The Ben Shapiro Show - Pelosi Goes Full Thelma And Louise | Ep. 910

00:00:00.000 Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi announces Democrats will move forward with impeachment.

00:00:04.000 Democrats call lawyers to jabber how much about they hate Trump.

00:00:07.000 And the Democrats have some explaining to do on surveillance of political opponents.

00:00:11.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.

00:00:11.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.

00:00:13.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is sponsored by ExpressVPN.

00:00:21.000 Your data is your business protected at expressvpn.com.

00:00:24.000 Okay, so the big news of the day is that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has now formally announced that the Democrats will move forward with impeachment.

00:00:32.000 Now, this was a foregone conclusion.

00:00:34.000 Obviously.

00:00:35.000 The minute that she announced there would be an impeachment inquiry, we knew where that was going.

00:00:38.000 Because, after all, why would the Democrats announce an impeachment inquiry and then A month later, be like, yeah, you know, we inquired and it turns out he was fine.

00:00:46.000 Turns out it was great.

00:00:47.000 The only reason that you overtly announce an impeachment inquiry as opposed to just pursuing that inquiry sort of quietly is because you know where this is going.

00:00:55.000 The brick was already on the accelerator and Nancy Pelosi just confirmed that today. 0.98

00:00:59.000 Yesterday, she had gone to her Democratic House caucus.

00:01:02.000 And she had asked them, quote, are you ready?

00:01:05.000 And apparently the answer was a resounding yes.

00:01:07.000 According to the Associated Press today, Nancy Pelosi came out and she made an announcement.

00:01:11.000 She said, I am asking my Democratic colleagues to bring forward articles of impeachment.

00:01:16.000 Now, hilariously enough, I should note that the Democrats don't even know what these articles of impeachment are going to encompass.

00:01:21.000 According to The Hill, Democrats are debating how broadly to make their impeachment case against President Trump, with some lawmakers seeking to expand the list of charges, even as the House Judiciary Committee members signal a relatively narrow approach.

00:01:33.000 House Democrats at the first Judiciary Committee impeachment hearing on Wednesday gave the clearest sign yet of the scope of their likely articles by unveiling posters featuring three possible charges, abuse of power and bribery, obstruction of Congress, and obstruction of justice.

00:01:45.000 I'm free.

00:01:46.000 Keep it simple, Scope, said Eric Swalwell, directly before recommending the nuclear annihilation of all gun owners in the United States.

00:01:52.000 The charts provided a clear signal of intent by the Judiciary Committee, as did Counsel Norm Eisen's pointed questions to a panel of constitutional experts about whether Trump had committed the impeachable offenses.

00:02:02.000 Three witnesses invited by Democrats all answered affirmatively.

00:02:04.000 We'll get to their testimony in just a little while.

00:02:07.000 Suffice it to say that the 300-page report brought forward by Adam Schiff yesterday Adam Schiff, there are serious questions about Adam Schiff's behavior in this whole debacle.

00:02:15.000 Okay, that report does not substantiate the charges to the extent necessary to support an impeachment effort.

00:02:22.000 Democrats overreached here.

00:02:23.000 Politically, strategically, legally.

00:02:25.000 What they should have done, is they should have moved forward on censure.

00:02:28.000 They should have said, President Trump did something bad and he did something wrong here, and now we are moving forward with a censure motion.

00:02:34.000 And force Republicans between a rock and a hard place. 0.54

00:02:37.000 In the sense that if they don't vote for censure, then they look like hypocrites because Trump was not in fact clean as the driven snow on this whole thing.

00:02:44.000 And second, if they did endorse the censure, then Trump gets very angry and yells about them on Twitter and they get primaried.

00:02:50.000 That would have been the smart Democrat political move.

00:02:51.000 Instead, they decided to go whole hog impeachment inquiry.

00:02:54.000 We're going to get rid of this guy.

00:02:56.000 Now, listen, it's going nowhere in the Senate.

00:02:57.000 We all know it's going nowhere in the Senate.

00:02:58.000 The Democrats know it's going nowhere in the Senate.

00:03:00.000 The reason they are rushing this thing forward The reason that they are pushing as hard as they can to do this as quickly as possible is because they know they do not have the goods.

00:03:08.000 Adam Schiff basically admitted as much yesterday.

00:03:10.000 He said, listen, we have to rush this because every day Trump's in office is another danger to the Republic.

00:03:15.000 Yeah, sure.

00:03:16.000 I mean, you've literally been saying he's a danger to the Republic since the day he was elected.

00:03:19.000 You've said it's a danger to the Republic when he tweets things you don't like.

00:03:22.000 He made a big fuss when he tweeted a picture of himself as Rocky Balboa like a week ago.

00:03:27.000 Spare me.

00:03:28.000 But Democrats have been pushing this idea he's a threat to the Republic since the very beginning.

00:03:32.000 And so we have to rush this.

00:03:33.000 We have to rush it.

00:03:34.000 We can't even wait for all the facts.

00:03:36.000 Adam Schiff actually said that yesterday.

00:03:37.000 He said, we can't wait for all the facts.

00:03:38.000 We don't have to wait for all the facts.

00:03:40.000 Remember, Democrats in the fact portion of the inquiry in the Intelligence Committee with Adam Schiff leading, they called precisely one witness who had ever had a direct conversation with Donald Trump.

00:03:52.000 One, Gordon Sondland, the ambassador to the EU.

00:03:55.000 And Gordon Sondland did not give them what they were looking for.

00:03:57.000 He did not give them a window into Trump's intent with regard to his activities in Ukraine.

00:04:01.000 And these are all intent crimes.

00:04:03.000 Abuse of power and bribery, that's intent.

00:04:05.000 And suggesting that obstruction of justice has taken place is an absurdity on its face.

00:04:09.000 There is no obstruction of Congress.

00:04:11.000 There is no obstruction of justice.

00:04:13.000 The reason there is no obstruction of Congress or obstruction of justice is because every subpoena issued by the Democrats Has been challenged in court.

00:04:20.000 Normally, the way a subpoena works is that you are subpoenaed, and then if you don't want to answer the subpoena, you challenge it in court, you wait for the judge to rule on it, and then you have to listen to the judge.

00:04:29.000 Not a single one of these subpoenas has been ruled on by a judge, and Democrats are claiming obstruction of justice anyway.

00:04:34.000 Congress does not have the untrammeled power to simply issue a subpoena, and then everyone has to obey, or Congress impeaches them.

00:04:41.000 That's not how any of this works.

00:04:44.000 Okay, so the Democrats don't have the goods, but Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats had already pre-committed to impeachment, literally the day that she opened an impeachment inquiry. 0.96

00:04:51.000 So today, Nancy Pelosi announced, we're moving forward with these impeachment charges.

00:04:54.000 Now, that's hilarious also, because as you'll recall, just yesterday, Adam Schiff was saying, no, we're still making up our minds.

00:05:00.000 We're still making up our minds.

00:05:01.000 It's all kabuki theater from the moment she said impeachment inquiry.

00:05:05.000 Impeachment was inevitable.

00:05:06.000 I've been saying that since that day.

00:05:08.000 Nancy Pelosi comes forward and she says that she is going to call on her colleagues to impeach the president of the United States.

00:05:17.000 It's very dramatic.

00:05:18.000 She says, we will impeach the president of the United States should the president's actions have seriously violated the constitution.

00:05:23.000 He leaves us no choice but to act.

00:05:25.000 She spoke for about six minutes.

00:05:27.000 She took no questions.

00:05:29.000 But she did, in fact, come back to the podium and start yelling at the press. 0.89

00:05:33.000 There's one point where she started yelling at the press.

00:05:36.000 And we'll get to that in just one second.

00:05:38.000 First, let's talk about the difficulties of running a business.

00:05:40.000 It is very difficult to run a business.

00:05:42.000 It's particularly difficult to run a business when you are racking up heavy legal costs.

00:05:46.000 When you rack up these massive legal costs, it can really hurt your bottom line.

00:05:49.000 This is one of the reasons you should be using LegalZoom.

00:05:51.000 I've been using LegalZoom for legal resources since way before they were a sponsor of the program.

00:05:55.000 Like, going back 10 years, I was using LegalZoom for things like wills and trusts.

00:05:59.000 Over the past 18 years, LegalZoom has helped more than 2 million business owners get started.

00:06:03.000 But every entrepreneur knows that getting started is just the beginning of your journey.

00:06:06.000 What happens along the way determines your success.

00:06:08.000 That's what LegalZoom's network of independent attorneys and tax professionals can help with.

00:06:12.000 Knowing where to turn for advice on trademarks, tax law changes, review and contracts puts you at an advantage.

00:06:17.000 Plus, you'll save money by avoiding hourly fees because LegalZoom isn't, in fact, a law firm.

00:06:21.000 Don't get distracted by legal hurdles and business questions as the year winds down.

00:06:24.000 Go to LegalZoom.com today.

00:06:26.000 Find out all the different ways they can help your business.

00:06:28.000 And don't forget to enter the promo code BEN in the box at checkout.

00:06:31.000 That's LegalZoom.com, promo code Ben.

00:06:33.000 LegalZoom, where life meets legal.

00:06:35.000 Go check them out right now.

00:06:36.000 Save yourself money.

00:06:36.000 Don't put your business behind the eight ball when it comes to legal costs.

00:06:39.000 Go check them out at LegalZoom.com, promo code Ben.

00:06:42.000 Again, that's LegalZoom.com, promo code Ben.

00:06:45.000 So remember, according to the Democrats, this entire shebang is based on a desperate need, a desperate need to impeach Trump on constitutional lines, on constitutional bases.

00:06:55.000 It is not about personal animus for the President of the United States.

00:06:58.000 It's not about that at all.

00:06:58.000 That's what Pelosi said.

00:06:59.000 She said, this is just about The crucial nature of impeaching the president for high crimes and misdemeanors.

00:07:06.000 This prompted President Trump for his part to go on Twitter.

00:07:09.000 And tell the Democrats to get this done fast because he's coming after him.

00:07:12.000 He said, The do-nothing radical left Democrats have just announced that they are going to seek to impeach me over nothing.

00:07:17.000 They already gave up on the ridiculous Mueller stuff, so now they hang their hats on two totally appropriate, perfect, phone calls with the Ukrainian president.

00:07:24.000 This will mean that the beyond important and seldom used act of impeachment will be used routinely to attack future presidents.

00:07:30.000 That is not what our founders had in mind.

00:07:31.000 The good thing is that the Republicans have never been more united.

00:07:34.000 We will win.

00:07:35.000 Now, he is correct that he's not going to be removed from office.

00:07:37.000 Not on the basis of the slim read the Democrats have proposed here.

00:07:40.000 They just don't have the goods.

00:07:42.000 When he says it's a perfect phone call, I've been saying all along it was not a perfect phone call.

00:07:45.000 It was obvious it was not a perfect phone call, but the Democrats overreached and that overreach is going to allow Trump to survive all of this and survive fairly easily.

00:07:53.000 Okay, so Nancy Pelosi, again, here's what it sounded like when she announced the impeachment effort. 0.99

00:07:59.000 Let's go back to that clip.

00:08:00.000 Here is her original announcement of the impeachment effort.

00:08:04.000 Yesterday, the Judiciary Committee, at the Judiciary Committee, the American people heard testimony from leading American constitutional scholars who illuminated without a doubt that the President's actions are a profound violation of the public trust.

00:08:21.000 The president's actions have seriously violated the Constitution.

00:08:25.000 Today, I am asking our chairman to proceed with articles of impeachment.

00:08:31.000 I commend our committee chairs and our members for their somber approach to actions which I wish the president had not made necessary.

00:08:39.000 Okay, so, basically, according to Nancy Pelosi, it is these lawyers who came forward who changed the entire nature of the ballgame.

00:08:45.000 We'll get to the lawyer testimony in just one second, because it did not change the nature of the ballgame.

00:08:49.000 It was basically a bunch of lawyers who are Democrats, who came forward and said that Trump should be impeached, and then one lawyer, who apparently is also a Democrat, who said Trump should not be impeached.

00:08:57.000 That is not dispositive.

00:08:58.000 Sorry, that's not how this works.

00:09:00.000 Okay, so, Nancy Pelosi says that.

00:09:02.000 Then, she has this very wild moment, where she's about to walk off stage, and James Rosen, Who's a reporter formerly for Fox News.

00:09:09.000 He asks her whether this is all based on hatred for Trump.

00:09:12.000 Because that, of course, is what Republicans and Trump have been alleging.

00:09:15.000 Is that this is all about personal animus.

00:09:15.000 Right?

00:09:16.000 That Democrats want Trump out.

00:09:18.000 This isn't about anything that is legally based.

00:09:21.000 That there is no actual crime that's been committed here.

00:09:23.000 And Nancy Pelosi turns around and starts berating him in the most bizarre possible fashion. 1.00

00:09:27.000 If this were a Republican, the media would be talking about how unhinged this is.

00:09:30.000 If this were a Republican, if Mitch McConnell did this, the media would be talking about how McConnell had lost his cool, about how McConnell was going crazy.

00:09:37.000 As it is, the media are talking about Nancy Pelosi's righteous indignation, standing up for the Constitution of the United States.

00:09:43.000 But what she says here is patently not.

00:09:46.000 Here's Nancy Pelosi saying, no, it's not about hatred of Trump.

00:09:48.000 Also, as a Catholic, as a Catholic, I'm offended you used the word hate in the same sentence with me.

00:09:55.000 Okay, really?

00:09:56.000 We're gonna go here now?

00:09:57.000 Seriously?

00:09:58.000 It's an attack on your religion?

00:09:59.000 If you say that you, a Democrat, hates the President?

00:10:02.000 That you hate the President?

00:10:03.000 That is an attack on your Catholicism?

00:10:04.000 By the way, the convenient Catholic card is one of the more irritating points about Nancy Pelosi, a woman who backs abortion on demand, the suggestion that men can become women, And same-sex marriage sponsored by the federal government. 0.73

00:10:16.000 None of which are positions of the Catholic Church.

00:10:17.000 She's a very convenient Catholic when it comes to invoking her Catholicism for purposes of outrage. 0.73

00:10:22.000 Here's Nancy Pelosi getting very angry that anyone would suggest that this impeachment effort is about personality rather than actual crimes and misdemeanors. 0.89

00:10:29.000 Nancy Pelosi came out right off a tele... 1.00

00:10:31.000 Sorry.

00:10:32.000 Representative Pelosi, please not ask.

00:10:34.000 I'm not happy to raise an outlet house, we don't hate anybody, not anybody in the world.

00:10:38.000 I'm not...

00:10:39.000 They're latched in.

00:10:40.000 Excuse me.

00:10:41.000 I did not excuse me.

00:10:42.000 You did, you did.

00:10:43.000 I asked the question.

00:10:44.000 This is about the Constitution of the United States and the facts that lead to the President's violation of his oath of office.

00:10:51.000 And as a Catholic, I resent your using the word hate in a sentence that addresses me.

00:10:57.000 How dare you, as a Catholic! 1.00

00:10:59.000 I'm gonna call the Pope over here, and the Pope is gonna tell you how mean you are! 0.98

00:11:03.000 The Pope!

00:11:04.000 We're gonna get Francis in here, and he's gonna tell you that you are not allowed to use the word hate with me, Nancy Pelosi, a woman who believes that abortion should be legal all the way until birth, on demand, for any reason.

00:11:14.000 We'll get the Pope right in here, man.

00:11:16.000 Right in here.

00:11:17.000 By the way, does that look like a person who doesn't hate the president right there?

00:11:19.000 Just gonna ask that.

00:11:20.000 Does that seem like a person who is very calmly and solidly just pointing out the law?

00:11:28.000 That she really is centered?

00:11:29.000 The rest of that clip is even wilder, right? 0.94

00:11:31.000 I mean, she starts the clip and she starts waving her hands around talking about how the president, she thinks he's a coward on gun control and a coward on climate change.

00:11:39.000 And those are all political questions, but this right here, this is a matter of standing up for the constitution. 0.99

00:11:44.000 Does anyone believe this crap? 0.99

00:11:45.000 No one believes this. 1.00

00:11:46.000 The media are orgasming over it, of course. 0.84

00:11:48.000 The media are just orgasmic, over the moon, over all of it.

00:11:52.000 But, does it really make a difference to the American people?

00:11:54.000 I would suggest probably not.

00:11:56.000 We'll get to more of this in just one second.

00:11:56.000 Probably not.

00:11:59.000 First, let's talk about how you can save time and money this holiday season.

00:12:02.000 So, we approacheth Christmas.

00:12:03.000 We approacheth Hanukkah.

00:12:05.000 It's time to send a lot of packages in the mail.

00:12:07.000 But, it's gonna be a pain in the butt to schlep all that stuff over to the post office.

00:12:11.000 And, why should you pay a price that you don't have to pay, when you could just go to stamps.com.

00:12:15.000 Stamps.com brings all the great services of the U.S. Postal Service directly to your computer.

00:12:19.000 Whether you're a small office sending invoices, an online seller shipping out products, or even a warehouse sending thousands of packages a day, stamps.com can handle it all with ease.

00:12:27.000 Simply use your computer to print official U.S. postage 24-7 for any letter, any package, any class of mail, anywhere you want to send it.

00:12:35.000 Once your mail is ready, just hand it to your mail carrier or drop it in a mailbox.

00:12:38.000 It is indeed that simple.

00:12:39.000 With stamps.com, you get 5 cents off every first class stamp and up to 40% off priority mail.

00:12:44.000 It's no wonder.

00:12:45.000 Over 700,000 small businesses already use stamps.com.

00:12:48.000 So if you haven't tried it yet, what exactly are you waiting for?

00:12:50.000 Don't delay.

00:12:51.000 Sign up right now.

00:12:53.000 Life is too short to spend all that time schlepping the boxes all the way to the post office.

00:12:56.000 Just do it from home.

00:12:57.000 We use it here at Daily Wire.

00:12:58.000 It saves us time.

00:12:59.000 It saves us money.

00:13:00.000 Right now, you get a special deal.

