Ep. 833’s Trial By Stupid dissects the chaotic clash of mascot controversies—Mr. Peanut’s Super Bowl death and Gritty’s assault allegations—while skewering Trump’s impeachment trial as a Schiff-led "speculation show." Jenna Ellis defends Trump’s religious liberty record, tying his judicial picks to rulings like Trinity Lutheran, and mocks Greta Thunberg’s Davos lecture while praising J.P. Morgan’s Jamie Diamond for championing capitalism. The episode pivots to constitutional conservatism, framing original intent as divine law, then slams media bias—CNN’s "corruption" vs. Fox’s "truth"—and debunks progressive narratives, like the NYT’s slavery-founding myth, using Tom Holland’s Dominion to reclaim Judeo-Christian roots. It ends with Trump’s pro-life shift, Schiff’s "strategic theater," and Tulsi Gabbard’s Clinton lawsuit as culture-war battlegrounds. [Automatically generated summary]
So I know many of you have been watching the impeachment trial until you just want to drive a screwdriver through your eye and into your brain so that you not only can't see the trial, but have rooted out every idea that the trial ever existed and so have become like a normal American voter.
So since you've been occupied with all that, I thought you might like to catch up on some of the other stupid news that's also being ignored around the country.
For instance, Mr. Peanut died.
Now, some of you may be wondering, who the hell is Mr. Peanut?
But others among you may be clutching your heart and gasping for breath because you're 97 years old and have some vague memory that Mr. Peanut was some sort of mascot for a peanut company back in the days when you still had teeth.
Apparently, in a desperate bid for attention, the Peanut Company plans to kill their beloved mascot in a Super Bowl commercial, which features Wesley Snipes and Matt Walsh, although not the Matt Walsh, but some other guy also named Matt Walsh.
In the commercial, Snipes, the other Walsh, and Mr. Peanut are dangling from a tree branch for some reason, and with the sacrificial selflessness we've come to expect from our peanuts, Mr. Peanut lets go the branch to save the others, whereupon he dies in a fiery explosion.
Many viewers were shell-shocked to see the peanut roasted.
Oh, sorry.
But others felt it was only right since Mr. Peanut was over 100 years old and wore a top hat and monocle, which is just creepy in a legume.
In other mascot news, Philadelphia Flyers hockey team mascot, Gritty, a furry orange creature of no known species, is under investigation for assaulting a 13-year-old boy.
Questioned about the incident by a reporter, Gritty said, hey, this is hockey, and slammed the journalist into a wall.
Educate Your Children00:05:32
But that's enough.
That's enough about ridiculous make-believe people, unless you want to go back to watching the impeachment trial.
Trigger warning.
I'm Andrew Clavin, and this, for what it's worth, is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky-donkey.
Life is to kiddie boom.
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.
All right, try to control yourself, people.
One of the ugliest spectacles of this week was actually not the impeachment trial, not even the death of Mr. Peanut, but the spectacle of world leaders at Davos sitting passively while they were lectured by now 17-year-old Greta Thunberg.
Here's a brief taste.
One year ago, I came to Davos and told you that our house is on fire.
I said I wanted you to panic.
I've been warned that telling people to panic about the climate crisis is a very dangerous thing to do.
But don't worry, it's fine.
Trust me, I've done this before, and I can assure you it doesn't lead to anything.
Whoever heard of a sarcastic 17-year-old, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, is under fire today for teasing Greta because she called for an end to the fossil fuel economy, which is the economy, and without which there is no economy.
Indeed, there's no modernity at all.
Mnuchin had the unmitigated gall to say, after she goes and studies economics in college, she can come back and explain that to us.
Oh, the horror, the horror.
How dare Mnuchin call an ignorant child an ignorant child.
To be clear, it's not young Greta's fault that she thinks she has something to say or some high moral ground from which to say it.
People keep telling her that she does, and it's deprived her of what little realism and self-awareness a 17-year-old girl can have.
She's the opposite of Socrates, who was wise because he knew he knew nothing.
Greta has been rendered ignorant of the fact that she's ignorant.
The same is true of the Bernie Sanders organizers who were caught on tape by Project Veritas, declaring that the Soviet gulags weren't so bad after all.
In fact, the same is true of all Bernie's young followers.
They weren't born ignorant.
Adults made them ignorant, not only by teaching them lies about the past, but by starving them of the great heritage of Western thought, thought that makes socialist Bernie look like the buffoon he is.
For a little non-ignorance, here's Jamie Diamond, the billionaire CEO of J.P. Morgan Chase.
I'm not a socialist.
I think capitalism is the greatest thing that ever happened to mankind.
I think people who haven't read the history books about socialism really should.
I think we've got to educate our younger kids.
Freedom and free enterprise are inextricably linked.
They are not different.
I mean, you can't tell people where you can work or how you're going to work or where you're going to free enterprise was the pursuit of happiness.
And, you know, once you have governments taking control of businesses, it ends up in corruption in Venezuela.
And it arose over time because companies get used for political purposes, not to give you great products and services.
