Andrew Clavin mocks Democratic demands for absurd investigations—from Trump’s firing of James Comey to Nancy Pelosi’s lipstick mysteries—before pivoting to political rage, condemning Laura Loomer’s disruption of Julius Caesar as hypocritical free-speech abuse. He blames media bias (CNN’s decline vs. Fox’s Brett Baer) and elite disdain for fueling polarization, citing 70% of Americans agreeing on core issues yet trapped in manufactured outrage. The episode ends with a bizarre detour: Clavin hates The Beatles’ "A Hard Day’s Night" for glorifying crassness, comparing their cultural dilution to rap’s decline, before abruptly signing off. [Automatically generated summary]
With the investigation into Trump's collusion with Russia stalled on the fact that Trump never colluded with Russia, Democrats have issued a call for, quote, new useless investigations into even more meaningless matters, unquote.
Among the issues Democrats want to investigate are, where do babies come from and when did Donald Trump know it?
Who put the bomp in the bomp a bompa bomp?
And do you think I need to see a doctor about this mark on my chest or is it just a mole?
Democrats say these questions cannot be answered without forming new committees, appointing special counsels, and holding gigantic magnifying glasses up to their eyes so that their faces look extra big.
Adam Schiff, who wears many hats as an investigator, including one with a propeller that goes around in a circle when he pulls the string under his chin, says the House Committee on Shiny Objects needs to open an inquiry into whether Donald Trump was obstructing justice when he fired James Comey or whether it was when he fired Andrea Lake during the fifth season of The Apprentice.
Schiff told reporters, quote, I know Comey behaved in a suspiciously partisan and self-serving manner, but I thought Andrea deserved another chance, unquote.
Schiff says a special counsel should also be appointed to examine whether it was Republicans who stole his G.I. Joe figure when he was eight years old or if his big brother really did stick its head in the garbage disposal to get Joe to confess to where he put the Aquaman comic collection.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi issued a statement saying, quote, I am hereby calling for a thorough inquiry into why I woke up in the broom closet with a big lipstick mouth drawn on my forehead this morning.
Also, who drank the bottle of tequila I'd been saving for whenever I remember when my birthday is, unquote.
Pelosi says she plans to chair a committee that will look into what day it is, why her blouse is buttoned incorrectly, and how, if she parked her car in the garage on Pike Street, like always, it ended up on a lawn in Alexandria with a life-size plush toy of Stewart the one-eyed minion from the despicable me movies in the driver's seat.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is also calling for a thorough investigation into whether the heart-shaped watch the wizard gave the Tin Man really will confer courage on the lovable metal woodcutter, or should courage be considered a universal right so that when the unicorns escape from Narnia, they can be rounded up and sent to Wonderland for free.
Schumer says he feels certain these investigations will lead to the impeachment of Donald Trump, a rousing victory for Democrats in the midterms, and his own elevation to the iron throne of Westeros, where he will rule over the seven lands.
Meanwhile, Republicans are working on a new tax reform plan, but Democrats say such non-investigations are just wasting the public's time and money.
Trigger warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
Shapiro's Fight Against Clickbait Rage00:15:22
I'm the hunky-dunky, life is tickety-boom.
Birds are ringing, also singing, hunky-dunky.
Ship-shaped topsy, the world is a bitty zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hoorah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
All right, the claven-less weekend comes to an end, but I have to say for me, it was a claven-less, claven-less weekend because I am here today with you with two hours and 15 minutes of sleep.
So it's going to be a long show in which I say very, start to, if I start to be incomprehensible or start to forget my words, that's why I was on a Virgin American flight.
Mathis tells me it's a great airline, but they messed up something awful.
It got in, it was supposed to get in at 7.30 or 8, I think.
I got in at 1 in the morning.
I got home at 2.
I didn't get to bed till almost 3 in the morning.
I had to wake up at 5, 5.30 to start the show prep, so I am a little bit insane.
Plus, our studio is still in a shambles, right?
We still don't have Skype, so we can't.
Knowles, Michael Knowles, our troll of trolls, Michael Knowles, sounds like a song, but our troll of trolls, Michael Knowles, is in New York, and we can't have him on because we still don't have Skype.
And you may say to yourself, you may say, why are you, do you have so many incompetence and malfeasant dopes at the Daily Wire who can't put a studio together?
And the reason is we didn't go to ziprecruiter.com to hire our people.
See, we thought it would be good if we just contracted with the county to use their chain gang prisoners and maybe round up a couple of people who escaped from asylums.
