The Ben Shapiro Show


It’s Impeachment Day…Again! | Ep. 1172


Summary

A day in 2021 is like 10 years in regular time, because a day in 2011 is like ten years in Interstellar time. We re living the plot of a sci-fi movie. Democrats push forward with impeachment again in the House, as Republicans argue over how to respond. Ben Shapiro provides a quick update on all the latest on the Capitol break-in and the DOJ considers sedition charges against some of the culprits. The Secret Service is planning a massive security operation to protect the January 20th Inauguration Day event, and the White House is getting ready for a possible assault on the Inaugural by members of the public, including members of Congress and the Vice President's security detail, as they prepare to attend the big day in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 20th, the day after the first day of the first week in office. And, of course, there s a lot of news about the Democratic National Convention, including a possible impeachment attempt by the House of Representatives. Ben Shapiro talks about it all on today s episode of The Ben Shapiro Show. Subscribe to Ben Shapiro's new show, "The Ben Shapiro Report," wherever you get your shows, wherever you re listening to the show. Don t like the government spying on you? Then visit ExpressVPN.me/BenShapirovp to stay safe, anonymous, and anonymous, to stay safely anonymous. That is a great site for anonymous tips, tricks, and tips on how to avoid getting spied on by the government. You ll get 10% off your first month, plus an additional 10% discount when you sign up for ExpressVPN when you become a new customer! - use coupon code PODCASTLEAGUE at checkout to save $10,000 and get 20% off the first month. If you like the show, you ll get 15% off for the entire year, plus free shipping when you shop at ExpressVPN, and get an extra $5,000 when you upgrade to PANDORA when you re-up the service starts in the second month, you get a maximum of $50,000, plus a FREE 2-day shipping offer when you enter the offer gets full-up to $99,000 gets full of VIP access, and a discount gets you a year, and you get an ad discount, and they get a discount on your first year of VIP membership starts in two months only gets you an ad-free membership?


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Democrats push forward with impeachment again in the House as Republicans argue over how to respond.
00:00:05.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.
00:00:05.000 This is the Ben Shapiro Show.
00:00:13.000 This show is sponsored by ExpressVPN.
00:00:15.000 Don't like the government spying on you?
00:00:16.000 Then visit expressvpn.com slash pen to stay safely anonymous.
00:00:21.000 Before we get to any of the news, and boy is there a lot of news today because a day in 2021 is like 10 years in regular time.
00:00:28.000 Basically, we are living the plot of Interstellar.
00:00:30.000 We'll get to all the news in just one second.
00:00:32.000 First, let's talk about something that you can do for yourself.
00:00:35.000 Save yourself some money.
00:00:36.000 You're spending way too much money on that cell phone bill.
00:00:37.000 You are.
00:00:38.000 I know you haven't thought about it recently, unless you've been listening to this show.
00:00:41.000 But if you have been listening to the show, you know you're spending way too much on your cell phone bill because you are paying for unlimited talk and unlimited text and unlimited data.
00:00:46.000 Here's the thing.
00:00:47.000 You're not using unlimited data.
00:00:48.000 What you really need is the program from Pure Talk USA.
00:00:51.000 When your family switches to Pure Talk from AT&T, Verizon, or T-Mobile, you could save over 800 bucks a year.
00:00:56.000 That is real money every single month right back in your pocket.
00:00:59.000 You don't have to sacrifice coverage.
00:01:00.000 Pure Talk is on the same network as one of the big carriers, but they will charge you half.
00:01:03.000 That's right, no gimmicks, no fluff added to your bills, which is why Pure Talk is the top rated wireless company by Consumer Affairs.
00:01:09.000 How about this offer right now?
00:01:10.000 You can get unlimited talk, text, and six gigs of data for just $30 a month.
00:01:14.000 And if you go over on data usage, they're not gonna charge you for it.
00:01:18.000 Grab your mobile phone, dial pound 250, say Ben Shapiro.
00:01:20.000 When you do, you save 50% off your first month.
00:01:23.000 Dial pound 250, say the keyword Ben Shapiro to get started.
00:01:26.000 Pure Talk USA.
00:01:27.000 Simply smarter wireless.
00:01:28.000 Get the same coverage as the big cell phone companies, but don't pay the same bills that you would be if you were Okay, so we begin with the quick update on everything that is happening in terms of violence and prosecutions.
00:01:36.000 The acting U.S.
00:01:37.000 Ben Shapiro saved 50% off your first month and a lot of money down the road.
00:01:41.000 Okay, so we begin with the quick update on everything that is happening in terms of violence and prosecutions.
00:01:47.000 The acting U.S. attorney Michael Sherwin said yesterday that from the DOJ that he's not sure that the federal government has seen something like this.
00:01:54.000 The wide variety of crimes that took place during the Capitol riots.
00:01:57.000 They are apparently considering sedition charges against some of the people who broke into the Capitol and were going in there to do bodily harm to members of Congress.
00:02:04.000 Here was the acting U.S.
00:02:06.000 Attorney Michael Sherwin.
00:02:08.000 The range of criminal conduct is really, I think, again, unmatched in any type of scenario that we've seen, the FBI or the DOJ.
00:02:15.000 We're looking at everything from simple trespass, to theft of mail, to theft of digital devices with inside the Capitol, to assault on local officers, federal officers both outside and inside the Capitol, to the theft of potential national security information or national defense information, to felony murder, and even
00:02:39.000 Okay, and apparently there's the possibility that this is not going to stop before the inauguration.
00:02:52.000 According to the Houston Chronicle, the Secret Service is going to launch a massive security operation to protect the Biden inauguration.
00:02:58.000 This is being reported actually from the Washington Post, Carol Lennig, Karen Demirjian, Justin Juvenal, and Nick Miroff.
00:03:03.000 They say the Secret Service and federal law enforcement agencies are spending the final days of the Trump administration bracing for a possible violent assault against the January 20th inauguration, launching a security mobilization that will be unlike any in modern U.S.
00:03:14.000 history.
00:03:15.000 On Wednesday, the Secret Service will take command of security preparations at the U.S.
00:03:18.000 Capitol and other federal buildings backed by as many as 15,000 National Guard troops, thousands of police and tactical officers, layers of eight-foot steel fencing.
00:03:25.000 The high alert security posture is starting six days earlier than planned in order to coordinate rules for the FBI, National Guard, U.S. Marshals Service, and a host of other federal agencies that will fall under Secret Service command. One Secret Service official said everyone can just rest assured they're throwing the kitchen sink at this event. Now, the reality is that many of the people who would be interested in engaging in violence actually would like to engage in violence with members of Capitol Police, with members of the Secret Service, because they are looking for That, of course, is not a reason not to have the security there.
00:03:53.000 The security there should be there.
00:03:54.000 It shouldn't be just there.
00:03:56.000 Everybody who is involved in any act of violence, and this has been my consistent standard for literally my entire life, should be arrested and locked up and the key thrown away.
00:04:04.000 Veteran Secret Service and Homeland Security officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share their worries described a level of concern unlike anything in their careers.
00:04:10.000 Threats they fear include a plot by armed groups to encircle the White House or U.S.
00:04:14.000 Capitol and the inauguration event, as well as the possibility that gunmen could stage coordinated attacks against less fortified targets in the city.
00:04:21.000 Apparently, House Democrats were briefed.
00:04:23.000 By the new Capitol Police leadership on Monday night about threats to the inauguration from groups supporting Trump, the new security measures they're putting in place to avoid a repeat of last Wednesday's riot.
00:04:31.000 Apparently, the threats included promises to execute members of Congress.
00:04:34.000 The most dangerous came from a handful of extremist groups.
00:04:37.000 On Tuesday, police in the Chicago suburbs arrested a 45-year-old named Luis Capriotti, charging with making threats to lawmakers last year, in which authorities say he promised to kill any Democrat who attempted to enter the White House on inauguration day.
00:04:49.000 Representative Jim Himes of Connecticut said in an interview the threats are real but will not stop the transfer of power, which of course is true.
00:04:55.000 And Vice President Mike Pence is planning on attending the inauguration.
00:04:58.000 President Trump, of course, has said that he is not going to attend the inauguration.
00:05:02.000 Okay, so meanwhile, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs wrote a letter to members of the armed forces telling everybody that Biden would become the 46th president.
00:05:12.000 This is not necessary, but the fact that people even think it's necessary is really sad, obviously.
00:05:17.000 The Joint Chiefs wrote a letter to everybody in the armed forces saying, the violent riot in Washington, D.C.
00:05:22.000 on January 6th was a direct assault on the U.S.
00:05:24.000 Congress, the Capitol building, our constitutional process.
00:05:26.000 We mourn the deaths of two Capitol policemen and others connected to these unprecedented events.
00:05:30.000 As service members who must embody the values and ideals of the nation, we support and defend the Constitution.
00:05:35.000 Any act to disrupt the constitutional process is not only against our traditions, values, and oath, it is against the law.
00:05:40.000 On January 20th, in accordance with the Constitution confirmed by the states and the courts, certified by Congress, President-elect Biden will be inaugurated and will become our 46th Commander-in-Chief.
00:05:51.000 So that is obviously the military basically just making clear to everybody, including the media, guys, there's not going to be a coup attempt here, right?
00:06:05.000 Nothing is happening here.
00:06:06.000 Okay.
00:06:07.000 Meanwhile, Democrats are pushing forward toward impeachment in the House.
00:06:10.000 So here's some updates, by the way, on the arrests being made around the Capitol Hill rioters.
00:06:13.000 You should check out Matt Walsh's show today.
00:06:14.000 He's going to be covering this at 1.30 p.m.
00:06:16.000 Eastern over at dailywire.com.
00:06:19.000 Meanwhile, the big news of the day, of course, is the Democrats are pushing toward impeachment.
00:06:22.000 They do have a majority in the House that will certainly support impeachment today.
00:06:25.000 The real question is whether Republicans are going to support that effort.
00:06:29.000 The impeachment resolution has only one charge.
00:06:32.000 So that single article of impeachment is all about incitement.
00:06:37.000 The actual text of the impeachment resolution suggests that President Trump is responsible for the riots because he incited the riots.
00:06:46.000 The actual text suggests that he reiterated false claims that we won the election.
00:06:52.000 He willfully made statements that in context encourage and foreseeably resulted in lawless action at the Capitol, such as, if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore, thus incited by President Trump, says the incitement charge.