Experience, age, wisdom, those are the guys you want to listen to.
See, IQs rise year by year, but cultural ignorance is spreading like wildfire.
I think with real sadness about the education of great writers like Harriet Beecher Stowe, who wrote Uncle Tom's Cabin.
She discovered literature by finding pages from the Arabian Nights and Pilgrim's Progress hidden in her father's attic.
Wordsworth memorized John Milton's Paradise Lost as a boy, and Coleridge read Robinson Crusoe.
How many of our kids could read those books, even if they would read those books?
Ignorance about our culture is ignorance about where we came from, it's ignorance about why we think the things we think, and ultimately it's ignorance about who we are.
And this spreading ignorance is not an accident.
A generation unable to accept the failure of their Soviet communist dream, we'll call them the Bernie generation, took over our school systems and not only taught our children lies, but shielded them from the long, hard search for truth that is the West's great heritage.
They used to call it the great conversation, and they're still shielding them from that information right this minute.
Every single thought our children think is shaped by the Bible, but they've never studied the Bible.
Their language comes from Shakespeare, but they don't really know Shakespeare.
And when they do read these things, their teachers hide the meaning beneath a blanket of feminist theory or race theory or Marxist theory intended to silence the voice of the authors and replace them with the voices of the failed Bernieites.
Then, when these children passionately regurgitate the leftist lies they've been taught, like Greta does, the left celebrates them as if they're wise future leaders, when really they're just puppets of an educational system run by fools and failures with the express purpose of creating more failure and more fools.
When you see the devoisie kowtowing to an adolescent, when you see adolescents cheering an 80-year-old communist buffoon, when you see parents sending their children into the maw of this terrible disinformation machine, it's easy to despair.
But that's just the wrong reaction because you're not helpless in this.
You can educate yourself.
You can educate your children.
It is never too late to start the world again.
We will talk more about this and what it has to do with impeachment, and it has a lot to do with impeachment.
Intentions Matter00:15:12
But first, let us talk about our wonderful sponsor, RockAuto.com.
I got an email yesterday.
I won't read the lady's name because she didn't give me permission to read it, but I didn't ask, get a chance to ask her.
But she said, I wanted to thank you for talking about rockauto.com.
My husband went on to their site and we saved a ton of money.
Plus, he gets with every order a magnet with a car on it that he wishes we had enough money for.
I also wanted to suggest you add that you can even get small things like light bulbs for brake lights and et cetera for cheaper than what you can get in she names a big box store.
This is the thing.
Rockauto.com is a family business that has been serving Auto Parts customers online for 20 years.
So instead of going down to a store and listening to someone who doesn't know anything about auto parts tell you about auto parts, you can go on to rockauto.com and shop for auto parts yourself right from home, and they will be delivered to you.
The rockauto.com catalog is unique.
It's easy to navigate and you always get reliably low prices.
Go to rockauto.com.
It's fun to say to rockauto.com right now and see all the parts available for your car or truck.
Write Clavin in there.
How did you hear about us box?
There are no easiest that they know we sent you and they know, they have to know that you know how to spell Clavin.
There are no easy favourites.
The Clavenless weekend is coming, but so don't forget to get Another Kingdom if you are a subscriber.
You will get it on Friday.
If not, I think we're up to episode 16, is that right?
And then you will get that on Monday if you're not a subscriber.
And just one more week and the story will be over and you'll get 17 and 18 on one day.
It is, it's really, I'm so proud of this story.
I'm so proud of the work our guys did.
Austin Stevens and Knowles narrating it.
They have just done a wonderful, wonderful job.
I think it is an amazing, amazing piece of work, if I say so myself.
And I obviously do because I just did.
All right.
All of this ignorance plays into this impeachment trial where they're basically telling us that Trump should be, our president should be thrown out of office, not because of what he did, not because of what he did, but because of what the reasons he did it, his intentions, why he did it.
He did it for political purposes.
You heard Adam Schiff say this yesterday.
We say he was investigating corruption, but you don't believe that.
He was doing it to investigate his political rivals.
Well, you could say that about anybody, right?
You could have said that about Barack Obama when he was talking to Medvedevedev, the president of the Soviet Union, of Russia, telling him to go back and tell Vladimir that he would be more flexible in the next election.
You could say it about anybody doing anything, any president doing anything that he does it for political reasons, but they know they depend on you to be stupid because they made you stupid.
All right.
Now let us talk about what is going on yesterday in the impeachment trial.
And the thing is, you know, the argument, this was Adam Schiff made his, I think it was a two and a half hour, two and a half hour appeal.
This is the opening statements.
It's kind of like a trial, but it's not really a trial.
The difference with a trial, right, is, for one thing, the difference with a trial is theoretically, you've been indicted by somebody who is not your enemy.
He's not your political enemy.
You've been indicted by somebody who actually is a balanced person just looking to bring justice.
But here, this is a political process, and they keep comparing it to a trial, but there are some comparisons.
One comparison is what is happening now is you're getting 24 hours of opening statements first from the House managers who are the prosecutors, and then you'll get it from Trump's, the opening statements from Trump's defense team.
And then there'll be a vote on whether to continue.
Probably there may be a move to dismiss.
That frequently happens in trials.
And it should happen in trials because what happens is if you have been indicted, the prosecutor goes in and says, I have got the evidence to convict you.
He's saying when a prosecutor goes in there, he is saying, I have got the evidence to convict.
You've all seen Law and Order and all the different trial shows and all this.
And the guy gets up and he makes his opening statement.
And he says, what you're going to hear is you're going to hear this witness who's going to tell you this.
And you're going to hear this witness who's going to tell you that.
And you're going to hear this witness going to tell you this.
If the defense attorney then gets up and says, every one of those witnesses is reporting hearsay, which should not be admissible to trial, I move to dismiss.
The judge can dismiss it.
In this case, the dismissal would come from the senators themselves because they are running the trial.
But Schiff is making this argument that this thing cannot, this can't be decided anywhere but in this place, right?
It can't be decided by the courts.
Schiff is, the arguments that he's making are really amazing when you think about them.
Not just that we should judge Trump on his intentions, which again, you could say it about anybody.
You could say any, Barack Obama, he bombed people with drones because he thought it would help him get elected.
You know, it's not corrupt per se, just like it's not corrupt per se for Donald Trump to say you should investigate corruption, including the corruption of Joe Biden.
It was corrupt because of why he did it.
Think about that for yourself, right?
Think about why, you know, if you, you know, it wasn't illegal for you to park there, but you parked there because you were cheating on your spouse, so it is illegal for you to park there and you should be put in prison.
You should get a $500 ticket for parking.
I live in LA where the tickets are expensive.
But in other words, it's a completely false, stupid argument.
And they're depending on your ignorance.
They're depending on your ignorance.
And they have reason to depend on your ignorance because they run the schools and they made you ignorant.
They went out of their way to try and make you ignorant.
And if they're not, didn't do it to you, they're trying to do it to your kids.
So here is Adam Schiff.
Remember, one of his arguments is that Donald Trump, by going to court to argue about executive privilege and about the fact that he doesn't want his people to be subpoenaed, by having due process applied to the president is per se obstructing justice.
So due process is obstructing justice, according to Adam Schiff, and he says this cannot be decided by the courts.
This is cut eight.
Given the seriousness of the conduct at issue and its persistence, this matter cannot and must not be decided by the courts, which, apart from the presence of the Chief Justice here today, are given no role in impeachments in either the House or the Senate.
Being drawn into litigation taking many months or years to complete would provide the president with an opportunity to continue his misconduct.
He would remain secure in the knowledge that he may tie up the Congress in the courts indefinitely.
Adam Schiff, he's a role-life.
He should be forced to resign.
I don't know.
That voice is in my ear.
I hope you're hearing that too.
Otherwise, I'm cracking up.
But you know, that's an amazing argument, right?
It's an amazing argument, again, that by using due process, his due process to challenge a subpoena, you don't have to show up for a subpoena.
You can challenge a subpoena in court.
You can do it.
The president can do it.
Anybody can do it.
It is the way the system works.
Schiff is saying that inherently, inherently is obstructing Congress.
And that's one of the arguments they made.
The other argument he made is an argument that if we had a press, if our press were not a bunch of liberal hacks, surrounded by liberal hacks so that they don't even know that they're liberal hacks, this argument would have set their hair on fire.
We're going to deal with the press later in the program, but this argument would have set their hair on fire.
Schiff says we cannot even decide this.
We can't decide.
The people can't decide this by a vote.
This is cut seven.
The president's misconduct cannot be decided at the ballot box, for we cannot be assured that the vote will be fairly won.
Now, this, I'm old enough to remember, and if you're three, you're also old enough to remember, when it was a horrific thing to question the legitimacy of an election.
You remember Donald Trump asked during a debate whether he would accept the outcome, and he said, I don't know.
Until I see the outcome, I won't know.
And Hillary Clinton said, that's horrific.
That is a horrific statement to undermine the people's confidence in the system that upholds our entire government.
Adam Schiff is basically saying that Donald Trump has so manipulated elections.
I mean, it's an incredible argument.
It's an incredible argument because they claim that Trump withheld the aid to Ukraine in order to get them to investigate Joe Biden, but the aid wasn't withheld.
There was no investigation of Joe Biden.
Where are we distrusting our elections?
Why are we distrusting our elections?
Because Schiff is still selling the false narrative that Russia and Trump colluded.
He's still selling that.
And remember, the collusion by Russia, even according to Mueller, basically constituted a couple of Facebook ads that were supposed to rock our world, which is absurd.
I mean, certainly, certainly the greater disturbance created by Russia was the misinformation, the disinformation sold to Hillary Clinton, who then sent it into the intelligence people who then used it to start this incredible parade and then spy on Barack Obama and spy on Donald Trump.
It's an amazing, amazing argument.
And again, again, they are depending on your stupidity.
First of all, they know we're not listening to this.
I mean, the ratings for this were not bad.
Something like 11 million people were watching this, which is about the people who were watching the Clinton impeachment.
But come on, most of us, most of us are listening to the stuff that comes out on Twitter, the things that are pulled out.
Nobody's mind is being changed.
That's not the point.
The point is to get independents to feel that the Republicans are somehow covering up malfeasance.
And by the way, Schiff is also misrepresenting.
He did this thing with Mulvaney.
Do we have this?
Mulvaney didn't just admit that the president withheld the crucial aid appropriated by Congress to apply pressure on Ukraine to do the president's political dirty work.
He also said that we should just get over it.
Should the Congress just get over it?
Should the American people just come to expect that our presidents will corruptly abuse their office to seek the help of a foreign power to cheat in our election?
Should we just get over it?
Is that what we've come to?
I hope and pray that the answer is no.
You can hope and pray all you want, but that's not what Mulvaney said.
In a long press conference, Mulvaney was saying there's always going to be some politics involved in giving foreign aid.
Just get over it.
That's what he was saying.
And he said that Trump, as an afterthought, mentioned that we should investigate some of these things, mentioned that as an afterthought, we should investigate the hacked emails and was talking about Ukrainian interference in the corruption, but was basically asking for past corruption to be investigated, not future corruption, to be instigated.
So the whole thing is really dishonest.
And finally, finally, what Schiff argued was the whole idea that witnesses should be called.
Schiff wants some witnesses, but as he told the press, not others.
This isn't like some fantasy football trade, as I said yesterday.
This isn't, we'll offer you this if you'll give us that.
We'll offer you a witness that is irrelevant and immaterial, who has no relevant testimony, but a witness that will allow us to smear a presidential candidate if you want to get a legitimate witness.
That's not a trade.
Trials aren't trades for witnesses.
That's an amazing statement, because if the problem here, if the problem here is Trump's secret intentions, which no one can know, I mean, we can't know what his intentions were.
We can't know whether he was sitting up on Mount Trump in the evil recesses of his fortress of solitude, rubbing his hands together, saying, ha, ha, ha, you know, I beat Hillary Clinton, but oh, there's no way I can beat Joe Biden if they ever get him out of the corner where he's walked and he can't find his way out.
There's no way I can beat him, so I'm doing this.
We can't know this.
So the defense against his bad intentions would be that Biden was actually corrupt.
The person to call to find out whether Biden was corrupt would be Joe Biden and Hunter Biden.
But they don't want those witnesses because they just want you to imagine Trump's intentions.
They just want you to, you know, it really is a dangerous argument because you can make it to anybody.
And the idea is here that you are not really listening, that the people who matter aren't really listening.
And all they're going to do is put together the show that they can use as fodder in the 2020 elections as they're campaigning, shouting about the corruption of the Republicans.
It's all about this.
And it is all about ignorance.
And that ignorance, again, is not an accident.
The ignorance has been created over 50 years, 50 years of the left controlling our academies.
All right, just a moment.
We're going to talk about another subject.
We're going to come back to the subject of impeachment.
But first, we have to talk about paint your life.
You know, I actually have an example of paint your life that I have in the office.
I sent them a photograph and they turned it into a painting.
And it really is nice.
If you can't see it, you just have to take my word for it.
And you say, well, why did you get a painting of yourself?
And the answer is easy, because if I got a painting of my family, I wouldn't be allowed to bring it in and show it to you because we keep our families off the air and off social media.
So I got a painting of myself, which, you know, I couldn't leave it at home because my wife would use it as a dartboard.
But you can see it's an actual really nice portrait that you can have, not of yourself, but also of your family.
You can have an original painting of yourself, your children, your family, a special place, anything you want.
And it's a real painting.
It's done by hand.
It's not done by a machine.
They keep in touch with you all along the way and they tell you what they're doing.
There's no risk if you don't love the final painting.
You get your money refunded.
All you got to do, all I did was send them a photograph, and that's what I got.
It really is a nice deal.
Right now, as a limited time offer, you can get 30% off your painting, 30% off, and free shipping to get the special offer.
How do you do it?
You text the word Andrew to 64-000.
That's Andrew to 64-000, A-N-D-R-E-W to 64-000.
It's a really nice gift.
All right.
We are bringing on one of our favorite guests, Jenna Ellis, who has risen.
I think she's now vice president of the United States, or possibly she's still a constitutional law attorney and a Trump 2020 advisory board member.
She's always on Fox News and CNN, but she's always here too, which is more important because we have a better show.
How are you doing, Jenna?
It's good to see you.
Great to see you too, Jare.
Thanks so much for having me on.
You are my favorite.
I expect you to say that, especially because soon you'll be running the country and I'll need a favor.
You know, what I want to do, I want to take some time off from talking about impeachment.
And I haven't asked you about impeachment because we kind of share the same views.
So I don't want you to repeat what I'm already saying.
But I do want to talk to you.
And you said so well.
Thank you very much.
I do want to talk to you about the Christian reaction, this Christian debate that's going on among evangelicals about Donald Trump, because it really is a good point.
And I, you know, you're 100% in on Trump.
I am sometimes put off by his attitude and by his behavior, certainly by his behavior in the past.
And Mark Galley, who's the editor-in-chief of Christianity Today, wrote Christianity, which used to be, it used to be a Billy Graham vehicle, and it used to be kind of the voice of evangelical Christians.
Religious Freedom in America00:16:00
And he says the president has dumbed down the idea of morality in his administration.
He's hired and fired a number of people who are now convicted criminals.
You know, he talks about his immoral actions in business and his relationship with women.
And he talks about the fact that they ran a similar attack on Bill Clinton.
And he says, to the many evangelicals who continue to support Mr. Trump in spite of his blackened moral record, we say this.
Remember who you are and whom you serve.
You are an evangelical Christian.
Why is he wrong?
Yeah, well, he's just factually false.
I mean, even just in the last couple of weeks with the president issuing the statement from the White House to preserve and protect religious freedom, protect prayer in schools.
And then tomorrow, being the first president in U.S. history to stand up and speak at March for Life.
I mean, if you want to talk about morality in America, you have to look at the record of Donald Trump as president because there are two candidates who are running this November in 2020.
One is going to be a socialist who is going to value the right of the so-called right of women to simply abort a child at whim, to just completely dismantle the American liberty and freedom, religious liberty that we value.
I mean, all of these things that are the socialist progressive agenda.
And then you'll have the other option, which is Donald Trump.
And, you know, we made this argument in 2016, and I was a supporter of Donald Trump then.
And it's always a binary choice.
And so even then, when President Trump didn't have a track record and we were relying on him to fulfill his promises and the fact that he was going to secure the protection of religious freedom in this country, that was a promise that we were hoping that he would fulfill.
And we knew that Hillary Clinton wouldn't.
But now in 2020, we're in a much different posture because he has the past three years of absolutely securing and protecting religious freedom.
And not just that, but also securing and protecting the U.S. Constitution, protecting our liberties.
Our first liberties, Drew, are the rights that are enshrined in our First Amendment that come from God, our Creator, which is the freedom of speech, freedom of association, and free exercise of religion.
That's what you and I are engaging in right now.
We are freely speaking together about morality and about issues of life and God.
And President Trump has protected those so much better than any modern American president.
And that's why it's just completely false what Christianity today is claiming.
And if you look at the facts, you look at the record, there is no way that any Christian can exercise their vote and not participate in this civil process and not vote for Donald Trump.
You know, I agree with you, but I want to play almost literally the devil's advocate here because I've been consistent.
When Clinton was impeached for carrying on an affair in the Oval Office, I said I thought that that was ridiculous too, that I thought he was slime for doing it, but it was none of our business essentially.
But Christians did come down very hard on Clinton.
The point he makes in that editorial is true.
Are they being two-faced by now saying, well, we don't care about Stormy Daniels.
We don't care about all the women that he chased around.
Is there any hypocrisy there?
It's not to say that we don't care.
And it's not to say that any Christian is advocating for adultery or for a divorce or for any of those things.
We've been very consistent.
Most Christians, at least, you know, I'm one and hopefully I'm consistent in what the Bible teaches.
And the difference here, though, is that President Trump, this is all in the past.
This is all, by the way, when he was a registered Democrat.
And so to say that somehow the conduct when he has been so clearly and demonstrably a Christian himself, genuinely, and preserving and protecting religious freedom is somehow the same conduct 12 years ago as Bill Clinton then and there in the Oval Office.
For us to condemn that behavior that's concurrently happening with his presidency, those are two very, very different instances.
So no, Christians aren't being two-faced.
I haven't seen any Christians condone any sort of past behavior that would be against biblical principles.
And certainly we don't have to, but we are defending this president for who he is today, who he was in 2016 and who he is in 2020.
That is a good argument.
I especially like your diagnosis that the problem wasn't the adultery per se, it was that he was a Democrat and that he just fell into those.
Well, unfortunately, the Democratic Party is all for the party of consent and licentiousness and license to do whatever they prefer.
And conservatives stand on principle and values of traditional morality.
Now, I want to ask you as a constitutional attorney, I want to ask you about this case that went before the Supreme Court day before yesterday, I think, about a law.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
I think it was in Montana where they wanted to fund religious schools and the Montana Supreme Court said they couldn't do it.
Could you explain the case?
Yeah, so just briefly, this is a constitutional or state constitutional amendment, essentially saying that religious schools or schools that are openly identifying as a religious organization can't receive the same federal tax credits that non-religious schools can.
So this is essentially the same Trinity Lutheran argument again.
That case that was argued a couple of years ago, where a Lutheran school wanted to receive funding from the state in order to pave their playground.
And their argument there, which the Supreme Court absolutely upheld, is that there can't be discrimination or different treatment from the government simply because the organization or the institution happens to identify as a religious organization.
And that is completely consistent with the U.S. Constitution.
The protection of free exercise of religion means that the government cannot discriminate against you or me as an individual, but also can't discriminate against an organization that identifies openly as religious and can't be dissimilarly treated from an organization or an individual that is non-religious.
You know, the ACLU has this nasty habit of going into schools wherever if they find a kid praying, basically, they go into schools and threaten to sue and the school system can't afford the lawsuit, so they cave in.
Has the Supreme Court given any clarity to, because I can't understand where the Supreme Court stands on this.
I got to be honest.
I have a very hard time figuring out where they stand on the separation of church and state.
Can you tell us like where, what basically the law is at this point?
Yeah, well, you know, we have two different constitutions in America, unfortunately.
We have the original Constitution, which was ratified in 1787, and that has changed 27 times in our nation's history with amendments.
But the protections of the Constitution in terms of the guarantee of free exercise of religion, that hasn't changed whatsoever.
What has changed is the second constitution, which is what everyone learns in law school, which is whatever the nine robed justices happen to decide.
Now, if we're in the posture of judicial activism over the last 50 or 60 years, then that changes at the whim of whether Anthony Kennedy is the majority vote or now, you know, we have perhaps John Roberts as the majority swing vote.
And so we've seen kind of this dissimilar inconsistency over the court over the last 50 or 60 years that really shouldn't happen.
What we're seeing today now is a shift back into constitutional conservatism, which means going back to the original intent of what the founders meant to preserve and protect, which is this idea that religious liberty and the freedoms and protections of the Constitution are not up for nine robed justices to decide at whim, but rather recognizing that our right comes from God, our creator, and our government is obligated to preserve and protect that.
So I think we're seeing with these cases such as Trinity Lutheran, now this one in Montana, and a few others that are coming down the pike.
And certainly we're going to be looking at overturning Roe versus Wade, a lot of these different moral issues and social issues that are coming before the court.
We're now seeing because of President Trump, again, Christians, pay attention.
This is why you should be voting for him because he is selecting and appointing justices and federal court judges that are going to protect and preserve religious freedom for everyone in America.
And so I think that the law now, that second constitution, is actually going to mirror in the coming years the actual supreme law of the land.
And that's a really good thing for everyone in America.
Jenna, it's always great to see you.
Thank you so much.
That was a really clear explanation.
I appreciate it.
I hope to talk to you again soon.
Sounds good.
Thanks, Jerry.
That's Jenna Ellis.
We always love having her on.
She always gives us a very clear description of what is going on in the Supreme Court.
All right.
So if you want to get some insights about what's going on in Washington from someone who is on the inside, I personally think Senator Ted Cruz is the smartest man in government, and our own Michael Knowles is the smartest man in his own imagination.
And now Ted Cruz with Michael Knowles has a terrific new podcast out called The Verdict.
They're going to be talking about the day's events and what's behind them.
Here's a trailer.
Join Senator Ted Cruz as he breaks down the most important political stories of the day on his new podcast, Verdict.
It's a Nancy Pelosi House.
I think they're interested in just nonstop investigations and attacking the president.
Conservatives believe in power to the people.
The socialists believe in power to the government.
What they're selling doesn't work.
Subscribe today and leave a five-star review for Verdict with Ted Cruz, co-hosted by me, Michael Knowles, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and everywhere else you get your podcasts.
Again, Senator Ted, smartest guy in government, and Michael Knowles, a guy who wrote a book with no words in it.
So it's a powerful combination.
Subscribe and give it a five-star review and take a look.
You'll like it.
All right, we got to take a break from Facebook and YouTube.
But come on over to dailywire.com and subscribe to get all the clavy goodness you can stand, plus the leftist tears tumbler.
Let us now talk about the impeachment as it affects the future, the 2020, because that's what I think it's all about, and also the way the press is playing it.
And of course, I don't, you can guess how the press is playing it, but just to serve, because we're here to serve, because we are here to tell you what's going on, we have put together our own little montage of the way the press reacted.
Now, I talked to you about Schiff's argument, and I just thought it was a bad argument, and I thought it was a sinister argument.
I really did.
But I understand if you're on the other side, you might have sat and nodded and agreed with Adam Schiff.
You hate Donald Trump.
I understand that.
There's no excuse.
There's no excuse for this from a supposedly objective press.
It was meticulous and well-organized.
It was grounded in evidence, which he recited and arranged, as you said, in a comprehensive narrative.
At times, he tried to rise to a level of eloquence and stir a sense of responsibility for the Senate.
A very, very powerful and forceful speech, almost two and a half hours.
Just a very factually based argument.
It was a remarkable presentation, leaving apart the stamina, the physical stamina that it took to deliver that for two hours and 25 minutes.
It was a very coherent, cohesive narrative.
It was dazzling.
I thought the way he wove through both the facts of the case and the historical context was really remarkable.
This is really an I am Spartacus moment where people really need to stand up.
What I really thought was just amazing about Schiff's presentation is he was speaking not just to the 100 people in the room, he was speaking to 100 years in the future.
We just added that last one in there.
You know, when these guys get called liberal hacks, they get all upset and excited and say, how can you do that?
We asked a reasonable question.
But no, you can't be a liberal hack.
You can't be 100% 24-hour, seven-day-a-week liberal hack and then say, well, that question was a good question, and therefore you have to answer the question and not call us liberal hacks.
You're liberal hacks.
This is what they are.
And, you know, it's a shame because, I mean, Jake Tapper has, it's not like Jake Tapper has no talent as a journalist.
He does.
But when you sit on CNN, you become part of a corrupt system.
The system is corrupt.
And this is the thing with a corrupt system.
This happens in government too.
It happens in all kinds of places.
That when you are in a corrupt system, you don't have to be corrupt.
And so you can feel like, oh, I'm a good person.
I'm doing the right thing.
But no, you're contributing to the corruption.
And it's bad for America.
It is part of the ignorance of America.
It is part of selling ignorance to America.
So you have this system where you go to the academy.
You've been brought up by your parents.
Maybe they taught you good values.
Maybe they even taught you a little history.
But maybe they don't know that much.
Maybe they're too busy working so they can afford to send you to college to teach you anything or to learn anything.
Maybe they don't know.
And then they send you to college and you get this academician who's never done anything in his life.
He's never built a business.
He's never hired anybody.
He's never dealt with the kind of red tape that comes down from a government.
He doesn't know anything about real life.
All he knows is that it's just not fair that the Soviet Union fell and became a tyranny and was soaked in blood.
And so somehow that has gotten his favorite idea, given a bad name to his favorite idea.
And so he's there telling you this stuff and basically erasing all of the culture that made him who he is, that gave him the values that he's perverting, and it has made you and your parents who they are and given you everything that you have and don't even know you have.
Because remember, progress is invisible.
Progress of Steven Pinker had a line, progress erases its own footsteps.
And that's right.
You look back and you don't know.
You just think you're here.
You just think you got planted here.
You know, you're standing on the shoulders of giants and you think that you can fly.
And so all these people who are selling the Bernie Bros socialism and selling these kids who are going out there and saying, oh, the goulages weren't so bad, selling the New York Times.
A leftist historian came out today and said the New York Times project to claim that America was founded to defend slavery.
A leftist historian came out and said, no, they said, sorry, that's just not good history, but they won't retract it because they're so woke that they just think that the history comes out of their imagination and that becomes the new history.
They're selling this ignorance and it is truly undermining everything that we are.
And even, you know, I talk about this a lot and I want to talk about it more, but even the history of Christianity and what Christianity piped into the human heart and into the human mind.
I'm reading a wonderful book about this now called Dominion by Tom Holland.
You know, we should get Tom Holland on the show actually and talk to him about it.
It's a doorstop.
It's like 900 pages.
It's a great big history book, but it's really fascinating.
But just talking about the fact that the ideas that we take for granted, the idea of human rights, the idea of sexual rights, the idea that men should be faithful in a marriage, not just women faithful in a marriage, all these ideas, they come to us through Christianity.
You don't have to believe in Jesus.
You don't have to believe in Jesus.
But shouldn't you know where your ideas come from?
Shouldn't you know why you think that even people who are selling socialism, why they think the poor should have dignity, why they think the poor are, you know, it used to be, I hate to break this to you, but it used to be that people look down on the poor.
They look down morally on the poor.
Jesus has asked in the Gospels, why is this person sick?
Did he sin or did his parents sin?
And Jesus says, nah, that's not the way it works.
That's not the way it works.
This idea that the least of us should have respect, that the least of us are the children of God, that does not come through the classical inheritance that is the inheritance of Christianity.
So again, I'm not preaching for you to believe, but to know, to know, just to understand.
Fox News Listeners Get It Right00:03:21
You know, I talk a lot about, I talk a lot when I talk to colleges about the way ideas spread.
And I talk about the fact that Socrates taught Plato and Plato taught Aristotle.
And Aristotle taught Alexander the Great, who went out and conquered the Western world and turned it into a Hellenic instrument.
He turned it into an instrument of Hellenic culture, which he got from Aristotle, who got it from Plato, who got it from Socrates.
Then that world was conquered by Rome.
Then Rome was conquered by Jesus Christ.
And they became a vehicle to spread that.
And those two ideas came together.
And that's where we come from.
And if you don't know that stuff, you don't even know why you think it's just instinct.
Oh, I just know what's right.
I just know what's wrong.
But you don't know that your heart has been schooled by a tradition and they're trying to make you stupid.
You know, there's an amazing thing going back to the press reaction to the impeachment.
CNN analyst Joe Lockhart tweeted a conversation he overheard between two Republican senators during the day's impeachment trial.
He said, overheard, this is his tweet, overheard convo between two Republican senators who only watch Fox News.
One said, listening to Schiff, is this stuff real?
I haven't heard any of this before, because he's watching Fox News, so he's ignorant.
I thought it was all about a server.
If half the stuff Schiff is saying is true, we're up the creek.
Hope the White House has exculpatory evidence.
Well, the tweet racked up over 8,000 retweets and 34,000 likes.
And then, of course, and journalist, journalist Jennifer Rubin, crazy, crazy lady from the Washington Post, she retweeted it.
And then, of course, Lockhart said, no, no, no, I was just kidding around.
It was just satire.
CNN, the people who fact-check the Babylon Bee, are suddenly okay with satire.
But the satire itself, I'll accept it as satire, but the satire itself is really bad because what he's saying is people who watch Fox News don't know what they're saying on CNN.
But the people who watch Fox News, in fact, are surrounded by CNN.
It's in the airports.
They're surrounded by NBC news because those are the networks.
That's where they watch their television shows.
So they're getting the news from there.
They hear the left because the left owns so much of the communications territory.
He's saying we're ignorant, but survey after survey shows again and again that Fox News listeners get more answers right about the news than anybody else.
That Rush Limbaugh has the most educated listeners.
And of course, we have, we already have the heaven of listeners and viewers here.
And, you know, I mean, I think that this is the illusion that they have, that people who aren't watching them don't hear what they have to say, but they're everywhere.
You have to turn on Fox News to hear Fox News, and they go out of their way.
They go out of their way to demonize Fox News so that you won't listen to them.
And this is the thing about Donald Trump.
Donald Trump, you know, we were talking to Jenna.
Donald Trump has behaved badly in the past.
Donald Trump talks in a way now that can sometimes seem rude.
It is rude.
He can be rude.
He can say things that he shouldn't say.
He does say things that he shouldn't say.
Trump is in a trap that was created by this veil of ignorance.
If Trump had not been as blustery and as pugilistic and as insulting as he was, he would not have won.
And if he loses, he's going to lose because of those very things, because they put off women, because they put off a lot of voters.
Fearless Truth-Tellers00:02:19
They have created a world, an empire of lies, in which only the nastiest person is willing to speak the truth.
Because everybody else, if you say, you know, there are only men and women, if you say a man can't be a woman, you get fired.
Everybody else is afraid.
So it takes a guy who's fearless and fearless people.
This is what my novel True Crime is about.
Fearless people, people who are dedicated to the truth, are sometimes not the nicest people of all.
This veil of ignorance has created the need for Donald Trump and the need for Donald Trump and what Donald Trump has to be has created a world in which he could be voted out of office after the most successful three years I've ever seen a president have.
But again, there's always hope because you don't have to be ignorant.
Your children don't have to be ignorant.
You can change the world, starting with yourself.
All right, a final reflection before we go into the Clavenless weekend and what a Clavenless weekend it will be, just reeling darkness, wailing, gnashing of teeth.
Doubtful you will survive.
But let me just reiterate this one more time because I hear this from conservatives all the time and it drives me a little bit bats.
We're doomed.
Everything is out of control.
This system is bad.
The colleges are bad.
The TV shows are bad.
The movies are bad.
But I never hear people saying, you know what?
I have a tool.
My tool is my brain and my children and my legacy, the things that I create.
I'm going to start to teach people things.
I'm going to start to read Plato, the Nicomachean ethics.
I'm going to start to find out what it means, what the pursuit of happiness means.
Because, you know, all of these philosophers, including Jesus, we're talking about happiness.
We talk about them as if they were talking about morality, shaking their fingers at us, but they weren't.
They were talking about happiness, what Aristotle and the Greeks called eudaimonia, which isn't just big, smiley, yellow, smiley-face happiness.
It means good spirit.
It means having what Jesus called life in abundance.
And Aristotle talked about the fact that that came from virtue.
So that's why he was talking about morality because he wanted you to be happy.
He wanted you to have life in abundance.
Same with Jesus.
Almost everything he says is in support of this joy that you get when your soul is aligned with virtue, when your soul is aligned with its creator, essentially.
And all of those things can be learned.
They're all there.
They're all in the books.
There are classes on them.
There's YouTube videos about them.
They're all there.
You can learn them.
Life in Abundance00:01:58
You can pass them on.
It is never too late to begin the world again.
It starts with you, and there's just no cause for despair as long as you have that power.
I got to stop there.
I got to plunge you into the Claven this weekend.
So everything I just said, negate it because you'll never survive.
But if you do survive, we will be back here Monday.
I'm Andrew Klavan, and this is The Andrew Klavan Show.
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 Robert Sterling and directed by Mike Joyner.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring, senior producer, Jonathan Hay, technical producer, Austin Stevens, and our supervising producer is Mathis Glover.
Assistant Director, Pavel Wydowski.
Edited by Adam Sayovitz.
Audio mixed by Robin Fenderson.
Hair and makeup is by Jessua Alvera.
Animations are by Cynthia Angulo.
Production assistants, McKenna Waters and Ryan Love.
The Andrew Clavin Show is a Daily Wire production, Copyright Daily Wire 2020.
Yesterday, President Trump announced that he would become the first president in American history to attend and address the March for Life, which is taking place as we speak.
We will examine how a man who once called himself, quote, very pro-choice, became the most pro-life president in American history.
Then, Democrat impeachment manager Adam Schiff accidentally explains why Democrats are so eager to oust Trump before November as the impeachment trial enters its agonizing second day.
And Tulsi Gabbard sues Hillary Clinton for defamation because we are living in the greatest timeline.