00:13:01.000 No risk.

00:13:02.000 My promo code SHAPIRO.

00:13:03.000 You get a special offer.

00:13:04.000 It includes a four-week trial, plus free postage and digital scale.

00:13:07.000 No long-term commitments or contracts.

00:13:08.000 Using our code, you'll be saving money and supporting the show.

00:13:11.000 So head on over to stamps.com.

00:13:12.000 Click on that microphone at the top of the homepage.

00:13:14.000 Type in Shapiro.

00:13:15.000 That is stamps.com.

00:13:16.000 Enter Shapiro.

00:13:17.000 Stamps.com.

00:13:18.000 Never go to the post office again.

00:13:19.000 So as I say, the media are just over the moon about the fact that Nancy Pelosi has officially opened this thing!

00:13:25.000 Yeah!

00:13:26.000 It's the time!

00:13:27.000 And she's not about hate.

00:13:28.000 She's not about personal animus for the president.

00:13:30.000 Doesn't matter that the Democrats still have not come up with the exact grounds of the impeachment.

00:13:33.000 By the way, good indicator that you don't actually know anything beyond you want the president out.

00:13:38.000 When people say, do you want to impeach the president?

00:13:41.000 You go, yeah!

00:13:42.000 And they say, well, what do you want it, how?

00:13:44.000 And you go, well, we're figuring it out!

00:13:47.000 It seems as though perhaps it might have something to do with you wanting Trump out, not so much you having objections to the president's behavior, per se.

00:13:55.000 Or at least objections serious enough to warrant impeachment.

00:13:59.000 And again, that Nancy Pelosi invoking her Catholicism, To be offended by- How dare you! 0.95

00:14:04.000 How dare you say that I am doing something that- out of hate!

00:14:08.000 No!

00:14:09.000 I'm- I'm a- I'm Mother Teresa!

00:14:11.000 Except Mother Teresa wasn't for the on-demand killing of unborn human beings. 0.99

00:14:14.000 Other than that!

00:14:15.000 Exactly like Mother Teresa!

00:14:17.000 Exactly! 0.94

00:14:19.000 So obviously that is silly stuff. 0.92

00:14:20.000 And she's hanging her hat, and so are the Democrats today, on the testimony of lawyers. 0.95

00:14:25.000 Ooh, lawyers.

00:14:27.000 Especially lawyers who are from, like, Ivy League schools.

00:14:31.000 Whoa! 0.71

00:14:32.000 So they called three, count them, three lawyers.

00:14:36.000 I know.

00:14:36.000 Amazing.

00:14:37.000 Life-changing.

00:14:38.000 They called three lawyers yesterday, who are all Democrats, to testify about how Trump should go.

00:14:44.000 And Nancy Pelosi is basing her announcement today on the fact that after one day of like four hours of hearing, now the Democrats know.

00:14:52.000 Until then, they were on the fence.

00:14:54.000 But then, they heard the compelling words of a professor named Pamela Carlin, and that changed everything.

00:15:00.000 That changed everything, because she is a legal authority on impeachment. 1.00

00:15:05.000 Now, if the Democrats had any stones at all, what they would just say is, listen, we don't have to have legal authority to do this.

00:15:10.000 We don't have to call lawyers.

00:15:12.000 It's a political process.

00:15:13.000 We think Trump is unfit for the presidency, we're impeaching him.

00:15:15.000 And then we can all have a referendum on that.

00:15:18.000 And then we can all say, okay, is impeachment worthwhile when we have an election a year away?

00:15:21.000 Because that's really what this is about, isn't it?

00:15:24.000 Is that the Democrats can make every case they're making against Trump in an election.

00:15:27.000 I mean, we're coming up hard on an election right now.

00:15:30.000 The Democrats are choosing their candidate right now.

00:15:34.000 And yet the Democrats are trying to push impeachment.

00:15:36.000 So that means they have to go above and beyond the simple political case, but they don't have anything above and beyond the political case.

00:15:41.000 So instead, they call a bunch of lawyers to jabber about it.

00:15:44.000 So they call one woman named Pamela Carlin, and the media are touting her yesterday.

00:15:49.000 I mean, just a law professor said Trump should be impeached.

00:15:52.000 Ooh! 0.96

00:15:54.000 Probably she's very objective in her approach.

00:15:57.000 Probably she's a constitutional expert with no serious political bias in any direction.

00:16:02.000 Or alternatively, she is a wild liberal who is so far to the left that Barack Obama did not choose her for the Supreme Court in part because she was too radical and too far to the left.

00:16:12.000 But he considered it.

00:16:14.000 Also, she worked in the Obama Department of Justice.

00:16:16.000 Also, she clerked for Harry Blackmun on the Supreme Court.

00:16:20.000 She also has performed litigation in the Supreme Court.

00:16:23.000 She teaches at Stanford Law.

00:16:24.000 She has performed litigation in the Supreme Court on landmark gay rights cases, trying to claim that sexual orientation is protected by a Title IX of the Civil Rights Act, which of course, it is not.

00:16:36.000 But she's an expert.

00:16:37.000 She's an expert.

00:16:39.000 She is widely known in liberal circles according to the New York Times.

00:16:42.000 She is chairman of the board of directors for the left-leaning American Constitution Society.

00:16:48.000 In December 2016, she and other scholars signed a letter expressing concerns over Trump's statements and actions during the 2016 presidential campaign.

00:16:58.000 She suggested in May 2017 that we had hit a constitutional crisis.

00:17:02.000 Here is a flashback clip of Professor Carlin suggesting that when she saw Trump's name in public, she physically had to cross the street.

00:17:12.000 Okay, this is who the Democrats called as their objective witness on whether Trump ought to be impeached.

00:17:17.000 I was struck, you know, I came in from the airport yesterday and I got off the bus from Dulles down at L'Enfant Plaza and I walked up to the hotel and as I was walking past what used to be the old post office building and is now the Trump Hotel, which I had to cross the street, of course.

00:17:35.000 Are you staying there?

00:17:37.000 God, no.

00:17:38.000 Never.

00:17:39.000 Never.

00:17:40.000 You see, it's not about hatred for Trump, guys.

00:17:42.000 It's about pure constitutional righteousness.

00:17:45.000 That's all.

00:17:46.000 It's not about how much she hates Trump.

00:17:48.000 By the way, how terrible is this person?

00:17:50.000 As a witness, she decided it would be a great idea to just go after Barron.

00:17:56.000 Like, Barron has nothing to do with anything.

00:17:57.000 But she, in the middle of her testimony, bizarrely decides to attack the president's son.

00:18:02.000 For no reason.

00:18:03.000 At all. 1.00

00:18:03.000 Just because she wants to be a horse's ass. 1.00

00:18:05.000 So here's Pamela Carlin being a horse's ass. 1.00

00:18:07.000 President Trump has said Article 2 does not give him the power to do anything he wants. 0.99

00:18:11.000 And I'll just give you one example that shows you the difference between him and a king.

00:18:16.000 Which is, the Constitution says there can be no titles of nobility.

00:18:20.000 So while the president can name his son baron, he can't make him a baron.

00:18:24.000 I mean, oh, the hilarity.

00:18:35.000 Oh, I mean, what?

00:18:36.000 Don't worry, she's not partisan, guys.

00:18:38.000 She just drops barren Trump jokes. 1.00

00:18:38.000 She's not partisan. 1.00

00:18:40.000 I'm Manchin, by the way.

00:18:42.000 That Republicans had tried to impeach Obama, which they did not.

00:18:44.000 And imagine that they had gone up there and made Sasha and Malia jokes.

00:18:48.000 Would the media have ever, ever stopped talking about how mean-spirited that was?

00:18:52.000 Later, she had to apologize for it.

00:18:54.000 Later, she said, you know, probably I shouldn't have referenced Barron.

00:18:56.000 That was in her prepared testimony.

00:18:58.000 Okay, she had pre-written that joke.

00:19:00.000 It wasn't like it just occurred to her to make a pun about Barron's name.

00:19:03.000 She was like, oh, well, I can make a, I can, like titles of nobility, his name is Barron.

00:19:07.000 First of all, it's a terrible joke.

00:19:09.000 Did you know that there was an artist in the United States named Prince, but he was not actually a prince?

00:19:15.000 Just want to put that out there.

00:19:17.000 Did you know that Martin Luther King was not actually a king?

00:19:20.000 Unbelievable.

00:19:21.000 Now things you learn each and every day in this country.

00:19:24.000 Here is Pamela Carlin having to back off of this and then apologize for referencing Barron. 1.00

00:19:29.000 And if I can just say one thing?

00:19:31.000 I want to apologize for what I said earlier about the president's son.

00:19:38.000 It was wrong of me to do that.

00:19:40.000 I wish the president would apologize, obviously, for the things that he's done that's wrong, but I do regret having said that.

00:19:46.000 Okay, that's always my favorite thing is, I apologize for that.

00:19:49.000 This is, by the way, the worst tactic you can use in marriage.

00:19:52.000 Honey, I really apologize for not taking out the garbage, but I wish you would apologize for being terrible at everything.

00:19:59.000 Obviously a great way to make an apology.

00:20:00.000 Okay, in just a second, we'll get to more of the Democrat witnesses who apparently convinced the Democrats' higher echelon that they must impeach.

00:20:06.000 We'll get to that in just one second.

00:20:07.000 First, I want to tell you about a movie that is now out.

00:20:11.000 It is called No Safe Spaces.

00:20:11.000 It is great.

00:20:13.000 No Safe Spaces, starring my friends Adam Carolla and Dennis Prager.

00:20:16.000 It's in theaters nationwide Friday, December 6th.

00:20:19.000 It takes you to the heart of the free speech battle in America.

00:20:22.000 And Adam and Dennis take you on this, it's a pretty great, I've seen the movie, it's really terrific.

00:20:26.000 Not just because I'm one of the stars of the movie, although mostly because I'm one of the stars of the movie, but also you should go see No Safe Spaces because it is a wild, hilarious, well-done ride to show you the effects of political correctness, identity politics, and cancel culture.

00:20:38.000 No Safe Spaces argues About why free speech is important to a free society, how it's being threatened, what we can do to fight back.

00:20:45.000 By the way, the film does take you behind the scenes of that crazy 2017 Berkeley speech that cost the city of Berkeley $600,000 for security because Antifa decided to threaten violence because I was speaking about free speech.

00:20:57.000 There are a bunch of different voices in this thing.

00:21:00.000 President Obama shows up, Brett Weinstein, Cornel West, Jordan Peterson.

00:21:03.000 Take all your liberal friends to see it because it really should cross partisan aisles.

00:21:06.000 Go check out No Safe Spaces this weekend.

00:21:09.000 It's rated PG-13 in theaters Friday, December 6th.

00:21:12.000 Also, help out conservative filmmaking.

00:21:14.000 Help out filmmaking that makes a difference in the culture.

00:21:16.000 Go to nosafespaces.com slash Ben for ticket information and theater locations.

00:21:20.000 Go check them out right now.

00:21:21.000 Okay, so as I say, the Democrats, Pelosi launched the statement this morning saying that it was the legal testimony of these objective experts that convinced her.

00:21:29.000 that a constitutional crisis had arisen and it was time for impeachment to be invoked.

00:21:33.000 Okay, but as I point out here, Pamela Carlin is a hack. 1.00

00:21:37.000 She's always been a hack.

00:21:38.000 She is a hack who is a very far left radical. 0.97

00:21:42.000 Okay, Matt Goetz, congressman of Florida, points out to Carlin that she has routinely spoken about how conservatives are nasty people and she dislikes them.

00:21:50.000 Now, have you ever been on a podcast called Versus Trump?

00:21:56.000 I think I was on a live panel that the people who rammed the podcast called Versus Trump...

00:22:04.000 On that, do you remember saying the following?

00:22:07.000 Liberals tend to cluster more.

00:22:09.000 Conservatives, especially very conservative people, tend to spread out more, perhaps because they don't even want to be around themselves.

00:22:18.000 Did you say that?

00:22:19.000 Yes, I did.

00:22:20.000 Oh, she's a perfectly objective witness, and you can hear the Democrats laughing about it.

00:22:25.000 No, this has nothing to do with partisanship, guys.

00:22:27.000 I believe Nancy Pelosi when she says she's very offended as a Catholic and anyone would think this is merely a partisan inquiry.

00:22:32.000 By the way, I'm old enough to remember, because I'm more than six months old, when Nancy Pelosi suggested that impeachment would be inappropriate if she did not have bipartisan support.

00:22:40.000 There is not one Republican that supports impeachment.

00:22:42.000 Not one.

00:22:44.000 That should tell you something, and it's not just that President Trump has tremendous sway inside his own party.

00:22:49.000 Not one.

00:22:50.000 Even Republicans in swing districts, even Republicans in swing states.

00:22:54.000 Okay, so she is the most obvious far-left legal commentator called Pamela Carlin, but she's not the only one called by the Democrats.

00:23:03.000 Another professor named Noah Feldman He teaches at Harvard Law School.

00:23:08.000 Feldman also testified that President Trump should be impeached.

00:23:12.000 And there's only one problem with that, which is that Noah Feldman in the past, as in like in the last two years, wrote a piece in the New Yorker looking for grounds for President Trump's impeachment and has talked openly as early as like March 2017 about how Trump's tweets made him impeachable and led to a constitutional crisis.

00:23:27.000 But here's Noah Feldman explaining why this set of circumstances is really impeachable.

00:23:32.000 Not the other stuff that I said was impeachable before.

00:23:34.000 This stuff is the truly impeachable stuff.

00:23:36.000 On the basis of the testimony and the evidence before the House, President Trump has committed impeachable high crimes and misdemeanors by corruptly abusing the office of the presidency.

00:23:49.000 Specifically, President Trump has abused his office by corruptly soliciting President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine to announce investigations of his political rivals in order to gain personal advantage, including in the 2020 presidential election.

00:24:06.000 Okay, but he's also very objective, guys.

00:24:07.000 It's not that he thinks Trump's been impeachable since day one.

00:24:10.000 It's only now.

00:24:11.000 Only now have circumstances arisen.

00:24:13.000 And then the Democrats call a third witness.

00:24:15.000 Ooh, a third witness!

00:24:17.000 We'll get to that third witness in just a second.

00:24:18.000 Another very objective witness being called by the Democrats to testify that impeachment is appropriate here.

00:24:24.000 We'll get to that in just one second.

00:24:25.000 First, would you like some free money?

00:24:27.000 I know, it sounds crazy, but this is an actual program, it will save you money.

00:24:31.000 They're not actually going to send you a check, but effectively speaking, that's kind of what they are doing, because every time you shop online, Honey searches the web for all of the promo codes that you need in order to save money on every deal, so you can make sure that you are always getting the best deal.

00:24:43.000 Honey has saved me probably thousands of dollars at this point, it works on every shopping site. 0.86

00:24:47.000 From Express, to Amazon, to any place.

00:24:49.000 I mean, Honey is constantly trying to save you money. 0.86

00:24:52.000 All you have to do is put it on your computer, it runs in the background, and then every time you shop, it searches for the best deal for you.

00:24:58.000 It's a free browser extension that automatically finds the best promo codes whenever you shop online.

00:25:02.000 Honey has found it's over 10 million members, over a billion dollars in savings.

00:25:06.000 Honey supports over 20,000 stores online, and they've got over 100,000 five-star reviews on the Google Chrome store.

00:25:12.000 Again, I've been using it shopping for the holidays.

00:25:13.000 It's been saving me a fortune.

00:25:14.000 If you're buying gifts this holiday season, you need honey.

00:25:17.000 If you're not, you probably know somebody who is, so do them a solid and tell them about honey.

00:25:21.000 Honey can help make sure you're getting the best price for whatever it is you are buying.

00:25:24.000 It is free to use.

00:25:25.000 It installs in just two clicks.

00:25:26.000 Get honey for free at joinhoney.com slash ben.

00:25:29.000 That's joinhoney.com slash ben.

00:25:31.000 So for free, you're saving money.

00:25:32.000 Sounds great, because it is.

00:25:33.000 Go to joinhoney.com slash ben and get honey for free.

00:25:36.000 I can testify, it saved me a bunch of money.

00:25:38.000 Joinhoney.com slash ben.

00:25:40.000 Okay, check that out.

00:25:41.000 The Democrats also called a third lawyer!

00:25:43.000 Ooh, lawyers!

00:25:45.000 Yeah!

00:25:46.000 Okay, if it seems as though I am less than impressed with people who have law degrees, it's because I have one.

00:25:54.000 Okay?

00:25:54.000 Because I went to the same Ivy League schools as many of these professors.

00:25:58.000 Because they have the same degree that I do.

00:26:00.000 And you know what it does?

00:26:01.000 It teaches you to think in a particular legal way, but it does not obscure your politics.

00:26:04.000 If you are a Democrat and you went to Harvard Law School, you're still a Democrat.

00:26:07.000 If you're a Republican and you went to Harvard Law School, you are still a Republican.

00:26:10.000 Ted Cruz went to Harvard Law School.

00:26:11.000 Barack Obama went to Harvard Law School.

00:26:13.000 So the law degree does not confer upon you a degree of objectivity that suddenly makes you magically capable of discerning whether an offense is inherently impeachable. 0.52

00:26:23.000 It's a very silly contention.

00:26:24.000 That's exactly what Nancy Pelosi is contending today. 1.00

00:26:26.000 Again, if she had the guts, she would just say, listen, I don't care what the lawyers say, this is impeachable, we're doing it!

00:26:31.000 We're doing it because it's impeachable, and I think it's terrible.

00:26:34.000 But instead, it's like, no, these legal authorities say we must.

00:26:38.000 It is with sadness in my heart and prayer for the president.

00:26:40.000 That's always the most obnoxious thing, is when you hear Nancy Pelosi say things like, I'm not angry at the president.

00:26:46.000 I'm just praying for him.

00:26:47.000 Yeah, I'm sure.

00:26:47.000 I'm sure you get down on your knees every night and you pray to God for President Trump.

00:26:50.000 I am sure.

