Andrew Clavin mocks Rep. Adam Schiff’s absurd Trump whistleblower claims while warning U.S. withdrawal from Syria risks empowering ISIS and Turkey’s Erdoğan, who threatens Kurdish forces holding 12,000 ISIS fighters. Jenna Ellis Reeves argues Supreme Court cases redefining "sex" to include gender identity could dismantle women’s rights and religious freedoms, citing legislative bypass via treaties like USMCA. The episode ties abortion debates to climate extremism, framing activists like Bernie Sanders as promoting population control through infanticide rhetoric, while praising South Park’s defiance of censorship. [Automatically generated summary]
McCarthyite Congressman Adam Schiff says there are now more whistleblowers he's never heard of ready to accuse Donald Trump of things he doesn't know about but which he will suddenly have evidence for when the time is right.
Schiff says his new witnesses will accuse Trump of crimes so terrible that it won't even matter if he committed them or not.
Just the fact that he's being accused of them will be enough to prove he's unfit for office.
Schiff says he doesn't know the whistleblowers personally but that he trusts them implicitly because they include several of his close relatives, the former head of the CIA, Chuck Todd, and a guy Schiff once hired as a caretaker who not only did an absolutely great job mowing his lawn, but also personally heard the president violate the Constitution in a way so horrific that Schiff doesn't even know what it is yet and is already appalled.
Among the charges Schiff says he doesn't know the whistleblowers will make, but he's sure they probably will, are that Trump was on hand when Justice Brett Kavanaugh forced himself on a string of high school girls during the greatest rape-murder spree that has ever been committed by a future Supreme Court justice without leaving any trace of the crimes that even been committed.
After escaping through the sewer system, Trump then dressed up in blackface, ran for president as Barack Obama, and had the CIA spy on himself in an abuse of power so dreadful that had he actually been the real Barack Obama, the press would have had to tie themselves in knots to ignore it.
According to Schiff, Trump was still wearing blackface when he took Stormy Daniels across state lines to commit unmentionable acts of campaign violation that should cost him the evangelical vote, thus leaving Democrats free to slaughter unborn children en masse.
Schiff says Trump's latest imaginary crimes are so heinous they demand an even more serious pretend impeachment.
Tricker warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky donkey.
Life is tickety boom.
Years are winging, also singing hunky-dunkity.
Ship-shaped ipsy-topsy, the world is it bitty zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hurrah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
All right, Another Kingdom is up and running the final season.
Episodes one and two are now available wherever you get podcasts.
If you are not listening to this, you are genuinely missing out.
It is really good.
I promise you, take a listen.
You only have to hear the first episode and you'll hear how great it is.
Also, tomorrow is the mailbag.
That's just what I was going to say.
And tomorrow's the mailbag, that means go to dailywire.com.
You've got to be a subscriber, so subscribe.
Do not be a fool.
Subscribe.
Press the podcast button.
Hit the Andrew Clavin podcast.
Hit the little mailbag symbol and ask whatever you want to ask.
Ask about religion.
Ask about politics.
Ask about your personal lives.
All my answers are guaranteed 100% correct and will change your life, possibly for the better.
Possibly it'll just be another one of those mailbag days.
But go ahead and ask your questions.
All your problems will be solved for a lousy 10 bucks a month, a lousy 100 bucks for the year.
Now, we on the right know that narrative is not everything, right?
The left thinks narrative establishes the truth, but we know the truth has a voice of its own, and the truth will speak out no matter what story you tell.
Even in the former Soviet Union, where propaganda narrative nearly drowned out reality, reality ultimately had its revenge.
Here, where information still flows around the massive wall of lies built by ABC, NBC, Google slash YouTube, the New York Times, CNN, and all the rest, the truth's effects are even more immediate.
When things in the country are going relatively well and NBC's Chuck Todd comes out and declares we're in a national nightmare because we won't buy into the Democrats' latest absurd impeachment kabuki show, it doesn't cause Americans to reel in nightmarish horror.
It only makes Chuck Todd look like a dishonest child, a hysterical old woman, a scurvy purveyor of false information, plus an hysterical child masquerading as a dishonest old woman, or vice versa.
But a relentlessly false narrative from a wide array of sources is harmful to our country in other ways.
Being a leftist narrative, it encourages the left to drift further and further into radicalization because they can't see themselves as they are.
It encourages them to lie and manipulate our politics because they know Chuck Todd and his dishonest ilk will never ever call them out on it, but will only amplify their shenanigans, defending the deep state and John Brennan of all people.
My goodness.
Those people who are foolish enough to believe the left-wing narrative, those people I mean who are foolish enough to watch Chuck Todd, become convinced that those who disagree with them are evil and can't be spoken to or debated with.
And those people who are being lied about, namely we conservatives, we become convinced there's no place for us in the mainstream, that no one will listen to what we're saying, and we become entrenched, angry, and alienated.
Because of the narrative, because of the media, we feel the divide between us is unbreachable, like a wall.
And that's nonsense.
There are always two sides to every debate, and there's usually room for compromise.
There's no need for us to hate one another over the fact we disagree.
We've always disagreed in America.
The hatred is coming from the narrative of bad actors like Chuck Todd and NBC who pretend to bring us the news but lie in their own interests, lie relentlessly, and those lies build a wall between us.
It's not the news that divides us.
It's the news media.
The rest of us have to work around them.
So I want to talk about this Syria thing, but first, let's talk about something even more important than that, your hair.
You want to keep your hair?
Do you want to look like me?
Of course not.
Look at me.
Look at me.
Do you want to look like this?
No.
Two out of three guys will experience some form of male pattern baldness by the time they're 35.
But the good news is with today's advancements in science, Keeps offers proven treatments that can combat the symptoms of hair loss, namely losing your hair.
That's one of the biggest symptoms of hair loss.
Keeps has revolutionized the way men are treated for hair loss.
You used to have to go to the doctor's office for your hair loss prescription.
Now, thanks to Keeps, you can visit a doctor online and get medication delivered right to your home.
No more waiting rooms, no more pharmacy checkout lines, no more like the girl behind the counter goes, hey, you got that bald medicine.
You don't need to do that.
Go to Keeps.
Prevention is key.
Many men even experience hair regrowth with Keeps treatment.
Find out why Keeps has more five-star reviews than any of its competitors and nearly 100,000 men trust Keeps.
Keeps treatments start at just $10 a month, plus for a limited time, you can get your first month free.
If you're ready to take action and prevent hair loss, go to keeps.com slash Clavin to receive your first month of treatment for free.
That's K-E-E-P-S.com slash Clavin.
Say you do not want to look like K-L-A-V-A-N.
There's no E's in Klavin.
All right.
Let's talk.
We're going to talk about this thing in Syria.
Trump has decided that he wants to take our 1,000 or 2,000 guys out of northern Syria, where they've been working with the Kurds and they've been keeping the ISIS fighters in prison.
There's about 12,000 ISIS fighters and then all their camp followers.
So it comes out to like 60, 70,000 people altogether.
So this story is so complicated, right?
Because it's northern Syria, which borders on Turkey, and Syria is in a civil war, and the Kurds want their, the Kurds want their own country, and they're trying to carve out some territory from themselves.
The Kurds are our allies.
Turkey is theoretically our ally, but we all know Erdoyan is an Islamist thug.
Why they let him into NATO, hard to say.
But it's so complex because Turkey also, Erdoyan in Turkey, has an insurgent movement of Kurds, a local insurgent movement of Kurds, and he identifies the Kurds in northern Syria as being linked to that insurgent movement.
So he looks at them as terrorists.
would be as if the communist rebels in some South American or Central American country had links to communists here, like the New York Times or the Democrat Party.
We would consider that like a terrorist threat.
So that's the way Erdoyan is looking at the Kurds.
He's talking about, oh, I'm going to come in there.
I'm going to take back this northern Syrian buffer zone.
And Trump is probably thinking at this point, it's only a thousand soldiers, and they're not pulling them out.
They're just pulling them away from this thing.
My guess, nobody has said this, but my guess is that Trump is thinking, what happens if the Turks go in there and our NATO ally kills American soldiers?
And American soldiers, what are we going to do?
We're going to go to war with the Turks, right?
So he's pulling out.
He says he's had it.
And remember, Obama's pullout from Iraq.
Remember, Obama pulled out from Iraq.
And Obama said, I have to pull out because they won't let us keep our police force there.
He didn't stay to negotiate.
He just wanted to get out.
He wanted to end that war.
He had promised to do it in his campaign speeches.
I always said that campaign promise was stupid, but he fulfilled the campaign promise.
He pulled out.
That was the beginning that let ISIS start to spread.
And ISIS took over so much territory.
It took over territory from Baghdad all the way up to Syria.
I mean, they were in control of millions of people.
It was really bad news.
And the left has tied itself in knots trying not to make Obama to blame.
Obama was one of the reasons this happened.
Trump went in there.
He cleaned this place out, right?
He and James Mattis, they said, let's go in and just kill these people.
They killed them.
They isolated them.
They wiped out the caliphate.
Very important because it's part of Islamist mythology that they're going to establish a worldwide caliphate.
So when they saw this caliphate being established, all these young men who want to be part of something bigger than themselves, they flocked to this place and they flocked from Europe.
A lot of these ISIS fighters are Europeans, which also brings up Angela Merkel and Germany's policy of letting all these people in this borderless country where they let all these refugees in, these Islamist refugees in, and anybody who said anything about it was Islamophobic, right?
So you weren't allowed to say anything.
And once they came in through Germany, wherever they came in, since it was the EU, they could travel anywhere they wanted.
This is part of the reason Britain wants out.
So it's all connected to this big story.
Trump's done.
He doesn't want to do it anymore.
He says when he announced before that he was going to pull out, that's when James Mattis walked, remember, he quit.
He says that was when there was still a little bit of ISIS left.
Now it's done and I am finished.
This is the first Trump cut, number three.
I will tell you this.
We defeated ISIS.
And when I wanted to, when we were at 96 and 95 and 97%, I sort of said, let the other countries in the area finish it off.
And I was met with a lot of anger from some people in our country.
I said, all right, I'll finish it off.
And I got together with our generals.
I flew to Iraq.
I got together, and we did it very quickly, far quicker than any general from here told us we could do it.
We had some great people over there.
They did it quickly.
And he's ticked off.
You know, he's ticked off because the Europeans won't take these fighters.
There's all these fighters back.
The Kurds are guarding them.
The fear is, the fear is their Erdoyan goes in there, slaughters our allies, the Kurds, whom we're continually abandoning.
We did this to them when they rose up against Saddam Hussein.
And we were like, yeah, we're not helping you.
Go ahead.
And they all got gassed and killed.
And we're constantly abandoning the poor Kurds.
So we're doing it again.
We're afraid that Erdoyan's going to go in and kill them, that the ISIS fighters who the Kurds are guarding will be released and ISIS will spread again because remember the caliphate is gone, but ISIS is not gone.
Trump says if Turkey does that, if they misbehave, he's going to devastate their economy.
He did this before when he wanted to get a hostage out of there.
So he feels that he still has some leverage over Edorian and over Turkey, and he will react to that if that happens.
Meanwhile, he's ticked off at the Europeans.
This is the other Trump cut.
Then I said, what are we going to do with these 60 to 70,000 people that are being held and being guarded?
And we can't release them and many fighters also.
And I said, I want them to go back to Germany, to France.
to different European countries from where they came.
And I said to the European countries, I said to all of them, take the people back.
And they said, no, no, no, we don't want to do it.
We don't want them back.
I said, well, they came from Germany or they came from France.
Take them back.
And they're so used to the United States being a sucker, being a fool.
We're talking about billions and billions of dollars.
You're talking about life.
You're talking about so many things, so many elements and elements of complexity because they're going to walk back into Germany.
They're going to go back into these countries from where they came.
So I said, take them back.
And they said, no.
And then I said, again, I'm going to give you another 30 days.
Take them back.
And they kept saying no.
Maybe they won't be saying no now.
I don't know.
He's just had it with our allies.
But the thing you can see is how so much of this is connected in terms of ideas, right?
The idea of open borders, which basically betrayed Europe into the hands of these Islamists who are now spreading from there into the Middle East to go back and fight for this incredibly devastatingly stupid idea of the Islamist caliphate.
The idea that the left is constantly promoting, that we can't argue ideas and actions because we have to only pay attention to race.
We can't argue against crime if the criminals are black.
Cannot Rely on Others00:02:31
can't argue against religious oppression if it's not our religion.
If it's somebody else's religion, then we'll be.
I was called a racist the other day on Twitter for attacking Islamic ideas.
Islam is not a race.
It's a series of ideas.
If we can't attack ideas, we're in big trouble because then when some guy comes along with some really bad idea, and you say, well, I can't attack him because his skin is this color or he comes from that country or he wears that kind of clothes.
Ridiculous.
It's the ideas and the actions that you have to judge, right?
It doesn't matter what color a criminal is.
It's the crime.
It doesn't matter what religion an oppressor is.
It's the oppression.
And so this kind of oppression coming out of Islam has to be fought.
And you can see, and the fact that these people spread into Europe, that matters.
The fact that Russia has a hand in this area, he has kind of come in.
Russia and Putin have come in trying to establish influence in Iran with their pals in Iran by taking over this fight.
And Trump is saying, let them have it.
I don't want anything to do with it.
Let them do it.
Now, here's the point I want to make, though, though, because of the right's reaction to this.
First, I'll stop for just a moment and talk about wise foods.
Very important.
You know, that every one of us, no matter where we live, there is always some kind of threatening disaster, something that can close the shop down.
Here it's earthquakes and firefight and forest fires.
We get them all the time.
And if you are in trouble, it can take a long time before the first responders to get to you.
You have to be able to take care of yourself.
WISE Company takes an innovative approach to providing dependable, simple, and affordable freeze-dried food for emergency preparedness and outdoor and outdoor use.
When government resources are strained, it can take a long time.
You can't rely on someone else.
You cannot rely on the government.
You have to be able to feed yourself just for a while until help arrives.
This week, my listeners can get any WISE emergency or outdoor food product at an extra 25% off the lowest marked price by using the promo code clavin at checkout at wisefoodstorage.com or by calling 855-474-4084.
Shipping is free, and WISE has a 90-day no-questions-asked return policy.
So there's no risk in taking the initiative to get yourself and your family more prepared today.
Go to wisefoodstorage.com.
Use the promo code Klavin to get any WISE emergency or outdoor food product at an extra 25% off and free shipping.
In any emergency, you have to know how to spell Klavin.
It's K-L-A-V-A-N.
So here's what I want to say before I get into the debate about this.
Lindsey Graham's Concerns00:14:54
When Obama left Iraq, right, as he promised to do, everybody knew it was the wrong thing to do.
Everybody was saying it.
Everybody on the right was just saying, this is ridiculous.
This is going to blow up.
When Obama came to office, the Iraq war was essentially over.
George W. Bush had gone against all the people attacking him and had instituted the surge, and the surge had turned the tide in Iraq.
And in the month before Obama took office, there were no American casualties in Iraq.
The war was essentially over.
He pulled out and the place blew up.
When Obama came in, the Middle East was pacified.
When he left, it was on fire.
And ISIS had taken over a huge, huge patch of territory.
Here's what the New York Times wrote when Obama left Iraq.
The announcement triggered some foolish criticism from neoconservatives who remain shamefully unapologetic for their role in unleashing this war.
They accused Mr. Obama of abandoning Iraq now.
Mitt Romney, a Republican presidential candidate, said Mr. Obama unnecessarily put at risk hard-won victories.
In other words, Mitt Romney, as he was about Russia, was absolutely right, okay?
He was absolutely right.
The New York Times attacked him.
In the Times today, oh, Mr. Trump appears once again to have acted impulsively, in this case, after a phone call with Mr. O'Doyant.
In other words, all you hear from the left, all you hear from the left, and from never Trumpers too, never Trumpers like Mitt Romney, all you hear is that the right is willing to follow Donald Trump anywhere, that they will follow him over a cliff, that they will abandon their principles.
Oh, the evil, you know, the evil evangelicals, they followed Donald Trump when he slept with Stormy Daniels.
How hypocritical they were.
No, no, it is that the right is not going to be fooled by left-wing garbage.
Stormy Daniels, garbage.
Has nothing to do with the governance of the country.
Yeah, is that a good thing to do?
Do I condemn it?
No, it's not a good thing to do.
Do I condemn it?
Yes.
Does it have anything to do with the way the guy is running the country?
No, nothing, none at all.
The evangelicals were right about this, but they don't like this and they're speaking out.
Here's Pat Robertson.
Here's what Pat Robertson said, right?
The evangelicals, all they have heard since Trump took office is, oh, they abandoned their principles because they haven't looked at the fact that Trump is not a Christian character.
He is not a guy who is faithful to his wife.
He's not a guy who talks about humility and he's not a guy who says the things that Christians are supposed to say.
All true, but the evangelicals said yes, but as the governor, as the president of the country, he will protect our rights and he will do the right thing about abortion.
That's what they said.
So they said, look, the Bible is full of non-believing leaders who do the right thing and God supports them.
They were not being hypocritical at all.
But when he does something that they think is against God in terms of being a governor, in terms of being a powerful man, in terms of being president, listen to what Pat Robertson says.
Ladies and gentlemen, I want to say right now, I am absolutely appalled that the United States is going to betray those democratic forces in northern Syria, that we possibly are going to allow the Turkish to come in against the Kurds.
The Ottaw Erdogan is a thug.
He has taken control of his country as a dictator.
He is a strong leader and to say he's an ally of America is nonsense.
He is in for himself.
And the president who allowed Khashoggi to be cut in pieces without any repercussions whatsoever is now allowing the Christians and the Kurds to be massacred by the Turks.
And I believe, and I want to say this with great solemnity, the President of the United States is in danger of losing the mandate of heaven if he permits this to happen.
All I'm pointing out here, whether you agree with Pat or not, All I'm pointing out is that Pat Robertson is taking a principled stand and he was taking a principle and the evangelicals are taking a principled stand when they support Trump, despite the fact that he doesn't live what they would or hasn't lived what they would consider a Christian life.
Whereas the New York Times, it doesn't matter.
It doesn't matter.
If Donald Trump is doing the same thing Obama did, it's bad.
If Obama did it, it's good.
It's the New York Times, it's the left that has no integrity whatsoever.
The same guys, the same Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi, who when Clinton was impeached, said, oh, to have a nonpartisan impeachment, that's a terrible thing.
Now they won't even let the right, the Republicans bring witnesses to the impeachment.
I mean, to their mock impeachment, their make-believe impeachment.
These guys are such hypocrites.
They are empty of principle.
They are empty of integrity.
And all they do is pick on the right who have supported Trump, some of us with misgivings.
I have misgivings.
Some of the people in the government with misgivings, but who'd stand up and say he's wrong when they think he's wrong.
Lindsey Graham, who is always the hawkish voice, you know, I mean, those are his principles.
Lindsey Graham is completely opposed to what Trump is doing and compared him to Obama.
Said if he didn't know it was Trump, he would say it was Obama.
This is Lindsey Graham who has stood up for Trump in every impeachment hearing, in all of the left's nonsense, in all of the Democrats politicizing our process.
Lindsey Graham has stood up for Trump absolutely ferociously, but he did it that on principle, and now he's opposing this on principle.
If I didn't see Donald Trump's name on the tweet, I thought it would be Obama's rationale for getting out of Iraq.
So here's what's going to happen.
This is going to lead to ISIS reemergence.
Nothing better for ISIS than to create a conflict between the Kurds and Turkey.
The Kurds will now align with Assad because they have nobody to count on because we abandoned them.
So this is a big win for Iran and Assad, a big win for ISIS.
I will do everything I can to sanction Turkey if they step one foot in northeastern Syria.
That will sever my relationship with Turkey.
I think most of the Congress feels that way.
I will do a resolution.
Urgate the president to reconsider this decision.
The president's right about the ISIS fighters.
Europe needs to do more, but he's the president of the United States, and it requires leadership.
When President Trump, excuse me, Obama was told what would happen, and Iraq it did.
And I'm here to say that this is going to lead to the re-emergence of ISIS, and the biggest winner of all this will be the Iranians, and that's too bad.
So that's Lindsey Graham, again, standing up on principle.
The right will stand up on principle against Trump when they think he's wrong.
They're just not going to be suckered in to the left's kabuki orange man bad impeachment show.
That's the only difference.
Whereas the left is always, always, always working toward power.
They're always working toward power.
The New York Times has zero integrity.
Chuck Todd, NBC, zero integrity, the way they support the deep state and guys like clowns like John Brennan against the president.
It is just amazing.
Whereas the right still, still will speak up.
Let's hear Rand Paul, because he's always like the most isolationist voice.
He's thrilled with what Trump is doing.
Leaving three or four hundred people in an area that are vulnerable could lead to catastrophe, but also doesn't really do anything to secure our national security.
You know, I'm kind of of the belief, go big, or go home.
You know, two or three hundred people are just a tripwire to get us drawn into something and a tragedy, probably, but they aren't enough to do anything.
In fact, there may be a couple, there may be dozens of people at a time, maybe a dozen here, a dozen there.
They aren't enough to deter anything.
And part of the resolution of the war over there has to be people who live over there.
The Turks live over there, the Syrians live over there.
And they've apparently come to an agreement.
There's about 3 million Syrian refugees in Turkey.
They're going to try to get some of those people back into Syria.
And they have to have an area, a zone where they can control that.
And, you know, I think that the best answer is that we don't have all the answer and that the people who live there are always going to have more of a stake in the game.
And we need to not think that it's always the U.S.'s responsibility to fight every war and find every peace.
You know, Rand Paul is not being completely honest there when he says he believes in go big or go home.
He really just believes in go home.
He doesn't believe in go big at all.
But I think he's making the point that Donald Trump, I think he is pinpointing what Donald Trump is worried about.
He's worried about a kind of Ronald Reagan in Lebanon situation where our Marines were hit by a terrorist attack and we were killed and then we had to retreat ignominiously and pull out ignominiously.
I think Trump is worried if Erdoyan goes in there and there's fighting and an American soldier gets killed, what then?
We're not going to go to war with Turkey.
We're not going to want to send in more troops.
He's worried about, he's not worried about the fact that there's just a few guys there.
He's worried about why are we going to get tangled up in this war and these forever wars that go on forever.
Listen, I'm worried about this.
I think Lindsey Graham is making a good point.
I thought Obama was an idiot when he pulled out.
I thought Obama was an idiot when he campaigned on pulling out.
I said it when he was campaigning that he's got it all backwards.
We should pull out of Afghanistan and stay in Iraq.
Okay, so I was really on top of Obama from the start.
I'm concerned about this.
I'm concerned that these ISIS fighters break out.
I'm concerned that the Kurds get massacred as they always seem to end up getting massacred.
I think they're the biggest cultural minority that doesn't have its own country.
They are the biggest ethnic group that doesn't have its own country.
They want their own country.
But of course, Erdoyan's not going to let them have it.
However, having said that, there does have to come an end.
The military never wants to leave.
They never want to leave.
They can always see the worst case scenario.
They want us to be policing the world.
Lindsey Graham wants us to be policing the world.
He's not always wrong.
He's not always wrong.
So my feeling about this is if Trump's going to do it, we're going to just have to wait and see.
If it turns out to be as bad as it was with Obama, we've got to hold his feet to the fire.
He's got to go back in and take care of it.
He cannot do what Obama did, that kind of eunuch wandering around saying, oh, I don't know what to do.
You can't do that because the world will catch fire if we don't take care of it and put it out.
Speaking of integrity, speaking of integrity, I got to just talk about this story about the NBA.
The Houston Rockets, the general manager of the Houston Rockets, put up a tweet, I think, that said, fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong.
And the NBA, the Chinese said, well, we're not going to sponsor your shows.
We're not going to sponsor your games anymore.
We're not going to have you over.
They didn't want to lose the money.
And so the NBA has started to apologize for standing up for the freedom fighters in Hong Kong.
I mean, it is absolutely embarrassing.
Here is Houston Rockets star James Harden apologizing for standing up for Hong Kong.
Yeah, we apologize.
You know, we love China.
We love playing there.
I know for both of us individually, we go there once or twice a year.
They show us the most important love.
So, you know, we appreciate them as a fan base, and we love everything they're about.
And, you know, we appreciate the support that they give us individually and as an organization.
So.
I feel for the guy.
The guy's just a ball player.
He doesn't have to know about world events and all this stuff.
But still, still, we should not be apologizing to the oppressors in China for defending the freedom fighters in Hong Kong.
The worst of them, as far as I was concerned, was Steve Kerr, the coach of the Golden State Warriors, who is constantly, constantly mouthing off about Donald Trump.
The GOP has sold its soul to Trump, he says.
He's constantly against about gun control, rescinding the Second Amendment and all this stuff.
And they ask him about China, and he weasels out.
Listen to this.
It's a really good bizarre international story.
A lot of us don't know what to make of it.
It's something I'm reading about just like everybody is, but I'm not going to comment further.
Honk, Weasel.
Meanwhile, the creators of South Park, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, they put out an episode called Band in China, B-A-N-D, in China, which excoriated Hollywood for kow-towing to China to get their money they wanted.
Remember Top Gun, they put out the new ad for Top Gun, and they took off the Japanese and Taiwanese patches off the hero's leather jacket, right?
Because they didn't want to offend their Chinese financers.
So they banned the Chinese, scoured South Park off the internet.
They just removed all reference to South Park from the internet.
So Parker and Stone put out a tweet saying, like the NBA, we welcome Chinese censors into our homes and into our hearts.
We too love money more than freedom and democracy.
She doesn't look just like Winnie the Pooh at all.
Tune into our 300th episode this Wednesday.
Long live the great Communist Party of China.
May this autumn sorghum harvest be bountiful.
We good now, China?
Just an absolute demonstration of integrity.
These are the same guys who got banned from Comedy Central for criticizing Islam, remember?
So they had that whole thing where they jumped on Jesus to prove that Comedy Central wouldn't stop them from jumping on Jesus, but did stop them from jumping on Islam.
They have had integrity throughout.
They have been true satirists, not make-believe satirists, like the guys who do the late-night comedy show and only attack Donald Trump.
They have attacked everybody.
They have attacked absolutely everybody.
It's been absolutely great to watch.
Just a reminder, by the way, to all you Ayn Rand fans out there, all you guys who curse at me when I attack Ayn Rand, that capitalism does not cover everything.
If you do not act morally, then the moral war will be lost.
Capitalism is not a be-all and end-all.
It is a system.
It's a great system.
I'm a thoroughgoing capitalist.
But capitalism, no system, no system can contain the sinfulness of man.
Only right action can do that.
Good for Trey Parker and Matt Stone for taking right action.
And shame on the NBA for abandoning freedom for a lousy buck.
All right, it's the first Tuesday in October, which means the Supreme Court is there, which means Jenna Ellis Reeves has got to be here.
We'll have her in just a second.
I got to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube.
But listen, the Daily Wire's long-awaited app is finally here.
Jenna Ellis on Gender Cases00:14:29
I have it.
I've downloaded it.
It is amazing.
If you're a subscriber, you can access all of our content, including articles, shows, and more straight from the app.
You can even get Another Kingdom on it.
All Access subscribers get our new and exclusive discussion features where they can interact directly with us, the hosts, the writers, other special guests.
The app is available on Apple and Android.
So download it today, become a subscriber and join the fun.
Jenna Ellis Reeves is coming right up.
All right.
Jenna Ellis Reeves, one of our favorite guests.
We have her whenever there is anything to talk about about the Supreme Court.
And of course, it's the first Tuesday in October.
So it is time for the court to get arguing.
She's a constitutional law attorney, a Trump 2020 advisory board member.
She's always on Fox News and CNN.
We have to beg her.
We have to humiliate ourselves, crawl on our hands and knees to get her to come on.
But she has, come on again, Jenna, you there?
I am, Drew.
And, you know, what are you talking about?
This, you have me on to talk about anything, not just the Supreme Court.
So, you know, I think that my portfolio is a little wider than that.
It's always happy to join.
You're my number one favorite person.
Oh, thank you.
I just like to complain.
You do, I know.
Can I stop calling you Jenna Ellis Reeves?
Can you not just be Jenna Reeves now?
Is that illegal?
Well, no, it's actually not.
And that's my legal name now.
I just keep the Ellis because I had so much in the journalistic community with that.
I didn't want to lose, you know, the Google searches there.
So, but you can just call me Jenna.
That's fine.
I should be like Beyonce, you know, first name basis on.
You are at this point on this show, you are the Jenna.
We just, we only have, we only have one Jenna.
So what are they arguing about today in the Supreme Court?
Yeah, so today was a really important two companion cases that were argued this morning.
One is represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, and this contemplates the definition of sex within federal law.
And so sex has always been used by the legislature to intend biological sex, the biological difference between male and female.
It is not contemplated by the legislature to include sexual orientation or gender identity.
That's what these two cases are about.
And so this would be a judicial overreach to then put into the law sexual orientation and gender identity or SOGI as it's called, and would be a runaround the legislative branch, which Congress has refused in all other instances to expand the definition of sex on a federal level.
And so we are hoping that these cases will once and for all come down from the Supreme Court saying that sex is what it has always meant, the biological difference between male and female.
What would be the ramifications if they didn't?
What would be the ramifications of including gender identification in the definition of sex?
Well, so that would have a really disparate impact on religious freedom organizations and people who want to be able to say, for example, Alliance Defending Freedom's client is a funeral home that has a dress code requirement for men and a dress code requirement for women.
And so if, for example, their employee who is a male wants to then have a gender identity as a female, can then claim Supreme Court protection by saying, I'm going to show up to work dressed as a female and not abide by these guidelines for a dress code.
And so not only would it have an impact there for employers who want to maintain their level of professionalism, but also for For religious entities who want to say that they can employ people who do not have a gender identity or sexual orientation differing from their biological sex.
And so, with that, there are some protections, of course, for sexual orientation, but not specifically under the federal definition of gender discrimination.
So, this would be expansive and it would reduce the religious freedom protections for a lot of businesses, for churches, for a lot of employers across the nation that Congress has never intended.
Wouldn't it also, though, just, I mean, this is off the top of my head, so you can check me on this, but wouldn't it also be a terrible blow to actual real live women who would now, I mean, basically, if you would say to me, well, you're not hiring women and I just have Austin put on a dress, I think he's already wearing a dress, but I mean, if I had Austin, you know, put on a dress, I say, well, he identifies as a woman.
Now I've hired women and I'm paying them the same as men, sports teams.
I mean, wouldn't it be a good question?
I mean, yes.
And so what's interesting here is that there is a conflict and an open conflict between traditional feminists and who have always advocated for equal rights of women, which is why we have the gender non-discrimination law to begin with.
And then the whole LGBT agenda that is trying to essentially reverse all of the rights that women have striven for.
And so, you know, and of course, we can talk about, you know, the first through the third waves of feminism and whether we agree with all that.
But the bottom line here, Drew, I think it's very important that this would actually hurt biological women in the long run and also would hurt, for example, for women's shelters and other very specific women's prisons, you know, things like that that have women categorically different than men for female protections.
And of course, the laws like in California that say, oh, we have to have a female board member.
Well, now you can have a biological man simply identify as a woman for purposes of getting on the board, and that's okay.
And so there are plenty of really non-intuitive reasons that this is not a good idea.
It's not because anyone is trying to discriminate specifically against people who choose to have a sexual orientation or gender identity different than their biological sex.
It's that the law actually makes sense to protect the category biological women it was always intended to.
You know, it's funny, even the gays, some gays protest against this because their whole definition of themselves is a woman who is attracted to a woman, a man who's attracted to a man.
If you obliterate those categories, you've essentially obliterated their self-identification.
They have no being after a while.
How can the court say if the deconstructionist mentality of the liberal left, though, right?
I mean, they want to break down all barriers and all meaningful constructs behind words.
Words are now meaningless and we can apply them however we want.
So sex and gender no longer mean intuitively what they're supposed to.
Well, this is the thing, the other thing.
If I am a lawmaker and I pass a law about sex with the understanding that sex means sex, it means men and women.
And you say, well, now I'm going to redefine that word.
Haven't you taken away from our legislators the right to legislate?
Absolutely.
And this is why I said in the very beginning that this would be an inrund around Congress.
And we've seen that in, you and I have talked to Drew about the USMCA and Canada's attempt to make an inrund around Congress by providing a chapter within the USMCA that redefines gender and gender bias specifically within the term sex to include this SOGI sexual identification gender identity language in the context of a treaty with the United States that is an inrund around Congress legislatively.
Article 1, Section 1 of the United States Constitution says all legislative authority is given to Congress.
That means it is not part of executive branch treaties.
It is certainly not the province of the judicial branch.
And so the Supreme Court and simply say sex is the definition of what the legislature has always intended.
And we can't do that.
If you don't like it, different groups, then your remedy is not the judicial branch.
It's to go back to Congress.
And that has failed every time, which is why they're trying to go to the other two branches.
Was there any, when they were making arguments, did the judge justices give any indication of where they were standing on this, you know?
Well, you know, so that was just argued this morning.
I did have a very brief text conversation with a friend of mine at ADF, but didn't really get anything substantively.
I also asked, and I'm not sure if Justice Thomas was back on the bench.
That'll be interesting, but the oral arguments are always posted usually on the Friday after they're argued.
So I'll definitely go back and read that.
And guess what that means?
You'll just have to have me back on.
Look how usually I slip that in there.
Is there any word about Clarence Thomas, about what's wrong with him?
So reports yesterday was that he was home recovering from the flu.
Whether or not that's accurate is anyone's guess, but we wish him well, certainly.
What other cases are upcoming?
Yeah, so there are a lot of immigration cases that will be very interesting, definitely attacking the Trump administration.
But definitely interesting for this particular term now that we have Justice Gorsuch and Justice Brett Kavanaugh are the abortion-related cases.
And so even though the Supreme Court has passed and they have refused to confront the issue of Roe versus Wade, there is a case and several cases that they have taken up that they will have to confront the abortion issue.
And one in particular to watch out for is a Louisiana-based case where the Court of Appeals actually upheld Louisiana state law restricting abortion by making doctors who practice abortions have to have medical privileges at facilities, which is very similar to the 2016 Whole Women's Health versus Heller Schott in Texas.
And the Court of Appeals in this Louisiana case ruled that there wouldn't be an undue burden or restricted access on Louisiana clinics.
And so it actually highlighted that doctors should want to have admitting privileges because let's remember that abortion is not merely an, you know, just an outpatient procedure in the sense that it's not medically invasive.
This is an elective procedure to intentionally cause the death of the baby and the child.
And it's completely elective surgery.
And so the fact that doctors aren't seeking admitting privileges and they only perform abortions to the Court of Appeals, that looked a little suspect.
So they actually ruled in favor of the Louisiana law.
And so the Supreme Court has agreed to take that up.
And there are a number also of fetal heartbeat bills that have been passed around the country that are being challenged.
And so we'll see if the Supreme Court takes that up.
My guess and anticipation is that they will have to confront those and that Chief Justice Roberts is going to be the deciding vote on those cases.
And that's why I think abortion will end up being one of the prime issues in the general election in 2020.
And I personally am so proud of President Trump for being very, very firm, especially in his United Nations speech that did not get any attention whatsoever because this whole fake impeachment inquiry just suddenly popped up.
But he talked in that speech about how there is no right to abortion in the context of human rights, period, but talked about the sanctity and protection of human life.
And that is just such a fundamental issue that regardless of all of his other many accomplishments is a reason that I'm proud to vote for him again, because I believe that the sanctity of human life is one of the most critical and foundational issues we as human beings made in the image of God can possibly advocate for.
Yeah, I agree with you on that, on that last bit, certainly.
And I'll be watching to see if you're right about it becoming an issue in the election.
I think that's a really, really interesting prediction.
And I think it's, I've noticed, I've noticed that John Roberts is suddenly coming under attack from the left and the New York Times running pieces about how right-wing he is and all this.
And we know that Roberts seems to be, he seems to be sensitive to those sorts of attacks.
So no doubt, an attempt to manipulate his opinions.
Jenna Ellis Reeves, it is always a delight to see you.
I hope to get to see you in person soon.
Next time you're passing through.
And that was great analysis.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Jeremy.
Thanks.
Always great to join you.
Thanks.
All right, a final reflection.
This is getting a little old news, but I didn't get a chance to cover it because it happened over the weekend.
And then I got involved in the conversation with Knowles about Joker, which I was really interested in, and so I let it run long.
This is this troll on AOC on Alexandria Occasional Cortex, where this woman got up and started to rant about saving the environment.
We're not going to be here for much long because of the climate crisis.
We only have a few months left.
I love that you support the Green Deal, but it's not getting rid of fossil fuel.
It's not going to solve the problem fast enough.
A Swedish professor saying, you know, we can eat dead people, but that's not fast enough.
So I think your next campaign slogan has to be this.
We got to start eating babies.
We don't have enough time.
There's too much CO2.
All of you, you know, you're a pollutant.
Too much CO2.
We have to start now, please.
Eat the babies.
What I love about this troll, she was from Lyndon LaRouche's gang over there.
But what I love about this troll is that it's perfectly valid.
I mean, it's a troll, and AOC handled it pretty well.
She didn't get phased by it at all.
But it's totally valid.
There is, in fact, a Swedish behavioral scientist named Magnus Soterlund who suggests that we have to eat other people after they die as a way of combating climate change.
And we've heard Bernie Sanders say, and others say, that abortion is necessary, that the killing of unborn children is necessary to curb human population in light of climate change.
The climate change movement is an anti-human movement.
We heard Jason Momoa, the guy who played Aquaman, come out and say, we are a disease, people are a disease, as opposed to the obvious truth that we are the only thing interesting about the planet.
The planet is beautiful, but the concept of beauty is a human concept.
There is no beauty unless we're here to appreciate it.
We are the only thing that makes this planet really interesting.
So it's not for the, you're not fighting for the planet to fight for the planet.
You fight for the planet only to preserve and maintain human life.
So the troll was good because it's perfectly true.
If you combine abortion with cannibalism, you get eat the babies.
So it was a perfectly good imitation of this particular environmental movement.
All right, tomorrow, the mailbag.
Be there.
Go to dailywire.com, hit the podcast button, hit the Andrew Clavin podcast, hit the mailbag button and ask your questions about anything.
I will solve all your problems for Alousy 10 bucks a month, Alousie 100 bucks for the year.
And not only will you have no problems, you'll have the exquisite leftist tears tumbler.
The Andrew Klavan Show00:01:12
I'll see you tomorrow.
I'm Andrew Clavin.
This is The Andrew Klavan Show.
Hey, if you enjoyed this episode, don't forget to subscribe.
And if you want to help spread the word, give us a five-star review and also tell your friends to subscribe too.
We're available on Apple podcasts, on Spotify, wherever you listen to podcasts.
Also, be sure to check out the other Daily Wire podcasts, including the Ben Shapiro Show, the Matt Walsh Show, and the Michael Knoll Show.
Thanks for listening.
The Andrew Clavin Show is produced by Austin Stevens and directed by Mike Joyner.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
And our supervising producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
Assistant Director, Pavel Wydowski.
Edited by Adam Sayovitz.
Audio is mixed by Mike Cormina.
Hair and makeup is by Jessua Alvera.
Animations are by Cynthia Ngulo.
And our production assistant is Nick Sheehan.
The Andrew Clavin Show is a Daily Wire production, Copyright Daily Wire 2019.
On the Matt Walsh Show, we're not just discussing politics, we're talking culture, faith, family, all of the things that are really important to you.