The Ben Shapiro Show - Impeach For What? | Ep. 871

00:00:00.000 Shana Tova, the theory of impeachment keeps changing, Democrats keep pushing full steam ahead, and President Trump continues to lash out in all directions.

00:00:07.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.

00:00:07.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.

00:00:09.000 So when last we left, our impeachment story, last Friday, I was preparing for Rosh Hashanah.

00:00:19.000 I figured not much would happen over the weekend.

00:00:21.000 And it turns out not much did happen over the weekend, except that the theory of impeachment keeps changing.

00:00:26.000 So back on Thursday and Friday, the theory of impeachment seemed to still be sort of that President Trump had engaged in a quid pro quo with the Ukrainian government in which he basically threatened to withhold aid, American aid, military aid to Ukraine in exchange for the Ukrainian government checking out his chief domestic political opponent, Joe Biden.

00:00:44.000 Well, as it turns out, over the past couple of days, it appears, and I'm just catching up on the news, it appears that the theory of impeachment is now changing.

00:00:52.000 It is malleable that Democrats weren't able to come up with the quid pro quo they were seeking on the specific transcript of this phone call that Trump had with Ukraine.

00:01:00.000 And so now they are attempting to construct Another impeachment based crime and that would be obstruction of justice They are trying to come up with some rationale why they can blame the Trump administration for blocking the investigation now doesn't matter that the Trump administration Turned over the transcript doesn't matter.

00:01:14.000 They turned over the whistleblower report doesn't matter that the Witnesses who have been requested by the house thus far have basically been scheduled so far as I can tell including the former ambassador to Ukraine as well as other officials American officials from the State Department who are active in Ukraine.

00:01:30.000 Still, the Democrats are pushing forward with the idea that if we can't get them for the underlying crime, we'll get President Trump for obstruction.

00:01:36.000 That seems to be one angle.

00:01:38.000 And then there's the generalized democratic angle, and you can see this happening in the press, which is that impeachment isn't truly about what Trump did here.

00:01:45.000 Impeachment isn't truly about any specific criminal allegation. 0.96

00:01:49.000 Impeachment is about Trump being a poopoo head. 0.98

00:01:52.000 Really, that's the case. 0.81

00:01:54.000 And as we'll see today, the Democrats keep broadening out the case.

00:01:57.000 So we are now seeing them begin to speak with more and more wild language about what a bad guy Trump is.

00:02:04.000 Well, Trump may be a bad guy according to Democrats.

00:02:08.000 That is not an impeachable offense.

00:02:09.000 Being somebody that people don't like, being somebody who acts in ways you don't like, that's not impeachable.

00:02:14.000 I didn't like Barack Obama.

00:02:15.000 That dude was not impeached.

00:02:17.000 Hey, Bill Clinton was impeached, but that was for a specific crime.

00:02:20.000 That was not because people didn't like his tax policy in 1994.

00:02:24.000 We had an election to fix his tax policy in 1994.

00:02:26.000 So as we will see, as the impeachment proceeding moves forward, it seems less like Democrats are honing in on any one theory of impeachment, And then getting to the heart of it, it seems instead that like an octopus, the tentacles are just reaching out in every direction and hopefully they can snag something that will be sufficient to move the public so that the public isn't anti-impeachment and it doesn't blow back on Democrats.

00:02:48.000 Okay, so along those lines today.

00:02:51.000 The media are making a very big deal out of the fact that Mike Pompeo, the Secretary of State, has now confirmed that he listened to President Trump's call with the Ukrainian president, which isn't a big surprise.

00:03:00.000 There are a lot of people who are listening to that phone call.

00:03:03.000 The Secretary of State very often frequently listens to phone calls that the president has with foreign leaders, but this was the first time that Pompeo had openly acknowledged that that is something that happened.

00:03:13.000 Before, he had been asked about the whistleblower complaint.

00:03:15.000 He said, I never saw the whistleblower complaint, so I have no specific answers about the whistleblower complaint.

00:03:20.000 But he never said that he was on the call itself.

00:03:23.000 So Democrats, of course, are jumping to, well, this means that it was a cover-up.

00:03:26.000 This means that it was a cover-up.

00:03:28.000 Except that it's not a cover-up since he just said it.

00:03:32.000 The Democrats keep doing this.

00:03:33.000 They did it with Mueller.

00:03:34.000 They did it with the whistleblower.

00:03:36.000 They did it with the transcript of the phone call.

00:03:38.000 And now they're doing it with Pompeo.

00:03:40.000 They keep claiming that there is a cover-up right about the point when the Trump administration blows the whole thing into public view.

00:03:48.000 Right, so here's Pompeo explaining.

00:03:49.000 Yes, I was on the phone call with Ukraine.

00:03:52.000 I was on the phone call.

00:03:53.000 The phone call was in the context of now I guess I've been Secretary of State for coming on a year and a half.

00:04:00.000 I know precisely what the American policy is with respect to Ukraine.

00:04:05.000 It's been remarkably consistent, and we will continue to try to drive those set of outcomes.

00:04:12.000 It's what our team, including Ambassador Volcker, were focused on was taking down The threat that Russia poses there in Ukraine. 0.62

00:04:22.000 OK, so he was immediately asked, of course, whether Trump did anything inappropriate on the call.

00:04:27.000 And he demurred to answer that question.

00:04:29.000 He just declined to answer the question.

00:04:30.000 Why?

00:04:30.000 Well, because the fact is that the president could have done things that are inappropriate but not impeachable.

00:04:35.000 But the fact is that Pompeo also works for Trump.

00:04:37.000 Trump is particularly thin skinned when it comes to this sort of stuff.

00:04:40.000 He doesn't like when his own officials are out there saying that he does stuff that they don't approve of.

00:04:44.000 This is what happened to John Bolton, and Mike Pompeo isn't about to fall into that trap.

00:04:49.000 Okay, so this follows hard on the Democrats claiming over the past 48 hours that Pompeo is somehow holding up their access to State Department officials.

00:04:59.000 So, the New York Times reported yesterday, Now, notice, again, that the language here used by the New York Times, and it's been used consistently by the media now, is that Trump was pressuring Ukraine as opposed to requesting Ukraine, which is a more accurate description of that phone call.

00:05:09.000 to pressure Ukraine for political advantage.

00:05:11.000 Now, notice again that the language here used by the New York Times, and it's been used consistently by the media now, is that Trump was pressuring Ukraine as opposed to requesting Ukraine, which is a more accurate description of that phone call.

00:05:23.000 Pressuring Ukraine would presume, I mean, that assumes the question that is in doubt. 0.77

00:05:28.000 The question in doubt is whether there was a quid pro quo, right?

00:05:32.000 Not whether Trump asked for something, but whether there was a quid pro quo.

00:05:35.000 When you use the word pressured, the assumption is that there is something credible on the other end of that pressure, namely a threat.

00:05:41.000 So you notice that the word pressure, whenever the media used the word pressure and not the word requested or asked, then that is the media infusing their own bias into a story.

00:05:50.000 In any case, the New York Times says, In the first skirmish in what promises to be an epic impeachment struggle between the executive and legislative branches, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo lashed out at three congressional committees that are seeking to depose diplomats involved in American policy toward Ukraine.

00:06:05.000 Mr. Pompeo called their demands for confidential interviews an act of intimidation.

00:06:10.000 Now, the reason that he says that is because he is saying you're not giving them time to get lawyers and deal with State Department lawyers.

00:06:15.000 Which, by the way, if that sounds like somebody covering up or somebody covering their butt, let me assure you, I know people who were questioned by the Mueller report.

00:06:24.000 Because I know a lot of folks inside the administration.

00:06:26.000 I know people who were questioned by the Mueller report.

00:06:27.000 It cost them tens of thousands of dollars with lawyers in order to be questioned. 0.98

00:06:31.000 Because anybody who goes and is questioned by a government committee under oath without a lawyer present at their side to advise them on what they should and should not say is a fool. 0.99

00:06:40.000 You would be a fool too, and that has nothing to do with truth-telling or not truth-telling. 0.99

00:06:44.000 It's like going to deal with the IRS without any lawyer on the line. 1.00

00:06:47.000 Like, doing that is a fool's errand.

00:06:50.000 They're literally putting you there so that they can then charge you with some form of perjury or misleading statement, and then they can use that to pressure you to say things you don't want to say.