00:26:52.000 Devout Catholic Nancy Pelosi is.

00:26:53.000 I'm sure that that's what she does every night when she's not being offended by people saying that perhaps she hates the president.

00:26:59.000 So the Democrats call forth Michael Gerhart, a professor who, according to the New York Times, made impeachment his specialty.

00:27:07.000 Gerhart testified that he's a professor at University of North Carolina.

00:27:11.000 This is the second time he's appeared as a witness.

00:27:14.000 And he was called in 1998 to testify on Clinton's impeachment.

00:27:19.000 So Michael Gerhardt said that Trump's actions are worse than any other prior president.

00:27:24.000 Any of them.

00:27:25.000 Any prior president.

00:27:27.000 Like all of them.

00:27:28.000 Which is a hell of a statement.

00:27:30.000 I mean, like, Watergate is a thing that happened.

00:27:33.000 We've had Teapot Dome.

00:27:34.000 We've had the President of the United States, FDR, essentially try to pack the Supreme Court of the United States and force private citizens to display insignia in their window so that they would be left alone by the government.

00:27:46.000 We've had Woodrow Wilson run completely roughshod over the Constitution of the United States and merely arrest people he disagreed with.

00:27:52.000 So, yeah, I mean, if we're talking about, like, things that are bad, the President... FDR interned 100,000 Japanese-American citizens.

00:28:00.000 And the Supreme Court, by the way, okayed that in Korematsu.

00:28:03.000 So in any case, the idea that President Trump has done something so far beyond the bounds of any... Sure, sure.

00:28:11.000 Okay, sure.

00:28:12.000 Here is Gephardt, Professor Gephardt saying, Gerhardt rather, saying that Trump's actions are worse than any other prior president.

00:28:19.000 If Congress fails to impeach here, then the impeachment process has lost all meaning.

00:28:24.000 And along with that, our constitution's carefully crafted safeguards against the establishment of a king on American soil, and therefore, I stand with the Constitution and I stand with the framers who are committed to ensure that no one is above the law.

00:28:38.000 Well, you know, that's very exciting stuff, except for the fact that this particular dude, Gerhardt, it turns out that he is also really far to the left.

00:28:47.000 It turns out that he is a partisan because he served as deputy media director for former Vice President Al Gore's first Senate campaign.

00:28:54.000 He was involved in Bill Clinton's transition to the White House in the early 1990s.

00:28:59.000 He was involved in confirmation proceedings for seven of the nine justices on the Supreme Court, and for two of those, he was special counsel to Senator Pat Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, who is one of the most left-leaning members of the Senate.

00:29:11.000 So, is that guy partisan?

00:29:12.000 Yeah, it turns out he's a partisan too.

00:29:13.000 So on the basis of three partisan Democrats, the Democrats are going, hey look, our partisan Democrats say we should impeach?

00:29:18.000 Mmm, we should impeach.

00:29:20.000 The Republicans had one witness, Jonathan Turley.

00:29:22.000 Jonathan Turley is not a Republican.

00:29:24.000 He's not.

00:29:25.000 I mean, as far as I'm aware, there's no information that suggests that he is a Republican.

00:29:29.000 In fact, he has been a liberal contrarian for a very long time, according to the New York Times.

00:29:37.000 He had called for Bill Clinton's impeachment like 20 years ago, but he was also sharply critical of George W. Bush.

00:29:45.000 He represented in 2011 two lawmakers, Representative Dennis Kucinich, who's the most left-leaning member of the House of Representatives, and Representative Walter Jones, a Republican who sued Barack Obama for participating in the NATO air war over Libya without congressional authorization.

00:30:01.000 So Turley is not exactly kind of your classic, he's not exactly your classic Republican lawyer.

00:30:07.000 And he testified yesterday, too, and he said, no, you Democrats, you have not shown that this impeachment is apolitical.

00:30:14.000 In fact, you're proving yourselves incredibly political.

00:30:17.000 Here's Turley.

00:30:18.000 If you prove a quid pro quo that you might have an impeachable offense, but to go up only on a non-criminal case would be the first time in history.

00:30:26.000 So why is that the case?

00:30:28.000 The reason is that crimes have an established definition and case law.

00:30:34.000 So there's a concrete, independent body of law that assures the public that this is not just political, that this is a president who did something they could not do.

00:30:45.000 You can't say the president is above the law if you then say the crimes you accuse him of really don't have to be established.

00:30:53.000 Okay, that's a great point.

00:30:54.000 The point that he is making is, if you're going to say the president is above the law, you have to establish what the law is.

00:30:59.000 If you cannot establish what the law is, then really you're not saying he's above the law, you're saying he's below the law, and that you can impeach him for something that is not, in fact, a criminal offense.

00:31:07.000 We'll get to more of Jonathan Turley's testimony yesterday, and we'll get to the media's response to all of that, because Even some members of the media, who you would typically expect to be fairly pro-impeachment, were like, yeah, I'm not so sure about this.

00:31:19.000 You can see the Democratic members of the media shifting away from even pretending that this isn't political.

00:31:25.000 Even as the Democrats maintain, like Pelosi, that this is absolutely apolitical.

00:31:30.000 Even as the Democrats claim that, many left-leaning commentators stare like, you know what?

00:31:34.000 Let's just get rid of the ruse.

00:31:36.000 We want him out.

00:31:37.000 We'll get to that in just one second.

00:31:37.000 It's that simple.

00:31:38.000 First, let me tell you about the greatest holiday gift.

00:31:42.000 The greatest holiday gift.

00:31:43.000 You want to make sure that somebody loves the holiday gift this year?

00:31:46.000 Very simple answer.

00:31:47.000 Cookies.

00:31:48.000 Has there ever been a human being who doesn't like cookies?

00:31:48.000 Really.

00:31:51.000 Maybe Hitler? 0.85

00:31:51.000 Like, who doesn't like cookies? 0.85

00:31:53.000 Everyone loves cookies.

00:31:55.000 Okay, and that is why you should go check out Mrs. Fields' special deal this year.

00:32:00.000 When Debbie Fields started Mrs. Fields Cookies 40 years ago, she won over cookie lovers everywhere with her gooey chocolate chip cookies, melt-in-your-mouth brownies, and passion for sharing the joy of baked goods. 1.00

00:32:09.000 I mean, this is good stuff.

00:32:11.000 Brownies, cookies, everything joyous in life.

00:32:14.000 Nowadays, you can have cookies sent right where you want them without visiting a bakery.

00:32:17.000 With gourmet gift tins and baskets filled with fresh-baked cookies, You know that your order will arrive fresh and flavorful.

00:32:23.000 Ordering is easy.

00:32:24.000 They can ship your cookies anywhere across the country.

00:32:26.000 If you're ordering as a gift, you can add a personal custom message, or a company logo, or a family photo.

00:32:31.000 And Mrs. Fields offers a 100% customer satisfaction guarantee.

00:32:34.000 You know why they can do that?

00:32:35.000 Because everyone is satisfied with cookies.

00:32:37.000 Every single human.

00:32:38.000 To sweeten the deal, Our listeners get 20% off your amazing order when you go to mrsfields.com and enter promo code SHAPIRO.

00:32:45.000 That's 20% off any gift at mrsfields.com, promo code SHAPIRO.

00:32:49.000 That's mrsfields.com, mrsfields.com, promo code SHAPIRO.

00:32:52.000 Your cookies are on the way.

00:32:54.000 Why would you not enjoy the cookies?

00:32:55.000 Go enjoy the cookies.

00:32:56.000 mrsfields.com, promo code SHAPIRO.

00:32:59.000 Okay, we'll get to more of the Democrats impeachment charade in just one second.

00:33:03.000 But first, if you're not already a subscriber, you're missing out.

00:33:05.000 Head on over to dailywire.com slash subscribe.

00:33:07.000 Perhaps you missed out on our special deals last weekend.

00:33:09.000 Good news, you can still become a subscriber.

00:33:11.000 You have to pay a little bit more than you would've last weekend, but it ain't that much more, and it's awesome.

00:33:15.000 For as little as 10 bucks a month, you get our articles ad free, access to all of our live broadcasts, our full show library, select bonus content, our exclusive Daily Wire app, which is pretty awesome if you haven't checked it out yet.

00:33:24.000 If you choose the new all-access plan, you get all of that, plus the legendary Leftist Tears Tumblr.

00:33:29.000 And our brand new Ask Me Anything style discussion feature that allows you to engage our hosts, writers, and special guests on a weekly basis.

00:33:36.000 You also get our Sunday special early on Saturday.

00:33:38.000 This week's Sunday special features my good friend, Lila Rose, who's the head of Live Action, a pro-life advocate extraordinaire.

00:33:44.000 Here's a little bit of what that sounds like.

00:33:48.000 The head nurse at UCLA sits me down and she says, point blank, UCLA doesn't support women who are pregnant or help them. 0.98

00:33:55.000 So it was very crystal clear immediately why there's no pregnant girls on campus, because we were being told, point blank, you should have an abortion.

00:34:04.000 It's really interesting stuff, really important stuff.

00:34:07.000 If you are on the fence about the pro-choice versus pro-life debate, it's worth listening to.

