Ep. 406 – Accused! dissects Paul Manafort’s $18M offshore laundering indictment, linking it to pro-Russia ties and Clinton-era uranium deals while questioning Mueller’s impartiality amid leaked charges. It pivots to Kevin Spacey’s 1986 assault allegation, then skewers progressive Halloween costume bans—Moana, sombreros, Pocahontas—as censorship masquerading as cultural appropriation. The episode ties these battles to media bias, from suppressed research on maternal parenting to Stranger Things’ derivative storytelling, framing leftist dominance as stifling free expression and originality. [Automatically generated summary]
I think we've learned that if Paul Manafort had only listened to our podcast, Another Kingdom, he could have avoided the Claybooks weekend.
But he made a mistake and now he's been indicted for being an unregistered agent of the Ukraine and hiding all the money he made.
Interestingly, this is before he was with the Trump campaign, but it was while he was as an agent of the Ukraine while he was working with the Podestas to buy off Hillary Clinton and the State Department so that they would agree to allowing the Russians to buy our uranium.
So who's been indicted?
It's a very, very strange story.
We'll take a closer look.
Also, actor Anthony Rapp has accused Kevin Spacey of sexually assaulting him when he was 14, 30 years ago.
Here's a clip of the accusation.
Help!
I've escaped from Kevin Spacey's basement!
Help me!
Okay, maybe.
I just flew that in up.
Sorry.
I am actually going to defend Kevin Spacey, sort of, kind of, not really, but a little bit.
I met Spacey once.
You know, I met Spacey once, and it's actually a funny, I'll tell the story because it's actually kind of amusing.
What else?
Michael Knowles, the star of Another Kingdom, and also he hosts some other show somewhere.
I don't know what he's doing.
He is going to come on and he's going to tell you exactly which Halloween costumes you are not allowed to wear.
So bring a pen and pencil so you can write this down.
I know you care very deeply about what the left thinks, which costumes the left thinks you're allowed to wear.
Trigger warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky donkey.
Life is tickety boo.
Birds are ringing, also singing, hunky-dunkity.
Shipshaw, dipsy-topsy, the world is a bitty-zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hurrah, hooray!
It doesn't want to sing.
Oh, hurrah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
All right, hooray, hurrah.
Does that sound better?
I was a little low there.
I was clutching my leftist tears mug, and I got it, let it get in front of the microphone.
But you too could have a leftist tears mug if only, if only you would subscribe for a lousy hundred bucks for a year.
You get a full year for 100 bucks, and you get the leftist tears mug.
It means you get to be in the mailbag.
You get to ask questions while you're in the mailbag.
You can write questions, and then when we take you out of the mailbag, you can hand us the questions.
And it's only a lousy 10 bucks a month to do that, and then you get the whole year for $100, and you get the leftist tears tumbler.
Also, you should be looking at Skillshare, right?
Because then you would know, you would know more things than you know now.
I mean, this is an online learning community.
It's got over 3 million members and more than 17,000 classes.
It's kind of the Netflix of online learning, and I've been using it.
I used it, first of all, I used it to test it.
So when I went on the first time, and it's a series, you know, it's like a course.
There are courses in all kinds of things.
Graphic design, DSLR, photography, social media marketing, digital illustration, lots more, things that you might want to add to your resume, but also things that you might want to do as a hobby.
I went on and tested the writing instructions because I figured that's something I know about.
And they were good.
They were really good advice, really good advice on marketing, which is not something I'm as good at.
And when Knowles and I did Another Kingdom, I actually, we were having so much trouble getting the things mounted.
I actually went on and took some of their podcasting classes as well.
Their classes are taught by industry experts, experienced professionals.
They're perfect if you're looking to build your career or start the side hustle of your dreams.
Skillshare, you know, and the other thing is you pay once and then you don't have to pay in the middle of the classes.
You basically get the whole, the whole array of 17,000 classes and all the different things.
Design, photography, marketing, entrepreneurship, brand strategy, business planning, watercoloring, hand lettering.
Yeah, I passed on the hand lettering, but you might, other people might be interested.
Here's what you do.
Skillshare is giving my listeners a one-month free trial of unlimited access to over 17,000 classes.
You go to www.skillshare.com slash Andrew and you get a free month, www.skillshare.com/slash Andrew.
Maggie Haberman On Campaign Confusion00:15:21
You get a free month.
It's worth trying out because once you see what you're getting, you'll think, like, oh, yeah, I can use this.
It's really useful.
All right, Paul Manafort's been indicted, former campaign manager of the Trump campaign.
And so Mueller indicted him.
This is the special counsel, obviously.
Mueller indicted him for charges that he laundered more than $18 million in funds from his work for a pro-Russia party in the Ukraine through offshore accounts.
So not only was he not registered as an agent of a foreign power, but he was also laundering the money, passing it through.
It was him and his, and Richard Gates.
This is what he's accused of, obviously.
As they say, you can indict a ham sandwich.
Though why you would want to indict a ham sandwich, I don't know, but you can.
You can indict anybody.
It's just a charge.
It doesn't mean he did it.
But this is all arising from that.
Remember, there was that raid back in July where they burst into his house with their guns drawn and all this stuff.
So it's a big indictment.
And obviously, it seems obvious to me anyway, and I've covered a lot of court stuff as a reporter.
It's obvious that they are throwing the book at him and hoping that they're going to get more stuff out of him.
Now, one assumes that their target is ultimately the president, but who knows?
Maybe Mueller is just going after him thinking, you know, I want to squeeze this stuff out of you.
The thing about it is, though, of course, if you put so much pressure on a guy, he might say anything, right?
He might say, yeah, I'll give you whatever you want.
I'll tell you, what do you want to hear?
So it doesn't make him as trustworthy as all that.
But it is a big indictment.
It's a complicated indictment.
It's going to take him a long time to work this out.
That means that anyone who hopes the Mueller investigation is going to go away really fast.
It is not going to go away.
Once the defense starts asking for discovery and this and that, this is going to take a long, long time just before it gets into a court.
So the first thing about this that we have to talk about is that Manafort wasn't working for Trump during the time any of this happened.
He was working on his own and he was doing this stuff on his own.
So before we get to that, because it's really important, the question, the thing that makes Trump look bad is why did you hire this guy if he was dirty, if he was working for these Ukrainian people and all this stuff?
And was it to get at some Russian catch of dirt on Hillary Clinton?
You know, the most logical thing here, and we don't know this, I mean, this is pure speculation on my part, but the most logical thing is that Manafort helped Reagan get the nomination at his convention.
And as you remember, if you think back, the GOP was so panicked about Trump getting the nomination that they started to say, well, at the convention, we're going to do this, we're going to pull this trick, and all this stuff.
So he probably pulled Manafort in to rig, you know, make sure the convention didn't get, as Trump would have said, rigged against him.
The minute the convention was done, Manafort was gone.
He just tossed him out.
So, I mean, it was really, it was a bad hire, makes him look bad in that degree.
But anything else beyond that, so far, we're not seeing anything.
More importantly, what we have to do is last week, I played some stuff that Tucker Carlson has, and Carlson says he has a source.
Now, I've been very suspicious about anonymous sources.
I remain suspicious about anonymous sources.
I like Tucker Carlson.
I think he's been a pretty reliable guy.
But he says he's got a good source.
And to begin with, he describes what Manafort was doing.
And this is essentially what Mueller is accusing him of.
So this is cut number 11, right?
Yeah.
Media reports describe Paul Manafort as a central figure in the Russia investigation due to the several months he spent as Donald Trump's campaign chairman.
According to our source, that's only half true.
Manafort is indeed at the center of this investigation, but not because of his ties to Trump.
In fact, Paul Manafort spent years working with the Podesta group on behalf of Russian government interests.
That relationship extends back to at least 2011, when our source claims Manafort had dinner in Washington with both Podestas, Tony and John.
In the years following, our source says he saw Paul Manafort in the podesta group offices, quote, all the time, at least once a month.
Manafort was not there to socialize.
He was representing Russian business and political interests who sought to influence Capitol Hill, Hillary Clinton's State Department, and the Obama administration.
Our source describes Manafort bringing what he called a parade of Russian oligarchs up to the Congress, where they met with members and their staffs.
But the central effort to extend Russian influence was focused on the executive branch, the Obama administration.
The vehicle through which Paul Manafort worked for the Russians was a shell group called the European Center for a Modern Ukraine.
Now, the group supposedly was based in Belgium, but it had no actual offices there.
It had, in fact, only two employees, both of them based in Ukraine.
Their telephone number in Brussels rang in Kiev.
It was a sham.
So it was, basically, he was representing Russian interests, and what was he doing?
Paul Manafort was going in and sitting down with Tony Podesta, brother of John Podesta, who was the campaign manager for the Clintons, and was basically setting up ways of reaching the Obama administration in part so that they could influence the State Department to approve their purchase of our uranium supplies, Uranium-1.
So I don't know.
You know, so far, so far, I mean, the media has gone nuts about this.
And that's another thing I want to talk about.
You know, all weekend long, last week we learned that Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid for the famous steel dossier, which was basically a collection of attacks on Donald Trump by Russian agents.
That's what it was.
It was gathered by a foreign national, an ex-British spy, but he was using information against Donald Trump.
Remember the whole prostitute thing and his business interests and all that stuff came from Russian agents, two Russian agents, okay?
So we learned last week that this was Hillary Clinton, and Hillary Clinton and the DNC had paid for this, which suddenly didn't matter.
All of a sudden, we were here, that's not a big deal.
That's not a big deal.
So then this Manafort indictment gets leaked.
Now, here's Trey Gowdy.
Trey Gowdy was on Chris Wallace, talking about the fact that leaking a grand jury indictment is totally illegal.
It is kind of ironic that the people charged with investigating the law and executing the law would violate the law.
And make no mistake, disclosing grand jury material is a violation of the law.
So as a former prosecutor, I'm disappointed that you and I are having the conversation because somebody violated their oath of secrecy.
Now, obviously, it seems obvious to me that someone, now, we're going to get to whether Mueller himself is reliable, but someone in this investigation leaked this to CNN for the specific purpose, I think, of getting the Hillary story off the air, of trumping, as it were, the story about the fact that Hillary was colluding.
All these charges about Donald Trump we now know are true of Hillary Clinton.
We know they're true of Hillary Clinton, and we know that there are leaks.
You know, this is a big deal, this way of leaking things and a way of working with the friendly press.
So, and it's not accidental.
I mean, this is what they do.
This is what they do.