00:06:59.000 Pompeo is saying, okay, we need time to get all these people the lawyers that they want.

00:07:03.000 And the Democrats, naturally, because they are attempting to gin up some sort of belief that there is a cover-up going on, they are saying that Pompeo is engaged in the cover-up.

00:07:11.000 And again, The two biggest officials who are being questioned so far have already set dates on which they are to be questioned.

00:07:18.000 The House postponed the first of the depositions, which had been scheduled for Wednesday, with the former U.S.

00:07:22.000 ambassador to Ukraine, but not before the impeachment inquiry's leaders upbraided Pompeo for questioning their work and for asserting that their bid to swiftly schedule depositions did not allow enough time for a proper response.

00:07:33.000 The latest standoff unfolded as lawmakers were unexpectedly put on notice Tuesday afternoon that they could soon be provided with new evidence related to the State Department and Ukraine, a twist that could add crucial information to their investigation and potentially complicate Mr. Trump's efforts to block it.

00:07:46.000 We'll get to what exactly that crucial piece of information is and why Democrats in the house are extraordinarily excited about a visit from a member of the State Department.

00:07:55.000 We'll get to that in just one second.

00:07:56.000 First, let's talk about going to the post office.

00:07:58.000 The fact is, the post office is a pretty great place, but if you really want to schlep all your packages in the back of your car and then go down to the post office and wait in line, they offer a lot of great services, but you'd prefer to save time and money, no?

00:08:09.000 Well, this is why you should be using stamps.com.

00:08:12.000 Stamps.com brings all the amazing services of the U.S.

00:08:15.000 Postal Office directly to your computer.

00:08:17.000 Whether you're a small office sending invoices, or an online seller shipping out products, even a warehouse sending thousands of packages a day, Stamps.com can handle it all with ease.

00:08:24.000 Simply use your computer to print official U.S.

00:08:26.000 postage 24-7.

00:08:28.000 Any letter.

00:08:29.000 Any package.

00:08:30.000 Any class of mail.

00:08:30.000 Anywhere you want to send it.

00:08:31.000 Once your mail is ready, just hand it to your mail carrier or drop it in a mailbox.

00:08:34.000 It is indeed that simple.

00:08:36.000 Stamps.com, it's a no-brainer.

00:08:37.000 Saves you time, saves you money.

00:08:38.000 It's no wonder over 700,000 small businesses already use Stamps.com.

00:08:43.000 Last time I went to the post office, I got a parking ticket because there's only one thing that the authorities in Los Angeles are good at.

00:08:49.000 And no, it is not cleaning up the streets.

00:08:50.000 It is giving parking tickets.

00:08:51.000 So, I vowed from then on, I will only use Stamps.com.

00:08:54.000 So far, I have kept to my vow and it has saved me time and money.

00:08:57.000 Right now, my listeners get a special offer.

00:08:58.000 It includes a four-week trial, plus free postage and a digital scale.

00:09:01.000 No long-term commitment.

00:09:03.000 Just go to stamps.com, click on the microphone at the top of the homepage, type in Shapiro.

00:09:06.000 That is stamps.com, enter Shapiro.

00:09:09.000 Okay, so why are the House Democrats so excited?

00:09:11.000 Because the State Department's independent watchdog wrote to several House and Senate committees to request a last-minute meeting on Wednesday to discuss and provide staff with copies of documents, according to an invitation reviewed by the New York Times.

00:09:23.000 So they're very excited.

00:09:24.000 Ooh, what are the documents going to be?

00:09:25.000 Well, we don't know yet.

00:09:27.000 Maybe when we know, then we can determine whether in fact there was either a quid pro quo or a cover-up, but at this point we do not have evidence of either.

00:09:34.000 It said the documents had been given to the Inspector General Stephen Linick by the State Department's Acting Legal Advisor, but did not provide additional information or indicate whether Mr. Pompeo was aware of the action.

00:09:44.000 Mr. Linick's office has not responded to calls or emails seeking comment for two days.

00:09:48.000 Well, maybe the whole purpose of the speed is because they know that the executive branch is not going to want to comply that quickly because it's actually kind of complicated to comply with subpoenas from the executive branch.

00:09:57.000 They are determined to quickly nail down facts at the heart of the whistleblower complaint.

00:10:01.000 Well, maybe the whole purpose of the speed is because they know that the executive branch is not going to want to comply that quickly because it's actually kind of complicated to comply with subpoenas from the executive branch.

00:10:12.000 You have to determine, for example, what is classified and what is not classified, what the president is going to declare executive privilege over and what he is not.

00:10:19.000 You have to make sure that everybody gets lawyers.

00:10:21.000 So, by artificially boosting the timeline, perhaps the goal here is for Democrats to actually create exactly the sort of conflict they are pretending they wish to avoid.

00:10:30.000 The White House is just as determined to thwart or at least slow the investigation.

00:10:34.000 I do love the New York Times language there.

00:10:36.000 They're just as determined to thwart or at least slow the investigation.

00:10:39.000 Well, which is it?

00:10:40.000 Thwart or slow?

00:10:42.000 Why don't you just say that they are determined to slow?

00:10:44.000 That's obvious, but thwart is a different thing.

00:10:46.000 Following back on the approach it has used to stonewall efforts by Congress to delve into episodes detailed by Robert Mueller, the special counsel who investigated Russia's interference in the 2016 election.

00:10:56.000 Okay, so we have a few pieces of competing news.

00:10:59.000 You have the Pompeo acknowledgement that he was in fact on the phone call, which doesn't actually mean anything unless there was something wrong with the phone call itself.

00:11:08.000 You have the House Democrats who are going to try and subpoena members of Pompeo's State Department.

00:11:14.000 And Pompeo saying, hold up a second guys, you're moving too fast here.

00:11:17.000 And the Democrats then claiming cover up.

00:11:19.000 And you have the State Department's Inspector General requesting an urgent briefing with senior congressional staff members after Pompeo pushed back on House Democratic demands to turn over documents.

00:11:30.000 So, we are still wondering exactly what exactly, the only real piece of news there, the only real piece of news, is not the hubbub between Pompeo and the House Democrats, and it's not really that Pompeo was on the call, because the call would be just as criminal or non-criminal, depending on whether Pompeo was there.

00:11:46.000 Like, Pompeo's presence doesn't change the tenor of the phone call, unless the case is somehow that Pompeo was the hatchet man for the quid pro quo, but even that doesn't answer the question as to whether there was, in fact, a quid pro quo.

00:11:59.000 The real piece of news here is that there may be new information that emerges thanks to the State Department Inspector General's request.

00:12:06.000 One congressional aide described the State's Inspector General's request as highly unusual and cryptically worded.

00:12:13.000 The Inspector General again said the reason for the briefing was that they had obtained documents from an acting legal advisor in the State Department.

00:12:20.000 But as I say, you know, all this talk about the Trump administration preventing members of the Trump administration from testifying, not so much.

00:12:27.000 The former U.S.

00:12:28.000 Special Envoy to Ukraine Kurt Volker is set to appear on Thursday, and Kurt Volker is the one who allegedly was texting with Rudy Giuliani.

00:12:34.000 So we're going to find out some more information there.

00:12:36.000 Was he texting with Giuliani because the Trump administration, in efforts to procure the quid pro quo, had deputized Giuliani from the State Department in order to go over there and dig up dirt with the Ukrainian government?

00:12:48.000 Or was Kurt Volker basically just a guy in Ukraine who knew, who was working for the government, knew Rudy Giuliani.

00:12:54.000 Giuliani called him up and said, I'd like to talk to Axe.

00:12:56.000 And he said, okay, here's his phone number.

00:12:57.000 We're about to find that out.

00:12:59.000 Meanwhile, Tuesday, the testimony of former U.S.

00:13:02.000 Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, which had been scheduled for Wednesday, is now going to occur next Friday.

00:13:08.000 So, again, they keep saying this is a cover-up.

00:13:10.000 She's gonna wait like a week and a half. 1.00

00:13:11.000 That's not a cover-up.

00:13:13.000 Three committees, the House Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, and Oversight panels have scheduled the depositions as part of their probe into whether the president solicited help from a foreign government to dig up dirt on his political opponent.

00:13:24.000 And again, that remains the central issue, but we are not seeing any additional information as of yet that suggests that the quid pro quo either took place or that was even threatened.

00:13:34.000 Remember, last week we uncovered three separate stories That suggested that the Ukrainian government didn't even know that military aid was on the line.