00:07:02.000 Members of the crowd he had addressed in an attempt to, among other objectives, interfere with the joint session's solemn constitutional duty to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election, unlawfully breached and vandalized the Capitol, injured and killed law enforcement personnel, menaced members of Congress, the vice president, and congressional personnel, and engaged in other violent, deadly, destructive, and seditious acts.
00:07:21.000 Trump's conduct on January 6th, this is all in the incitement charge that's going to be used as the basis for the impeachment in the House.
00:07:28.000 Followed his prior efforts to subvert and obstruct the certification of the results of the 2020 presidential election.
00:07:33.000 Those prior efforts included a phone call on January 2nd, 2021, during which President Trump urged the Secretary of State of Georgia, Brad Raffensperger, to quote-unquote, find enough votes to overturn the Georgia presidential election results and threaten Secretary Raffensperger if he failed to do so.
00:07:46.000 In all of this, President Trump gravely endangered the security of the United States and its institutions of government.
00:07:51.000 He threatened the integrity of the democratic system, interfered with the peaceful transition of power, and imperiled a co-equal branch of government.
00:07:57.000 He thereby betrayed his trust as president to the manifest injury of the people of the United States, says the impeachment charge, whereby Trump by such conduct has demonstrated he will remain a threat to national security, democracy and the constitution if allowed to remain in office and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self-governance and the rule of law.
00:08:14.000 Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial removal from office disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States.
00:08:21.000 Okay, so that is the charge that is being put forth for impeachment.
00:08:25.000 And so this requires us to now take a close look at what exactly are the rationales for impeachment and what are the rationales against impeachment.
00:08:31.000 Because what we just saw is indeed unprecedented in modern times.
00:08:36.000 President Trump spoke to a crowd of tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands of people in Washington, D.C.
00:08:42.000 Some of those people then went and invaded the Capitol building with, in some cases, blood on their mind.
00:08:47.000 Clearly.
00:08:48.000 People were going in there with zip ties.
00:08:50.000 There was actual blood spilled.
00:08:52.000 They were attempting, obviously, and first and foremost, to disrupt the constitutional working order.
00:08:57.000 They were going there with lies in mind, right?
00:08:59.000 Lies about the election being stolen.
00:09:01.000 Lies that the Congress of the United States had the power to overturn state-certified electoral results.
00:09:06.000 So what happened on Wednesday, as we talked about all of last week, and we'll continue to talk about, was absolutely egregious in every way.
00:09:12.000 The question is whether this amounts to an impeachable charge against Trump.
00:09:16.000 So there's two questions.
00:09:17.000 One, is impeachment warranted for Trump?
00:09:20.000 And two, is it prudent?
00:09:22.000 So these are two separate questions.
00:09:23.000 They're not quite the same.
00:09:24.000 The first relies on what your concept of impeachment is.
00:09:28.000 And this is a serious question.
00:09:29.000 What exactly is impeachment for?
00:09:30.000 So if you want to say that impeachment is for High crimes and misdemeanors, meaning that an actual legal violation has to be found, it's going to be difficult to impeach Trump along those lines, as we'll get to in just one second.
00:09:42.000 If you say that it is a political remedy to a political breach by the president, well then, impeachment looks more legitimate.
00:09:49.000 But here is the problem.
00:09:50.000 There are some complicating factors.
00:09:52.000 So we're going to get to all of this in just one second.
00:09:54.000 Really analyze it.
00:09:55.000 We're going to try and be as dispassionate as possible and try to steelman some of the arguments in favor of impeachment and not strawman them.
00:10:02.000 We're going to try and suggest what exactly are the arguments that folks are making and why exactly are those arguments flawed if they are flawed.
00:10:07.000 We'll get to that in just one second.
00:10:08.000 First, Let us talk about your house.
00:10:11.000 So right now, look around your house.
00:10:13.000 Looks pretty nice, right?
00:10:14.000 But there's something a little dingy and off about your house.
00:10:16.000 I'll tell you what it is.
00:10:16.000 You haven't looked at your window coverings, right?
00:10:18.000 Those window coverings have not been updated in 15, 20 years.
00:10:20.000 They're starting to look dingy.
00:10:21.000 The curtains look yucky.
00:10:22.000 And what you really need is to go over to blinds.com and shop top quality blinds, shades, interior shutters from home with easy online ordering and free shipping.
00:10:31.000 The experts at Blinds.com understand that window treatments are one of the household items you just don't think about.
00:10:36.000 They can make an enormous difference on the look and feel of your home.
00:10:39.000 You don't need to do a full renovation.
00:10:40.000 By simply changing what's on the windows, you can create a totally different feel because it changes how light comes into the home, which is a huge thing.
00:10:46.000 Go to Blinds.com.
00:10:47.000 Just take a look at all the options.
00:10:48.000 Faux wood blinds, cellular and roller shades, even outdoor shades.
00:10:51.000 If you're nervous about trying them, there's really no reason to be.
00:10:53.000 Blinds.com has helped millions of homeowners through the process, plus they guarantee the perfect fit, whether you do it yourself or have them measure and install everything for you.
00:11:01.000 We've used Blinds.com before, they really do a fantastic, fantastic job.
00:11:04.000 Go right now, see how much you can save at Blinds.com.
00:11:07.000 When you check out online, don't forget to tell them you heard about Blinds.com from the Ben Shapiro Show.
00:11:10.000 That helps them, it helps us.
00:11:12.000 Rules and restrictions that may apply, check them out at Blinds.com today.
00:11:15.000 Okay, so there are really three rationales for impeachment, and then we'll get to the three rationales against impeachment.
00:11:21.000 So, the three rationales in favor of impeachment.
00:11:25.000 The first is what Democrats are claiming, which is that Trump actually committed a crime.
00:11:28.000 The incitement charge is the suggestion that Trump committed a crime.
00:11:32.000 And that crime was incitement.
00:11:34.000 That was the crime of incitement.
00:11:36.000 That is what the actual article is.
00:11:38.000 It's a one article charge.
00:11:40.000 Article one, incitement of insurrection.
00:11:42.000 The Constitution provides that the House of Representatives shall have the sole power of impeachment and that the President shall be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
00:11:53.000 Further, Section 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution prohibits any person who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States from holding any office under the United States.
00:12:02.000 So they're trying to link this with the 14th Amendment.
00:12:03.000 The 14th Amendment was specifically written in the aftermath of the Civil War in order to prevent people who had been Confederate handmaidens from serving in the government.
00:12:12.000 It was to prevent Jefferson Davis from coming back as a senator.
00:12:15.000 The notion that Trump falls under the 14th Amendment is an extraordinary stretch, just legally speaking.
00:12:20.000 He doesn't fall under the 14th Amendment, neither does Josh Hawley, neither does Ted Cruz.
00:12:24.000 That does not amount to an insurrection under the 14th Amendment.
00:12:29.000 And so Ilhan Omar makes the dumb person's case this way.
00:12:30.000 United States in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of the United States and to the best of his ability, preserve, provide, protect, defend the Constitution, they say that Trump engaged in high crimes and misdemeanors by inciting violence against the government of the United States. And so Ilhan Omar makes the dumb person's case this way.
00:12:46.000 She says that this is like holding a murderer accountable.
00:12:48.000 I know that some have likened the reaction that we are getting, obviously, from the president and some of, you know, Democrats and some of Republicans in Congress to someone saying, you know, if we were to hold a murderer or someone who's committed violence accountable, there will be more.
00:13:15.000 And to me, it is Okay, so first of all, there is some grave irony to Ilhan Omar, who went extraordinarily soft on riots around the nation, talking about holding murderers accountable because you just have to hold people accountable for their violent actions.
00:13:36.000 It's also supremely ironic from Ilhan Omar, who literally wrote a letter to a judge recommending that a recruit of ISIS ought to be let out of prison early.
00:13:44.000 Because that person had been impacted by their social circumstances.
00:13:46.000 So it's always weird to hear Democrats talk about crime and punishment in this way.
00:13:50.000 At least Democrats like Ilhan Omar.
00:13:51.000 In any case, what is the actual legal standard?
00:13:54.000 So, if you're talking about legal incitement, the standards on legal incitement are really, really loose.
00:13:59.000 In order to be considered responsible for incitement of violence, there is something the Supreme Court put in place in Brandenburg v. Ohio in 1969.
00:14:06.000 It's called the Brandenburg Test.
00:14:09.000 The Brandenburg test was established to determine when inflammatory speech intending to advocate illegal action can be restricted.
00:14:15.000 In the case of Brandenburg v. Ohio, according to Cornell Law School, a KKK leader gave a speech at a rally to his fellow Klansmen.
00:14:21.000 After listing a number of derogatory racial slurs, he then said, quote, Okay, the court found that this was not actual, the speech has to be directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action.
00:14:36.000 Like, it has to be pretty clear, right?
00:14:37.000 You want to incite lawless action right now, and the speech is likely to incite or produce such action.
00:14:43.000 So, examples of things that are not actually applied under the Brandenburg Test would be Hess versus Indiana, 1973.
00:14:50.000 The Supreme Court said that an Indiana University protester who said, we will take to the effing street again, The Supreme Court said that that was protected under the Brandenburg test because the speech amounted to nothing more than advocacy of illegal action at some indefinite future time.
00:15:05.000 And the court said since there was no evidence or rational inference from the import of the language that his words were intended to produce or likely to produce imminent disorder, those words could not be punished by the state on the ground.
00:15:13.000 They had a tendency to lead to violence.
00:15:16.000 In NAACP versus Claiborne Hardware, 1982, the Supreme Court found that a person named Charles Evers threatened violence against those who refused to boycott white businesses.
00:15:26.000 The Supreme Court, applied Brandenburg, found that the speech was protected.
00:15:29.000 They said strong and effective extemporaneous rhetoric cannot be nicely channeled in purely dulcet phrases.
00:15:34.000 An advocate must be free to stimulate his audience with spontaneous and emotional appeals for unity and action in a common cause.
00:15:39.000 When such appeals do not incite lawless action, they must be regarded as protected speech.
00:15:44.000 So, the Supreme Court has had a pretty broad standard, and virtually all lawyers agree that what Trump did does not amount to legal incitement, right?
00:15:51.000 You couldn't charge him in a court of law with incitement.
00:15:53.000 That's specifically true because, again, you can argue that Trump was urging imminent action, right?
00:15:59.000 He literally said, I want you to go to the Capitol building and march with me.
