The Ben Shapiro Show - Mueller Lite | Ep. 824

00:00:00.000 Robert Mueller testifies on the Hill, the media defend Ilhan Omar, and the Justice Department targets Big Tech.

00:00:05.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.

00:00:06.000 This is the Ben Shapiro Show.

00:00:07.000 Oh, man, it was the biggest news of the day of the year of the century, right?

00:00:16.000 Robert Mueller was going to appear before the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees.

00:00:21.000 And my goodness, we were going to find out at long last what President Trump had done.

00:00:25.000 I mean, sure, there was already a 448-page report about it.

00:00:29.000 Sure, I remember.

00:00:30.000 I seem to remember reading the whole thing because it was super boring and had some spicy moments.

00:00:35.000 I mean, it wasn't a great book or anything.

00:00:37.000 And then I remember coming on this show and summarizing it in detail for like three straight days.

00:00:42.000 But that wasn't enough.

00:00:43.000 The Democrats had to bring Robert Mueller in because they wanted to grill him.

00:00:47.000 And they wanted to demonstrate that in reality, despite the fact that Robert Mueller had said he was not hindered in his investigation, despite the fact that the investigation, in fact, found no collusion with the Russians, despite the fact that the obstruction charges were not sufficient to bring a prosecution and that Robert Mueller had begged off.

00:01:04.000 The Democrats were under the weird assumption that Robert Mueller was going to show up and he was going to say, guys, time for me to drop the pretense and drop the pretense right now.

00:01:11.000 Trump is guilty.

00:01:12.000 And you only you can impeach him.

00:01:17.000 That was what the Democrats were hoping for from this.

00:01:18.000 And so the buildup to this event was magnificent.

00:01:21.000 Folks in the media were really, really excited about all of this.

00:01:26.000 Folks in the media thought, well, this will be the moment.

00:01:28.000 This will be the moment when finally Trump is brought to heel.

00:01:32.000 And so were Democrats.

00:01:33.000 Democrats were very excited about this.

00:01:35.000 So you had Representative Ted Lieu from the state of California saying, mines are gonna be blown.

00:01:40.000 It's gonna be incredible.

00:01:41.000 Basically, this was like the buildup to Ishtar.

00:01:44.000 We're gonna spend an awful lot of money, and there's gonna be a lot of press, and then the movie's gonna be not very good.

00:01:50.000 Well, that's how it kinda ended up.

00:01:51.000 Here is Ted Lutho, really, really pumping up this thing, as though it was Alita Battle Angel.

00:01:57.000 He's like, we're just gonna pump this thing up.

00:01:59.000 Here he is explaining, guys, it's gonna blow your mind, it's like a James Cameron movie, except boring and with an old guy.

00:02:07.000 For people who have read the Mueller report or follow the issues, this will not be surprising tomorrow.

00:02:12.000 But for people who have not read the report or have only listened to Bill Barr or Donald Trump, their minds may be blown.

00:02:18.000 Because they're going to see facts that they never saw.

00:02:21.000 They're going to be seeing that the president directed his White House counsel to fire the special counsel.

00:02:26.000 That's a crime.

00:02:27.000 You're going to see that the president directed his White House counsel to then cover that up and create a fake document.

00:02:32.000 That's a second crime.

00:02:33.000 And then you're going to see that he directed Corey Lewandowski to ask Jeff Sessions to limit their investigation into Donald Trump.

00:02:40.000 That's a third crime.

00:02:41.000 OK, none of those are crimes.

00:02:42.000 OK, none of those are crimes.

00:02:44.000 The first and the third particularly are not crimes.

00:02:46.000 He could have fired the special counsel at any time.

00:02:47.000 It would have been impeachable.

00:02:49.000 It would not have been a crime.

00:02:50.000 He could have had Jeff Sessions limit the scope of Mueller's investigation.

00:02:53.000 That wouldn't have been impeachable.

00:02:55.000 It would not have been a crime.

00:02:56.000 As far as instructing Don McGahn to create a document for the press, that was not a crime, right?

00:03:01.000 I mean, that probably was not a crime, at least not sufficient to charge, according to none other than Robert Mueller, in any case.

00:03:07.000 The media had really built this thing up.

00:03:10.000 There's a piece by Bloomberg talking about, in high stakes Mueller hearing, there are big risks for everyone.

00:03:14.000 They say, Robert Mueller has vowed he won't go beyond what he's already written about Russia, Donald Trump, and obstruction of justice when he testifies on Wednesday.

00:03:21.000 But there's a lot at stake in how much or how little he brings to life the dry specifics of his 448 page report.

00:03:28.000 Wow, it was going to be supremely exciting.

00:03:30.000 And Democrats were hoping that Americans would tune in.

00:03:32.000 Well, if they did, they were asleep by the end of the first inning.

00:03:36.000 If this is a baseball game, they were out by the end of the first inning.

00:03:39.000 Representative David Cicilline, he says, this is Congress saying no one is above the law.

00:03:43.000 Here's Chris Cuomo getting super excited with David Cicilline.

00:03:47.000 Well, you're not going to learn anything tomorrow that you don't know already.

00:03:50.000 The Democrats aren't going to learn if they've done their homework.

00:03:52.000 But our responsibility is also to be sure that the American people understand.

00:03:54.000 Understand?

00:03:55.000 I get it.

00:03:55.000 This is their democracy that was attacked.

00:03:58.000 They have a right to know this.

00:03:59.000 This investigation was conducted on their behalf.

00:04:01.000 It's important that the person who led the investigation report to the American people about his findings, about the evidence that he uncovered.

00:04:08.000 And then it will be incumbent on Congress to hold him accountable.

00:04:11.000 In fact, Mr. Mueller, in the very final paragraphs of the report, It says this is Congress's responsibility to demonstrate that no one is above the law, including the president.

00:04:20.000 So Mueller's performance was going to be the big thing.

00:04:22.000 Now, it's worthwhile reviewing what the Mueller report actually found.

00:04:25.000 So there were several key claims in the Mueller report.

00:04:27.000 The first is that the Trump-Russia collusion claims were farcically overblown, like really, really overblown.

00:04:34.000 There are certainly members of the Trump team who acted suspiciously, including President Trump, who continued to tell the American public no work was occurring on the Trump Tower Moscow deal during the 2016 campaign, which, of course, Was not true.

00:04:45.000 But the Mueller report makes it clear that all of this was really, really exaggerated.

00:04:49.000 There's a quote from the Mueller report.

00:04:51.000 Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the campaign expected it would benefit electorally for information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

00:05:11.000 The Mueller report also never really referred to the Steele dossier, which apparently was the basis of a lot of the investigation in the first place.

00:05:19.000 The Mueller report revealed that when it came to obstruction of justice, that they had no real clear definition sufficient to prosecute the president or recommend prosecution.

00:05:28.000 It found that Trump acted perversely in a lot of ways, this report.

00:05:32.000 It found that he was threatening to fire people.

00:05:34.000 He was trying to push his White House counsel, Don McGahn, to lie to the press regarding Trump's desire to fire James Comey.

00:05:40.000 And there's a lot of ugly stuff in the report, but there is nothing that rises to the level of criminally prosecutable behavior.

00:05:46.000 Trump's team basically stopped him from violating the law time and time again.

00:05:51.000 What the report mostly reveals when it comes to obstruction is that Trump was just ticked off at his own DOJ and at his own FBI because he felt he was being unjustly persecuted by them.

00:06:01.000 The real takeaway from the Mueller report was, here is a bunch of information.

00:06:05.000 If Congress wants to go forward with it, if Congress wants to impeach, then that is a Congress problem.

00:06:09.000 Congress tried to throw this back in Mueller's lap today.

00:06:11.000 They tried to basically get Mueller to testify that Trump should be impeached.

00:06:15.000 And Mueller, that's not how it went.

00:06:17.000 Now, Republicans basically expected this was going to happen.

00:06:19.000 So Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, he said, we're not going to find anything out that's new here.

00:06:23.000 How many times we got to watch this movie, guys?

00:06:26.000 It seems to me, I don't know how many times we want to see this movie again, but I think the American people have moved on past this.

00:06:35.000 Okay, and he's not the only one.

00:06:38.000 Lindsey Graham said, I've heard all I want to hear on this thing.

00:06:41.000 It won't reshape my dynamic.

00:06:43.000 I've heard all I need to hear from Mueller.

00:06:45.000 I've read his report.

00:06:46.000 I accept the findings.

00:06:48.000 I don't think it's going to change public opinion.

00:06:51.000 Having been involved in the Clinton impeachment, if the public's not with you, you'll pay a price.

00:06:56.000 And I don't think anything Mueller can say that's going to change anybody's mind.

00:07:00.000 Now, again, in the run up to this, there was a lot of talk about maybe the Trump administration was going to restrict what Mueller could testify about.

00:07:06.000 There's a lot of talk about a particular letter sent from the DOJ to Robert Mueller that basically said, stick to the report.

00:07:13.000 So why did that letter come about?

00:07:14.000 As it turns out, William Barr, the attorney general, says that Mueller actually requested the letter so that he could point to the letter when it came time for him to testify.

00:07:23.000 You know, at his press conference, Bob had said that he intended to stick with the public report and not go beyond that.

00:07:31.000 And in conversations with the department, his staff was reiterating that that was their position.

00:07:39.000 And they asked us for guidance in writing to explain or to tell them what our position was.

00:07:48.000 So we responded in writing.

00:07:49.000 The department sent the guidance they had requested.

00:07:52.000 Okay, so this was all the buildup.

00:07:55.000 In a second we are going to get to the punchline because it turns out that the punchline didn't exactly match the buildup first.

00:08:01.000 Nowadays there are a lot of different types of cars on the road and there's no way that the local auto parts store is going to supply you or stock everything that you actually need.

00:08:08.000 There's no reason why you should wait in line to find the right part that's probably overpriced or get the wrong part that is overpriced anyway.

00:08:14.000 You can do it all with the convenience of Rock Auto.

00:08:17.000 The internet was made for this sort of stuff, guys.

00:08:19.000 RockAuto.com.

00:08:19.000 It's a family business serving auto parts customers online for 20 years.

00:08:23.000 Go to RockAuto.com.

00:08:25.000 Shop for auto and body parts from hundreds of manufacturers.

00:08:27.000 The RockAuto.com catalog is unique.

00:08:29.000 It's really easy to navigate.

00:08:30.000 I've checked it out myself.

00:08:31.000 Quickly see all the parts available for your vehicle.

00:08:33.000 Choose the brands, specifications, and prices that you prefer.

00:08:36.000 Best of all, prices at rockauto.com are always reliably low.

00:08:40.000 They are the same for professionals and do-it-yourselfers.

00:08:42.000 There's no reason to spend up to twice as much for the same parts.

00:08:46.000 Instead, use the internet webs.

00:08:48.000 rockauto.com.

00:08:48.000 They're great.

00:08:50.000 Amazing selection.

00:08:51.000 Reliably low prices.

00:08:52.000 All the parts your car will ever need.

00:08:53.000 Go to rockauto.com right now.

00:08:55.000 See all the parts available for your car or truck.

00:08:57.000 Write Shapiro in their how-did-you-hear-about-us box so they know that we sent you.

00:08:59.000 That helps us.

00:09:00.000 That also helps them.

00:09:01.000 Go check them out at rockauto.com right now.

00:09:04.000 Again, write Shapiro in there.

00:09:05.000 How did you hear about us, Fox?

00:09:06.000 And don't waste your money shopping at the local auto parts store when you could just go to rockauto.com and get it done yourself.

00:09:11.000 Okay, so, as I say, the media were prepared.

00:09:14.000 They were prepared.

00:09:15.000 Their body was ready.

00:09:16.000 Stephen Colbert last night, he was like, yeah, this is gonna be the moment.

00:09:19.000 It's clip 21.

00:09:21.000 This whole thing is damning evidence.

00:09:23.000 It's gonna be, oh, it's gonna be.

00:09:25.000 He turns into Meg Ryan from When Harry Met Sally.

00:09:29.000 The Justice Department has told Mueller to limit his testimony to what is in his report.

00:09:36.000 Oh no!

00:09:37.000 Now all he's got is 448 pages of incredibly damaging evidence that the president committed 10 separate instances of obstruction of justice and that at one point he said, and I quote, Okay, well, again, they're so excited.

00:09:54.000 Did it turn out to be exciting?

00:09:55.000 Did it turn out to be wonderful?

00:09:57.000 Not really.

00:09:58.000 Now, imagine that you're Robert Mueller.

00:09:59.000 Imagine that you spend two years working on this report.

00:10:01.000 Or, as it turns out, that you spend two years chain-smoking cigars out back while your team writes your report, as it appears is what actually happened.

00:10:09.000 Imagine that that is your life.

00:10:10.000 And then, you walk off America's stage Into the sunset, having done your work.

00:10:16.000 And then they call you back in and they're like, tell us what, tell us, tell us what you said.

00:10:20.000 And you're like, God, don't you people know how to read?

00:10:23.000 That's pretty much how this went, except that Robert Mueller was not the steadfast, thorough, Solid public servant that the people thought he was.

00:10:32.000 He looked pretty precarious out there.

00:10:33.000 And this was the critique from both right and left.

00:10:35.000 David Axelrod was saying he looked old.

00:10:37.000 He looked a little bit dithering.

00:10:39.000 He looked like he didn't really know what was going on, which did raise the question as to how much of this report he actually wrote.

00:10:44.000 This was a serious question because there was a claim by President Trump that it was actually Mueller's team that did most of the writing.

00:10:51.000 Mueller's deputy, a guy named Andrew Weisberg was a Hillary Clinton I mean, who's at Hillary Clinton's election headquarters the night that the election actually happened.

00:11:01.000 He was a big Hillary Clinton fan.

00:11:02.000 He apparently was the lawyer for one of Hillary Clinton's aides who helped smash her blackberries with a hammer.

00:11:07.000 That guy was involved in the writing.

00:11:09.000 And so there's claims today that given how dicey Mueller was on the stand here, how dicey he was in his testimony, that maybe he wasn't actually in control of this report in the first place.

00:11:17.000 That would explain why you got that bizarre letter from Mueller's team to William Barr Suggesting that he did not fully elucidate the findings of the report or that there had been some sort of cover-up.

00:11:29.000 Mueller doesn't look like he's in control of the report.

00:11:31.000 He didn't look like he was in control of himself.

00:11:33.000 It was not a good showing for Robert Mueller, who I think, again, is a good man.

00:11:36.000 I have no evidence to the contrary.

00:11:38.000 But he didn't look like he was in control today, and that was the widespread critique.

00:11:41.000 Here is a mash-up of Robert Mueller repeatedly asking for questions to be repeated.

00:11:47.000 This is clip 18.

00:11:50.000 You could not publicly state that in your report or here today?

00:11:53.000 Can you repeat the question, sir?

00:11:55.000 Is it correct that if you had concluded Okay, and there's a lot of this over and over.

00:12:01.000 Could you repeat the question?

00:12:02.000 I don't, I can't hear what you're saying.

00:12:04.000 Could you please repeat that?

00:12:06.000 Mueller did not look as though he was on top of his game.

00:12:09.000 That, for sure.

00:12:10.000 And, that was kind of the story.

00:12:13.000 That was kind of the story.

00:12:13.000 Now, the Democrats got a couple of talking points, and the Republicans got some talking points.

00:12:17.000 So, the Democratic talking point was obvious.

00:12:20.000 President Trump oversold the findings of the report in his own favor.

00:12:23.000 So, President Trump kept going out there and saying, I'm exonerated, I'm cleared.

00:12:27.000 And, as I said at the time, no you're not.

00:12:30.000 You're not exonerated.

00:12:31.000 You're not cleared, particularly when it came to obstruction.

00:12:33.000 Maybe on collusion, but not on obstruction.

00:12:35.000 And yet you're going out there and saying, totally exonerated, totally cleared.

00:12:39.000 That, of course, was never true.

00:12:40.000 The wording of the report suggested it wasn't true.

00:12:42.000 So that was always going to be an easy spot for Democrats to hit.

00:12:45.000 And sure enough, they did in fact hit that.

00:12:47.000 This clip 20, Robert Mueller being asked if he exonerated President Trump.

00:12:51.000 The president has repeatedly claimed that your report found there was no obstruction and that it completely and totally exonerated him.

00:13:00.000 But that is not what your report said, is it?

00:13:03.000 Correct.

00:13:03.000 That is not what the report said.

00:13:05.000 So the report did not conclude that he did not commit obstruction of justice.

00:13:11.000 Is that correct?

00:13:12.000 That is correct.

00:13:13.000 And what about total exoneration?

00:13:15.000 Did you actually totally exonerate the president?

00:13:17.000 No.

00:13:18.000 Now, in fact, your report expressly states that it does not exonerate the president.

00:13:24.000 It does.

00:13:25.000 OK, so that was the talking point for the Democrats coming out of this hearing.

00:13:30.000 But there's one problem, which is that it wasn't Mueller's job to exonerate the president.

00:13:33.000 He's a prosecutor.

00:13:34.000 It was his job to determine whether there was a prosecutable offense.

00:13:38.000 And this became obvious in clip 16 when Representative Ratcliffe, he said to Mueller, you know, you say you didn't exonerate the president.

00:13:45.000 Who said it's your job to exonerate the president?

00:13:46.000 Can you think of another instance in which a prosecutor's job is to exonerate anybody?

00:13:51.000 Can you give me an example other than Donald Trump where the Justice Department determined that an investigated person was not exonerated because their innocence was not conclusively determined?

00:14:02.000 I cannot, but this is a unique situation.

00:14:03.000 Okay, well, you can't.

00:14:05.000 I've got five minutes.

00:14:05.000 Time is short.

00:14:06.000 Let's just leave it at you can't find it because I'll tell you why.

00:14:09.000 It doesn't exist.

00:14:10.000 It was not the special counsel's job to conclusively determine Donald Trump's innocence or to exonerate him.

00:14:16.000 Because the bedrock principle of our justice system is a presumption of innocence.

00:14:22.000 It exists for everyone.

00:14:23.000 Everyone is entitled to it, including sitting presidents.

00:14:27.000 Okay, that of course is exactly right.

00:14:29.000 That's exactly right.

00:14:30.000 And so that's the takeaway from the Republicans.

00:14:32.000 So the takeaway from Democrats is he wasn't exonerated, maybe out there.

00:14:35.000 Lurking somewhere like the X-Files is the actual damning material and then John Ratcliffe from Texas there He says, um, dude, that's not your job.

00:14:43.000 You don't exonerate people.

00:14:44.000 You're not in the exoneration people business That's for defense counsel during a prosecution.

00:14:48.000 Your job is to determine whether there is evidence sufficient to prosecute And Mueller basically admits, yeah, I guess that's kind of right.