00:13:42.000 And even the aspects of the transcript that look like they are dealing with military aid.

00:13:46.000 Where you have Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, talking about buying Javelin missiles.

00:13:51.000 I was informed by somebody in the defense arena, shall we say, that even that has nothing to do with the so-called quid pro quo with regard to military aid.

00:14:00.000 That had to do with Zelensky trying to butter Trump up by saying he wanted to buy Javelins.

00:14:03.000 Meaning that, actually, the entire call was just Zelensky trying to butter Trump up.

00:14:08.000 Because foreign leaders are constantly trying to butter the President up.

00:14:10.000 That doesn't mean that the President was actually threatening.

00:14:13.000 Meanwhile, the House is threatening to subpoena the White House for Ukraine records.

00:14:17.000 On Wednesday, the House threatened to subpoena the White House if it did not comply by Friday with requests for a broad range of documents relating to President Trump's efforts to pressure Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden and his son.

00:14:28.000 Again, there is the word pressure again.

00:14:30.000 Representative Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the chairman of the Oversight and Reform Committee, notified his committee of the impending subpoena on Wednesday.

00:14:36.000 He said the White House had thus far ignored Congress's voluntary request.

00:14:39.000 He said, I do not take this step lightly.

00:14:41.000 Over the past several weeks, the committee's tried several times to attain voluntary compliance with our request for documents.

00:14:47.000 Wait up, what is this past several weeks business?

00:14:50.000 I mean, what exactly is that supposed to mean?

00:14:55.000 This whole thing happened five seconds ago.

00:14:57.000 I mean, it's only been going for two moments so far as we can tell.

00:15:05.000 So, again, this seems like thus far overblown Democrats trying to accelerate the timeline specifically so that the White House will buck the timeline.

00:15:14.000 And Cummings threatening a subpoena is obviously an escalation along these lines.

00:15:19.000 The subpoena threat comes as House Democratic leaders are preparing to lay out steps in their rapidly unfolding impeachment inquiry.

00:15:25.000 And we will find out what the State Department Inspector General is about to say as of today.

00:15:31.000 In just a second, we're gonna get to President Trump's response to all this.

00:15:34.000 Plus, Bernie Sanders hospitalized.

00:15:36.000 A heart stent has been inserted.

00:15:38.000 He had a heart problem.

00:15:40.000 Heart surgery, all of his campaign events have been canceled.

00:15:44.000 Obviously, thoughts and prayers to Bernie Sanders.

00:15:46.000 You may disagree with him.

00:15:47.000 You may think that he's a bad guy.

00:15:49.000 I think that his political beliefs are awful, but you don't want to see anybody who is not a terrorist, basically, or a murderer, in this position.

00:15:59.000 And so, thoughts to his family, even if I wildly disagree with all of Bernie Sanders's politics.

00:16:05.000 Apparently he's conversing, and in good spirits, he'll be resting up over the next few days, according to senior advisor Jeff Weaver.

00:16:11.000 We are canceling his events and appearances until further notice.

00:16:14.000 Obviously, on a political level, that spells doom for Bernie Sanders' campaign, and it probably means that Elizabeth Warren is the Democratic nominee, which was the direction that this was moving anyway.

00:16:22.000 So that is indeed a piece of enormous news.

00:16:25.000 We'll get to more on Bernie Sanders and more on President Trump and the impeachment effort in just one second.

00:16:30.000 Let's talk about hiring.

00:16:32.000 So hiring can be a slow, difficult process.

00:16:34.000 Cafe Altura COO Dylan Miskiewicz needed to hire a director of coffee.

00:16:38.000 For his organic coffee company, he was having some trouble finding qualified applicants.

00:16:41.000 So he switched to ZipRecruiter.

00:16:43.000 ZipRecruiter doesn't depend on candidates finding you.

00:16:45.000 It finds them for you.

00:16:46.000 Its technology identifies people with the right experience and then invites them to apply to your job.

00:16:51.000 So you will get qualified candidates fast.

00:16:53.000 Dylan posted his job on ZipRecruiter, said he was impressed by how quickly he had great candidates apply.

00:16:57.000 He also used ZipRecruiter's candidate rating feature to filter his applicants so he could focus on the most relevant ones.

00:17:03.000 And that is how Dylan found his new director of coffee in just a few days.

00:17:06.000 With results like that, it is no wonder that four out of five employers who post on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate within the very first day.

00:17:13.000 And here at The Daily Wire, we have tons of employees, and we are constantly thinking about how to upgrade those employees.

00:17:18.000 Like, say that you had an employee named Donovan, and the guy just looked like Henry Cavill.

00:17:22.000 I mean, the guy was just a studly-looking dude.

00:17:24.000 And you thought to yourself, it's really intimidating to have this person around the office.

00:17:27.000 I'd like to replace this Donovan fellow with somebody who's not quite as good-looking without violating the appropriate laws.

00:17:32.000 Well, I would be going to look at ZipRecruiter.com.

00:17:35.000 See why ZipRecruiter is effective for businesses of all sizes.

00:17:38.000 Try ZipRecruiter for free at our web address, ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire.

00:17:42.000 That is ZipRecruiter.com slash D-A-I-L-Y-W-I-R-E ZipRecruiter.com slash DailyWire.

00:17:47.000 ZipRecruiter is indeed the smartest way to hire. 0.73

00:17:50.000 Okay, we'll get to more of that Bernie Sanders stuff in just a minute because at the moment it is breaking news, but President Trump, meanwhile, is blowing back against the whistleblower.

00:17:59.000 So, while the Democrats are pushing forward, President Trump is rage-tweeting.

00:18:02.000 So, over the last 72 hours, he's been rage-tweeting up a storm. 0.97

00:18:06.000 And this is where the Democratic case has shifted, and you're starting to see it shift from, maybe Trump did something criminal to Trump is a big poopoo head. 0.98

00:18:14.000 Really, because Trump started tweeting a lot of stuff, and then people were like, oh my god, I can't believe he tweets all this stuff.

00:18:20.000 If you still find Trump tweeting like a madman, somehow shocking, appalling, if it adds a new level of pressure to your day and stress to your day, if you believe that this is like, every time he tweets, it's a new level of low, may I suggest that you take a chill pill?

00:18:37.000 Because the fact is that this is what Trump's gonna do, it's what he's always done.

00:18:40.000 It's so funny, whenever I say this, people are like, well, if Obama tweeted this, you'd take it seriously.

00:18:44.000 Correct, because Barack Obama was a serious human being.

00:18:47.000 I don't know what you want from me!

00:18:49.000 I mean, Donald Trump is the President of the United States, which means that we should take him with a certain amount of seriousness when he does things.

00:18:55.000 But when he says things?

00:18:57.000 Like, we're gonna pretend that everything Donald Trump says is well-considered, thought-out policy, an official statement from the White House?

00:18:57.000 Really?

00:19:03.000 I remember there was a...

00:19:05.000 There was a big debate early on in Trump's administration over whether his tweets amounted to actual statements from the White House.

00:19:11.000 People were like, yes.

00:19:12.000 And so people started releasing these on White House stationary, right?

00:19:18.000 It's kind of a joke.

00:19:19.000 And it was obvious that this was not official statements from the White House.

00:19:21.000 It was obvious that Trump just got up in the morning and he was like sitting on the toilet watching Fox News and he was just tweeting.

00:19:27.000 And yet, whenever he does this, people are like, oh my god, it's so terrible, ugh.

00:19:30.000 Okay, if you really think that this... He was elected, in part, because of this?

00:19:35.000 There'll be a referendum on his tweeting habits in 14 months?

00:19:37.000 You can talk about it anyway.

00:19:39.000 Here's what Trump tweeted.

00:19:40.000 He tweeted, So if the so-called whistleblower has all secondhand information, and almost everything he has said about my perfect call with the Ukrainian president is wrong, much to the embarrassment of Pelosi and Schiff, why aren't we entitled to interview and learn everything about the whistleblower, and also the person who gave all the false information to him?

00:19:55.000 This is simply about a phone conversation that could not have been nicer, warmer, or better.

00:20:00.000 No pressure at all, as can confirmed by Ukrainian press.

00:20:01.000 It is just another Democrat hoax.

00:20:03.000 And so there's some things in this tweet that are true, some things in this tweet that are not true.

00:20:07.000 It is true that the Ukrainian president said he was not pressured.

00:20:09.000 It is also true that I am very skeptical that the whistleblower did not have outside legal help on that letter that he wrote.

00:20:16.000 I'm also skeptical the whistleblower is not actually working with Democrats behind the scenes, considering that Adam Schiff was tweeting out the exact points of the whistleblower report two weeks before he was supposed to know about it.

00:20:26.000 With that said, the whistleblower was not wrong about the cause.

00:20:28.000 I mean, the details of the call, there was one detail of the call that was wrong.

00:20:31.000 The vast majority of the details were correct.

00:20:33.000 Anyway, Trump says, As I learn more and more each day, I am coming to the conclusion that what is taking place is not an impeachment.

00:20:39.000 It is a coup intended to take away the power of the people, their vote, their freedoms, their Second Amendment, religion, military, border wall, and their God, given rights as a citizen of the United States of America.

00:20:51.000 Okay, and this is obviously a wild overstatement.

00:20:53.000 Impeachment is a political process.

00:20:54.000 Even if it moves forward in the House, it's probably going nowhere in the Senate.

00:20:58.000 In order for a coup to take place, it has to happen outside the legal system.

00:21:01.000 There's no such thing as a legal coup.

00:21:03.000 Okay, legal coups are not things.

00:21:06.000 They're things that can be done to oust an illegal dictator. 0.98

00:21:10.000 But working within the system to oust a sitting president within the impeachment system is not, in fact, a coup, and for President Trump to call it that is dumb. 0.98

00:21:19.000 Okay, that is a silly thing to say. 0.95

00:21:20.000 However, is anyone supposed to be surprised here?

00:21:23.000 Like, are we supposed to pretend that President Trump tweeting things out is supposed to be the big disqualifier?

00:21:30.000 And yet, oddly enough, that's exactly what Democrats and many Democrats are now claiming. 0.98

00:21:34.000 Is that because Trump is a poopoo head, right? 0.99

00:21:36.000 This is, really, this is, I keep saying poopoo head because that is the best way to describe the sort of labels that they are throwing at Trump, right? 0.98

00:21:43.000 They're not accusing him of actual criminal activity, really.

00:21:46.000 They're not accusing him of violating his oath of office in any serious way.

00:21:50.000 They're accusing him of being somebody who they don't like, who mouths off a lot on Twitter.

00:21:54.000 And that, I guess, is their case for him being impeachable.

00:21:58.000 And I don't really see that.

00:21:59.000 I gotta be honest with you.

00:22:00.000 Usually impeachment requires a crime.

00:22:03.000 And so you see, for example, Joaquin Castro, who's out there, you know, the failing Democratic, well, he's a representative, right?

00:22:10.000 Representative Castro.

00:22:11.000 And he is a 2020 Democratic candidate for the presidency.

00:22:16.000 Oh, sorry, his brother, Julian, is running.

00:22:18.000 Joaquin, who's his twin brother, is a representative.

00:22:20.000 Joaquin Castro is on CNN.

00:22:21.000 And he was out there saying, well, Trump is going to bring harm to the whistleblower.

00:22:25.000 Oh, God, really?

00:22:26.000 We're going to do this routine?

00:22:27.000 So he's impeachable because he's tweeting he doesn't like the whistleblower?

00:22:30.000 Yes, I'm sure. 0.98

00:22:31.000 Like, really, this Democratic line, which is so irritating and so stupid and has been trotted out by people like Ilhan Omar repeatedly, that if you criticize her, if you say that she's a bad congressperson, you're actually threatening her with violence. 0.97

00:22:42.000 As somebody who has 24-7 security because of legit threats of violence, I can pretty well tell the damn difference between a threat of violence and people who just don't like what I say and are saying mean things about me. 0.98

00:22:53.000 But Democrats, in an effort to stretch impeachment beyond its natural boundaries, they're like, oh, well, Trump is gonna harm the whistleblower.

00:23:00.000 This is impeachable.

00:23:01.000 The president at this point has been very abusive of the Whistleblower Protection Act and really is basically on the verge of not only revealing the identity or getting somebody else to reveal the identity of the whistleblower, but also bringing harm to that person.

00:23:18.000 It's getting quite scary, the president's behavior and his words and what that could conjure up.

00:23:23.000 Okay, and then my favorite part of this is that Castro says that, right, that Trump is going to bring harm to the whistleblower.

00:23:29.000 And this is obviously a very, very, very bad thing.

00:23:31.000 Super, super bad.

00:23:31.000 And then Maxine Waters goes on TV.

00:23:33.000 Well, actually, she tweets. 0.99

00:23:34.000 She tweets, I'm calling on the GOP to stop Trump's filthy talk of whistleblowers being spies and using mob language implying they should be killed. 0.77

00:23:41.000 Impeachment is not good enough for Trump. 0.97

00:23:43.000 He needs to be imprisoned and placed in solitary confinement.

00:23:46.000 But for now, impeachment is the imperative.

00:23:49.000 Hey, so Trump says he doesn't like the whistleblower and he calls him a traitor because Bill Weld called him a traitor and everybody's calling each other traitors these days.

00:23:56.000 Maxine Waters suggests the sitting president of the United States should be imprisoned and placed in solitary confinement.

00:24:02.000 What does Julian Castro have to- what does Joaquin Castro have to say about that?

00:24:05.000 Well, that's fine.

00:24:06.000 That's just her being passionate.

00:24:07.000 Guys, that's it.

00:24:09.000 I have a lot of respect for Maxine Waters, and she's a very passionate person and has felt very strongly for a long time that the president has broken the law.

00:24:20.000 And so you see that in her words.

00:24:22.000 I think a lot of Americans have been very upset and outraged about the president's conduct.

00:24:27.000 I think all of us want to make sure that this process is a fair one, that there is due process for the president and all the other witnesses that are going to come forward.

00:24:35.000 But we're committed to getting to the bottom of what happened.

00:24:37.000 She's just a passionate person, that's it.

00:24:39.000 So when she threatens to put the president in jail in solitary confinement, that's her being passionate.

00:24:43.000 When Trump yells about the whistleblower, that's him being impeachable and horrible and terrible and no good and very bad.

00:24:48.000 This is part of the broader democratic agenda at this point to delegitimize Trump as president, not on the basis of actual crimes, but based on who Trump is as a person.

00:24:57.000 Well, if you want to do that, we have a thing called elections. 0.55

00:24:59.000 You can do that.

00:25:00.000 But that's not what Democrats are doing.

00:25:02.000 Instead, they seem to continually be broadening out the scope of the impeachment itself, of the impeachment inquiry, of the impeachment grounds. 0.91

00:25:11.000 And that is ridiculous.

00:25:12.000 As we'll see, that actually ties into a broader agenda on the part of many people on the left, which is to use Legal methods and silencing methods to shut down opposition rather than winning the argument, right? 0.88

00:25:22.000 They have an election.

00:25:22.000 They want to beat Trump.

00:25:23.000 They can just do this in 14 months.

00:25:25.000 But they're not doing that.

00:25:26.000 Instead, they're pursuing impeachment.

00:25:27.000 We'll get to more of that in just one second.

00:25:28.000 First, gotta tell you about something cool that happened in our house over Rosh Hashanah.

00:25:32.000 So right before Rosh Hashanah, we received in the mail from a company called Paint Your Life a portrait A full-on huge portrait of my family.

00:25:41.000 It's just great.

00:25:41.000 We were able to put it over the fireplace.

00:25:43.000 It looks beautiful.

00:25:44.000 It really changes the tenor of our house.

00:25:46.000 If you want to give a truly meaningful gift, you have to try PaintYourLife.com.

00:25:50.000 So here is the way that it works.

00:25:52.000 You take a picture and you send it in to PaintYourLife.com and they will send you back an original painting of yourself or your kids or your family or a special place or a cherished pet at a price you can afford from PaintYourLife.com.

00:26:04.000 You don't have to hire some artist and then have the artist Sit with you, and you have your portrait painted like Napoleon or something.

00:26:10.000 Instead, you send them the picture, and instead, they send you back a true painting done by hand by a world-class artist created from your favorite photo.

00:26:16.000 It makes a fantastic gift for birthdays, anniversaries, graduations.

00:26:20.000 You choose the artist whose work you most admire, and you work with them throughout the process until every detail is perfect, and there is no risk.