00:16:02.000 But he also said, peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
00:16:05.000 So he didn't say, I want you to go to the Capitol and invade the Capitol.
00:16:08.000 He used a bunch of charged language.
00:16:10.000 It was highly charged.
00:16:11.000 I don't think it was great.
00:16:12.000 None of this is to argue that what Trump has been doing for the past couple months is appropriate, decent, or good.
00:16:17.000 But in order to meet the test of legal incitement, which is the crime that you would want under high crimes and misdemeanors, the test is a little bit higher.
00:16:24.000 That test is, did he mean to incite imminent lawless action?
00:16:28.000 That is the Brandenburg test.
00:16:30.000 Well, if he did, it would be weird for him to say that you should peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
00:16:35.000 Here was President Trump saying just that at the rally the other day.
00:16:39.000 We've come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated.
00:16:48.000 Lawfully slated.
00:16:50.000 I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.
00:16:59.000 Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity.
00:17:06.000 Okay, so again, peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard is not quite the same thing as I want you to go over there, invade the Capitol building, and beat a police officer to death.
00:17:15.000 That doesn't seem like quite the same thing.
00:17:17.000 So in any Senate defense against impeachment, obviously that is going to be Trump's defense.
00:17:22.000 Listen, if you wanted to impeach me for all the stuff that I've said since the election, then you'd have to find the grounds upon which you could impeach me.
00:17:31.000 You can't find those grounds, and to suggest that I incited the violence as opposed to raising the temperature is a different thing.
00:17:37.000 Now, listen, I've had that standard for a very long time, right?
00:17:39.000 I've said this a thousand times on the show.
00:17:41.000 When Barack Obama said over and over and over again that the police were racist across the country, that the policing had a systemically racist problem, that blacks in America were at existential risk, and then a Black Lives Matter supporter went and shot to death six Dallas police officers in 2016, I didn't say that Obama was responsible.
00:17:56.000 I said that Obama was responsible for increasing the temperature in the country, and that was really bad.
00:18:00.000 But was he responsible for the man shooting six police officers?
00:18:04.000 No.
00:18:05.000 Bernie Sanders spent years claiming that if you didn't back Medicare for All, it's because you wanted people to die.
00:18:10.000 That Republican attempts to stymie Obamacare were designed at killing people.
00:18:13.000 And then a Bernie Sanders supporter went and shot a bunch of members of Congress, including Steve Scalise, almost to death.
00:18:19.000 I said at the time, Bernie Sanders was responsible for raising the temperature.
00:18:23.000 Did he deserve to lose his office for quote-unquote incitement?
00:18:25.000 No, that's not the way any of this works.
00:18:28.000 Okay, so my standard for incitement has been completely consistent across time for Democrats and Republicans.
00:18:33.000 I cannot say the same for most of the people in the political sphere.
00:18:37.000 And again, it is worth noting, politics is replete with all sorts of, I would say, violent rhetoric, rhetoric that exacerbates the tensions, that raises the temperature, passionate rhetoric that Is it implicit with sort of violent imagery?
00:18:56.000 I mean, how many times have you heard a politician say that we need to fight, fight, fight, fight, fight?
00:18:59.000 I mean, that's Republican and Democrat.
00:19:01.000 In fact, here's a little montage of various Democrats using some rather inflammatory language just over the course of the past couple of years.
00:19:08.000 I just don't even know why there aren't uprisings all over the country, and maybe there will be.
00:19:13.000 People need to start taking to the streets.
00:19:15.000 This is a dictator.
00:19:17.000 You know, there needs to be unrest in the streets for as long as there is unrest in our lives.
00:19:21.000 Enemies of the state.
00:19:23.000 Show me where it says that protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful.
00:19:27.000 Do something about your dad's immigration practices, you feckless... When they go low, we kick them.
00:19:32.000 How do you resist the temptation to run up and wring her neck?
00:19:35.000 The biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right.
00:19:42.000 I thought he should have punched him in the face.
00:19:44.000 Even if he lost, he insulted your wife.
00:19:46.000 He came down the escalator and called Mexicans rapists and murderers.
00:19:48.000 He said, well, what do you think I should have done?
00:19:49.000 I said, I think you should have punched him in the face and then gotten out of the race.
00:19:52.000 You would have been a hero.
00:19:53.000 I'd like to punch him in the face.
00:19:56.000 So, as far as the first rationale for impeachment, which is that Trump committed a crime, it's going to be very difficult to meet that test.
00:20:02.000 Okay, so that brings us to the second argument in favor of impeachment.
00:20:07.000 And this one is at least more honest.
00:20:09.000 The second argument in favor of impeachment Is that this was a challenge to the legislative branch, that the legislative branch of government cannot abide challenges from the executive branch of government.
00:20:20.000 If the executive branch of government attacks the legislature in the way that Trump attacked the legislature, rhetorically speaking, that the legislative branch needs to fight back, particularly if that culminates in an actual attack by armed supporters of that person on the Capitol building.
00:20:32.000 It's not a criminal argument.
00:20:34.000 It is now a political argument.
00:20:36.000 Our sole method of protecting ourselves against the executive branch is for us to strike back with impeachment.
00:20:40.000 This is the angle that's being taken by Liz Cheney, the number three House Republican.
00:20:43.000 A lot of people very angry at Liz Cheney today.
00:20:46.000 Again, I think the differences, as always, my opinion on this is the differences of opinion are acceptable within the Republican caucus and within the Democratic caucus.
00:20:53.000 I think we should we have to take the argument at least seriously, even if we decide at the end that the argument lacks.
00:20:58.000 So here's what Liz Cheney said.
00:20:59.000 She said she's going to vote to impeach Trump today.
00:21:01.000 She says on January 6th, a violent mob attacked the United States Capitol to obstruct the process of our democracy and stop the counting of presidential electoral votes.
00:21:08.000 This insurrection caused injury, death and destruction in the most sacred space of our republic.
00:21:12.000 Much more will become clear in the coming days and weeks.
00:21:14.000 What we know now is enough.
00:21:15.000 The President of the United States summoned this mob, assembled the mob, and lit the flame of this attack.
00:21:19.000 Everything that followed was his doing.
00:21:21.000 None of this would have happened without the President.
00:21:23.000 The President could have immediately and forcefully intervened to stop the violence.
00:21:25.000 He did not.
00:21:26.000 There has never been a greater betrayal by a President of the United States of his office and his oath to the Constitution.
00:21:30.000 I will vote to impeach the President.
00:21:32.000 Okay, so basically, the argument here is not even...
00:21:35.000 Criminal incitement, right?
00:21:36.000 The argument here is that on a broad sort of causal level, without Trump, none of this happens, which is very likely true, right?
00:21:43.000 On a broad causal level, it's true that James Hodgkin, the congressional baseball shooter, doesn't go and shoot a bunch of people if Bernie Sanders isn't saying what he's saying.
00:21:50.000 It's on a broad causal level.
00:21:51.000 Lots of rhetoric is endemic to violence that happens in the nature of politics.
00:21:59.000 Right, so the reality here of what she's saying, which is that this is a challenge to the legislative branch that culminated in violence, that's an actual argument, and that's an argument that I've heard from a lot of good-hearted Republicans and a lot of conservatives who have called for impeachment.
00:22:11.000 I heard the Wall Street Journal editorial board made a similar argument last week.
00:22:15.000 Which of the legislative branch has to defend itself.
00:22:17.000 And that's an argument worth taking seriously.
00:22:19.000 Now what's sort of interesting about the argument is that the argument that Trump was making originally is that he was imputing powers to Congress that Congress does not actually have.
00:22:27.000 It's sort of a bizarre situation because usually when the executive challenges the legislature, it's to deprive the legislature of powers that the legislature does have.
00:22:36.000 Usually when you hear presidents attacking the legislature, it's the do-nothing Congress.
00:22:39.000 If you don't do what I want to do, then I'm just going to use the pen and a phone.
00:22:42.000 The legislature is an institution that is not worthy of respect, and so we're just going to take its authority and use it here in the executive branch.
00:22:49.000 In this particular case, Trump was doing the very odd, bizarre, and constitutionally incorrect thing of suggesting that the legislature, the federal legislature, had the power to actually overturn state electoral results.
00:22:59.000 He was imputing power to Congress that Congress doesn't actually have.
00:23:02.000 Nonetheless, The president urging people to go march on the Capitol building, even if not to do violence, is a unique thing.
00:23:12.000 We haven't really seen that before.
00:23:14.000 Is that impeachable?
00:23:14.000 I wonder whether that's impeachable.
00:23:17.000 Again, that comes down to whether Trump actually incited.
00:23:20.000 So the broad causal argument, I'm not sure sustains all the way through.
00:23:26.000 In other words, did Trump tell people?
00:23:28.000 I think that the legal incitement standard is not just for me a legal incitement standard.
00:23:32.000 I think it's sort of a moral incitement standard, too.
00:23:35.000 When it comes to the issue of causation, you can say that, broadly speaking, Trump caused everything that followed.
00:23:40.000 But I think that on a moral level, can you say that Trump is Responsible to the extent that he wanted people to go invade the Capitol building and attack Mike Pence physically and harm people.
00:23:53.000 I think that is going to be a bit of a stretch.
00:23:56.000 So, does that mean that it's completely out of bounds for Liz Cheney to say what she said?
00:24:01.000 I don't think it's completely out of bounds.
00:24:02.000 I just think that her argument is too strong and proves too much.
00:24:05.000 Because you can certainly see a point in the past or in the future where the presidency attacks a co-equal branch of government in extraordinary language And as long as he's not urging people to openly attack that institution, that's still an attack on a co-equal branch of government.
00:24:18.000 That sort of stuff happens pretty regularly in American politics.
00:24:20.000 The issue here is that a bunch of fringe wackos decided that they were going to invade the Capitol building under those auspices.
00:24:27.000 And then finally, we'll get to in just a second, the third, the third rationale for impeachment.
00:24:31.000 And the third rationale for impeachment is just pure politics.
00:24:35.000 So the first was something criminal happened.
00:24:36.000 I don't think that's correct.
00:24:37.000 The second was this was a challenge to the legislative branch's authority.
00:24:40.000 I think there's a lot of truth to that one.
00:24:42.000 But I also think that that's an argument that applies broadly to a lot of people in the past.
00:24:45.000 So maybe we should impeach presidents more often.
00:24:47.000 Maybe it would be the comeback.
00:24:48.000 Then the third is just pure politics, which seems to be why Democrats are doing what they are doing right here.
00:24:54.000 Not all Democrats.
00:24:54.000 I think some Democrats are participating in the first two standards.
00:24:57.000 They think an actual violation of law happened.
00:24:59.000 Some Democrats are suggesting that it's a violation of the prerogative of the legislative branch.
00:25:04.000 I get that.
00:25:04.000 But It's hard to look at the actions of Democrats in leadership over the last 48 hours, last week, really, and not see an attempt to play politics.
00:25:12.000 We'll get to that in just one second.
00:25:14.000 First, let's talk about your need for life insurance.
00:25:17.000 So, it's been a really dismal year.
00:25:19.000 Really dismal year.
00:25:20.000 And maybe that's got some dark thoughts percolating in that brain of yours.
00:25:23.000 Well, while those dark thoughts are percolating, why not turn that to something useful?
00:25:27.000 So, for example, you need life insurance.
00:25:28.000 God forbid something should happen to you and your family is left without any sort of income.
00:25:32.000 You are going to be upset.
00:25:34.000 Or you would be upset were you alive that you had not gotten life insurance.
00:25:36.000 This is why you should go check out Policy Genius right now.
00:25:40.000 Policy Genius makes it easy for you to compare more than 30 top insurers all at once.
00:25:43.000 Save over 50% in the process.
00:25:45.000 There's no hassle.
00:25:46.000 Their licensed experts work for you, not the insurance companies.
00:25:48.000 Here's how it works.
00:25:49.000 First, you head on over to PolicyGenius.com.
00:25:52.000 In minutes, you can work out how much coverage you need and compare quotes from top insurers to find your best price.
00:25:56.000 PolicyGenius will compare policies starting at as little as a buck a day.
00:25:59.000 You might even be eligible to skip that in-person medical exam.
00:26:02.000 Once you apply, the PolicyGenius team will handle all the paperwork and the red tape.
00:26:05.000 If you hit any speed bumps during the application process, they'll take care of everything soup to nuts.
00:26:09.000 That kind of service has earned PolicyGenius a five-star rating across over 1,600 reviews on Trustpilot and Google.
00:26:14.000 So, make this the year you finally cross life insurance off your to-do list.
00:26:17.000 Get protection for your loved ones.
00:26:19.000 Go to PolicyGenius.com right now and get started.
00:26:21.000 It could save 50% or more by comparing quotes.
00:26:23.000 Start the new year with one less thing to worry about, PolicyGenius.
00:26:26.000 When it comes to insurance, it's nice and extraordinarily important to get it right.
00:26:29.000 Okay, so...
00:26:30.000 As I say, there are three reasons why impeachment is being pursued.
00:26:35.000 One is that some people think that Trump actually committed a formal crime.
00:26:38.000 I think that that's a very difficult standard to uphold.
00:26:40.000 Very few lawyers would say that it counts as legal incitement what Trump did the other day.
00:26:44.000 Number two is the overall challenge to the legislative branch.
00:26:47.000 I think there is some legitimacy to the idea that Trump challenged the authority of the legislative branch who's sending people to march on the Capitol building.
00:26:53.000 I also think that that has been a long time move by a variety of presidents.
00:26:57.000 This is just a much more extreme version of it.
00:27:00.000 I mean, FDR suggested that he was going to pack the Supreme Court because he didn't like the outcome of the Supreme Court.
00:27:05.000 If his supporters had then gone and marched on the Supreme Court, it would look like something very similar.
00:27:09.000 So, once you separate out the incitement issue and you get into the challenge to the legislative branch, then that looks bad and ugly.
00:27:17.000 I'm not sure that it looks impeachable.
00:27:18.000 I understand the countervailing logic, by the way, which is the Liz Cheney logic, which is the legislative branch cannot stand for this sort of infringement on its authority.
00:27:27.000 And in fact, you know, I'm kind of happy to see if the legislative branch wants to stand up to the executive just on a broad level.
00:27:32.000 My problem is I think it's partisan, but if the legislative branch wants to far more often stand up to the executive branch, I think that'd be a welcome development.
00:27:40.000 Finally, there's the third rationale for impeachment, and this one seems like it's the most cynical.
00:27:45.000 It's also probably the most accurate because we live in a very cynical time, and that is just pure politics.
00:27:49.000 This is not really about principles so much as it is about the pure politics of the situation.
00:27:53.000 The way that you can tell There's a lot of truth to this, is the way that the Democrats decided that they wanted to move forward with the impeachment.
00:28:01.000 The first thing that they did is they pushed for Mike Pence to use the 25th Amendment.
00:28:06.000 They passed a resolution trying to push Mike Pence to use the 25th Amendment.
00:28:10.000 Now, that's unconstitutional.
00:28:11.000 Okay, the 25th Amendment is an executive branch remedy for the president being incompetent.
00:28:16.000 It was originally put into law after Woodrow Wilson essentially went brain dead while he was president of the United States, and his wife, Edith, was essentially running the country.
00:28:24.000 And so, Congress, the states, they decided, you know what?
00:28:27.000 We're going to need a solution to this, and that is the cabinet can declare that the president is incompetent and then replace him with the vice president.
00:28:32.000 But that is an executive branch remedy.
00:28:34.000 It has to then be greenlit by the legislative branch.
00:28:37.000 It's a very complicated process, but It's generally not the legislative branch threatening that if the executive branch doesn't do what it wants, then they are going to impeach.
00:28:45.000 That would be the legislative branch now encroaching on the territory of the executive branch, right?
00:28:52.000 So it's sort of the reverse of the argument that was being made a second ago about why Trump needs to be impeached for violating the prerogatives of the legislature.
00:28:59.000 So Nancy Pelosi tried to pass a resolution suggesting use of the 25th Amendment and Mike Pence slapped that down.
00:29:07.000 He wrote a letter to Pelosi.
00:29:08.000 He said he's not going to invoke the 25th Amendment.
00:29:10.000 He said, Every American was shocked and saddened by the attack on our nation's capital last week.
00:29:14.000 I'm grateful for the leadership you and other congressional leaders provided in reconvening Congress to complete the people's business on that very same day.
00:29:19.000 It was a moment that demonstrated to the American people the unity that is still possible in Congress when it is needed most.
00:29:24.000 But now, with just eight days left in the President's term, you and the Democratic Caucus are demanding that the Cabinet and I invoke the 25th Amendment.
00:29:31.000 I do not believe that such a course of action is in the best interest of our nation or consistent with our Constitution.
00:29:35.000 Last week, I did not yield to pressure to exert power beyond my constitutional authority to determine the outcome of the election.
00:29:41.000 I will not now yield to efforts in the House of Representatives to play political games at a time so serious in the life of our nation.
00:29:46.000 So Pence is saying, like, I can see the politics here, lady.
00:29:48.000 Like, we know exactly what you're doing.
00:29:50.000 Which is right.
00:29:50.000 As you know full well, the 25th Amendment was designed to address presidential incapacity or disability.
00:29:55.000 Just a few months ago, when you introduced legislation to create a 25th Amendment commission, you said, quote, a president's fitness for office must be determined by science and fact.
00:30:02.000 You said then, we must be very respectful of not making a judgment on the basis of a comment or behavior we don't like, but based on a medical decision.
00:30:09.000 Madam Speaker, you are right.
00:30:10.000 Under our Constitution, the 25th Amendment is not a means of punishment or usurpation.
00:30:14.000 Invoking the 25th Amendment in such a manner would set a terrible precedent.
00:30:17.000 After the horrific events of last week, our administration's energy is directed to ensuring an orderly transition.
00:30:22.000 The Bible says, for everything there is a season, a time for every purpose under heaven, a time to heal, a time to build up.
00:30:26.000 That time is now.
00:30:27.000 In the midst of a global pandemic, economic hardship for millions of Americans, and the tragic events of January 6th, now is the time for us to come together.
00:30:34.000 Now is the time to heal.
00:30:35.000 I urge you and every member of Congress to avoid actions that would further divide and inflame the passions of the moment.
00:30:39.000 Work with us to lower the temperature and unite our country as we prepare to inaugurate President-elect Biden as the next President of the United States.
00:30:45.000 I pledge to you that I will continue to do my part to work in good faith with the incoming administration to ensure an orderly transition of power.
00:30:51.000 So help me God.
00:30:52.000 By the way, Mike Pence's behavior during this whole debacle has been extraordinary.
00:30:56.000 I mean, really, really good.
00:30:57.000 I mean, Mike Pence has done what he was constitutionally supposed to do under heavy pressure from Trump to violate his constitutional oath of office.
00:31:06.000 There are apparently now stories emerging that Trump had said directly to Pence when it came to whether he should count the duly certified electoral votes that you can either be a patriot or you can be a p-word.
00:31:17.000 See how I say P-word even if it's not a Cardi B song?
00:31:19.000 Apparently that's what Trump said to Pence, and Pence decided actually to be a patriot, which is to do his constitutional duty.
00:31:26.000 Okay, but the fact that the Democrats were attempting the 25th Amendment, as opposed to impeachment first, suggests that politics were being played here.
00:31:33.000 Also suggesting that politics are being played here, that this is a lot about democratic political game, is who Nancy Pelosi is now appointing to be the managers, the House impeachment managers.
00:31:44.000 So, included among their number, Eric Swalwell.
00:31:48.000 Who most recently was seen screwing Chinese spies, apparently, and being on the intelligence committee at the same time.
00:31:54.000 So that is good times.
00:31:56.000 That's really solid.
00:31:57.000 Other people.
00:31:58.000 Jamie Raskin of Maryland is going to serve as the lead impeachment manager.
00:32:03.000 Jamie Raskin did indeed, in 2016, challenge 10 of 29's Of Florida's 29 electoral votes, saying that they violated Florida's prohibition against dual office holders.
00:32:13.000 So it's interesting that, you know, the apparent push by Trump to challenge electoral votes.
00:32:20.000 Jamie Raskin is going to be leading the way on the impeachment, despite the fact that Jamie Raskin did the exact same thing back in 2016.
00:32:26.000 Meanwhile, as far as playing politics goes, the Democrats are not stopping at Trump, of course.
00:32:30.000 Their suggestion is that it's time to expel members of Congress who challenged electoral votes.
00:32:36.000 So, Democrats are now pushing that measure.
00:32:39.000 According to the New York Times, Progressive House Democrats on Monday introduced legislation that would allow a committee to investigate and potentially expel Republican lawmakers who had participated in efforts to subvert the results of the November election.
