Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 15, 2023 - The Ben Shapiro Show

49:48

The Woke Lynching of Daniel Penny

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Okay, if we really want to talk about the fact that there are two systems of justice in the United States, that splits in a wide variety of ways.
	People have talked for a long time about two systems of justice applying when it comes to the rich versus the poor, for example.
	If you can afford a really good lawyer, a really good lawyer makes it a lot easier to navigate the criminal justice system.
	People have talked about A disparity in the criminal justice system between Republicans and Democrats.
	And we'll get to that in a little bit with regard to Donald Trump's indictment versus the treatment of Hillary Clinton.
	But there is also a two-tiered system of justice when it comes to people who are accused of crimes in blue cities who are white versus people who are accused of crimes in blue cities who are black.
	And that is particularly true when it comes to interracial crime.
	When it comes to intraracial crime, well, then the disparity goes away.
	In the sense that if a black person victimizes a black person, pretty good shot that the victimizer will go to jail.
	And if a white person victimizes a white person, pretty good shot that the white person is going to go to jail.
	But, if a black person victimizes a white person, the chances that that person is going to end up indicted for a bad reason, as opposed to a white person victimizing a black person, that they will get an equivalent sentence, Those chances are just not the same and we all know it.
	That's particularly true if you're talking about a controversial circumstance in which it is unclear whether a crime was even committed.
	So take, for example, a case in which a crazed white homeless person is subdued by a law-abiding black American Marine who subdues him and then the white person dies.
	Do you think that black person is going to end up in the dock, indicted by a grand jury, and The answer, of course, is no.
	That is not a thing that would cross any prosecutor's mind.
	It would not end up in a courtroom.
	However, if a white person does it, and the person in question who died is a crazed homeless Black person who is threatening people on the subway system, then the white person may end up in jail for the rest of his life.
	And that is the case currently with Daniel Penney.
	So we all remember the video on the New York subway system of a crazed black homeless person named Jordan Neely
	who assaulted old women, abused people on the streets, routinely threatened people.
	There's an outstanding warrant for him.
	He was on the subway system and he was openly threatening people
	according to the other people on the subway system.
	And he was subdued eventually by US Marine Daniel Penny.
	Penny came up behind him and he put him in a submission hold.
	I call it a submission hold and not a choke hold because the notion of a choke hold,
	which is they're basically the same thing, but the idea of a choke hold
	is typically to cut off air supply, whereas a submission hold is very often
	Blood supply is meant to basically put you to sleep, it's a sleeper hold, whereas cutting off your air supply typically can kill you.
	So, not quite the same thing in terms of how we colloquially use these terms, even if legally speaking they are the same thing.
	There's no question that Daniel Penney did not mean to kill Jordan Neely.
	And Jordan Neely, in all likelihood, we haven't seen the toxicology report yet.
	I would be shocked if he was not high as a kite because, again, if you are a homeless person who's living on the streets of New York acting erratically, there's a very good shot statistically that you are high as a kite.
	We know that Jordan Neely also had a history of drug use and drug abuse.
	And so in this particular case, we also know from the video that there was a black man who was helping hold Jordan Neely down because he was thrashing about and still apparently attempting a violent.
	There's a Hispanic man also involved.
	It was like a cross-racial crew of people attempting to stop this person from threatening people on the subway system.
	And eventually, Jordan Neely goes non-responsive.
	When he goes non-responsive, the three of them turn him into the prone position on his side so he doesn't choke on his own phlegm or his own spit or his own tongue.
	And by the time EMT arrives, he's already essentially dead.
	That's the story.
	Well, in any normal circumstance, when a person gets threatening to women, children, other people on a subway system, and then is put into some sort of submission by a person who actually knows what they are doing physically, and Daniel Penney had actually trained people in terms of takedowns.
	In the U.S.
	military.
	When that sort of thing happens, you don't prosecute the person who's responsible for defending the life and limb of innocent citizens from a crazed homeless person on the subway.
	And yet, that is precisely what's happening in New York.
	And the reason that's happening is because Daniel Penney is white.
	There's just no other way to read this.
	If Daniel Penney were a black man, this would not be in court.
	According to ABC News, a grand jury has now indicted former U.S.
	Marine Daniel Penney in connection with the chokehold death of Jordan Neely aboard a subway train.
	The exact charges will not be unsealed until Penney appears in a court at a later date.
	Penny was initially arrested on a second-degree manslaughter charge.
	Some witnesses told police that Neely was yelling and harassing passengers on the train, according to authorities.
	Now, the media immediately went into spin mode after this incident, and they released old tape of Jordan Neely dancing like Michael Jackson.
	And, ah, this innocent Michael Jackson impersonator.
	This innocent Michael Jackson impersonator.
	He was just dancing his life away when he was accosted and attacked by this evil white person.
	But, of course, the reality is that Jordan Neely Had a long history of arrests.
	42 prior arrests on charges ranging from evading fares and theft to assaults on three different women.
	He had pled guilty to assaulting a 67-year-old woman leaving a subway station just back in 2021.
	And yet the media do what they typically do in a case in which the alleged perpetrator is white and the alleged victim is black.
	Very often, they will find you a picture of the most innocent that the person who's black has ever been, right?
	This is what happened with Michael Brown.
	When Michael Brown was shot by an officer in Ferguson, Missouri after attempting to grab the officer's gun.
	The pictures that you saw were not of Michael Brown in any sort of thug pose or him beating up a store owner five minutes before.
	What you saw was his graduation photo.
	And you see this very often.
	The media immediately attempt to go to their defined narrative of innocent black man killed for no reason by terrible white person.
	Now, again, other people on the train have already said, publicly, to the media, that Neely was threatening people.
	Penny held Neely for several minutes.
	At some point, Neely stopped moving.
	Penny held him for a longer period of time.
	But you can see on the tape that he's kind of thrashing about until he's not thrashing about anymore.
	The medical examiner determined that Jordan Neely was killed by a chokehold.
	His death was ruled a homicide.
	Now, typically, when you say that somebody's death is ruled a homicide, that doesn't mean it was a murder.
	A homicide just means you didn't die of quote-unquote natural causes.
	Okay, but again, this is a perfect example.
	What is the picture that ABC News uses in order to promote this story?
	It's a picture of Jordan Neely from 2009.
	Okay, from 2009 where he's dressed up as Michael Jackson seeing This Is It outside Regal Cinemas.
	That's the picture that they use, not the picture of him screaming and yelling at people or the picture of him punching an old lady.
	Apparently, Steinglass said prosecutors conducted a thorough investigation that included interviews with eyewitnesses, 911 callers, and responding officers before moving forward with a criminal charge.
	Neely had a long documented mental health history and his family has of course come out of the woodwork with the help of Benjamin Crump apparently.
	to try to sue because this is typically the way that this works.
	The family that was nowhere to be found when this unfortunate homeless crazed person was alive suddenly emerges from the woodwork when tragedy occurs.
	In a second, we'll get to Daniel Penny's account of the incident.
	First, this Father's Day, it's time to grill.
	And we all know Father's Day is a great time for grilling.
	I'm planning on getting out there.
	But here's the thing.
	You can get the best gift for dad by getting him the gift of meat from good ranchers.
	Producer Savvy actually just got her husband the Ranchers Classic Box for his first Father's Day.
	They're very pumped about all this.
	They have a new baby, which makes, you know, going to the grocery store kind of difficult.
	And now they have the world's best meat.
	So I'm sure that Savvy's husband will be a very happy man.
	Good Ranchers offers ribeyes, New York strips, T-bones, all-natural burgers, and the most delicious chicken you could ever want.
	Plus, right now, you'll get $30 off with code BEN at GoodRanchers.com.
	Good Ranchers also offers a price lock guarantee for the next two years.
	You can lock in that price right now.
	And if you'd done that a couple of years ago, you know how much you would avoid in inflation?
	A lot.
	Whether your dad is a steak lover, a barbecue enthusiast, or just enjoys that good old-fashioned burger, Good Ranchers has something for everyone.
	Order today.
	Make this Father's Day a sizzling success.
	Head on over to GoodRanchers.com.
	Use code BEN for 30 bucks off any box.
	That is promo code BEN at GoodRanchers.com.
	GoodRanchers.com.
	American meat delivered.
	Okay, so, Daniel Penny?
	Some people say I was trying to choke him to death, which is also not true.
	I was trying to restrain him.
	You can see in the video, there's a clear rise and fall of his chest, indicating that he's breathing.
	especially after the restraint was let go.
	I didn't see a black man threatening passengers.
	I saw a man threatening passengers.
	A lot of whom were people of color.
	Okay, and all of that, you know, presumably went by the wayside when the grand jury decided to indict.
	Now, they do say that a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich, right?
	And this is a frequent phrase in American criminal law.
	It's not hard to get a grand jury to indict.
	But the fact is that no reasonable prosecutor will bring this case.
	You're talking about a case of reasonable doubt.
	But here's the thing.
	Reasonable doubt cases turn into not reasonable doubt cases in the United States when the races are wrong.
	That's the way this works.
	And this is the reason Derek Chauvin is currently in prison.
	I'm about to say a very unpopular thing, but this is what I do because the thing happens to be true.
	George Floyd is not dead because Derek Chauvin put a chokehold on him.
	Or because he was putting pressure on his neck.
	There was no damage to George Floyd's neck.
	George Floyd was in a state of excited delirium by the medical evidence.
	He was already saying he could not breathe when he was in the car.
	He was begging to be let out of the car.
	And the best available footage, as the prosecution itself admitted, involved Derek Chauvin on his shoulder, not on his neck.
	But the fact is that Derek Chauvin was a white man, and George Floyd was a black man, and the video was ugly, and therefore, Derek Chauvin will now spend the rest of his life in prison, even though in any normal situation, if there was a black officer and there was a black man on the ground, that officer would not be in prison right now.
	If there were a white officer and a white man on the ground, that officer would not be in prison right now.
	But this is the way that our justice system works.
	And talk about a two track justice system.
	If it fits the narrative, you may find yourself in jail for the rest of your life.
	Daniel Penney described the situation on the New York City subway.
	He said, Jordan Neely was in fact threatening a lot of people.
	He said, good morning America.
	The three main threats that he repeated over and over was, I'm going to kill you.
	I'm prepared to go to jail for life.
	And I'm willing to die.
	Penny claims he was intimidated by Neely, who he says boarded the train and began yelling in passengers' faces.
	I was scared for myself, but I looked around.
	I saw women and children.
	He was yelling in their faces, saying these threats.
	I couldn't just sit still.
	Okay, so normally you would consider that a heroic act.
	When someone is threatening somebody on the subway system, threatening women and children on the subway system, and somebody stops them, you would normally consider that an act of heroism.
	But again, the media saw the races.
	All they saw was the colors.
	And in this justice system, if the colors are wrong, that means that the media lynch mob.
	It's not just, it's not common citizens.
	It's not everyday common citizens who are driving lynch mobs anymore.
	It is the media.
	The media decides that somebody is worthy of being hamstrung for the rest of their life.
	And then they whip people up into a lather, and then they unleash the lynch mob on the person.
	And that is how people like Daniel Penny end up in the dock, when the truth is, they should be giving Daniel Penny the key to the city.
	The fact is that New York City has not protected its own citizenry.
	Either the crazed homeless people who are living on the street, who should not be living on the street, and who need treatment, or the people they are victimizing on the streets.
	New York City has had dozens of people who have been assaulted on the subway system, pushed in front of trains, killed, And yet, none of that makes headlines.
	The only thing that makes headlines is when the racial narrative stacks up.
	So, guess what?
	If you have a city where people are getting prosecuted for defending other people, and the cops are basically barred from actually enforcing the law in places like the New York City subway system, nobody's gonna ride the subways anymore.
	Or if they do, then they are going to be subjected to the sort of behavior that Jordan Neely was subjecting people to, which included actual physical assault in at least one case, and two more cases, allegedly.
	Like, at least three cases of alleged assault against the person who ended up dying in this particular circumstance.
	Speaking of our two-tiered system of justice, Hillary Clinton was back out there at it.
	Get to that momentarily first.
	It takes a special kind of company to want to partner with this show.
	As you noticed, I say a lot of things that may tick people off, but I say them because they are true.
	Well, I'm proud to stand behind companies that are willing to stand with this show.
	PeerTalk is one of those companies.
	They share my values, as well as the values of Matt Walsh, Candace Owens, Michael Knowles, the rest of the DailyWire hosts.
	That's why we made them the official wireless partner of the DailyWire, but that's not the only reason.
	Their coverage also happens to be excellent.
	It is premium coverage.
	PeerTalk is the most dependable 5G network in the United States.
	I use it myself.
	Mix and match your plans to fit every person in your family.
	Choose from talk, text, and 5G data for just $20 a month all the way up to unlimited data with mobile hotspot for $55 a month.
	Remember, you vote with how you spend your money.
	So stop supporting woke wireless companies that don't support you and switch on over to Pure Talk today.
	Head on over to puretalk.com slash Shapiro.
	Save an additional 50% off your very first month of coverage.
	That's PeerTalk.com slash Shapiro.
	PeerTalk is wireless for Americans, by Americans.
	I've been using PeerTalk myself for all of my business calls.
	The coverage is great.
	They share one of the big tower networks with one of the big guys.
	Go check them out yourself.
	PeerTalk.com slash Shapiro.
	Save an additional 50% off your very first month of coverage.
	Okay, meanwhile...
	The Donald Trump indictment has now moved forward, obviously, and Hillary Clinton is emerging from the woodwork.
	The shameless sociopath who was exonerated of her similar behavior back in 2016 is now out there pretending that she is clean as the driven snow, while Donald Trump is dirty and evil.
	So she's appearing on Pod Save America, which is a show made by people who used to work for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
	On behalf of people who like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
	So here is Hillary Clinton being interviewed slash slobbered on by John Lovett over at Pod Save America.
	Now, again, I've told people a thousand times that this is an opinion show.
	Pod Save America is an opinion show.
	If you want to hear the different opinions, listen to my show, listen to their show, and then figure out what you think is true.
	In any case, Hillary Clinton was on with John Lovett.
	And she took the opportunity to talk about how it was literally impossible to defend Trump.
	She does not own any mirrors.
	There are no mirrors anywhere in a 300-mile vicinity of Hillary Clinton.
	She has never owned a mirror, apparently.
	I don't say that because of how she looks or anything.
	I say that because she literally has no self-awareness.
	It just does not occur to her.
	Or it does occur to her and she doesn't care and she's a sociopath.
	So, Hillary Clinton, you will recall, literally set up a private server in her home, like in her basement.
	And she put a bunch of classified information on that private server and it ended up being farmed out to like a private server company that had their server in a bathroom.
	And it was all very likely, according to the FBI, accessible to foreign sources and very well could have been stolen by foreign sources.
	And then when she was questioned about it, she bleach bit the entire hard drive and all the emails went away.
	And she claimed it was all just a bunch of stuff about yoga and wedding planning and all the rest.
	And it turns out that that wasn't true because the emails reemerged on the computer of convict Anthony Weiner, who had an unfortunate pension for soliciting minors.
	So yeah, that didn't seem real secure.
	But none of it was a problem for Hillary Clinton.
	She's out there claiming that she is wonderful and Donald Trump is the root of all evil.
	And we can all see it.
	We can all see it.
	You wonder why Donald Trump was elected in the first place.
	It's because of double standards like this.
	It's the reason why he remains a viable candidate, despite the fact that his behavior in this particular scenario is really pretty egregious.
	I gotta say, his behavior, according to the indictment, if the indictment is proved, is not the sort of behavior that you want anyone involved in.
	Let alone a person who claims to really respect law and order and the classification standards of the American military, which is what Donald Trump was claiming back in 2016.
	But all of that is irrelevant when the Democratic Party is full-scale dedicated to the idea that for my friends, anything, and for my enemies, the law.
	And Hillary Clinton is just the best example of this.
	They refuse to read the indictment.
	They refuse to engage with the facts.
	There's nothing new about that.
	And what they refuse to admit is, you know, this is on a track about him, not about anybody else.
	No matter how much they try to confuse people and how much they try to It's going to be fascinating, I guess, in a bizarre and sad way, to watch them spin themselves up.
	If you watched any of the news programs this weekend, their efforts to defend this man are truly beyond anything that I ever thought possible in our country.
	I love all the people on the stage from Crooked Media.
	And there is the word crooked above her, which is funny.
	I love all the people from Crooked Media nodding along with this nonsense.
	They literally spent years defending Hillary Clinton's activities here and pretending it was but her emails.
	No big deal.
	Why are we even covering this sort of stuff?
	And she's like, I can't believe people are spinning up in defense of Donald Trump.
	I don't have to defend Donald Trump on these charges in order to point out the double standard.
	That is obvious.
	But Hillary has no self-awareness, which is why in the middle of all this, she tweeted out a photo of herself with a photoshopped hat that said, but her emails.
	Yeah, we all see it, Hillary.
	We all know.
	We all know you got off and Donald Trump is not getting off.
	We can all see that happening in real time, which is one of the reasons why so many people are motivated to vote for Donald Trump as sort of you've chosen the form of your destroyer.
	Now he will come in the form of the Pillsbury president.
	Stomping on New York City.
	I mean, that is essentially what you guys are begging for.
	Neal Katyal is doing the same routine.
	He's the former principal deputy solicitor general.
	And he, of course, worked in the administration of Barack Obama.
	And here he was talking about how nobody ever would have charged Hillary Clinton.
	I mean, yeah, we're charging Donald Trump, but nobody ever would have charged Hillary Clinton.
	But we know you wouldn't have charged Hillary Clinton.
	We know.
	What all of this Hillary Clinton talk is is just classic Trumpian misdirection.
	And, you know, back then, no reasonable prosecutor would have charged Hillary Clinton.
	I think that's right.
	That was based on the independent inspector general's report.
	Nobody, no reasonable prosecutor, except for how she violated the law, but you know, no biggie, no biggie.
	The double standard is perfectly obvious.
	Perfectly obvious here.
	Meanwhile, the Biden administration, which is responsible for the indictment of Donald Trump, is pretending that it's all happening because of independent investigation.
	Now, as I've said, I don't blame the prosecutor in this particular case.
	There are a lot of people who are very angry at Jack Smith, the special counsel for the DOJ in this particular case.
	But Jack Smith's job, he's the special counsel, is to investigate this particular case and then to look at the fact pattern and decide whether some criminal activity has taken place.
	It's not his job to decide, based on the politics, whether Trump should be actually indicted.
	That is the job of Merrick Garland and Joe Biden.
	So if your job is just to look at the charges and the evidence, and if you read the indictment, the charges and the evidence are pretty strong, and you're Jack Smith, I understand why Jack Smith is bringing the indictment.
	The real question is why Merrick Garland is signing off on it?
	Because the real consideration here is a political consideration.
	Is it a good idea to prosecute the former president of the United States and the current frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination on the basis of mishandling classified information and obstruction of justice when a Democratic chief candidate for president of the United States ran against him in 2016 was exonerated on exactly the same sort of behavior?
	Is that a smart idea by Merrick Garland?
	Is that good for the country?
	That's a political decision.
	And when you have prosecutorial discretion and it's used frequently, you have to question why that discretion is being used in the way that it's being used.
	Again, prosecutorial discretion is used in deciding whether or not to prosecute Daniel Penney in a case where there is clear reasonable doubt, obviously.
	Prosecutorial discretion is being used by Merrick Garland in deciding whether the DOJ ought to go forward with the prosecution of Trump.
	That's not up to Jack Smith.
	That's up to Merrick Garland, and it's up to Joe Biden.
	But here was Merrick Garland asked yesterday about his role in the indictment, and he basically refuses to answer the question.
	Can you give the American public a very clear sense of what exactly your role was in the indictment process, just so people can understand what that role is?
	And then secondarily, given the historic and extraordinary nature of the case, explain to people, if you would, why this was the best and most appropriate step that was taken and why there were no other alternatives.
	I'm trying to remember the first question.
	Yes, so my role is completely consistent with the regulations that set forth responsibilities to the Attorney General under the Special Counsel regulations.
	And I followed those regulations.
	With respect to the second question, this again is asking for particulars, and I'm not going to be able to comment.
	So he's just going to avoid all that.
	But again, it's his DOJ.
	He is the head of the DOJ.
	He's the Attorney General of the United States.
	This indictment does not go forward without his sign-off on it.
	He doesn't have to take the recommendation.
	It's a political question.
	They decided they wanted to prosecute Trump.
	It is that simple, and everybody can see it.
	In a second, we'll get to the media response to all this again covering for the Democrats, because this is what they do professionally speaking first.
	Abortion is the leading cause of death among infants in the United States and the world.
	Sadly, with the abortion pill accounting for about 50% of all abortions, babies' lives are now at greater risk than ever in some ways.
	Thankfully, you and I can do something about it thanks to our new partners at Preborn's Network of Clinics.
	is the largest provider of free ultrasounds in the United States.
	They offer love, support, and compassion to hurting women, helping them make the right choice.
	By letting a mom see and hear her baby on ultrasound, the child's chance at life is doubled.
	The ultrasound quality these days is astonishing.
	We have a brand new baby, baby number four, and we met him long before he emerged from the womb, and guess what?
	He is the same kid.
	Preborn clinics provide mothers who choose life with maternity and baby clothes, diapers, car seats, counseling, and much more.
	All of these services, up to two years of assistance, are provided free of charge thanks to people like you.
	Join me on my mission to save 17,000 babies from abortion.
	One ultrasound is just 28 bucks.
	A $140 donation gives five babies a chance at life.
	A $15,000 donation will cover the cost of an ultrasound machine and save countless babies lives for years to come.
	All gifts are tax deductible.
	We're the answer to saving these lives.
	So help out today.
	Donate by dialing pound 250 say keyword baby.
	That's pound 250 baby or go to preborn.com slash ben.
	That's preborn.com slash ben.
	Okay so CNN is doing its best to pretend that Joe Biden is not behind these charges.
	Again, it is the Biden administration that's pushing forward with this.
	The special counsel does not have the power to simply prosecute.
	They have to have the sign off from the DOJ.
	Here is CNN pretending that is not the case.
	Trump insinuated that Biden had him arrested, that Biden did it, also that Biden also had illegally obtained and kept troves of documents.
	Yeah, so the first part, there was no indication, no evidence whatsoever that President Biden is somehow behind these charges.
	They were brought by a special counsel and approved by a Florida grand jury of ordinary citizens.
	Then this claim about Biden and the 1850 boxes.
	Look, Biden is under his own special counsel investigation.
	Because he did take some number of classified documents from his time prior to being elected president.
	But these 1850 boxes, Jake, are not 1850 classified boxes.
	I'm sorry, Daniel Dale reemerging from witness protection.
	You remember Daniel Dale, right?
	He's the guy who during the Trump administration would appear every five minutes on CNN for a fact check.
	And then when Joe Biden was taken out of his coffin, they mothballed Daniel Dale and now he's back to fact check.
	Here's the reality.
	Joe Biden's administration is in charge of the DOJ.
	The DOJ is in charge of the prosecution.
	It's that simple.
	They could have killed it.
	They decided not to kill it.
	Now, they may have good legal reasons not to kill it, but certainly from a political level, they've now opened a can of worms.
	Meanwhile, we have some updates on Donald Trump and how this case is going to proceed.
	Many of the witnesses in this particular case are going to be people who are closely associated with Donald Trump.
	According to the New York Times, The judge is making clear that Trump should not be talking about the facts in his indictment with any potential witnesses.
	Because, again, there is the idea that they might be colluding with one another.
	That's particularly true of his aide, Walt Mauda, who is also under indictment at this point.
	But many of the people who are giving evidence at this point are going to be closest aides, advisors, lawyers, even members of his secret service detail.
	Because those are people who presumably may have been implicated in the activity of moving classified documents around Mar-a-Lago.
	Throughout the document's investigation, according to the New York Times, many employees at Mar-a-Lago were interviewed about Trump by Mr. Smith's team at a time when, like now, they were being represented by lawyers paid by Trump's PAC.
	Some of the lawyers Trump hired to defend him in this case have also wound up being questioned by the government, and they may also appear as witnesses.
	Again, that goes to the crime-fraud exception.
	This is the case with regard to some of his lawyers who basically informed the federal government that Trump had turned over all of the classified documentation.
	And then it turns out that Trump was actually hiding some of the classified documentation from his own lawyers.
	So they were lying without knowing they were lying, according to the indictment.
	That would include, of course, Evan Corcoran and Jennifer Little, both of whom were subpoenaed for testimony and records, nearly all of them possessed by Corcoran and by Mr. Smith's team during the investigation.
	According to the indictment, Trump had told Corcoran he wanted to be at Mar-a-Lago, and Corcoran did a search, and Little did not have to be there.
	And then in the time when Corcoran was not there, he moved around some of the documents.
	So, some of those people presumably will be called to testify.
	There's an argument that's now being made by Trump's legal team, and by people who are his defenders, that he is safe under the Presidential Records Act, which allows the president to take with him personal records of the presidency.
	That is not the same thing as agency records, as Andy McCarthy has pointed out.
	It's a dubious legal argument.
	The Presidential Records Act not only applies to Contemporaneous records of conversations the president like his diary that he himself was making but also any any material that crossed his desk is now considered presidential records as opposed to the CIA gave him a confidential top-secret report and now he gets to take that home and put it on his wall.
	Typically speaking that is not covered by the Presidential Records Act as Andy McCarthy has made pretty clear.
	Others have made this clear as well.
	With that said, that is a defense that will be presumably tried.
	Again, all this comes down to on Donald Trump's level, so many things can be true at once here.
	One of the things that is true is that Donald Trump's behavior here is just irresponsible and reckless.
	There is no reason to do this.
	I can't say this too much.
	When you know your enemies are targeting you, do not put a target on your own back.
	His enemies are going after him with fire ants and Donald Trump is like smothering himself in honey.
	I don't understand why you would do that, like he's a rational human being.
	If Donald Trump actually took his opposition seriously, if he actually believed the left was as much of a threat as he says the left is, and I believe they are, then why would he make himself vulnerable in this way?
	And we're now finding out that Trump rejected his own lawyer's advice on all of this stuff, which of course is obvious.
	Apparently, according to the Washington Post, one of Trump's attorneys, Christopher Kyes, wanted to quietly approach the Justice Department to see if he could negotiate a settlement that would preclude charges, hoping Attorney General Merrick Garland and the department would want an exit ramp to avoid prosecuting a former president.
	Kyes would hopefully take the temperature down, he told others, by promising a professional approach and the return of all the documents.
	But Trump was not interested after listening to other lawyers who urged a more pugilistic approach, so Kyes never approached prosecutors.
	Three people briefed on the matter said a special counsel was appointed just months later.
	That quiet entreaty was just one of the many occasions when lawyers and advisors sought to get Trump to take a more cooperative stance in a bid to avoid what happened on Friday.
	Apparently, all of his lawyers were saying over and over pretty much, you should just give them back the documents.
	Why are you not giving back the documents?
	What are you doing?
	And he was doing what he always does, which is ignore his lawyers.
	It was a total unforced error, said one person close to Trump, who's been part of dozens of discussions about the documents.
	We didn't have to be here.
	Trump again and again rejected the advice from lawyers and advisors who urged him to cooperate.
	Why exactly that is the case is beyond me.
	I don't understand what motivated Trump, why he had such a deep desire to keep the documents that he wished to put himself in this particular situation.
	And again, this goes forward to electability.
	Is this a person with the sort of discipline necessary to win an election against a person he already lost an election to?
	I don't know the answer to that.
	So it's very difficult to say the answer is yes.
	It's also difficult to know what's going to happen with Walt Mauda.
	One of the questions here is whether Walton Aouda may now turn on Trump because Walton Aouda is being charged.
	This is the big question in the case.
	Trump has the- essentially, Watanabe was his ballot, he was his valet, he was essentially bringing him Diet Coke in the White House as an aide, and then eventually he ended up working for Trump's Super PAC, and then eventually he ended up working for Trump personally, which is why he was the one who was being texted to move all of these boxes around.
	But he is facing decades in prison now.
	He's a 40-year-old, he's facing 20 years in prison if he's convicted of the most serious charge against him.
	There's certainly the possibility that the prosecution is going to try and get him to flip.
	So far, there have been no indications that Nauda is going to flip.
	But apparently, people familiar with the case say that Nauda spoke more than once with federal investigators, and the conversations turned contentious last year when a senior DOJ lawyer suggested the valet was in legal trouble for some of his statements.
	Apparently, Nauda's lawyers reacted angrily to that suggestion, and the relationship never recovered.
	The judge has already said that Trump should not be talking to Naoda, but Naoda and Trump took the same plane, apparently, to Bedminster directly after the indictment.
	So we'll see what happened in relation to all of that.
	Meanwhile, the GOP continues to futz about for some sort of retaliatory solution here, to put some pressure on Democrats.
	So if the idea is the Democrats are going to politically prosecute Trump, or they're going to open this door, then there has to be some form of retaliation.
	Well, yesterday, the House GOP Put forward a bizarre measure to censure and then fine Adam Schiff.
	Now, there are two measures here that ought to be considered.
	One is censure.
	Censure is a congressional method where the Congress gets to make up its own rules.
	It basically is a statement of, this guy is terrible.
	Congressional censure has happened a few times in the past.
	The particulars of this case, it's happened Approximately, it's only expelled, only five members in the history of the United States Congress have actually been expelled.
	But censure is significantly more popular.
	Back in 2021, Paul Gosar was censured by the Democratic Congress.
	In 2010, Charlie Rangel was censured by Congress.
	Then you have to go back to 1983.
	So there was talk about censuring Adam Schiff because he spent years on end lying.
	Lying routinely about the Trump-Russia investigation, suggesting that there was information right around the corner that he was privy to, that Trump was guilty of collusion with Russia.
	Again, one of the reasons why there's so much goodwill toward Trump in this particular case is because the Democrats have been crying wolf about Trump literally since the day he came down the golden escalator.
	Well, now the House attempted to vote to censure Schiff, but they also attempted to add on top of that a $16 million fine.
	Well, I gotta say, is that good strategy?
	I mean, this is a serious question.
	There are 20 Republicans who voted against that, so the censure motion ended up getting tabled.
	The reason that 20 Republicans voted against that, some of them presumably didn't want to vote to censure Schiff because they're weaklings.
	I mean, that's certainly possible.
	Some of them, like Thomas Massey.
	Thomas Massey of Kentucky is definitely not a weakling.
	Okay, Thomas Massey is a very strong libertarian member of Congress.
	He does not like Adam Schiff.
	He's been very warm toward Donald Trump on a wide variety of issues.
	What he says, and I find this somewhat compelling, is, do you want to set the precedent that Congress can fine people $16 million?
	Is that a good idea?
	Because again, if the idea here is that turnabout is fair play, whatever you do now is going to be used by Democrats against you five minutes from now.
	So people who are saying that this is just weak Republicanism, that the Republicans couldn't get it together to censorship, they'll still censorship.
	That's going to come up again next week.
	The original attempt here was to pry $16 million from Adam Schiff to pay for all the bills of the Mueller report.
	But again, the precedent being set, which is that if you don't like what a member does and you censure them, then you get to take, you know, tens of millions of dollars out of their pocket.
	I could see that being used in pretty bad ways against people like Marjorie Taylor Greene or Lauren Boebert or literally anyone else the Democrats decide ought to be on the chopping block today.
	According to the Washington Post, The Republican-led House voted to table that measure.
	20 Republicans voted with Democrats to table the measure, effectively killing it 225 to 196.
	The resolution sought to fine-shift the former House Intelligence Committee chairman $16 million.
	And again, one of the things that Massey, who's very constitutionally minded, said is, that's not constitutional.
	You can't just fine members tens of millions of dollars.
	Because again, that just means a majority in the Congress is going to be fining the minority.
	You can take that to its logical extreme.
	Anytime the Democrats hold Congress, they can just fine every Republican member of Congress by a majority vote their entire net wealth.
	How's that going to work exactly?
	The resolution correctly alleged that Schiff purportedly deceived, purposely deceived his committee, Congress, and the American people, and used his position and access to sensitive information to investigate a fraudulently based investigation.
	It also said Schiff behaved dishonestly and dishonorably on many other occasions.
	And again, all of that happens to be true.
	Shift said it showed courage for the Republican colleagues to vote against the thing, but that's really not what was happening here.
	Again, there were some moderates in swing districts who voted against it, but there were also a bunch of right-wing members, including Representative Thomas Massey.
	Massey said, Shift acted unethically, but if a resolution to fine him $16 million comes to the floor, I will vote to table it.
	He currently has a pending lawsuit against former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi for a salary reduction resulting from a fine for refusing to wear masks during the pandemic.
	Remember Pelosi tried to fine members of Congress for not wearing masks.
	So does she have the power to do that?
	The answer should be no.
	Should members of Congress be voting to take money away from each other?
	That seems like a very, very bad precedent.
	Again, this should be the way that everybody thinks about politics these days.
	Anything that you do to the other side will be done against you within the next five minutes.
	So unless you have some sort of bright line rule that you can apply that makes it okay, just recognize whatever sword you establish here will be used because it will cut both ways.
	Okay, meanwhile, over in California, the insanity continues.
	We'll get to that momentarily first.
	Hiring used to be pretty hard.
	You'd post your job on multiple sites, hope the right people see it, and then wait for them to apply.
	Well, the same goes for finding a job.
	You upload your resume to every job posting site, you comb through never-ending lists of jobs trying to find the right position for you.
	ZipRecruiter is the best place to find the right position or, if you're an employer, the right person to join your team.
	Right now, you can try ZipRecruiter for free at ziprecruiter.com slash dailywire.
	ZipRecruiter's matching technology helps you find the most qualified candidates for a wide variety of roles.
	If you see a candidate you like, you can easily send them a personal invite so they're more likely to apply.
	Their user-friendly dashboard makes it easy to filter, review, and rate your candidates all from one place.
	Let ZipRecruiter help you find the best people for all your roles.
	Four to five employers to post on ZipRecruiter.
	Get a quality candidate within day one.
	See for yourself.
	Go to ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire.
	Try ZipRecruiter for free.
	Again, that's ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire.
	ZipRecruiter is indeed the smartest way to hire.
	We've been using it here at DailyWire for years on end.
	Why do you want to sift through job boards?
	Why do you want to sift through batches of bad resumes when you can have ZipRecruiter basically sift all that stuff for you or get you the best possible jobs in your inbox today?
	Go to ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire right now.
	ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire to try it for free.
	Also, maybe you were one of the tens of millions of people who watched a Netflix's hit show, Making a Murderer.
	If so, you will love DailyWire Plus's new exclusive 10-part docuseries with Candace Owens, Convicting a Murderer.
	It comes out this summer.
	There's no such thing as your truth.
	There's only the truth.
	And while it feels like the truth is being lost, some people are still pursuing it.
	Candace is doing that with the case that Netflix attempted to make.
	Candace found out the key facts may have been omitted in Netflix's series, so she set out to uncover the truth behind the notorious Stephen Avery case.
	The end result is a new series called Convicting a Murderer.
	You're not going to want to miss it.
	Right now, there's never been a better time to become a DailyWirePlus member.
	Sign up now for Convicting a Murderer.
	You will receive an early bird discount of 25% off your DailyWirePlus membership.
	You also get all of the other premium content from DailyWirePlus, including The Greatest Lie Ever Sold, What Is Woman, and the largest collection of content from Dr. Jordan B. Peterson anywhere, including his series on the Book of Exodus.
	So, head on over to dailywire.com slash subscribe right now, become a member, see the truth when it finally comes out.
	Okay, meanwhile, remember that time that Democrats pretended that they didn't want to take your gas stove?
	Uh, they did.
	They did.
	member the energy secretary jennifer granholm testifying that they didn't want
	to take your gas stove uh...
	it's This is why I'm so excited to be here. I'm going to be
	interviewing a couple of people. I'm going to be interviewing some of the specialists that are going to be
	speaking. And I'm going to be interviewing some of the people that are going to be speaking. Thanks for coming.
	They don't want to take your gas, Dov.
	They would never want.
	Yesterday, 181 Democrats voted to ban gas stoves.
	So just going to point that out.
	So that's good news.
	Glad they're doing that.
	According to FoxNews.com, the House on Wednesday passed legislation to block the Department of Energy from implementing tough new energy conservation rules on gas stoves, an effort that was supported by more than two dozen Democrats.
	Lawmakers passed the Save Our Gas Stoves Act in a 249 to 181 vote, which means 181 Democrats voted in favor of letting the Department of Energy ban gas stoves.
	This is always the rule.
	We're not doing it, and it's good that we are.
	That is the way all of this stuff works.
	Meanwhile, Joe Biden's Catholic Church is holding a special mass.
	Are you excited?
	Are you really excited?
	Well, apparently, Wednesday evening, they celebrated a special mass over at this Catholic Church, this very Catholic Church.
	Now, there are a bunch of Catholics who work for this program, and so it's time to survey the Catholic room.
	Guys, have you ever heard of a pride mass?
	A gay pride mass?
	Savvy, is this a thing that you do at your local church, a gay pride mass?
	Nope, I didn't think that this was part of the normal rosary.
	I wasn't aware.
	Is there a sloth mass or a wrath mass also?
	Also no, Savvy says.
	I assume that the adultery mass is rather lit.
	Um, but I'm confused because I thought that the Catholic Church was a hierarchically structured church in which the Pope had the final say, and so I'm very confused that the localities are somehow allowed to somehow greenlight full-scale violations of both the Old and New Testaments.
	That's exciting stuff to learn.
	The pastor of Holy Trinity Catholic Church in Georgetown, which counts Biden among its congregants, defended the decision to have the Mass, saying it was not celebrating pride in terms of vanity.
	Oh!
	Oh!
	Not in terms of vanity, just in terms of, you know, lust.
	Okay.
	This celebration is an expression of our parish's mission statement to accompany one another in Christ, celebrate God's love and transform lives said the Reverend Kevin Gillespie.
	Our celebration of pride is not celebrating personal vanity, but the human dignity of a group of people who have been too long the objects of violence, bullying, and harassment.
	Our parish reaches out to LGBTQIA plus people as it reaches out to Catholics in all of our areas.
	Well, I assume that they are going to teach all of these people that they had best give up their particular sexual lifestyles and identities in favor of, you know, the biblically prescribed ones.
	I assume that'll be part of the deal, right?
	I mean, because it's not pride in the actual act.
	It's not pride in the actual identification as anything other than a Christian.
	I have to say, more respect to the Southern Baptist today.
	The Southern Baptist actually decided to essentially dissociate from churches that have appointed female reverends, because they say that that violates our scruples.
	When is the Catholic Church going to do the same?
	I'm wondering, when are archbishops going to suddenly decide that it's time to stop giving communion to people like Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden, or to excommunicate churches that participate in pride masses?
	Aren't there any limits at all?
	I'm just, I'm confused.
	Again, Savvy, film me if I'm doing this wrong, because I'm not the Catholic expert, but it feels like at some point the Vatican should do something about this, no?
	At least speak out would be a big one.
	Yeah, that makes sense, but I guess they're not going to.
	You know who is speaking out, though?
	The Muslims.
	So, in my favorite intersectional battle of the day, A Michigan city, which is all Muslim, it's an all Muslim
	city council in Hamtrak, Michigan, they voted unanimously on Tuesday to approve a resolution
	banning the LGBTQ pride flag from being flown on the city's public property. Here's what
	the city council meeting looked like.
	Our soldiers fought, bled and died in the jungles of Iwo Jima and the beaches of Omaha
	so that you and I can live with peace, prosperity and freedom.
	Those soldiers fall under the American flag and no other.
	It's shameful and embarrassing to have any other flag in public buildings.
	You have the freedom to display whatever you wish in your home or your private businesses.
	We respect all nations, cultures, and their flags, but we only salute the American flag.
	Do not waver and do not flinch.
	You are doing the right thing.
	God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.
	Well, good for that guy.
	I'm all in on that.
	That sounds correct.
	It'll be fun to watch the Democrats struggle with intersectional populations in conflict.
	So, good for Muslims for standing up for, you know, basic Americanism there.
	Like the American flag should be the only one that flies above public buildings.
	I thought that that should have been, you know, wrote by this point, but apparently not.
	But it's gonna be fun to watch Democrats struggle with Muslims are the new homophobes.
	That's gonna be fun to watch.
	Okay, time for some things I like and then some things that I hate.
	So, things that I like today.
	There are a couple of things to like.
	One, Starbucks has now had to pay a manager almost $26 million.
	Why?
	Well, you remember during the Black Lives Matter kerfuffle back in 2020 when every major corporation was pretending that America was systemically racist against black people and therefore they had to pay obeisance to people who were acting badly in their stores.
	So Starbucks had a situation in which there were two black men at a Philadelphia cafe who were not buying anything and then asked to use the restroom.
	And a white lady, who is a manager, basically called the police when they refused to leave.
	And Starbucks chided this person.
	They made her a national scandal.
	Well, now the lady, whose name apparently is Shannon Phillips, she sued Starbucks for discrimination.
	And she won a $25.6 million verdict.
	A New Jersey federal jury decided in favor of Shannon Phillips.
	She sued Starbucks in 2019 over allegations of racial bias and discrimination.
	It took the eight-member panel nearly five hours to award $25 million in punitive damages and $600,000 in compensatory damages to Phillips, determining her skin color played a decisive role in her termination.
	Phillips worked for Starbucks for 13 years.
	She oversaw roughly 100 cafes.
	She was fired less than a month after Dante Robinson and Rachelle Nelson were arrested at a Spruce Street store on April 12, 2018, for refusing to leave a table.
	The incident was captured on a cell phone video, quickly went viral, and Starbucks faced intense scrutiny for the treatment of the black men who said they were waiting for a business associate and hadn't ordered anything when a manager called the Philly police on them.
	Phillips was not present at the time.
	To quell the firestorm, you'll recall, Starbucks, being an idiotic chain, apologized and closed 8,000 stores for racial bias training.
	Remember this insanity in 2020?
	It was totally crazy.
	Well then, Starbucks looked for a sacrificial lamb.
	So, they decided to fire this lady.
	Apparently, the district manager Paul Sykes is black and reported to Phillips.
	He said she was beloved by her colleagues and her termination, which came out of the blue, was likely due to the color of her skin.
	This is all about appearances, the optics of what they did.
	Matti Aci said, if Shannon Phillips is black, does it play out like this?
	This case is about Starbucks and self-preservation.
	So good for good for the jury.
	So it turns out that the lady who is presiding over, you know,
	Starbucks is handling at this point in this region was fired
	basically because they were looking for a scalp in a stupid case.
	There's a reason, by the way, there's new polling out this morning with regard to the Black Lives Matter movement, and it turns out that the American support for Black Lives Matter has now fallen to its lowest point since George Floyd's death.
	Which, it's amazing again that our country is so stupid that it decided to embrace full-scale a scam movement based on a lie for years on end, but I'm glad to see that people seem to be awakening from that nightmare.
	Meanwhile, the Major League Baseball apparatus is quietly telling teams they can stop forcing players to wear uniforms and hats adorned with Pride garbage.
	The decision comes as LA Dodgers are taking major heat for inviting the radical anti-Catholic hate group the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence to their Gay Pride Night game on June 16th.
	The Tampa Bay Rays were the first MLB team to announce that players would not wear any rainbow-colored patches or jerseys during the June Pride game this year.
	The league kept this change to its Pride celebrations very quiet.
	They basically just gave a dispensation to teams that they didn't have to force it down on their players.
	The reason that happened is because players said no.
	Good for the players.
	Again, resistance actually breeds victory, and this is one case where that is perfectly obviously true.
	Okay, time for a quick thing that I hate.
	Okay, so I guess we have to have a story now about Kim Kardashian and her biggest turn-on.
	Yeah, page six is doing this.
	The reality star broke down her man list of dream qualities in a partner during a Thursday episode of The Kardashians.
	And here is what she said.
	Good teeth.
	Teeth are like one of my biggest turn-ons.
	The straighter, the hornier I'll get.
	Just kidding.
	But not kidding.
	So apparently, straight teeth, she says, make her horny.
	This is her thing.
	Other qualities that she seeks in a man.
	A calm man.
	And we're going to go through her dating history momentarily, guys.
	Just a warning.
	With good hygiene.
	No mom or dad issues.
	Who will protect and fight for her.
	No heavy baggage, she says.
	I have enough.
	No heavy baggage.
	Yeah, that's her dating history, is men without baggage.
	Mm-hmm.
	Taller than me.
	Someone that loves to work out.
	A motivated person.
	An independent person that's not clingy.
	And someone with good taste.
	I think the first mark of bad taste is that you're dating Kim Kardashian.
	She also said, no balding.
	But then, I don't know.
	If I'm in love, I'll rub your bald head, you know what I mean?
	But we're just talking about our perfection list.
	She has been married three times.
	I'm wondering why, you know, what the guy's teeth look like are the real deciding factor for her considering in publicly available materials of her, like, what makes her horny.
	We have some publicly available evidence of this and apparently, you know, facial recognition is not an element of that.
	I'm going to put that as subtly as I possibly can for the minors in the audience.
	In any case, I think that means that if teeth are her big turn-on, it's time.
	It's time for us to take a walk down memory lane with Kim Kardashian's ex-boyfriends and husbands, and we'll determine, based on teeth structure, whether these are good partners.
	So, this is a person named Damian Thomas, who is a Grammy-nominated music producer.
	She was 19 when this happened.
	He claims the Kardashian cheated on him and that he initiated the separation and divorce.
	I find it hard to believe that Kim Kardashian would be sexually profligate.
	How dare you, sir?
	How dare you?
	So, how are his teeth?
	They are okay.
	He has okay teeth.
	Okay, next.
	Ray J, who she had some experiences with on tape.
	He does indeed have teeth.
	Yes, those are teeth.
	Okay, so on a scale of one to ten, I'm gonna have, again, our producers right in the producer's room.
	So, Damon Thomas, scale of one to ten for teeth on Damon Thomas, guys.
	Taking consensus in the room?
	Six and a half, seven-ish?
	Six and a half to seven is the consensus in the room on Damon Thomas' teeth.
	Okay, so it didn't last because of the teeth.
	Obviously, that was the deciding factor.
	Okay, we have Ray J. How are his teeth doing?
	Those are nice.
	I like those.
	Not too bad.
	Not bad teeth, according to Savvy.
	So we're gonna give the, what, like an 8?
	8 in terms of teeth?
	Okay, let's give that guy an 8.
	Alright, Nick Lachey.
	The rare white guy dating Kim Kardashian.
	Veneers.
	Those are veneers.
	Yeah, those look like veneers for sure.
	So that dings him.
	Look like veneers according to Savvy, so he is downgraded.
	A point.
	Also, Nick Lachey, I mean, I have to say, that is a dating history for Nick Lachey, right?
	He goes right from his divorce with Jessica Simpson to dating Kim Kardashian.
	And next, we get Nick Cannon, and we got some teeth problems here with Nick Cannon.
	Not great.
	So, yeah, he's got some British teeth going on over here.
	Cheers.
	Uh, yeah, there is some, there is some, there is some, you know, food material in the teeth over there.
	Yeah, that's, that not, not ideal.
	That is, that is Nick Cannon.
	That's, those are not the, the dentist is not proud.
	He is not brushed every day.
	A tooth per kid.
	He's not flossed.
	By the way, Nick Cannon's dating history is, that's a saga of its own.
	Yeah.
	Right.
	Next, we have Reggie Bush.
	This presumably is like right after he won the Heisman, but before it was revoked or something.
	Anyway, Reggie Bush does have, he does have teeth.
	They are in his face.
	I think it's a seven.
	I don't think they're the straightest teeth.
	Around a seven.
	So that's, that's like a seven.
	We're being told by Savvy.
	Okay, Miles Austin, who is again, football pro Miles Austin.
	And this dating history is longer than the Boston phone book here.
	Miles Austin.
	And it got lost because it didn't last very long.
	Apparently they broke up because they were long distance.
	She needs people in the immediate camera vicinity.
	There he is.
	That's a good one.
	Then you have Chris Humphreys.
	So he was on Keeping Up with the Kardashians and they had a huge fairytale wedding and the fairytale ended with disaster as per her usual arrangement.
	That's a decent smile.
	But good teeth, right?
	Those feel like good teeth.
	Good teeth.
	For Chris Humphreys?
	Yeah, nine.
	Nine.
	That's like a nine.
	That's like a good orthodontic.
	work over there, whoever Zorthinanas was, gets credit for the braces.
	She married him.
	She did marry him.
	So, so far the ones that she has married were guy number one, and then she married this
	guy, right, Chris Humphries, who had good teeth.
	And then, um, they, uh, and then they, she got married to Kanye West, which ended beautifully,
	of course.
	Um, and, uh, Kanye West?
	Well, yeah, this is definitely the teeth with the grill.
	This is where he had, like, the diamond grill on him.
	So, I don't know if she likes the shiny teeth or what.
	Not sure what the story is there.
	And then, finally, Pete Davidson.
	Who, to be fair, Pete Davidson has dated at least 72% of the female population of the United States.
	And he had some tooth work done.
	And so, she dated him post-tooth work.
	So, apparently, like, if teeth are her thing, then the average human I don't know if they had their wisdom teeth removed, but most adults have like 32 teeth.
	And I believe the number of men that we just went through was, if I count correctly, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.
	Go Kim!
	So that means that she had a fulsome view of at least 288 teeth.
	So that is exciting stuff for Kim Kardashian.
	I know.
	I had to do it, guys.
	You hated it too.
	We all hated it together.
	I liked it.
	But them's the rules.
	I wasn't the one who brought it up.
	Kim Kardashian did.

▲