00:26:25.000 If you don't love the final painting, your money is refunded.

00:26:28.000 So, I mean, that's a pretty awesome, awesome deal.

00:26:30.000 It makes a fantastic gift.

00:26:32.000 Go check it out right now.

00:26:33.000 Again, we got that family portrait.

00:26:35.000 It is fantastic.

00:26:35.000 It sits above our fireplace right now.

00:26:37.000 Right now is a limited time offer.

00:26:39.000 You get 30% off your painting.

00:26:40.000 That is correct.

00:26:41.000 30% off and free shipping, which is a great offer.

00:26:43.000 To get that special offer, text the word BEN to 64000.

00:26:47.000 That's 64000.

00:26:48.000 Text BEN, B-E-N, to 64000.

00:26:50.000 Text Ben to 64000.

00:26:53.000 When you support our show, you support our sponsors.

00:26:55.000 Message and data rates may apply.

00:26:57.000 Go check them out.

00:26:59.000 Text Ben to 64000 and get yourself a great gift and one for your family.

00:27:02.000 It really is fantastic.

00:27:03.000 Okay, so as I say, there's part of a broader impeachment agenda here, and that is to continue broadening out the actual accusation.

00:27:09.000 You can see it from Will Wilkinson, who writes a piece at the New York Times today.

00:27:14.000 He's vice president for research at the Democrat-leaning Niskanen Center.

00:27:18.000 And the entire piece is about how Trump ought to be impeached because he has disqualified himself from running.

00:27:23.000 Why?

00:27:24.000 The president's brazen attempt at cheating has taken decided at the ballot box off the menu.

00:27:29.000 Impeachment is imperative.

00:27:31.000 Right?

00:27:32.000 Beto O'Rourke said in March, I think the American people are going to have a chance to decide this at the ballot box in November 2020, but says Wilkinson, this is no longer a tenable position.

00:27:40.000 It's not tenable to allow an election to go forward.

00:27:43.000 Trump has to be impeached because otherwise he's going to cheat and he's going to win the election by cheating.

00:27:48.000 It's hilarious to watch as Democrats claim that Trump is going to do this while simultaneously claiming that Trump claiming the Democrats are going to do this is somehow impeachable.

00:27:55.000 So just to get this straight, if Trump says it's a coup and they're cheating, that's impeachable.

00:27:59.000 If Democrats say that Trump is cheating and will engage in a coup, then that's totally fine.

00:28:05.000 And not only that, it should be grounds for impeaching Trump.

00:28:07.000 So, I mean, that is heads I win, tails you lose right there.

00:28:11.000 Wilkinson says, This is no longer a tenable position.

00:28:14.000 The president's bungled bid to coerce Ukraine's leader into helping the Trump 2020 reelection campaign smear a rival struck decided at the ballot box off the menu of reasonable opinion forever.

00:28:26.000 Forever.

00:28:27.000 So apparently whatever happens with the vote will be illegitimate.

00:28:29.000 Good news for President Trump.

00:28:30.000 Even if he loses, he wins now.

00:28:32.000 Because apparently the vote is illegitimate.

00:28:34.000 Wilkinson says, Trump's brazen attempt to cheat his way into a second term stands so scandalously exposed there can be no assurance of a fair election if he's allowed to stay in office.

00:28:45.000 Resolving the question of the president's fitness at the ballot box isn't really an option, much less the best option, when the question boils down to whether the ballot box will be stuffed Impeachment is therefore imperative.

00:28:56.000 So in other words, they still have improved quid pro quo, but because Trump and his campaign were digging in Ukraine for dirt, this apparently perverts the election beyond all reasonable measure and thus all results are perverse.

00:29:07.000 Well, there's only one problem with that.

00:29:08.000 Hillary Clinton in 2016 worked with the Ukrainian embassy in order to dig up dirt on Trump.

00:29:13.000 Did that make the results of the election illegitimate?

00:29:16.000 It did not.

00:29:17.000 It did not.

00:29:19.000 Rudy Giuliani is out there, by the way, making the case that he's going to be able to prove that Barack Obama ordered Hillary Clinton and the Democrats to dig up dirt in Ukraine.

00:29:28.000 We'll see if this is true or not or whether this is just another overplay by Rudy.

00:29:32.000 The reason why I was investigating, and the reason why the President of the United States had an obligation to ask the President of Ukraine to follow up on these allegations, because there is substantial, and I don't want to exaggerate it, but pretty close to overwhelming evidence, including a finding by a Ukrainian court, that Hillary Clinton and the Democrats Cooperated with Ukrainians with the order coming directly from the White House in January of 2017 to dig up dirt.

00:30:03.000 on her political opponent, and they did.

00:30:06.000 Okay, so this is Rudy's case.

00:30:08.000 And by the way, the case that Joe Biden and Hunter Biden, there was something corrupt there, is not insanely weak.

00:30:14.000 Now, it's not as strong as I think people have made it out to be, but there are serious questions to be asked about Hunter and Joe Biden.

00:30:19.000 Joe definitely knew that Hunter was making money off his name.

00:30:22.000 Does that impact his actual policy toward Ukraine?

00:30:24.000 That is at best dicey.

00:30:26.000 But still, the case that the Democrats seem to be making over and over is that they can just keep broadening out this inquiry until it's meaningless.

00:30:33.000 Again, Wilkinson is not making a case that an actual quid pro quo will happen.

00:30:38.000 He's just assuming that it did.

00:30:41.000 Right?

00:30:41.000 This is, this I guess is the grounds for impeachment is that he's not going to allow an actual election to go forward.

00:30:48.000 And it turns out that that is not the only Democrat case that's being made today.

00:30:51.000 As you'll notice, whenever the impeachment grounds get less and less specific, they get more and more passionate.

00:30:56.000 That seems to be the way that this works.

00:30:58.000 When this started off, it was supposed to be a very narrowly focused inquiry with a very narrow end goal or end point.

00:31:07.000 And that does not seem like what this is turning into.

00:31:10.000 It seems like instead it is broadening out and like the case for impeachment is broadening out over and over and over again.

00:31:16.000 By the way, I should mention that while Rudy Giuliani is out there talking about how Joe Biden ought to be investigated and Republicans and Trump are saying Joe Biden ought to be investigated and they're saying that's a legitimate point of inquiry given the fact that Ukraine is requesting help and good relationship with us, and therefore we want to make sure that corruption is taken care of.

00:31:34.000 With all of that, it is amazing.

00:31:37.000 The same people on the left who suggest that people on the right are shying away from the Trump investigation because they're afraid of what they're going to find.

00:31:44.000 They're saying over and over and over, there's nothing to find with the Biden stuff.

00:31:48.000 Nothing whatsoever.

00:31:49.000 How do we know this?

00:31:49.000 Well, because we know this.

00:31:51.000 Because there can't be anything because we know this.

00:31:53.000 Here's Kamala Harris doing this routine. 1.00

00:31:55.000 If you're elected president, would you allow the son or daughter of your vice president to serve on the board of an oil company outside this country?

00:32:02.000 Probably not.

00:32:03.000 But I think that the problem that we've got, again, with this issue is that it's a distraction from the fact that, look, as far as I'm concerned, leave Joe Biden alone.

00:32:15.000 Just leave him alone on this issue of what this president has done that has been about corrupting America's democracy.

00:32:24.000 Okay, my favorite part of that is where she starts laughing hysterically about Joe Biden and his son.

00:32:39.000 That's always a good sign.

00:32:40.000 When Kamala Harris laughs nervously, you know that she thinks there's actually a there there.

00:32:43.000 Okay, we'll get to more of this in a second.

00:32:45.000 Plus, of course, Bernie Sanders effectively dropping out of the race today thanks to a health problem.

00:32:49.000 We'll get to that in just one second.

00:32:51.000 Great news for another Kingdom fans.

00:32:53.000 The third final season is here at last this Monday, October 7th.

00:32:57.000 Episodes 1 and 2 will be released.

00:32:59.000 But if you're a subscriber, you get exclusive access to both of those episodes this Friday, October 4th.

00:33:04.000 So, do not wait.

00:33:05.000 Subscribe now.

00:33:05.000 Also, seasons 1 and 2 are available on dailywire.com and iTunes and YouTube.

00:33:09.000 Make sure you check those out and get caught up.

00:33:12.000 And as I say, you should go subscribe generally because the fact is there are people on the left who, as we will see, are very much interested in destroying the ability of conservatives to get their message out when you subscribe.