00:32:49.000 I don't like what they did either, okay?
00:32:50.000 I don't think the electoral votes should have been challenged.
00:32:52.000 issue a report on lawmakers who had sought to overturn the election and determine if they should face sanction, including removal from the House of Representatives.
00:32:58.000 That sounds like playing politics.
00:32:59.000 You don't like what they did, so now you're going to expel them.
00:33:01.000 They're duly elected members of Congress.
00:33:03.000 You're going to expel them from the House of Representatives.
00:33:05.000 Now I don't like what they did either.
00:33:06.000 OK, I don't think the electoral votes should have been challenged.
00:33:08.000 I don't even think there's a ground for the challenge of the electoral votes.
00:33:12.000 And this time apparently in the minority when it comes to the House of Representatives, where a bunch of Republican House members actually issued the challenges.
00:33:17.000 But just because I don't like something doesn't mean that you get to expel the member.
00:33:21.000 Again, Jamie Raskin did the exact same thing in 2016.
00:33:23.000 I don't think he should lose his House seat because of that.
00:33:25.000 He should if he's... I mean, I don't think he should hold a House seat based on electoral results, but I don't think he should be expelled.
00:33:31.000 The Democrats' attempt to expand the definition of the 14th Amendment to include challenges to electoral votes is really, really crazy, and super political, obviously.
00:33:39.000 Cori Bush, a Black Lives Matter Democrat, right?
00:33:42.000 I mean, that's literally how she got her start, as a Black Lives Matter activist.
00:33:44.000 She said, even if it's just a few, we have to make sure the message is clear.
00:33:47.000 You cannot be a sitting Congress member and incite an insurrection and work to overturn an election.
00:33:51.000 Work to overturn an election?
00:33:52.000 Okay, now we get into, like, super political territory, because the Democrats worked for four years to overturn the results of the 2016 election with all of the Russia nonsense.
00:34:01.000 Democrats refused to accept that Trump had been elected President of the United States in 2016 in any serious way.
00:34:07.000 So, like, this is the third rationale for impeachment and it seems like, frankly, the most obvious, which is the purely political.
00:34:14.000 Sherrod Brown, the Senator from Ohio, he suggested that the Senate of the United States should move to expel Josh Hawley under the 14th Amendment.
00:34:20.000 I'm not a big Hawley fan.
00:34:22.000 I think what Hawley did here was really, really bad.
00:34:23.000 I thought it was really cynical.
00:34:25.000 I think Hawley knew that the election was not, quote-unquote, stolen.
00:34:28.000 I think Hawley knew that there was not sufficient evidence of voter fraud or voter irregularity to overturn any electoral results.
00:34:33.000 In fact, he said as much.
00:34:35.000 I think that's bad.
00:34:36.000 Do I think that that is insurrection under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution?
00:34:39.000 No, not unless you're a nut.
00:34:40.000 Here is Sherrod Brown being a nut.
00:34:43.000 The public humiliation doesn't seem to matter much, even some of their allies.
00:34:47.000 Senator Hawley, his sort of mentor, former Senator Danforth, has said that he wished he hadn't encouraged him to run for the Senate.
00:35:00.000 They're hearing that, but the Senate as a body needs to take action, and I know Senator McConnell won't.
00:35:06.000 But we should, if he's not going to resign, which of course they won't, they continue to be like Trump and take no responsibility for anything, even though we saw their words, we saw the picture of Holly, who George Will said there's a huge chasm between his ambition and his achievement, then we should take action on expulsion.
00:35:27.000 Okay, so again, that looks super duper political.
00:35:30.000 So those were the three rationales in favor of impeachment.
00:35:32.000 One is the super political.
00:35:34.000 One is the challenge to the legislative branch.
00:35:35.000 That's the only one that I think has any legitimacy at all.
00:35:38.000 And the third is the incitement charge, which again, is legally specious.
00:35:41.000 Okay, so in a second, we're gonna get to the three cases against impeachment.
00:35:45.000 Like why impeachment would not be the proper remedy here.
00:35:49.000 We'll get to that in just one second.
00:35:51.000 First, we're trying to take all the passion out of this.
00:35:53.000 We're trying to take all the passion and just analyze.
00:35:55.000 First, let's talk about the fact that a lot of dudes out there losing their hair, obviously.
00:36:00.000 Male pattern baldness runs in my family.
00:36:02.000 It's something that freaks me out.
00:36:03.000 It's not something that I want to be a part of.
00:36:04.000 Well, you need a one-stop shop for hair loss, skincare, sexual wellness.
00:36:08.000 It's time to write a new chapter one Thanks to science, baldness can now be an optional thing.
00:36:14.000 HIMS is helping guys be the best version of themselves with licensed medical providers and FDA approved products to help treat hair loss.
00:36:19.000 We're not talking about snake oil pills or gas station counter supplements.
00:36:23.000 HIMS was created by a dude who knows some of men's health conversations are easier online and in person.
00:36:27.000 It's easier to be discreet and get your medication in mail.
00:36:30.000 No more awkward in-person doctor's visits or long pharmacy lines.
00:36:33.000 For HIMS, Connects you to licensed medical professionals online.
00:36:36.000 That could save you hours.
00:36:37.000 It's completely confidential and discreet.
00:36:39.000 You answer a few quick questions, a medical professional will review.
00:36:41.000 If they determine it's right for you, they can prescribe you medication to treat hair loss that is shipped directly to your door.
00:36:46.000 Today, HIMS is giving you their best offer yet.
00:36:48.000 If you are not happy with the results after 90 days, HIMS will give you a full refund, so you got nothing to lose.
00:36:52.000 Right now, my listeners can get their first visit absolutely free.
00:36:54.000 Go to forhims.com slash ben.
00:36:57.000 That is forhims.com slash ben.
00:37:00.000 Prescription products require an online consultation with a health care provider who will determine if a prescription is appropriate.
00:37:04.000 Restrictions do apply.
00:37:05.000 See website for full details and important safety information.
00:37:08.000 Remember, that's 4hims.com slash Ben.
00:37:11.000 OK, we're going to get to the three cases against impeachment in just one second.
00:37:15.000 First.
00:37:16.000 Tomorrow night is a big night for The Daily Wire, for this company.
00:37:19.000 Daily Wire makes its grand entrance into entertainment content.
00:37:21.000 We've been talking for a long time about culture being upstream of politics and how Republicans, conservatives, people who are just not of the left need to fight the culture war.
00:37:29.000 Well, we are getting involved.
00:37:31.000 At 7 p.m.
00:37:31.000 Eastern, 4 p.m.
00:37:32.000 Pacific, we will air a virtual premiere of our first feature film, Run, Hide, Fight, in a special episode of Backstage.
00:37:38.000 The premiere will stream live over at DailyWire website, mobile and streaming apps, as well as our YouTube channel.
00:37:43.000 After tomorrow's event, the movie will be available exclusively to DailyWire members.
00:37:47.000 Now, please be aware.
00:37:48.000 Run, Hide, Fight?
00:37:49.000 It's not really political.
00:37:50.000 It is intense.
00:37:51.000 It is not a leftist film.
00:37:52.000 It is for mature audiences only.
00:37:54.000 It's a rated R film.
00:37:55.000 The movie follows a high school besieged by a quartet of school shooters when one young girl, 17-year-old Zoe Hull, uses her wits and survival skills to fight back.
00:38:02.000 This is not like a typical conservative documentary about like George Washington's mother's cousin.
00:38:07.000 We are excited to bring you excellent, edgy, cutting edge stories that Hollywood refuses to acknowledge.
00:38:12.000 We hope you'll join us for the special event tomorrow night at 7 p.m.
00:38:15.000 Eastern, 4 p.m.
00:38:16.000 Pacific at dailywire.com, Apple TV, or Roku, or the Daily Wire YouTube channel.
00:38:20.000 you are listening to the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.
00:38:23.000 All righty, so now we get to the three arguments We did the three arguments in favor of impeachment.
00:38:33.000 Namely, he committed a crime.
00:38:35.000 Secondly, a challenge to the legislative branch.
00:38:36.000 It needs to be rebutted by the legislative branch.
00:38:39.000 And third, this is just pure politics and we need the pure politics of the situation.
00:38:42.000 Okay, finally, here's the rationales against impeachment.
00:38:45.000 Okay, number one, and this is just true, there's no time, okay?
00:38:48.000 Realistically speaking, the impeachment is not going to have any effect because it is already, by the calendar, January 13th, one week from today, Joe Biden will be the president of the United States.
00:38:57.000 He will not be the president-elect, he'll be the president one week from today.
00:39:01.000 The Democrats are slated to vote on impeachment today.
00:39:03.000 Let's say they pass it.
00:39:04.000 Let's say they get it to the Senate.
00:39:06.000 The Senate is not supposed to come back into session until January 19th.
00:39:09.000 Okay, like the day before the inauguration.
00:39:11.000 Even if the Senate were to reconvene in order to hear the charges, you would then have to have an actual defense for due process purposes put up by the Trump team.
00:39:20.000 That would take longer than a week.
00:39:22.000 Okay, so realistically speaking, there will be no impeachment before the actual inauguration of Joe Biden, at which point impeachment becomes a moot point.
00:39:29.000 This is a point that's made by Michael Luttig, a former judge on the U.S.
00:39:31.000 Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
00:39:34.000 He made a convincing case.
00:39:35.000 It's not even constitutional to impeach a former president.
00:39:37.000 Some of the Democrats have been saying, you know what we should do?
00:39:39.000 We should just keep the impeachment going, and then we'll impeach him after he is no longer in office, and that will bar him from running again.
00:39:46.000 And now, first of all, that looks purely political, because at that point, Trump is not even in office.
00:39:49.000 So what exactly are you getting done?
00:39:51.000 I guess you're passing a bill saying that he can't run for office again, kind of, but you don't need an impeachment in order to do that, presumably.
00:39:57.000 You could theoretically just pass a bill to that effect, I think.
00:40:01.000 Okay, but here's what Ludwig says.
00:40:02.000 He says, the crux of my argument is that the very purpose of an impeachment power is to remove an incumbent official.
00:40:07.000 That seems to me to be crystal clear and inescapably true under the text of the Constitution.
00:40:11.000 Here's the relevant portion.
00:40:12.000 The president, vice president, all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
00:40:21.000 The House of Representatives shall have the sole power of impeachment.
00:40:24.000 So judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the The party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment according to law.
00:40:36.000 It's pretty obvious that this is designed to remove the president from office.
00:40:40.000 A secondary purpose is to disqualify a president from holding office.
00:40:44.000 Again, Ludwig says it's the impeachment that is the authority for the disqualification.
00:40:48.000 A former president cannot be removed from office because he is not in office.
00:40:52.000 Also, the Constitution says that if you actually want to go after him, the Constitution says specifically he will still be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment according to the law.
00:41:01.000 Democrats are saying they can start this thing now and they can finish it later.
00:41:05.000 Okay, so that is just not going to happen.
00:41:07.000 So realistically speaking, there is no time to get this done, just on a purely realistic timeline level.
00:41:12.000 So that is a prudential argument, it is also a legal argument.
00:41:15.000 Okay, second, there's the sort of broader narrative argument.
00:41:18.000 So the broader narrative argument, which is the counterpart to the argument in favor.
00:41:20.000 The argument in favor is Trump did a bunch of bad stuff that resulted, broadly speaking, what happened at the Capitol building.
00:41:25.000 The countervailing narrative is that the attempt to impeach Trump is really just the camel's nose, right?
00:41:31.000 That what it really is about is not Trump.
00:41:33.000 It's about trying to lump Trump in with every one of his supporters and then lump all of those supporters in with what happened at the Capitol riots.
00:41:39.000 That's really what this is about.
00:41:40.000 So the argument is, it goes something like this.
00:41:43.000 What you guys are really trying to do with impeachment is you're trying to suggest that Trump's actions resulted directly in what happened at the Capitol building.
00:41:52.000 And that because Trump has not changed over the past five years, all of that was 100% foreseeable.
00:41:57.000 And that if you're saying that it's 100% foreseeable, that means that everybody who voted for Trump, anybody who backed anything Trump ever did, anybody who suggested that Trump would be better for the country than the countervailing Democrats, anybody who voted, all 75 million people voted for Trump, All of those people should have known, and in fact did know, what exactly was going to go down at the Capitol.
00:42:14.000 Or at least, they were okay with what went down at the Capitol.
00:42:17.000 Because of course, it was completely foreseeable.
00:42:19.000 Because Trump has not changed.
00:42:20.000 His folks have not changed.
00:42:21.000 And this was completely foreseeable.
00:42:23.000 And so what impeachment is really about, politically speaking, is about smearing every Trump supporter with the stain of what happened at the Capitol building.
00:42:29.000 Right?
00:42:30.000 That is the political argument against impeachment.
00:42:32.000 Okay, so.
00:42:34.000 That argument is not true for every Democrat.
00:42:36.000 It's not true for everybody who's liberal.
00:42:37.000 There are a lot of Democrats and liberals who say, listen, the people who did that, they're responsible for what they did.
00:42:42.000 Trump's actions are unsustainable on a personal level, but I'm not going to suggest that every Republican knew this was coming.
00:42:47.000 I'm not going to say that every Republican is responsible for this.
00:42:49.000 Unfortunately, there's a lot of credibility to this argument for people who oppose the impeachment because Democrats keep saying over and over and over again that they're lumping all Republicans together, which, by the way, is extraordinarily dangerous for the country.
00:43:00.000 There are many dangerous things happening in the country right now.
00:43:02.000 One is a group of people who are disconnected from reality doing violence at the Capitol building and maybe threatening further violence down the road here.
00:43:09.000 That's extraordinarily dangerous.
00:43:10.000 Another extraordinarily dangerous thing.
00:43:12.000 These are not mutually exclusive.
00:43:13.000 Many dangerous things can happen at once.
00:43:15.000 In fact, usually they do.
00:43:17.000 The other extraordinarily dangerous thing is labeling half the country people who support violence and then seeking to quash their ability to speak freely.
00:43:25.000 Morally, morally extirpating them, right?
00:43:28.000 That's a dangerous thing too.
00:43:30.000 Many dangerous things can happen all at once.
00:43:32.000 So in favor of the argument that what impeachment is truly about is targeting his supporters, all you have to do is look at the Democratic side of the aisle where they keep saying this kind of stuff over and over and over again.
00:43:41.000 So for example, AOC says that we need to rein in our media environment.
00:43:47.000 The natural consequence of this should be to rein in our media environment.
00:43:50.000 We need like a truth and reconciliation commission like South Africa.
00:43:54.000 Hint, we don't.
00:43:55.000 South Africa was an actual apartheid state, gang.
00:43:56.000 You want to say we needed a Truth and Reconciliation Commission in, like, 1966?
00:43:59.000 Okay.
00:43:59.000 You want to say we need one in 2021?
00:44:03.000 I'm sorry, but no.
00:44:05.000 But AOC says we need to rein in the First Amendment, essentially.
00:44:07.000 Well, that's lumping everybody in together, is it not?
00:44:09.000 Here was the estimable Representative Alexander Ocasio-Cortez, D-Twitch.
00:44:14.000 But what I can say is that there's absolutely a commission that's being discussed, but it seems to be more investigatory I'm in style rather than truth and reconciliation.
00:44:25.000 And so I think that's an interesting concept for us to explore.
00:44:29.000 We're going to have to figure out how we rein in our media environment so that you can't just spew disinformation and misinformation.
00:44:41.000 She didn't just say that, by the way.
00:44:42.000 She also said that we can only begin to heal if southern states become democratic.
00:44:45.000 So it seems almost as though this is purely political and about targeting Trump supporters.
00:44:50.000 Here was the estimable Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez once again.
00:44:54.000 That southern states are not red states.
00:44:57.000 They are suppressed states, which means the only way that our country is going to heal is through the actual liberation of southern states The actual liberation of the poor.
00:45:11.000 The actual liberation of working people from economic, social, and racial oppression.
00:45:19.000 That's the only way.
00:45:22.000 Or take, for example, the tweets of Chris Hayes of MSNBC.
00:45:26.000 So Chris Hayes tweeted out, in the aftermath of all of this, a picture of Trump with Amy Coney Barrett.
00:45:31.000 Quote, wonder if Amy Coney Barrett has pictures like this framed and up in her house or not.
00:45:35.000 It's a picture of Coney Barrett with Trump.
00:45:37.000 So the idea is any remote association with Trump means that you are in favor of the Capitol riots, right?
00:45:44.000 Everyone is guilty.
00:45:45.000 Every single person is guilty.
00:45:46.000 Amy Coney Barrett is guilty.
00:45:47.000 She was just a judge.
00:45:49.000 And now, she's gonna be appointed, she's on the Supreme Court, put there by Trump.
00:45:53.000 That means everything Trump ever did, anything he ever touched, anybody who's in favor of those things is bad.
00:45:56.000 Right, so the case against impeachment here is that when you're impeaching Trump, what you're really doing is you are setting the predicate for an argument, which is that, again, not only is he responsible for quote-unquote incitement, but everybody who voted for him knew that this sort of stuff was gonna culminate in what happened at the Capitol building, which is an absurd contention.
00:46:12.000 It's an absurd contention.
00:46:13.000 Okay, but that is, you know, what much of the Democratic left is pushing.
00:46:18.000 You have Nicole Hannah-Jones saying the same thing, right?
00:46:20.000 She basically just says, well, you know, those Capitol rioters, essentially, they're just reflecting the generalized Republican point of view, right?
00:46:26.000 Because she believes that all Republicans are basically racists who are seeking to impose white supremacy on the nation.
00:46:30.000 Here was the excreble, awful, terrible liar, Nicole Hannah-Jones.
00:46:36.000 The racial divide has always been, since the American Revolution, when the British exploited the racial divide against the colonists, the sharpest tool in the arsenal.
00:46:50.000 Reaction to the stoking of that racial divide.
00:46:53.000 And it never benefits low-income white Americans.
00:46:55.000 It only benefits the elite.
00:46:57.000 And we saw what happened with that this past week.
00:47:00.000 Oh, so it's about benefiting the elite.
00:47:02.000 You see, it's all part of the same kind of broad-writ Republican evil conservative coalition.
00:47:08.000 Another point in favor of this idea that impeachment truly is about going after Trump supporters.
00:47:11.000 And this has become a big talking point on the right.
00:47:15.000 And given the reaction of the left, there's some credibility to it.
00:47:18.000 It is not completely specious.
00:47:19.000 Hey, Forbes magazine put out an article today suggesting, quote, a truth reckoning.
00:47:24.000 Why we're holding those who lied for Trump accountable.
00:47:26.000 This is Randall Lane of Forbes staff.
00:47:29.000 He says the insurrection was rooted in lies.
00:47:32.000 He says, from day one at the White House, up has been down, yes has been no, failure has been success.
00:47:38.000 He cites Sean Spicer and Kellyanne Conway.
00:47:41.000 He says, as American democracy rebounds, we need to return to a standard of truth when it comes to how the government communicates with the governed.
00:47:47.000 The easiest way to do that, from where I sit, is to create repercussions for those who don't follow the civic norms.
00:47:51.000 Trump's lawyers lie gleefully to the press and public.
00:47:53.000 Those lies magically almost never made it into briefs and arguments.
00:47:56.000 So, what's the parallel in the dark arts of communication?
00:47:58.000 Simple.
00:47:59.000 Don't let the chronic liars cash in on their dishonesty.
00:48:01.000 Press secretaries like Joe Lockhart, Ari Fleischer, and Jay Carney, who left the White House with their reputations in various stages of intact, made millions taking their skills and credibility to corporate America.
00:48:09.000 Trump's liars don't merit the same golden parachute.
00:48:12.000 Let it be known to the business world.
00:48:13.000 Hire any of Trump's fellow fabulous above, and Forbes will assume everything your company or firm talks about is a lie.
00:48:20.000 So Jay Carney is now the standard of truth, according to Forbes.
00:48:23.000 So we're going to excise everyone who worked with Trump, not just Trump, everybody who worked with Trump is going to be excised.
00:48:30.000 Meanwhile, YouTube is cracking down on Trump.
00:48:33.000 According to the Washington Post, YouTube has now suspended Trump from uploading new videos to his official account for at least a week, joining Twitter and Facebook and shutting the president out of his account due to concerns his posts will incite violence.
00:48:45.000 So again, they've not made the case that his post did incite the violence in any sort of legal fashion, doesn't matter.
00:48:52.000 They're just gonna take what Trump says and they're just gonna remove it.
00:48:54.000 Okay, and everybody on the right is going, okay, so you can now make the argument that anything that I say is going to incite violence as well and just remove that willy nilly.
00:49:02.000 So when the left uses this as a tool, as a political tool to club into submission, all the people on the right, then I don't think the right is wrong to look sideways at impeachment and say, I'm doubting some of your motives here.
00:49:14.000 I'm doubting some of your motives, which brings us to the third case against impeachment.
00:49:18.000 OK, the third case against impeachment goes something like this.
00:49:22.000 If you wish for the country to reunite, then Democrats are going to have to show some magnanimity and victory here.
00:49:28.000 And it would be magnanimity, right?
00:49:29.000 They're going to have to say, listen, we're a week out.
00:49:33.000 Trump got what he deserved.
00:49:34.000 He got not elected.
00:49:36.000 If we have criminal charges to bring, we'll bring them against the people who actually violated the law.
00:49:40.000 And in order to move forward here, we're going to recognize there are a lot of Republicans across the other side of the aisle who disagree with us on impeachment, but who stood with us in the face of threats to democracy, right?
00:49:48.000 Mike Pence stood with us.
00:49:50.000 Mitch McConnell stood with us.
00:49:51.000 This is not a right-left divide.
00:49:52.000 This is an American versus anti-American divide.
00:49:55.000 First of all, if they said that, I think there might actually be more support for impeachment.
00:49:58.000 It's the fact they're lumping everybody together that's creating the backlash.
00:50:02.000 However, If they continue along these lines, what they're actually going to create is a backlash in favor of Trump, right?
00:50:08.000 This is another of the arguments against impeachment.
00:50:10.000 It creates a backlash in favor of Trump, right?
00:50:11.000 Trump is already stoking that.
00:50:12.000 He says this is a continuation of the witch hunt.
00:50:14.000 Here's President Trump.
00:50:16.000 On the impeachment, it's really a continuation of the greatest witch hunt in the history of politics.
00:50:23.000 It's ridiculous.
00:50:24.000 It's absolutely ridiculous.
00:50:26.000 This impeachment is causing tremendous anger.
00:50:30.000 And you're doing it, and it's really a terrible thing that they're doing.
00:50:35.000 Okay, so, you know, that is going to start generating more and more support the more that the left continues to lump in everybody with Trump.
00:50:41.000 Tim Scott has put out a tweet thread suggesting why he is not in favor of impeachment.
00:50:47.000 He tweeted, A lot of people saying, well, you know, if he deserves impeachment, then like you're talking unity, but nobody was talking unity last week.
00:51:07.000 That's true.
00:51:08.000 But that's the point about unity.
00:51:10.000 Somebody is going to actually have to step forward and be the uniting figure.
00:51:13.000 Biden posed himself as that person.
00:51:15.000 So at a certain point here, he is going to have to step forward and he is going to have to stump in favor of unity.
00:51:21.000 Now, if Trump had been isolated here?
00:51:23.000 If Trump had actually committed criminal conduct, like actual prosecutable criminal conduct, I think this would be a lot easier.
00:51:29.000 But when people on the left say, ah, you're calling for unity now?
00:51:32.000 You weren't calling for unity five minutes ago.
00:51:33.000 Well, some of us were actually kind of calling for unity for a long time here, at least around fundamental American principles.
00:51:38.000 And the left was rejecting a lot of those fundamental American principles.
00:51:40.000 We were saying, how about we unify around violence is bad?
00:51:42.000 And a lot of folks on the left were like, well, it depends on what the violence is for.
00:51:45.000 And some of us were like, you know, what if we unified around the principle that claims require evidence?
00:51:50.000 And the left was like, well, it depends which claims.
00:51:53.000 So, here's the thing about unity.
00:51:56.000 Unity requires some sacrifice on both sides.
00:51:58.000 Okay?
00:51:59.000 Unity requires for the right to recognize baseline truths.
00:52:02.000 Like, some of the truths I've said.
00:52:03.000 Violence is bad at the Capitol.
00:52:05.000 I think most Republicans agree with that.
00:52:08.000 That unevidenced allegations are not sufficient to support action.
00:52:13.000 I think that the right should agree with that.
00:52:15.000 In fact, there have been some of us who've been saying this since the day of the election, when President Trump declared himself the victor.
00:52:19.000 I said immediately, he does not have the evidence to back that.
00:52:22.000 I got a lot of flack from the right for saying that.
00:52:25.000 But we should all agree on that.
00:52:26.000 On the left, the same agreement has to take place.
00:52:29.000 What does that have to do with impeachment?
00:52:31.000 Well, it means that you have to make clear the grounds of the impeachment.
00:52:36.000 You can't lump people together if you're going to pursue it.
00:52:39.000 And again, you have to explain why it's necessary to do this when it's not going to get done before the election.
00:52:45.000 Why this isn't a political tool?
00:52:46.000 Because it looks like a political tool.
00:52:48.000 That's what it looks like.
00:52:49.000 Especially in the midst of this massive backlash against people of the right on tech platforms, in the midst of removing Parler from Amazon Web Services, and all the rest.
00:52:59.000 So what exactly would be the proper response here?
00:53:01.000 Some people are like, okay, well, you're saying no impeachment.
00:53:03.000 What's the proper response?
00:53:05.000 Well, it seems to me, number one, that the generalized sort of Republican leadership position, which is Republicans should vote whatever their conscience decides, is not a bad impulse.
00:53:14.000 I think that when Republicans do that, I'm generally in favor.
00:53:18.000 I don't think that you need a lot of top-down direction inside Republican circles.
00:53:21.000 I think it sort of cuts against the nature of conservatism.
00:53:24.000 So, you know, Mitch McConnell not rallying support against the cause again, because I think that there's some legitimate claims here.
00:53:31.000 I don't think that that's bad.
00:53:33.000 I don't agree with him if he is in favor of impeachment.
00:53:35.000 But I think the idea that Republicans have to decide based on their own conscience is where they stand on this thing.
00:53:40.000 And they have to weigh all of the varying sort of narratives here is.
00:53:44.000 Good people can come to different conclusions, is, I guess, what I am saying here.
00:53:47.000 I know.
00:53:48.000 Shocking conclusion.
00:53:49.000 But what do I think is the actual proper response?
00:53:50.000 I think the actual proper response is what Brian Fitzpatrick, the Republican congressperson from Pennsylvania, suggested.
00:53:57.000 He was moving for an act of congressional censure.
00:53:59.000 Kevin McCarthy, the House Minority Leader, was also pushing for congressional censure of President Trump's behavior.
00:54:05.000 That seems proper to me because, again, the president did not commit a crime, but that doesn't mean you can't censure him for his language.
00:54:11.000 You can't censure him for his actions.
00:54:12.000 That seems perfectly appropriate.
00:54:14.000 It has nothing to do with the impeachment process.
00:54:16.000 It can get done before the election.
00:54:17.000 Democrats have rejected that out of hand because they want something obviously more dramatic.
00:54:20.000 And again, a lot of this is about holding over the heads of conservatives the threat that if you ever say anything in the future, we just say, well, you voted for Trump and Trump resulted in the Capitol riot.
00:54:30.000 That's going to be the line from Democrats from here to the end of time.
00:54:32.000 Republicans know it, which is why so many Republicans are knee-jerk against what Democrats are trying to do here.
00:54:37.000 Okay, meanwhile, one of the things that is forwarding a lot of the ire on the right is, again, that vast wave that you are seeing from the left.
00:54:45.000 You're trying to lump everybody together and suggest that every Trump supporter knew this was coming, and that if you voted for Trump, this was part of the bargain.
00:54:51.000 It was riots at the Capitol building, which is just not true.
00:54:54.000 Again, if the policing had been sufficient, that would not have been the outcome there.
00:54:58.000 A lot of people would have gotten arrested.
00:55:00.000 In any case, the next move is the social media attempt to shut down all dissenting speech.
00:55:07.000 And this is the thing that's scaring the hell out of everybody, right?
00:55:09.000 We have seen YouTube and Twitter and Facebook all move in coordination to censor the President of the United States.
00:55:15.000 You don't have to like what Trump says.
00:55:16.000 I've been condemning it consistently.
00:55:18.000 That does not mean that the best move here is for social media to literally shut off the tap for the President of the United States.
00:55:25.000 The social media companies should not be held responsible for people posting content that is then misused by fringe people to go do violence because that literally justifies the removal of any controversial speech ever.
00:55:38.000 Ever.
00:55:39.000 As somebody who's in the business of political speech, it is not difficult to find, for people who have very, very large audiences, nutjobs who will misuse their words to go do bad things.
00:55:47.000 This is true right, left, and center.
00:55:49.000 The left doesn't seem to care about it, though, because they know they're not going to be held accountable for it, so if they hold the right accountable for it, this means they can also deplatform sites they don't particularly like.
00:55:56.000 So Amazon Web Services takes down Parler, and then Amazon Web Services put out a brief Pointing out all of the bad things that have been said on Parler.
00:56:03.000 All the violent things that have been said on Parler.
00:56:05.000 Okay, just a note.
00:56:06.000 Twitter has exactly that same kind of content.
00:56:08.000 There's plenty of evil, terrible content on Twitter that they're remiss in taking down.
00:56:13.000 The same thing is true on Facebook.
00:56:16.000 So Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook, she said, you know, these riots were not organized on our platform.
00:56:20.000 Then she adds, as far as we know, I'm not sure how far that is.
00:56:23.000 I would assume that many of the people who, I mean, stopped the steal was still on Facebook up until about 24 hours ago.
00:56:29.000 So I assume that a lot of the activity actually was coordinated in places like Facebook because Facebook is a hell of a lot bigger than Parler is.
00:56:34.000 And Facebook has billions of users.
00:56:36.000 Parler, at its height, had like three and a half million users.
00:56:39.000 Anyway, here is Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook saying, no, we've never, no, nothing bad has ever happened at Facebook.
00:56:43.000 Mm-hmm.
00:56:43.000 Sure.
00:56:45.000 Well, we know this was organized online.
00:56:47.000 We know that.
00:56:49.000 We, again, took down QAnon, Proud Boys, Stop the Steal, anything that was talking about possible violence last week.
00:56:57.000 Our enforcement's never perfect, so I'm sure there were still things on Facebook.
00:57:02.000 I think these events were largely organized on platforms that don't have our Okay, so she can't be sure?
00:57:11.000 Also, just a note, there were mass riots in the summer.
00:57:14.000 How many of those do you think were organized on Parler?
00:57:16.000 How many?
00:57:17.000 Can't imagine tons of them.
00:57:17.000 Really?
00:57:18.000 that might be leading to this and making sure we get it down as quickly as possible.
00:57:22.000 Okay, so she can't be sure.
00:57:24.000 Also, just a note, there were mass riots in the summer.
00:57:28.000 How many of those do you think were organized on Parler?
00:57:30.000 How many?
00:57:31.000 Really?
00:57:32.000 Can't imagine tons of them.
00:57:34.000 I'm not sure Black Lives Matter was using Parler as its organizing weapon.
00:57:37.000 If the idea is that platforms are now responsible for people misusing the platforms, that's the, I mean, honestly, that's a bigger argument against free speech.
00:57:45.000 And that is the argument that people on the left are now making.
00:57:47.000 They're basically saying free speech is inherently dangerous because free speech can be misused.
00:57:51.000 Yes, that's true.
00:57:52.000 Free speech can be misused.
00:57:53.000 And you know what's even worse?
00:57:53.000 The government cracking down on free speech or...
00:57:56.000 In the cultural sphere, social media, which was supposed to be the public square, cracking down on free speech, particularly from apps that centralize conservatives.
00:58:05.000 That is a very, very dangerous thing because there is no consistent standard.
00:58:09.000 This is the point that I'm making.
00:58:10.000 It is not that Parler did an amazing job of policing its content.
00:58:13.000 I don't think anybody's making that argument.
00:58:15.000 The point is that there is no consistent standard being applied.
00:58:18.000 It is not as though if a platform allows violent rhetoric, To fester.
00:58:22.000 That this is what causes Amazon Web Services to take down the app.
00:58:27.000 Twitter's still up.
00:58:28.000 Plenty of gross stuff on Twitter.
00:58:30.000 It is that when it is located in quote-unquote conservative or Trump-supporting circles, and it seems to centralize those supporters in one place, then it's super bad and becomes targeted by the entire tech bro infrastructure.
00:58:42.000 There's a reason for that.
00:58:43.000 The tech companies are dominated by the left.
00:58:45.000 They're dominated by it.
00:58:46.000 And they do not have, overall, a great commitment to free speech.
00:58:50.000 I think the most ironic tweet of yesterday, it was getting passed around an awful lot, was this tweet from Twitter Public Policy.
00:58:56.000 So, according to Twitter Public Policy, ahead of the Ugandan elections, they said they were hearing reports that the internet service providers were being ordered to block social media and messaging apps.
00:59:03.000 They said, we strongly condemn internet shutdowns.
00:59:05.000 They're hugely harmful, violate basic human rights and the principles of the open internet.
00:59:08.000 And then they added, access to information and freedom of expression, including the public conversations on Twitter, is never more important than during democratic processes, particularly elections.
00:59:18.000 Oh, Twitter.
00:59:20.000 Oh, Twitter, you stupid, stupid app.
00:59:23.000 I was, I mean, I'm old enough to remember because I'm more than six months old.
00:59:28.000 When you for a month suspended the New York Post in the run up to an election because you didn't like that they printed a true story about Joe Biden's son's laptop.
00:59:36.000 And so do I trust you guys being a free speech outlet?
00:59:40.000 No, I do not.
00:59:40.000 Now, there are a lot of people who are saying, well, you know, you have a lot of followers and a hundred percent.
00:59:43.000 I have a lot of followers on Twitter.
00:59:44.000 Does that mean I trust them to interpret standards properly?
00:59:48.000 No, I do not.
00:59:50.000 I have a huge following on Facebook.
00:59:51.000 Do I trust that Facebook is going to be consistent in its standards or that they are not going to morph their standards in order to excise conservative speech?
00:59:58.000 No, I do not.
00:59:59.000 And I'm not sure why you would either, considering they have been utterly opaque as to what their standards are.
01:00:04.000 They've not been clear about what those standards ought to be.
01:00:06.000 They've not been clear with people when their accounts get taken down, why those accounts are getting taken down.
01:00:11.000 This is scary stuff.
01:00:12.000 It should frighten people.
01:00:14.000 Many bad things can be happening at once.
01:00:16.000 Many bad things, okay?
01:00:17.000 And among those bad things is indeed the domination of social media, which is effectually our public square by the left.
01:00:23.000 By the way, if you think that it is any sort of coincidence that Facebook and Twitter and YouTube all started doing the bidding of Democratic politicians the minute that Joe Biden won, You're a fool.
01:00:35.000 It is purely obvious, and I know this from... I have many friends who work inside various tech companies.
01:00:42.000 It is perfectly clear that the minute that Joe Biden won, and particularly the minute that the Republicans lost the Georgia Senate races, that the movement inside tech was going to be to please Democratic senators who are putting overt pressure on the tech bros to crack down on speech they don't like.
01:00:56.000 That is a threat to the Republic.
01:00:58.000 So, when we're talking about threats to the Republic, people storming the Capitol building, yes, that is a threat to the Republic.
01:01:02.000 It also happened to be a couple of hundred people who are violent and evil and ought to be put in jail.
01:01:08.000 When you're talking about institutions that govern the lives and free speech patterns of hundreds of millions of people deciding arbitrarily what their free speech standards are, and doing so on the basis of politics and pressure from Democratic actors, Democratic senators claiming that they're gonna break up companies unless those companies do what they want, That seems to me like a threat to the Republic as well.
01:01:28.000 That is a super dangerous thing.
01:01:30.000 And it is not a coincidence that so many members of the incoming Biden administration are tech bros.
01:01:35.000 According to the Daily Caller, at least 14 people who Biden had picked to serve either in his administration or advise his transition have worked for big tech firms that cracked down earlier this week on President Trump.
01:01:44.000 Apple's top lobbyist was a chief advisor to the Biden transition.
01:01:47.000 A former Facebook executive will serve as staff director in the Biden White House.
01:01:50.000 A former Twitter executive will serve as chief spokesperson for the National Security Council under Biden.
01:01:54.000 Current and former executives at those firms and two others, Google and Amazon, fill out other positions in the incoming Biden administration.
01:02:00.000 By the way, if you ever look at the donations of tech companies, I was looking this up the other day, donations by employees of the various tech companies, there is not a major tech company in the United States outside of Qualcomm, so far as I'm aware, that does not donate in extraordinary proportions to Democrats.
01:02:17.000 There's a reason that Susan Rice, the Obama admin staffer who lies to the American public about Benghazi, now the newcoming domestic policy advisor for no reason in the Biden administration, she was on the Netflix board.
01:02:30.000 Okay, as of 2018, 99.6% of all donations from Netflix employees went to Democrats.
01:02:33.000 Adobe, 93% of all donations in 2018 went to Democrats.
01:02:34.000 employees went to Democrats.
01:02:36.000 Adobe, 93% of all donations in 2018 went to Democrats.
01:02:43.000 In 2016, it was 99%.
01:02:46.000 This is according to CNBC.
01:02:48.000 IBM went 90-10 for Democrats.
01:02:51.000 Salesforce went 89-11 for Democrats.
01:02:53.000 Google went 88-12 for Democrats.
01:02:56.000 Microsoft went 85-15 for Democrats.
01:02:57.000 Apple went 84-16 for Democrats.
01:02:59.000 PayPal went 84-16 for Democrats.
01:02:59.000 Cisco went 80-20 for Democrats.
01:03:01.000 And Amazon went 77-23 for Democrats.
01:03:02.000 How about Facebook?
01:03:02.000 for Democrats. Cisco went 80-20 for Democrats and Amazon went 77-23 for Democrats.
01:03:08.000 How about Facebook? 77-23 for Democrats.
01:03:11.000 Of course, Sheryl Sandberg previously worked for Larry Summers, who is the Treasury Secretary under Bill Clinton.
01:03:17.000 Intel, by the way, also, 68-32 Democrats.
01:03:20.000 The tech companies are dominated by the left.
01:03:22.000 It's perfectly obvious.
01:03:23.000 So why would you trust them to have any sort of consistent standard when they won't be transparent about those standards?
01:03:28.000 And what we are watching, and all of this doesn't happen in a vacuum, right?
01:03:32.000 When bad things happen on the right, very often there's a corollary on the left, and vice versa, and vice versa.
01:03:37.000 There is a mishmash of bad information.
01:03:40.000 And I will tell you the kind of lie that is the worst right now.
01:03:43.000 There are lots of lies all over the place.
01:03:44.000 There are lies told about this election by President Trump.
01:03:48.000 There are lies told about this election by the media.
01:03:51.000 The worst kind of lie is the double standard.
01:03:53.000 The worst kind of lie is the double standard because it assumes that the person who is of your political ilk ought to be treated with absolute reverence and the person on the other side, for doing the exact same thing, ought to be torn down to the ground.
01:04:05.000 It is double standards that undermine the Republic more than any other kind of lie.
01:04:08.000 There are lots of lies out there.
01:04:09.000 Misinformation is nothing new.
01:04:11.000 It's the double standard in American politics where you hold somebody to a different standard than you would if they were a member of the other party.
01:04:16.000 That is the real danger to the Republic right now.
01:04:19.000 And when that is applied formally in terms of policy at both the governmental and non-governmental levels inside major tech corporations that control how you speak and how you think and how you communicate with others, We are at an extraordinarily dangerous moment in the life of the American Republic.
01:04:33.000 All righty, we'll be back here tomorrow with much, much more of the outcome of the House impeachment vote, which is pretty much a foregone conclusion.
01:04:40.000 We'll also get to how the Senate is going to respond, I am sure.
01:04:43.000 In the meantime, stick around for our other shows, as well as the second hour of The Ben Shapiro Show, coming a little bit later today.
01:04:49.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.
01:04:49.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.
01:04:51.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Colton Haas.
01:04:58.000 Executive Producer, Jeremy Boring.
01:05:00.000 Our Supervising Producers are Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.
01:05:03.000 Production Manager, Paweł Lajdowski.
01:05:05.000 Our Associate Producers are Rebecca Doyle and Savannah Dominguez.
01:05:08.000 The show is edited by Adam Sajewicz.
01:05:10.000 Audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.
01:05:12.000 Hair and Makeup is by Fabiola Cristina.
01:05:14.000 Production Assistant, Jessica Kranz.
01:05:16.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.
01:05:18.000 Copyright 2021.
01:05:20.000 On the Matt Wall Show, we talk about the things that matter.
01:05:22.000 Real issues that affect you, your family, our country, not just politics, but culture, faith, current events, all the fundamentals.