But instead, we should have gone to ziprecruiter.com.
With ZipRecruiter, you can post your job to 100-plus job sites with just one click.
And then their powerful technology efficiently matches the right people to your job better than anyone else, certainly better than the county and its chain gang.
That's why ZipRecruiter is different.
Unlike other job sites, ZipRecruiter doesn't depend on candidates finding you.
It finds them.
In fact, over 80% of jobs posted on ZipRecruiter get a qualified candidate in just 24 hours.
That is amazing.
No juggling emails or calls to your office.
Simply screen, rate, and manage candidates all in one place with ZipRecruiter's easy-to-use dashboard.
Find out today why ZipRecruiter has been used by businesses of all sizes to find the most qualified job candidates with immediate results.
And right now, my listeners can post jobs on ZipRecruiter for free.
That is right.
That's free.
Just in case you were trying to count that up.
Go to ziprecruiter.com slash DailyWire, ziprecruiter.com slash DailyWire.
To try it for free, go to ziprecruiter.com slash DailyWire.
If you look around at this studio, which really is in a shambles, you will know that the chain gang and the escapees from the asylums don't work.
All right, rage.
Rage is the topic of the day.
It really is.
I mean, it's just been after this shooting in DC, the wounding of Representative Scalise, and just a thing that was just so close to being an utter, utter tragedy and disaster.
Everybody is looking at each other and wondering why is everybody so angry and who's to blame.
I have to say that I should start, I'm going to start this conversation with some good news that literally just came over.
Some Supreme Court decisions are beginning to trickle in, and the Supreme Court has unanimously reaffirmed there is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment.
And that is good news because we do not want the government deciding what speech of ours is hateful because, of course, it's hateful if you disagree.
That's the whole point.
And this is the thing that happened over the weekend.
I actually got into a Twitter fight.
I couldn't believe it.
I never, ever, ever get in Twitter fights.
I never challenge anybody on Twitter.
I never argue with people on Twitter.
I just won't do it because it's, first of all, it's a battle of wits with unarmed people most of the time.
But secondly, it's just like, it's ridiculous.
It's a ridiculous way.
And it's just because you can't see the other person or relate to the other person is conducive to rage and anger.
And as I always say, anger is the devil's cocaine.
That is one of the mottos of this show and this host.
Anger is the devil's cocaine.
And, you know, every time I say it, I have to explain it because people immediately write in and say, no, no, some anger is righteous.
Some anger is righteous, but no anger is righteous in us.
And the problem is anger makes you feel righteous and you start to do stupid stuff and feel righteous doing it.
And it feels good.
And it's just an addictive, addictive drug.
And one of the other things about this is we in the media, all kinds of people in the media, especially on social media, we are cocaine dealers.
You know, I noticed this when I was a little kid.
I remember noticing when I was a little kid, you know, in my teens, but in my young teens, you know, we'd get the New York Times delivered to the House, of course.
We were a liberal household.
Although back then the New York Times was still a newspaper, so it was, you know, it was pretty decent.
And I noticed that your eyes would go to the things that outrage you, that outrage you.
You would immediately look at something that made you angry, and your eye would flick to that.
And of course, now, social media and all the websites, all the news sites, they have noticed this too, because now they can do studies and find out what gets clicked so they can find out that you will click on something that outrages you.
So, you, you know, when you see this, that clickbait that says, you won't believe what the guy in the other party said, you will hit that thing and you'll get angrier and angrier and angrier.
And it builds up and it feels like righteousness.
It feels like righteousness, but it's just anger, okay?
And so, this is why the right got in a fight on Twitter about this effort to shout down the play.
Shakespeare in the Park was doing Julius Caesar with Julius Caesar as Donald Trump.
So, I called him Orange Julius.
And so, every day in Central Park, people were watching.
I think the play ended last night.
I think it was a last performance last night or the night before.
Every night, people were watching Donald Trump get assassinated.
And I don't care what their meaning was.
I know it's a complex play.
I know it's a play that really says, you know, assassination is not such a good thing because it leads to war and the end of the Republic.
All the same, it was a despicable, ugly, stupid, outrageous, and useless thing to do.
It was a conformist thing to do because everybody in the theater is on the same side.
It was a conformist thing to do because everybody in the audience was probably on the same side or thereabouts.
It was shallow and it was ugly and it was ridiculous.
But, but it was wrong to break in.
It was two kind of trolls.
Somebody else did it again last night or the night before on Friday.
Two trolls went out and who was it?
It was Laura Loomer.
Is that her name?
From Heat Street.
Yeah, Rebel Media.
I'm sorry.
Laura Loomer from Rebel Media.
Sorry, because it's an alt-right website.
And an alt-right activist, Jack Posabik, went on and started screaming.
Loomer was arrested and ordered to make a court appearance to face charges.
And Twitter erupts, and many people on Twitter, including some people I like very much, John Nolte, my pal.
And by the way, I should add, John Nolte is a good friend.
I really like John Nolte a lot, and we really get along.
And Nolte wrote to me and offered to debate me because I disagreed with him on Twitter.
And he offered to debate me, and I would love to have him on to debate, and we will hopefully get him on to debate.
But we don't have Skype, so I can't bring people on.
So he was completely noble and outspoken.
He would come on and face the music because he knows I'll destroy him because he's totally in the wrong.
But he would do it.
And so I don't want to sound like he's a bad guy.
But it really did annoy me that Shapiro said, you know, Ben Shapiro, our Ben Shapiro, went on and said, this is a bad thing.
And this woman from rebel media, Laura Loomer, says, oh, well, you weren't there.
You were just lying on your sofa.
And this, the reason I got into the, started to respond is because, of course, it was Sabbath, it was Saturday.
So Ben can't go on Twitter, right?
So the idea that this clown is going to leave this tweet on for 24 hours when Ben, who walks through police lines, he walks through riots, he walks through all this stuff, all these social justice warriors, Snowflakes, screaming at him to speak, but he doesn't shut down other people's speech, right?
He doesn't shut down other people's speech.
And the idea that she could attack him while he was on Sabbath really bugged me, so I actually answered her, which I almost never do.
I left it at that, luckily.
So essentially, it's all the fault of the Jews.
That's what it all comes down to.
It's all Shapiro's fault because he was celebrating the dark rights of whatever he does on Saturday.
But here's the thing about this: it's not a bad thing because it's smash mouth politics.
I understand smash mouth politics.
It's not a bad thing because we, you know, oh, you know, they can be tough, but we can't be tough because of my principles.
It's a bad thing because you're not fighting for what we fight for.
What we fight for is free speech.
It's not free speech to interrupt a play.
That's a bogus argument.
It's not free speech to shut down other people's speech when they have the right to speak because it's a theater.
People have paid to watch the play.
They're there to watch the play.
It's not an incitement to kill Donald Trump.
It's a play in which they made a stupid political statement.
It's outrageous and you feel outraged, but that doesn't make it an outrage, an outrage like a rape or something, you know, a war atrocity.
It's not war.
This is the other thing.
They keep saying, well, it's a war, and no war, we have to.
It's not war.
And I'll tell you why it's not a war.
Because the purposes of war and political fights are different.
The purpose in a war is to slaughter as many of your enemies as you can until the other side surrenders.
The purpose in a political fight is to convince those people who can be convinced to come on your side in the next vote and vote down the opposition, and in the case of the far left, hopefully, to eliminate them as a political force.
And the funny thing about this is we're winning this fight.
We're winning this fight.
The left has lost a thousand seats through the Barack Obama years.
Their media is collapsing.
Nobody's watching their media.
Their universities are losing people because of the things that go on there.
Everything, everything is, they've lost credibility.
Everybody hates the media.
And now we're going to give them talking points by stopping free speech ourselves.
You can't fight if you're not fighting for what you believe in, right?
It's not about being, this is not like, you know, people beat their chests and they use this hyper macho talk on Twitter: Yeah, we got to do this, we got to do that, and we got to show them, and they did it to us so we can do it to them.
What good is it if you're not fighting for the things we fight for?
We fight for free speech.
And as you saw on that Supreme Court decision, we're winning that speech.
So a lot of this is just about anger and the rage.
Pardon me, I have to keep injecting coffee or I'm just going to pitch forward face forward onto my keyboard here.
Peggy Noonan wrote a piece about rage in the Wall Street Journal and her column in the Wall Street Journal.
And I really like the way Peggy Noonan covered the election.
I always say Peggy, I like Peggy Noonan because she writes like a girl.
And what I mean by that is that she brings a kind of womanly sensibility.
So many women who write political columns basically imitate men and they are not as good as some of the men columnists.
But Peggy Noonan, I also think this is true of Hemingway.
You know, she brings a certain female sensibility that enlightens corners things that don't get enlightened by male columnists.
Unfortunately, she also, when she goes astray, I think she also goes astray in certain ways that I can't follow because they're a little soft for me.
And ever since Trump has been elected, she's been sort of trying to find a way to bring people together.