00:14:54.000 I guess that's kind of right.

00:14:55.000 Well, in one second, we're going to get to the rest of Mueller's lackluster performance at best.

00:15:00.000 I mean, it really was lackluster.

00:15:01.000 He opened his performance by suggesting, for example, that he could not speak about the The beginnings of the investigation.

00:15:09.000 He suggested that he couldn't speak about the Steele dossier, so there were key topics that were left off the table, which immediately makes this much less interesting.

00:15:16.000 He suggested in the middle of this hearing he didn't know what Fusion GPS was, which, again, was the company that was hired by Hillary Clinton's law firm to create the Steele dossier.

00:15:25.000 It was really a bad performance for Robert Mueller and not a good performance in favor of Democrats.

00:15:30.000 We'll get to that in a second.

00:15:32.000 Let's talk for a second about how you preserve your memories.

00:15:35.000 One of the things that I think is most important in life is making sure that your memories are preserved.

00:15:38.000 Because over time, they fade.

00:15:40.000 You don't remember what your kids necessarily looked like a couple of years ago because you're with them every day.

00:15:44.000 You don't remember what your parents looked like 20 years ago.

00:15:46.000 And your parents are looking to preserve their memories right now.

00:15:49.000 I think one of the most important things that you can do is preserve those memories, and that's why I love working with Legacy Box.

00:15:54.000 Legacy Box allows you to save your family films and photos from degrading or being lost forever.

00:15:58.000 You know, you go out in your garage, and there's just boxes and boxes of old photos and films, and they're being covered in dust, and bugs are eating away at them, and they're degrading over time, they're getting less easy to see, the quality of them is falling apart.

00:16:10.000 Well, this is why you need Legacy Box.

00:16:11.000 It gives you peace of mind and a great sense of accomplishment, and ensures that your family history is preserved Forever.

00:16:16.000 Here's how it works.

00:16:17.000 You send your Legacy Box filled with old home movies and pictures, and then they do the rest.

00:16:20.000 They professionally digitize your moments onto a thumb drive, digital download, or DVD.

00:16:24.000 You can receive all your original recorded moments back, along with perfectly preserved digital copies.

00:16:29.000 Legacy Box is the world's largest, most trusted digitizer of home movies and photos.

00:16:33.000 They've got over a decade of experience.

00:16:35.000 All the work is done by hand right here in the United States, and there has never been a better time to digitally preserve your memories.

00:16:40.000 Visit LegacyBox.com right now.

00:16:42.000 Get started.

00:16:43.000 Plus, for a limited time, you get an exclusive discount because you're my listener.

00:16:46.000 Go to LegacyBox.com slash Ben to get 40% off your first order.

00:16:49.000 Again, that's LegacyBox.com slash Ben.

00:16:51.000 Save 40% today.

00:16:53.000 Get started preserving your past.

00:16:54.000 It's not just a great gift, it's an important gift.

00:16:56.000 Go to LegacyBox.com slash Ben.

00:16:58.000 I've used it myself for my parents.

00:16:59.000 It's great.

00:16:59.000 LegacyBox.com slash Ben.

00:17:01.000 Get 40% off your first order.

00:17:03.000 Okay, so.

00:17:05.000 Is it true the evidence gathered during your investigation did not establish that the president was involved in the underlying crime related to Russian election interference as stated in volume 1 page 7?

00:17:13.000 The answer is no.

00:17:14.000 Representative Collins asks him about this.

00:17:17.000 Again, this does not cut against the president.

00:17:20.000 Is it true the evidence gathered during your investigation did not establish that the president was involved in the underlying crime related to Russian election interference as stated in volume one, page seven?

00:17:30.000 We found insufficient evidence of the president's culpability.

00:17:39.000 So that would be a yes.

00:17:40.000 I'm pardon?

00:17:41.000 That would be a yes.

00:17:43.000 Thank you.

00:17:44.000 OK, so that not good for Democrats, right?

00:17:46.000 Insufficient culpability on the underlying crime of collusion.

00:17:50.000 And then he is asked, OK, so you say that you didn't find conspiracy and then you say that you're unclear on collusion.

00:17:56.000 But in your own report, it says that collusion and conspiracy are basically the same thing.

00:18:00.000 Doug Collins is questioning from Georgia is very good right here.

00:18:03.000 And Mueller just stumbles over himself.

00:18:04.000 Mueller does not know his own report.

00:18:06.000 I mean, that is very obvious from this testimony.

00:18:08.000 He keeps having to refer back to his report.

00:18:10.000 The members of Congress know his report better than he does.

00:18:12.000 And that's because his team probably wrote the report.

00:18:14.000 OK, what is clear now is that Mueller was not doing the vast majority of the work in compiling the report.

00:18:19.000 It was his team, which makes sense.

00:18:20.000 I mean, he had a big team of lawyers.

00:18:21.000 He oversees that team of lawyers.

00:18:23.000 He probably reads the final report and then gives his sign off on it.

00:18:26.000 But in no way is Mueller the expert on his own report.

00:18:29.000 And that is obvious because he keeps getting caught off guard when people ask him specific questions about his own report.

00:18:36.000 And again, he started off this thing by saying that he was not going to comment on some of the most confusing aspects of the report, such as, for example, why Fusion GPS is basically not mentioned.

00:18:45.000 I mean, that was an intelligence gathering group hired by Hillary Clinton's law firm in order to go get the Steele dossier, which was used as the basis for much of the investigation.

00:18:55.000 How was that not within the FBI's purview?

00:18:57.000 How about the beginning of the investigation?

00:18:59.000 He says, well that was before my time and not within my purview.

00:19:02.000 Well, the entire investigation was about Russian interference in the 2016 election.

00:19:06.000 So wouldn't you want to know how the investigation was initiated?

00:19:08.000 Considering that the Republicans have been accusing the investigation of being initiated off the basis of Russian interference in collusion basically with Hillary Clinton's campaign.

00:19:19.000 So you took a bunch of key issues off the table from the very beginning.

00:19:21.000 Here is Doug Collins forcing Mueller to stumble on collusion and conspiracy, and pointing out that when you say that you're unclear on collusion but there's no conspiracy, you're really saying no collusion.

00:19:32.000 Although your report states collusion is not a specific offense, and you said that this morning, or a term of art in federal criminal law, conspiracy is.

00:19:41.000 In the colloquial context, are collusion and conspiracy essentially synonymous terms?

00:19:47.000 You're going to have to repeat that for me.

00:19:50.000 Collusion is not a specific offense or a term of art in the federal criminal law.

00:19:57.000 Conspiracy is.

00:19:59.000 In the colloquial context, known public context, collusion and conspiracy are essentially synonymous terms.

00:20:08.000 No.

00:20:08.000 Correct?

00:20:09.000 No, so they're not synonymous terms.

00:20:11.000 And then Collins goes on and he actually refers specifically and specifically to a quote from the from the actual.

00:20:20.000 Manifesto from this 448 page report in which they equate collusion and conspiracy and Mueller is forced to refer back to the report.

00:20:27.000 I mean, it was really, really a bad thing for him.

00:20:29.000 It just it did not.

00:20:31.000 It did not pay off for Robert Mueller or for Democrats at any point here.

00:20:34.000 It was a very, very bad day for Democrats.

00:20:37.000 Mueller was asked by Representative Collins.

00:20:38.000 Here's a key takeaway.

00:20:40.000 Representative Collins says to Mueller, was your investigation hindered at any point or curtailed?

00:20:45.000 That would be the key question when it comes to obstruction.

00:20:47.000 Did anybody do anything to your investigation?

00:20:49.000 And Mueller says, no.

00:20:50.000 No.

00:20:52.000 At any time in the investigation, was your investigation curtailed or stopped?

00:20:57.000 Or hindered?

00:20:58.000 No.

00:21:00.000 Okay, that would be the key takeaway.

00:21:02.000 Now, what Democrats are trying to latch onto is this suggestion that, in reality, Mueller wants Trump prosecuted after Trump leaves office.

00:21:11.000 And they're hanging that coat on a very, very slender hook, okay?

00:21:16.000 And that is an exchange in which Robert Mueller is asked specifically if President Trump could be prosecuted after he leaves office.

00:21:23.000 And this is the new clip, okay?

00:21:24.000 And here is Mueller's answer, and I'll explain why Democrats are wrongly jumping on this answer.

00:21:31.000 Could you charge the President with a crime after he left office?

00:21:35.000 Yes.

00:21:36.000 You believe that he committed... You could charge the President of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office?

00:21:41.000 Yes.

00:21:43.000 Okay, so Democrats are saying, well, that's the key takeaway, isn't it?

00:21:47.000 I mean, he could be charged after he leaves office.

00:21:49.000 Technically, he can be charged after he leaves office.

00:21:52.000 This does not answer the question as to whether he should be charged after he leaves office.

00:21:56.000 I could be charged today.

00:21:58.000 That doesn't answer the question as to whether I should be charged today.

00:22:01.000 As a matter of law, of course the president can be charged after he leaves office for crimes committed while he is president of the United States.

00:22:08.000 However, that was not the question that Mueller was asked and had he been asked that question, presumably he would not have answered the question properly.

00:22:14.000 Again, the Democrats are really attempting to spin this into something that it is not because the answer is this has been a giant nothing burger and Mueller does not acquit himself well.

00:22:22.000 Mueller said that the investigation did not establish Trump campaign conspiracy with Russia.

00:22:27.000 He said that openly.

00:22:29.000 The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government in its election.

00:22:38.000 And then Mueller basically said, that's all I'm talking about.

00:22:41.000 I'm talking about the stuff that's in the report.

00:22:43.000 I'm not going to talk about any of the other stuff that you guys want to know about.

00:22:46.000 So he won't talk about Fusion GPS.

00:22:48.000 He apparently doesn't know what Fusion GPS... I mean, this was an amazing moment.

00:22:51.000 You're the head of the Mueller investigation because your name is Robert Mueller and it's your investigation.

00:22:56.000 You've never heard of Fusion GPS?

00:22:58.000 Is there anybody who has been following this thing for two years who doesn't know what Fusion GPS is?

00:23:03.000 And yet Mueller, Clip 22, When you talk about the firm that produced the steel reporting, the name of the firm that produced that was Fusion GPS.

00:23:10.000 Is that correct?

00:23:11.000 I do.

00:23:12.000 Everyone who's been following this does.

00:23:14.000 I thought that you wrote the report, dude.

00:23:15.000 When you talk about the firm that produced the steel reporting, the name of the firm that produced that was Fusion GPS.

00:23:26.000 Is that correct?

00:23:27.000 I'm not familiar with that.

00:23:31.000 Well, let me just help you.

00:23:34.000 It was.

00:23:34.000 It's not a trick question.

00:23:36.000 It was Fusion GPS.

00:23:38.000 Now, Fusion GPS produced the opposition research document widely known as the Steele dossier.

00:23:45.000 And the owner of Fusion GPA was someone named Glenn Simpson.

00:23:50.000 Are you familiar with?

00:23:51.000 This is outside my purview.

00:23:53.000 Okay.

00:23:54.000 Oh, it's outside his purview.

00:23:55.000 Why?

00:23:56.000 Why is it outside his purview?

00:23:57.000 Again, the entire investigation was about Russian interference in the election.

00:24:01.000 If Fusion GPS was funneled Russian disinformation via Christopher Steele and that became a part of the investigation, how exactly is that outside the purview of his investigation?

00:24:11.000 And it gets worse.

00:24:12.000 Mueller says, I can't answer any questions about the initial opening of the FBI investigation.

00:24:17.000 Why?

00:24:17.000 Really?

00:24:17.000 Wouldn't that be sort of important to determining, for example, how this whole thing came about and whether it was legit or not?

00:24:25.000 The Justice Department has asserted privileges concerning investigative information and decisions.

00:24:31.000 ongoing matters within the Justice Department and deliberations within our office.

00:24:37.000 These are Justice Department privileges that I will respect.

00:24:42.000 The Department has released a letter discussing the restrictions on my testimony.

00:24:47.000 I, therefore, will not be able to answer questions about certain areas that I know are of public interest.

00:24:53.000 For example, I am unable to address questions about the initial opening of the FBI's Russia Okay, so, in the end, trainwreck.

00:25:08.000 Trainwreck.

00:25:09.000 And Matt Gaetz followed up on all of this.

00:25:10.000 He said, Can you state with confidence the Steele dossier was not part of Russia's disinformation campaign?

00:25:15.000 And Mueller says, With regard to Steele, that's beyond my purview.

00:25:17.000 And Matt Gaetz says, It's exactly your purview.

00:25:19.000 The organizing principle was to fully investigate Russia's interference.

00:25:23.000 Well, yes.

00:25:25.000 Yes.

00:25:27.000 What a mess.

00:25:28.000 What an absolute mess.

00:25:30.000 And it's not just conservatives who are saying so.

00:25:31.000 So Chris Wallace is one of the more objective reporters on Fox News.

00:25:35.000 And he says correctly, he says, this thing was a disaster for Democrats.

00:25:38.000 It was a disaster for Mueller.

00:25:39.000 He looked terrible.

00:25:41.000 It was awful.

00:25:43.000 Frankly, I think you've both been very kind.

00:25:46.000 I think this has been a disaster for the Democrats, and I think it's been a disaster for the reputation of Robert Mueller.

00:25:53.000 He has seemed very uncertain with his brief.

00:25:56.000 He doesn't seem to know things that are in the report.

00:26:00.000 He's been attacked a number of times, and you would think that almost anybody else would have defended his own integrity and the integrity of the investigation.

00:26:09.000 Okay, but that's not what happened.

00:26:10.000 So in the end, does any of this matter?

00:26:12.000 No, it doesn't.

00:26:13.000 So Democrats who have been trying desperately to continue to push the Russia stuff, desperately trying to push the obstruction stuff, it's just going to fall apart on them.

00:26:22.000 It's absolutely going to fall apart on them, and it should fall apart on them.

00:26:25.000 It was a mistake for them to call Mueller.

00:26:26.000 Mueller was never going to give them what they wanted.

00:26:29.000 The best that he was going to do was repeat some of the more incendiary reports from the report.

00:26:34.000 But everybody had that out there, and Democrats can cut ads on that stuff anytime, or give speeches on it at any time.

00:26:39.000 Mueller appeared confused.

00:26:41.000 It appeared as though he wasn't in control of his own team.

00:26:43.000 He didn't know his own report.

00:26:45.000 It basically looked like when your parent wrote your book report for you in third grade and you went in there and your teacher was like, so tell us what happened in Bridge to Terabithia.

00:26:54.000 You're like, uh, what?

00:26:56.000 Because your parents read it?

00:26:58.000 That's what it felt like from Robert Mueller.

00:27:00.000 Can you repeat the question?

00:27:01.000 Bad, bad showing for Robert Mueller and worse showing for Democrats who thought that this was going to be the moment, finally the moment, when President Trump went down.

00:27:08.000 Not the case.

00:27:10.000 Giant fail.

00:27:12.000 Now, the testimony is going to continue to be a news story, but I don't think that this is actually going to be news.

00:27:20.000 I don't think anyone cares about this, frankly.

00:27:21.000 I think that this was over the moment that the report came out and there was no recommendation of prosecution.

00:27:26.000 There's no place for Democrats to go from there.

00:27:28.000 If Democrats want to impeach on this basis, I don't think the American people are for it.

00:27:31.000 I don't think that the polls show that the American people are for it.

00:27:34.000 And bringing Robert Mueller up there, hoping that he was going to open some other can of worms or point to the shadowy man in the back and say, ah, deep throat, here he is.

00:27:42.000 It wasn't going to happen.

00:27:42.000 It never happened.

00:27:43.000 So, end of story.

00:27:45.000 But will it be the end of... Well, what will CNN do for the next two years?

00:27:49.000 That really is the question.

00:27:50.000 Meanwhile, the media have another purview.

00:27:52.000 They have another agenda.

00:27:53.000 And their agenda is they must, at any cost, defend Ilhan Omar.

00:27:57.000 So President Trump has decided he's going to go to war with Ilhan Omar.

00:28:00.000 That's going to be his 2020 campaign.

00:28:01.000 Ilhan Omar versus President Trump.

00:28:03.000 And that's pretty smart, because the fact is that Ilhan Omar is not popular.

00:28:07.000 The more people see of her, the less popular she is. 0.99

00:28:09.000 That is not because she is black. 1.00

00:28:10.000 That is not because she is a woman. 1.00

00:28:12.000 That is not because she is Muslim. 1.00

00:28:13.000 It's because she's terrible. 0.99

00:28:14.000 It's because she says routinely anti-semitic things. 0.79

00:28:16.000 It's because she says things like some people did something on 9-11.

00:28:20.000 It's because her sneering tone of voice when she describes the United States is extraordinarily off-putting.

00:28:26.000 It's because she treats, I mean, she literally said legislative bodies in the United States are more interested in treating dogs decently than humans. 0.99

00:28:35.000 There's a reason folks are not real fond of Ilhan Omar.

00:28:38.000 President Trump has decided he's going to make her his bait noir in all of this.

00:28:42.000 So you're speaking at Turning Point USA, great organization, and here is President Trump making this point.

00:28:48.000 And she starts screaming.

00:28:51.000 And this is not a sane person, folks, when you look at that.

00:28:56.000 And this is what we're up against.

00:28:57.000 You have some of that.

00:28:58.000 Now, your other friend from an incredible state, right?

00:29:03.000 A state that I'm going to win.

00:29:04.000 Minnesota.

00:29:05.000 You know that one, right?

00:29:08.000 And you know why I'm going to win the state?

00:29:10.000 Because of her.

00:29:12.000 I almost won it last time.

00:29:13.000 We came with just about a point.

00:29:15.000 That's a very, because Minnesota's a very hard one for a Republican to win.

00:29:19.000 We almost won it one more night.

00:29:21.000 I wanted to go there one more time.

00:29:22.000 I said, I'm telling you we're going to win Minnesota.

00:29:24.000 Okay, so Trump is really leaning heavily into the Ilhan Omar of all of this.

00:29:29.000 And again, that makes sense.

00:29:30.000 When I say that she's an anti-Semite, it's because she's an anti-Semite. 0.68

00:29:34.000 She accused Israel of, quote-unquote, hypnotizing the world, which is not an accusation of Israeli policy being bad.

00:29:40.000 It's an accusation that the Jewish state is hypnotizing the world.

00:29:43.000 She suggested that American support for Israel is, quote-unquote, all about the Benjamins.

00:29:47.000 She accused everybody who supports Israel of having dual loyalty to the state of Israel, and she's backed the anti-Semitic BDS movement.

00:29:54.000 So what are the media doing?

00:29:55.000 They're out there in force defending Ilhan Omar.

00:29:57.000 In one of the great gaslighting articles I've ever seen, there's a BuzzFeed contributor named Chase Madar, who wrote a piece called, Just like hippies spitting on Vietnam vets, or welfare queens sipping champagne, Omar's antisemitism has become a structural support beam for American politics.

00:30:16.000 And then he says, well she never actually said anything that was antisemitic.

00:30:19.000 Really?

00:30:20.000 So then why did she apologize under pressure from Nancy Pelosi and other top members of the House Caucus just a couple of months ago for her anti-Semitic remarks?

00:30:28.000 And then, like two weeks later, she went right back to the anti-Semitism.

00:30:31.000 Why was her first move, since national prominence hit her again, why was her first move to sponsor a resolution comparing Israel to the Nazis from 1933 to 1941?

00:30:42.000 She's not an anti-Semite, though, according to the press.

00:30:44.000 This is all, everything, According to the press, everything Trump says is wrong.

00:30:48.000 So even when he says something right, they treat it as though it is wrong.

00:30:51.000 Our indubitably wonderful fact-checkers and decent people in the media, don't worry.

00:30:56.000 They're here just to tell you the truth.

00:30:57.000 Defending Ilhan Omar.

00:30:58.000 We'll get to more of that in just one second.

00:31:00.000 And why this actually is really bad for Democrats.

00:31:02.000 Why they'd be better off cutting her loose and recognizing her for what she is.

00:31:06.000 They're making a large-scale mistake.

00:31:08.000 But first, This month marks the 50th anniversary since we first put a man on the moon.

00:31:11.000 There's an exciting new podcast by Esoteric Radio Theater.

00:31:14.000 It's called Apollo 11.

00:31:15.000 What we saw, it immediately rocketed to number three on iTunes Apple Podcast.

00:31:19.000 It stayed in the top ten for a week, and it's getting rave reviews from everybody who listens to it.

00:31:22.000 It is fantastic.

00:31:23.000 Almost 1 million people have listened to the podcast or watched on YouTube so far.

00:31:27.000 You should be one of them.

00:31:28.000 The host is Bill Whittle, author, pilot, NASA enthusiast.

00:31:31.000 He knows more about NASA than pretty much anybody that I've ever heard of.

00:31:34.000 He tells you the story of the journey of getting to the moon and what happened when we got there and how things almost went horribly wrong.

00:31:40.000 All four episodes are available right now.

00:31:42.000 Head on over to Apple Podcasts or wherever you listen to podcasts and subscribe today to Apollo 11, what we saw.

00:31:48.000 You can also watch, we produced this beautiful video episodes.

00:31:51.000 They include tons of amazing space, historical footage.

00:31:54.000 Over there at Esoteric Radio Theater YouTube channel really is worth the watch.

00:31:58.000 Go check it out right now.

00:31:59.000 Also, make sure that you tune in today at 7 p.m.

00:32:02.000 Eastern, 4 p.m.

00:32:02.000 Pacific for our latest episode of The Conversation, host Andrew Klavan.

00:32:06.000 Not me, thank God.

00:32:07.000 We'll be answering your questions live on air, so make them good.

00:32:10.000 The episode is free to watch on Facebook and YouTube.

00:32:12.000 Only subscribers can ask the questions.

00:32:13.000 So, head on over.

00:32:15.000 Subscribe to Daily Wire, get your questions answered by Clavin today at 7 p.m.

00:32:19.000 Eastern, 4 p.m.

00:32:20.000 Pacific, and go join the conversation.

00:32:23.000 It'll be well worth your time.

00:32:24.000 Also, I mean, while you're at it, why don't you just subscribe to dailywire.com in general, because it'll make your life 1,000 times better.

00:32:30.000 You can get the annual subscription for $99 a year.

00:32:32.000 Ooh, magical.

00:32:33.000 And that comes along with this, the very greatest in beverage vessels.

00:32:36.000 The leftist here is hot or cold tumbler.

00:32:38.000 Cast your eyes upon it and despair that you have it not, but you could.

00:32:42.000 If you just joined our team.

00:32:43.000 By the way, the real reason you should join the team, beyond all the great benefits, beyond being part of the mailbag, and being able to have early access to VIP tickets at our events, and beyond two additional hours of the show you get every single day, beyond all of that, one of the magical things is that you help defend us from the nastiness of the left that seeks to de-platform everyone they disagree with.

00:33:01.000 When you join up, that's what helps us bring you the show.

00:33:03.000 So please, become part of the team.

00:33:05.000 Subscribe over at dailywire.com.

00:33:06.000 We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast in the nation.

00:33:08.000 So as I say, the media are out in full force defending Ilhan Omar.

00:33:19.000 Why?

00:33:20.000 Because Donald Trump opposes her, of course.

00:33:21.000 So this means they are now going to gaslight all of us.

00:33:24.000 It's so funny.

00:33:24.000 The media are constantly accusing Trump of gaslighting Americans.

00:33:27.000 And there's some truth to that.

00:33:28.000 Trump says things routinely that are simply not true in order to achieve a partisan political end.

00:33:33.000 In this, he is mirrored by the mainstream media, which have been doing this for my entire lifetime.

00:33:37.000 They've been doing this for my entire lifetime, and they have not stopped one iota.

00:33:41.000 They've accelerated that problem since President Trump became president.

00:33:44.000 So BuzzFeed has an entire article today about how Ilhan Omar's anti-Semitism is a myth.

00:33:49.000 It's a myth.

00:33:51.000 Okay, there's a columnist who says the rabidly anti-Semitic comments that Omar never made, along with the equally fictitious Jew hatred of her allies in the so-called squad, have swiftly become a load-bearing myth in U.S.

00:34:01.000 politics.

00:34:02.000 Really?

00:34:03.000 It's a myth.

00:34:04.000 Okay, so Rashida Tlaib associating with a bevy of anti-Semites. 0.99

00:34:08.000 Inviting an open anti-Semite to give her a painting at her inauguration.

00:34:12.000 Ilhan Omar hanging out with Linda Sarsour, rabid anti-Semite, AOC doing the same thing.

00:34:17.000 All of them hanging out with Jeremy Corbyn.

00:34:19.000 The first resolution that Ilhan Omar sponsors being a resolution that compares Israel to the Nazi party.

00:34:25.000 And then Rashida Tlaib getting up on the floor of the U.S. 0.63

00:34:27.000 House and doing the same thing.

00:34:28.000 It's all a myth.

00:34:29.000 It's all in your head, guys.

00:34:31.000 So either this BuzzFeed columnist fell and hit his head and ended up in an alternative reality like sliding doors, or We all did.

00:34:39.000 Because I'm living in the reality where Rashida Tlaib yesterday said this on the house floor.

00:34:44.000 So I can't stand by and watch this attack on our freedom of speech and the right to boycott the racist policies of the government and the state of Israel.

00:34:54.000 Americans of conscience have a long and proud history of participating in boycotts specifically to advocate for human rights abroad.

00:35:03.000 Americans boycotted Nazi Germany in response to dehumanization, imprisonment, and genocide of Jewish people.

00:35:10.000 Okay, and the media are out defending this, in force today.

00:35:12.000 Dana Milbank, columnist over at the Washington Post, has a piece called, Ilhan Omar, quintessentially American.

00:35:18.000 Quintessentially.

00:35:19.000 I mean, not just she's American, true, she's an immigrant to the United States, who is legal, and has her citizenship, she is American.

00:35:27.000 Quintessentially American, like the most American. 0.98

00:35:30.000 The most American.

00:35:31.000 Why is she the most American? 0.99

00:35:33.000 Well sure, she says stuff on a routine basis that's gross. 1.00

00:35:37.000 Sure she does.

00:35:39.000 But I mean, but really in the end, isn't she more American than Trump?

00:35:42.000 This is Dana Milbank's case.

00:35:43.000 She says, Omar remains ill-defined beyond the monstrous caricature the president has made of her with his racist slander.

00:35:49.000 Okay, it's not a monstrous caricature to point out that she has gone easy on terrorists.

00:35:53.000 She did.

00:35:54.000 She wrote a letter in support of people attempting to join ISIS to a judge in which she suggested that those are people who are just angry because of their socioeconomic status and that they should be let off the hook because they are just pursuing change by other means.

00:36:07.000 She says that in her letter.

00:36:09.000 She is, in fact, an anti-Semite.

00:36:11.000 She has not made any secret of this.

00:36:13.000 Minnesota Democrats in her own district have said that for years she has been saying this sort of stuff.

00:36:17.000 But it's a monstrous caricature.

00:36:19.000 She's one of four non-white Congresswomen, the Squad, who Trump proposes should go back to the countries from which they came, even though three were born in the United States.

00:36:26.000 By the way, Little side note, both Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar have told people to go back where they came from in the past few years on Twitter.

00:36:33.000 I'm just going to point that out.

00:36:35.000 That does not justify what the president says, but let's just say that these women have not been shy in their own rhetoric about people they... Rashida Tlaib in 2015 told Trump that he should be deported. 0.98

00:36:43.000 Okay, so...

00:36:46.000 Before everybody starts going off on, like, no one who is rational would say this sort of thing, I agree.

00:36:51.000 It is not a rational thing to say, Rashida Tlaib and President Trump.

00:36:55.000 Like, it's funny that the media just dismiss it when it comes from Rashida Tlaib.

00:36:59.000 When Trump says it, of course, then we have to take it super, super duper seriously.

00:37:02.000 But Rashida Tlaib is the greatest and most innocent and wise among us.

00:37:05.000 Same thing with Ilhan Omar.

00:37:07.000 Well, not totally unsubstantiated.

00:37:08.000 The Minneapolis Star Tribune has been investigating that, and there's fairly good evidence that she committed some sort of immigration fraud with this dude.

00:37:12.000 on this show condemned in very harsh terms and of Trump's unsubstantiated suggestion that she once married her own brother.

00:37:18.000 Well, not totally unsubstantiated.

00:37:20.000 The Minneapolis Star Tribune has been investigating that and there's fairly good evidence that she committed some sort of immigration fraud with this dude.

00:37:27.000 She certainly committed marital fraud when she filed her tax returns. 1.00

00:37:30.000 Yeah, that's what it is.

00:37:30.000 That's surely what it is.

00:37:31.000 the stage Tuesday at the Muslim Caucus Education Collective Conference in Washington, Trump tweeted about America hating anti-Semite representative Omar, who along with the others in the squad is a nightmare for America. 0.90

00:37:40.000 For Trump's racist base, Omar has it all. 0.99

00:37:43.000 Black female Muslim immigrant. 0.98

00:37:44.000 Yeah, that's what it is. 0.77

00:37:45.000 That's surely what it is.

00:37:47.000 Because that same base, by the way, despises Nancy Pelosi. 1.00

00:37:50.000 But Dana Milbank says, Omar, he admits.

00:37:53.000 This is the part where they admit, well, you know, she's not, she might have a few problems, but in the end, isn't she more American than you?

00:38:00.000 Dana Milbank says, Omar previously heard her cause when her criticism of Israel crossed into anti-semitism, displaying the same sort of prejudice that is often directed at Muslims.

00:38:08.000 I even love the phraseology there, right?

00:38:10.000 That the real problem with what Ilhan Omar said about Jews is that it really mimics what people say about Muslims.

00:38:15.000 Not that it's bad in and of itself, but that, you know, just as people say this stuff about Muslims, she kind of, she slipped into it.

00:38:21.000 Slipped.

00:38:25.000 She may revert again, says Dana Milbank, but the woman I saw Tuesday represented American values far better than the bigoted demagogue who has made her his bete noir.

00:38:34.000 Really?

00:38:35.000 She may revert again.

00:38:36.000 I love that.

00:38:36.000 Can you imagine that in any other context?

00:38:39.000 Sure, he just slipped right into racism.

00:38:41.000 He may revert again, but isn't he super-duper American? 0.97

00:38:43.000 Isn't he the most American, actually?

00:38:45.000 And the media out in full force to defend Ilhan Omar.

00:38:48.000 By the way, the Democrats are not out in full force defending Ilhan Omar.

00:38:51.000 So, Ilhan Omar sponsors this resolution that would cut in support of boycott, divest, and sanctions from Israel.

00:38:59.000 One month ago, Nancy Pelosi spoke at AIPAC and called that exact policy anti-Semitic.

00:39:03.000 One month ago.

00:39:05.000 Not a word from Nancy Pelosi, she's still not been asked about it.

00:39:07.000 But, presumably foreseeing that she might be asked about it, Nancy Pelosi then sponsored an anti-BDS resolution on the House floor. 0.59

00:39:15.000 And this anti-BDS resolution basically said BDS is a bad idea.

00:39:18.000 It was a non-binding resolution that opposes the boycott movement against Israel, a measure that won broad bipartisan support, but faced pushback from some high-profile progressives.

00:39:26.000 Let me note here, Let me note here the headline from CNN.

00:39:29.000 So, House approves resolution opposing Israel boycott movement in divisive vote.

00:39:35.000 Can you imagine any other vote that goes 398 to 17 that is called divisive?

00:39:41.000 Any other vote?

00:39:42.000 That is what we call nearly unanimous.

00:39:44.000 So we're not talking about, like, 200-something to 200-something.

00:39:47.000 That's not what we're talking about here.

00:39:48.000 We're not even talking about 230 to 198 or something.

00:39:51.000 We are talking about 398 to 17.

00:39:54.000 And CNN calls it divisive.

00:39:55.000 Why is it divisive?

00:39:57.000 Because members of the squad were on the side of the 17.

00:40:01.000 The resolution was introduced in March, not long after Democrats faced a bruising internal debate over how to handle comments and tweets by Representative Ilhan Omar that were criticized as being anti-Semitic.

00:40:10.000 Now, notice again how CNN characterizes this.

00:40:13.000 So when Ilhan Omar says something anti-Semitic, it's that they were criticized as being anti-Semitic.

00:40:17.000 But when Trump says something that is criticized as being racist, they just say racist, straight out, right, in the headline. 0.94

00:40:23.000 So it's always Ilhan Omar, controversial figure, Donald Trump, racist.

00:40:27.000 The way they cover this stuff is wildly inconsistent, of course.

00:40:31.000 The resolution supports a two-state solution, argues that BDS movement is an effort to delegitimize Israel, which is true, of course, and urges Israelis and Palestinians to return to direct negotiations. 0.87

00:40:42.000 Omar, as well as Rashida Tlaib, have been openly supportive of the BDS movement and critical of the resolution.

00:40:47.000 AOC also voted against the resolution.

00:40:50.000 By the way, AOC's quote on this is astonishingly bad.

00:40:54.000 So AOC was asked about why she voted against a resolution to condemn BDS.

00:41:00.000 And her answer is wild.

00:41:03.000 She actually suggested that the reason that you shouldn't oppose BDS is because if you oppose BDS, it might force people into violence.

00:41:11.000 So you should support soft antisemitism, softer antisemitism, because otherwise you might lead to violent antisemitism.

00:41:19.000 Can you imagine her saying that in any other context?

00:41:21.000 No, we should really, like, be okay with white supremacist rhetoric, because you never know, they might turn into terrorists.

00:41:26.000 So better that they should kind of just talk about it than be terrorists. 0.98

00:41:31.000 This is all insane. 0.95

00:41:32.000 It's all insane.

00:41:33.000 And of course, it's very bad for the Democratic Party, so keep it up, guys.

00:41:36.000 Well done, everybody.

00:41:37.000 And meanwhile, in other big news, the Justice Department is now looking at going after big tech.

00:41:42.000 According to Brent Kendall over at the Wall Street Journal, the Justice Department is opening a broad antitrust review into whether dominant technology firms are unlawfully stifling competition.

00:41:52.000 Adding a new Washington threat for companies such as Facebook, Google, Amazon, and Apple.

00:41:56.000 The review is geared toward examining the practices of online platforms that dominate internet search, social media, and retail services.

00:42:03.000 The department said, confirming the review shortly after the Wall Street Journal reported it.

00:42:06.000 The new antitrust inquiry under AG Barr could ratchet up the already considerable regulatory pressures facing the top U.S.

00:42:13.000 tech firms.

00:42:14.000 Now, as I've said before, I am not in favor of regulating big tech unless they've actually violated the law.

00:42:19.000 But the big problem for big tech is that they've been utterly non-transparent in many cases to what they are doing.

00:42:23.000 This is particularly true of the social media platforms.

00:42:26.000 Basically, people see data points and then they assume that the data points are representative of broader trends inside these various companies.

00:42:34.000 And this leads them to be angry and feel like they are out of control and feel like they were lied to because, for example, if you use Google and you think that Google is going to provide you with some sort of unbiased result, and then it turns out that behind the scenes Google is manipulating the algorithm and not making clear to you what exactly they are doing, then it makes you feel like you are being taken advantage of.

00:42:52.000 And lack of transparency also doesn't really allow for the sort of competition that you'd want because suspicion alone is really not a great basis to form a company.

00:43:00.000 Like if Google were to just say, listen, You want your left-leaning search results?

00:43:03.000 You come to us, and people would start going to DuckDuckGo, and they would actually get less biased results.

00:43:10.000 Same thing is true with Facebook.

00:43:11.000 And so, I've met with some of these tech leaders, and I've said to them, you want not to be regulated?

00:43:15.000 I'm not in favor of regulation.

00:43:17.000 I think putting the government in charge of stuff is a really bad idea, but...

00:43:20.000 The drive for this is stemming directly from your lack of transparency.

00:43:24.000 And you need to be transparent with the American people.

00:43:26.000 And you have not been transparent on everything from privacy to how you make decisions on who gets banned and who gets demonetized.

00:43:33.000 And if you're not going to be transparent, people are going to take their suspicions and they are going to suggest that that actually is the governing fact.

00:43:40.000 Now, using antitrust to go after these companies seems to me a massive mistake.

00:43:46.000 The reason being, particularly with Amazon, for example, What exactly did Amazon do wrong that they have violated antitrust?

00:43:54.000 So there are two models of antitrust and they're in conflict.

00:43:57.000 Model one of antitrust law was sort of the pre-Robert Bork model.

00:44:00.000 So Robert Bork wrote a very famous book called The Antitrust Paradox.

00:44:04.000 The Antitrust Paradox posited that antitrust laws were designed for consumer benefit.

00:44:08.000 That the reason you break up a company is because the company is anti-competitive and is harming consumers.

00:44:13.000 So for example, you have two companies and they would be in competition with one another, lowering price, but they decide to make a regional split.

00:44:21.000 And you take the Western United States and we take the Eastern United States and we will collude to keep prices up, right?

00:44:26.000 That would be anti-competitive and thus would be subject to antitrust in the Robert Bork view.

00:44:30.000 However, you have one company that is providing you with wonderful services and that those services are really good and there are no competitors because it's just a good business.

00:44:38.000 And it's efficient?

00:44:39.000 Bork would say that's not an antitrust problem.

00:44:40.000 The other model is that any company that is too big should be broken up.

00:44:44.000 And I fear that model because it is completely subjective.

00:44:47.000 What exactly is too big?

00:44:48.000 What does too big look like?

00:44:49.000 How do you decide that Walmart shouldn't be broken up, but Amazon should?

00:44:52.000 How do you decide that big firms that you like should not be broken up, but big firms that you don't should not be broken up?

00:44:59.000 Is it like a dollar cutoff or a market percentage cutoff?

00:45:02.000 How do you decide if a company decides to purchase, vertically integrate its own business?

00:45:07.000 Is this monopolistic now just because they wanted to save money by not having to outsource their labor?

00:45:12.000 Most companies at some point will do some sort of vertical integration with an independent company that they were once doing business with.

00:45:19.000 So, for example, we here at Daily Wire bought a marketing firm that we were doing business with.

00:45:23.000 Why?

00:45:23.000 Because it was cheaper for us to buy the marketing firm than it was for us to simply outsource to the marketing firm.

00:45:29.000 That doesn't violate antitrust.

00:45:30.000 That is us growing our business in the most efficient way.

00:45:33.000 And a lot of places do this sort of stuff.

00:45:35.000 The problem with the model that is being used to go after a lot of these tech companies is it's extraordinarily vague.

00:45:40.000 You have to find the wrongdoing before you start accusing antitrust.

00:45:43.000 So, to take an example of the vagueness, Andrew Ross Sorkin over on CNBC is interviewing Steve Mnuchin, the Treasury Secretary, and Mnuchin is talking about Amazon, and here's what he has to say.

00:45:54.000 Justice said yesterday that they're going to look into some of the big tech companies that were at the White House yesterday, in fact, and consider the antitrust issues that are involved.

00:46:05.000 Do you believe that they are hurting competition?

00:46:10.000 I think, as you know, if you look at Amazon, although there's certain benefits to it, they've destroyed the retail industry across the United States, so there's no question they've limited competition.

00:46:21.000 There's areas where they've really hurt small businesses.

00:46:25.000 So I don't think this is a one-size-fits-all, and I don't have an opinion going in other than I think it's absolutely right that the Attorney General is looking into these issues.

00:46:36.000 You think I'm a little bit off base when I say that the government shouldn't be in charge of these issues? 0.97

00:46:40.000 That is the vaguest, stupidest standard I've ever heard. 0.99

00:46:43.000 Of course Amazon has hurt the retail industry. 1.00

00:46:45.000 Why?

00:46:45.000 Because you're getting products cheaper delivered directly to your door via Amazon than you would if you went out to the retail store.

00:46:50.000 That's not Amazon's fault.

00:46:51.000 That's because brick-and-mortar installations have been on the downturn for approximately a decade and a half.

00:46:56.000 And that's because there's a thing called the internet and shipping.

00:47:00.000 That's not Amazon unfairly restraining business. 0.94

00:47:03.000 That's ridiculous.

00:47:04.000 And you think I want to put the FTC in charge of Facebook? 0.76

00:47:07.000 Policing content neutrality?

00:47:09.000 What happens when Kamala Harris is president, and then appoints the majority of the FTC? 0.96

00:47:13.000 And she decides that neutrality means that you have to get rid of voices she doesn't like.

00:47:18.000 By the way, that's something the left is perfectly fine with doing.

00:47:20.000 Folks on the left suggest that neutrality does not mean that the right should be allowed on the platform.

00:47:26.000 They believe that neutrality means only facts should be spoken, and when they say fact, what they mean is leftist perspective.

00:47:31.000 This is an agenda that is pushed by an enormous number of people on the left where they say, well, we don't want fake balance.

00:47:37.000 What we actually want is just the truth.

00:47:38.000 And the truth is the world is how we see it.

00:47:41.000 This is why I push back against a lot of the push from the right that we should regulate Facebook.

00:47:45.000 But as I say to these companies, you want the right to rally around a sort of libertarian principle that you should be left alone.

00:47:51.000 You need to be transparent.

00:47:53.000 You need to tell us what you are doing.

00:47:55.000 That doesn't mean you have to give away proprietary algorithms.

00:47:57.000 It does mean we need to know the inputs.

00:47:59.000 We need to know what are the factors you are using to decide whether or not to downgrade news.

00:48:04.000 When you say, at Facebook for example, that we need trusted sources, how are you deciding what a trusted source looks like?

00:48:11.000 Is that decided by the same people who like CNN and the New York Times?

00:48:13.000 Because then you're taking the endemic mistrust of the media and you're filtering it up to Facebook.

00:48:18.000 We didn't trust CNN or the New York Times.

00:48:20.000 Now you're calling them trusted sources and benefiting them.

00:48:22.000 What do you think we are going to think of you?

00:48:25.000 Do we feel like that is a restraint of trade in the sense that you're downplaying particular companies without actually telling them that's happening and there are no rivals in the market?

00:48:34.000 It leaves the door open.

00:48:35.000 So more transparency from big tech is the solution to this.

00:48:39.000 Government pressure for more transparency, voluntary transparency seems good.

00:48:44.000 The sort of arbitrary nature of antitrust law being used to target businesses that are not liked on one side of the political eye or another, I think it's a huge, huge, huge mistake.

00:48:52.000 Wait till Elizabeth Warren is in charge, guys. 1.00

00:48:54.000 And then you'll see how much you enjoy this routine.

00:48:56.000 Okay, time for some things that I like.

00:48:58.000 So, things that I like today.

00:49:00.000 There is a series that I was unaware of called Legion.

00:49:02.000 It is based on comic book series.

00:49:05.000 And it stars the dude from Downton Abbey.

00:49:07.000 I can never remember his name.

00:49:09.000 Dan something.

00:49:10.000 Dan Stevens.

00:49:11.000 And the series is really quirky and really weird.

00:49:14.000 And it's also pretty compelling.

00:49:16.000 It's about a superhero who's a telepath, but he thinks that he's a paranoid schizophrenic.

00:49:21.000 And so, it's shot in this really weird, jolty, bizarre style.

00:49:26.000 It's kind of fascinating.

00:49:27.000 It's pretty psychedelic.

00:49:28.000 Here's a little bit of the preview of Legion.

00:49:31.000 Just tell me what happened next.

00:49:34.000 Look.

00:49:35.000 I don't know.

00:49:37.000 It's fuzzy.

00:49:39.000 You went off your medication.

00:49:40.000 Wait.

00:49:42.000 Why?

00:49:45.000 Looking for the truth.

00:49:47.000 Which you promised to tell.

00:49:49.000 I told you they took her.

00:49:50.000 I told you they took her.

00:49:56.000 Sydney Barrett, the girl who disappeared.

00:49:58.000 She didn't disappear.

00:50:01.000 She took my place and I took hers.

00:50:03.000 Wait, what?

00:50:04.000 The show is really weird and really quirky and quite bizarre.

00:50:11.000 So you can check it out.

00:50:12.000 It's kind of fun.

00:50:13.000 OK, other things that I like today.

00:50:15.000 So today is the day.

00:50:17.000 Today is the day in which all secrets are revealed.

00:50:21.000 We learned earlier today that Robert Mueller basically had nothing.

00:50:25.000 He suggested at one point during his testimony that he did not indict Trump because of the OLC opinion that you can't indict a sitting president.

00:50:33.000 But then he also suggested that principles of fairness The principles of fairness were involved.

00:50:38.000 In other words, there are no real big talking points for the Democrats coming out of that hearing.

00:50:41.000 Mueller had nothing, right?

00:50:42.000 Mueller did not have the goods on President Trump.

00:50:44.000 And Democrats were hoping that he would spill the goods on President Trump.

00:50:47.000 That all fell apart for them.

00:50:49.000 So there was a day of that secret revealed.

00:50:51.000 It is also a day in which the story of State Representative Erica Thomas completely comes apart.

00:50:57.000 So you'll recall State Representative Erica Thomas of Georgia.

00:51:00.000 Just a few days ago, she claimed over the weekend that she was at a Publix grocery store and she was in the checkout line.

00:51:05.000 And she was in the express checkout line with 15 to 20 items.

00:51:08.000 And a man said to her, Ma'am, you are in the express checkout line and you have too many items.

00:51:14.000 And she apparently, according to the dude, started screaming at him, at which point he called her lazy.

00:51:20.000 And then she claims that he told her to go back where she came from.

00:51:24.000 Deliberately evoking the words of President Trump with regard to the squad, and deliberately evoking the chants of the crowd with regard to Ilhan Omar.

00:51:35.000 That was the pitch.

00:51:36.000 The pitch for the story was that Trumpian racism and xenophobia is broadly crossing the country, and here is an example of it hitting somebody in their everyday life.

00:51:44.000 She's just an innocent woman at the grocery store, and this evil white Republican And then she comes up and starts quoting Trump at her while wearing a MAGA hat and carrying a Subway sandwich or something. 1.00

00:51:54.000 And then, it turns out, not so much.

00:51:57.000 The guy who she confronted, who confronted her, was apparently a Cuban Democrat.

00:52:02.000 Not only that, he fully denied that she ever said that.

00:52:04.000 And then she came out and said, yeah, he might not have said, go back where you came from.

00:52:07.000 I might have just sort of made that up.

00:52:09.000 Well now, there's witness testimony as to what exactly happened in this case.

00:52:14.000 This is according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

00:52:16.000 A witness to a heated grocery store encounter between state rep Erica Thomas and a man she accused of uttering racist comments told authorities she didn't hear him make those remarks, according to a Cobb County police report.

00:52:26.000 A Publix employee told a Cobb County officer that she witnessed part of the conversation and heard Thomas continually tell Eric Sparks to, quote, go back where you came from, but did not hear Sparks utter those words to Thomas.

00:52:40.000 So in other words, it sounds like she completely made this up, and not only did she make it up, she's the one who said this to the guy, right?

00:52:47.000 So, she claims this white man came and said, go back where you came from, and then she's weeping, in the video she's crying, because how could this sort of racism and bigotry exist in America?

00:52:57.000 And then a woman was like, uh, actually lady, you said that to him. 0.98

00:53:01.000 So you got this right, but like, not at all.

00:53:04.000 Lefoto negative.

00:53:06.000 Sparks admitted calling the Democrat an expletive during the run-in, saying he was upset she was at an express aisle in the grocery store with too many items, but he said he didn't tell her to go back where she came from.

00:53:15.000 Thomas' attorney, Gerald Griggs, said the officer's report shows the case needs additional investigation.

00:53:20.000 Aha.

00:53:21.000 Because the employee and another witness, who also said he didn't hear Sparks use the phrase, quote, didn't hear the initial argument.

00:53:27.000 He said he's interviewed three other customers who heard the exchange.

00:53:30.000 Top authorities said they don't intend to file criminal charges in the case.

00:53:34.000 Right, because it's not criminal.

00:53:35.000 Even if he said that, that's not criminal.

00:53:37.000 This is still the United States.

00:53:38.000 We don't prosecute people for saying mean things to one another.

00:53:40.000 The back and forth has led to new scrutiny, says the AJC, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, that mirrors the nation's political divide.

00:53:48.000 Some conservatives cast Thomas as a version of Jussie Smollett.

00:53:51.000 I mean, so far, that's sort of the evidence, isn't it?

00:53:55.000 So all of this has fallen apart for her.

00:53:59.000 It is a day of secrets revealed.

00:54:00.000 It turns out that she apparently said exactly the thing, according to witness testimony, that she claims that the bad guy said.

00:54:08.000 Sparks made a statement on Tuesday.

00:54:09.000 He said he wasn't surprised the cop authorities decided not to file charges.

00:54:13.000 He said the police report speaks for itself.

00:54:15.000 He says, everyone that knows me knows I'm anti-hate, anti-bigot, anti-racism.

00:54:18.000 Sadly, too much of media isn't fact-checking items, or they're just taking the word of a politician when they do a live Facebook or a Twitter post.

00:54:26.000 Correct.

00:54:26.000 OK, so that is a story of the day when it comes to secrets being revealed.

00:54:30.000 Other secrets being revealed.

00:54:32.000 According to Amanda Prestigiacomo over at DailyWire.com, Senator Bernie Sanders' 2020 presidential campaign has been hit with an unfair labor practice complaint, according to the National Labor Relations Board.

00:54:43.000 It turns out that he is a vicious, brutal capitalist.

00:54:46.000 Turns out that Bernie Sanders, as I've said before, Marx in the streets, Hayek in the sheets, baby.

00:54:52.000 That guy is ready to crack down on his labor force when he needs more work from them for the same pay.

00:54:57.000 The complaint was filed on July 19th by an individual in Indiana who claims that the Sanders campaign took part in illegal employee interrogation and retaliation against staffers.

00:55:08.000 According to Bloomberg Law, a copy of the charge has not yet been made public, but the agency's July 22nd docket lists five potential violations of the National Labor Relations Act.

00:55:19.000 Here are the five allegations.

00:55:20.000 One, concerted activities, retaliation, discharge, discharge, discipline, repudiation, mediation of contract, and interrogation, including polling.

00:55:29.000 The complaint is just more embarrassing news for the self-identified democratic socialist.

00:55:33.000 Over the weekend, of course, Bernie Sanders had to cut staffers hours to accommodate his routinely advocated $15 minimum wage.

00:55:40.000 He also scolded some on his campaign for going to the press to discuss the internal negotiations.

00:55:46.000 Pretty awesome stuff.

00:55:47.000 So the National Labor Relations Board is going to now be investigating Bernie Sanders because all justice shall be done.

00:55:54.000 So, good times, good times.

00:55:56.000 I'm pleased to see that Bernie Sanders is learning that his own employees may not, in fact, be the best employees, and that Bernie Sanders has been relegated to now treating them in vicious, capitalist, terrible, terrible ways.

00:56:12.000 I will say, it would not surprise me at all if it turns out that one of these staffers is just basically a member of another campaign in disguise, and this is an attempt to take down Sanders.

00:56:20.000 I think that's a possibility.

00:56:21.000 Okay, time for a quick thing that I hate.

00:56:24.000 Now at the same time that Democrats like Bernie Sanders Bill de Blasio is pitching a new bill of rights for employees that would outlaw firing them.

00:56:41.000 Here is Bill de Blasio with his crazy plans as he strangles a groundhog under the table.

00:56:46.000 Giant weird Bill de Blasio, unpopular in his own town, now campaigning for president on the basis of being a weirdo. 0.91

00:56:51.000 Here he is.

00:56:53.000 My proposal is really clear.

00:56:54.000 I call it a bill of rights on purpose.

00:56:58.000 Because it's not just enough to give lip service to working people.

00:57:00.000 We need to enshrine these rights.

00:57:02.000 So for example, right now in America, folks can get fired for no cause whatsoever.

00:57:07.000 This legislation I'm proposing, what I would enact as president, is that there has to be just cause for any termination.

00:57:14.000 There has to be due process.

00:57:15.000 Right now in America, there's no guarantee of time off, no matter how much you work.

00:57:20.000 Every other industrialized country in the world guarantees paid vacation days, but this one?

00:57:24.000 My proposal is minimum two weeks paid vacation for every American worker.

00:57:27.000 We're going to put that into law in New York this year.

00:57:30.000 Okay, so you are going to have a right to a voice on the job, so apparently you can completely humiliate your employer and say whatever you want in the workplace, which is going to work until somebody says something conservative, at which point they're fired.

00:57:43.000 There will be a right to paid time off, which, again, is a right against an employer that you bargained with to take the job.

00:57:48.000 What if you don't want to take the paid time off?

00:57:49.000 Or what if the employer can't hire as many people, specifically because now he has to pay you to take vacation?

00:57:55.000 But most of all, the idea that an employer is supposed to tell the government why they're firing an employee You wanna gum up the labor market?

00:58:02.000 You wanna make it so that people are less likely to hire people they find risky?

00:58:05.000 This is the way to do it.

00:58:07.000 Really, the predictable result of this is that people are less likely to hire the marginal employee.

00:58:11.000 So you're only going to hire the employee that you think is guaranteed to do the job.

00:58:15.000 So the people who are gonna be hurt the hardest by this, the hurt the most, are people who have a bad record of employment, people who probably, I would guess, just based on statistics, are minorities. 1.00

00:58:27.000 Because if you hire somebody who is a minority and then they claim that you're firing them 'cause of racism and you say, "Well, no, I'm just firing you 'cause you're a bad employee." It's a lot harder to do that than presumably if you hire a white employee and you fire him because he's doing a bad job.

00:58:41.000 It's hard for him to claim racism.

00:58:42.000 There are predictable effects to all of this.

00:58:45.000 But Democrats don't care about predictable effects. 0.88

00:58:46.000 All they care about is the virtue signaling of claiming that employers are evil and employees are wonderful.

00:58:51.000 All of which is sometimes true and is mostly not true.

00:58:55.000 Mostly, it turns out that employers and employees are fairly good people overall.

00:58:59.000 And that when people get fired, very often it's because they're not doing the job or because there's a conflict.

00:59:04.000 Trying to police this stuff on the government level is pretty tyrannical, but I guess Bill de Blasio is used to that.

00:59:09.000 Okay, we'll be back here later for two additional hours of content.

00:59:12.000 More on the ongoing Mueller saga.

00:59:15.000 We'll be back then.

00:59:16.000 See you then.

00:59:16.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.

00:59:17.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.

00:59:18.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Robert Sterling.

00:59:26.000 Directed by Mike Joyner.

00:59:27.000 Executive Producer, Jeremy Boring.

00:59:30.000 Senior Producer, Jonathan Hay.

00:59:31.000 Our Supervising Producer is Mathis Glover.

00:59:34.000 And our Technical Producer is Austin Stevens.

00:59:36.000 Edited by Adam Sievitz.

00:59:38.000 Audio is mixed by Mike Koromina.

00:59:40.000 Hair and Makeup is by Jesua Olvera.

00:59:42.000 Production Assistant, Nick Sheehan.

00:59:43.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.

00:59:46.000 Copyright Daily Wire 2019.

00:59:48.000 Hey everyone, it's Andrew Klavan, host of The Andrew Klavan Show.

00:59:51.000 Robert Mueller is testifying before the House Judiciary Committee today, and earlier this morning, a Volkswagen pulled into the Capitol Rotunda, and onlookers watched with delight and wonder as all 235 congressional Democrats poured out of the car until Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler finally emerged, wearing a baggy polka dot outfit, gigantic shoes, white makeup, and a fright wig, and announced to reporters that he did not want the hearing to turn into some kind of circus.

01:00:16.000 We'll talk about it on The Andrew Klavan Show.

The Ben Shapiro Show - July 24, 2019

Mueller Lite | Ep. 824

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript