Ep. 903 dissects New York’s Cuomo-led "reopening" as a bleak, mask-clad PR stunt amid Minneapolis riots, where the host dismisses systemic racism claims but condemns Derek Chauvin’s actions while mocking Maxine Waters’ and Biden’s inflammatory rhetoric. Jenna Ellis argues Twitter’s Trump fact-checks manipulate elections, exposing Section 230 loopholes, while CNN’s "cancel culture" attacks on her Christian views highlight double standards—all as Pinker’s secularist claims about afterlife beliefs are rejected as pandemic-era moral oversimplifications. The episode ties censorship, legal battles, and cultural clashes into a critique of elites exploiting chaos for control. [Automatically generated summary]
New York has unveiled its new reopening plan called Transitioning into Some Vague Semblance of Competence.
Although the plan is intended to echo Donald Trump's theme of transitioning into greatness, New York officials will not be looking to restore the economy or bring New Yorkers' lives back to normal, but will instead simply aim to stop slaughtering people's grandparents in large numbers while saying indefensibly stupid stuff they have to retract hours later.
Governor Andrew Cuomo announced that the transitioning into some vague semblance of competence plan will be launched at a large gathering of nursing home residents and Chinese virus sufferers in the hopes that a show of togetherness will ease any hard feelings about that time he forced nursing homes to take the virus sufferers in, thus causing the deaths of thousands.
After the launch party and the resulting funerals, New York will have a grand reopening of the subway system, heralded by make-believe music on invisible guitars played by homeless schizophrenics moving from car to car, asking passengers for money as the passengers packed tightly together in the narrow space try to edge away from the beggars without actually having sex with the person next to them.
Restaurants will also be reopened, although each diner will have to sit a minimum of three blocks away from their companion unless it's their spouse.
Then it's four blocks.
To facilitate that, restaurants will be allowed to set up tables in the middle of the larger boulevards, although customers will have to clean up after themselves if they should be hit by a bus.
In a speech made to the mountain of corpses he keeps seeing in his dreams for some reason, Cuomo said, quote, it's not enough for New York City to be merely intolerable.
We must show the world what the greatest city on earth looks like when it's been misgoverned into the ground, unquote.
Cuomo said that for himself, he would continue to wear a mask lest he be recognized and brought to justice.
Trigger warning, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky-dunky.
Life is tickety-boom.
Birds are winging, also singing hunky-dunkity.
Ship-shaped tipsy-topsy, the world is a bitty-zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hurrah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hoorah.
All right, I hope you are going on the Andrew Clavin YouTube channel and subscribing.
We need you there.
We want to bring up the numbers as much as possible, and we're keeping track of your comments.
Here is one from Jay Mikalski.
I took the Clavin's advice as I always do and tried out Ancestry.com and found out that I am part Clavin, which means, of course, I am part God.
I wish I didn't find this out because now do I ask myself for advice?
Do I pray to myself?
That's terrible.
I choose not to do that.
Instead, go back to seek the true Clavin for all I do in life.
Very wise, Jay Mikalski.
And of course, I'm not God.
I'm a God.
That's a very different thing altogether.
All right, let's talk about what is happening in Minneapolis.
There's no good response to a riot.
The violence and looting that tore up the city yesterday in response to the death of George Floyd in police custody is a tragedy.
And we all know the routine.
We know how it's going to go.
There'll now be awful, dishonest behavior by left-wing activists, politicians, and Don Lemon.
And there'll be ineffectual responses by the right as we try to marshal facts and figures to dismiss and minimize what clearly is a widespread sense of things in some black communities.
There will be speeches about how we must listen to one another, and this idea will be immediately hijacked by lowlifes at the New York Times.
So it essentially means we must be lectured to by activists, which accomplishes nothing.
Then some clown on the right will make a slightly racist remark, and that will be blown out of proportion to skew the narrative.
All this, of course, will be noise hiding the truth of the event, which is this.
The rioters have worsened relations between themselves and the police and brought long-lasting economic hardship to their neighborhood.
Plenty of cops who went into black neighborhoods with the idealistic notion that they could make a difference will now be disillusioned and returned to their jobs with new cynicism and distrust.
I have witnessed this happening.
And of course, the law-abiding citizens in the neighborhoods, which is usually the vast majority of people, they're going to be humiliated and discredited by the looters who made their community look terrible.
There will be no good outcomes.
There never are.
Our old friend Uncle Jesus said, in the world, you will have trouble, but take heart.
I have overcome the world.
We here at the Andrew Clavin Show can't say that, unfortunately, because of the minor technicality that we're not Jesus.
But I will say this: in the world, there will be trouble, but we will not be the world, not here.
The riots are part of a phenomenon I've been talking about, the release that comes at the end of a crisis as we let down our guard just a little too soon, and the anger and irrationality and stupidity that have been building up in us follow.
It's as if everyone suddenly said, Hooray, now we can come out of our houses and hate one another and break things again.
We're going to watch this happen.
We're going to comment on it, but we're not going to participate, even if it makes you angry at times that I don't say what you want me to say.
Because the thing about riots, just like other tragedies, is that nobody wins.