Remember when this came out, when it came out about Hillary Clinton, Maggie Haberman, White House correspondent for the New York Times, she comes out and says, they lied.
The Clintons lied to me.
They lied for over a year about this, meaning she was asking them about this, and she was not running the story because they told her they weren't involved.
So the Clinton people told Maggie Haberman of the New York Times that they were not involved with this steel dossier, and she didn't run the story.
And other reporters at the times were saying the same thing.
Now, I'm reading a book by Cheryl Atkinson called The Smear.
This is her second book, and I've read them both.
Atkinson was an investigative reporter at CBS, and she left because they kept killing her stories on Obama.
She had exposed stuff about Bush.
She was just a fair-minded, right-down-the-middle reporter.
But when she went after Obama, they killed the stories.
And she talks about the fact that while she was investigating the Fast and Furious scandal, the Obama administration, she's suing the Obama administration, the DOJ, for bugging her computer, for going into her computer, planting classified documents so they could smear her, and going through her Fast and Furious files.
She has in this book, this is Maggie Haberman, right?
Maggie Haberman says the Clintons lied, and she believed them, and so she didn't run this story.
This is what Cheryl Atkinson writes about Maggie Haberman.
In a January 2015 strategic memo about shaping a public narrative, Clinton officials describe then politico reporter Maggie Haberman as an ideal, friendly journalist willing to generate positive press for the Clinton campaign.
Under the title Placing a Story, the memo states, we feel that it's important to go with what is safe and what has worked in the past.
We've had a very good relationship with Maggie Haberman of Politico over the last year.
We have had her tee up stories for us before and have never been disappointed.
While we should have a larger conversation in the near future about a broader strategy for re-engaging the beat press that covers Clinton, for this we think we can achieve our objective and do the most shaping by going to Maggie.
And Cheryl Atkinson writes, it almost sounds, it almost makes it sound as if Haberman is on the payroll of the Clinton campaign.
My point is that all this stuff, this kind of engineered stuff of the leak of the indictment, and I'm not saying the indictment itself, but the leak of the indictment and the press running over this leak and saying, spending the weekend covering it to obscure the fact that Hillary Clinton has been caught dealing with the Russians to get dirt, paying Russian agents, essentially, to get dirt on Donald Trump.
And when Fox News didn't go for it, the rest of the press attacked Fox News, which is part of the whole thing.
We have this, let's play the stelter clip.
I mean, this is just stelter.
This is just an example of what the press does to demonize Fox News and to demonize anybody who dares to report the truth about the Clintons and the Democrats.
This is a campaign of confusion.
It is one of the most important things happening in American politics today.
I mean, if you watched the opinion shows on Fox News this week, you might have thought Hillary Clinton was president.
Not Trump, Clinton.
Here is how the campaign of confusion works.
First, the Hill newspaper revived a relatively old story about Russian efforts to gain influence in the American uranium industry during the Obama administration.
Fox became fixated on this story, and the messaging was clear.
The Russia investigations were recast as a scandal for Clinton and the deaf.
But that was the truth.
He's accusing Fox of telling the truth.
He is accusing, and Jake Tapper was doing it on Twitter, you know, saying, why are they covering this?
Why are they covering HRC?
You know, that Hillary Clinton, that Hillary Clinton colluded with Russian agents to put out dirt during the election and then blame Trump for doing what she had done is in fact a bigger story than Paul Manafort evading taxes and doing, you know, all this stuff, which may also also involve the Clintons.
So, this is a concerted thing with the press.
This is not accidental.
I mean, if you read Cheryl Atkinson's book, you see the way it works is there are these smear merchants who go out and they bring information to the friendly reporters.
And since most reporters are leftists, they tend to believe the left-wing smear merchants.
It's not that there are no right-wing smear merchants, there are plenty of them, but the left-wing reporters don't believe them.
They just think, oh, that guy is a right-wing smear merchant, but they believe the left-wing guys.
All right, so let's look at Mueller reliable because the Wall Street Journal, which is in no way a radical newspaper, called on him to resign.
They said that because of this dossier, because of this dossier, the question is whether the FBI used this dossier to advance their investigation without checking the information in it.
So, in other words, was the FBI using Russian information to get wiretaps on Paul Manafort or Trump people?
And that's a big question.
And it says this news means the FBI's role in Russia's election interference must now be investigated, even as the FBI and justice insist that Mr. Mueller's probe prevents them from cooperating with congressional investigators.
Mr. Mueller, this is the Wall Street Journal.
Mr. Mueller is a former FBI director, and for years he worked closely with Mr. Comey.
It is no slur against Mr. Mueller's integrity to say that he lacks the critical distance to conduct a credible probe of the bureau he ran for a dozen years.
He could best serve the country by resigning to prevent further political turmoil over that conflict of interest.
Well, that's not going to happen.
And today there was an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal saying that Trump should just pardon everybody.
He should just pardon anybody involved in the Russia, and that would bring it to an end.
That's the stupidest advice anybody has ever given anybody.
I mean, that would just make Trump look like he's running a gigantic cover-up.
However, Trey Gowdy, who, as I say, was on Chris Wallace, he took a totally different tack.
He said it's time to let Mueller alone, let him do his job.
And he said he's one of the few Republicans left who feels this way.
This is cut number two.
I think Bob Mueller has a really distinguished career of service to our country.
I don't think any of your viewers can think of a single thing he did as the FBI director that caused them to have a lack of confidence in him.
I think most of your viewers have to be reminded that he actually was the FBI director or that he actually was a U.S. attorney because he's a pretty apolitical guy.
I see the reporting.
I see the same thing you're making reference to, that he and Comey are friends.
I'm not really sure what the definition of that is.
I've got a lot of co-workers that it wouldn't stop me from investigating them or prosecuting them.
So they're not family members.
They weren't business partners.
I would encourage my Republican friends, give the guy a chance to do his job.
The result will be known by the facts.
So that's important because Trey Gowdy is a nemesis.
He has been like the furies to the Clinton.
He has hounded them and the Obama administration all through the Obama administration.
He hounded them.
Always, I thought, you know, he's the guy who did the Benghazi stuff.
He was just their living nightmare.
And if he thinks Mueller is clean, that's a pretty good endorsement.
So we'll have to keep watching this.
All I would say is the things to pay attention to are where the indictments really lead, who is seen to be guilty, and the fact that the press is running a game.
The media, when I say the press, I mean CNN, I mean NBC, very specifically, the New York Times, all those guys, they are running a game to make sure that your focus stays on anything that can condemn Trump and maybe endanger his presidency and keeping it away from anything that really shows that the corruption of the last eight years, because the Obama administration was one of the most corrupt administrations in American history, and universally, the press came out and said they were scandal-free.
Do we have that montage?
Indictments And Media Games00:16:23
Let's play that one more time.
Remember, as you're watching this, think of Fast and Furious, think of Benghazi, think of the IRS, and now think of the fact that maybe the Obama administration was spying on Donald Trump during the election, and this is what the press had to say about them.
And he's been scandal-free, frankly, in the White House.
We haven't had that for a while.
He ran an administration that was largely scandal-free.
There's a White House that takes pride in being scandal-free.
That in the Obama years, which are remarkably scandal-free.
A lot of people were talking about how he's going to be remembered for the scandal-free administration that he ran.
The president has been very rightfully proud of the lack of scandal in his administration.
So far, there's been no major scandals of brown top aides.
But President Obama has run an amazingly scandal-free administration, not only he himself, but the people around him.
He's chosen people who have been pretty scandal-free.
This has been a scandal-free administration for the last eight years, and oftentimes people don't even talk about that fact.
Your media at work, your news media at work.
So just remember, as you're watching that, these are the guys who were reporting the news, and they were reporting it from that point of view.
We're going to talk about Kevin Spacey, and then, speaking of serial abusers, we're going to talk to Michael Knowles, who will come on and talk about Halloween costumes.
But first, we have to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube.
Come on over to thedailywire.com and you can listen to the rest.
Actually, you can just subscribe on YouTube and listen to the rest as well, right?
But if you want to watch the whole thing, subscribe for a lousy $10 a month, and you can just watch the whole thing on the website dailywire.com.
All right, so actor Anthony Rapp says when he was 14-year-old, a 14-year-old, Kevin Spacey invited him to a party.
And somehow his parents allowed him to go to this party.
And he got there, and Rapp says he was the only kid there, so he got bored.
And so he went into Kevin Spacey's bedroom and sat and watched TV until about midnight when Spacey came in drunk and they were alone.
And Rapp suddenly realized, this 14-year-old boy realized they were alone.
Spacey picked him up, carried him to the bed, got on top of him.
Rapp got out, and Spacey said, are you sure you want to leave?
And Rapp left.
And now he has brought this out because of all the stuff about Harvey Weinstein and all this stuff.
And Spacey, in what I thought was a really dumb move, came out and said, you know, I don't remember this, but if I did it, it was bad behavior, drunken behavior, 30 years ago.
This is 1986 he's talking about.
But it brings me to the point where I have to be honest and live my life as a gay man.
And so, of course, immediately on the left, it was like, oh, well, in that case, the big story is that Kevin Spacey is gay.
Let me tell you something.
Back in the 90s, I was at an award dinner for Michael Kaine and Michael Kaine, I should say, Michael King.
And at my table was Kevin Spacey.
And he showed up a little bit late after the ceremonies began.
He says that he's been a lover of both men and women.
I don't think so.
Spacey, he was flamboyantly gay.
I mean, there was no pretense.
He was with two young, you know, legal age, but young, strapping, you know, kind of male model types hanging on his arm.
They were hanging on his arm, and he was like, hello, everyone.
You know, that kind of, he was like Noel Coward or something like this.
There could be no question that this guy coming up to the table was a gay man with his two lovers.
You know, I mean, everybody there, nobody had any qualms about it.
Nobody saw, was like, Kevin Spacey, everybody knew.
I knew, and I'm not that big a Hollywood insider, but I knew Kevin Spacey was gay.
So he's just saying this to divert attention from this.
However, however, I would like to point out, without in any way defending going after a 14-year-old boy, I'm not defending that in the least.
He did a bad thing.
He said he did a bad thing.
It would be a shame if we went from attacking alleged monsters like Harvey Weinstein and the guy, I've forgotten the guy's name at NBC, the journalist, Mark Halpern.
These are guys who do things, right?
A woman does not want to be alone with Harvey Weinstein.
A woman doesn't want to be alone.
If these allegations are true, I'm not saying they are, but if they're true, a lot of women are saying they are.
If a woman does not want to be alone with Mark Halpern, the question is, is this something that Kevin Spacey does, or is it something that he did?
And so that's the information that I want.
Because if we go from nailing people who are bad actors to nailing people who have done bad things, everybody will be nailed because everybody has done bad things, you know, and it's whether it's sexual or something else.
Everybody has something.
That's why I always hate in these things where they say, oh, Mitt Romney tied his dog to the roof or whatever.
Everybody has done stuff.
Everybody.
So if this is a question of him getting drunk, when I was 15, I lied about my age and I joined a professional organization for writers.
And I won't say which one it was, but I joined the professional organization for writers, very good organization.
I love it.
It's a terrific organization.
I went to one of their cocktail parties.
So I've lied.
I'm 15.
I look older.
And I'm going there and I have a drink.
And a gay guy started hitting on me.
And I said, you know, pal, God love you.
You know, go in peace, but that's not my thing at all.
And he would not leave me alone.
And he kept following me around the room and he just kept coming after me.
I was gorgeous, by the way.
So I'm just throwing that in.
He would not leave me alone.
And finally, I said to him, look, I lied about my age to get here.
I'm 15 years old.
And then he really got excited.
And finally, I said to him, look, I have been as polite as I possibly can be.
I've been, it's gone on for like an hour.
I've been as patient as can be.
I'm going to drop you.
I am going to knock you unconscious if you don't leave me alone.
And then he went away.
And he went away and he started doing Barbara Streisand imitations for old ladies.
That was what he did.
But if he had been a famous guy, and this was a professional organization, so he could have been a famous guy, I would not out him.
I mean, that was like something he did.
He shouldn't have done it.
I wasn't traumatized.
I wasn't, you know, I never went back.
I never went back until I was older, you know, and all this stuff.
And I kind of could process it.
But people do dumb things.
They do bad things.
They do get drunk.
It's not the right thing to do.
Spacey did the wrong thing.
If it now comes out that a 14-year-old boy can't be alone in a room with Kevin Spacey, then I say that's a problem.
And then he's one of these guys, right?
But if it's something he did, that's different than being something he does.
So that is my mitigated, you know, I'm not going to dance on the grave of every guy who gets accused of doing something bad because everybody, men and women both, have done bad things.
I mean, what is it if we all got our just desserts, who would escape a whipping?
Who would escape a whipping?
And it's like, that's the thing.
All right.
So that is as nice as I'm going to be.
Kevin Spacey.
And I have no, I don't know the guy.
You know, I met him and I said hello to them that one time.
I have no idea.
So have we got Knowles?
The great and powerful Michael Knowles?
Oh, my God.
All right.
Oh, and you're wearing your Rachel Mautow costume for Halloween.
You know, I actually have been preparing my costume for the last forever.
So I have been getting into the spirit of it to make sure that this Halloween is the most convincing ever.
Well, you're virtually identical.
In fact, I wanted to bring up the fact that you and Rachel are never seen together at the same time, which I think is.
That is true.
And I have as much incriminating evidence about Donald Trump's taxes as Rachel does.
So, you know.
And I want to congratulate you on the incredible reception we're getting for Another Kingdom.
I just, just for people who haven't heard, this is our new serial podcast.
It's a story I wrote.
Knowles is performing about a Hollywood schlub who walks through a door and suddenly finds himself a murder suspect in a fantasy land, a weird, bizarre kingdom.
But the reviews, we now have over 400 five-star reviews, many of which actually say that you're not a bad actor.
This has been shocking.
I will tell you, I assumed after the blank book that I would never ever work in this town again.
And then after meeting you in your bathrobe in the hotel room, you cast me a nice, very gracious look.
I have no memory of that.
I appreciated it.
Yeah.
This was 30 years ago.
I was 14.
We're confusing.
30 years ago or Thursday.
I can't remember.
There are so many of these Hollywood stories, it's hard to keep track.
But the reaction has been really good.
We've got tens of thousands of listens and 400 reviews.
I was talking to my dad about this, and we were discussing how great it would be if the way into Hollywood is conservative politics.
That's what Betty Davis said.
What's the fastest way into Hollywood?
K-Street.
That's right.
You'll be given an interview.
Yeah, no.
I couldn't have gotten in them if I hadn't been a conservative Trump supporter.
That's what that MAGA hat.
You have to wear it or you get blacklisted.
No, it's been a lot of fun.
And I will say, I might have to retract my statement and your statement that conservatives are Philistines because this conservative audience has been listening to fiction and art.
And I don't know, maybe they've just been, the real issue is that they hate Hollywood because the art is terrible.
That may be true.
And not only that, the reviews, and I do go on and read some of the reviews, they've been very smart and insightful.
They're actually following what we're doing and not just the story, but the whole idea of the thing.
And it's cool.
And I think the reason we've gotten away with all of this is because it's audio.
We don't have to wear costumes, which I think now is a federal crime.
I think Mueller will actually indict you if you wear a costume that's offensive.
Our audience is waiting on tenter hooks because, you know, tomorrow, Halloween's tomorrow, right?
Yeah, so they want to know.
I mean, they want to know which costumes the left doesn't want them to wear because I know how concerned they are about this.
So I do have a full, I have a complete list of costumes that you're allowed to wear this Halloween.
It's actually similar content to what I've been writing about.
Nothing.
You can't wear anything.
You're not allowed to wear any costume.
The main ones that the left is.
This is easy to remember.
It's easy to remember it.
The ones that the left has mainly been griping about are, and to say this is a partial list doesn't do justice to partiality.
You can't wear Moana.
You can't wear Maui boys.
Disney actually pulled that costume.
It was so offensive.
Wait, Moana's the Disney princess from Hawaii.
Moana is the costume.
Like you cannot, it's a Disney princess from Hawaii.
It has been, this is no joke.
I went into a party city over the weekend because I was going to a party and I obviously wanted a Moana costume.
Of course, yeah.
I asked them, I said, are you guys all out of Moana?
The woman looked at me like I was crazy.
She said, oh, we never got that costume.
No, we didn't.
Oh, we didn't stock that.
So little girl goes to mom and says, oh, I want to be Moana.
I saw that movie.
I loved it so much.
Nope, no way, because the left says no.
I actually can't, I'm shaking thinking that a child could be so insensitive and racist.
Now, what are the Maui, what were the Maui boys?
The Maui boys, you can't, because that's insensitive to the native Polynesian Hawaiian cultures.
You can't be obviously Aladdin Pocahontas, which I was last year as Liz Warren.
You can't be Mulan.
You can't be Princess and the Frog.
You can't wear sombreros.
You can't wear a turban and you can't wear grass skirts.
It goes on and on and on.
The reason for this, of course, is of cultural appropriation.
So for those who aren't familiar with cultural appropriation, if you participate in a culture that is not your own, so you eat a burrito, but you're from Ohio or something, you are a racist because you're appropriating that culture.
Now, if you don't participate in a culture that is not your own, you are also a racist because you're not living through it or seeing the experiences of other people who are different from you.
So the long story short, of course, is that you're a racist.
You needed me to tell you that.
So why is it not like a celebrate?
I mean, why is that not the best thing about America that we let everybody in and they become part of our society and their things become our things and our things become their things?
Why is that not a good thing?
Well, because of our vicious imperialism that accepts anybody who comes here of their own free will and gives them a lot of free stuff and a chance at a good life.
And at that time we conquered some places.
Yeah, that time that we ever conquered anybody ever.
And even the few times that we had to have imperial incursions, like in Guam or something, we didn't even want them.
We had to take those territories as a result of a war and we let them go free the minute we could.
I mean, we should own Germany now, right?
Even, yeah, we rebuild Japan, we rebuild all these places that we should have conquered.
Any rule of traditional history would say, you conquer the land and you keep it, but because we're Americans, we say, no, we want you to be free.
So anyway, as a result, this has gone all the way down to elementary schools.
A lot of elementary schools are canceling their Halloween parades because they just don't want to deal with it.
I can't say I blame them.
But the real fights are not about the little toddlers at elementary schools.
They're about the little toddlers on college campuses all over the country.
Yeah, the real children, yeah.
So the University of Florida right now is offering counseling to students who have been affected by scary Halloween costumes.
I don't mean scary boo, I mean scary like coconut bikini or something.
Let's not forget that famous incident at dear old Yale where the student was screaming at that professor.
That was over Halloween costumes.
Do we have to cut?
We're all Salmon students.
Do you understand that?
As your position and master, it is your job to create a place of comfort and home for the students that live in Siliman.
You have not done that.
By sending out that email, that goes against your position as master.
Do you understand that?
Thank you.
No, I don't agree with that.
Then why the f can you accept the position?
Because I hired you.
I have a different vision.
You should step down.
If that is what you think about being a faster, you should step down.
It is not about creating an intellectual state.
It is not.
Do you understand that?
It's about creating a home here.
It's scary.
That is scary.
That, by the way, was in reaction to an email that that man didn't even send.
His wife sent it, suggesting that Yale students were capable of choosing their own clothing.
Someone who's studying at one of the most elite institutions in the world could pick out a silly costume for a Saturday night.
It really is the authorities who let this happen, who even tolerate for 10 seconds this stupid idea.
You and I, who have, between us, we have an IQ of 80, I think, too.
know we we understand what's wrong with this we see what why don't they just say you know what Shut up.
I mean, this is ridiculous.
What is the appeal of this to live in terror so that little children can't wear whatever damn costume they want to?
Well, a few reasons.
One, these are the flower children grown up, so the people who are running Yale now, I think, really believe their own Kool-Aid and they've let the inmates run the prison and the lunatics run the asylum.
They don't understand that there's a thought that stops thought and that's the only thought that ought to be stopped.
They don't understand that there are premises to liberal education and to a liberal society, and you can't attack those premises.
You can attack all of the other things, but there are axia that you have to believe.
But I think the reason with the Halloween costumes, the reason that this is such an issue is that it's a power play.
It's a power play over which speech we can censor.
So the left has tried to censor speech on campuses all across the country.
And I think it's because their view of the world denies to varying degrees reason and objective reality.
So they never fight with arguments.
The weight of your opinion is not determined by the perspicacity of your argument.
It's determined by things like the color of your skin or your sexual organs.
Your opinion is a greater privilege or greater disadvantage based on some irrational concept.
So they get in trouble for this, and they look absurd when they ban speakers like that Jewish Nazi Shapiro.
Why They Need Their Moms00:05:25
I hate that guy.
He's just such a bigot.
But with Halloween costumes, because they're not really about an argument per se, they take the opportunity to smack them, to flex their muscles, to censor speech.
The University of Massachusetts, the Center for Women and Community, put up a board, and it basically was a board to give you guidelines on how you can dress.
And it said, don't be an a-hole.
They always have to go to these kind of epithets.
You know, it's funny.
I know some leftists I know will curse me within three sentences of greeting.
You know, it goes from hello to a-hole, like almost instantly.
I don't quite, the rage, the rage, and the desire to control people, I have to believe that there's some emptiness there, that they are feeling that they don't have a belief in any positive thing, that all they can do is censor everybody else.
And they can only do it with vulgarity.
They can only do it because to write well is to think clearly, which is why it's so hard, as David McCullough said.
And so they don't have any good argument.
They don't have a clear language with which to express their deep emptiness that makes them control people.
So they just have to lash out with profanities.
I mean, they're literally, at the University of Massachusetts, they put up different flowcharts and different degrees of danger so that you could do this.
No, Joe, it's called SCREAM.
It's the simple costume racism evaluation and assessment meter.
That's got to be, that has got to be satire.
Well, that's what I thought.
And I'm still not totally sure.
By all accounts, it's a legitimate flyer.
But this does bring up Poe's law, which is that on the internet, things are so absurd.
And really in our culture, things are so absurd, the internet culture, that you can't tell the difference between satire and reality.
They got to merge as one.
You know, you know what?
What really bothers me, I think I got to say goodbye, but what really bothers me about this is like kids want so little out of life.
You know, they want mom to love them.
They want a cookie.
They want to dress up as their favorite princess.
Leave them alone for crying out.
You know the best part.
So the Moana costume has been at the center of all of this, you know.
And Cosmo ran this big piece that said, the headline was, maybe don't dress your kid up as Moana this Halloween.
This very condescending thing.
It said, if your kid wears a racist costume, you're kind of wearing it too.
Encourage your kids to step back and realize there are awash and privileges that the real Moanas and Tianas of the world will never see because the world is full of racist a-holes.
This is the big piece that went viral.
Now, Cosmo has a piece out today that's about a casting call that went out from Disney.
It says, quote, did you wake up this morning and think, how can I become a Disney princess while traveling the world?
Good news, they're looking for princesses and princesses for their cruises.
Somebody is not coordinating the articles.
What are you talking about on your show?
So today I'm going to talk about how Mueller is indicting Democrats.
I mean, he's literally indicting Republicans.
But I don't think people have read through the indictment.
The implications that this has for top Democrats, for Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, for his brother, that's fine.
You want Paul Manafort's scalp?
All right.
Let's see who else goes down with it, folks.
It's amazing.
It is really amazing.
And the press is going to not cover it for as long as they can.
But if Mueller's honest, you know, the Clinton people are going to be in real trouble.
We'll see if he is or not.
All right, Michael Knoll's Star of Another Kingdom, and also that other show, the Michael Knoll Show.
Oh, yeah, I knew that one.
Yeah, that's true.
Yeah, watch that one, too.
All right, I'll see you later.
You know, just to talk about, I have to, this piece ran in the Wall Street Journal of the weekend.
James Toronto is a great reporter, really funny guy.
He wrote about a woman named Eric Commissar, a Jewish psychoanalyst who lives and practices on the upper west side of Manhattan.
And he says, if that biographical thumbnail leads you to stereotype her as a political liberal, you are right.
She is a political liberal.
She's a psychoanalyst.
But she did some research and she discovered something kind of funny.
She discovered that children need their moms and they need their moms around.
Little children need their moms around.
And she says this has made her a pariah.
Let's play just a little clip of her talking about why they need their moms.
As a mother and as a therapist, about 12 years ago, I was noticing that children were suffering and they were suffering from the absence of their mothers and from a disconnection between mothers and children.
More and more children at an earlier age were being diagnosed and labeled with mental disorders and emotional problems like ADHD and behavioral problems and increased aggression.
And in looking into the research, I did find a connection that mothers are critically important to children in the first three years of life and that that impacts their emotional well-being.
You can't be emotionally present if you're not physically present.
You can't be emotionally present if you're not physically present.
She says, Christian radio stations interviewed me and loved me.
She went on Fox and Friends and the host was like, your book is the best thing since the invention of the refrigerator.
But she says, I couldn't get on NPR and I was rejected wholesale, particularly in New York, by the liberal press.
She did appear on ABC's Good Morning America, but seconds before the camera went live, she says the interviewer told her, I don't believe in the premise of your book at all.
I don't like your book.
First Season Mysteries00:06:09
Now, here's the thing.
I mean, which women are in the news media, right?
They're not women who have to work because they have to put enough money together to put food on the table.
They're not those women.
They're the women who talk about those women so they can go to their big careers and not take care of their kids.
That is who they are.
And, you know, I don't like your book.
Who cares if you like it?
The woman is obviously a scientist.
She's a liberal.
She's using this to argue that the government should take care of, you know, give women time off of their work.
But they are just, they just shut her down.
It's all about what they want to be true, and they're only going to report what they want to be true.
You know, if you look at, they talk about obesity.
They say, oh, children have this terrible problem with obesity.
Does it ever, ever, ever occur to them to look at whether there's a connection between women, mothers being at home, and obesity?
Why do people eat?
They eat because they want love, you know?
So it's just an entire world, an entire way of looking at the world that is not being reported, that's not being followed.
Questions, just like there are costumes you're not allowed to wear, there are questions you're not allowed to ask.
And when a woman like this, one of their own, starts to find out the truth and follows the truth wherever it leads, they shut her down.
It really is amazing.
Which brings me to our crappy culture.
All right.
So I watched the first episode of the second season of Stranger Things.
I enjoyed the first season, so I watched the second episode and I thought it was great.
I mean, you were further into it than I am, yeah.
Yeah, it's really good.
This is Austin, by the way, the employee of the month at the daily.
I didn't even know we had an employee of the month, and if I had known it was you, I would have thought, what the?
I mean, it's nothing.
Do they give you anything?
Do they put your picture up or something?
Yeah, I got a giant plaque on the wall with a terrible picture of the child.
Well, congratulations.
You deserve it, he said, lying.
No, that's great.
But you're far into Stranger Things, and it remains good.
The first one was dynamite.
It really was.
So, well, you know what we should play with when we put this video?
This is a recap.
If you haven't seen the first season, there's some spoilers in this.
This is just a little bit of the Daily Wire's three-minute recap of the entire first season.
Will is abducted by a creature.
Hint, it's the Demogorgon.
Will's mom and brother notice he's gone missing.
While boys get bullied by mouth breathers, Barb is concerned that Nancy likes Steve.
Nancy, Nancy is great.
Nancy's a 10.
Why is she dating Steve?
So Police Chief Hopper checks things out with Joyce while a secret government facility is investigating a gateway.
A girl named Eleven has escaped the facility.
Barbed is sucked into the upside down and killed.
Seriously, look, Steve is fine, maybe for Barb.
You don't have that much time.
Can we please get through this?
All right, all right.
He's got so much hair.
Eleven eats echoes.
Hopper tells the boys not to go looking on their own.
In the meantime, Joyce gets mysterious calls from Will, and they all go looking for him, only to find Eleven.
Eleven explains that Will is trapped in the upside-down prisoner to, you guessed it, gang, the Demogorgon.
Think of the upside down, like a flea walking on a tightrope and then somersaulting into the other dimension.
Okay, so you're a flea, you're playing D ⁇ D, and then you cross over to the Demogorgon, and you're upside down.
Noel's demonstrating which costumes you're not allowed to wear while wearing them himself.
The only thing I want to say about this is when I've watched the first season, if you're, like me, a Stephen King fan, every scene and every character is stolen from Stephen King and from Steven Spielberg.
The kids, the characters from Stephen King novels, the facility, the government facility doing evil experiments, even the kind of atmosphere is a Stephen King slash Spielberg-y thing.
And it does bring up this gripe I have.
And this is not an attack on the show at all, because I really like the show.
But it does bring up this gripe I have that this is a generation with no original content.
Everything they do is from the 80s, and the 70s, Star Wars.
All the superheroes are back from the 40s and 50s, Superman and Batman and all these things.
And the one exception is Harry Potter.
That is the one big exception that is a mythology that has come into being since the baby boomer generation.
This is Harry Potter's the one exception.
And I would just like to put forward very briefly, because I'm running out of time, but I put forward a theory that because the hideous baby boomer generation, of which I'm ashamed a part, because we destroyed the culture, that the new generation has no tools with which to build their own mythology.
And this is especially true when it comes to the relationship between the genders, because women are told what they should be.
They're told that they should be strong.
Like, I'm very uninterested in strong women, but like, if what you mean by strong is doing the right thing and standing up for things, women have been strong like that for years, very, very strong.
But if what you mean is like, you know, punching people in Wonder Woman and winning World War I in this fantasy world, that to me is nonsense.
But men, boys, are not told how to be men, and they are afraid of making a mythology of men.
The thing that works about Harry Potter is he is a boy who is becoming a man.
He becomes a big athlete.
He becomes a powerful adept at his trade.
He becomes a defender of the weak and all these things that men should be.
And until you start to develop that, you don't even have the tools.
You don't have the makings.
Like a guy who wants a cigarette, but he doesn't have the tobacco.
You don't have the makings of a mythology.
And that's why I think that all these things harken back.
I mean, Stranger Things is wonderful, but it's a 1980s piece.
I mean, it not only is about the 1980s, it could have been written in the 1980s, and all of the tropes in it come from the 1980s.
And it's really interesting.
I think that when I talk, I see in the eyes of younger people when I talk about what manhood means and what femininity means, I can see this kind of like, look as if I am speaking, you know, Swahili, basically, because they have never heard anybody say it.
And they think it's daring.
Afraid to Burst Out00:00:47
And they think it's like, and the left has wrapped them up in so much fear, what costume they can wear, how they can be a man, what they can say, what they can't say, that they do not, they are afraid to burst out and just say, you know what?
Get stuffed, leftists.
Get stuffed.
You're wrong, and we're going to say what's right, and we're going to tell what's true, and we're going to make art that's true, and we don't care whether Hollywood likes us or not, and we don't care whether the publishing industry likes us or not, because we now have our own tools for publishing and making things.
And when they start to do that, there'll be a new mythology, which is what this country needs to move us into the future.
And that is our crappy culture.
And now I got to say goodbye.
Tomorrow is we have some.
Yes, tomorrow is Tuesday.
We have some incredibly wonderful guest, but I don't know who it is.