00:34:11.000 Check that out.

00:34:12.000 That's our Sunday special this week.

00:34:13.000 week, we are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast and radio show in the nation.

00:34:16.000 So the Republican Party brings forth Jonathan Turley, who again is not a Republican, to point out that the Democrats have not actually fulfilled any definition of a statutory crime.

00:34:29.000 He says there was no bribery, no extortion, no abuse of power shown.

00:34:34.000 And of course, Turley is exactly correct.

00:34:36.000 So if I were to summarize your testimony, no bribery, no extortion, no obstruction of justice, no abuse of power.

00:34:42.000 Is that fair?

00:34:43.000 Not on this record.

00:34:45.000 Okay, and then Turley points to the Democrats and he said, listen, if you want to talk about abusive power, you guys are abusing power.

00:34:50.000 I mean, right now, what you guys are doing is an abuse of power.

00:34:54.000 I can't emphasize this enough, and I'll say it just one more time.

00:34:59.000 If you impeach a president, if you make a high crime and misdemeanor out of going to the courts, it is an abuse of power.

00:35:09.000 It's your abuse of power.

00:35:11.000 You're doing precisely what you're criticizing the president for doing.

00:35:15.000 We have a third branch that deals with conflicts of the other two branches.

00:35:20.000 And what comes out of there and what you do with it is the very definition of legitimacy.

00:35:25.000 Okay, what Turley is saying here specifically is he's talking about the obstruction of justice charge.

00:35:28.000 He's saying what I've been saying, which is of course legally factual.

00:35:31.000 If someone subpoenas you, you go to a court if you don't want to obey the subpoena.

00:35:35.000 The court then rules.

00:35:36.000 If you do not abide by the court, now you're obstructing justice.

00:35:39.000 But it is not an obstruction of justice to tell the Democrats to stuff it until you go to a court.

00:35:42.000 And if Democrats are to call that obstruction of justice, they're pretending the judicial branch does not exist.

00:35:47.000 Now, speaking of abuse of power, the Wall Street Journal editorial board has an interesting editorial today about Adam Schiff and his possible abuse of power.

00:35:54.000 According to the Wall Street Journal editorial board, Adam Schiff's 300-page House Intelligence Impeachment Report does not include much new about President Trump's Ukrainian interventions, but it does disclose details of telephone calls between ranking intelligence Republican Devin Nunes, Trump attorneys Rudy Giuliani and Jay Sekulow, reporter John Solomon, former Giuliani associate Lev Parnas, the White House, and others.

00:36:13.000 The details are metadata about the numbers and length of the calls, not the content.

00:36:18.000 The impeachment press is playing this as if the calls are a new part of the scandal, but the real outrage here is Schiff snooping on political opponents.

00:36:24.000 The Democrats' motive appears to be an attempt to portray Devin Nunes, a presidential defender and Schiff's leading antagonist in Congress, as part of a conspiracy to commit impeachable offenses.

00:36:33.000 Schiff told the press on Tuesday, I think it is deeply concerning that at a time when the President of the United States was using the power of his office to dig up dirt on a political rival, that there may be evidence that there were members of Congress complicit in that activity.

00:36:46.000 The Wall Street Journal editorial board says, complicit in what?

00:36:49.000 Doing his job of congressional oversight?

00:36:51.000 Talking to Trump's lawyer to get a complete view of the Ukrainian tale?

00:36:54.000 Apparently Schiff now wants to impeach members of Congress too.

00:36:56.000 This is an unprecedented, and it looks like an abuse of government surveillance authority for partisan gain.

00:37:01.000 Democrats were caught using the Steele dossier to coax the FBI into snooping on the 2016 Trump campaign.

00:37:06.000 Now we have elected members of Congress using secret subpoenas to obtain, and then release to the public, the call records of political opponents.

00:37:14.000 Our sources, says the Wall Street Journal, say that Schiff issued a subpoena in September to AT&T, demanding call logs for five numbers, including Giuliani's.

00:37:21.000 Subsequent subpoenas to AT&T and Verizon demanded more details.

00:37:24.000 Republicans were told of the subpoenas, but under rules of committee secrecy, they couldn't raise public objections.

00:37:30.000 Here, the companies appear to have handed over metadata based on little more than Schiff's say-so and an AT&T's case in response to a request that was made even before the House began a formal impeachment inquiry.

00:37:40.000 AT&T released a statement on Wednesday saying it is required by law to provide information to government and law enforcement agencies.

00:37:46.000 But AT&T can question the validity of subpoenas in courts, and they had grounds to do so given the highly political nature of their requests.

00:37:52.000 Then again, maybe it felt it had no choice.

00:37:55.000 We'll leave it to legal experts to decide whether a powerful congressman's demands of a highly regulated company are extortion.

00:38:02.000 According to the Wall Street Journal, Schiff's metadata disclosures hardly bear on his impeachment case.

00:38:06.000 Giuliani had broadcast to the world he wanted Ukraine to investigate Hunter and Joe Biden.

00:38:10.000 He's also Trump's personal attorney.

00:38:12.000 Does Schiff have a legal opinion saying he can ignore attorney-client privilege?

00:38:16.000 Schiff published a select log of Giuliani's calls, but presumably he has a record of everyone Giuliani spoke to for months.

00:38:22.000 Imagine the political outrage if Republicans had snooped on Rudy Giuliani's attorneys.

00:38:26.000 Schiff's accusations against Nunes are even more suspect.

00:38:29.000 The Democrat doesn't know the content of Nunes' conversations, and the Republican says he believes his spring talks with Giuliani related to the Mueller report.

00:38:37.000 Noons can speak to whomever he likes.

00:38:38.000 Schiff has no authority to investigate fellow members.

00:38:41.000 Since Schiff is going to release the call logs of Republicans, can we see the logs of his calls with the impeachment press and, by the way, with any whistleblowers?

00:38:48.000 And by the way, Schiff's targets include one of their own, John Solomon.

00:38:52.000 How is Solomon's reporting trail relevant to impeachment?

00:38:55.000 The media usually condemn government officials who use surveillance to track and intimidate the media, but here they're cheering Schiff on.

00:39:02.000 So he subpoenaed AT&T for a bunch of phone numbers, including Giuliani, and then just spilled that out into public.

00:39:06.000 How exactly is that a good look?

00:39:08.000 And meanwhile, it seems like the Democrats themselves, many of the Democratic commentators, are basically just letting the cat out of the bag at this point.

00:39:15.000 They're not gonna bother with the whole pretense of legality here.

00:39:18.000 They're just gonna say, no one cares about the actual articles of impeachment, whatever. 0.98

00:39:22.000 Just say he sucks and then impeach him. 0.90

00:39:25.000 Michael Tamasky has a piece at the New York Times today called, Do Voters Even Care About the Articles of Impeachment? 0.99

00:39:30.000 Everyone knows what Trump did.

00:39:32.000 The Democrats shouldn't draw out the process any longer than necessary.

00:39:34.000 In fact, why even do the process?

00:39:35.000 That's the real question.

00:39:36.000 Why not just vote for impeachment?

00:39:37.000 We all know what this is.

00:39:39.000 We all know the Democrats are voting this way. 0.99

00:39:41.000 This whole thing is ridiculous. 0.96

00:39:42.000 It's not convincing a single American one way or the other. 0.98

00:39:45.000 Not one.

00:39:46.000 All this is baked into the cake.

00:39:46.000 Right?

00:39:48.000 In this way, Tamasky's right.

00:39:50.000 Because this is a hack job.

00:39:52.000 But Tomaski says, "The questions now facing House Democrats "concern scope and speed, "whether to pass one or two articles of impeachment quickly "or bide their time and pass several articles "that more comprehensively reflect the record "of Trump's crimes against the Constitution.

00:40:04.000 "In general, those in the former camp "tend to be members from purple swing districts "that Mr. Trump may have carried in 2016.

00:40:09.000 "They've almost all signed on to the effort at this point, "but they'd just as soon get it over with "and get back to talking about prescription drugs.

00:40:15.000 "Those in the latter camp tend to be "from safer blue districts, "which gives them the freedom to take a position "that sounds more uncompromising." By the way, this should be a dead giveaway that Democrats know they're losing this debate.

00:40:24.000 If the purple district Democrats are the ones pushing for a rush, you know this ain't going well for the Democrats.

00:40:30.000 If only blue district Democrats are like, yeah, let's take our time and put this together.

00:40:34.000 That means only the true believers really think that there are grounds for impeachment here.

00:40:38.000 The purple Dems are going to vote with the blue Dems because they have to, because of partisanship, but they don't actually believe that they have the grounds to do it, and they don't actually believe that they have the political wherewithal to benefit from it.

00:40:50.000 According to Michael Tamasky, He says, But, everyone knows what went on.

00:40:54.000 this has become such a pitched battle, it's a deeply emotional question.

00:40:56.000 To many, it's a clear matter of right and wrong.

00:40:58.000 To fail to condemn Trump's many sins in official articles of impeachment constitutes a whitewashing of history.

00:41:04.000 But everyone knows what went on.

00:41:07.000 So let's just push forward, he says.

00:41:09.000 He says an extended process might produce more riveting testimony.

00:41:12.000 But if a separately orders the former White House counsel, Don McGahn, to testify, he will have to, whether it's officially part of an impeachment proceeding or not.

00:41:19.000 I mean, Americans will watch his testimony and take it in.

00:41:22.000 There's risk in the maximalist approach.

00:41:24.000 A process that drags on for too long might just result in more Democratic infighting, at a time when the party needs to be unified.

00:41:30.000 There's a decent argument for throwing the hot potato to Mitch McConnell and shaming him, and the Senate Republicans, for abasing themselves of the blanket exoneration of Mr. Trump.

00:41:38.000 Well, that's not how this is going to go, by the way.

00:41:39.000 If this gets to the Senate, Hunter Biden and Joe Biden will be called.

00:41:42.000 They will.

00:41:43.000 And then, they will be subpoenaed.

00:41:46.000 And then, if they refuse the subpoena, we'll go to court.

00:41:48.000 And then, Republicans can make the exact same case Democrats are making, that simply by appealing a subpoena, Hunter and Joe Biden are involved in obstruction of justice.

00:41:56.000 That's exactly what Democrats are claiming now.

00:41:59.000 And we're seeing again this opinion, you know, repeated across the media that we don't need any grounds for this impeachment.

00:42:05.000 We should just push it forward no matter what.

00:42:08.000 At least that's honest.

00:42:09.000 At least that's honest.

00:42:11.000 So, that is where things stand.

00:42:12.000 By the way, the media continue to try and dig up dirt on President Trump in the weirdest possible ways.

00:42:17.000 There's an article in the Washington Post today going to talk to his housekeepers.

00:42:22.000 What did they find about the housekeepers?

00:42:24.000 These housekeepers apparently at Mar-a-Lago were illegal immigrants. 1.00

00:42:28.000 Which we've known for a long time is that Trump employed illegal immigrants.

00:42:31.000 Because he runs a very large firm and because a lot of large firms employ illegal immigrants and now his firm employs E-Verify. 0.94

00:42:39.000 But the real core of this dumb Washington Post piece Is that Trump has personal habits and those personal habits are supposedly bizarre.

00:42:46.000 So the Washington Post has this long piece today about how the president liked his Diet Coke in small glass bottles with a plastic straw that no one could be seen touching. 0.98

00:42:55.000 Impeach! 1.00

00:42:56.000 Impeach! 1.00

00:42:58.000 The Washington Post says the undocumented workers were often left to perform the most intimate and personal work.

00:43:02.000 Those who cooked and served Trump knew he liked his cheeseburgers well done.

00:43:06.000 Trump loved Tic Tacs, but not an arbitrary amount.

00:43:08.000 He wanted, in his bedroom bureau at all times, two full containers of white Tic Tacs and one container that was half full.

00:43:14.000 The same rule applied to the Bronx Colors brand face makeup from Switzerland that Trump slathered on.

00:43:20.000 Two full containers, one half full.

00:43:21.000 Even if it meant that housekeepers had to regularly bring new shirts from the pro shop because of the rust color stain on his collar.

00:43:28.000 A special washing machine in the laundry room was reserved for his wife Melania Trump's clothing.

00:43:32.000 Donald Trump liked Irish spring bar soap in his shower.

00:43:35.000 Impeach! 1.00

00:43:36.000 He does not use body wash.

00:43:38.000 Bar soap is not as clean as body wash.

00:43:40.000 Impeach! 1.00

00:43:42.000 Also, it turns out according to the Washington Post, I know, breaking news here.

00:43:46.000 Brutal!

00:43:46.000 Cruel!

00:43:46.000 On the floor!

00:43:46.000 Housekeepers quickly learned not to throw out his soap, even if it had worn down to the tiniest sliver.

00:43:51.000 Trump decided when he wanted something discarded.

00:43:53.000 When that happened, with clothes or newspapers, he would toss them.

00:43:56.000 On the floor.

00:43:57.000 Brutal.

00:43:59.000 Cruel.

00:44:00.000 Impeach. 0.98

00:44:01.000 All of this is really dumb, but yeah, I definitely trust our media to be objective in their coverage. 0.93

00:44:08.000 Meanwhile, speaking of objective media coverage, I have to say, I am deeply enjoying the media coverage of Kamala Harris's political demise. 0.92

00:44:15.000 It really is amusing to me.

00:44:17.000 One of the reasons that it is so immensely amusing to me Is because Kamala's candidacy was a complete fail.

00:44:23.000 She leapt to the top of the standings, then she completely collapsed. 1.00

00:44:27.000 And now, the going conventional wisdom is that everybody in the United States is racist because we didn't make Kamala Harris president.

00:44:34.000 It's like Barack Obama never existed.

00:44:36.000 Now, if you say, well, Barack Obama, that doesn't show that you're not racist.

00:44:40.000 Well, then why are you using the presidential race as a litmus test for racism?

00:44:43.000 Either it's a litmus test or it isn't.

00:44:44.000 If it is, Americans ain't racist.

00:44:47.000 If it isn't, then Kamala Harris dropping out is not an indicator of American racism. 0.92

00:44:52.000 But Cory Booker is continuing to try and play this card.

00:44:54.000 It's pretty amazing.

00:44:55.000 And Cory Booker is a desperate, desperate man.

00:44:57.000 Pops on those angry's eyes, the angry eyes.

00:45:00.000 Blinks in very deliberate fashion to demonstrate that he is extremely angry.

00:45:07.000 Hey guys, and then he sends out emails like this.

00:45:09.000 He's been sending these... I mean, he is like a jilted lover, man.

00:45:12.000 He is sending these emails once every six hours.

00:45:14.000 It is incredible.

00:45:15.000 So here's the new one from Cory Booker today.

00:45:17.000 As the current December debate lineup stands, not a single one of the candidates who will appear on stage is a person of color.

00:45:24.000 This is a shame, Ben.

00:45:28.000 Well, I disagree, Cory.

00:45:30.000 The 2020 Democratic field promised one of, if not the, most diverse sets of candidates in modern history, though you wouldn't see that from looking at the frontrunners.

00:45:38.000 Our party is better than this.

00:45:40.000 It's time we show it.

00:45:41.000 I love, LOVE, that Cory Booker is now calling his own party racist.

00:45:45.000 That's what that is!

00:45:46.000 Cory Booker is now suggesting that his own party is completely racist.

00:45:50.000 It's fantastic.

00:45:52.000 It's really, really good stuff.

00:45:54.000 Because, again, I guess that's the way you play this game inside the Democratic Party.

00:45:58.000 And then, there's a piece from Melania Price, a political scientist who specializes in contemporary black politics, public opinion, and political rhetoric at the New York Times, called Why There Won't Be a Black Woman Running for President. 0.87

00:46:09.000 Cause she was terrible!

00:46:11.000 That's why!

00:46:13.000 I also love that we are ignoring the simple and obvious fact that if Michelle Obama jumped into the race today, she would win the nomination by 40 points going away and probably be the next president.

00:46:22.000 A black woman. 1.00

00:46:23.000 So no, it ain't about black women. 0.93

00:46:25.000 It is about Kamala Harris specifically.

00:46:26.000 But we are now going to get a bevy of articles where every... It's amazing.

00:46:31.000 It's amazing.

00:46:32.000 No matter what the antecedent is of the if-then relationship in democratic statements, the then is always America is racist. 0.97

00:46:40.000 If the sky is blue, Americans are racist. 0.99

00:46:42.000 If Kamala Harris is out, Americans are racist. 1.00

00:46:44.000 If Barack Obama is elected president, Americans are racist. 0.98

00:46:46.000 It doesn't matter what is on the if side of that arrow. 0.90

00:46:49.000 The only thing that matters is what's on the then side of that arrow, of that logical arrow.

00:46:54.000 So why there won't be a black woman running for president? 1.00

00:46:56.000 When Senator Kamala Harris of California entered the race for the presidential nomination in January, many believed she would be hard to beat, writes Dr. Melania Price. 0.99

00:47:04.000 Telegenic, highly educated, from a multi-ethnic background, she would have been an ideal candidate in the pre-Obama era.

00:47:10.000 We expected her to create an all-American narrative that is relatable to a wide cross-section of the country.

00:47:14.000 After all, that's how President Obama ascended in 2004.

00:47:17.000 Harris failed to do that.

00:47:17.000 But Ms.

00:47:20.000 As we write eulogies of this once-promising campaign, which ended on Tuesday, it is important we talk about more than just personal failings by Harris and her staff members.

00:47:27.000 We need to talk also about what campaigning looks like for Black women, and what challenges and hurdles the Harris campaign laid bare.

00:47:35.000 There are biases and structural disadvantages that can be found in subtle ways.

00:47:40.000 The media and the public responded to her candidacy.

00:47:44.000 I mean, oh, the bias.

00:47:45.000 Oh, the subtle racism.

00:47:47.000 Subtle, subtle, subtle.

