Ben Shapiro dissects Beto O’Rourke’s political collapse and Trump’s 2016 wins, praising tax cuts and deregulation while dismissing impeachment as a partisan sham. He slams Warren’s $20.5T Medicare for All as economically reckless and the 1619 Project as revisionist history, framing Democrats’ anti-Americanism as a threat to national unity. Contrasting Trump’s strategic ISIS rhetoric with media outrage, he attacks "deep state" figures like Brennan and Vindman while mocking progressive films like Terminator: Dark Fate for ideological overreach. The episode ends by urging listeners to abandon mainstream platforms for DailyWire.com. [Automatically generated summary]
Beto O'Rourke has dropped out of the 2020 presidential race.
The man who once said he was born to run for president discovered that in fact he was born to run for president, then sink lower and lower in the polls while he began desperately spewing increasingly inane, unconstitutional,
and anti-American nonsense until he had so utterly humiliated himself and any noble cause he once may have mistakenly thought he represented that even audiences holding printed instructions on when to cheer felt their attention drifting and began to wish they had joined the political party that still eats a Chick-fil-A where the sandwiches are just so very, very good.
Beto was born to then resign in lonely disgrace, and having already literally eaten dirt after his defeat in the Texas Senate race, he was born to try to find something even more disgusting to put in his mouth to mark what is almost certainly the end of an ill-conceived political career.
It seems like only yesterday, Beto was a floppy-haired make-believe Kennedy who displayed a puppy-like enthusiasm as he grabbed the Constitution in his teeth and shook it to tatters.
And now, like the protagonist of a Greek tragedy who understands the full scope of his destiny only too late, O'Rourke must wander the world seeking some way to cope with the fact that this, this complete ruin, this utter failure, this was what he was really born for.
It would take a heart of stone not to sympathize with a man born for such a life.
And yet, when we think back on how he declared America a racist country, how he threatened to completely ignore the Second Amendment of the very Constitution he would have sworn to uphold in the horror/slash fantasy world in which he became president, I think we must reflect that the gods are just and say in the immortal words of the Greek poet Sophocles, so long, schmuck, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out unless you were born for that too.
Trigger warning.
I'm Andrew Clavin and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky donkey.
Life is tickety boom.
Ears are ringing, also singing, hunky-dunky-dicky.
Shipshaw, tipsy-topsy, the world is a bitty zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray.
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hurrah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
All right, live from New York, it's Monday morning.
And don't write to me and tell me that Sophocles was not a poet.
He was a playwright.
I ad-libbed that, and I couldn't get the word playwright into my brain fast enough, and I know what he was.
One of the ways incredibly sagacious people like myself become even more sagacious over time is by examining our errors, learning from them, and correcting course.
I voted for Donald Trump with grave misgivings.
And now that his presidency has been a largely conservative success, I've asked myself where my judgment was off and who got it more right than I did.
I was deeply put off by Trump's personal style and values, the way he treated people and spoke to them, and I was fearful of his apparent ignorance of the most basic rules of constitutional governance.
I was afraid he would either tack back to his liberal Democrat roots or veer into some sort of dangerous authoritarianism that our system, weakened by eight years of Obama malfeasance and an absconded press, would not be able to restrain.
But of course, an election is a binary situation, and he was running against Hillary Clinton, so my choice was simple.
After all, Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself.
I missed a couple of things in my assessment.
I underestimated Trump's intelligence and his ability to learn on the job and to change.
He has grown personally and reacted flexibly to reality in ways Obama never did.
And I could have seen that coming if I'd studied his career more carefully.
Then there were things I might have guessed, but didn't.
I didn't foresee that the left would so close off the path to compromise that Trump would only be able to move rightward.
In doing so, he's cut taxes and regulations, set our economy free, destroyed the ISIS caliphate, appointed great judges, cut back on illegal immigration, and, in all the essential ways, colored within the constitutional lines.
all the while exposing the left and their media for the un-American clown parade they are.
At the risk of sounding graceless, I don't think the always Trumpers could have seen all that coming either, even though they were more right about what would happen than I was.
I think the people who got Trump exactly right were the evangelicals.
They saw a man whom God could use and they did what they could to move him toward that happy destiny.
They remembered that God is in charge of history.
If he's with us, no one can stand against us.
If he's not, like the good book says, we're screwed.
Although maybe those aren't the good book's exact words.
Trump still has many traits I dislike, but now that I see just how very bad, how very tyrannical, how very entrenched, power-hungry, and democracy-resistant the left and their deep state are, I can see God needed a hammer where a gentleman wouldn't do.
The evangelicals got Trump right because they read the fine print in the book of Psalms.
Put not your faith in princes, not in Trump, not in any man.
Happy is he whose hope is in the Lord.
We're going to talk about all the stuff that's going down, but first let us talk about Wise Foods.
If you're watching TV, if you're watching the news, you see California is burning down, burning down.
And it's right near my place.
I can smell it some days when the wind is that way.
And every day I know that it could come my way.
I want to be prepared.
Wise Company makes freeze-dried food that is easy to be prepared and can be stored for up to 25 years, which in my case is about as long as I'm going to need it.
Knowing that you have what you need brings an incredible peace of mind.
It's perfect for all the disasters that could hit you wherever you are.
And when government resources are strained, it can be days, if not weeks, before you can get to fresh food and water.
You can't rely on someone else.
You have to rely on yourself.
All you need with Wise Foods is four cups of water.
It doesn't need to be hot.
You take the contents of the pouch, pour them into the water, stir, cover, that's it.
In 15 minutes, it's ready to go for your family, no matter what the situation.
This week, my listeners can get any WISE emergency or outdoor food product at an extra 25% off the lowest marked price.
Use the promo code Clavin at checkout at wisefoodstorage.com or call 855-474-4084.
Plus, shipping is free.
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.
So use promo code Clavin at wisefoodstorage.com to get any WISE emergency or outdoor food product at an extra 25% off and free shipping in every emergency.
The one thing you have to know is how you spell Clavin so you can get that discount is K-L-A-V-A-N.
So from the very start of this thing, I have taken a different tack toward this impeachment investigation than everybody else.
I called it garbage from the minute it appeared.
Behind Ziprecruiter's Private Push00:15:45
I literally could not believe that grown-up men and women were on television discussing seriously whether this was an impeachable offense or whether Adam Schiff was not lying this time when he lied all the other times, whether the Democrats were not running a game or whether the impeachment they had planned since the day he was elected was not now unfolding in front of us after the Russian thing failed and the obstruction of justice thing failed and the Stormy Daniels thing failed.
It was like anything they could pull out of their pocket.
Now, this information, they could have been listening to the Andrew Clavin show.
It's where the future comes to rehearse.
But now this information is just beginning to seep out that their candidates suck and they got nothing.
The impeachment thing is moving nobody.
The New York Times, the New York Times has a fascinating front page today, a former newspaper, as you know, but it has this front page that really is beginning to feel a little like squirrely, a little uncertain of what's going on.
So first they have this poll.
They say despite low national approval ratings and the specter of impeachment, President Trump remains highly competitive in the battleground states likeliest to decide his reelection, according to a set of news surveys from the New York Times, Upshot, and CNN College.
So remember, this is after all this time.
They've been pushing this narrative.
Trump is falling.
He's failing.
He's 20 points behind Warren.
He's 40 points behind Biden.
It's just a matter of time.
Suddenly, none of that is true.
Across the six closest states that went Republican in 2016, he trails Joe Biden by an average of two points among registered voters, but stays within the margin of error.
And that's really scary to Trump because here's Joe Biden's response to that.
Increasing exponentially, top one in 2% have done exponentially better.
Well, corporate profit has been up over exponentially.
Their profits have gone up exponentially.
It's going to be up exponentially.
When you register it, the likelihood of it being used diminishes exponentially.
That guy's an idiot.
He's an idiot.
He's not going anywhere.
In fact, Trump had this hilarious routine he did at one of his rallies where he was talking about what the narrative is about what the narrative is about impeachment and what they're trying to sell the American public.
And he did an imitation of it.
Here it is.
Clinton, she was easy, right?
Obama was easy.
The Bush dynasty was Sleepy Joe, I'm worried about, right?
So then I said to myself, gee, I guess there's only one way.
Let's call up Ukraine for help.
These people are sick.
These people are so full of hate and self-assurance and so drunk on the power they've accumulated in their deep state and their administrative state, which just kept rolling along no matter who was in office that they can't hear how good the guy is.
I mean, that is really funny material, and it really does make them seem utterly ridiculous.
This poll anyway goes on to say Trump leads Elizabeth Warren by two points among registered voters.
And I'll get back to her in a minute because there's a really interesting article in the Times about this as well.
And he leads Elizabeth Warren, which is the same margin as his win over Hillary Clinton in these states three years ago.
And we all know what happened to her.
The poll showed Bernie Sanders deadlocked with the president among registered voters, but trailing among likely voters and also living voters and also voters with an IQ above six.
So I think this idea, that's the other thing.
You know, when you interview these guys randomly, it doesn't mean anything.
You got to interview likely voters, people who can vote, people who will vote.
So I want to show you an ad.
I don't usually play political ads, but this is a Trump ad, which I think is really fascinating for two reasons.
One, because they're doing exactly what I thought they should do.
And I've written to guys in the White House and told them I think this is what they should do.
And that's the first thing.
And the other thing is it's a bad sign for you when your opponent's ad is simply factual, when the ad is just stating the way things are.
Because then people sit there and go, you know, like you can say this, you can say that, but those are the facts.
This is a great ad.
But the thing about it is, it's all true.
Listen to this.
President Trump is changing Washington, creating 6 million new jobs, 500,000 new manufacturing jobs, cutting illegal immigration in half, obliterating ISIS, their caliphate destroyed, their terrorist leader dead.
But the Democrats would rather focus on impeachment and phony investigations, ignoring the real issues.
But that's not stopping Donald Trump.
He's no Mr. Nice guy, but sometimes it takes a Donald Trump to change Washington.
I'm Donald Trump, and I approve this message.
That no Mr. Nice guy line is genius, and they should use it again and again.
I've told them this, basically, with the few contacts that I have over there, that, you know, Trump has had a tremendously successful record.
He really has.
He has done amazing things.
He's kept a lot of his promises, and he's had the Congress against him every step of the way.
Even when he had both houses of Congress, the Republicans were not all that apt to help him out.
Some of them didn't want to help him out.
Some of them were just incompetent.
Some of them are afraid, but they didn't get that much done.
But he has gotten a lot done, and he's really done a good job.
But he's off-putting to a lot of people.
Like I said at the beginning, he was off-putting to me and still sometimes is, but he's especially off-putting, I think, to suburban women.
A little bit of self-awareness, a little bit of saying, hey, I know how I come across, but look at what I'm dealing with.
You know, I know that sometimes I'm not the nicest guy, but the nicest guy couldn't deal with what I deal with.
You know, to say, you know, yeah, I'm a great big character and sometimes that's off-putting to some people.
And I get it, I get it.
But look at what is going on here because it is a mess.
And the thing is, you know, I think that that would just a little bit of, he's always very appealing when you hear that self-knowledge.
Remember that time when he said, I don't drink.
I would be such a mess if I did drink.
You know, that is always like the best Trump you can get.
And I think putting that into his ads and letting him say it in some of his rallies once the 2020 race begins was just a very good idea.
But the other thing about this is just that it's true.
Okay.
It is just all that he has created a wonderful job market.
It is because of his cut in regulations and his cut in taxes.
That is the reason he is now dealing with the border.
I mean, this was the big thing on him.
His big promise was the wall.
So the Washington Post unbelievably runs this piece saying smugglers are sawing through Trump's new wall, but they never ran a piece saying Trump is building a new wall.
So if you're reading the Washington Post, your reaction should be when you read the smugglers are sawing through Trump's new wall, your reaction should be, Trump built a new wall, you know, because suddenly you're finding out that this guy has been a success.
There has been a study from the Princeton Policy Advisors in Pennington, New Jersey, that said there has been a summer fall drop in expected apprehensions following the Trump administration's success in getting Mexico and other Central American countries to help with the illegal immigration crisis.
And the analyst says the crisis is over and President Trump is due credit for the reduction in apprehensions.
So that's what Trump is doing.
I mean, what Trump is doing is like, you know, he just killed the leader of ISIS, but they never reported or they never really reported and really gave him full credit for eliminating the caliphate of ISIS.
I mean, Obama was sitting there juggling, waiting for Iran to come online and become part of the community of nations or whatever the hell was in his mind about that.
Whereas Trump like wiped that place out as he himself, obviously, because he always bragged, as he himself would say, in like two months, it was gone.
It was the size.
The caliphate was the size of Ohio.
It is now gone.
So even just killing this guy, Al-Baghdadi, it was just icing on the cake.
I mean, it was all those people he chased out of there.
So what's the other side doing?
This is the other thing.
What is the other side doing?
Elizabeth Warren has been their absolute darling, right?
They have been pushing Elizabeth Warren like she is the second coming.
And she's a very disciplined candidate.
Like I actually think she's a little more dangerous than people on the right are sort of shrugging her off.
She'll never whinge.
She won't do it.
But she's a disciplined, attractive candidate who I think Trump will beat, but who still has a kind of appeal that, you know, that when it's a binary choice, once again, the left is going to line up behind her.
And of course, the reporters are not going to give her any problems whatsoever.
So the New York Times runs a story that the Wall Street Journal ran a long time ago about the fact that Wall Street is looking at her and thinking she is going to destroy business.
They're looking at her.
So they try to write it as a good thing.
It's a positive thing that she is going to destroy the business community in America.
But their ad, their story from the New York Times is: as Warren gains in race, Wall Street sounds the alarm with a populist message that promises to rein in corporate excess.
Ms. Warren has been facing more hostility from the finance industry than any other candidate.
From corporate boardrooms to breakfast meetings, investor conferences to charity galas, Ms. Warren's rise in the Democrat primary polls is rattling bankers, investors, and their affluent clients who see in the Massachusetts Senator a formidable opponent who could damage not only their industry, but their way of life.
Now, for everybody who hates the free market and everybody who hates businessmen and people who make the world work, that sounds like a good thing.
So that's 10 of the people who read the New York Times.
And then the rest of the people who read the New York Times read it because their father read it.
And they get that this is, of course, a disaster.
If they have money in the stock market, everybody at this point has money in the stock market.
If the stock market tanks, we all go down with it, as we learned in 2008.
One of the reasons it should be watched, but certainly not regulated out of existence.
So she comes out.
She has had this health care plan and she has been dodging the question about how you're going to pay for the health care plan.
And what always, these are important questions.
It's important to ask how you're going to pay for the health care plan.
However, it's even more important to ask, where does our freedom go with the health care plan?
And what happens when we get old and the government decides that it's not worth spending the money on us?
And then we get the death panels.
That's what happened with Obama.
He kept saying, oh, there's no death panels, you crazy right-wingers.
We're not going to have a death panel.
We're just going to have a panel of people who decide when you die.
It won't be a death panel.
It'll just be your death panel.
Think of it as it's personalized.
It'll be a personalized death panel.
So that's going to happen with her plan too.
But she has come up with this thing, this idea that this plan, which is going to cost something like $50 trillion.
You know, Thomas Soule has this wonderful line.
He says, the Democrats are trying to sell us the idea that we can't afford health care, but we can afford health care plus this tremendous bureaucracy, this government bureaucracy that is now going to manage it.
That's what they're selling us.
Megan McCartle, who is a, she's kind of a libertarian.
I think she skews right somewhat, but she's not a far right-winger.
She looks at this math and she says the math adds up on her plan as long as you buy her assumptions.
The bad news is that Warren's assumptions are crazier than keeping a pet rhinoceros, after which who cares that her calculator works.
This is to actual policymaking as to plastic noodles in a ramen bar window, as plastic noodles in a ramen bar window is to lunch.
Warren says she can deliver a generous Medicare for all plan with only $20.5 trillion in additional federal spending.
That's a quarter to a third less than any serious estimate of the plan from outside her campaign.
So most people are saying it's going to be $60 trillion or around there.
So how will she get there?
She'll slash administrative costs and then mandate that everything else cost less.
So that's where you say, oh, yeah, you can't charge for that and you regulate the prices.
Never works, always destroys everything.
It's the communist way.
Warren is not exactly the first progressive.
This is Megan McArdle again.
Warren is not exactly the first progressive reformer to have the same idea.
And if she pushes forward with it, she will be but the next in a long line to discover that she can't make it work politically or economically.
Now, most of you I know are probably listening to this and not watching it, but it is worth finding a video of her.
She's asked who's going to be taxed to pay for this imaginary $20 trillion, which is really $55 trillion or whatever it is.
She's asked who is going to pay for it.
And she says, only the billionaires.
But if you can see her, the panic in her eyes is amazing.
Here it's 100%.
It doesn't raise taxes on anybody but billionaires.
And you know what?
The billionaires can afford it.
And I don't call them middle class.
So billionaire, that's where it worked.
Anyone under a billion dollars network?
That's right.
It's not paying a penny more.
That's exactly right.
She turns away because she knows the next question is, are you lying like you did about the Indian thing?
Is this another one of those lies?
Because that doesn't make any sense.
It also doesn't make any sense to chase the rich away because the rich are the creators.
I know people don't like the rich.
I get it, but they are the creators of jobs.
They are the hirers.
As somebody once said, no poor man ever gave me a job.
And those are the people she wants to destroy.
And it's a no-win situation.
Plus, the equality.
This inequality thing is a complete boondoggle itself because with all the wealth transfers we have in this country, people are not as unequal as you think.
Obviously, the very rich are more, you know, are very, very far ahead of me and you and everybody else.
But the rest of us, there is still a middle class, and that's what she'll destroy with this plan.
I'll get back to her in just a second.
But you're probably looking at her and thinking, why didn't the Democrat Party use ZipRecruiter if they're going to hire a candidate?
If you want to hire anybody, you want to use ZipRecruiter.
You know, they tell the story about Cafe Altura, where the COO, Dylan Miskiewicz, needed to hire a director of coffee for his organic coffee company, but he was having trouble finding qualified applicants.
So he switched to ZipRecruiter.
ZipRecruiter doesn't depend on candidates finding you.
It finds them for you.
Technology identifies people with the right experience and invites them to apply to your job so you get qualified candidates fast.
Dylan posted his job on ZipRecruiter and said he was impressed by how quickly he had great candidate supply.
He also used ZipRecruiter's candidate rating feature to filter his applicants so he could focus on the most relevant ones.
That's how Dylan found his new director of coffee in just a few days with results like that.
It's no wonder.
Four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the first day.
See why ZipRecruiter is effective for businesses of all sizes.
Try ZipRecruiter for free at our web address, ziprecruiter.com slash dailywire.
That's ziprecruiter.com slash D-A-I-L-Y-W-I-R-E.
One word, ziprecruiter.com slash daily wire.
ZipRecruiter is the smartest way to hire.
So another, just one more quick Elizabeth Warren cut.
She's asked, what's going to happen when she destroys the private insurance industry?
Aside from the fact that you will no longer be able to choose private insurance, which is like a lot of people in this country, where are all the people who work in the insurance industry going to go?
People who work in private insurance and all the people even here in Des Moines who work in private health insurance, where do they go and work when private insurance is eliminated?
So if you've had a chance to read the plan, you'll see no one gets left behind.
Some of the people currently working in health insurance will work in other parts of insurance and life insurance and auto insurance and car insurance.
Some will work for Medicaid.
And there is a five-year transition support for everyone.
Because what this is about is how we strengthen America's middle class and how we make sure that in transitions, no one gets left behind.
Private Insurance Transition00:15:08
It's right there in the plan and it's fully paid for.
You know what's fascinating to me about this?
Elizabeth Warren didn't used to be like this and she claims she's not, but she obviously is.
The Democrat Party now no longer knows what private industry is for.
They think it's just a bank where they can take out like an ATM where they can take out funds to fund their crappy plans without ever asking the question, what industry, what business, what job does the government do better than the private sector?
The answer, spoiler alert, is none.
They don't do anything better.
I mean, we let them do the military because we have to, because no independent person can be trusted with the military.
But could anybody doubt that an independent businessman running a competitive military would get things done cheaper and faster than the government does it?
I mean, any soldier, no matter how patriotic, will tell you the biggest problem with the military is the government running is the fact that his government worked.
But we have to do that.
I get it.
But everything else that the government does, they do worse.
So why is it that their money, the money that they make, the profits that they make, are just supposed to fund bad programs that replace them.
That doesn't make any sense.
It's not freedom.
It's not intelligent.
And the other side of that also is this misunderstanding.
Like I've heard leftists say, profit is theft.
You know, we on the right say taxes are theft.
Taxes are theft because we don't want to give them.
They take them away at gunpoint.
That's why we call it theft.
Profits are theft because you paid for something willingly that you wanted and they made a profit and gave you something good.
I don't understand where that logic is, but that is what they think.
You know, I think I already quoted Thomas Sall today, but the guy's so brilliant.
I'll quote him again.
I have to give a hat tip to Adam Baldwin, who posted this on Twitter.
But he talks about how these bad plans work and how they become permanent.
And he says it's four stages.
This is Thomas Sowell.
He says, first, there's a crisis.
Some situation exists whose negative aspects the anointed propose to eliminate, the elites.
Such a situation is routinely characterized as a crisis, even though all human situations have negative aspects and even though evidence is seldom asked or given to show how the situation at hand is either uniquely bad or threatening to get worse.
Sometimes the situation described as a crisis has been getting better for years.
Stage two, the solution.
Policies to end the crisis are advocated by the anointed, who say that these policies will lead to a beneficial result, A. Critics say that these policies will lead to a detrimental result, Z.
The anointed dismiss these latter claims as absurd and simplistic, if not dishonest.
Stage three, the policies are instituted and lead to the detrimental result, Z.
They do exactly what the critics said they would do.
Stage four, those who attribute detrimental result Z to the policies instituted are dismissed again as simplistic for ignoring the complexity.
So in other words, these bad programs, they never go away.
And all this comes out, all this is right in front of our eyes.
We see it.
We see it's going on while the Democrats hold these secret hearings, these secret impeachment hearings about something that 0% of the population cares about.
Zero percent, including the left, who's raving, oh, it's the Constitution, oh, it's our freedom.
All of that, 0% of people care whether Donald Trump talked to the Ukrainian president and asked him to look into corruption, including Joe Biden.
But I'll get back to that in a second.
The other thing is, the other thing that Trump has exposed is the insane anti-Americanism on the left.
It has gotten insane.
Beto O'Rourke quits the campaign and he gives this interview to a black-oriented radio show.
Now, you'll remember we've talked about the New York Times, their 1619 project, which basically says everything we don't like about America, freedom, capitalism, all the good things that we have in America that they don't like, that the New York Times doesn't like, they all stem from slavery.
And so we should basically not talk about 1776.
We should talk about when the slaves come over.
Beto O'Rourke just echoes all of this nonsense.
The foundation of this country is an extraordinarily brutal one.
I think of Nicole Hannah-Jones, the 1619 project, the case that she makes that has persuaded me that you marked the foundation of America not on the 4th of July, 1776, but the 20th of August, 1619, the first time someone was kidnapped from West Africa, brought here against their will, made to build the wealth, the success, the greatness of America, which neither they nor their descendants alive today are able to fully participate in.
And we know that from any way we can cut it or measure it, 10 times the wealth in white America than there is in black America.
And it's not accidental.
It's by design.
So his basically his campaign slogan should have been, make me president, I hate you.
Make me president.
I hate this country.
I mean, that really is, is it?
And it's with all of them.
It's all of them that are like this, you know, deep down.
I mean, not one of them, not one of them has an ounce of gratitude, has an ounce of appreciation, has an ounce of respect for the country that has given them everything they have.
And by the way, there's an article in, I mean, you don't need me to tell you this, but there's an article in the City Journal by Arthur Millick of the Heritage Foundation.
It says America's founding was not defined by slavery and white supremacy, quite the contrary.
And he says that this is what he says, which just listen to it.
It makes perfect sense.
To make America's founding contemptible, one must hide, ignore, and distort the founders' writings and thoughts.
Irresponsibly omitted from this narrative, this New York Times narrative, is the fact that not a single major founder endorsed slavery, not a single one.
On the contrary, the founders unambiguously saw slavery as evil.
George Washington said there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a plan adopted for the abolition of it.
Thomas Jefferson's original draft of the Declaration of Independence calls the slave trade an execrable commerce.
And an affront against human nature itself, Governor Morris called slavery a nefarious institution and the curse of heaven.
And John Jay said it is much to be wished that slavery may be abolished.
To contend for our own liberty and to deny that blessing to others involves an inconsistency not to be excused.
Franklin, Madison, Adams, and Hamilton spoke strongly against the institution of slavery too.
These guys were stuck between a rock and a hard place.
They would lose the southern states if they did, if they moved to get rid of slavery.
They decided it was better to start a country based on freedom, even with this flaw.
And they could see if it didn't get fixed, it was going to lead to civil war.
They did what they had to do to get the country started.
And to say the country is founded on this, to say that the slaves uniquely built American wealth, to say that, you know, obviously slavery a horrible institution, but still, to say that this is the point of America.
If it was the point of America, Martin Luther King would not have said live up to the meaning of your creed.
He knew that the creed was good.
He knew it was the creed of America that had destroyed slavery.
It's the New York Times that is selling lies.
And the fact that the left, which is the New York Times, that the Democrats, which is the New York Times, have bought into this.
I mean, that's what Trump is running against.
That's what he's running against.
He's running against make us president.
We hate you.
Hey, Another Kingdom is out today for everybody, but if you subscribe at dailywire.com, you can get it on Friday, cutting the Clevelandless weekend down by a single day and upping your chances of surviving it.
It's a good story.
It is a great story.
Another Kingdom Knowles is doing a terrific job on it.
So go listen to it.
Please leave us a five-star review and also subscribe.
And all of that is really helpful to us.
And I think you'll really love the story.
But I got to say goodbye to Facebook and YouTube.
Come on over to dailywire.com while you subscribe.
You can listen to the rest of the show.
I want to go back to some of this impeachment nonsense in just a second.
But first, I just want to play one more cut because we're talking about the anti-Americanism of the of the left.
Or at least if it's not anti-Americanism, it is indifference to America as it was founded.
I call them the enemies of the founding, but just the sort of sense that the politics, that their politics are so important, their opinions so important, their victory so important that it's worth sacrificing anything.
They haven't found one single way, not one single way that Donald Trump has jiggered with the electoral machinery to get his victory in 2016, not one.
And yet, again and again, we have seen that Obama tapped phones in Trump Tower, sent a spy possibly into the Trump campaign, did everything he could, as the intelligence agencies did everything they could to basically wrongfoot Trump and destroy the electoral system.
They did all that.
They did all that because they feel they have got their claws into power and they feel that that's the right thing, that that's the good thing, as I'll show you in just a minute.
But first, I have to talk about Brian Stelter.
It's a wonderful cut because, you know, the New York Times is actually running a story, actually ran a story in some of the local TV stations.
They're starting to talk about doing what they used to do when I was a kid, which is playing the national anthem at the end of the day.
And the New York Times runs a story saying this is divisive.
This is political.
It's a loyalty test to play the national anthem.
This is the way these guys are thinking.
So when Trump comes out and he says that when Bakir al-Baghdadi was killed, he was whimpering like a dog and he was a coward and all this stuff.
Boy, oh boy, immediately, immediately the press goes out there to make sure that he could have heard that.
And so far, they say he could not have.
Now, given the record of the press, I bet Trump actually heard it.
I bet Trump was not lying, you know.
But even if he was, is there anyone among us who doesn't understand what he was doing, who doesn't understand that he was spitting in the face of this dead guy saying to his successor, we'll come after you too, and his successor will come after you too.
There's not going to be any glory in it.
There's only going to be death.
There's only going to be disgrace.
Does anybody not know that Trump was doing that?
But here is Brian Stelter on the case, making sure.
I mean, listen to the equivalence that he draws between al-Baghdadi and Donald Trump.
I think it is clear a week after the al-Baghdadi raid, he made it up.
We should just be honest about that.
All signs point to the fact that he made up the claims about lying, about crying and whimpering.
And he's been doing it all week long, repeating this at other events, swearing that al-Baghdadi was crying and whimpering in those last moments, even though there was no live audio from inside that raid.
There was no indication the president was ever told this by anyone in the military.
So he seems to have made it up.
This is par for the course from the president.
But we shouldn't get used to this.
You know, we teach our children to tell the truth.
And we teach our children that the president is supposed to tell the truth.
So even when the United States is celebrating a major military victory, I think we should still hold the bar as high as possible for the president of the United States.
You know, Stephanie Grisham, the White House Press Secretary, took issue with the New York Times reporting and said here, is it not possible just to celebrate that a terrorist, murderer, and rapist has been killed?
Yes, of course.
I think it's been very clear for a week there's been a celebration that al-Baghdadi is dead.
But it is also possible to expect the president to tell the truth.
And for now, it seems the Republican Party is okay with him spinning up these stories, even about U.S. military action.
I mean, it's childish, but it's childish hatred.
And it's child, it's a sense of disconnect from the things that matter.
It really is.
It's a sense of disconnect from the things that matter.
You know, Trump does have this Carney Barker thing.
He does overemphasize things, but he's also constantly in a negotiation with people.
He's also constantly like in a relationship with the people he's talking about.
He's clearly sending a message.
I don't think there was a single American over the age of 12 who didn't understand that he was sending a message to ISIS about what he was going to do to the next guy and the guy after that.
I think we all understood that.
And given CNN's track record on reporting on Trump, it wouldn't surprise me if he had the audio, in fact, and they just don't know it.
It would be hilarious if he could bring that out.
Anyway, so here's the thing.
So this is what we're seeing on one side.
We're seeing incompetence.
We're seeing the stupidity of Joe Biden, the kind of, you know, the exponential stupidity of Joe Biden, the incompetence and dishonesty of Elizabeth Warren.
That's their lineup.
And then the communism of Bernie Sanders.
So that's their lineup.
That's who they've got.
Beto is gone.
Kamala Harris is starting to close down her operation.
She'll be gone soon.
I mean, that's what they've got.
And on the other hand, they have this constant investigation.
And on the other hand, you've got Trump, who's doing a good job.
So finally, finally, Chuck Todd, basically the figurehead for the left, is a spokesman for the left.
He's not a newsman.
He's not a journalist.
He's just a left guy.
It occurs to him that maybe this isn't working.
You know, there's a poll in the Wall Street Journal today, which basically says people are hardened where they are.
The Democrats want Trump gone.
They don't care if it's impeachment.
The Republicans want Trump to stay.
They don't care about impeachment, right?
So that's where we are.
It's not moving the ball.
And I would guess it's making the House and the Democrats look pretty small and stupid.
So Chuck Todd goes out and he actually sends reporters out to ask voters how they feel about impeachment.
Listen to what he says.
We went out and tried to find some voters, guys, to talk about impeachment.
We had to bring it up to them.
Here's what they told us.
And I think it's a waste of time.
We are a bunch of little kids fighting and not accomplishing what the hell they're elected for.
And I think we have the systems of checks and balances.
And the way it should work is that, you know, the House and the Senate should do what is set out in the Constitution.
I've read the document, and there was absolutely nothing concerning to me from one president to another.
It was absolutely appropriate.
Helene, these were in the early states.
And I love the fact that he says we had to bring it up to them.
That is the thing that I think is the most important thing.
I don't think you're going to find a single voter who says, you know, the economy is better.
He got rid of ISIS.
His judges' picks aren't bad.
But, you know, he talked to the Ukraine.
I mean, it's just ridiculous.
He talked to the Ukrainian president about Joe Biden.
It is just absurd, especially given what we're going to find out almost certainly that Obama did and the way they behaved.
And they're selling that as a good thing.
See, this is the thing.
At the same time, at the same time, they're selling the idea that it's a bad thing that Trump investigated, wanted Ukraine to investigate corruption, which included Joe Biden, because Joe Biden is a candidate.
They're selling the idea that it's a wonderful, wonderful thing that these unelected spies are spying on Trump.
They keep calling this guy a whistleblower.
They got to protect the whistleblower.
He's not a whistleblower.
He's a leaker.
He's a leaker.
He wasn't whistleblowing on anything.
This is not some major thing that affects that you have to lie down and die for because it affects the freedom and safety of America.
This is nothing.
And he's a leaker.
That's what he is.
And they are selling us.
The New York Times, all of them are selling us the idea that this is great, that the spies and bureaucrats are out there.
You know, the former CIA director, I think his name is McLaughlin.
I think it's John McLaughlin.
He's on a panel and the moderator says, you know, all these bureaucrats and spies coming forward, in fact, it's a little deep statey.
It's kind of making Trump looks like he's right.
Isn't this in fact the deep state?
Lie Infiltrator00:03:10
Here's his answer.
Thank God for the deep state.
You know, everyone here has seen this progression of diplomats and intelligence officers and White House people trooping up to Capitol Hill right now and saying, these are people who are doing their duty or responding to a higher call.
It doesn't surp.
I guess it doesn't surprise.
Well, think about it for a minute.
With all of the people who knew what was going on here, it took an intelligence officer to step forward and say something about it, which was the trigger that then unleashed everything else.
Now, why does that happen?
What I tell American people why that happens is this is the institution in the U.S. government that, with all of its flaws, and it makes mistakes, is institutionally committed to objectivity and to telling the truth.
It is one of the few institutions in Washington that is not in a chain of command that makes or implements policy.
Its whole job is to speak the truth.
It's engraved in marble in the lobby.
Crap, right?
It's not its job.
They're spies.
Their job is to lie and infiltrate.
That's their job.
Their job is to lie and infiltrate and get information for the president to use.
That's their job.
And the idea that somehow, I mean, because they keep missing the important point is if we don't want them to do this stuff, how do we stop them?
If we don't want them to be the unelected government, how do we make them stop?
They're not in the Constitution, so we have no control over them.
He said it himself.
They're an independent agency.
That's not a good thing.
We do not want independent agencies governing us.
We want responsible agencies, responsible to us, representing us, right?
So it's complete crap.
Every word that just came out of his mouth shows he doesn't know what he's talking about.
You know, that guy, Lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman, who said he was listening to the famous phone call between Trump and the Ukrainian president, and he went in and testified, and it was a terrible, terrible thing that some people questioned his patriotism.
He told lawmakers, this is in the Washington Post in a flattering article about him, that he was deeply troubled by what he interpreted as an attempt by the president to subvert U.S. foreign policy.
The president makes U.S. foreign policy.
The president makes U.S. foreign policy.
If he says it's U.S. foreign policy, it basically is.
And there's a lot of stuff coming out about this guy.
I don't want to, you know, I don't want to diss him without knowing who he is, but there's a guy named Jim Hickman who put out a long thread on Twitter saying that he worked with him in a combined U.S.-Russian exercise called Atlas Vision, and that he was spreading anti-American propaganda.
He was sharing with the Russians things that he thought were bad about America.
So we don't know anything about him because it's all being done in secret.
My spy novel is this.
My spy novel is this.
John Brennan is at college in Fordham and he's a communist, right?
We know he voted for the Communist Party while he was at Fordham.
We also know that while he's at Fordham, he reads an ad to go into the intelligence business to go into the CIA and he decides that that's his future.
Now, flash forward ahead, he's Obama's advisor on the Iran deal.
So maybe he's a Russian, maybe he's the mole.
John Brennan's Spy Novel00:02:10
I mean, this is the story.
We're missing, oh, never mind.
But I mean, maybe Putin is on the phone to John Brennan, you know, making like dead drops and everything.
All right, all right.
That's probably not true.
But it could be, it's just as likely as anything else.
All right, a final reflection on Terminator Dark Fate, which just laid a tremendous egg.
And you know how much these things cost.
I mean, talk about the misuse of funds.
This is probably something that costs as much as a small country, the economy of a small country.
But it put forward this aggressive feminism.
Now, one of the things I love the first Terminator movie a lot.
And I've always resented the fact that one of the sequels, I guess it was the second one, everybody says how good that was because the special effects were great and all this stuff.
But for a story, it was such an original story.
This guy coming from the future to kill a guy, kill a woman before he's born.
And the wonderful thing about this story is that Sarah O'Connor is just a dame.
She's kind of dopey.
She's worried about her hair.
She's worried about dating and all this stuff.
And the idea that she will become a hero is very inspiring and uplifting, that this ordinary person is uplifted by the son she has and by this love affair and by the danger she gets into.
That's a great story.
The story that a bunch of women go around beating up machines is just garbage.
It's like nobody believes it.
Nobody wants to see it.
It's not what stories are about.
They really aren't.
I mean, we want to see brave men because we want to know men can take care of women.
We want to see loving women because we want to know women can take care of children.
That's the way the human race progresses.
It's not about whether women are strong, they can be strong, but this nonsense where they become action heroes and we're supposed to think, oh, yeah, let's go see that, is not something that necessarily is going to sell movies.
It's not like we won't see it sometimes.
It's just that it's not the most amazing thing.
But here's the thing.
Before the movie comes out, Tim Miller, the director, says, if you're at all enlightened, this character, this female hero of the movie, will play like gangbusters.
If you're a closet misogynist, she'll scare the F out of you because she's tough and strong, but very feminine.
This is what keeps we closet misogynists up at night.
We did not trade certain gender traits for others.
She's just very strong and that frightens some dudes.
Female Hero Scare Tactics00:01:56
You can see online the responses to some of the early crap that's out there, trolls on the internet.
I don't give an F. Once again, it's the Beto Aurora campaign slogan.
We hate you.
Now come to our movie.
Screw you.
Now come to our movie.
We're so much better than you that we should be able to lecture you instead of entertain you, which is our only job.
Our only job is to entertain you.
We're not going to do that.
We're just going to explain to you why you're no good.
Give us your 20 bucks.
Not going to happen.
Not going to happen for Beto.
I don't think it's going to happen for the Democrat Party, but who knows?
There's still a lot of time left.
It's now one year till the next election.
So it's one year till we find out.
I got to stop here.
I'm moving on to Boston where I will be speaking tomorrow.
So, but I'll still be on the air.
So come on, tune in then.
I'm Andrew Clavin.
This is the Andrew Clavin Show.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
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 Wall 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 Kormina.
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.
If you prefer facts over feelings, aren't offended by the brutal truth, but you can still laugh at the insanity filling our national news cycle, well, tune into the Ben Shapiro Show, where you'll get a whole lot of that and much more.