Andrew Clavin dissects the left’s entitlement crisis, from Democrats’ absurd impeachment hearings—featuring a fictional "impeachment machine" malfunction—to media bias, where figures like George Stephanopoulos and Chuck Todd push partisan narratives while silencing conservatives. He contrasts this with populist resistance, citing New York’s gun laws under Supreme Court scrutiny and Jenna Ellis’s defense of Second Amendment rights as divine, not government-granted. The episode ties elite impunity—from Roger Ailes’ Fox News abuses to Prince Andrew’s Epstein ties—to a broader cultural regression, where Christianity’s moral framework is dismissed in favor of power dynamics. Clavin argues the left’s entitlement extends from financial control to sexual exploitation, exposing a system where accountability vanishes for the powerful while ordinary voices are drowned out. [Automatically generated summary]
The House Judiciary Committee will take up the impeachment hearings tomorrow, and I know you're every bit as excited about that as I am.
House Democrats decided to go forward with the hearings despite messages written on the Capitol walls in lipstick saying, please stop me before I make an even bigger fool of myself.
The messages were unsigned, but sources say Congressman Adam Schiff arrived at work not wearing lipstick, which they say may be a clue.
The current hearings will be chaired by Gerald Nadler, whose warm, charming personality reminds many people of a favorite uncle from their youth who mysteriously disappeared after Little Sister locked herself in the bathroom and called the police.
Nadler says his first witness will be an executive from the Acme Impeachment Company, who will explain why their previous impeachment machine caused Democrats to be chased out of a tunnel by an oncoming train until they smashed into the side of a cliff and were flattened to the width of a sheet of paper before slipping through a crack in the ground to where they'd hidden an explosive device,
which then went off and blew them sky high, their tails on fire, and their faces blackened, whereupon they looked down and realized they were hovering in midair and plunged several miles to the earth below, where they vanished in a puff of dust.
Otherwise, Democrats say the impeachment machine worked great and they'd like to order three more of them.
Other witnesses will include a real-life law professor who will testify that Donald Trump did indeed break the law when he did whatever everyone's saying he did with whoever he was with in whatever country they're talking about.
After that, Democrats say they will call fact witnesses who will testify to facts like tin is the major export of Bolivia and Mount Washington is 14,500 feet high.
Although maybe it's not tin and maybe that's Mount Whitney.
But that shouldn't hold up the impeachment.
Trigger warning, I'm Andrew Clavin and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky donkey.
Life is to kiddie boom.
Birds are winging also singing hunky dunkidy.
Ship-shaped hipsy-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.
If there is one word that seems to sum up the left, I can't say it on air, but if there is a word I could say, it's entitlement.
Whatever they do, whatever they want, the left feels it's theirs by right.
Your money, the money you earn by working, is theirs to spend as they see fit.
They even call their spending entitlements, as if somehow the product of your labors belongs to them and whoever they choose to give it to.
During the 2016 election, Donald Trump said he would not commit to accepting the outcome of the election.
The New York Times, a former newspaper, called this a remarkable statement that seemed to cast doubt on American democracy.
And Hillary Clinton simply called it horrifying.
But when the outcome turned out to be a Trump victory, the left immediately began crying foul and has never stopped.
They called for electoral voters to overturn the results.
You remember that?
They claimed the election was stolen from them by the Russians or the Electoral College, stolen from them by the Constitution, in other words.
They've been trying to overturn the results through impeachment for any reason they could find ever since.
Remember, Molly Hemingway overheard Jerry Nadler making impeachment plans on a train ride the day after the election.
The left feels they're entitled to power and they're entitled to dominate the media and our speech.
George Stephanopoulos, the man who silenced women for Bill Clinton, now heads the news network that silenced the women abused by Jeffrey Epstein.
No one complains.
Nora O'Donnell at CBS and Chuck Todd at NBC echo every Democrat talking point as if it were a fact.
Trump ads and Trump supporters are silenced on Google, YouTube, and Twitter.
And when Facebook refuses to silence them, Mark Zuckerberg is hounded and damned.
The left feels entitled to own the airwaves.
It's illegitimate for anyone else to express an opinion.
Even the name progressive suggests the left feels entitled to the future, that socialist ideas as old as Pharaoh represent progress from the one and only radical political idea ever created, the idea of liberty, the idea of our founding.
They're entitled to destroy that and replace it with their higher moral wisdom.
How did the Democrats get to be as entitled as a spoiled trust fund brat?
The answer can only be because they succeeded so well in taking over America's communication machinery that they've begun to believe their own press and its ceaseless narrative of left-wing moral superiority, superiority not just over us conservatives, but over Western civilization itself.
Left's Entitlement Debate00:14:17
Leftists are now absolutely certain they should get what they deserve.
And the rest of us can only hope they do get it and hard.
All right, we're going to take a moment to talk about Ring.
You know, I've installed one of my new, I got two new Ring doorbells.
I've installed one so far.
I'm going to install the other.
And the thing that I love about these is that they not only keep you safe because you can see who's ever coming to the door, who's ever coming to my gate.
I can see them.
That makes you safer, but it also makes you feel safe.
It means in the middle of the night, you know, I'm awake all night.
I can just check and see if anybody's out there, see what's going on if I hear a noise without having to send my wife out with a baseball bat to search the house.
And this is the season, too, you know, when people, they call them porch pirates.
People come up and steal gifts that are left on your doorstep if the postman leaves it outside.
You got to watch for that too.
And people are traveling around so much and everyone in your family is going to be moving around.
You want to keep in touch with everybody.
And just, as I say, feel safe.
And Ring helps you do it, I can tell you.
As a listener, you have a special holiday offer on a Ring starter kit available right now.
You get a Ring video doorbell too.
This allows you to be in touch with your home through your phone, anywhere, anytime.
And you also get a motion-activated floodlight cam.
The starter kit has everything you need to start building a ring of security around your home, no matter what the holiday season brings.
With Ring, you're always home.
Just go to ring.com forward slash clavin.
Can't you let me finish?
Tommy, I'm talking here.
I'm talking to the ring.com forward slash clavin.
Additional terms may apply, like the term clavin, which is spelt K-L-A-V-A-N.
So I just got mail.
You're just starting.
Oh, yeah, the mailbag.
The mailbag is tomorrow.
Thank you very much.
You reminded me.
The mailbag is tomorrow.
Get your mail questions in today.
This place is insane.
I can't stand it anymore.
Go on dailywire.com.
Go to the podcast button.
Hit the Andrew Clavin podcast.
There's a little mailbag symbol.
Hit it.
If you are a subscriber, you can ask me any question that you want.
You can ask me about your personal life.
You can ask me about religion, politics.
All my answers are guaranteed 100% correct and will change your life for the better.
Don't be an idiot.
All right, let's start with talking about this.
Let me start with this piece from some place called Now This News, which is a left-wing website that has been caught out in dishonesty.
Even by left-wing sites like PolitiFag have called them out on their dishonesty.
However, they have a new enemy that they have discovered, and they really feel that it is sinister that these people are actually expressing opinions.
Here he is.
A toxic right-wing website is gaming Facebook to reach millions of people in advance of the 2020 election.
And Facebook is letting them get away with it.
The Daily Wire, which was founded by conservative pundit Ben Shapiro, pushes inaccurate and incendiary stories.
Recent content from the Daily Wire claimed gender equality is a lie.
LGBTQ people don't want to be accepted by society, and there's not anything that can be done to combat climate change.
The Daily Wire is also the 11th most popular publication on Facebook.
Beating out established themes like ABC, CBS, NPR in USA Today.
And that actually understates how well the Daily Wire does on Facebook.
Outlets like the New York Times employ hundreds of journalists who produce well over 10,000 pieces of content a month.
The Daily Wire has just a few dozen employees that produce much less.
On a per article basis, content from the Daily Wire is shared far more often than any other outlet.
No, no, no, no.
You know, those people sound great.
I mean, just with fewer people than the New York Times, they actually put out more truth and are more popular.
You know, for as little as 10 bucks a month, you can get our articles ad-free.
I mean, this guy is making our arguments for us.
You can get all five of our broadcasts.
That's Shapiro, me, Walsh.
Who else?
Who the hell?
Oh, the backstage and somebody else.
I can't remember.
Oh, yeah, Knowles.
And you can choose the all-access plan now.
You'll get all that, plus the legendary leftist tears tumbler.
Our 11, the legendary, it's legendary.
There's a legend about it.
I can't tell you what it is.
It's filthy.
But you can also get a new Ask Me Anything style discussions with me and some of the other guys.
This guy's making our case.
But notice the shock that how dare they be popular?
How dare they be popular?
They're gaming Facebook by being on Facebook.
And he then lists the evil things we say.
Gender equality is a lie.
Who would say that?
Oh, it's probably me, right?
Sounds like me.
There's nothing you can do about climate change.
That's probably me too.
He doesn't make any arguments that we're wrong.
It's just you're not allowed to say it.
They are entitled.
They have got the truth.
They're entitled to the truth.
You know, now CBS News, Leslie Stahl, had the CEO of YouTube, Susan Wojicki, Wojcicki, who was on and basically badgered her to take down conservative sites.
Here's just an excerpt of this.
They've already said they've taken down over 300 video ads.
Obviously, we know whose video ads they are.
But listen to this.
And if you can't see it, some of the people they show, they show Steve Crowder, our pal Steve Crowder, who's a comedian, right?
He makes silly jokes, he says outlandish things.
And then they put Nick Fuentes, who's an actual alt-right Nazi, they put him up, and like those two are the same.
But she just, Leslie Shahl just badgers this woman to take down conservative content.
The private sector is not legally beholden to the First Amendment.
You're not operating under some freedom of speech mandate.
You get to pick.
We do, but we think there's a lot of benefit from being able to hear from groups and underrepresented groups that otherwise we never would have heard from.
With name-calling of Nazi or propagandists.
But that means hearing from people with odious messages about gays, Mr. Lisby queer from Box, women, sex robot, and immigrants.
The easiest way for Mexicans to not get shot and killed in Walmart is.
Rojiski explained that videos are allowed as long as they don't cause harm.
But her definition of harm can seem narrow.
So if you're saying don't hire somebody because of their race, that's discrimination.
And so that would be an example of something that would be a violation against our policies.
But if you just said white people are superior by itself, that's okay.
And nothing else, yes.
She's just trying to, she just wants anything that she disagrees with taken off.
And I love the way the word odious appears as just as Steve Crowder comes on.
That happens in my mind too.
The word odious and Steve Crowder frequently come into my mind at the same time.
But it's just amazing the entitlement, the idea, because who decides if she can decide that Steve Crowder is as odious as Nick Fuentes?
Anybody can decide anything, anything that Leslie Stahl doesn't like.
And remember, these are the networks where they wouldn't let them report on Matt Lauer.
They protected Matt Lauer.
They silenced a reporter on Jeffrey Epstein.
This is the networks.
You know, we don't trust them.
Why should we trust them?
When that guy from the first video, what's it called?
Now this news, when that guy is attacking us, he's saying, oh, the New York Times, they are not getting the big audience that we have.
We're more honest than the New York Times.
We tell you when it's our opinion.
We try to bring you actual facts.
We don't say all the news that's fit to print and then spew Trump hatred all day long.
Let me show you.
Let me show you an evil video, an evil video.
It wasn't banned on YouTube, but it is restricted on YouTube.
A lot of this material is restricted on YouTube.
And I want to, because they don't want children to see this.
They do not want children's students.
They don't want this appearing in libraries.
Let me show you something because this is truly incendiary.
I mean, when you talk about odious, listen to this.
This is a cut one.
No document in world history so changed the world for the better as did the Ten Commandments.
Western civilization, the civilization that developed universal human rights, created women's equality, ended slavery, created parliamentary democracy, among other unique achievements, would not have developed without them.
As you will see when each of the Ten Commandments is explained, these commandments are as relevant today as when they were given over 3,000 years ago.
In fact, they're so relevant that the Ten Commandments are all that is necessary to make a good world, a world free of tyranny and cruelty.
How dare you?
How dare you, Dennis Brager?
You know that they told him?
This is true.
They told him that they restricted his videos on the Ten Commandments because they mentioned murder, as in thou shalt not commit murder.
I mean, these guys, these guys are unbelievable.
They sit there raping women in their offices with buttons that lock the poor girls in so that Matt Lauer can get his clutches on them.
And then when they try and cover that, they shut down that.
And when they try to cover Jeffrey Epstein, they shut down that.
And then they say, how come the Daily Wire is getting all this attention?
Why aren't you?
How dare you?
You know what also is odious?
We talk about odious.
We talk about odious.
What also is odious?
Losing your hair.
I mean, do you want to look like this?
Look at me.
Look at me.
No.
You want to go to Keeps.
You know, two out of three guys will experience some form of male pattern baldness by the time they're 35.
And you know who's going to laugh at them?
Me.
Do you want me laughing at you?
No.
Keeps has revolutionized the way men are treated for hair loss.
Thanks to Keeps.
You no longer have to go to the doctor's office for your hair loss prescription.
Now you can visit a doctor online and get your hair loss medication delivered to your home.
No more waiting rooms, no more pharmacy checkout lines, get doctor attention and discreet drug delivery, all from the comfort and privacy of your own home.
You don't want to stand at the counter in the pharmacy while the 16-year-old girl behind the counter goes, you have the bald medicine.
Give him the guy.
The guy wants the bald medicine.
Prevention is key.
Keeps treatments really work.
They're up to 90% effective at reducing and stopping further hair loss.
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 Claven.
What kind of ad copy is this?
They tell you how to spell keeps, but they don't tell you how to spell Clavin.
They're not just entitled.
The left is not just entitled to information.
They're entitled to power.
Here is Liz Warren talking about how she's going to deal with her second term, right?
This is after she gets elected the first time.
As a presidential candidate, what are your thoughts on the Electoral College?
I want to get rid of it.
So here's my goal.
My goal is to get elected and then to be the last American president elected by the Electoral College.
College.
I want the second term to be that I got elected by direct vote.
I'm ready.
Popular vote.
I just think.
This is how a democracy should work.
Call me old-fashioned, but I think the person who gets the most votes should win.
I'm in.
I'm in.
Pocahontas is not happy.
It's not as old-fashioned as, say, James Madison.
It's not as old-fashioned as the founders.
I mean, the thing is, you know, there's an article in the Federalist from John Daniel Davidson, the political editor at the Federalist.
He says, although couched in the facile rhetoric of every vote counts, what Warren means is just the opposite.
Under a system of direct democracy, votes in places like Wyoming, Iowa, and every other small state wouldn't really count at all.
The country would effectively be ruled by New York and California, and indeed by the residents of the largest cities in those states.
That's what Warren and the Democrats really want.
They just can't say it.
They know that most large cities are blue and that the ongoing urbanization of America would give them a huge advantage if they were able to run their votes up in those districts and ignore the rest of the country.
It certainly would have been enough to put Hillary Clinton in the White House.
In fact, the collapse of Democrats' blue wall in 2016 is largely what's behind the current assault on the Electoral College.
And, you know, not just after the Electoral College, it's after the Supreme Court.
They don't like senators.
They say, why should a small state have two senators?
I mean, seriously, they're against the entire constitutional system.
And, you know, it's not just, to be fair, it's not just the left who feels entitled, right?
It is also right-wingers, the kind of conservatives who say, oh, yes, we know our free trade theories work, and it doesn't matter what happens to American workers.
They just have to deal with it, right?
You know, there's an excellent, excellent article by Bobby Jindal, the former governor of Louisiana, who's been writing spectacular, insightful columns in the Wall Street Journal.
And he talks about Trump standing for the populist patriots against both the left and the right.
He says, populist patriots reject the elites of both parties.
They believe President Trump defends their cultural beliefs from the left and their economic interests from the right.
They see open borders, illegal immigration, and multiculturalism threatening to redefine what it means to be an American, while unfair trade and a rigged tax code endanger their jobs.
The divide between these patriots and the left in particular is growing, is growing.
The left look at America and see only its failure to live up to its highest ideals.
In their eyes, this isn't a country that has provided more freedom and opportunity to a greater number of people than any other.
It's a society hopelessly riddled with social injustices like racism, sexism, classism.
Supreme Court and Gun Rights00:10:13
We were talking about this yesterday.
Their prescription is radical restructuring.
Populist patriots are equally disappointed with the results of decades of Republican economic orthodoxy.
Freely flowing American capital builds factories around the globe, raising many people's quality of life, but this arrangement fails to deliver clear benefits to America's working class.
How dare you?
How dare you, exactly.
No one is entitled to power.
Not on the left, not on the right.
Your ideas have to work.
You can't sit there and say, well, they work in theory.
You know, they have to work in practice.
And you can't say they work for the world.
They have to work for America.
There is no president of the world.
We don't want there to be a president of the world.
There's only a president of America.
And this is why Trump is really standing against the entitled on both the left and the right.
And of course, this is what gun rights are about.
You know, gun rights are this, the whole unspoken thing about gun rights is they're not to hunt deer.
They're not just to protect your home.
They're to kill the government if the government becomes oppressive.
That's what they're for.
They're to fight a revolution for the states, specifically for the states.
Gun rights were put in the Constitution to protect states' rights against the military of the United States.
And as we know, from Afghanistan and Vietnam, we know a small band, and from that movie, Red Dawn, also important, we know a small band of dedicated guerrilla fighters can hold the ground against even a massive army like ours.
So gun rights are important.
And, you know, that's why I want to bring in there's an important case in front of the Supreme Court.
I think it was argued yesterday.
And I want to bring in our favorite legal commentator, Jenna Ellis, who is also a favorite of Donald Trump.
She is Trump 2020's senior legal advisor and a constitutional law attorney.
She's a frequent guest on Fox News and CNN, but we don't care because she's a frequent guest here, which is all more important.
Jenna, you there?
Yes, I am, Jerry.
Thanks so much for having me.
I always love your interest.
It just, it's always the bread of the heart of my day.
You're so kind.
I always feel by the time I'm finished, you're going to be like Vice President of the United States.
I'm going to say, but you still have to come on the show, Jenna.
And you know, I would, too.
You know, I would.
I'd be, you know, Air Force 2.
There we go.
I believe in you.
So, this case that went before the Supreme Court, I think they argued it yesterday.
This is kind of a bizarre gun case.
Can you explain what it was?
Yeah, so this is bizarre in the sense that the question really is whether or not there's any real case or controversy still.
So, of course, under Article 3 of the Constitution, there has to be a case or controversy.
So, what happened is that New York had this very restrictive gun law had where it was basically not even permissible to carry your gun to the shooting range.
And if you stopped for coffee or if you stopped at your second home, you would be violating this law.
I mean, it's so restrictive that it was challenged, of course, by the National Rifle Association.
And as it made its way up, and then the Supreme Court actually accepted this case to review the Second Amendment challenge, then New York basically said, Okay, wait a minute, we know that we're going to lose.
This is overly restrictive.
And so, they amended their law.
They repealed it and then, for good measure, actually enacted a second provision that would specifically allow for transport and carry of legally owned firearms.
But the interesting question that was before the Supreme Court yesterday really centered around whether or not the court is going to expand District of Columbia versus Heller, which is, of course, the last time that the Supreme Court over a decade ago has touched on Second Amendment gun rights for individuals.
And so, that's really what this case is about.
Even though the progressive leftist judges wanted to say, Well, you know, hey, you got all of the relief that you wanted.
You can now carry your firearms, stop at Starbucks, and go on to the gun range.
What more do you want?
You know, that's what Ruth Vader Ginsburg was basically saying.
What conservatives and those of us who love liberty are really hoping that the Supreme Court will do with this case is say, wait a minute, this isn't just about your ability to have this very narrowly tailored exception and provision to say, sure, you can stop at Starbucks while you're on your way to your gun range, or you can stop at your second home, or we can tell you exactly when, where, how, and why you can carry.
But this is more about a fundamental right to be able to keep and bear arms that the Second Amendment preserves and protects.
And so, Drew, this is the very important thing that I always talk about.
You and I have talked about so many times.
Our rights are inalienable.
They come from God, our Creator, not our government.
And so we don't have a Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms just because the founders in their wisdom decided to enumerate it in the Bill of Rights.
We have a fundamental right to keep and bear arms, whatever those arms happen to be, because our government is obligated to preserve and protect it.
So even if someday, and God forbid, the Second Amendment is repealed, we still have that very same right, and our government is obligated to preserve and protect it.
So I'm hopeful that the conservative majority of the Supreme Court will hold on the merits of this case and they will expand gun rights to say what the Second Amendment actually does in context.
You know, it's really interesting.
I mean, the key thing, the thing that attracted my interest to this case was New York to try and get out of going to the Supreme Court corrected the law in their eyes, but the courts still accepted it.
And what really got me is I'm reading the Wall Street Journal this morning or yesterday, I can't remember, the news section of the Wall Street Journal tends to the left and has tended more and more to the left because they hate Trump.
The op-ed section, the editorial section, has always been more kind of standard conservative Wall Street right wing.
In the news section today, the headline was, high court cool to expanding gun rights.
In the editorial on the same subject, it basically emphasized the opinions of the conservative judges, sort of saying that they had kind of indicated that they would, in fact, expand gun rights.
Listening to the arguments or hearing the arguments, where did you feel the court was going to come down?
Just on a guess.
Yeah, well, you know, it's only whoever was in the courtroom because even though they're recorded, they're not published simultaneously.
So I haven't actually heard the full argument.
Those are usually published approximately the Friday after the arguments are presented to the court.
So we'll have that soon.
But at least with what's been reported, it seems that Justice Gorsuch is very clear that he would like to rule on the merits.
Justices Thomas and Kavanaugh reportedly didn't ask a single question.
And then, of course, you have Ginsburg and Kagan who are coming at this saying, you know, what more do you want?
This case is moot.
We shouldn't even be hearing it.
So I think it's going to come down to the new Kennedy, who, of course, is Chief Justice Roberts.
And we will be hopeful that they do rule on the merits, that they don't allow states like New York to play with our gun rights, because that's what's going on.
They're saying we're going to enact this law.
And but for this challenge, then they would have gotten away with it, right?
But for the National Rifle Association and the petitioners in this case challenging this absurdly restrictive gun law, then we wouldn't even be in this position.
And for them to then go and correct it, knowingly, basically admitting that they know that they're infringing on our right to keep and bear arms, this still should be a signal to all states that you cannot, cannot infringe arbitrarily on our Second Amendment protected right to keep and bear arms.
So I'm hopeful.
I think that it's, of course, going to come down to probably a split decision, 5-4.
We'll see which way it goes.
You know, it's interesting that in New York, they went through such convulsions to stop what they called stop and frisk, which was a way of getting guns out of the hands of actual criminals and actual people who didn't have permits and didn't have the right to carry guns in New York.
And they stopped, the left stopped police from doing that.
So they don't seem to care that criminals have guns because they're not afraid of the criminals.
I think they're afraid of the people.
You know, you mentioned that this is a right given to us by God, which of course is exactly right.
And I just have to ask you out of curiosity.
I saw you a couple of times on Twitter that you've joined a new think tank that basically is pushing the idea of God into the conservative mindset.
Have I got that right?
Well, yes.
So I have joined with Jerry Falwell Jr. and Charlie Kirk of Turning Point USA with Liberty University.
They have started a great new think tank at Liberty University called the Falkirk Center.
And essentially what we're doing is teaching through the same tools that the leftist mainstream media uses, which is social media influences, entertainment, just the talking points in the public square to say that we can't just defend conservatism.
We can't just defend the Constitution.
We need to advance.
We need to be willing to boldly speak truth of God and society and also the conservative principles that our founding fathers built this country upon.
And we need to be teaching that daily in the public square because if we just defend our liberty, then we are going to end up retreating because the liberal left has encroached in incrementalism.
And so this think tank, you can follow us at Falkirk Center, Twitter, Facebook, and we're going to be teaching and giving you tools for why the Christian worldview is comprehensive and it touches and concerns literally every aspect of our lives, especially civil society.
Yeah, I think this is, I'm so glad to hear you're doing this because I think this is the way that the right has got to go.
We cannot make our arguments without God because it's all based on an idea of God that the founders knew and understood.
Jenna Ellis, the Trump 2020 Senior Legal Advisor, we're going to have you back just to talk about this.
But right now, I appreciate your coming on.
Thanks so much, dear.
Always great to talk to you.
Great talking to you.
De Niro's Manipulation Scene00:15:33
Candid Co will stop you from being that guy in the photograph who isn't smiling because you don't want anybody to see your teeth.
You do not want to be that guy.
If you are, you want to get Candid Co.
We gave these to Knowles.
We forced Knowles to try them out because I'm just too far gone, basically.
But look at the guy is the guy is gorgeous.
He walks down and we all, we sigh, our knees shake.
Why?
Because his teeth look good.
And Candid's aligners can help straighten your teeth faster and cheaper than traditional wire braces.
Treatment takes just six months on average and costs 65% less.
Here's how it works.
An experienced orthodontist who is licensed in your state creates a custom treatment plan.
Then they show you a 3D preview so you can see how your teeth will look after you're done.
Candid's aligners are comfortable, removable, and completely invisible.
There's no hassle.
You don't have to go to an orthodontist office.
Candid ships your aligners directly to you.
And in the season of giving, Candid donates $25 with each aligner, purchased a smile train, which brings safe, 100% free cleft lip and palate treatment to children around the globe.
I can't tell you how important that is.
Very important to actually fix kids' faces where they can't afford it.
Give yourself the gift of Candid.
Go to candidco.com slash Clavin.
Use code Claven to get 75 bucks off.
That's candidco.com slash Claven.
Don't make me shout down my own name.
Claven for $75 off.
Candidco.com slash Clavin.
Code Clavin.
Now, now play Clavin.
There are no easy claims in Clavin.
I just make it look easy.
Come over to dailywire.com and subscribe for as little as 10 bucks a month.
You get your articles ad-free and you can get our new all-access plan.
You've got to see this new app on the phone, too.
It's absolutely spectacular.
And of course, of course, you want the leftist tears tumbler carved in the jungles of Peru by Peruvian animals of some sort.
I don't know what kind of animals they have in Peru.
I think communists.
But they will carve you a leftist tears tumbler and you can use it when people are reflecting on how popular Daily Wire is on Facebook.
Come over to dailywire.com.
You know, we're talking about entitlement and especially the left's form of entitlement.
I mean, like I said, they even call their spending of your money.
They call it an entitlement, which is really a strange idea, you know, this idea that somehow people are entitled to money other people made.
But maybe the most primitive, the most basic form of entitlement is entitlement to sexual ownership of people weaker than you.
Tom Holland, an historian, has written a book called Dominion, and he argues that it's the Christian worldview.
It's the Christian worldview that said, whoa, whoa, just a minute.
Just because you're more powerful than someone doesn't mean you get to own them sexually.
Just because you're more powerful than someone doesn't mean you get to take them anytime you want.
And it was not always women.
It could be boys.
It could be anything.
And it's the left with their progressive idea to progress backwards into the past, to the time before Christianity, to what they call the post-Christian world, which is really the pre-Christian world because there's only Christianity and then paganism and atheism and chaos.
In going back there, they're kind of approving of this.
There's this new movie out called Bombshell.
Let's play a clip.
This is about, what do you think?
It's about Roger Ailes abusing women at Fox News.
And I just saw this.
I was watching Knives Out, and this was the preview in the film.
You have to adopt the mentality of an Irish street comp.
The world is a bad place.
People are lazy morons.
Minorities are criminals.
Sex is sick, but interesting.
Ask yourself what would scare my grandmother or piss off my grandfather.
And that's a Fox story.
Oh, it makes so much sense.
Women are everywhere.
We're letting them play golf and tennis now.
HR's on the phone because you called me a skirt.
Yes.
I got to read that manual again.
The attitude off camera was even worse.
You're a manhater.
Learn to get along with the boys.
You're sexy, but you're too much work.
I have a whole list.
Will other women come forward?
You may have heard there was a dust-up involving yours truly in presidential contender Donald Trump.
There was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her, wherever.
Did he just accuse me of angrymenstrating?
Wait, am I going to be the story?
No.
No, I'm going to be the story.
No.
Nobody stops watching because of a conflict.
They stop watching when there isn't one.
So this is the second time they've made this story.
The other one was the loudest voice.
And again, you know, remembering that George Stephanopoulos helped Bill Clinton silence women and then became the top newsman on ABC, which silenced women by killing, by spiking the Jeffrey Epstein story, right?
No movie about that.
And again, you know, what Roger Ailes did, Roger Ailes did, and that story should be told, no question about it.
But two movies about this.
Where's the Matt Lauer story?
Where's the story about how NBC killed the Matt Lauer story?
Where's the story about how ABC is hunting for the person who revealed that they spiked the Jeffrey Epstein story, but not hunting for the person who spiked the Jeffrey Epstein story?
So, you know, this is this thing, this idea among the powerful, among the elite, that their sexual objects, whether they're women or men, their sexual objects are belong to them.
You know, they just own them.
And this is this Jeffrey Epstein story.
It's why it haunts me.
It's why Another Kingdom has this strain going through, which really was not about Jeffrey Epstein.
It's just the amazing kind of coincidences or whatever you want to call it, where the story that I tell in Another Kingdom is the story that is so closely connected to the Jeffrey Epstein story.
But I'd written about this before.
I'd written about it in other novels.
This idea that the elites just own whoever they want.
You know, I was watching a movie last night called Hustlers.
I get that, you know, during this season, the award season, because I'm in the Writers' Guild, I get what they call screeners.
And I was watching the screener for Hustlers, which has Jennifer Lopez in it.
And it's about girls, true, based on a true story, about a bunch of strippers who start to drug men to steal from them.
But it really gives a good picture of the stripper world.
The fact that the women in that world are being degraded, but they're not victims.
They're doing it maybe because they have to, but they're also part of their mindset that it's somehow glamorous to have a rapper.
At one point, usher, the rapper comes in and he's throwing money around.
And the girls just think this is fabulous.
And all the girls are dancing naked on stage and the money is flying.
And they just think this is really glamorous.
But, you know, so it's part of the female mindset that women can be, some women can be, manipulated in this way, which puts it on men, a certain responsibility on men, not to do that.
It simply does.
I mean, if a young girl can be manipulated into having sex with you when she shouldn't have sex with you, don't do that, right?
That's the basic idea.
And that's why this Prince Andrew story is a big deal.
You remember Prince Andrew went on BBC and said he couldn't remember Virginia Jufrey, believe her name is Juffre maybe, and that this is the 17-year-old girl.
He's pictured with his hand around her.
She says he had sex with her three times.
And she now, she's given interviews before, but she now went to the BBC in England and said, hey, you know, don't believe this guy.
I'm the one who's telling the truth.
Here's just a couple of clips from that interview.
He is the most hideous dancer I've ever seen in my life.
I mean, it was horrible.
And this guy was sweating all over me.
Like his sweat was like, it was raining basically everywhere.
And I was just like, grossed out from it.
But I knew I had to keep him happy because that's what Jeffrey and Guillen would expect from me.
People on the inside are going to keep coming up with these ridiculous excuses, like his arm was elongated or the photo was doctored or he came to New York to break up with Jeffrey Epstein.
I mean, come on.
I'm calling BS on this because that's what it is.
He knows what happened.
I know what happened.
And there's only one of us telling the truth.
And I know that's me.
I implore the people in the UK to stand up beside me, to help me fight this fight, to not accept this as being okay.
This is not some sordid sex story.
This is a story of being trafficked.
And the thing is, again, you look at her and she says she was a sex slave.
She was Jeffrey Epstein's sex slave.
And you think, well, you had a choice.
Why did you do it?
And all this stuff.
But people can be manipulated.
Women can be manipulated in this way.
Young girls can be manipulated, especially.
You have a responsibility.
We all have responsibilities to each other.
I mean, I feel this way about women, you know, dressing in provocative ways and then blaming men for getting excited by that.
But we have a responsibility for each other.
We have a responsibility to take account of the way we feel.
And this Prince Andrew story is a big story because he made a fool of himself in this BBC interview.
And he's a powerful guy, and he should be held to account.
But whatever happened to the Bill Clinton side of the story?
How did Bill Clinton disappear in this story?
And why?
Is it possibly, could it possibly be?
It's like the TV show, The Path to 9-11, which has never been released.
Bob Iger, I think it is, a Disney ABC, has never released this onto DVD.
And you think, well, what's the difference now?
Well, the difference is Hillary Clinton is still thinking of running.
And these people are powerful enough that maybe, maybe that's why this story about Bill Clinton has still just disappeared.
You do not see ABC covering the story.
You do not see this story coming to the fore, especially the Bill Clinton aspect.
Hillary Clinton, listen to this interview.
She's still talking about whether she's going to run.
And where are you?
Are you saying, forget me?
Is that your mantra now?
Not yet.
You could step back into the ring.
Yeah, I hear that.
I especially have been deluged in the last few weeks with thinking about doing that.
But right now, I'm not at all planning that.
I'd have to make up my mind really quickly because it's moving very fast.
Now, I do want to tell you exclusively on this show, the people deluging her with requests for her to run.
That's me.
How dare you?
How dare I?
I know.
I can't stop myself.
I just want her to run.
But, you know, I mean, look, these are powerful people.
These are people whose foundation was raking in the bucks until suddenly Hillary lost and now it's bleeding money.
Why?
Because they were selling influence.
That's why.
I mean, let's put it this way.
That's a fair inference.
And after all, Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself, right?
I mean, again, again, entitlement, this entitlement to power, the sense that it's all for you, whatever it is, that's the thing that, you know, kind of, it's funny that Donald Trump, who himself should feel entitled, who himself is a rich guy and has always been a rich guy and the son of a rich guy, you know, that he should be the guy who stands in the way of their entitlement is ironic.
But irony is one of the voices of God.
So, I mean, I think that that is what's going on.
A final reflection.
I want to talk about the Irishman, this Martin Scorsese three and a half hour picture that came on YouTube.
You know, this is the thing that nobody is, Netflix.
I'm sorry, Netflix.
This is the thing that nobody's talking about.
It's a bad movie.
The movie is bad.
And the movie is a story.
It's from a book called I Heard You Paint Houses, which is a euphemism for kill people, painting houses.
And it's the story of this hitman, this mob hitman, who basically claims to have been the guy who killed Jimmy Hoffa, the famous union boss, who vanished.
It's a bad movie.
And it's a bad movie for a lot of reasons.
Too long.
But also, it stars Pacino and Robert De Niro, and they are computerized so that they look young.
But the process doesn't work all that well.
It takes them, they've got to be, what are they, 112 or like 80 or something like this?
And it makes them look like they're about 40, even when they're supposed to be really young.
At one point, De Niro should be in his 20s, and maybe he looks 40 or 50.
On his face, his face looks like that old, but he still moves like an old man.
After a while, you're not as limber as you were, and your shoulders kind of hunch up, and he still moves like he's 80 years old.
So it's like this guy wearing a mask moving, and it's very, very distracting.
And why?
Why is it about that?
Why should you put Pacino and De Niro terrific actors?
I'm not denying that.
Why put them in?
Let's take a quick look at a scene.
This is a really good scene.
Tony Prowe is a mob boss who has been tangling with Al Pacino, who's Jimmy Hoffa, and Jimmy Hoffa is demanding respect.
And Tony Pro shows up for a meeting, dressed in shorts and a flowered shirt.
So you dress for a meeting?
And this is how you dress in Florida?
In a suit?
For a meeting?
Anywhere.
Florida, Timbuktu, I dress in a suit.
For a meeting.
And you're late.
What?
You're late.
And it was traffic.
Yes, traffic.
Wasn't it traffic?
You give me traffic.
Traffic.
What do you want for us?
It was bump with a bump.
Yeah, no, no, it's better, you know.
Traffic.
I never waited for anyone who was late more than 10 minutes in my life.
I'd say 15.
15's right.
No, 10.
I don't think so.
10's not enough.
You have to take traffic into account.
That's what I'm doing.
I'm taking traffic into account.
That's why it's 10.
I still say 15.
No, 10.
Fine, we disagree on that.
How about 12 and a half minutes?
Here we go.
Right in the middle.
Beautiful, beautiful.
That's a classic Scorsese scene.
They're talking about traffic, but they're really talking about respect.
They're talking about power.
It's a good scene.
There's a lot of good writing in it, excellent acting.
But the problem with it is that use these old actors in these young parts is absurd, except for the fact that the movie is not really about the mob.
The movie is really about Scorsese.
The movie brings back these guys who have been his guys since back in the day when he did Mean Streets, De Niro, you know, these guys who play mob bosses.
Harvey Keitel is in it.
All these guys that have been his actors who have basically expressed his vision through his stories about the mob.
And so when you're looking at the old De Niro sitting in the old person's home, you're not really looking at an old hitman, you're looking at the old De Niro.
And it reminds me a little bit of Shakespeare's The Tempest, you know, which is his story about an old artist.
And at the end of The Tempest, Prospero, the wizard, who is also a stand-in for Shakespeare, buries his wand in his book and gives his power back to the earth and releases it and lets it go.
And this is kind of Scorsese saying that.
He gave these interviews about how they're not making movies like his anymore.
They're making these superhero roller coaster rides.
And you know, the thing is, even a great filmmaker, and Scorsese at times has been a great filmmaker, is not entitled to hold the stage forever.
Scorsese On Modern Cinema00:02:19
And even when he says goodbye, he still has to tell a good story.
And this is just three and a half hours.
It's way, way too long.
It's distracting to have these computerized actors on screen.
Why didn't he go out and find the new De Niro, the new Pacino?
And the reason is those days are gone.
That kind of acting is gone.
This kind of story is to some degree gone.
And he just doesn't bring it up to the level where it matters anymore.
And everybody feels something when they watch this because they feel an artist letting go of his powers, burying his wand.
But it's not a good story.
It's not a good movie in and of itself.
And that's too bad because it's really, I think, his farewell to a genre to which he has meant an enormous amount.
Anyway, really interesting film.
And as I say, nobody is entitled to anything, really.
And this is just one more case where somebody thought like he could just do what he wanted to do.
I got to say goodbye.
Tomorrow is the mailbag.
Be there and ask your questions.
Go on dailywire.com, hit the podcast button, hit the Andrew Clavin podcast, hit that little mailbag button, ask anything you want.
All your problems will be solved, but you got to be a subscriber, which will solve all your problems right there.
I'm Andrew Clavin.
This is the Andrew Clavin Show.
How dare you!
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.