And I don't think, I think there is a way to bring people together.
I'm not hopeless that we can come back together.
And I'll talk about that in a while.
But I don't think it's going to be by being nice, right?
You know, I was joking with Shapiro over the weekend that I believe in useless calls for evanescent civility because they pass the time and they distract people so I can sneak out and get a drink.
And I think, you know, the problem with useless calls for evanescent civility is that they just devolve into arguments about who broke the truce first.
That's all that happens.
It's like, oh, yeah, well, you called for civility, but then some clown on Twitter said this, you know, so it just completely disappears, and it really is effines, and it really does disappear.
So that is not the answer.
But there are some answers.
But what we got to say goodbye to people on Facebook and YouTube.
Come on over to thedailywire.com so you can hear the rest of the show, but you could watch the whole thing there if you would just subscribe.
A lousy eight bucks a month, and you get to be in the mailbag and ask questions and have all your life's problems solved.
Plus, if you subscribe for a year, you get Ben Shapiro and David Shapiro's new book, and here it is, Say It's So.
And it's a great title because it's about the 2005 White Sox Championship season.
And of course, the Black Sox, the scandal of the Black Sox, somebody said, say it ain't so, Joe.
Say you aren't dirty.
So this is say it so because they actually won, which had not happened in Ben's lifetime and will never happen in his lifetime again.
But anyway, good book.
You can get that as a gift if you subscribe for a year.
So come on over to TheDailyWire.com.
All right.
So Peggy Noonan is writing about rage, and she says, What we are living through in America is not only a division, but a great estrangement.
It's an estrangement between those who support Donald Trump and those who despise him, between left and right, between the two parties, and even to some degree between the bases of those parties and their leaders in Washington.
It is between the religious and those who laugh at your make-believe friend, between cultural progressives and those who wish not to have progressive ways imposed upon them.
It is between the coasts and the center, between those who fly over country and those who decide what flyover will watch on television next season.
It is between I accept the court's decision and bake my cake.
We look down on each other, fear each other, increasingly hate each other.
Oh, to have a unifying figure, program, or party, but we don't, nor is there any immediate prospect.
We have been seeing a generation of media figures cratering under the historical pressure of Donald Trump.
He really is powerful.
It's no excuse to say Trump did it first.
He lowered the tone.
It's his fault.
Your response to his low character is to lower your own character.
He talks bad, so you do.
You let him destabilize you like this.
You are making a testimony to his power.
So many of our media figures need at this point to be reminded you belong to something.
It's called us.
Do your part.
Take it down some notches.
Cool it.
We have responsibilities to each other.
This is not going to happen, okay?
It is not going to happen and is not Donald Trump's fault.
Donald Trump did not create the anger he represents.
He represents an anger that no one was listening to.
And that is what you are seeing.
And that is why you're seeing so many people so upset.
This is an anger that was boiling up and boiling up.
Powerful Testimony00:14:43
Why aren't we represented on television?
Why aren't we represented in the movies?
Why do I have to go and see a movie and have, you know, some movie star that I like and admire and want to watch say something nasty about my political beliefs?
Why does the news only represent everything from one side?
This was way, way, way before Donald Trump.
This thing that they're saying is Donald Trump is so egregious that now we have to take sides.
You were taking sides before.
You treated George W. Bush almost as badly, not quite, but close.
And listen, listen to the absolute ignorance of the people on the right.
They know each other.
I mean, this is true even of Noonan.
You know, they're in Washington, they're in New York, and they're in L.A.
They know each other.
They don't know us.
They don't know you.
They don't know anybody outside of these places.
And they cannot see what they cannot see.
It is frustrating because the fact is we on the right do see it because we're immersed in it.
We can't get away from it.
We can't stop hearing the news.
We can't stop hearing Hollywood.
We can't see, you know, every time you turn on a speech, you turn on an award ceremony to see what pretty gowns the pretty girls are wearing.
And they're shaking their fist in your faces.
These people whose job is to entertain and amuse you are shaking their fist in your face and saying you're an idiot.
They live off our good grace.
They live because we turn up to their movies, but they know they're not going to be penalized because the audience is so fragmented and so niched that they can get that niche and make a living.
So listen to, I want you to hear Jill Abramson talking.
Everybody's talking about, of course, this terrible shooting in Washington, D.C. Left-wing Bernie Brough goes out and, you know, with a list of Republican congressmen in his pocket, starts trying to start shooting at and shooting Republican congressmen.
Luckily, it is brought down by two Washington cops.
So here is Jill Abramson, the former editor of the New York Times.
And I always knew who Jill Abramson was because after she was fired, she was replaced.
She said, you know, the New York Times plays it straight.
Anybody who thinks the New York Times is not a left-wing newspaper is either lying or is so ignorant, is so sequestered, is so broken off from the reality of the political landscape that she has no business in journalism.
I mean, you don't have business in journalism if you think the New York Times is a straight down-the-middle newspaper giving everybody a fair shake.
I mean, it's just absurd.
It is a left-wing provda.
So, here's Jill Abramson's theory on why there is political violence in America.
I do think that both sides are not equally at fault and that there's been a bit of a false equivalency at work, especially in the discussion over the past couple of days.
I think that in terms of political leadership right now, that both President Trump and the congressional leadership on the Republican side are extremely divisive and that they are really benefiting from a kind of rage machine that operates in this country.
So, men are toxic, conservatives are racist.
Anybody who questions the values of Islam is Islamophobic, and you're not being civil.
I mean, that's basically what it is.
You're a hateful piece of garbage, and you're not being civil to me.
You know, that is what Jill Abramson hears because she never leaves 57th Street.
You know, she never leaves 57th and Park.
She doesn't know anything about what's going on, and she despises the people.
And if you despise the people, you can't believe in democracy.
That was bad, but she was a woman offering her stupid opinion.
Everybody's entitled to a stupid opinion.
That's the whole point of the show, right?
Everybody's entitled to a stupid opinion.
But listen to this, okay?
Scott Pelley, I always compare Scott Pelley, the anchor of the CBS News, to Ted Baxter.
And a lot of people have forgotten who Ted Baxter is.
Ted Baxter was the idiot local newsman on the Mary Tyler Moore show back in the day.
Do we still have a Ted Baxter clip?
Play Ted Baxter before I play Scott Pelley.
State Line, Washington.
The Gatewater case is in the news.
Make that the Casewatergate.
And my incredible sources tell me exclusively that we'll continue to keep our eye on the latest developments there.
Elsewhere around the nation, more weather heading our way.
And some especially good news for residents of our area.
Despite the tornado watch and severe hurricane warning, today's pollution index was only six.
Six.
That's six, of course.
Six is on a scale of one to seven, and that's the same scale we use at home at our Baxters at home when we're back on our Weight Watchers.
Speaking of the trouble in South America, here's a special report via satellite from special correspondent Muck Racker.
Muck?
I love playing that because he's Scott Pelley.
He's got the white hair, he's got the deep voice, he's got the authoritative presence, and he's an idiot.
So listen to Scott Pelley.
I mean, this is one of the most appalling pieces of TV journalism I think I've ever seen, and that is saying quite a lot.
He's talking about the shooting.
Listen to this report.
It's time to ask whether the attack on the United States Congress yesterday was foreseeable, predictable, and to some degree self-inflicted.
Too many leaders and political commentators who set an example for us to follow have led us into an abyss of violent rhetoric, which it should be no surprise has led to violence.
Yesterday was not the first time.
In December last year, a man with an assault rifle stormed into a Washington area pizzeria to free child sex slaves whom Hillary Clinton was holding there.
Or at least that's what political blog sites had said.
He fired into a locked door to discover no children in chains.
Bernie Sanders has called the president the most dangerous in history, and the shooter yesterday was a Sanders volunteer.
So Jill Abramson sees a false equivalency that the right is much, much worse.
So here's Scott Pelley making the comparison between a mainstream, almost one Democrat candidate for president, right, and his ugly speech, and the crazed conspiracy theory of Pizzagate from guys like Alex Jones.
I mean, that's who he's comparing.
Plus, plus, the motive of the guy who walked into that pizza place, obviously a disturbed man and obviously inspired by these crazy conspiracies, and it was, I researched this down to the ground, it was a nutty conspiracy.
But the motive of the guy was to save children.
The motive of the shooter in Washington at the Washington ballgame was to eliminate his political opposition as two entirely different things.
And there is Scott Pelley, the face of CBS News, the Ted Baxter of CBS News.
There he is comparing those two.
Well, of course people are furious on the right.
Of course that makes people furious on the right.
For you to have that authority, that power of the media and talk like that makes people nuts.
And I want to play, you know, I have to play this one cut of Jay Sukolo and Chris Wallace went at it on Chris's show.
And Sukolo is special counsel to the president.
And the Washington Post ran an anonymously sourced story saying Trump was under investigation by Robert Mueller for obstruction of justice.
Okay, completely unsourced.
Their unsourced stories have had a very poor record of being factual.
You know, there have been a lot of them that have been proved untrue, so we don't know whether this is true or not.
But it's an unsourced leaked story from anonymous sources.
And Jay Sokolo came on and said he is not under investigation as far as we know.
But Trump came out.
Trump tweeted, I'm under investigation by these guys and so-and-so, you know, his usual stuff referring to this story.
So Sukolo comes out and says, as far as we know, he's not under investigation.
And then he is reacting to the story and says he is under investigation.
And Wallace quite rightly goes after him.
So here's a little bit of their exchange.
He's being investigated for taking the action that the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General recommended him to take by the agency who recommended the termination.
So that's the constitutional threshold question here.
And that's why, as I said, no one's going to be able to do it.
What's the question?
I mean, you stated some facts.
First of all, you've now said that he is being investigated after saying that you didn't.
You just said that.
You just said that he's being investigated.
No, Chris, I said that the inventory.
Let me be crystal clear so you completely understand.
We have not received, nor are we aware of any investigation of the president of the United States.
Sir, you just said two times that he's being investigated.
No.
The context of the tweet, I just gave you the legal theory, Chris, of how the Constitution works.
If, in fact, it was correct that the president was being investigated, he would be investigating for taking action that an agency told him to take.
So that is protected under the Constitution as his Article I power.
That's all I said.
So I appreciate you trying to rephrase it, but I'm just being really sad.
The tape will speak.
Jay, this tape will speak for itself.
Now, here's the thing about this.
This is really, to me, this is really interesting, and I haven't heard anybody else say this, so you're getting this, you know, you're getting a fresh take on this.
This piece of video was put out by both the left and the right as Chris Wallace destroys, you know how everything on YouTube is.
He destroys in big capital letter, destroys Jay Sukolo.
And it was put out by the right saying, Jay Sukolo destroys Chris Wallace.
So everybody saw it both ways.
But what I saw was the interesting phenomenon that the media creates its own reality.
So Sukolo is talking both.
The reason he's contradicting himself is it's not because he's doing a dance or anything like that.
It's because he is speaking both into the reality that is created by the media and into the reality as he sees it, which, fair enough, he hasn't been notified that the president is under investigation.
So as far as he knows, he's not.
And this is an anonymously sourced story from the Washington Post, which, you know, journalism dies in darkness should be their motto instead of democracy dies in darkness because they're just becoming a terrible, terrible paper in their rage, their desperation to bring Trump down.
So Sukolo is reacting to the fact that the media creates this world that you react to.
I mean, this is one of my problems with the people who go on and get so angry and shout down, you know, William Shakespeare in the park.
You know, even my pal Nalty, what they think, they think that CNN is reality.
Nobody watches CNN unless they're stuck in an airport like I was.
And even then I wasn't watching CNN.
Nobody watches it.
It's not creating, if it were creating such a great reality, the left wouldn't have lost 1,000 seats since Barack Obama came to office.
It's not reality.
But the problem is, in our minds, the media creates an alternative reality, alternative facts, as Kellyanne Conway would say.
And Jay Sukolo is reacting both to that, saying he's under investigation, because that's what the Washington Post said, and he's not under investigation, because as far as I know, as his counsel, I haven't heard that he is.
He's not being a fool.
He's simply suffering from a situation that we're all suffering from.
So on the right, the anger, I really do believe, is from an unreformed media.
And I really think the media should be reformed.
I mean, it can't be reformed by law.
It shouldn't be reformed by law.
We have an absolute right to free speech, and they have an absolute right to do the dirty, disgusting, ugly, dishonest things that they do.
Absolute right.
They really do.
But they should reform themselves if they have any sense of the good of the country and the good of economics, because nobody watches them or trusts them anymore.
That's why CNN has no ratings, because nobody trusts them.
If they weren't just playing to outrage, if they weren't just playing to anger, if they weren't just peddling the devil's cocaine, you know, and just told the story straight.
This is something we're going to have to do a whole show about, about meta-jobs, jobs that are above the sides that you take.
Being a priest, being an artist, being a newsman, are things that should be above the fray.
You should tell the story straight.
And on television, the only guy who does it is Brett Baer on Fox News Special Report.
That's the only straight arrow news show there is.
These guys are all slanted, and it just drives people crazy.
On the right, the thing that is making, the thing that would help us come together on the right is if Congress would do something.
You know, Jason Chaffetz, a guy I kind of liked.
He was a big investigator in the Congress.
He announced he's stepping down.
Now, I don't know why he's stepping down, but he talked to Cheryl Atkins on her show, and I wish I could remember her show because she's a great reporter and a deserve.
I'm going to look it up while I'm sitting here.
She has this new show that she's doing full measure, it's called.
Yeah, her program is full measure, and it's kind of a serious, you know, what's the word I'm looking for?
She's created her own network of programs where it plays, and she interviews Jason Chaffetz, and he talks about why he's become disgusted with Washington.
This is cut six.
The reality is, sadly, I don't see much difference between the Trump administration and the Obama administration.
I thought these floodgates would open up with all the documents we wanted from the Department of State, the Department of Justice, the Pentagon.
In many ways, it's almost worse because we're getting nothing.
And that's terribly frustrating.
And with all due respect, the Attorney General has not changed at all.
I find him to be worse than what I saw with Loretta Lynch in terms of releasing documents and making things available.
I just, that's my experience, and that's not what I expected.
What were some of the investigations that this committee was stalled on that you hoped could be picked up now that's not been able to happen in terms of documents not provided by federal agencies?
We have everything from the Hillary Clinton email investigation, which is really one of the critical things.
There was the investigation into the IRS, and one that was more than seven years old is fast and furious.
I mean, we have been in court trying to pry those documents out of the Department of Justice, and still to this day, they will not give us those documents.
And at the State Department, nothing.
Room for Agreement00:02:03
Okay, so here's what I think, right?
There's a segment of the left and a segment of the right that are going to be at odds.
We have people who are now so angry that they're never going to come back together.
I truly believe that the actual state of the nation is not represented on social media.
It's not represented in the media.
There is a much different state of the nation than we know.
I think that I believe that 70% of the American people agree on 70% of the issues.
I really do.
And I think that there is a lot of room for us to come together.
It's not going to come through civility because there are always going to be these people who say outrageous things and they're always going to get the big press, right?
They're always going to make a presence on Twitter.
They're always going to be in the comment sections and people are going to point them out and all this stuff.
But if the press would do its job and if the government, which is now run by the Republicans, would do its job, if it would cut some taxes, bring the economy back, make health care in some sense navigable and sensible and sane, if it would eliminate the absolute mess that Barack Obama made out of this country for eight years while the press lay supine in absolute awe of the color of his skin, if it would start to correct those things, whether it helps Donald Trump or not,
because I know some of these Republicans don't want to give Donald Trump anything.
If those things happen, I believe the economy might come roaring back, roaring back in ways that the experts say it won't.
You'll hear it from me.
We can have way over 3% GDP again.
If those things happen, I believe that a lot of these problems will, they won't disappear, but they'll fade into the background.
It is not as hopeless as it seems at this moment when everything is stagnant.
They're going to continue to hammer at Trump.
But if somebody, you know, if guys like Scott Pelley could be shown the door, you know, if you could get rid of guys like Scott Pelle and George Stephanopoulos and start to reconstruct and reform the mainstream media just in this, out of goodwill and honesty, also out of good economic sense, I think that a lot of this anger would start to go away.
Beatles and Working Class Values00:08:04
All right, stuff I like.
I'm still talking.
We're going to turn off this mic in a while and I'm just going to pitch forward onto the desk.
But this week on stuff I like, I'm doing great Beatles songs and why I hate them.
I was discussing this with my son-in-law over the weekend and I was talking about, I mean, he's a big Beatles fan.
And, you know, I'm a reluctant Beatles fan.
Every time I hear the Beatles, I like them, but there's something about them I have never liked.
And it has to do with the fact that because of the radio station my father worked for, I grew up listening to songs of the previous generation.
In other words, my generation was the generation of rock and roll, but I grew up listening to the generation of Tin Pan Alley because that was the station that my father worked for.
So I grew up listening to Frank Sinotra and Bing Crosby.
I have the musical tastes of 120-year-old man.
I think that that is like the problem I have with the Beatles.
And so I listen to the Beatles and I think, what is it about these guys that bug me so much?
So here is the first great Beatles song and why I hate it.
It's A Hard Day's Night from 1964.
Here is a rare cut of The Beatles playing it live.
So why is it I can't do alone how I feel?
Okay, so that's the Beatles singing it.
But here is, and I've played this before, but it is hilarious.
Here is Peter Sellers dressed as Richard III giving his own, Peter Sellers, great comic, a lot of people don't remember him, great, great comic actor.
He played the original Pink Panther, a British comic actor.
Here he is dressed as Richard III, delivering the lyrics in a plummy accent.
It has been a hot day's night.
And I have been working like a dog.
It's been a hard day's night.
I should be sleeping like a dog.
But when I get home to you, I find the things that you do will make me feel.
All right.
You know I work all day to get you money, to buy you things.
And it's worth it just to hear you say, you'll give me everything.
That's why I love to come home.
Because when I get you alone, you know I feel.
Okay.
So the thing that he's making fun of there, right, is that the Beatles have now brought popular music down to the working class, which was partly the fact that they were imitating black music.
You know, they were bringing black music into the mainstream, which has been a constant, has been a constant theme in certainly in American music, was blending the great jazz and, well, I can't remember the name of it now, but the ragtime, the great jazz and ragtime music of black Americans with the white music, you know, guys like Bing Crosby and all this, and bringing it into this kind of fusion.
But in the fusion, the fusion was always directed upward.
It was always directed toward being sophisticated and being, the lyrics were sophisticated, the music was sophisticated, the people singing it were often sophisticated.
Even the black singers would dress up and be sophisticated.
People like Lena Horn was basically the very image, the picture of sophistication in the dictionary.
And what this did was it basically turned it around the other way.
A Hard Day's Night basically is saying, these are the romantic values that you work to give your wife, your girlfriend, pretty things.
And in return for the pretty things, she will be nice to you.
You know, I mean, it's kind of like crummy values.
And that goes on to these horrible, horrible rap lyrics about killing police, about slapping women, about treating women like garbage that then get listened to by white kids in rich neighborhoods who then imitate that kind of attitude and think it's cool.
Now, most of them, if they have parents who stay together and are well-raised, they grow out of it and they go on to listen to the music without its harming them.
But I think for actual people in ghettos and for kids who don't have parents to take care of them and watch out for them, I think this stuff is polluting.
And I think to admire Something that is, you know, as people go up the ladder, hopefully their values start to become more sophisticated and better.
This is not always true, but I think it's true in a sort of vague general socialized way.
And I think turning the romanticizing the values of the working class with maybe not such values of the working class, that's not fair.
Romanticizing the worst values of the working class, the romanticizing the worst values of the working class, the kind of I work all day and I give you things and now you're nice to me, was maybe not such a good thing.
However, it's easy to see why it happened because if you look at a song like My Baby Just Cares for Me, which is a song about the opposite of this, you know, My Baby Doesn't Care for Rich Things, it was introduced by Eddie Cantor.
And if you are watching this, if you're watching this on video, you will see something about this Eddie Cantor version.
This is a 1930 film that Eddie Cantor was in.
You will see something about it that will tell you every reason why these values, these upper-class values, should have been and were going to be deserted.
My baby don't care for shows.
My baby don't care for clothes.
My baby just cares for me.
My baby don't care for forest and lasers.
My baby don't care for high-tone blazers.
My baby don't care for ring or rather expensive things.
She's sensible as can be.
My baby don't care who I will be.
My baby just fears for me.
So he's doing it in this hideous black face, you know, with the big white lips and all this stuff.
And if you have no respect for the people you are trying to fuse your music with, I don't see why they should have any respect for you.
So basically, the Beatles were baked into this Eddie Cantor, you know, this Eddie Cantor number.
This was going to happen as long as people were treated with the horrible, horrible disrespect that black people were treated with in this country back in those days.
So, you know, this was a revolt.
It really was.
It was the Beatles were revolting against something.
They were bringing something new and fresh into popular music.
I'm just not sure that the direction it was going in.
You know, there are these artists, these very fortunate artists, who come along at a gateway when things are changing.
And frequently they do beautiful things.
Picasso was one of them.
You know, T.S. Eliot was one of them in poetry.
The Beatles were one of them in music.
Marlon Brando was one of them in acting.
And frequently what happens is they start a movement and the movement that comes after them is dreadful.
You know, the movement of abstract art I think is dreadful.
The movement of modern poetry, so much of it is so bad.
And of course, poetry ceases to be read by normal people after T.S. Eliot.
And, you know, Picasso was one of them.
Brando, I would say, was different.
He actually moved acting into a new phase.
The Beatles did this, and I just think that what came after them is so bad that it reflects badly on them, and it makes me dislike them.
So it's a great song, and I hate it.
I'm Andrew Glavin.
This is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I will try and get some sleep, and I hope I made sense today.
I thought I was doing all right.
I was stumbling through there.
Yeah, okay.
So, but I will be back again tomorrow, hopefully a little bit better rested, and we will See you then.