00:33:20.000 You make sure that we can continue to bring you the truth and the analysis that you need.

00:33:25.000 When you get the annual subscription, you get this.

00:33:26.000 The very greatest in beverage vessels, the leftist year's hydrocold tumbler.

00:33:29.000 It is indeed magnificent.

00:33:31.000 Go check that out right now for $99 a year.

00:33:34.000 You'll make your life better.

00:33:35.000 $9.99 a month.

00:33:36.000 We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.

00:33:39.000 So, as I keep saying, The goal of the Democrats and many in the media seems to be to broaden out the scope of the rationale for Trump's impeachment from quid pro quo, which would be an actual legal standard, to he's a meanie and we don't like him.

00:34:03.000 So Thomas Friedman has a really famously awful column today.

00:34:07.000 Thomas Friedman is an awful, awful columnist.

00:34:09.000 I've said for years that if you want Thomas Friedman to write a nice column about you, all you have to do is offer him a hotel suite in a nice place for a night.

00:34:15.000 He would go to Iran and people would offer him a nice hotel suite and Thomas Friedman of the New York Times would be like, Iran, a wonderful open country with a regime that has been misunderstood.

00:34:24.000 If you buy him a nice suite in China?

00:34:27.000 He'll write you a piece about how the United States should emulate China's one-party system.

00:34:32.000 Well, today, he has a piece in the New York Times talking about how to impeach Trump, and here's how it opens.

00:34:38.000 You ready for this?

00:34:39.000 I'm going to discuss impeachment today, but first I want to talk about the National Symphony Orchestra's opening concert and gala last Saturday night.

00:34:45.000 It was very revealing.

00:34:47.000 At mid-concert, the chairman of the Kennedy Center, David Rubinstein, came out to greet the audience and the VIPs.

00:34:52.000 He welcomed the different ambassadors, and then he went through the cabinet members present and then the Supreme Court justices.

00:34:56.000 He introduced Justice Samuel Alito, who got a smattering of applause.

00:34:59.000 Then he introduced Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, seated in the balcony.

00:35:02.000 First, many women in the audience stood up to applaud, and then everyone stood up, and then everyone applauded, and then everyone applauded more, and then some people cheered, and then some whistled, and it went on and on.

00:35:11.000 It was extraordinary.

00:35:12.000 I've been to a lot of Kennedy Center concerts, and a few when the president sitting in his official box was introduced.

00:35:17.000 But I've never witnessed anything like the reception for Justice Ginsburg.

00:35:20.000 And this was not a totally liberal audience.

00:35:22.000 There were many older GOP donors and corporate types here.

00:35:25.000 Okay, just quick note, it was pretty much a totally liberal audience.

00:35:28.000 It's the Kennedy Center event, okay, in New York.

00:35:31.000 That means there are like seven Republicans.

00:35:33.000 And if they are Republicans in New York, good shot that they are not really hardcore Republicans.

00:35:37.000 They're in New York.

00:35:39.000 This was a spontaneous bipartisan expression of respect for and longing for a national leader of integrity and humility.

00:35:45.000 By the way, Ruth Bader Ginsburg is an awful justice. 1.00

00:35:49.000 I also pray for her health because the fact is we should pray for the health of all of our officials in public positions, but she's a terrible justice who has ruled terribly on virtually every major ruling of the last 30 years. 0.98

00:36:02.000 But basically, Friedman is saying, Ginsburg is a person of class who unifies the country, but Trump is classless and should be impeached.

00:36:08.000 So that's Thomas Friedman's case.

00:36:09.000 So we've had Will Wilkinson's case, which is Trump won't let an election go forward, which is nonsense.

00:36:13.000 And then you have Friedman's case, which is everyone likes Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

00:36:17.000 And then you get Susan Rice's case, which is that nothing says we should write about impeachment and corruption in foreign policy, like Susan Rice, a woman who lied repeatedly to the American public about Benghazi writing in the New York Times.

00:36:33.000 By the way, you want to know what drives the right so fully insane about all of this?

00:36:37.000 Is the fact that you've got Democrats sitting there on their high horses when they engaged in nearly the same activity repeatedly.

00:36:42.000 Whether you're talking about Hillary seeking dirt on Donald Trump from the Ukrainians, or whether you're talking about Barack Obama pledging flexibility to the Russians openly on Mike.

00:36:51.000 But you get Susan Rice writing for the New York Times about Trump should be impeached. 0.74

00:36:55.000 Why?

00:36:57.000 Well, because Joe Biden is innocent, right?

00:37:00.000 She says Joe Biden is innocent and Trump is guilty because she says that Biden had nothing to do with the Obama policy and that Biden is fine and that Biden was backing a good policy.

00:37:12.000 Nothing there about how it was inappropriate for the Obama administration to let Biden run up the Ukrainian policy, to lead up the Ukrainian policy when his son was earning money off his name in Ukraine while working with groups that were under investigation.

00:37:26.000 Nonetheless, Susan Rice pushing the point that the Trump administration is the corrupt administration as opposed to the beautiful, wonderful, great Obama administration.

00:37:38.000 If you want to drive people nuts, this is the way to do it.

00:37:40.000 I mean, this is full-on gaslighting at this point.

00:37:44.000 She says, the differences in these two engagements are stark.

00:37:47.000 In Biden's case, the purpose of the intervention was to pursue a widely accepted U.S.

00:37:51.000 policy objective in the full light of day.

00:37:54.000 In Trump's case, it was to advance a personal political interest in opposition to the national interest, and it was deliberately hidden from view.

00:38:00.000 Was it deliberately hidden from view that Trump wanted Giuliani in Ukraine?

00:38:03.000 I mean, we've known for two years that Giuliani is running around in Ukraine.

00:38:07.000 And as it turns out, the Washington Post agreed.

00:38:09.000 I mean, they reported that the transcript of the call was not hidden for purposes of this specific call was bad, but because Trump hides all the transcripts because all of them leak.

00:38:19.000 This is the stuff that drives Republicans up a wall.

00:38:21.000 It drives conservatives up a wall.

00:38:23.000 You'll see articles from the press, repeatedly, suggesting that Trump is engaged in corruption, where if you just flip the parties, they'd be talking about how great it was.

00:38:32.000 A perfect example today, there's a piece in the Washington Post called, A Presidency of One, Key Federal Agencies Increasingly Compelled to Benefit Trump.

00:38:41.000 Have you, maybe you noticed, by the way, that, did you, that, Obama did the exact same- Like, there was the Obama IRS scandal.

00:38:49.000 There was the Obama Health and Human Services scandal.

00:38:52.000 There was Obama utilizing his DOJ as a protection racket for himself in Fast and Furious.

00:38:58.000 But apparently, according to the Washington Post, it is a great shock that the head of the executive branch is also the head of the executive branch.

00:39:05.000 They point out that a series of disclosures has illuminated President Trump's command over key federal agencies, revealing how he has compelled them to pursue his personal and political goals, investigate his enemies, and lend legitimacy to his theories about the 2016 election.

00:39:18.000 Yes, that's called being the head of the executive branch.

00:39:21.000 This stuff drives Republicans up the wall for a reason.

00:39:24.000 Again, if we were talking about Obama, the press would be cheering right now.

00:39:28.000 By the way, the best case in point, Eric Holder, the head of the DOJ, the Attorney General, who suggested that he was Barack Obama's wingman, now says that Attorney General William Barr may have crossed political lines.

00:39:39.000 Eric Holder said that.

00:39:40.000 Are we supposed to not laugh out loud?

00:39:43.000 To see how the President is now involved in trying to help the Attorney General in that effort gives me pause.

00:39:50.000 I think the Attorney General needs to be a little more sensitive to the appearance that that gives.

00:39:55.000 You have to not only be substantively neutral, you have to appear to be neutral when you are the Attorney General of the United States, and I fear that he has crossed a political line.

00:40:06.000 I mean, does this man own a mirror?

00:40:07.000 Are mirrors illegal where Eric Holder lives?

00:40:09.000 You have to appear to be neutral?

00:40:10.000 You literally call yourself Barack Obama's wingman.

00:40:13.000 He declared executive privilege on your behalf in Fast and Furious.

00:40:16.000 This sort of stuff.

00:40:17.000 It's because there's a generalized belief in the United States that there's a miasma of corruption in Washington, D.C., that the swamp exists, and when Trump is kind of swampy sometimes, people are like, okay, well, and?

00:40:28.000 Really, because, sorry, if you think that the world began spinning when Donald Trump was elected president, you may have missed the past 20 years in American politics.

00:40:36.000 Meanwhile, I think that this is part of a broader agenda, unfortunately.

00:40:39.000 Impeachment is indicative of a broader lefty mindset that has set in, which is that even if you don't have the goods, you use what you have to silence your opposition.

00:40:47.000 Again, there's an election in 14 months.

00:40:49.000 All the Democrats have to do, if they wish to win, is simply go forward to the election and make a good case for themselves.

00:40:54.000 Instead, they're pushing impeachment.

00:40:56.000 And this is part and parcel of a broader, radical left attempt to shut down all opinions they do not like.

00:41:04.000 And so, for example, you have Kamala Harris suggesting today that Donald Trump's Twitter account should be suspended.

00:41:09.000 He's the President of the United States.

00:41:11.000 Here she is on CNN, desperately seeking attention.

00:41:14.000 I mean, she's basically become Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction, boiling a rabbit for attention. 1.00

00:41:19.000 Here she is.

00:41:20.000 When you look at what he's been tweeting today, directed at the whistleblower, directed at so many people, I frankly think that based on this and all we've seen him do before, including attacking members of Congress, that his Twitter account should be suspended.

00:41:36.000 When the President of the United States speaks, her words are very powerful and should be used in a way that is not about belittling, much less harming, anyone.

00:41:49.000 And this president has, I think, never fully appreciated that responsibility.

00:41:54.000 So he should be barred from Twitter, according to Kamala Harris.

00:41:56.000 It's funny how comfortable the left is with deplatforming people they just don't like.

00:42:00.000 Kara Swisher makes the same case.

00:42:01.000 This is the same Kara Swisher who once suggested to Susan Wojcicki, the head of YouTube, that I should be barred from YouTube because her son watches my videos.

00:42:09.000 I'm sorry that I make a convincing case to your kid, Kara.

00:42:12.000 But, like, now here she is saying Trump is too dangerous for Twitter.

00:42:15.000 It's time to bar him.

00:42:17.000 Do you get the feeling that there's a group of people in the United States who just don't want to hear the other people's opinion?

00:42:21.000 I've never called for Kara Swisher to be barred.

00:42:24.000 I've never suggested that Kamala Harris should be barred from Twitter. 0.97

00:42:27.000 That would be absurd.

00:42:29.000 I mean, there are people who target me day in and day out on Twitter.

00:42:31.000 I've never called for any of them to be barred unless they're making actual violent threats to me.

00:42:36.000 But this is part and parcel of a basic attempt to pressure everyone.

00:42:39.000 So you're going to use the pressure tactics of impeachment in order to get rid of a president you don't like, not elections.

00:42:45.000 You're going to use the pressure tactics against the advertisers to get rid of shows that you don't like, not just not listening to the shows, not the ratings, and you're going to try and pressure big tech to crack down on opinions you don't like, not simply tune out from those opinions, which would be the proper policy.

00:43:01.000 Which, by the way, raises the issue Facebook has now put forward a policy about elections.

00:43:07.000 Nick Clegg, who's the VP of Global Affairs and Communications, I'm gonna put forward this policy, and it's a pretty decent policy.

00:43:15.000 The basic policy is that they are not going to referee political debates and prevent a politician's speech from reaching its audience and being subject to public debate and scrutiny.

00:43:23.000 So, Facebook exempts politicians from third-party fact-checking programs.

00:43:28.000 So, very often, Facebook has what I think is a dumb system of third-party fact-checkers who are very often left.

00:43:34.000 You'll see Snopes, or you will see PolitiFact, and these are left-leaning, Left-leaning fact-check sites, and they will use that as an excuse to go after particular stories.

00:43:43.000 I've always argued that that's foolishness because bad data in means bad data out.

00:43:47.000 There are very few right-wing fact-checking sites.

00:43:49.000 There probably should be one, but there aren't.

00:43:51.000 Okay, but at least Facebook is not applying that to politicians because that effectively would make them the great truth arbiters in politics, and that is an enormous mistake.

00:44:00.000 They said we will not send organic content or ads from our politicians to third-party fact-checking partners for review.

00:44:06.000 When a politician shares previously debunked content, including links, videos, and photos, we plan to demote that content, display related information from fact-checkers, and reject its inclusion in advertisements.

00:44:16.000 Again, all of this seems...

00:44:18.000 Perfectly reasonable.

00:44:20.000 Doesn't matter.

00:44:20.000 Facebook is being attacked.

00:44:21.000 Why?

00:44:22.000 Because the left would like to turn Facebook into the arbiter of truth, but the lefty arbiter of truth.

00:44:26.000 That's why Elizabeth Warren is targeting Facebook too. 1.00

00:44:30.000 Again, this is not about Elizabeth Warren just disliking Facebook as a big company. 0.57

00:44:34.000 This is about the Democrats threatening Facebook so they can control of it politically.

00:44:38.000 Mark Zuckerberg knows this, by the way.

00:44:40.000 There was leaked audio of him over the weekend pointing out that Elizabeth Warren was an existential threat to his company.

00:44:46.000 She is.

00:44:47.000 She's an existential threat to big tech. 1.00

00:44:49.000 And while the right may celebrate the downfall of big tech, the fact is you don't want Democrats in control of big tech.

00:44:54.000 That's really what this is about for Democrats.

00:44:56.000 In the same way they want to bar Trump from Twitter, they would like to see Facebook broken up so they can then control Facebook and determine what it is that you see and you hear.

00:45:03.000 And naturally, the press are cheering this on.

00:45:05.000 The New York Times has a headline, Zuckerberg hates Warren's plan to break up Facebook.

00:45:09.000 She doesn't care! 1.00

00:45:11.000 Well, okay, so what?

00:45:13.000 So what?

00:45:13.000 I mean, who is the aggressor here?

00:45:16.000 Mark Zuckerberg built up a bajillion-dollar company that affects billions of people around the world, and Elizabeth Warren is going to willy-nilly grab the power of the American government and try to break it up, and she's the courageous one?

00:45:28.000 She didn't build anything. 0.90

00:45:29.000 She's never built anything.

00:45:30.000 She worked as a law professor. 0.97

00:45:33.000 It's all very silly. 0.55

00:45:34.000 Okay, meanwhile, gotta give you the update on Bernie Sanders.

00:45:36.000 As I mentioned earlier, Bernie Sanders has now had a heart-sense surgery after chest discomfort.

00:45:41.000 According to Politico, breaking news, Bernie Sanders experienced chest discomfort during a campaign event on Tuesday.

00:45:47.000 He had two stents inserted to address a blockage in an artery, his campaign announced.

00:45:51.000 He is, you know, 78 years old, so this is not exactly a massive shock.

00:45:55.000 How old is Bernie now?

00:45:55.000 Is he 80?

00:45:56.000 I think he may be 80.

00:45:58.000 So he is, sorry, he's 78.

00:45:59.000 I was right the first time.

00:46:00.000 He's getting up there.

00:46:01.000 And this is, by the way, this is why when people say, older politicians may have health problems, and then everybody's like, that's ageist!

00:46:07.000 No, that's called reality.

00:46:08.000 With age come health problems.

00:46:11.000 According to his senior advisor, Jeff Weaver, he said, Senator Sanders is conversing and in good spirits.

00:46:15.000 He'll be resting up over the next few days.

00:46:17.000 We are canceling his events and appearances until further notice.

00:46:19.000 We will continue to provide appropriate updates.

00:46:21.000 Sanders has maintained a relentless campaign schedule over the past several months.

00:46:26.000 He is the oldest candidate in the Democratic field, but has projected vigor belying his age.

00:46:30.000 The news came a day after Sanders posted a robust $25 million fundraising haul in the third quarter of the year, but as he's been eclipsed in recent weeks by Elizabeth Warren in the polls.

00:46:40.000 So apparently, the Sanders campaign canceled the entirety of its recently scheduled ad buy in Iowa on broadcast television.

00:46:47.000 They'd announced a $1.3 million ad buy on Monday in the state that was set to begin on Thursday.

00:46:53.000 Kamala Harris was eager to jump in and wish him the best.

00:46:57.000 She says she looks forward to seeing him on the campaign trail soon.

00:46:59.000 I'm sure that is not true, but it is certainly true that, you know, listen, you never want to see politicians put out of it by health, obviously.

00:47:09.000 Beneficiary politically, you know, putting aside the human aspect, which is, you know, thoughts and prayers to the Sanders family.

00:47:14.000 With that said, Politically speaking, obviously Elizabeth Warren now looks to be the heavy favorite for the nomination because the going theory for Joe Biden was that Elizabeth Warren would split the vote with Bernie Sanders on the socialist left. 1.00

00:47:27.000 Well, now that Bernie Sanders looks to be out of the race for the foreseeable future, there's no way he's gonna recover coming back in.

00:47:34.000 It is now a two-person race.

00:47:35.000 It is now Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden, and Joe Biden is collapsing in the polls.

00:47:39.000 According to the national polling average, Biden is up just a point and a half on Elizabeth Warren, There are now several polls that show them in a dead heat.

00:47:48.000 There's an Economist YouGov poll that came out yesterday showing that Warren is now up six on Biden.

00:47:53.000 There's a Monmouth poll showing that Warren is up three on Biden.

00:47:56.000 So, Warren is obviously in commanding position in the early running here.

00:48:01.000 She is leading in Iowa.

00:48:03.000 Sanders is at 12%.

00:48:04.000 All of that probably kicks to Elizabeth Warren. 1.00

00:48:07.000 In New Hampshire, Elizabeth Warren is again running within the margin of error. 0.79

00:48:11.000 In Nevada, she's running inside the margin of error.

00:48:14.000 The betting odds on Elizabeth Warren are now up to 49% to Biden's 22%.

00:48:19.000 So, she is the prohibitive favorite in this election. 0.87

00:48:23.000 That means that what we are looking at right now is Donald Trump versus Elizabeth Warren.

00:48:26.000 And that, by the way, does explain, at least in part, why the Democrats are moving forward with the impeachment inquiry, even if they're not able to come up with any hard evidence of a quid pro quo.

00:48:33.000 That is, if they can portray Trump as corrupt, and then they can portray Elizabeth Warren as the fighter against corruption, the populist fighter against corruption, she wins. 0.72

00:48:41.000 Well, that's a very scary prospect, because she's a dangerous politician with wild left views. 1.00

00:48:46.000 Man, there's gonna be one hell of a race.

00:48:48.000 Okay, let's do a quick thing I like, and then a thing I hate, and we will be out of here.

00:48:52.000 So, a quick thing that I like.

00:48:54.000 So there's a lot of talk, very frequently, about racial bias in the justice system.

00:49:00.000 Well, there is a case that happened in Dallas of, I guess it was last year it would have been, in which an officer, an off-duty officer, Amber Geiger, She's white.

00:49:11.000 She was in the wrong apartment.

00:49:12.000 She walked into the wrong apartment.

00:49:15.000 She came home from work one night last year, believing she'd found an intruder inside her apartment.

00:49:18.000 She then shot the man inside.

00:49:20.000 The man she shot was not an intruder, but her neighbor, Botham Shemjean, a 26-year-old black accountant who was watching TV and eating ice cream in the apartment he rented directly above Ms.

00:49:28.000 Geiger's.

00:49:30.000 On Tuesday, Gene's family braced themselves for the possibility his death would be treated like many others across the country, in which police officers have been cleared of wrongdoing, but that moment never came.

00:49:38.000 Instead, a Dallas County jury found Geiger 31 guilty of murder, choosing the more serious conviction over a lesser option of manslaughter.

00:49:46.000 And that seems...

00:49:47.000 Perfectly appropriate for this fact pattern.

00:49:50.000 The case did not fit into the familiar narratives of police killings in which the officers fired their weapons on duty.

00:49:55.000 And it just goes to show, again, that the notion that everyone in the United States is eagerly awaiting police shootings of black people by white officers is just not true.

00:50:04.000 It's always funny, the left tends to pick out cases where the fact pattern is murky in order to make the case that people don't pay enough attention to black folks being killed. 0.61

00:50:15.000 And that is not the case, right?

00:50:16.000 I mean, they never talk about the case of a man in South Carolina who was shot to death from behind by a police officer who planted the gun on him.

00:50:26.000 That officer went to jail.

00:50:27.000 They never talk about that, because we all agree on the fact pattern.

00:50:29.000 Instead, they talk about Michael Brown, where the fact pattern is in dispute, or Eric Garner, where the fact pattern is in dispute.

00:50:35.000 In this case, the fact pattern was not in dispute, and so this officer will go to jail for a very, very long time.

00:50:41.000 As is appropriate, because if you shoot somebody in an apartment not your own, that means that you should go to jail. 0.56

00:50:46.000 Okay, time for a quick thing that I hate.

00:50:52.000 Okay, so, there is a new ruling from a judge about Harvard University.

00:50:57.000 New York Times reports, a federal judge on Tuesday rejected claims that Harvard had intentionally discriminated against Asian American applicants in a closely watched case that presented one of the biggest legal challenges to affirmative action in years.

00:51:08.000 The lawsuit against the university came from a group hoping to overturn a long-standing Supreme Court precedent that allows race to be considered as one factor among many in admissions, but prohibits universities from using racial quotas.

00:51:18.000 The group argued, Harvard favored black and Hispanic applicants at the expense of another minority group, Asians.

00:51:23.000 Which is true.

00:51:24.000 The judge rejected the plaintiff's argument, said the university met the strict constitutional standard for considering race in its admissions process.

00:51:32.000 She defended the benefits of diversity.

00:51:34.000 Ah.

00:51:35.000 Not ideological diversity.

00:51:36.000 Not experiential diversity.

00:51:38.000 Racial diversity.

00:51:39.000 Which again, there is no benefit to racial diversity on its own.

00:51:43.000 As a matter of experiential diversity?

00:51:45.000 Sure.

00:51:45.000 As a matter of socioeconomic diversity?

00:51:47.000 Sure.

00:51:48.000 As a matter of viewpoint diversity?

00:51:49.000 Sure.

00:51:50.000 But why it should make a difference that a black person and a white person are in a room and somehow this is like better than two white people or two black people in a room. 0.82

00:51:57.000 is beyond me without any other metric. 0.97

00:51:59.000 That's silly.

00:52:00.000 But she said diversity will foster the tolerance, acceptance, and understanding that will ultimately make race-conscious admissions obsolete. 0.68

00:52:07.000 Okay, they've been saying that for 40 years now since Grutter v. Bollinger in the late 70s, and the court's not letting up on this nonsense.

00:52:14.000 So I do—there is a great irony to the fact that now the courts are standing up for diversity by barring Asians from Harvard.

00:52:20.000 Well done, everybody.

00:52:22.000 Well done, everybody.

00:52:24.000 Alrighty, we'll be back here a little bit later today with all the updates on Bernie Sanders' health, and on the impeachment inquiry, and all of it.

00:52:29.000 Otherwise, we'll see you here tomorrow.

00:52:31.000 Shana Tova, I'm Ben Shapiro, this is The Ben Shapiro Show.

00:52:38.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Robert Sterling.

00:52:40.000 Directed by Mike Joyner.

00:52:42.000 Executive Producer, Jeremy Boring.

00:52:44.000 Senior Producer, Jonathan Hay.

00:52:46.000 Our Supervising Producer is Mathis Glover.

00:52:48.000 And our Technical Producer is Austin Stevens.

00:52:51.000 Assistant Director, Pavel Wydowski.

00:52:53.000 Edited by Adam Siovitz.

00:52:54.000 Audio is Mixed by Mike Koromina.

00:52:56.000 Hair and Makeup is by Jesua Olvera.

00:52:58.000 Production Assistant, Nick Sheehan.

00:52:59.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.

00:53:02.000 Copyright Daily Wire 2019.

00:53:04.000 Hey everyone, it's Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show. 0.91

00:53:07.000 Well, I guess we have to cover this stupid Ukraine story, an amazingly shameless and naked attempt to discredit the people who are in the process of exposing the Obama administration's spying campaign on Donald Trump. 0.89

00:53:19.000 So that's unpleasant, but we'll also have the mail back, so all your problems will be solved. 0.99

00:53:23.000 Woo-hoo! 1.00

00:53:24.000 That's on The Andrew Klavan Show.

The Ben Shapiro Show - October 02, 2019

Impeach For What? | Ep. 871

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript