge racial discrimination against blacks.
	So she is basically suggesting that white people are instead resentful.
	They're racially resentful.
	And so Biden needs to forget Those racially resentful white people who may oppose things like affirmative action.
	Instead, she says, a more viable strategy for progressives than trying to win over Trump's supporters right away would be to continue to win elections powered by energized majorities of black Americans in critical states in coalitions with other energized people of color, rightfully taking their place in American politics and the critical mass of whites willing to see and resist racism.
	As Biden implicitly acknowledged in his victory speech, the Democratic Party cannot win a governing majority, which now hinges on two Senate runoff races in Georgia without speaking authentically to and actually redressing the burdens and aspirations of black people.
	So what exactly does that look like?
	What exactly does that look like?
	Well, with Democratic control of both chambers, says Sheryl Cashin in Politico, an unshackled Congress could abolish anti-black policies and processes the federal government set in motion and repair continuing damage.
	What would that look like?
	Well, it would look like a $60 billion investment in communities hit hardest by COVID-19 could be financed by repealing tax breaks for large corporations included in the first federal COVID-19 relief package.
	So instead of giving money to companies to keep people employed, instead you should directly invest in areas that are heavily minority.
	That's what she's talking about.
	She says new investments should be allocated to black communities.
	Bolder still, Congress could atone for the federal legacy of promoting segregation by enacting a law that bans exclusionary zoning.
	Now, normally, exclusionary zoning used to refer to zoning practices that said, you cannot be a black person and live in this area.
	That is against the federal constitution of the United States.
	It also happens to be violative of the Civil Rights Act.
	It's been federally illegal for half a century.
	Thank God.
	Okay, well, that's not what she's talking about.
	When she talks about exclusionary zoning, she means getting rid of local laws that privilege single-family homes and exclude denser affordable housing.
	So in other words, she wants to have a federal law that prevents you, you're living in a single-family home suburb, right?
	Racially diverse, doesn't matter.
	She wants the person The developer, to be able to come in, buy four single-family homes directly next door to you, knock down all of the homes, and build a low-income apartment complex.
	That might change your quality of life, regardless of who is actually occupying those apartments.
	But she says that because, in her view, minority people are inherently poor, this means that this will be helpful to minorities is getting rid of all of those local land-use regulations at the federal level.
	Also, she suggests that Congress could condition federal infrastructure or other spending on measurable local progress in creating affordable housing in high-opportunity areas.
	As though people don't then make the decision to leave those areas and move to other areas, right?
	Biden's already promised to back similar legislation.
	Also, they want to apply a formula across all federal programs to ensure targeted spending in census tracts with persistent poverty.
	Okay, again, here she is.
	If we're talking persistent poverty in white communities in white Appalachia, she wouldn't be talking about this.
	What she really means is trying to inject money into impoverished black communities as an attempt to get those people to vote Democratic.
	And of course, this will all be paid for by repealing tax cuts for the people who actually pay all the taxes in the country on the top end of the tax spectrum.
	The great lie of the Democratic Party has always been that people at the top end of the income spectrum in the United States don't pay their fair share of taxes.
	That, of course, is a complete lie.
	People at the top end of the income spectrum in the United States pay virtually all net taxes in the United States because they don't receive benefits back from the federal government.
	Okay, so that's the sort of radical policy you can look forward to if the Democrats were to take control of the Senate and if Joe Biden is inaugurated, right?
	That is what you can look forward to.
	And the media are there for it, man.
	And here's the thing.
	What the media are going to tell you, and this is the really critical point, what the media are going to tell you is that all of this is uncontroversial.
	This is the part where you're going to go quietly nuts over the course of the next several years, or maybe not so quietly nuts.
	It's the reason the media got Trump in 2016.
	The reason is the media more than any other force in American life have lied to you and they have denigrated you.
	The media are trotting out all of these radicals.
	John Kerry is a radical.
	Jake Sullivan is a radical.
	Tony Blinken is a foreign policy blob member.
	It doesn't mean he's a radical.
	He's just wrong about everything.
	They're going to trot forward all of these people and all these radical policies as completely non-radical.
	Natural responses to the world around you.
	And these are not.
	These are perfectly in line with reason and decency.
	And if you oppose them, it's because you are against reason and decency.
	This is the line Barack Obama used for eight long years, and the media simply mirrored it.
	The media ignored everything that Barack Obama did to violate the Constitution, and there was plenty there.
	They ignored the fact that he militarized wings of the federal government against his political opponents.
	They ignored the fact that he spied on journalists.
	They ignored all of that, and then they told you that he had no scandals.
	His only scandal is that he wore a tansuit at a press conference.
	By the way, that happened to be the press conference where he declared that ISIS was dead shortly before ISIS was revived.
	I know everybody likes to ignore that part.
	Okay, but the media are going to drive you up a wall, which is why you need to cut the cord and stop subscribing to them and find different alternative modes of communication because that is what is coming next.
	Your media are lying to you.
	They're lying to you.
	And they're going to tell you that everything they say is a matter of fact as opposed to a matter of opinion.
	That's the biggest lie of all.
	It's not just that they lie about policy and say it's effective when it isn't, although they do that.
	It is that the media are telling you the biggest lie, which is they are lying to you about who they are, and about who you are.
	They are saying that they are reasonable, objective voices, and you, for not agreeing with them, are an unreasonable partisan hack.
	That is untrue.
	I'm going to show you proof of the media doing just that in one second.
	First, let us talk about the fact that if you've ever tried Tommy John underwear, these are like, they're the best.
	They're the best underwear on the market.
	Bar none, I've thrown out all of my other underwear.
	I only wear Tommy John.
	My wife has thrown out all of her stuff and she's gotten only Tommy John.
	This Black Friday, you can fight cold with cozy in Tommy John underwear, loungewear, pajamas, and bras.
	I mean, I love the Tommy John loungewear.
	It's basically my Sabbath garb when I'm not in synagogue.
	yourself with Tommy John men's and women's loungewear.
	Say goodbye to those old stained sweatpants.
	Tommy John loungewear, it is luxuriously soft, guaranteed to fit perfectly.
	The same level of comfort and innovation that goes into everything Tommy John makes.
	I mean, I love the Tommy John loungewear.
	It's basically my Sabbath garb when I am not in synagogue.
	Plus, Tommy John's loungewear, pajamas and underwear, they come in limited edition sets, perfect for giving, but they sell out quickly, so order soon.
	You don't really think about your underwear in everyday life, but you should, because I mean, those are on your butt like all day long and you want them to be comfortable.
	There is no risk with Tommy John's Best Pair You'll Ever Wear, or its free guarantee.
	Shop Tommy John's Black Friday Sale right now to make sure your gifts arrive by the holidays.
	Go to tommyjohn.com slash ben for 20% off site-wide.
	Get 20% off for a limited time only at tommyjohn.com slash ben.
	That is tommyjohn.com slash ben.
	See site for details.
	Okay, so...
	As I mentioned, the great lie the media have been telling you for years is a lie about you and a lie about themselves.
	The lie about themselves is that they're objective.
	The lie about you is that you're a partisan if you disagree with them.
	And so they're just going to go right back to this method of informational distribution.
	They are going to go back to performing illicit services for Democrats.
	They're going to go right back to turning their entire profession into the Democratic massage parlor.
	That is what they are going to do.
	And it's not just the so-called objective journalists, it's also your comedians, right?
	Comedians used to come with a patina of objectivity.
	Johnny Carson famously did not give away, he was a Democrat, but he famously did not give away his own political positions on things because he said it would undermine his ability to do comedy.
	Jay Leno did the same thing.
	Now you have overt hacks like Stephen Colbert, who's essentially a Spartacus Club socialist from college.
	Talking about politics in the most sycophantic possible way, but he's a comedian, guys, so that means we have to take him with a certain grain of salt.
	Here is Stephen Colbert.
	He's not even the best example.
	I'm just gonna give this because it's the best example of somebody desperately seeking to perform illicit services on behalf of Democrats.
	So Barack Obama's on his book tour right now, and that means the entire media has kicked into gear to go back to the Halcyon Obama era when they could sit around and massage Barack Obama's shoulders as he told them that he was going to prosecute them for treason.
	In any case, here is Stephen Colbert last night I mean, this is just sycophantic, drooling nonsense.
	Can we just take a moment?
	And I want to talk.
	I just want to take a moment to drink you in for just a moment, because I'm having to get used to looking at a president.
	Again, you know, I've gotten out of the habit.
	I've got to warm up for Joe Biden.
	I don't want to pull anything when I see him take the oath of office.
	You've got to ease me into this a little bit.
	But then there are your actual objective journalists, people like Yamiche Alcindor.
	So Yamiche Alcindor has a long history of being a partisan hack.
	She is a correspondent for PBS NewsHour and a political contributor to NBC News and MSNBC.
	She worked as a reporter for both USA Today and The New York Times.
	Now, when Donald Trump said that she was a political hack, the entire media and journalistic establishment came to her.
	She's an amazing reporter, amazing, amazing reporter.
	Here is your very journalism objective journalist being so objective in her journalism and the journalism is going to get absolutely everywhere.
	She talks about the glories of Joe Biden's cabinet.
	I was talking to a Democrat who just said this also felt like the Avengers.
	It felt like we're being rescued from this craziness that we've all lived through from the last four years.
	And now here are the superheroes to come and save us all.
	Oh, they're like the Avengers, guys.
	That's objective journalism at its finest.
	The Avengers.
	Which presumably means they'll break lots of things and then everybody will cheer.
	That's what the Democratic Avengers are here to do.
	They're like superheroes.
	Now, I'm not sure how you objectively cover a superhero or a person you think is a superhero, but Yamiche Alcindor thinks these people are superheroes.
	And there's Nicole Wallace just nodding along.
	Isn't that funny?
	Isn't that great?
	Yeah, they're all superheroes.
	Your objective journalists.
	Andrea Mitchell.
	She comes out and she says, Biden's not political.
	That's the thing about Joe Biden is he's not political.
	He literally is the guy who suggested that Mitt Romney was going to put black people back in chains.
	He was a moving force behind the implementation of Obamacare.
	He was the first major American politician to publicly support same-sex marriage.
	He has spent his career borking people.
	He went after Robert Bork.
	He went after Clarence Thomas.
	Joe Biden is the definition of a political animal.
	He's been a politician literally his entire adult life.
	He was elected to high office at the age of 29.
	The hell is she talking about?
	But here is Andrea Mitchell saying, well, you know, here's the thing.
	He's really just like a non-political guy.
	See, the implication here is that if you disagree, it's because you're political.
	Here's Andrea Mitchell, very objective news journalist for NBC News, being very objective in journalism.
	They are now being told that it is not going to be political.
	And Joe Biden is saying, these are people, this is a team who's going to tell me, this team will tell me what I need to know, not what I want to know.
	That is a big change.
	Oh, I mean, this team is not political.
	It's not a political team.
	Every one of the people on that team has been a longtime Democratic hack inside the halls of Washington power.
	The story is not Biden doing what Biden is going to do, because Biden is a Democrat.
	He's going to appoint other Democrats.
	The point here is that the media are also Democrats.
	And I, honest to God, don't understand why any incoming Biden administration would even need a press secretary.
	They don't need one.
	They could literally just have somebody from the administration walk out, pick at random a member of the media from the press pool, have that person stand behind the podium and just defend the administration that day.
	That is what the media do.
	I mean, Andrea Mitchell has moderated presidential debates.
	You know who else has?
	Martha Raddatz.
	So Martha Raddatz came out and she said his foreign policy team, Joe Biden's foreign policy team, is not political.
	Remember, Martha Raddatz has moderated presidential debates.
	She claimed not a single member of Biden's foreign policy team was political.
	That would include John Kerry, John effing Kerry, Jake Sullivan, and Tony Blinken.
	She, I mean, come on.
	She actually puts John Kerry aside.
	She says, when I look at that group up there, let's put John Kerry aside because he was the Democratic nominee.
	But they're not political.
	They're just career people, you know, career people, because career people are never political.
	If you work in Washington, D.C., your entire career, you're no longer political, unless you're a Republican who's worked in Washington, D.C., your entire career, in which case you're obviously a terrible person.
	But here is Martha Raddatz doing the work for the Democrats.
	This is about the least flashy team you could possibly get.
	They are deeply experienced.
	They are humble, and they are lifelong public servants.
	When I look at that group up there, and let's put John Kerry aside, because as we know, he was the Democratic nominee for president once, but they are not political.
	They are just career people, and as they say, they really do reflect America.
	So, is it any shock then to learn that there's this giant revolving door between the media and the Biden administration?
	Ash Scowell over at Daily Wire details this.
	that she says for four years, CNN and MSNBC, MSNBC decried the revolving door between the Trump administration and Fox News.
	Now, analysts and contributors from those networks are joining Joe Biden's transition team and administration.
	For starters, Biden's pick for Secretary of State, Tony Blinken, worked as a global affairs analyst for CNN after serving as deputy national security advisor for Obama between 2013 and Blinken also worked for Bill Clinton's administration in the State Department.
	Jen Psaki just left the CNN payroll as a commentator to join the Biden transition team as a senior advisor.
	Before that, she worked as the spokesperson for the State Department under Obama and then as White House Communications Director.
	NBC News and MSNBC have even more analysts headed to Team Biden, including Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, He's the former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel's brother and the Chief of Staff to Obama.
	Emanuel will be guiding Biden's COVID-19 response.
	Barbara McQuaid, a legal analyst for NBC and MSNBC, will join the Biden transition as part of the Justice Department review team.
	She previously served as U.S.
	Attorney for Eastern District of Michigan under Obama.
	Richard Stengel, a political analyst for NBC and MSNBC, who by the way is just awful.
	I mean, Richard Stengel?
	Has been wrong on every major political issue he has ever covered.
	Stengel is a disaster area.
	He's been tapped as Biden transition's team lead for the U.S.
	Agency for Global Media.
	He wrote an op-ed in 2019 for the Washington Post.
	As you'll recall, he talked about it at length last year, in which he called for free speech to be restricted.
	I'm so glad he is representing America with regard to the global media in the Biden administration.
	He wrote in that piece, quote, How about Corinne Jean-Pierre?
	Jean-Pierre, she's a political analyst for NBC and MSNBC.
	who must add new guardrails.
	I'm all for protecting thought we hate, but not speech that incites hate." And he suggested that perhaps we should ban burning the Quran or false narratives and lies on social media.
	How about Corrine Jean-Pierre?
	She's a, Jean-Pierre, she's a political analyst for NBC and MSNBC.
	She left the network and made a work on Biden's campaign before she joined Kamala Harris as her chief of staff.
	And then there's John Meacham, presidential historian, MSNBC contributor, who failed to disclose to the network that he was writing speeches for Biden during the campaign and then went on air and talked about about how wonderful the speeches were that Joe Biden had just given.
	The revolving door between the media and the Democrats is not a coincidence, because the media and the Democrats are a revolving door.
	They are just the same.
	They're the same.
	There's no difference between Jen Psaki as the White House press communications official, and Jen Psaki as commentator on CNN.
	It's the same Jen Psaki, and CNN basically is just an outlet for For Joe Biden.
	But there's something more important here.
	There are two things that are more important.
	One is the implication the media are constantly drawing about themselves.
	They're objective.
	And so when they say that Joe Biden's team is apolitical and professional and expert and elite, when they say it, it's objectively true.
	And you are a fool for not believing them.
	You're a partisan for not believing them.
	That's point one.
	Point two is they then shut the door behind them.
	Because the idea is if they are the objective ones, anyone who disagrees with them is not objective and is thus a purveyor of quote unquote fake news.
	And thus, They should not be allowed to disseminate their information.
	The objective media cadre are not invested in the viability of the First Amendment.
	They're invested in their own viability and in curbing the First Amendment to prevent anybody from saying things they don't like because, of course, they are the expositors of truth while everyone else is an expositor of lies.
	We'll get to that in just one moment.
	First, Let us talk about how often it feels like banking is years behind in terms of technology.
	I mean, we had a bank account a while ago where we were still having to go into the actual bank, like the physical bank, and write checks.
	And in order to do basic transactions, we couldn't go online to do it.
	Well, this is why you need Aslo.
	Aslo offers a free business checking account with invoicing, bill pay, no minimum balance requirements, no maintenance or overdraft fees.
	Instead of the days it takes at a traditional bank where you're still required to go in person, with Aslo, you just go to azlo.com and you can apply in minutes.
	There's no waiting to use your account.
	With Aslo's free instant funding feature, you can deposit up to a thousand bucks and you can access it like right now instantly.
	Now they've launched the all new Aslo Pro Bundle for only 10 bucks a month with tools like unlimited envelopes to organize your money, discounted instant transfers, and the ability to set up recurring invoices.
	Because you listen to this podcast, you can try Aslo Pro for free for 14 days at aslo.com slash Shapiro.
	Aslo's banking services are provided by BBVA USA member FDIC Money Magazine called Aslo the quote, best business banking option for freelancers and entrepreneurs.
	Aslo's co-founder is one of Fortune Magazine's latest 40 under 40.
	Go check out Aslo right now.
	It's going to make your life, it's going to make your banking a lot easier.
	Learn more with a free copy of Aslo's Small Business Starter Guide or get started right now and get an Aslo Pro Free 14-day trial at azlo.com slash Shapiro.
	That's aslo.com slash Shapiro.
	No minimum deposit required.
	Get started for free at aslo.com slash Shapiro.
	Go check them out right now.
	azlo.com slash Shapiro.
	Okay, so much of this for the media is about maintenance of their own position.
	They understand.
	They do.
	Deep down, they have to understand that they've completely blown up their credibility, that the American people do not trust them, and the American people should not trust them.
	And so the way that they have posed themselves is they have increasingly come out of the closet as members of the left, but it destroys their self-image to acknowledge their own politics.
	It really does.
	I'll give you just a brief anecdotal example.
	So back during the 2012 Republican National Convention was held down in Tampa.
	And I was there and I remember I was walking around the floor and the floor of the convention is kind of a fun place to be.
	They have like a media row in the media row.
	You have all of these kind of prominent media people who are sitting in their little booths broadcasting from the convention back in the days when we could all meet together and at one of these booths at the ABC News booth with Sam Donaldson and Sam Donaldson at that time was doing like a 15 minute opinion piece every day.
	And I saw him walking around and it occurred to me, you know, it's kind of weird that Sam Donaldson is now doing sort of quote opinion stuff, given the fact that for years he was the quote unquote objective journalist on ABC, right?
	He was the guy who people would go to.
	He was a trusted name in objective news.
	And so I went up to him.
	And I will say, as a man with magnificent eyebrows, Sam Donaldson puts me to shame.
	That is a dude with eyebrows.
	So Sam Donaldson, I was talking with him and I said to him, I'm wondering, sir, if you have the same opinions now that you had then on politics.
	And he said, yes.
	And I said, well, do you think that maybe your opinions shaped how you covered politics?
	He said, no.
	And I said, well, I don't think you're being honest because frankly, I think that your opinions do shape your policies.
	Do you think you're better than I am?
	He got very angry.
	You think you're better than I am?
	And I said, well, I mean, kind of.
	I'll tell you my biases and then I'll give you what I think.
	And then you can make a decision as to whether you believe me or not.
	And you can take everything I say with a grain of salt.
	He got very, very angry.
	OK, but this is how members of the media think.
	They're like dolphins.
	Okay, they have two sides of their brain.
	One is the political side of their brain, and one is the objective journalisming side of their brain.
	And they believe that they can turn off one side in favor of the other side.
	And that is not true.
	It is not true at all.
	Okay, some of them are better at separating their objective journalisming from their own political opinions, but most of them actually suck at it because human beings have biases, and those biases infuse how they think very often, unless they have methodologies for thinking, like formalistic methodologies for thinking, as in law, like originalism.
	Unless they have actual methodologies that you can follow a step-by-step process to go from point A to point B.
	That is based on some objectified metric of interpretation.
	If you don't have that, then basically they're just jumping from point A to point B because point A and point B are the same in their head, meaning their political view and their opinion journalism are exactly the same.
	That is how you get to the point where Andrea Mitchell and Martha Raddatz are suggesting that overtly political people are not political because in their view, those people are not political.
	See, they're just saying the truth.
	They're just saying what's true.
	This is why I don't think that the media are badly motivated.
	I don't think that they are lying to you in the sense that they are purposefully trying to prevaricate.
	I think that for them, they actually believe that their opinions are the objective truth.
	They believe that the things they say are objectively true, no matter whether those things are opinion.
	And they've been in the bubble so long that nobody has ever disagreed with them.
	And so they walk around all day long thinking that they are the expositors of capital T truth, and anyone who disagrees must be an expositor of falsehood.
	And I guess this gives them the justification for doing what they are doing right now, which is attempting to slam the door behind them.
	And when I say slam the door behind them, what I mean is that they are now attempting to turn social media into basically a bullhorn for their own politics.
	So the Democrats turned the media into a bullhorn for their politics, because the media is totally democratic.
	And then the media, your establishment legacy media, they decided that Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, all these places have to be turned into a bullhorn for them.
	Because here's what happened.
	And it's very clear that this has happened from the data.
	Originally, when the internet sprung up, you could get the New York Times on your front doorstep.
	You get the LA Times.
	A lot of people said, I don't like what I'm being provided here.
	I think what I'm being provided here is politically biased and I'm being lied to.
	I don't agree that what these people are presenting as quote-unquote objective truth actually represents objective truth.
	I remember media bias in my family.
	I remember my first being aware of media bias when I was about 12 years old and my dad looked at the front page of the LA Times in which they printed a photo that was overtly false of supposedly an Israeli soldier beating a Palestinian man.
	It turns out there was an Israeli soldier who was actually defending an Israeli man from being beaten by Palestinians.
	They miscaptioned it.
	The New York Times had to run a correction.
	The L.A.
	Times picked up the same photo.
	I remember my father calling in and canceling the L.A.
	Times.
	This was back in the 90s.
	But there weren't a lot of great alternatives.
	If you were in L.A., you could get the Daily News, which was a fine paper, but it didn't have the same sort of breadth and scope as the L.A.
	Times, because the L.A.
	Times was much bigger.
	And then the internet cropped up, and you could easily cancel your subscription.
	You could easily stop visiting these sources of supposed news.
	You could easily find alternative sources of information.
	And so the internet opened up this whole new vista of ways for people to get information and facts That they had not been provided because the media engage in selective reporting.
	There are several types of media bias.
	There is the media bias in which they simply do not report facts they do not like.
	And then there's the media bias in which they inject the facts they do like with a particular shade of coloring in order to receive, in order to achieve certain outcomes.
	And so what happened is that as the internet came up, and Matt Drudge was the leader in this, as the internet came up, suddenly you could get news from places that were not the LA Times without the filter of Pinch Solsberger at the New York Times.
	And people were into it.
	People were into it and then Facebook came along and Facebook provided you an easy way of getting all of that news.
	An easy way of networking with other people who might think like you.
	An easy way of disseminating information through channels of like-minded people so that you could actually blow up news.
	It wasn't merely that you could find news on some obscure website that the media had refused to report.
	It was that you could actually You could actually allow your friends and family to see those pieces of news quickly and easily simply by sharing.
	And this is why people rushed to Facebook, because it wasn't just about creating social networks.
	When it came to news, it was explicitly about finding alternatives to the mainstream media.
	See, if you subscribe to the New York Times or the LA Times or the Boston Globe or NBC, CBS, ABC, you watch those on your basic cable, or you watch those on network news, if you did all that, you didn't need to be on Facebook for your news.
	You already had all that.
	It was for everybody else.
	This is why news sharing on Facebook blew up because there were so many people who went to Facebook specifically to avoid, specifically to avoid the mainstream media dominance of the space.
	And so this provided the impetus for publications like ours, Daily Wire, to begin and garner hundreds of millions of views over the course of like a single month.
	This is what allowed other right-wing outlets to start to thrive, specifically because, again, if you wanted to view the New York Times or any of the legacy media, you knew about them.
	If you wanted other sources of information, you needed a platform where you could view those other sources of information, and Facebook made it quick and made it easy.
	Well, now the establishment and legacy media, because they believe that they are the sole expositors of truth, they have decided they are going to Curb social media.
	They're going to attack social media until social media refuses to allow you to see the stuff you went on Facebook to see in the first place.
	And Facebook, because now apparently they're being controlled from the inside by their woke staffers and craven politicos, now because of that, you're starting to see social media curb their own, your ability to access the information you went there to see in the first place.
	And they're doing so at the behest of a pathetic Self-indulgent media firmly convinced of their own virtue.
	We're gonna get to more of this in just one second.
	This is what it's gonna be like for years, by the way.
	It's gonna be like this for years.
	This is the battle.
	I've been saying this for months now.
	This is the battle.
	It's been obviously the battle since the Hunter Biden shutdown.
	This is the battle.
	Will you even get to see?
	Will you even get to access the information you want to see?
	Will you be able to fight back against the misinformation put out by the left if the left controls all the sources of informational dissemination?
	We're gonna get to more of this in just one second.
	First, let us talk about how you protect yourself from malware.
	So if you've ever been hit with ransomware, it's like a nightmare.
	Somebody hacks your computer.
	They lock up all your files.
	They try to make you pay them to unlock all of those files.
	And it's not just ransomware.
	There's all sorts of malware.
	If it hits your computer, it wrecks not just your day, it could wreck your week, your month, it could wreck your year, depending on what kind of files you lose.
	PCmatic is a next-generation antivirus designed to stop modern threats like ransomware.
	Independent testing firm AV-Test just named PCmatic a top performer in the cybersecurity industry, giving it the best performance award for 2019.
	Only PCmatic has American research, development, and support.
	PCmatic's competition is foreign-made, often in countries where malware originates.
	PCmatic blocks annoying and malicious ads for hassle-free web browsing and makes your computer faster and more reliable, even after years of use.
	PCmatic protects Windows computers, including XP, Vista, Windows 7, 8, and 10, Windows servers, Mac, MacBooks, and Android phones and tablets.
	PCmatic is just $50 for five devices for one year with a full 30-day money-back guarantee.
	If you act right now, PCmatic has offered my listeners a free month of security protection with the purchase of an annual license.
	To access this offer, head on over to PCmatic.com to get world-class security that keeps your computer running great.
	Okay, we'll get to more of all this in a moment.
	First, Thanksgiving is almost here.
	That means Black Friday is almost here, guys.
	Almost here.
	Since last year's Black Friday deal, we've been consistently adding more features and products to our membership program.
	We are really pumped up about it.
	To name just a few things, we've added much more exclusive Reader's Pass content.
	Our Insider and above members can now stream our content on Apple TV and Roku.
	That's exciting because of all the new content we're adding.
	Like the Michael Molls show that's going five days a week starting Friday, December 4th.
	Your account also now comes With custom badges you can earn by participating in daily wire events.
	If you're an All Access member, you get to join All Access Live, our exclusive daily live streams with me or one of the other hosts, where we talk directly with you about, well, anything you want.
	You can ask us any sort of bizarre question.
	We are likely to answer it for you.
	You also get two leftist years tumblers, early access to our daily wear merch, daily discussions with our writers and special guests.
	Also, we're continuing to add new features and products.
	The entire PragerU library that's currently being added to the website, and Candace Owens is joining us early next year with a pretty special show.
	We can't wait to announce more details about that.
	Needless to say, we are excited about this year's deal.
	You're not going to want to miss it, so make sure that you stay tuned in for the Black Friday deal.
	You're listening to the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
	Okay, so the media's goal here is now to reestablish their dominance.
	Top down.
	Because the social media companies, they took you in, they said that you had a platform now where you could see stuff that was not the mainstream media.
	Again, the mainstream media dominated the space.
	They didn't need the social media companies.
	The social media companies were explicitly an alternative to those mainstream media companies.
	Now the mainstream media, legacy media companies, they're attempting to use social media in order to shut down the debate again.
	They drew you in and now they are shutting the door.
	They're shutting the door and they're making sure that you don't see anything that they don't want you to see.
	And they are laundering their information in order to do so.
	So what they have basically declared is that Facebook, for example, should shut down any right-wing site.
	So the way they do this is they actually just go in very often and they falsify information.
	People on the left will just go in and falsify information.
	So what they'll do is they'll do things like this.
	They'll go to NewsGuard, which is a pathetic site, which is designed to basically say that anybody on the right is disinformation.
	If you say you're overtly conservative, they say that you are not a trusted news source.
	If you are covertly leftist, right?
	If you're The New York Times and you're pretty overtly leftist, but you try to pretend that you're not, then you are a trusted news source.
	If you're The Daily Wire and we just say we're conservative, NewsGuard will literally say to us that we are not a trusted news source because we are more honest about our own political biases than the New York Times.
	And so NewsGuard will then be used by Facebook in order to shut down our traffic.
	You will see people on the left suggest that we at the Daily Wire were disinformation.
	Why?
	Well, they'll go over to Wikipedia and they will actually use a sentence in our Wikipedia profile inserted by a partisan leftist that does not reflect reality in any way.
	Right now, the Wikipedia profile literally reads, many of the website's stories involve unverified information and may be considered fake news.
	They then link to a story that does not say anything like that.
	There's nothing in the story that even alleges that.
	It doesn't matter.
	So, before the election, this is not a shock, and here they are, here are your journalistic tech activists, okay?
	They are not journalists, they are activists, they are the tip of the spear in terms of trying to get social media to shut down dissemination of all information that doesn't come from the New York Times.
	Kevin Roos, who spends every day trying to get Facebook to shut down traffic to places like Daily Wire, or The Federalist, or Breitbart, or The Blaze, or any place that he disagrees with.
	He has a piece today with Mike Isaac and Shira Frankel saying Facebook struggles to balance civility and growth.
	Civility and growth.
	By civility, they mean that they just want you not to be able to see any information that is not from the New York Times.
	In the tense days after the presidential election, a team of Facebook employees presented the chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, with an alarming finding.
	Election-related misinformation was going viral on the site.
	President Trump was already casting the election as rigged.
	Stories from right-wing media outlets with false and misleading claims about discarded ballots, miscounted votes, and skewed tallies were among the most popular news stories on the platform.
	Now, note, the reason that a lot of those stories were popular on the platform is because the New York Times refused to report many of them, and a lot of them were true.
	Kevin Roos himself has said this.
	Hey, we reported election irregularities in Michigan, okay, and it was a true story.
	Kevin Roos suggested that it was a false story openly on Twitter, and now he's writing a story about how Facebook needs to shut down those sorts of stories, even though he acknowledged the story was true on Twitter.
	The employees proposed an emergency change to the site's News Feed algorithm, which helps determine what more than 2 billion people see every day.
	It involved emphasizing the importance of what Facebook calls News Ecosystem Quality Scores, or NEQ, a secret internal ranking it assigns to news publishers based on signals about the quality of their journalism.
	Typically, NEQ scores play a minor role in determining what appears on user feeds.
	But several days after the election, Zuckerberg agreed to increase the weight that Facebook's algorithm gave to NEQ scores to make sure authoritative news appeared more prominently, said three people with knowledge of the decision who were authorized not to discuss internal deliberations.
	The change was part of the break glass plans Facebook had spent months developing for the aftermath of a contested election.
	It resulted in, wait for it, wait for it, wait for it, a spike in visibility for big mainstream publishers like CNN, The New York Times, and NPR.
	While posts from highly engaged hyper-partisan pages such as Breitbart and Occupy Democrats became less visible, the employees said, it was a vision of what a calmer, less divisive Facebook might look like.
	Some employees argued the change should become permanent, even if it was unclear how that might affect the amount of time people spent on Facebook.
	In an employee meeting the week after the election, workers asked whether the Nicer News feed could stay, said two people who attended.
	First of all, Zuckerberg is in control of his company, or if he is in control, maybe he's not.
	If he is in control of his company, this would be about the damn time for him to turn to his employees and say, why do I care what you think of the Nicer News algorithm?
	You are not the great arbiter of what truth constitutes.
	And by the way, for the New York Times to say that their program, that they've been pushing results in a spike in visibility for them, means they boosted their own traffic by basically hijacking the levers of power at Facebook via their staffers.
	CNN, The New York Times, and NPR, all massive publications with huge, $100 million budgets.
	All of them got bigger.
	Meanwhile, any alternative source of information was blocked.
	Shocker.
	Shocker.
	Guy Rosen, a Facebook executive, said that the plan was meant to be temporary, but apparently there are many people on Facebook who want to see it not be temporary.
	Instead, they would like to see Facebook continue to boost only information that they like and denigrate all of the information that they don't like.
	This is all part of the plan for the radical journalistic left.
	They pretend they are objective.
	If you don't agree with them, it's because you're bad.
	And the social media feeds should only reflect real news like the New York Times and NPR and CNN.
	Give me an effing break.
	And that's what you're going to be dealing with under a Biden administration.
	A media, the Praetorian Guard for Joe Biden, the Praetorian Guard for Democrats.
	Every Republican will be castigated as evil and malevolent and satanic.
	That is where all of this is going.
	So get ready.
	The lid is going to clamp down on your ability to get information.
	It's why you should go subscribe to your favorite publications right now before it is too late.
	All right.
	So speaking of this, the media have, as I've said, been in a long running battle to basically shut down all methods of information that allow you to see alternative sources.
	The staffers at a variety of different outlets for dissemination of information, they have been very vocal in their attempts to shut down that dissemination of information.
	So, as I've been saying, Facebook itself had an algorithm that it put into place that boosted the New York Times, CNN, and NPR in the aftermath of the election.
	We know for a fact that they shut down our traffic like probably three weeks before the election.
	We could see it in the actual metrics over at Daily Wire.
	And the New York Times continues to push this day in and day out.
	You do not deserve to see information that Charlie Warzel and Kevin Roos and Kara Swisher at the New York Times don't want you to see.
	You should only see the information that they want you to see.
	See, this is the difference between folks on the left and folks on the right.
	I have never, not once, told you that there should be some attempt to shut down CNN, NPR, New York Times, CBS, ABC, NBC.
	I've never said that, not once.
	I've said you might want to cut your cable because they're lying to you.
	Because they are.
	But I have never said, I have never said that there should be an attempt by any overt authority, any major social media platform to shut down systems of informational dissemination that I don't like.
	I've never said CNN, New York Times should be downgraded in terms of their ability to have reach on Facebook's platform.
	I've never said anything remotely like that.
	In fact, when it comes to people asking me what sources of information they should view, The truth is, I don't even tell them not to read the New York Times.
	I tell them they shouldn't subscribe, but that's because you shouldn't fund people who are overtly against you and don't like you very much, but...
	I've always said, when people say, what do you read?
	I'll tell you, I read the New York Times, the Washington Post.
	I'll tell you that I read alternative sources of information, ranging from the Daily Wire to the Washington Examiner to the Federalist and all the rest.
	And when people ask, what sort of podcast should I listen to?
	I've always told them, listen to my podcast, then listen to Pod Save America, and then decide which one of us you think is being more honest.
	Decide where you think you come down on various issues.
	Folks on the left won't do that.
	To folks on the left, it is anathema to allow you to listen to alternative points of view.
	It is very bad for them to allow you to listen to alternative points of view.
	In fact, if a left-wing host were ever to suggest that you might give a listen to my show, they would be run out of town by their own supporters.
	They'd be run out of town on a rail.
	I say to my listeners all of the time that you should listen to alternative sources of information other than mine.
	I've had on this show, many times, people on the left.
	On our Sunday special, we routinely feature guests who disagree with us.
	The same simply does not hold true for many members of the left.
	And this is why you see pieces like this one from Charlie Warzel, another one of the informational shutdown advocates of the New York Times, what Facebook fed the baby boomers.
	Many Americans' feeds are nightmares.
	I know because I spent weeks living inside two of them.
	Well, clearly, Charlie Warzel should police what kind of feed you have on your Facebook.
	He said, In mid-October, I asked two people I'd never met to give me their Facebook account passwords for three weeks leading up to Election Day.
	I wanted to immerse myself in the feeds of a type of person who has become a trope of sorts in our national discussion about politics and disinformation, baby boomers with an attachment to polarizing social media.
	By the way, we should analyze the word disinformation here.
	Okay, misinformation is overt falsehood.
	Disinformation, generally speaking, used to refer to an overt psychological campaign waged by a place like the Soviet Union in order to push false narratives about America.
	If we're speaking about disinformation in that way, the mainstream media engage in disinformation campaigns and tactics far more often than people in the right wing.
	The mainstream media have sold the lie that America was rooted in racism and bigotry and continues to be the home of racism and bigotry.
	The mainstream media has sold the lie that Donald Trump was a Russian collusion actor.
	Hey, that's disinformation.
	And in the case of that particular story, that was actually Russian disinformation.
	In any case, Charlie Weitzel says Facebook is bad.
	Really, you should just read the New York Times.
	He said, I went looking for older Americans, not full-blown conspiracy theorists, trolls, or partisan activists, whose news consumption has increased sharply in the last few years on Facebook.
	Neither of the two people I settled on described themselves as partisan.
	Both bemoan the toxicity of our politics.
	Here's a sample. A set of adoring grandparents posing with rosy-cheeked babies. Mimi and Pop Pop's first visit since March, the post reads. Next, a meme of Joe Biden next to a Photoshopped for sale sign. For more information, contact Hunter, the sign reads. After that is a post advertising a funny rude metal sign displaying a unicorn in a tutu giving the middle finger.
	Thought of you, the post reads. Below that is a screenshot of a meme created by the pro-Trump group Turning Point USA.
	You're sitting on socialism.
	The post reads, displaying a series of photos of abandoned buildings, empty grocery store shelves, and bleeding men in makeshift, dirty hospital beds.
	The feed goes on like this, an infinite scroll of content without context.
	Ah, you need context for socialism being awesome, guys.
	That's really what you need.
	And you need context for memes.
	Now we need to contextualize memes.
	Now, perhaps Charlie Warzell doesn't understand how the internet works, but memes exist on both the right and the left, and they're quite popular on all sides.
	Specifically because they're basically the junk food of informational dissemination.
	But he says, touching family moments are interspersed with Bible quotes that look like Hallmark cards, hyper-partisan, fear-mongering, and conspiratorial misinformation.
	The feed is, in a word, a nightmare.
	I know because I spent the last three weeks living inside it.
	Okay, I'm sorry.
	This is just a joke.
	It's a joke.
	Charlie Warzel thinks that this is a nightmare because Charlie Warzel doesn't like what he's reading.
	That's the end of the story.
	And this is the way that so many on the left think.
	They think, I don't like what other people are reading.
	Therefore, I should be in control of what other people are reading.
	Therefore, I should try to prevent other people from reading the things I don't want them to read.
	And this is how you end up With the ridiculous story that we saw break yesterday about Penguin Random House staffers trying to get Jordan Peterson's book canceled.
	Okay, so Jordan Peterson's book, his last book, 12 Rules for Life, which is great.
	You should read it.
	Jordan's a friend.
	I love Jordan.
	Jordan's a really, really good guy.
	Jordan's book sold 3 million copies.
	3 million copies.
	You know how many crappy, woke books that sold 5,000 copies Jordan Peterson's book supported?
	You know how much money the publisher made off of Jordan Peterson's good book?
	Said they could publish a bunch of woke crap that sold seven copies?
	A lot of those books got published because Jordan Peterson exists.
	Apparently, according to Vice World News, several Penguin Random House Canada employees confronted management about the company's decision to publish a new book by controversial Canadian psychologist Jordan Peterson at an emotional town hall on Monday.
	Dozens more have filed anonymous complaints.
	Okay, so...
	Like, so what?
	I'm so tired of companies being run by the peons.
	That's not how this works.
	I run a company.
	We love our staffers.
	We love them so much that we pay them.
	And we support them.
	And we provide them, as employees, with the insurance to which they are entitled.
	And, if they tried to run the editorial on this site, if they tried to tell me how editorials should be run here, they would be fired, and they would find themselves unemployed.
	The idea that they would come to me crying, crying about a decision to publish Jordan Peterson is unthinkable and unthinkably stupid.
	It's ridiculous.
	And yet it's taken seriously in the halls of corporate power because they are so unwilling to defend the First Amendment and broadness of speech protections that they won't stand up for their own values.
	It's all about the sensitivity of their own employees, as though there aren't 10 employees waiting to get in the door in the middle of a global pandemic to work at a publishing house.
	On Monday, Penguin Random House Canada, Canada's largest book publisher and a subsidiary of Penguin Random House, announced it will be publishing, beyond order, 12 more Rules for Life by Peterson to be released in March 2021.
	The book will be published by Portfolio in the U.S.
	and Penguin Press in the U.K., both part of the Penguin Random House empire.
	Four Penguin Random House Canada employees, who did not want to be named due to concerns over their employment, Well good, they should be concerned.
	Okay, can I tell you something we're never gonna do at this company?
	Hold a town hall.
	It's not gonna happen.
	If you got a complaint, you can come and talk to me about it.
	We are not holding town halls.
	We are not holding whining grievance sessions.
	not a thing that is going to happen.
	During which executives defended the decision to publish Peterson while employees cited their concerns about platforming someone who is popular in far right circles.
	He's an icon of hate speech and transphobia.
	The fact he's an icon of white supremacy, regardless of the content of his book.
	I'm not proud to work for a company that publishes him.
	A junior employee who is a member of the LGBTQ community and who attended this town hall told Vice World News.
	Okay, well, if you're not proud to work, there's the door.
	Enjoy!
	But they held the town hall anyway.
	By the way, the idea that he's an icon of hate speech and transphobia is absurd on its face.
	I love that this employee says the fact that he's an icon of white supremacy regardless of the content of his book.
	So it doesn't matter if his book explicitly denounces white supremacy.
	All that matters is that there are a bunch of people I don't like who like his book.
	That means we should ban his book.
	Let's just preemptively burn books.
	Why not?
	He hasn't even read the book, but let's preemptively burn the thing.
	Another employee said people were crying in the meeting about how Jordan Peterson has affected their lives.
	They said one co-worker discussed how Peterson had radicalized their father.
	Another talked about how publishing the book will negatively affect their non-binary friend.
	The company, since June, has been doing all these anti-racist and allyship things, and then publishing Peterson's book goes completely against this.
	It just makes all of their previous efforts seem completely performative!
	Okay, spoiler alert, guys.
	Their efforts were completely performative.
	I mean, I'm glad that you're just noticing this now, but, um, yeah, all these corporations, they're doing performative wokeness to shut you up.
	Because your perspective is annoying to them.
	They'll do it because they don't want legal liability, and they don't want HR grievances.
	But if it comes up between, here we can publish a book that's gonna sell 3 million copies, and you guys are gonna bitch a little bit, that's a pretty obvious decision.
	But the fact that this is even being taken seriously speaks to the leftist mentality.
	It is not about free speech, and it is not about any sort of diversity of thought.
	It is simply about who gets to rule.
	That is all.
	The Penguin Random House Canada employees said the company was secretive about releasing the new book.
	One said the title didn't appear in an internal database that normally includes all future books.
	The junior employee said, I feel it was deliberately hidden and dropped on us once it was too late to change course.
	Again, you have options.
	One of those options is not working there.
	You can do it.
	I've done that before.
	When I disagreed with the publication, I walked out the door.
	When I disagreed with Breitbart in 2016 and how they handled a particular controversy, I left.
	You can do it too.
	Anytime you damn well please.
	But you don't have the courage of your convictions.
	You just want to take control of the company itself.
	Apparently, Scott Sellers, Director of Marketing Strategy, spoke about how the company has to work with writers whose views we, quote, don't necessarily support.
	But said Sellers also defended Peterson by stating he supports same-sex marriage.
	The implication being, of course, that if Peterson did not support same-sex marriage, they simply could not publish the book.
	This is ridiculous crap.
	But this sort of ridiculous crap extends to every area of the American culture.
	Like, every area of the American culture.
	If you so much as wink at people who do not think like you, you will be taken out to the woodshed.
	So, let's take an example.
	So there's a new movie that's out on Netflix called Hillbilly Elegy.
	I got to see an early viewing of the movie because I'm a special person.
	It is the story of J.D.
	Vance.
	J.D.
	Vance is a columnist for National Review.
	He went to Yale Law School.
	He served in the military.
	And it's based on his book, Hillbilly Elegy.
	So Hillbilly Elegy sold a bajillion copies.
	The book was basically a story about poverty culture in white Appalachia.
	It was about how his family came from Kentucky, and how he grew up in impoverished, formerly industrial areas of Ohio, and how a culture of poverty contributes to drug use and to bad parenting, and how in order to break that cycle of poverty, very often you have to make deliberate decisions to change how you have thought about your life.
	That's what Hillbilly Elegy is about, and it's an interesting sociocultural study.
	It became sort of a decoder ring for a lot of people in the media about Trump's America, because they were wondering, why did all these rural white people vote for Donald Trump, this New York real estate mogul?
	Like, how did that happen?
	And so, Hillbilly Elegy became kind of the way that they decoded that.
	Because these were a lot of people who were impoverished, and these impoverished people had been stuck in cycles of poverty, and Donald Trump promised them a way forward, and he promised them that he was gonna solve some of their problems, and he took them seriously.
	Okay, that was how Hillbilly Elegy was viewed.
	Then, there was a switch, a couple of years ago.
	So this book was published in 2016, it was widely heralded right, left, and center.
	Okay, then...
	There was a move that happened probably 2017, 2018.
	A backlash against the book after Trump won.
	And the backlash went something like this.
	It was really threefold.
	One was...
	Hillbilly Elegy is bad because it takes white poverty seriously.
	As we all know, poverty is a racial problem.
	White poor people are still beneficiaries of white privilege.
	So why are we even talking about them?
	That was point number one.
	So Hillbilly Elegy on his face was bad because it talked about white poor people and cultures of poverty, which suggested that perhaps cultures of poverty have nothing to do with race and that the way to break cycles of cultures of poverty is to make individual decisions, which cuts against the intersectional argument that all poverty is connected with systemic Racism and evil and can only be broken by the system itself being broken.
	Okay, so that was point number one against teleology put forward by the left Point number two is why are you even taking these Trump supporters seriously?
	Because as we all know, they are bad people.
	And then point number three is that hillbilly elegy is a simplistic view of the power of individual decision making and that we should never tell people that they themselves have the capacity to rise in America.
	Right?
	So it was sort of a threefold attack on hillbilly elegy.
	And suddenly hillbilly elegy went from being the darling book of the critic circle to being a whipping post for so many leftist think pieces.
	Okay.
	So in that glowing period where hillbilly elegy was popular all the way across the aisle, they made a movie of it.
	Okay, and the movie features some of the biggest stars in Hollywood.
	It's got Glenn Close as Mama, and it's got it's got Amy Adams It's got Amy Adams playing JD Vance's mother Okay, and the movie's good.
	It's a good movie, okay?
	The movie doesn't go into sort of all the socio-cultural stuff, the socio-economic stuff that the book does, because a book is a book and a movie is a movie.
	But it is a good, well-told family story.
	Amy Adams is terrific in it.
	I mean, she's physically transformed.
	You can't recognize her, right?
	Amy Adams is a very beautiful woman.
	She plays somebody who's essentially gone to seed, and she's very good.
	Glenn Close plays Mama, and she's very, very good.
	The performances across the board are universally quite good.
	The script is...
	Inarguably apolitical.
	It is not a political script.
	It is very obviously not a political script.
	The critics have just savaged this thing to death.
	They've savaged this thing to death.
	And the reason they've savaged this thing to death is because when it was greenlit, it was considered a sort of, again, decoder ring for Trump's America.
	And then after Trump won, it became an evil book that was justifying the evils of Trump's America.
	So the Atlantic, for example, has a big piece by David Sims called Hillbilly Elegy.
	It's one of the worst movies of the year.
	The new Netflix film is a think piece trap, shiny on the outside, hollow on the inside.
	Everyone in this world is one of three kinds, declares Maw Maw, the wise grand matriarch of Ron Howard's new film, Hillbilly Elegy.
	A good Terminator, a bad Terminator, a neutral.
	I hate to correct Maw Maw, who is trying to encourage her impressionable grandson, J.D.
	Vance, to follow a righteous path by invoking Arnold Schwarzenegger's beloved action franchise.
	There is no such thing as a neutral Terminator.
	These cyborg heroes exist to either protect or destroy.
	I cannot imagine what a neutral Terminator would do.
	Momo is entitled to her bad movie opinions, of course, but this monologue is the kind of speechifying that rings hollow throughout Hillbilly Elegy, an adaptation of J.D.
	Vance's best-selling 2016 memoir that debuts on Netflix tomorrow.
	When it first arrived on bookshelves, Vance's story was celebrated as a glimpse into an oft-ignored pocket of America, the white working class of Appalachia and the Rust Belt who swung to Donald Trump in the 2016 election.
	Held as an anger translator and cited by both Hillary Clinton and Oprah Winfrey, Vance wrote about growing up poor, living with a heroin-addicted mother, and clawing his way into Harvard Law School.
	The book arrived at a seemingly serendipitous moment, offering a bleak but candid view of communities gutted by drug abuse and poverty.
	As you can see, really, the rip on the movie is going to be a rip on the book.
	J.D.
	Vance happens to be a Republican.
	We can't have a movie that makes a Republican book look good.
	and perseverance, launching vague broadsides against the American welfare system, the author often appears uninterested in interrogating deeper systemic issues.
	As you can see, really, the rip on the movie is going to be a rip on the book.
	J.D. Vance happens to be a Republican.
	We can't have a book that makes a Republican, a movie that makes a Republican book look good.
	That can't be a thing.
	In adapting the book, Howard and the screenwriter Vanessa Taylor have gone even further, stripping the text of anything that might feel remotely controversial or pointed.
	Netflix's Hillbilly Elegy is an Oscar-friendly narrative of personal triumph in the face of great hardship, a movie designed to end with an uplifting epigraph.
	It is also one of the worst movies of the year, stuffed with A-list stars and tearful monologues.
	It is a neutral terminator of a film, polished yet utterly inert.
	Okay, so again, all that matters here is that the basic movie is bad, because JD Vance is bad, because Hillbilly Elegy is bad.
	And this is how entertainment is going to be treated.
	I mean, we know this.
	We know that the Oscars are only going to feature stories that the left likes.
	You have to have a particular protagonist, or a particular percentage of staffers, or members of a particular sexual orientation, or sexual or racial minorities.
	Every aspect of your culture is going to be turned in favor of the leftist narrative.
	And if Hollywood deigns to step out of that narrative for like one single second and make a movie like Hillbilly Elegy with big stars, then Ron Howard, one of the biggest Democrats in Hollywood, will be eviscerated by the media for it.
	That is the way this is going to go.
	The left has designs on your personal future, on what you can see, on the information you can consume.
	They have personal designs on exactly how your kid is going to be educated.
	John Murakowski, over at RealClear Investigations, has a piece talking about anti-racist teaching in K-12 schools targeting whiteness.
	He says, the notices to parents began arriving fast and furious in the weeks after the death of George Floyd in late May. In dramatic urgent language, K through 12 schools across the country, both public and private, profess solidarity with Black Lives Matter and vowed to dismantle white supremacy as they scrambled to introduce anti-racist courses and remake themselves into racism-free zones. The president of the Lower Merion School Board on Philadelphia's affluent mainline declared to families, we need to eradicate white supremacy and hetero-patriarchy in all of our institutions.
	That's the Lower Merion School Board.
	In Maine, a coastal public school district where 3.7% of the students are black or Hispanic, the superintendent declared war on quote, the intentional barriers white people have built to harm black people.
	The top administrator added, we grieve for all of the black lives taken by white supremacy at Brentwood College School in LA.
	They've made more changes to the curriculum this year than any other in the private school's five-decade history.
	Teachers are introducing critical race theory and assigning readings from garbage purveyor Ibram Kendi.
	The academic and author who contends race-neutral policies are the bulwark of the white ethnostate.
	The nation's K-12 schools have been incrementally adopting multiculturalism and ethnic studies for decades, but those courses were the exception, not the rule.
	This summer's BLM protests have sparked new levels of commitment, a newfound urgency, and a new trend—anti-racist pedagogy.
	And if administrators deliver on their promise, the sweeping changes will introduce new courses, shift hiring priorities, rebalance student demographics, redirect stipends and scholarships, and revise conduct standards.
	That is the way the educational system is going to move.
	So prepare for it.
	The Biden era is not going to be an era of great comity and unity.
	The Biden era is going to be an era in which all informational dissemination systems ranging from the educational to Hollywood to corporate America to social media are going to be directed at you and your values.
	The fight is not ending right now.
	The fight is just beginning.
	So get on board or they're going to throw you off the boat.
	Well, this brings us to the end of today's podcast.
	If you want two additional hours, check out our radio show later today and subscribe at dailywire.com so that you don't have to pay attention to a media that hates you and wishes to eviscerate all of your values.
	Otherwise, have yourself a wonderful Thanksgiving weekend.
	Try to relax a little bit.
	We'll see you here next Monday.
	I'm Ben Shapiro.
	This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Colton Haas.
	The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Colton Haas.
	Executive Producer Jeremy Boring.
	Our Supervising Producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
	Production Manager Pavel Lydowsky.
	Our Associate Producers are Nick Sheehan and Rebecca Doyle.
	The show is edited by Adam Siavitz.
	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.
	Hey everybody, it's Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.
	You know, some people are depressed because the American Republic is collapsing, the end of days is approaching, and the moon has turned to blood.
	But on The Andrew Klavan Show, that's where the fun just gets started.

▲