All right, we're going to talk about, you know, there's this meme going around on Twitter where they'll put some picture of an incredibly handsome man.
They did one of me, of course, and say, What, men, why don't you look like this?
But I think they should put out a picture of me and say, women, do you want to look like this?
Because obviously, women don't.
And women don't often talk about thinning hair, but nearly half of all women will experience thinning hair.
You can take charge of your hair growth and make the next few months your time to grow thicker, fuller, healthier hair with Neutrophol.
Nutrofol is formulated with potent botanicals to help you grow hair that remains strong and is physician formulated to be 100% drug-free.
Visit neutrafall.com and take their hair wellness quiz for customized product recommendations that put the power to grow thicker, stronger hair back into your hands.
You can grow thicker, healthier hair and support our show by going to neutrafall.com and saying, please, please don't let me look like Andrew Clavin.
You can use promo code Clavin and get 20% off.
This is their best offer available anywhere.
Plus, this shipping is free on every order.
Get 20% off at Nutrafall.com, promo code Clavin.
Their best offer anywhere.
20% off at NeutraFold.com.
Spelled, and I know this is the question you're asking, N-U-T-R-A-F-O-L.com, promo code Clavin for hair as strong as you are.
Wait, that's not the question you're asking.
You're asking, how do I spell Clavin?
How come you always let me start before you play this on?
Jenna Ellis is going to come and talk to us.
We're waiting for Donald Trump to issue his statement, his executive order about Twitter.
We don't know what it's going to be, so we're not going to comment on it.
But Jenna Ellis will come and talk to us about the legal implications.
Police Actions and Perceptions00:11:56
But let's talk about this riot.
At least one person has been killed in a shooting.
I know somebody was shot by a pawnbroker when he came into his shop.
The rioting just looks absolutely awful.
The police action on this guy, George Floyd.
Can we show the videotape of this?
What do you want?
I can't breathe.
Please, the demonic.
I can't breathe here.
Bro, get up and get in the car, man.
I will.
Get up and get in the car.
I can't move.
I've been wiping the whole car.
So Floyd came to Minneapolis.
He was trying to start a new life.
He was charged in 2007 with armed robbery and a home invasion in Houston.
In 2009, he was sentenced to five years in prison as part of a plea deal.
He then moved to Minneapolis.
He had been a football player in high school.
He was a big, big guy.
And on Monday night, an employee at a Minneapolis grocery store called the police after Floyd allegedly tried to pass a counterfeit $20 bill.
The officers said that he was under the influence and that he was resisting arrest.
There's no sign of that in the video, but I don't know about that.
What I do know is the guy kneels on his neck.
The cop kneels on his neck.
And that is not accepted police procedure.
I've never heard of that.
I've never heard of any policeman saying that.
I can understand somebody doing it if he was in an active fight.
But the guy is in handcuffs.
He's not in an active fight.
If you have to restrain a guy who is fighting back, you're supposed to kneel between his shoulder blades, which a cop can do without crushing the guy, but he's crushing the guy's neck.
And the guy's saying, I can't breathe.
It looks like bad police action.
Four policemen have been fired for it.
And I'm sure this is not the end of the story.
So it does not look, I mean, you know, I hate it when they portray these guys as if they were saints and, you know, the gentle giant and a wonderful person in the community.
We don't know anything about the guy except what I just told you.
We know the facts.
We know the people who loved them loved them.
The people who didn't like them didn't like them like everybody else on earth.
But the cop was obviously, it seems from that video, was obviously not behaving according to the rules of policing that any that I know of or have ever heard a police officer talk about.
So now you have the results, right?
And the reason the press is so bad, the reason it's so dangerous to have this press that I keep complaining and complaining and complaining about.
The reason it's so bad is because they seize control of the narrative rather than telling the story, rather than telling the story, okay?
We've got this guy who has been killed, and obviously this reflects a feeling in some black communities that the police are racist against black people.
Now, you can cite facts and figures about this forever, but I am perfectly willing to stipulate, as I think any sane white person would be, that my dealings with a police officer are going to be different than a black person's dealings with a police officer.
That doesn't mean that cops are racist.
It may simply be that, you know, I personally would probably blame the fact that so many criminals are black.
A disproportionate number of criminals are black.
Now, you can have to go back past that and find out the reasons for that, but the cop on the street is not a sociologist.
The cop on the street is just trying to deal with the situation he has.
By the way, nothing I say is meant to forgive this police officer for kneeling on that guy's neck, right?
That is not the way a police officer is supposed to behave.
So please don't misunderstand that I'm saying anything about that.
But what I am saying is that clearly it is not the police officer's job to change the sociology of the country.
He can't do that.
When it gets to him, what he's seeing is more black criminals.
Likewise, it's not the honest black guy's job to change the sociology of the country.
He doesn't have that power any more than the police officer does.
And what his experience is, is that the police are being more suspicious of him, more reactive toward him, meaner maybe, more disrespectful, you know, whatever is happening in that particular instance.
And this is the honest guys, the good guys, you know, our fellow citizens' experience.
And that is going to filter down into the relationships between the police.
So you're looking at that level, at the level of police and the guy on the street, you're looking at tragedy.
Tragedy is when something happens that the people involved can't do anything about.
The other day, but the problem with the narrative, the problem with a media that seizes the narrative and immediately sells this as a widespread problem is that they make things worse.
That is not helping anything.
That's not bringing an issue to the fore.
That's not bringing something that can be solved to the fore.
And once the riots start, it's all over.
Conversation is over.
Somebody on Twitter tweeted just before I came on, they tweeted, boy, things would be really different if white men were being murdered by the police daily.
And I thought, yeah, they'd be really different if black men were being murdered by the police daily.
That's not what's happening.
What is happening is a narrative is being pushed by the media that is feeding into a genuine feeling among black people about their relationships to the police, which probably is realistic, right?
Their relations with the police, probably different than white people.
And the police are reacting to what their problem is on the ground, right?
They're seeing, look, if a cop had an app on his phone that could show criminal intent, he could hold it up and it would bleep every time there was criminal intent.
Would he be looking at the color of a person's skin?
No, he'd be looking at the app because most cops don't care about the color of the person's skin.
They're just trying to prevent crime.
But once you're in a situation, whatever caused it, once you're in a situation where a lot of the crime in your neighborhood or on your beat is being committed by black people, that becomes in your mind.
There's nothing you can do about this.
There's nothing you can do about it.
That makes in your mind black skin a clue, right?
It means that that is going to set off a little ping in your head that this person may be more likely to commit a crime.
These are all things that don't have anything to do with the vast majority of good cops and the vast majority of law-abiding black people, but they bring these two people in these two groups into conflict.
And then the result is this riot, which just makes everything worse.
So now, now this comes to us, right?
Now it comes to the people who talk, the chattering classes, as they call them in England.
What's your responsibility?
Well, your responsibility is to try to describe the situation as it is instead of selling your stinky little agenda, right?
Because your stinky little agenda may be good, like on this show, or it may be bad, like on CNN, but still, this is not the time when people are dying and neighborhoods are burning and this vast economic disaster is hitting Minneapolis.
This is not the time to sell your stinky little agenda, right?
Here's Don Lemon selling his.
How many more excuses do you need to make before you examine yourself and say, okay, maybe I need to wake up a little bit and take a good long look at what I've been doing?
Maybe I need to understand or realize that the environment that this president has trafficked in can help to lead to these sorts of situations where people think that that sort of behavior, meaning the people who are doing these things, the people who are calling the cops on people falsely in Central Park, the people who are chasing people down the street in Georgia and killing them, that you may begin to think that your actions are normal, are normal.
That you may begin to think that you as the preeminent voice can do things that are inhumane to other people and it will be accepted.
CNN sucks.
He doesn't like Donald Trump, so he's blaming Donald Trump for something Trump had nothing to do with, and he's blaming you, the voter who voted for Donald Trump.
I blame Don Lemon.
I think it's Don Lemon's fault.
In fact, I think that cop was actually Don Lemon in a cop mask trying to spread his doctrine.
He doesn't, he's willing to lie on TV about it.
Why wouldn't he dress up as a Minneapolis cop and go kill a black man to spread his, you know, that's the way I look at it, right?
Of course, I'm joking, but I'm being sarcastic about the fact that this is not the time to spread your narrative because it's the narrative really that is causing the problem.
Obviously, these are people.
These are people on the street doing stuff.
And if this cop misbehaved, he should face justice at every level.
He should face all the justice that he can get.
But the fact is, is there anybody, is there anybody in America, seriously, any serious person in America?
I'm sure there are nutcases all over the place.
But is there any serious person in America who's thinking, no, that's a good idea.
Kneel on a guy's neck after you handcuff him and there should be no punishment for that.
I mean, I'm not even seeing that on Twitter where you see every stupid comment that can be possibly be made.
You know, nobody is saying that.
Justice will come.
The system is set up right now so that justice will come.
So why are you burning your neighborhood?
Why are you robbing Target?
Why are you setting fire to car parks places?
You know, it's insane.
It's insane, but of course, it's the madness of crowd.
So let's look.
Again, let's look at a couple of people who, like, I'm not holding them responsible for the action.
I'm holding them responsible for what they say about the action.
Maxine Waters, who at this point really belongs in a padded cell, here's her comment about this police officer.
I think that the officer who had his knee on his neck enjoyed doing what he was doing.
I believe sometime some of these officers leave home thinking, I'm going to get me one today.
And I think this was his one that he got today.
And he didn't care whether or not anybody was photographing him.
He did what he was doing.
And the officers who stood there and watched him are just as guilty as he is.
And I'm glad that all of them were fired.
If, in fact, you have subdued a suspect that and you're not in any danger at all because the handcuffs are on him, there's no reason for the police to do what these police did.
So let's say you're a liberal and you're listening to this.
I mean, really, is this really what that neighborhood needs?
You know, if it's a high crime neighborhood and they need the police, they need to think that the police are coming out there thinking today I'm going to get me one, which, by the way, if there are psychopaths on police forces who do that, they are very much in the minority.
You know, think about it.
Think about it.
You're a police chief.
You do not want this to happen.
Let's listen to the potted plant, Joe Biden, what his reaction to this was, very much from the Obama playbook.
I can't breathe.
It's a tragic reminder that this was not an isolated incident, but a part of an ingrained systemic cycle of injustice that still exists in this country.
It cuts at the very heart of our sacred belief that all Americans are equal in rights and in dignity.
And it sends a very clear message to the black community and black lives that are under threat every single day.
So there's 800,000 police officers in America.
The only other incident he can come up with is five years ago.
He connects these two incidents from five years apart, 800,000 cops, two incidents in five years, and that's a systematic pattern.
That's, remember, that is what Obama was selling.
Obama was selling that there was a systematic pattern.
All the proof is not in there, though I acknowledge, I acknowledge there is a difficulty in the relations between black people and the police that may have nothing to do with black people and the police.
It may just have to do with the sociology of the country right now, but it is there.
I acknowledge that, but it's not systemic racism and it is not systematic oppression of black people by the police.
That is a nonsense.
It's a provable nonsense.
Even leftists who have studied this say it's a nonsense.
So Joe Biden is saying to you, vote for me, and I will bring back, I will bring back the Obama days.
I will bring back this narrative that caused police to be murdered in Dallas.
I'll bring back this narrative that caused race relations to deteriorate to the point they've deteriorated now in Minneapolis.
Political Mistake at Rockauto00:16:03
That is not the way to go.
This is a tragedy.
It is a true tragedy in that nobody wins.
And we've got to look at the things that caused the tragedy and start to deal with those.
All right, let us talk about one of our favorite sponsors, rockauto.com.
And of course, it's not just our favorite sponsor because they do such a good job supplying auto parts from your home.
It's one of our favorite sponsors because we just love saying rockauto.com.
Who could not?
Who could not?
You wake up in the morning, you go out, you turn the key to your car, it doesn't start.
You know you need a part.
So you get in your car and pretend to drive to the auto parts store.
No, that's not going to work because your car is not running.
It makes no sense.
So go to your computer and go on rockauto.com.
And while you're doing it, you get to say, I'm going on.
When your wife says, what are you doing?
You say, I'm going on rockauto.com, which really will get her going.
Rockauto.com is a family business serving auto parts customers online for 20 years.
Go to rockauto.com to shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers.
And best of all, prices at rockauto.com are always reliably low and they're the same for professionals and do-it-yourselfers.
Go to rockauto.com right now and see all the parts available for your car or truck.
Write Clavin and use the same tone of voice, okay?
It's Clavin, Clavin, in there.
How did you hear about us box?
So they know we sent you.
And also that little box next door that says, how do you spell Clavin?
They're no easy.
They're no easing, Clavin.
Just make it look this incredibly easy.
All of this, all of this, I really do believe, I sincerely believe, is part of this phenomenon that we're seeing, which is that the lockdown is ending.
The Chinese flu lockdown is ending, whether Andrew Cuomo wants it to or not, whether Uber of Storm Fuhrer and Gretchen Whitmer in Michigan wants it to or not, it's ending.
People are coming out.
20-year-olds are not going to stay indoors for three months.
They're going to play games.
They're going to date.
They're going to go to bars.
And they've got a 0% chance of dying from the Chinese flu.
So why shouldn't they do it?
And they're going to do it, and it's going to happen.
And as we come out, as I said before, as I've said all week, and I think it's worth repeating because I think it's going to be a nationwide phenomenon, we start to do stupid stuff because we let down our guard.
We don't think, we think to ourselves, I got to get through this crisis.
I'm going to hold myself together.
I'm going to have good habits.
I'm going to do the thing that I have to do.
I'm going to keep my mind right.
And then it's like the door opens a crack and it's like, I'm going to go insane because I've been holding all that stuff down for all this time.
And that's what's happening.
And I think that's what happened with Twitter.
I think that that is what happened with Twitter.
As I said, we're waiting for Donald Trump to come out with an executive order in regards to social media.
And everybody is all, it's hilarious.
Everybody's already commenting on how it's not going to work or how it is going to work or how nobody knows what it is yet.
So I can't comment on that.
However, however, the one thing I have to say is Twitter clearly, clearly stepped on their own feet.
I mean, this is a genuine mistake that they made.
Trump has been going after Joe Scarborough.
We had a really interesting discussion on the backstage thing last night, a really fair disagreement between me and Jeremy and Ben when we were talking about criticizing Trump.
And I criticized Trump for going after Joe Scarborough, first because I think it's wrong to accuse a man of murder without any evidence whatsoever.
But secondly, because I think it's bad politics.
And that's the thing.
And Ben and I agree on this.
I think Jeremy probably agrees too.
I want Trump to win.
So I don't like it when he makes political mistakes.
I think this is a political mistake.
But Jeremy and Ben were saying we criticize our side more because we like our side more and we want them to do better and we have no control over the other side.
And Ben compared it to his children, saying if two children do something wrong and one of them is his child, he's going to punish his child, not the other child because he has control over his child.
I don't think that that's a good metaphor.
And I disagree with this.
I mean, I think a better metaphor is that politics is more like a fist fight.
It's more like a brawl.
And you want to be on the right side of a brawl.
You don't want to be a bad guy in a brawl.
But once you know you're on the right side, on the right side and the brawl has begun, you got to fight the brawl.
So no, if one guy picks up a fight and my friend Jeremy picks up a pipe, an iron pipe, and my friend Jeremy picks up an iron pipe, I don't turn to Jeremy and say, you know, I hold you to a higher standard because you're my pal.
I say, have you got an extra iron pipe?
And I think that that's why me, and I think Knowles agrees with this, is that's why we don't criticize Trump in the same way we criticize the left, because I think Trump is doing the right thing.
And he is an eccentric guy, and he does outlandish stuff sometimes.
And with Scarborough, he did something I thought was really wrong, both politically and morally.
So I did criticize that.
But no, I don't hold him to the same standards as the left because I think the left is doing something bad.
And in this fist fight, I want to make sure our side wins.
However, if Twitter had been smart, if Twitter had been smart, they'd have gone after Trump for that.
They'd have gone after Trump where he was talking about stuff that has been debunked and can't be proven.
And they would have said, let's fact check this.
Instead, like idiots, like idiots, they walked into Trump's standing fist.
It was like Trump was standing there with his fist out and Jack at Twitter just walked right into it and broke his jaw and then he said he hit me.
Trump put out a completely legitimate tweet about the fact that there is more of a chance for fraud in mail-in votes.
I mean, logically, the Wall Street Journal said this today.
If you break the chain of custody between the voter and the ballot box, logically, that increases the opportunity for shenanigans, right?
And it's an opinion whether it will or not, obviously, but there's no fact-checking Donald Trump's opinion on Twitter.
That's absurd.
By the way, here's Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democrat congressman, former chairman of the DNC, at the last election, talking about this as reported by CNN.
Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz argues a mail-in ballot has wrong written all over it.
It'd be a risky experiment for us with an election that has stakes as high as a presidential election does.
We've never done a mail-in ballot statewide.
Wasserman Schultz is worried about signature fraud, disenfranchising college students, getting addresses wrong, and having private donors instead of states footing the bill.
She favors seating the delegates already chosen.
There's a way to solve this without totally redoing this and causing more chaos.
So in other words, this is something that it's a political football.
When it hurts the left, the left complains.
When it hurts the right, the right complains.
And we don't quite know.
It does seem logically to increase the chances of fraud and increase the chances of cheating.
And there have been examples of cheating.
And here in California, we have this thing where Democrats are allowed to go out and gather votes and then bring them to the, you know, bring them to the ballot boxes themselves.
So that we know is going to cause cheating.
You know, and they fact-check this.
This is the one they, so it's just dumb.
It's just dumb and is typical.
It is typical of, first of all, what's going on now in the country with people acting stupidly.
People are acting stupidly all over on both sides because I think Trump was acting stupidly and going after Scarborough.
Twitter was acting stupidly.
But it also just goes to the fact that the social media and the media are biased toward this one side.
And they think they cited CNN in the Washington Post in fact-checking him.
So here's Jack came out when, you know, we noticed, we noted yesterday that Yoel Roth, who is the head of Twitter's site integrity, has called Trump and his team Nazis.
He has called, you know, fly over country, as he called it.
He said they voted for a fascist.
He's the guy who's making these decisions.
So people went after him.
And Jack, you know, the head of Twitter, what's Jack's last name?
I just went out of my head, but remind me when you get a chance.
But he just calls himself at Jack.
He just calls him, Jack Dorsey.
That's right.
Thank you.
He calls himself at Jack on the site.
He tweets out, fact check.
There is someone ultimately accountable to our actions as a company, and that's me.
Please leave our employees out of this.
Well, as if, Jack.
I mean, come on.
Your head of site integrity is calling Trump a Nazi, and then you fact-check something on Trump, the president of the United States.
You fact-check him on something that isn't even a fact.
It's just an opinion.
It's absurd.
It was a tremendous tactical error.
And again, I attribute it to the fact that everybody's acting a little nuts.
Then Mark Zuckerberg comes out from Facebook and he says, no, this is the wrong way to go.
We have a different policy, I think, than Twitter on this.
I just believe strongly that Facebook shouldn't be the arbiter of truth of everything that people say online.
I think in general, private companies probably shouldn't be, or especially these platform companies shouldn't be in the position of doing that.
So everybody goes after Mark on the left.
But the thing about it is, of course, they say, no, he's got to arbitrate truth.
What's the matter?
He's got to arbitrate truth.
But they don't mean that, do they?
I mean, you know, this is another thing that was pointed out in the Wall Street Journal.
Alexandria Ecazio-Cortez, occasional cortex, as we call her, went on with a tweet that said cleaning up Pentagon accounting errors could pay for two-thirds of universal health care.
No fact-check for that.
Twitter didn't verify when leaders, the leaders of Iran, when they started posting their terrorist stuff, they didn't fact-check Bernie Sanders when he said Medicare for all will cost substantially less than the status quo.
I mean, all those things could be fact-checked in the same way, but they don't do it.
And people do not mean the left does not mean that they want more fact-checking.
They mean they want the right silenced, and they cannot.
It is just, it's an amazing thing.
They cannot get it through their head.
They cannot get it through their head that their point of view is just a point of view.
I mean, I know my point of view is a point of view.
I defend it.
I think it's the best point of view.
I truly do.
But I don't think other people should be silenced because they disagree with me.
I mean, it would be, let's face it, be a better world, but I don't want people silenced because they disagree with me because I want my free speech.
And you can't have free speech for me and free speech and not free speech for thee.
We're going to talk to Jenna about this because I think the legal implications are very, very complicated.
And she's the one to untie them for us.
But I just think that this is Twitter made a really serious tactical error.
And now we have to work this out.
And I think it's going to be, could get kind of ugly.
All right.
I will be, as I know you all want to know, I will be on all access live tonight.
Those of you who have not subscribed to all access will just be out in the cold.
You'll just be standing there wearing what, why, why, why didn't I not subscribe?
When you could be talking to me, I love talking to you.
I really do.
And I love getting your questions and hearing what you're thinking about.
It means a lot to me to hear it.
And I answer as well as I can.
And of course, as well as I can is as well as anybody can, because my answers are always 100% correct and will change your life.
So it's good.
It's good.
So you want to head over to dailywire.com/slash subscribe and join all access.
But, but, first of all, you'll also get the two leftist tears tumblers for that.
But you want to do it with the name Clavin.
You get 15% off with coupon code Clavin, and you have the deep restorative knowledge that you did not let Knowles get more subscriptions than me.
If Knowles gets more subscriptions than me, obviously a tremendous pit opens up in the center of the earth.
Demons come flying out, and the end of the world ensues.
We all know this.
We all know it's happening.
Don't be that guy who gives Knowles more subscription than me.
Plus, if you subscribe under Knowles' name, it costs 75% more.
Whereas if you subscribe under Clavin, it's 15% less.
All right.
We got Jenna Ellis coming right up.
All right.
Do I have to introduce Jenna Ellis?
I mean, at this point, everybody on earth knows she is the secret president of the United States.
She is also the senior legal advisor to the Trump campaign.
That's her cover, her cover of senior legal advisor to the Trump campaign.
That's how she governs from behind the scenes.
She's the author of the legal basis for a moral constitution and one of our favorite guests because she always straightens us out on things.
How are you doing, Jenna?
It's great to see you.
Great to see you too, Drew.
And so, you know, at least I'm not in a basement like Biden, you know, trying to run a shadow government.
So I'm at least doing better than he is.
My favorite, my two favorite things are one when he comes out with not just the gigantic mask that covers the whole bottom half of his face, but the sunglasses too.
So he's just complete.
We don't even know it's him anymore.
And I also love the fact that he made that his Twitter avatar because I know that your avatar can spread the disease to other avatars.
Exactly.
He and Hillary Clinton.
Yeah, they're so woke these days.
So I don't think when I went on the air, Trump had not yet issued his executive order about Twitter.
Do you have any guess about what he could possibly say to deal with the fact that it is an unfair site?
It's not a balanced site.
But do you have any idea what he could possibly say that would be legal?
Well, there are a number of things that he could.
And of course, I'm not going to get ahead of the White House in terms of what the content is, but we should definitely talk after the executive order because like most things that the president does, he's going to come out and he's going to talk about what action he's taking.
And of course, the left is immediately going to say, oh my gosh, he's overstepping his bounds, right?
Because they're going to take issue with one or two keywords or something like that.
And they're going to filter that through their own political bias.
And so I would just encourage everyone to actually read the content of what he's doing and know that this is the president that has stayed fully within the margins of the U.S. Constitution and within the executive action that he can take.
So, but broadly speaking, I think that everyone understands that Twitter and social media giants are not actually just neutral public forums that they're saying, you know, come one, come all.
We are not a publisher.
We're just a platform.
We aren't responsible for the content because we just want everyone to be able to freely express their ideas.
That's not what they're actually doing.
And they have been shielded by Section 230 liability that basically says that as a platform under the Communications Decency Act, they are not responsible and can't be held liable for certain content because they are just a platform.
But now we're seeing Twitter actually actively engage and step in and say, we want to curate content and we want to put this ridiculous flag under the auspices of fact checking on the president of the United States to try to manipulate the American public and viewers into believing that somehow that content needed to be fact checked.
And they put that flag on really to just generate content and users to look at a different bias and a reaction to election laws.
And that is really interesting, Drew, that Twitter chose that particular tweet thread to put their fact check flag on when there was absolutely no reason except a bias toward changing election laws heading into 2020.
If that's not election manipulation, I don't know what is.
It really was strange.
It was a true tremendous tactical error.
I mean, Trump is always blessed in his opponents because they make such stupid mistakes, but this was certainly one of them.
So I'm trying to process this radical idea you have that we should first gather information before we have an opinion.
I don't even know.
I'm not even sure I can translate that into English.
But there are a couple of questions that spring up anyway, which is one you're talking about, the Section 230, which is really important, but it is part of the law, right?
An executive action can't just cancel that out.
Cancel Culture Context00:11:18
Right.
And so that's why Representative Matt Gates talked yesterday about drafting a bill to remove some of that liability protection.
And so, you know, so the president, of course, can encourage Congress through executive order.
And so, you know, let's remember an executive order is simply a formalized executive action.
And so if President Trump came out and gave a speech or if he signed an executive order in that text, it's still all executive action.
And so in terms of that particular enforcement, that's something that Congress definitely needs to look at.
And I'm happy that Representative Gates and others are looking at that.
But then also antitrust laws and consumer protection.
I mean, these are things that if you and I go onto Twitter and we sign a user agreement under the terms of service of Twitter, there's no notice whatsoever in Twitter that says, and by the way, if you're a conservative, we reserve the right as a publishing platform to curate your content, to put flags, to challenge your views, to censor you, to block you, to remove your account, because we aren't viewpoint neutral.
And so by enforcing through potentially the Department of Justice or other action antitrust laws, consumer protection laws that already exist, then these platforms are going to have to decide, do they want to remain content neutral?
Do they want to act like a traditional public forum and have the First Amendment apply in ways that are designed to promote the free marketplace of ideas?
Or are they going to take the responsibility of publishers and be liable and open to lawsuits and open to that content?
But then they would have the right to remove anything they wanted to for any reason, just like the Daily Wire can as a publisher.
But they would have to then accept that liability.
What's happening and what's so unfair and what so many conservatives are pushing back against is that right now social media giants are having their cake and they're eating it too because they are curating content.
They aren't content neutral.
This isn't a traditional public forum, but yet they're still shielded from liability because they're saying, hey, we're just a platform.
We're not a publisher.
They can't have it both ways.
So if you become a public forum, basically, you know, this is one of the things I keep hearing conservatives say that the First Amendment essentially doesn't apply to private businesses.
And that seems to me to be a false legalism because it just seems to me logical if this is the way we communicate now.
I mean, if somebody came on my phone call and said, oh, by the way, what your grandma is telling you isn't true, I would consider that a violation of my rights.
And it seems to me there's something very similar to this.
It does seem to me that these guys are in a First Amendment arena.
Am I wrong about that?
Well, so in the example that you just gave, if somebody came on your phone and said something that was false, then if that was defamation and it was communicated to a third party, then the person that just a sec.
What I was saying was if they interrupted my phone call to fact check my grandmother on the phone, it would be an intrusion.
She should be able to say whatever she wants.
Right.
And so, yeah, so in that context, and sorry, I misunderstood your hypothetical.
If somebody, if let's say that, you know, your carrier came onto your phone and they suddenly interfered and Verizon or AT ⁇ T put a flag on a text message thread that you and I are sharing and are like, wait a second, fact check Jenna, then they're now inserting themselves into the dialogue and they're actually acting more as a curator of that content.
But of course, our communications platforms on our cell phones, they're just a public utility and that's how the law recognizes them.
And so we have freedom of speech and we have privacy in the content of our communications on our cell phones because the law recognizes that we need that vehicle in order to communicate in the 21st century.
And so I think it would be a lot more wise.
And of course, you know, I'm not a lawyer for Twitter and Jack's tweets, it seems like he needs to get some better lawyers on Twitter to maybe curate his own content there.
But if I'm looking at this as a social media giant, is their bias and their insertion of themselves into the conversation more important than shielding themselves from liability and saying, you know what, in the 21st century, we recognize that these platforms are so important to the free marketplace of ideas.
We don't want to be arbiters of truth.
I think that Facebook's perspective on that front was actually a lot better than what Twitter seems to be doing.
Yeah.
Yeah, me too.
You know, recently something happened to you that really, it kind of got my goat, but I just want to ask you about it.
CNN, was it CNN that came after you?
Someone came after you using some comments that you made that expressed traditional Christian beliefs about homosexuality, basically portraying you as they always do as a hater and basically trying to get you canceled, trying to get you thrown off all the various interview platforms where you appear.
How worried are you about that?
Well, thankfully not at all.
I mean, you know, this is something where the left is all about cancel culture and they like to, you know, just take content out of context and they try to just do this whole scorched earth kind of thing.
And I mean, they've done it to Kaylee McEniny, who's now the new press secretary, you know, going after her for various things.
They've tried to do it for any person who is around President Trump or works for him.
They try to go back and dig up past comments and then say, hey, defend yourself, defend yourself.
Well, you know, that's not actually my obligation.
I don't have to answer to CNN.
I don't work for them.
And so, you know, this type of thing, it would be great if people would actually recognize and go learn for themselves what the whole breadth of the Christian worldview is.
I'm unapologetically a Christian, but I also don't allow CNN to speak for me as far as what their view of what my Christianity is and their view of what I've said.
So they took a lot of those statements and then that conclusion out of context completely.
But thankfully, you know, the president and the campaign love the work that I'm doing.
They understand that this is the same thing that CNN has been trying to do to the president himself for three and a half years is this whole notion of cancel culture.
And so I think that it's kind of an old hat.
They're crying wolf at this point to say, oh, no, something that, you know, we're taking out of context from four years ago, we're now going to suddenly make this a big deal.
So I'm thankful that my relationships are still intact and that people look at this, they see it for what it is.
Yeah, it is amazing.
And I'm glad that you negotiated your way through it.
It is amazing to see news agencies trying to silence people giving opinions instead of basically reporting on the opinions that are out there.
Jenna, it's always great to see you.
That was really helpful and I appreciate it.
And, you know, again, continue, you're doing a great job running the country.
And we know that Trump is just a front for you, but you're doing great.
Thanks, Drew.
And you know what?
If CNN ever wants to have me on, I tweeted Jay Tapper and said, if you really want to talk about the Christian worldview, not just cancel culture, have me on.
And guess what?
Crickets from there end.
So, you know, I'm just saying, because I know that you get all of your conservative information from Andrew Clavin.
So I know you're watching this.
And if you want to have me on, open invitation still.
Thanks, Vera.
Thanks a lot, Jenna.
All right.
A final, a final reflection.
You know, Steven Pinker had this comment.
I don't know if this was just a tweet.
You know, I read his, I've read a bunch of his books, actually.
I've read, I don't know, three or four of his books.
And his latest one is called Enlightenment Now.
And it makes the argument, which I actually don't think is a very good argument, that things are always getting better and just getting better and better.
And what we need to do is we need to stick with the experts, stick with the science, stick with breaking away from religion and all this stuff that is dragging us down into the Middle Ages and all this.
And obviously, I don't agree with that.
And there were lots of reasons.
I wrote a piece for City Journal called Can We Believe, where you can see some of my comments about it.
But I take him as a man of goodwill.
I do believe things are better than they've ever been.
I love science and I love all the technology that we have and all the wonderful things that it's accomplished.
And I don't think that that is out of keeping with the work of God.
In fact, I think it was predicted by God and I think it was partially formed by the fact that we were Christians and had a mindset that basically thought that God worked in a way that our rationality could understand.
I mean, I think that that was part of where the scientific mindset came from.
So he now posts, they're talking about the idea that those of us who believe the economy should reopen and that we should take some risks with our health in order to get back into work, stop the suicide, stop the despair, stop the destruction of dreams, stop the unemployment, which reached 40 million today, that we believe that, yes, that is worth some risks to our health.
That somehow the Washington Post wrote this piece, had this op-ed saying, this was because we're evangelicals and we don't take life seriously because we believe in an afterlife.
And Steven Pinker wrote, belief in an afterlife is a malignant delusion since it devalues actual lives and discourages action that would make them longer, safer, and happier.
Exhibit A, what's really behind Republicans wanting a swift reopening, evangelicals.
I mean, that is an amazingly, amazingly ignorant thing to say.
I mean, a lot of these soldiers, nurses, doctors who risk their lives so that others might live.
A lot of them are, in fact, Christians who believe in an afterlife and who are putting something above themselves.
Some of them may be atheists who just believe in the common good and are putting that above themselves, but they believe in something above just themselves and just their own lives.
And I don't think it's wrong when they risk their lives to save our lives.
I don't think it's wrong for us to risk our lives to live our lives so that their work won't be in vain.
And, you know, the belief in an afterlife for me is just an actual logical belief.
It just seems to me that that is the logical conclusion of the world as I understand it.
But it doesn't make me not love my life.
In fact, it makes my life better.
It makes my life more beautiful and more meaningful to me.
It doesn't take away the tragedy of death.
It doesn't take away the pain of death or my not wanting to die.
It doesn't take away any of that.
It just assures me that there is a moral logic beyond the logic that we see in which the evil often triumph and injustice reigns.
And I think that there is a logic to the world and to nature that goes beyond that.
You know, and it's just, it's just ignorant.
And the thing about Pinker is he knows a lot about a lot of stuff, but he's ignorant about theology.
I mean, he spent one of his books, he spent like hundreds of pages debunking the idea that there is a ghost in the machine, that the soul is like this little ghost in the machine, which is not what people believe.
I mean, that was one theory back in the 17th century that is not really the way people look at their souls.
So anyway, I just think this kind of, you know, I talk to, I've talked to people about this before.
Why do scientists have to get off topic, off the thing they know, and talk about the thing that they don't know at all?
And it's just a mistake.
It is a misuse of expertise.
We have seen during this crisis that expertise is not always as expert as it thinks it is, but it's certainly not expert at all about the things it doesn't know.
All right, I got to stop there.
The Clavenless Weekend00:01:46
For those of you who are all Access members, come and see us at 5 o'clock California time, 8 o'clock Eastern time.
For those of you who are not all Access members, it's over.
This is it.
The Clavenless weekend is upon you.
There'll be great wailing.
There'll be gnashing of teeth.
It will not lead to anything good.
But those few of you who survive can gather here on Monday.
I'm Andrew Clavin.
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.
Technical producer, Austin Stevens.
And our supervising producer is Mathis Glover.
Assistant Director, Pavel Wydowski.
Edited by Adam Sayabits.
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.
President Trump promises to rein in the power of big tech after Twitter makes unprecedented moves to interfere in the presidential election.
Then, speaking of power grabs, our de facto president Dr. Fauci seems to be appointing himself Pope as well by telling churches to stop giving out Holy Communion.
Jimmy Fallon apologizes for a joke he told 20 years ago.
Planned Parenthood gets caught lying about their baby body part business under oath.