00:47:50.000 And she says, well, it's because when we talk about electability, we mean white. 0.88

00:47:53.000 No, when you talk about electability, you mean not a crazy person. 0.94

00:47:57.000 Kamala Harris, if she were not a crazy person, would be a very likely nominee right now. 1.00

00:48:01.000 Unfortunately for Kamala Harris, she was a crazy person who locked up half the state of California. 1.00

00:48:05.000 So that didn't, that didn't work particularly well.

00:48:09.000 Melania Price, professor at A&M University in Texas.

00:48:14.000 She says, I'm still trying to make sense of her candidacy and its larger implications, but I have seen how uncertainty about black women can be the Harris may not have been the black woman to upend these biases in 2020. 0.99

00:48:14.000 Texas. 0.99

00:48:25.000 We can't let our notions of who is electable cause us to overlook black women in the future.

00:48:29.000 them in terms of how many of them go to college and in terms of baseline income.

00:48:32.000 Well, Ms. Harris may not have been the black woman to upend these biases in 2020. 1.00

00:48:36.000 We can't let our notions of who is electable cause us to overlook black women in the future.

00:48:40.000 And that's not the only article like this today.

00:48:42.000 There's also an article from Danielle Campo Amor over at NBC News called Kamala Harris's failed presidential campaign is bad news for Democrats, even her critics.

00:48:52.000 You don't have to be a supporter of Harris or even like her very much to understand why her dropping out now is bad news for the Democratic Party.

00:49:00.000 Harris' exit from what was once a historically diverse pool of presidential hopefuls signals how truly difficult that fight—the fight for all people to be represented by their elected officials and to be heard by those in positions of power—truly is.

00:49:13.000 Because when diverse candidates such as Harris or New York Senator Kyrsten Gillibrand drop out of a presidential race, Even as white male billionaires such as Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer enter it, something is broken.

00:49:24.000 By the way, I love that Deval Patrick entered.

00:49:26.000 He's a black dude.

00:49:27.000 Totally overlooked here. 0.98

00:49:28.000 No one cares.

00:49:29.000 They'll love the fact there are two women on the stage still, Klaubuchar and Warren.

00:49:33.000 Doesn't matter.

00:49:33.000 Kamala Harris is an indicator of deep, brutal American racism.

00:49:40.000 It's pretty amusing.

00:49:41.000 So let them fight.

00:49:43.000 In the famous words of that Godzilla film, Okay, time for a quick thing I like, and then a thing that I hate.

00:49:52.000 So, things that I like today.

00:49:55.000 So, I'm late on this, I'll acknowledge, because, frankly, it looked like a soap opera to me, but my wife was interested in watching the show.

00:50:00.000 We watched the first episode, and it's really enjoyable.

00:50:02.000 This Is Us, the network television show, it's available on Hulu now.

00:50:05.000 I don't even know what network it is, because I cut the cable a while ago, but This Is Us is actually, the first episode of it, anyway, is pretty spectacular, and extraordinarily pro-life.

00:50:15.000 It's one of the great ironies of Hollywood that on an emotional level, they understand that a baby is a baby is a baby.

00:50:20.000 It's on NBC, I guess.

00:50:21.000 That a baby is a baby is a baby.

00:50:22.000 But on an intellectual level, they refuse to acknowledge this.

00:50:25.000 So the entire premise of the opening episode of This Is Us is that losing a baby during childbirth is a horrific tragedy because you've lost a baby, not a cluster of cells.

00:50:33.000 And yet the Democrats will still claim that aborting a baby just before birth is perfectly morally acceptable.

00:50:38.000 In fact, morally praiseworthy in many circumstances.

00:50:41.000 Here's the trailer for This Is Us, an extremely pro-life first episode, at least.

00:50:47.000 Tell me to wake up! 0.99

00:50:48.000 Tell me to lose the damn weight! 1.00

00:50:52.000 We lost the third baby, but you have two healthy children, Jack. 1.00

00:50:56.000 I quit. 0.99

00:51:03.000 Screw you. 0.98

00:51:06.000 So it's a little soap opera-y, but it's good. 0.91

00:51:13.000 And some of the performances are actually quite spectacular.

00:51:16.000 So if you haven't checked out This Is Us, I can only vouch for the first episode.

00:51:19.000 So far, so good.

00:51:20.000 It's really good and really, shockingly pro-life.

00:51:23.000 And I won't tell you the twist at the end of the first episode if you're one of the five people, like I was until five seconds ago, who doesn't know the twist.

00:51:29.000 Okay, other things that I like today.

00:51:30.000 There's a great article in the Washington Post today.

00:51:33.000 about a guy named Freddy Figures who was set down next to a dumpster in a rural area of Florida's Panhandle in 1989.

00:51:40.000 He is now an entrepreneur worth millions of dollars because it turns out that every human life is worthwhile.

00:51:47.000 Every single one.

00:51:48.000 A passerby found him alone and in distress and called police.

00:51:51.000 The infant was hospitalized with minor injuries for two days, then placed in a foster home.

00:51:54.000 The couple who took him in, Nathan and Betty Figures, lived in nearby Quincy, Florida.

00:51:58.000 They already had a daughter.

00:51:59.000 Shortly after Freddy began living with them, the Figureses, who often took in foster kids, decided to adopt him.

00:52:05.000 He was called Dumpster Baby by other kids at school, because kids can be awful to each other.

00:52:10.000 But as he grew older, it turns out that he was great with technology.

00:52:14.000 He'd gotten so good at tinkering with computers that when he was 13, the city of Quincy hired him to help repair its computers.

00:52:20.000 When he was 15, he started his first company, Figures Computers, repairing computers in his parents' living room, helping clients store their data on servers he created.

00:52:28.000 He decided to skip college, and then his big break came several years later in 2012 when at age 23, he sold a GPS tracker program to an undisclosed company in Kansas for $2.2 million.

00:52:40.000 He had apparently created a device also that he could insert in his dad's shoe.

00:52:44.000 His dad apparently developed Alzheimer's and would wander off.

00:52:47.000 He developed a device he could insert in his shoe that would allow him to track him, plus talk to him, through his shoe.

00:52:53.000 Nathan Figures, the father, died in 2014 shortly after Freddie started Figures Communications and developed 80 custom software programs with the money he'd earned from his smart shoe technology.

00:53:03.000 He now lives in Parkland, Florida.

00:53:04.000 He's founder of Figures Wireless, a privately held telecommunications company he said was appraised in 2017 worth more than $62 million.

00:53:14.000 And also runs the Figures Foundation, which donates to a variety of causes, including relief efforts after natural disasters, college scholarships for high school students, and assistance with school supplies for cash-strapped teachers.

00:53:25.000 Spectacular, spectacular story.

00:53:28.000 After Figures grew up, he learned that his birth mother was a prostitute with a drug addiction.

00:53:32.000 He said he has not met her.

00:53:33.000 He said he has no desire to.

00:53:34.000 He said, my parents adopted me and gave me love and a future.

00:53:36.000 They did their best to make the world a better place.

00:53:38.000 And now that's all I want to do, too.

00:53:40.000 He's married to Natalie Figures, an attorney.

00:53:47.000 Yes.

00:53:47.000 You know what's a good thing?

00:53:48.000 That that kid was born.

00:53:49.000 Good thing for the world.

00:53:50.000 Good thing for the United States. 0.97

00:53:53.000 Good thing for his family.

00:53:55.000 The idea that circumstances are better when you kill an unborn human being because the unborn human being is going to be born into a bad situation.

00:54:02.000 Bad situations can be made better.

00:54:03.000 Death cannot.

00:54:05.000 So that's a great story.

00:54:06.000 Okay, we've run out of time, so we'll skip Things I Hate today, but we will be back here later today with two additional hours of content, or we will see you here tomorrow for our Friday Frenzy.

00:54:14.000 This is the Ben Shapiro Show.

00:54:19.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is produced by Rebecca Dobkowitz.

00:54:22.000 Directed by Mike Joyner.

00:54:23.000 Executive Producer Jeremy Boring.

00:54:25.000 Senior Producer Jonathan Hay.

00:54:27.000 Supervising Producers Mathis Glover and Robert Sterling.

00:54:29.000 Technical Producer Austin Stevens.

00:54:31.000 Associate Producer Colton Haas.

00:54:33.000 Assistant Director Pavel Wydowski.

00:54:34.000 Edited by Adam Sijewicz.

00:54:36.000 Audio is Mixed by Mike Karlmina.

00:54:38.000 Hair and Makeup is by Jesua Olvera.

00:54:39.000 Production Assistant Nick Sheehan.

00:54:41.000 The Ben Shapiro Show is a Daily Wire production.

00:54:43.000 Copyright Daily Wire 2019.

00:54:46.000 Democratic Representative Jerry Nadler and the House Judiciary Committee presided over the first day of official impeachment hearings yesterday, where expert witnesses made the incisive constitutional argument that Orange Man bad.

00:54:58.000 Orange Man very, very bad, explained the expert constitutional experts.

00:55:02.000 Therefore, we got to overturn the 2016 election.

00:55:04.000 We will examine their arguments and the arguments against impeachment from an unexpected source.

The Ben Shapiro Show - December 05, 2019

Pelosi Goes Full Thelma And Louise | Ep. 910

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript