The Ben Shapiro Show - Trouble At YouTube | Ep. 510

00:00:00.000 We discussed what we know about the YouTube shooting.

00:00:02.000 Robert Mueller announces that President Trump is not a criminal target.

00:00:05.000 And President Trump says he's going to put the military on the border.

00:00:08.000 We'll discuss all of it.

00:00:09.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.

00:00:09.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.

00:00:15.000 All right, so we do have a lot to get to today.

00:00:17.000 We're going to go through in fulsome detail everything that we know about the YouTube shooter, about the attempted murderer over at YouTube who shot herself after wounding several people.

00:00:27.000 We're not going to mention her name because that's something that we don't do here on The Ben Shapiro Show.

00:00:31.000 We also don't do it at Daily Wire.

00:00:32.000 That's an edict that I put down after the Parkland shooting where we do not cover the actual name of the shooter.

00:00:36.000 So if you want the name of the shooter, you'll have to go elsewhere.

00:00:38.000 I don't think it's that important.

00:00:39.000 We'll give you all the information you need to know about her without actually naming her and glorifying her in the way that the media

00:00:44.000 I'm good.

00:01:01.000 Is that right?

00:01:16.000 We're good.

00:01:34.000 On it.

00:01:35.000 So you can relive, rewatch, enjoy it all the time.

00:01:38.000 I've done this for my parents.

00:01:39.000 It is a fantastic gift for your parents.

00:01:40.000 It's a fantastic gift for yourself if you're trying to maintain your childhood memories without those things withering away.

00:01:45.000 There's a reason over 350,000 families have used LegacyBox.

00:01:49.000 And for a limited time, when you go to LegacyBox.com slash Ben, you get a 40% discount on your order.

00:01:54.000 That's LegacyBox.com slash Ben for that 40% discount.

00:01:57.000 Again, LegacyBox.com slash Ben.

00:01:59.000 Use that slash Ben so they know that we sent you.

00:02:02.000 Again, fantastic service.

00:02:03.000 Nothing more important in life than preserving those memories you've created.

00:02:06.000 If you let them moulder away, it's going to be your own fault. 1.00

00:02:08.000 So go to LegacyBox.com slash Ben and get that 40% discount on your order.

00:02:12.000 Alright, so...

00:02:13.000 Yesterday, in the middle of the day, a woman walked into the YouTube headquarters in Northern California and began shooting up the place. 0.72

00:02:21.000 We are not going to mention her name, as I say, because here at The Daily Warrior and on my podcast in particular, I have a policy.

00:02:28.000 My policy is that we don't mention the names of attempted mass shooters because studies tend to show that when you glorify mass shooters,

00:02:35.000 All that does is create copycats. 0.97

00:02:36.000 People want to think that their message is getting out there.

00:02:39.000 So what we will discuss is everything we know about this woman without actually mentioning her specific name.

00:02:44.000 Just what you need to know as news consumers.

00:02:47.000 So according to Mercury News in San Jose, the night before this woman opened fire in a courtyard at YouTube's headquarters Tuesday afternoon, Mountain View Police found this woman sleeping in her car.

00:02:57.000 She'd been reported missing by her family in Southern California, and her father told police she might be going to YouTube because she hated the company.

00:03:04.000 Okay, so here's what we know already. 0.99

00:03:06.000 She's crazy. 0.98

00:03:07.000 She hates YouTube. 0.95

00:03:08.000 She put up a bunch of videos on YouTube about being demonetized.

00:03:12.000 She's an animal rights protester with an Islamic background. 0.89

00:03:15.000 Her dad is Muslim, I guess.

00:03:16.000 All I can say is that her videos make it fairly clear that she is not an Orthodox, observant Muslim.

00:03:23.000 She's dressed in garb that I don't think traditional Muslims would be particularly happy with. 1.00

00:03:26.000 There are a bunch of videos of her doing exercise videos.

00:03:29.000 And she was demonetized. 0.97

00:03:31.000 She had about 55,000 followers on Instagram, I guess is the latest.

00:03:35.000 She had a few followers on YouTube, and YouTube cracked down on some of her videos, and she was very angry at YouTube for that, and so her dad called the cops and said she might be going to YouTube.

00:03:44.000 The cops obviously did nothing, so just like in Parkland, the cops were called over and over and over.

00:03:49.000 There was no follow-up, and this person obviously was unwell.

00:03:52.000 Okay, I'm not going to sit here and diagnose this person with anything, but a person who creates these kind of videos, there's a screw loose, okay?

00:03:59.000 Just in conventional terminology, this woman had a screw loose. 0.97

00:04:03.000 After this guy, the father, called the police, the police called the family at 2 a.m.

00:04:07.000 Tuesday to say that this woman had been found and that everything was under control.

00:04:10.000 But hours later, this woman was dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound after shooting three people and causing an afternoon of terror at YouTube's headquarters.

00:04:17.000 In an interview Tuesday night with the Bay Area News Group, this woman's father said his 38-year-old daughter told her family a couple of weeks ago that YouTube had been censoring her videos and stopped paying her for her content.

00:04:27.000 She was angry, he said in an interview.

00:04:29.000 It wasn't clear Tuesday night what Mountain View Police knew about her history with YouTube.

00:04:32.000 A police spokeswoman confirmed that officers had found a woman of the same name asleep in a vehicle early Tuesday morning in a parking lot, and the officers made contact with the woman after the license plate of her vehicle matched that of a missing person.

00:04:44.000 Out of SoCal, the woman confirmed her identity and answered subsequent questions.

00:04:47.000 At the conclusion of their discussion, her family was notified that she had been located.

00:04:51.000 So according to her dad, his daughter was a vegan activist and animal lover.

00:04:55.000 As a youngster, she would not even kill ants that invaded the family home, instead using paper to remove them to the backyard.

00:05:00.000 State records show she had once established a charity called Peace Thunder Inc., which

00:05:04.000 Sounds fantastic.

00:05:06.000 And she made weird YouTube videos.

00:05:14.000 And these videos are really weird.

00:05:15.000 And again, I'm not going to show you the YouTube videos because I don't think future shooters should have it in their mind that the media are going to give them the sort of coverage they seek if they go and shoot people.

00:05:25.000 So according to this woman, she was actually quoted by the San Diego Union Tribune at a PETA rally in 2009 outside Camp Pendleton, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

00:05:34.000 And she said, for me, animal rights equal human rights.

00:05:38.000 She told her family that YouTube had stopped paying her for the content she posted to the site.

00:05:42.000 YouTubers, of course, can receive payments if their videos have been monetized.

00:05:45.000 She was prolific on social media.

00:05:47.000 She posted videos and photos on Instagram, Facebook, YouTube.

00:05:49.000 It's very weird.

00:05:50.000 There's strange workout video clips.

00:05:54.000 But a bunch of her latest posts show evidence of her growing frustration.

00:06:00.000 Apparently, all of her pages were taken down late on Tuesday.

00:06:02.000 But, for example, in a March 18th Instagram post, she railed at YouTube, quote, This also happened to many other channels on YouTube.

00:06:14.000 This is the peaceful tactic used on the internet to censor and suppress people who speak the truth and are not good for the financial, political gains of the system and big businesses.

00:06:22.000 I recently got filter on Instagram too and maybe it's related to YouTube and YouTube staff asked Instagram to filter me here too and then she recorded a video on January 28th where she was complaining about her perceived discrimination by YouTube.

00:06:33.000 She said, I'm being discriminated and filtered on YouTube and I'm not the only one.

00:06:37.000 They restricted my ab workout video, a video that has nothing bad in it, nothing sexual.

00:06:41.000 She has at least four YouTube channels, one in English and then others in Farsi and Turkish as well.

00:06:47.000 So, the original story that was coming out of the police department is that this was a woman who was angry at an ex-boyfriend, and so she went into YouTube and started shooting up the place.

00:06:56.000 It is now clear, or at least becoming clear, that there's not a lot of evidence for this, that it seems more likely that she had a vendetta against YouTube and she decided to just go and start shooting.

00:07:05.000 The family apparently came to California from Iran in 1996,

00:07:09.000 And apparently, this woman was living with her grandmother, and she was always complaining that YouTube ruined her life. 1.00

00:07:14.000 So, apparently, nobody knows where she got the gun.

00:07:19.000 It was not a rifle, I believe.

00:07:20.000 I believe that this was a handgun.

00:07:22.000 And that's what we know about this woman. 1.00

00:07:25.000 She would have turned 40 in two days, and again, she had problems. 1.00

00:07:30.000 It's very clear this is a woman who is mentally ill, right? 1.00

00:07:32.000 And she said in one video, quote, Your knowledge is their enemy. 0.99

00:07:39.000 This is what she said about YouTube.

00:07:41.000 Her family said she'd been making a living as a YouTube personality.

00:07:45.000 So, here's what comes out of this.

00:07:47.000 First of all, the entire left, as soon as the shooting went down, said, OK, this obviously means we must have gun control.

00:07:53.000 Because when you're a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

00:07:55.000 Every single thing looks like a nail.

00:07:57.000 And in this particular case, the hammer doesn't fit the nail, because it's pretty obvious that this woman had serious problems. 1.00

00:08:03.000 It's not clear where she got the gun yet.

00:08:04.000 We don't know the answer.

00:08:05.000 Depriving me of a gun would not have deprived this woman of a gun. 1.00

00:08:09.000 At least we don't know that a blanket gun confiscation would have done that.

00:08:12.000 This doesn't appear to have been an AR, and so this isn't going to be top-line news for the media for much longer than 24 hours.

00:08:18.000 It would have been top-line news if this had been an NRA activist.

00:08:21.000 It would have been top-line news if this had been a devotee of The Ben Shapiro Show. 0.84

00:08:24.000 But since this person is a weird person with mental illness and left-wing leanings,

00:08:29.000 And a Muslim background, that means that this is not going to be news beyond, you know, the next five minutes. 1.00

00:08:34.000 The media is going to bury this one.

00:08:35.000 We'll get right back to Parkland, which has a nice narrative that the media can glom onto, ignoring, of course, all the facts about what happened in Parkland, where the FBI ignored warnings and the local police ignored warnings, and then the shooting happened anyway.

00:08:46.000 So, look for this shooting to hit the back pages in about five seconds flat.

00:08:50.000 Again, because it doesn't promote the agenda that folks want it to promote.

00:08:53.000 The entire left decided that they were going to jump immediately on this as it was happening.

00:08:58.000 And this is one of the problems with social media, places like Facebook and YouTube and Twitter, is that people react immediately to all of this stuff as soon as it happens.

00:09:07.000 Right?

00:09:07.000 As soon as it happens, people are reacting without reference to reality.

00:09:11.000 So, Michael Ian Black is already tweeting he wants to take away all the guns.

00:09:14.000 The comedian is tweeting that he wants to take away everybody's guns.

00:09:17.000 He's coming for our guns.

00:09:18.000 Why?

00:09:18.000 Do we even have the facts?

00:09:19.000 No.

00:09:20.000 We don't have the facts, but the narrative must be purveyed at all costs.

00:09:23.000 And then folks on the right are saying, well,

00:09:25.000 Maybe this woman was a religious Muslim.

00:09:27.000 Maybe it's a terrorist attack, based on the initial report that it was a woman in a headscarf who walked in.

00:09:32.000 So nobody actually waits for the facts to come out.

00:09:34.000 It's important to wait for the facts to come out, because if you don't wait for the facts to come out, you screw things up.

00:09:39.000 And in this particular case, the facts demonstrate that, once again, we had a mentally ill person who was basically being ignored by the cops, and the cops didn't do what they were supposed to.

00:09:49.000 Every red flag was there.

00:09:50.000 She was

00:09:51.000 The police were told that she had a vendetta against YouTube.

00:09:53.000 Now, the other thing that you may see in the coming days is the media tried to turn this into a defense of YouTube's policies.

00:10:00.000 Suggesting, for example, that this woman was egged on by people who were angry at YouTube and angry at social media. 0.99

00:10:07.000 That she was angered because there were so many people, on the right particularly, who talk about the problems with demonetization of video.

00:10:13.000 Now, in order to get to that point, they would have to ignore the fact that this woman was, in fact, left-wing. 1.00

00:10:17.000 I mean, she was rallying with people for the ethical treatment of animals.

00:10:20.000 But that wouldn't stop the left before.

00:10:21.000 The reality is that every time there's a shooting, the left immediately swivels and tries to blame it on the right.

00:10:26.000 This goes all the way back to the JFK assassination, when the New York Times attempted to blame right-wingers for the JFK assassination, even though JFK was assassinated by a communist.

00:10:35.000 Who may or may not have been in contact with the Cuban government.

00:10:38.000 They tried to blame it on the right.

00:10:39.000 They suggested it was America's collective guilt.

00:10:41.000 You may see that emerge in the aftermath of the shooting.

00:10:44.000 But now you know what you need to know about the shooter.

00:10:46.000 And again, it's pretty clear this does not fit into the narrative that the left would like from all of this.

00:10:51.000 Now, what would have stopped something like this?

00:10:52.000 Presumably a gun violence restraining order if she obtained her weapon legally.

00:10:55.000 So some of the stuff that Marco Rubio is pushing and some of the stuff that's been pushed by David French over at National Review.

00:11:01.000 The policy that suggests that family and friends could have gone to a judge and said this woman should not have guns because she's a danger to herself or others. 0.82

00:11:09.000 That would have stopped her from getting a gun. 1.00

00:11:10.000 What else would have helped?

00:11:11.000 Well, if the police had followed up and ensured that this woman did not have guns after it turns out that she was sleeping in her car and ranting about YouTube. 1.00

00:11:19.000 One of the big problems that we have in American society with regard to the treatment of mental illness is we act as though a person who rants crazy things and lives in their car is just exercising normal American freedoms.

00:11:29.000 You don't have the freedom to sleep in your car in public areas.

00:11:32.000 And you don't have the freedom to be deeply mentally in danger to yourself or others.

00:11:37.000 And the ACLU has made a cause, a crusade, out of ensuring that, for example, homeless people get to sleep on the streets of Los Angeles.

00:11:44.000 This person was not homeless, presumably.

00:11:45.000 She was living with her parents.

00:11:46.000 But she clearly had some problems.

00:11:48.000 And when there are problems like this, again,

00:11:50.000 Jared Loeffner, the shooter in the Gabby Giffords situation, the shooter in Aurora, Colorado, the shooter in Sandy Hook, the shooter in Parkland.

00:12:01.000 All of these people had serious mental health issues, serious mental health problems.

00:12:05.000 Virginia Tech.

00:12:06.000 And there were warning signs and people didn't do what they were supposed to do.

00:12:09.000 In just a second,

00:12:11.000 I'm going to get to the other big story of the day, and that, of course, is regarding President Trump and whether he is a target of criminal investigation.

00:12:18.000 Robert Mueller comes up with some interesting analysis.

00:12:22.000 But first, I want to say thank you to our sponsors over at PolicyGenius.

00:12:25.000 So, 71% of people say they need life insurance, but only 59% of people have coverage.

00:12:30.000 So, that's a pretty solid discrepancy.

00:12:32.000 A lot of people who say they want life insurance haven't bothered to go get the coverage.

00:12:35.000 So 12% of people are just procrastinating.

00:12:37.000 They're just sitting around.

00:12:38.000 They're not doing what they're supposed to do.

00:12:40.000 And while you're procrastinating, policy genius is making life insurance easier.

00:12:43.000 So now is the time for you to go get your life insurance.

00:12:45.000 Okay? 0.98

00:12:45.000 Just do it now before you die, because once you die, it's too late to do it, and then your family's screwed. 0.98

00:12:49.000 So, you need policy genius.

00:12:50.000 It's the easy way to compare life insurance online.

00:12:53.000 You can compare quotes in just five minutes.

00:12:55.000 When it's that easy, putting it off becomes a lot harder.

00:12:58.000 So you can compare those quotes.

00:12:59.000 You can sit on the couch, watch TV.

00:13:01.000 You can compare quotes while listening to this podcast.

00:13:03.000 Policy Genius has helped over 4 million people shop for insurance and placed over $20 billion in coverage.

00:13:08.000 And they don't just do life insurance.

00:13:10.000 They do disability insurance, renter's insurance, health insurance.

00:13:13.000 If you care enough about it.

00:13:14.000 And if you care enough about something to insure it, PolicyGenius probably has a program for you.

00:13:19.000 So, right now, go over to PolicyGenius.com.

00:13:21.000 That's PolicyGenius.com.

00:13:23.000 The easy way to compare top insurers and find the best value for you.

00:13:26.000 No sales pressure.

00:13:27.000 Zero hassle.

00:13:27.000 When you compare prices, you save money.

00:13:29.000 PolicyGenius.com.

00:13:30.000 When it's this easy, why not just do it right now?

00:13:33.000 Go over there.

00:13:33.000 Head over there.

00:13:34.000 PolicyGenius.com.

00:13:35.000 Okay, so meanwhile, the other big news of the day yesterday.

00:13:38.000 I'm still confused as to how we're actually supposed to pronounce his name.

00:13:42.000 So for the sake of argument, we will say Mueller right now.

00:13:45.000 But Robert Mueller, who is the special investigator who was tasked by the DOJ with checking into supposed Trump-Russia collusion in the last election cycle, he has now come out with some information and suggested that President Trump is not in fact a target of the investigation.

00:13:59.000 When the rest of the left, the entire left,

00:14:02.000 is now doing Bill Paxton from Aliens.

00:14:05.000 Game over, man.

00:14:06.000 Game over.

00:14:08.000 They can't believe that Robert Mueller isn't going to come in, deus ex machina, and oust President Trump from office with some sort of criminal indictment.

00:14:14.000 Here's what The Washington Post reported that blew up the internet last night.

00:14:18.000 Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III informed President Trump's attorneys last month that he is continuing to investigate the president, but does not consider him a criminal target at this point, according to three people familiar with the discussions.

00:14:29.000 In private negotiations in early March about a possible presidential interview, Mueller described Trump as a subject of his investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election.

00:14:38.000 Prosecutors view someone as a subject when that person has engaged in conduct that is under investigation, but there is not sufficient evidence to bring charges.

00:14:45.000 The special counsel also told Trump's lawyer that he is preparing a report about the president's actions while in office and potential obstruction of justice, according to two people with knowledge of the conversations.

00:14:55.000 Mueller reiterated the need to interview Trump, both to understand whether he had any corrupt intent to thwart the Russia investigation and to complete this portion of his probe that people said.

00:15:04.000 Mueller's description of the president's status has sparked friction within Trump's inner circle as his advisors have debated his legal standing.

00:15:10.000 So the president, some of his allies, they apparently are seizing on Mueller's words as an assurance that Trump's risk of criminal jeopardy is low.

00:15:17.000 But other advisors say, well, a subject can quickly become an indicted target.

00:15:20.000 So there are a couple of questions here.

00:15:23.000 And some good news for Trump and some bad news for Trump in this report from The Washington Post about what Robert Mueller is labeling Trump, a target, a subject, but not a target of the investigation.

00:15:32.000 So point number one,

00:15:33.000 After a year of investigation, more than a year of investigation by the DOJ, and about nine months of investigation by Team Mueller, there is no evidence to indict Trump at this point.

00:15:43.000 There isn't.

00:15:44.000 So all of the talk about how Trump is on the ropes, and Trump is going to be ousted from office in a criminal investigation, there is not evidence at this point, which means that the only evidence that Mueller can get is from Trump himself.

00:15:55.000 And this brings us

00:15:57.000 Right here, this brings us to some of the bad news for President Trump.

00:16:00.000 When Mueller says that President Trump is a target of the, a subject, but not a target of the investigation, what he means is that he's still looking at everything Trump is doing, but he doesn't have enough information to indict.

00:16:12.000 That could change.

00:16:13.000 And so what he could be doing here is making Trump feel comfortable.

00:16:16.000 He could be saying to him, you know, Mr. President, look,

00:16:18.000 I don't have the evidence to indict you right now.

00:16:20.000 I have no interest, really, in indicting you.

00:16:22.000 But I need to talk with you to clarify. 0.98

00:16:24.000 Trump would be a fool to get in a room with Robert Mueller and testify under oath. 0.94

00:16:28.000 He would be—or even to talk to the FBI, generally, because it's still a crime to lie to the FBI, even if you're not under oath. 0.99

00:16:35.000 The reason is this.

00:16:36.000 Let's say that right now, one of the things we know is that Mueller is doing two things.

00:16:40.000 One is the possible criminal investigation against Trump for obstruction of justice.

00:16:44.000 Now, as I've discussed on the program before, the case for obstruction against President Trump is particularly weak.

00:16:49.000 It's very difficult for the president of the United States to obstruct justice when he's just firing members of the executive branch.

00:16:55.000 The president has tremendous control

00:16:58.000 over the executive branch and firing anybody inside the executive branch, it's difficult to claim that there would actually be a solid case against President Trump.

00:17:08.000 So I've done this before, but I'm gonna do it again.

00:17:10.000 Let me explain to you what obstruction of justice constitutes under federal law.

00:17:13.000 So under 18 U.S. 0.82

00:17:13.000 Code 1503, it's called the Omnibus Clause. 0.82

00:17:16.000 Okay, it covers corruptly or by any threatening letter or communication, influencing or impeding or endeavoring to influence, obstruct or impede the due administration of justice.

00:17:25.000 But the clause requires a pending judicial proceeding.

00:17:27.000 There is no pending judicial proceeding right now.

00:17:30.000 If there were a pending judicial proceeding, if, for example, Trump fired James Comey in order to protect Michael Flynn, then that would be one thing.

00:17:36.000 But if he fired James Comey just because he got mad, or if he fired James Comey because he didn't want James Comey investigating him, then that would all be actually perfectly legal under this clause.

00:17:46.000 It's only if there's a pending judicial proceeding and the president interferes with that pending judicial proceeding

00:17:50.000 By firing someone, maybe, that you could theoretically say that's obstruction.

00:17:54.000 Very difficult to make that case when the president obviously has the right to fire someone like James Comey, the former FBI director, who was underneath his rule, right?

00:18:02.000 Under his purview in the executive branch.

00:18:03.000 Okay, another clause of federal law that's often used when you're talking about obstruction is 18 U.S.

00:18:08.000 Code 1512c.

00:18:10.000 This provision of law covers anyone who, quote, obstructs, influences, or impedes an official proceeding or attempts to do so.

00:18:16.000 So it's not clear that an FBI investigation is an official proceeding.

00:18:19.000 And more than that, you have to prove intent.

00:18:21.000 So you have to prove that President Trump actually intended to obstruct the investigation.

00:18:25.000 He wasn't just pissed at James Comey.

00:18:27.000 I think, realistically speaking, that's exactly why he fired James Comey, the former FBI director.

00:18:31.000 He was angry at him because he went to Comey.

00:18:33.000 He said, why don't you just say I'm not under investigation?

00:18:35.000 And Comey said, I don't want to say that.

00:18:37.000 And Trump said, but I'm not, am I?

00:18:38.000 And Comey said, right, you're not under investigation.

00:18:40.000 Trump said, well, why don't you say that?

00:18:42.000 And Comey said, I don't want to, and Trump fired him.

00:18:44.000 I mean, really, I think that's how things went down.

00:18:46.000 Final piece of the US code that deals with obstruction of justice.

00:18:50.000 This provision covers destroying evidence related to a federal investigation.

00:18:54.000 It's 18 U.S.

00:18:55.000 Code 1519.

00:18:56.000 There are no accusations at this point that Trump has destroyed evidence of any kind.

00:19:00.000 So, again, very difficult to make a criminal case on obstruction of justice against the President of the United States.

00:19:05.000 However, even if Trump talks to Mueller, and then he says something like, Yeah, I fired Comey because I didn't like what he was doing with Flynn.

00:19:11.000 Boom.

00:19:12.000 Now you're talking about a possible obstruction of justice charge.

00:19:15.000 It would be difficult to prove in court.

00:19:16.000 It would be really out of the box for the President of the United States to be actually charged with obstruction of justice.

00:19:23.000 Obstruction of justice was part of the impeachment proceeding, however, against Richard Nixon.

00:19:27.000 And this brings us to the second point with regard to what Mueller is doing.

00:19:30.000 So what Mueller is doing here, right, is he is compiling a report to issue to Congress.

00:19:36.000 That seems to me perfectly appropriate, considering that this is basically a political issue, but I'm not sure that it was inside Mueller's purview in the first place.

00:19:43.000 Now, Alan Dershowitz, who's a defense lawyer, obviously a Harvard Law School professor, he has suggested that Mueller is operating outside his purview.

00:19:50.000 His purview is not to issue reports to Congress.

00:19:52.000 His purview is not to issue intelligence or counterintelligence reports.

00:19:56.000 His issue is to do a criminal investigation.

00:19:58.000 Either he's got the goods or he doesn't.

00:19:59.000 If he doesn't have the goods, then he should shut up.

00:20:02.000 That's Dershowitz's basic point here, is that every special counsel investigation is set, has set parameters, and Mueller has exceeded those parameters.

00:20:11.000 Other people who believe this, Andy McCarthy over at National Review has made the same case, that Mueller's parameters have expanded and expanded and expanded, so now we're no longer talking about Trump-Russia collusion anywhere in here, right?

00:20:20.000 Trump-Russia collusion has nothing to do with anything.

00:20:22.000 Instead, we are now talking about something completely different, possible obstruction of justice by President Trump.

00:20:28.000 But this is a problem for President Trump.

00:20:30.000 Because, remember, there's an election coming up in 2018.

00:20:33.000 And in just a second, I'm going to explain to you why Mueller's little report to Congress could be pretty devastating for President Trump.

00:20:39.000 Just another reason why Trump probably should not talk to Mueller.

00:20:42.000 I'll explain that in just a second.

00:20:43.000 First, I want to say thank you to our sponsors over at Blinds.com.

00:20:47.000 So Blinds.com is

00:20:49.000 The place that you need to go if you are interested in ensuring that your house doesn't look like a trash heap, okay?

00:20:55.000 One of the things that you never look at, one of the things that you never pay attention to, is the blinds on your windows.

00:21:00.000 You just don't.

00:21:01.000 They look like garbage, they look terrible, but the reality is that you need to pay attention to those blinds because the window coverings in your house actually make a pretty large difference. 0.94

00:21:08.000 We just had some of our blinds replaced by blinds.com and everything looks a lot better. 0.98

00:21:13.000 And Blinds.com makes it really easy for you.

00:21:14.000 So you don't have to go to a store, you don't have to shop around, you don't have to have someone come to your house.

00:21:17.000 Instead, you go to Blinds.com, and if you're not sure what you want or even where to start with Blinds.com, you get a free online design consultation.

00:21:24.000 You send them pictures of your house, and they send back custom recommendations from a professional for what will work with your color scheme, furniture, and specific rooms.

00:21:31.000 They'll even send you free samples to make sure everything looks as good in person as it does online.

00:21:36.000 Every single order gets free shipping, and here's the best part.

00:21:38.000 You screw it up, it's your fault.

00:21:39.000 You mismeasure, you pick the wrong color.

00:21:41.000 If you screw it up, Blinds.com remakes your blinds for free.

00:21:44.000 They made it really easy for you.

00:21:45.000 For a limited time, you get right now 20% off everything at Blinds.com when you use promo code BEN.

00:21:51.000 So make sure you use promo code BEN to get 20% off everything at Blinds.com.

00:21:54.000 We're talking faux wood blinds, cellular shades, roller shades, and more.

00:21:58.000 Blinds.com promo code BEN.

00:22:00.000 Rules and restrictions do apply.

00:22:01.000 Blinds.com, promo code Ben.

00:22:03.000 Make your house look fantastic.

00:22:04.000 Blinds.com, promo code Ben.

00:22:05.000 And again, when you use promo code Ben, you let them know that we sent you, and you get 20% off all of the things.

00:22:10.000 So, that's a pretty awesome deal.

00:22:12.000 Check it out.

00:22:12.000 Blinds.com, promo code Ben.

00:22:14.000 Okay, so, back to the Mueller investigation.

00:22:17.000 So, as we say,

00:22:18.000 According to the Washington Post, Mueller is drafting a large report that he's going to issue to Congress.

00:22:24.000 And this, of course, will be a bombshell no matter what it says.

00:22:26.000 If Mueller says, you know, Trump acted improperly, but it's not criminal,

00:22:31.000 Then, if Democrats win back Congress, they will attempt to impeach him.

00:22:34.000 So, here is why 2018 matters for Republicans if they don't want to see Trump impeached in the House.

00:22:38.000 Now, the chances that he's impeached in the Senate are virtually nil.

00:22:41.000 But, he could be, or convicted in the Senate, anyway, he could be impeached in the House if Democrats win back the Congress.

00:22:47.000 And right now, the polls suggest that they are very likely to win back Congress.

00:22:50.000 Which means, let's say Mueller issues this report a few months down the road.

00:22:54.000 Let's say he issues it in December.

00:22:56.000 Let's say he issues it in September.

00:22:57.000 And this becomes an issue.

00:22:59.000 If he issues it before the election, Democrats will use this as, elect us and we will impeach Trump.

00:23:04.000 Right?

00:23:05.000 Hope will spring alive anew for Democrats and the turnout will be even greater than it otherwise would be because they will now have the grounds to go after President Trump.

00:23:13.000 If he does it after the election and Democrats run the House, then there will presumably be some sort of impeachment proceeding because all they need is the drop of a hat and they're going to move to impeach Trump just because they don't like Trump.

00:23:22.000 Doesn't matter.

00:23:23.000 that we've been hearing nothing about collusion.

00:23:25.000 Doesn't matter.

00:23:25.000 The collusion was the buzzword for literally a year and a half here.

00:23:30.000 None of that matters.

00:23:31.000 They'll talk about obstruction, obstruction.

00:23:33.000 Sure, there was no collusion, but there was obstruction, and the president was acting in criminal fashion, and that means we have to impeach him.

00:23:39.000 So, this is why Trump should not talk to Mueller, because if he talks to Mueller, is there any doubt that if you're Trump's lawyer, you're just gritting your teeth the entire time?

00:23:47.000 If you're Trump's lawyer, President Trump has an unfortunate habit of making loud, brash statements.

00:23:53.000 You can't do that in front of lawyers.

00:23:54.000 You do that in front of Mueller, and Mueller will catch you in a perjury trap faster than you can say boo.

00:23:59.000 So there you actually do have criminal liability, right?

00:24:01.000 There you actually have a problem.

00:24:02.000 If Trump actually lies to the FBI, then you have a crime.

00:24:05.000 But even if he doesn't lie to the FBI, if he provides any evidence that allows Mueller to suggest obstruction that's not quite criminal, but is uncomfortable and weird, then you could see Democrats move to impeach President Trump.

00:24:16.000 And that, of course, is the end goal of so many of these folks.

00:24:21.000 This investigation is still dangerous.

00:24:22.000 Now, does that mean that Trump should fire Mueller?

00:24:24.000 No, because then there would presumably be an impeachment proceeding against Trump by the House anyway for obstruction.

00:24:29.000 But at least we can fight back if the Mueller report proves to be particularly weak.

00:24:34.000 Everybody who's jumping to conclusions, suggesting that Trump is off the hook now, that's not right.

00:24:38.000 Everybody who's suggesting that this shows that Trump is on the hook, that's not right either.

00:24:42.000 We don't have enough information.

00:24:43.000 Trump needs to be protecting himself.

00:24:45.000 And if Trump believes that this is going to let him off the hook, that everything's going to be fine,

00:24:50.000 This is now in the political court.

00:24:51.000 Okay, this is no longer in the legal court.

00:24:53.000 It probably won't be in a legal court.

00:24:54.000 It will be in the political court.

00:24:56.000 And that could be a serious problem for President Trump.

00:24:59.000 Although, I will say this.

00:25:01.000 If the Democrats try to impeach Trump in 2018, and he doesn't get convicted in the Senate, and he remains in office,

00:25:06.000 How big is turnout going to be for Republicans in 2020?

00:25:10.000 Nothing was better for Bill Clinton than Republicans attempting to impeach him in 1998.

00:25:13.000 His approval rating skyrocketed to 60%.

00:25:16.000 So I think the same thing will happen with Trump?

00:25:17.000 No, because I think Trump is a more polarizing figure on the American public scene, or at least people react to him in a more polarized way.

00:25:24.000 If Democrats try to impeach him on weak grounds, that would be a political mistake that could really hurt them in the re-elect effort in 2020.

00:25:34.000 Okay, so meanwhile, the President of the United States, President Trump, has now decided that he wants to put the military on our southern border and Democrats are losing their minds.

00:25:41.000 Here's President Trump announcing that he wants to put the military on the border yesterday.

00:25:47.000 And we are going to be doing some things.

00:25:50.000 I've been speaking with General Mattis.

00:25:51.000 We're going to be doing things militarily.

00:25:53.000 Until we can have a wall and proper security, we're going to be guarding our border with the military.

00:25:59.000 OK, so the left went nuts over this.

00:26:01.000 So he says, listen, if we don't have proper security, we should be guarding our border with the military.

00:26:04.000 He says we'll use the National Guard for all of this.

00:26:06.000 I think this is a fine move.

00:26:07.000 I have no problem whatsoever with the president putting the National Guard on the border.

00:26:11.000 This is what he was elected to do.

00:26:13.000 He was elected to solidify that border.

00:26:15.000 And it's amazing to me that so many members of the left are truly upset about all of this.

00:26:19.000 What do they think ICE is?

00:26:20.000 ICE is a federal armed force that is on the border.

00:26:22.000 This is just supplementing that federal armed force with members of the National Guard.

00:26:26.000 And right now, there is a serious problem with not just illegal immigration, but flow of drugs and crime across that southern border.

00:26:34.000 Even the Mexican ambassador came out yesterday and said that they understand President Trump's concerns, that, you know, this isn't completely ridiculous.

00:26:50.000 OK, so even the Mexican ambassador, I think, is making some noises that are correct here. 1.00

00:26:54.000 The Mexican government has facilitated illegal immigration.

00:26:56.000 This is true.

00:26:57.000 The Mexican government benefits from remittances from people who cross the border illegally into America and then send money back to their family back in Mexico.

00:27:06.000 They have an interest in those sort of cross-border monetary transfers that have been happening into Mexico.

00:27:11.000 And that's why Mexico is not anti-illegal immigration, even though they are anti-illegal immigration into Mexico.

00:27:16.000 But there's a deeper question at issue here.

00:27:19.000 First of all, I just want to point this out.

00:27:21.000 The reality is that illegal immigration does carry with it serious risks, not just in terms of crime, but also in terms of the heroin epidemic.

00:27:28.000 There's a great book called Dreamland by Sam Quinonez.

00:27:31.000 I've recommended it on the show before in the things that I like.

00:27:34.000 And one of the things that the book talks about is the fact that the heroin epidemic that's been taking place has largely been pushed by black tar heroin traffickers out of a small town called Elisco in the state of Nayarit in Mexico.

00:27:48.000 They take drugs, they look for new markets, and they've set up an entire distribution system all throughout the United States.

00:27:55.000 So, according to Quinones, Mexican drug cartels use customer service.

00:27:58.000 They deliver just like pizza delivery, and it really appeals to this new class of addicts who are white, really kind of unfamiliar, maybe a lot of times, with the drug world. 0.63

00:28:05.000 They don't want to get involved in skid row or housing projects where everyone has always bought dope.

00:28:09.000 A drug addict wants one thing above all, and that's reliability, and these guys provided that above all.

00:28:13.000 They relied on being very low profile.

00:28:15.000 They didn't spend their money lavishly.

00:28:16.000 They look like the day workers outside your Home Depot.

00:28:18.000 They drove old cars.

00:28:19.000 They never used gunplay, drive-by shootings, or any of that kind of stuff because they didn't need to.

00:28:23.000 According to Quinones,

00:28:25.000 All these guys don't like selling heroin, but here's the thing.

00:28:28.000 Back in the town where they're from, they've been humiliated all their lives.

00:28:30.000 Their jobs are dead-end jobs.

00:28:31.000 They work as bakers. 0.80

00:28:32.000 They work as farm boys.

00:28:33.000 They work as butchers.

00:28:34.000 They don't have anything pushing them ahead.

00:28:36.000 And as the business model began to take hold in Jalisco, Mexico, the effects were immediately seen in the town.

00:28:41.000 People began to do better.

00:28:42.000 They began to build big houses.

00:28:43.000 They began to have nice trucks, nice cars.

00:28:45.000 All around them, young men saw this.

00:28:46.000 And they saw that this was a route to real economic progress.

00:28:49.000 One of the strangest things I encountered when I was doing this book was how Levi's 501s were these huge forces in pushing the system across the United States.

00:28:56.000 They're these very well-made, very expensive jeans.

00:28:58.000 And the system was a system for turning cheap heroin into stacks of Levi 501s.

00:29:03.000 Because dealers noticed that addicts they were selling to were fantastic shoplifters.

00:29:07.000 So, I mean, there's a whole system here.

00:29:09.000 The book is really phenomenal and really, I think, a must-read.

00:29:13.000 They talk about the fact that this entire Mexican drug cartel invaded the United States, and when people are about to be arrested and deported, those people are deported back to the United States.

00:29:22.000 They just send people right across the border, new people right across the border.

00:29:25.000 Trump is not wrong to use the military on the border in order to secure that border.

00:29:29.000 But in a second, I'm going to explain to you something amazing, and that is why the left is so all-fired enamored, really enamored,

00:29:37.000 with the idea of keeping the border open.

00:29:39.000 And I have a couple of clips to show you and clips to talk about on that.

00:29:43.000 But first, I want to say thank you to our sponsors over at Chappaquiddick.

00:29:46.000 So as I say, if they had not sponsored Chappaquiddick to be on the program, I would still be talking about Chappaquiddick.

00:29:51.000 That's how good the movie is.

00:29:52.000 It is a must-watch.

00:29:53.000 You should go see Chappaquiddick.

00:29:54.000 It is coming out on April 6th.

00:29:56.000 So just two days from now, you can see it.

00:29:57.000 I've already seen the film.

00:29:58.000 The film is tremendous.

00:29:59.000 Not only is it well acted, not only is it beautifully shot, not only is it beautifully written, but it really tells a story about one of the worst crime covers up in the history of the United States.

00:30:10.000 That is Ted Kennedy leaving Mary Jo Coppock to drown in about six feet of water.

00:30:14.000 She actually died suffocating in an air bubble at the top of the car.

00:30:17.000 So it wasn't that he left her and she was already drowned.

00:30:20.000 She was alive in the car when he left her.

00:30:22.000 And then he went home, he went to sleep, he woke up the next morning, and only the next morning did he call the cops, by which point she had suffocated to death in the air bubble at the top of the car.

00:30:30.000 All he had to do was walk about 50 feet to a phone, make a call to the police, and Mary Jo Kopechni would be alive today.

00:30:36.000 And if he had, by the way, Ted Kennedy probably would be president.

00:30:39.000 He would have been president.

00:30:40.000 But Ted Kennedy did not do that.

00:30:42.000 The movie is fascinating in so many ways, not just because it paints a really realistic picture of what happened at Chappaquiddick, but also

00:30:48.000 Because it took 50 years to even get this on the screen, which is an incredible thing.

00:30:51.000 Again, imagine the top Republican candidate, top Republican contender, you know, somebody like a George W. Bush figure who left a woman who died at the bottom of a river and then was excused with two months of probation, right?

00:31:03.000 And two months served was the time served, right?

00:31:05.000 He didn't serve a day in jail for any of this.

00:31:07.000 Imagine how quickly that movie would be made by Hollywood.

00:31:09.000 It went for 50 years without a Hollywood movie being made about this.

00:31:12.000 But now that movie is out.

00:31:13.000 And if you're a conservative and you care about the culture and you care about film, you need to go see the movie because you must support films that actually tell the truth, even if they're 50 years late.

00:31:22.000 Go check it out.

00:31:23.000 I'm amazed that it was made.

00:31:24.000 It's really phenomenal. 0.99

00:31:26.000 And it does paint a well-rounded, I think, nuanced picture of Teddy Kennedy at the time and the Kennedy family, which was replete with scumbags and liars. 0.99

00:31:33.000 So go check that out. 0.99

00:31:34.000 Chapel Critic this weekend.

00:31:35.000 OK, so.

00:31:36.000 I have a lot more to say about the U.S.

00:31:38.000 military being used to guard the U.S.-Mexico border, but first, you're gonna have to go over to Daily Wire.

00:31:41.000 So for $9.99 a month, you get the rest of the Daily Wire shows, you get the rest of my show live, the rest of Clavin's show live, the rest of Michael Mulls' show live, you get all of those things, and then you also get to be part of the conversation.

00:31:51.000 So our next episode of The Conversation is coming up next Tuesday, April 10th, 5.30 p.m.

00:31:56.000 Eastern, 2.30 p.m.

00:31:57.000 Pacific.

00:31:58.000 It's with my good friend, Andrew Clavin, and my other good friend, Elisha Krauss.

00:32:01.000 She hosts it, and you ask your questions, and Andrew answers them for a full hour.

00:32:06.000 It's free for everybody to watch at YouTube or at Facebook, but only subscribers can ask the questions.

00:32:12.000 So if you want to ask a question, subscribe, log into our website at dailywire.com, and head over to the conversation page to watch the live stream.

00:32:18.000 And after that, just start typing into the Daily Wire chat box and I'll answer questions.

00:32:22.000 Drew Will, as they come in for an entire hour.

00:32:25.000 Once again, subscribe to get your questions answered.

00:32:27.000 Also subscribe because on Friday we do our mailbag, and then you can get your questions answered by me, the greatest question answerer of the modern era.

00:32:35.000 You can ask a question directly to moi.

00:32:38.000 If you subscribe right now, get that annual subscription instead of the monthly for $99 a year.

00:32:43.000 It's cheaper, and you also get the Tumblr, the Leftist Years Hot or Cold Tumblr that so many Louder With Crowder subscribers are jealous of.

00:32:49.000 So check that out over at dailywire.com.

00:32:51.000 Get the subscription.

00:32:52.000 It always helps us make the show possible, hire all of our hirelings to do slave labor at near slave wages. 0.98

00:33:00.000 So check that out.

00:33:01.000 Please get the subscription.

00:33:02.000 We appreciate it.

00:33:03.000 We are the largest, fastest growing conservative podcast in the nation.

00:33:11.000 So President Trump wants to put national guardsmen on the border.

00:33:14.000 Makes perfect sense to me.

00:33:16.000 I do not see why this is a big problem.

00:33:17.000 But there are two groups of people who do have a big problem with this.

00:33:20.000 People who are sort of the normal Democrats and then the radical Democrats.

00:33:24.000 So we'll start with the normal Democrats.

00:33:25.000 David Gergen over on CNN has been a longtime Democratic political consultant.

00:33:29.000 He's angry about this, not because the policy is bad, but because he thinks President Trump is too militaristic.

00:33:35.000 The most disturbing part of the news to me today was this notion that he wants to now send troops to the border.

00:33:44.000 It's true that two past presidents have deployed National Guard to the border.

00:33:47.000 That was because there were pressing needs.

00:33:50.000 There's no oppressing need here.

00:33:52.000 This is more of a political move.

00:33:55.000 And it suggests that the president increasingly sees the military as a play toy that he can make political points with.

00:34:00.000 First, he wants to have this big, massive parade, which most people in the military look at and say, oh, why are we really doing this?

00:34:06.000 And the country is shrugging its shoulders, but he's now got the money.

00:34:09.000 He wanted to take money out of the military budget and pay for the wall.

00:34:12.000 And now he wants to send troops to the border.

00:34:14.000 There's no real reason why we need to send troops to the border. 0.96

00:34:17.000 OK, this is ridiculous.

00:34:18.000 OK, I'm sorry. 0.96

00:34:19.000 This is just ridiculous.

00:34:20.000 George W. Bush sent a border deployment of the National Guard 0.90

00:34:23.000 Does anyone remember?

00:34:24.000 Does anyone remember?

00:34:43.000 Remember all the way back to 2010 when Barack Obama did this?

00:34:46.000 Okay, Barack Obama deployed National Guard troops as part of a border protection plan in 2010.

00:34:51.000 They said up to 1,200 National Guard troops would be in place along the U.S.-Mexico border for up to a year to assist U.S.

00:34:58.000 Customs and Border Protection.

00:34:59.000 So Democrats are upset with this because the guy who's doing its name is Trump.

00:35:03.000 Otherwise, they wouldn't care.

00:35:04.000 But the suggestion that Trump sees the military as a plaything, and that's why he's doing this?

00:35:07.000 Trump literally campaigned on solidifying the border.

00:35:10.000 That's what he campaigned on.

00:35:12.000 So there is no problem here.

00:35:13.000 That's absurd.

00:35:14.000 But there's a deeper problem.

00:35:15.000 And that is, you know, I was asked yesterday by somebody specifically about this issue.

00:35:19.000 Why are so many Democrats, why are so many folks on the radical left

00:35:22.000 Interested in open borders.

00:35:24.000 And I said because there's a group of people who really believe that America bears blood guilt for all of the problems in the rest of the world.

00:35:29.000 They look at America, they say America's rich, America's powerful.

00:35:31.000 There are a lot of people all over the world who are poor, who are not powerful.

00:35:35.000 Lots of countries all over the world where people are suffering.

00:35:38.000 That's our fault, because we're rich and powerful.

00:35:40.000 In their view, world politics is a zero-sum game.

00:35:43.000 Well, just demonstrating this, Tucker Carlson had on last night a fellow who calls himself a border angel.

00:35:49.000 His name is Enrique Morones.

00:35:51.000 He is a person who attempts to smuggle people across the border.

00:35:56.000 He's a founder of the caravan of migrants that was headed to the U.S.

00:36:00.000 via the U.S.-Mexico border from Central and Latin America.

00:36:03.000 And here he is with Tucker Carlson explaining why he thinks

00:36:06.000 That it's fine to smuggle people across the border.

00:36:09.000 And Tucker does a good job with both making the famed Tucker Carlson face, as well as quizzing this guy.

00:36:17.000 In the United States, interfering in these countries, the demand for the drugs, invading sovereign land like Iraq, or interfering in the civil wars of Central America, that causes people to flee.

00:36:26.000 The U.S.

00:36:27.000 should be more welcoming.

00:36:29.000 Oh, so our sins are the reason this is happening.

00:36:31.000 So you hate America, is what you're saying.

00:36:33.000 A very big part of that is the U.S.

00:36:36.000 sins.

00:36:36.000 You're blaming America for illegal immigration into America.

00:36:41.000 Okay, and that is essentially what he's saying.

00:36:43.000 Tucker does a good job of boiling it down there.

00:36:45.000 But this guy is saying that America is responsible for sins all over the world, so America should take in all of the refugees from those sins.

00:36:52.000 So a couple of things that are weird about that.

00:36:53.000 Number one, if you really think America is such a terrible place filled with such awful people, why do people want to get in?

00:37:00.000 If a country victimized my country and destroyed my country and made my country a wrecked state, why would I want to live in the country that just wrecked my state? 0.63

00:37:08.000 Why would I want to be a citizen of the country that is apparently just a predatory force around the globe?

00:37:13.000 That's a weird logical gap.

00:37:15.000 Maybe just for the materialistic gain, I suppose.

00:37:18.000 But the other point here is that there is an actual attempt by some members of the radical left to castigate America for our global sins.

00:37:26.000 Again, the idea being that America is bad and America must be punished.

00:37:29.000 Too much of America's foreign policy from the left has been based on this.

00:37:32.000 When Barack Obama did his fabled apology tour all around the Middle East and Europe after he was elected, this was the basic message.

00:37:39.000 America has sinned in the world, and we are here to rectify those sins.

00:37:43.000 And if that means that we have to curb our economy with the Paris Accords, cracking down on American economic growth for the sake of chimerical environmental gain, then we will do it.

00:37:54.000 Everything will be fine because we deserve it.

00:37:56.000 We deserve it.

00:37:56.000 It's our fault.

00:37:57.000 Right?

00:37:57.000 And if it comes to propping up the UN, one of the most useless and nefarious institutions in the history of modern politics, if we have to do that in order to slap America itself, we'll do that because America is a guilty place filled with guilty people and they have to pay.

00:38:12.000 Now, this view of the left is a really dangerous one.

00:38:15.000 And if you're wondering why politics has become so polarized and so, so yelly and so screamy, it's because there's no way to have a rational conversation with people who legitimately believe that the United States has to pay for its past sins and that virtually everything counts as an American sin.

00:38:31.000 So when President Trump says he's going to put people on the border, I'm all in on that. 0.73

00:38:34.000 I think that's a perfectly rational thing to do.

00:38:36.000 And I also think that the illegal immigration crisis is not all that hard to solve.

00:38:40.000 It's just that there are a bunch of people on the left, particularly, who don't want that crisis solved.

00:38:44.000 They want more illegal immigration because they think that America ought to pay on a moral level.

00:38:49.000 That's on the radical left.

00:38:50.000 It's not every Democrat.

00:38:51.000 There are many other Democrats who don't want to solve the illegal immigration situation because they believe that they're going to be able to get additional Democratic voters as people are made citizens, or they believe that, for example, a bunch of people are going to vote Democrat if they see nasty pictures of Republicans pushing for deportations.

00:39:09.000 It's political football.

00:39:09.000 But again, this core group of leftists who believe that America is a bad force in the world, and therefore we must be punished by taking in all sorts of refugees and immigrants,

00:39:18.000 That's dangerous stuff, and there's no way that the United States can survive with that sort of perspective becoming more and more common.

00:39:25.000 Okay, so now I want to talk about something really weird that happened yesterday.

00:39:29.000 This is a weird thing that happened yesterday to me.

00:39:34.000 I have become friendly with a student at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School whose name is Kyle Kashuv.

00:39:39.000 He first started becoming prominent when he was speaking out in favor of gun rights, even though he was a witness to what happened at the Parkland High School.

00:39:48.000 And the entire left basically ignored him.

00:39:51.000 And so I pointed out to the media that they should stop ignoring survivors who disagreed with them.

00:39:56.000 And so he started getting booked a little bit more.

00:39:58.000 And one of the things that has happened in the past couple of days is that there are a bunch of people on the left who have attacked him.

00:40:03.000 And the reason this is relevant is because, of course, there was this massive boycott launch against Laura Ingraham by the left, suggesting that she had been mean to another Parkland survivor named David Hogg.

00:40:12.000 David Hogg, of course, had been the kid who'd gone on TV and suggested that everyone who disagreed with him was basically a murderer with blood on their hands, taking NRA blood money.

00:40:21.000 And Laura Ingraham said that he was whiny about his college admissions, an ill-advised comment, and then there was a boycott against her. 0.87

00:40:26.000 Well, Kyle was attacked in much more nefarious fashion by the left, and no one seems to be commenting on this other than to say that the guy who did it is kind of crazy.

00:40:33.000 So the guy who did it is a guy named Kurt Eichenwald.

00:40:36.000 Kurt Eichenwald, on his bio on Twitter, five days ago, it said he was an MSNBC contributor and a Vanity Fair contributing editor, right?

00:40:45.000 That's what it said.

00:40:46.000 On his on his biography.

00:40:48.000 Well, a few days ago, he ripped into Kyle on Twitter.

00:40:52.000 I pointed this out and MSNBC started losing sponsors.

00:40:56.000 And so MSNBC came out and they said, well, actually, we would not hired him for since February 20, since February.

00:41:02.000 He hasn't been able to to really do anything

00:41:06.000 Since February hasn't been with MSNBC.

00:41:08.000 So, first Kurt had to remove the MSNBC contributor part of his Twitter profile.

00:41:12.000 So suddenly it just said, Kurt Eichenwald, Vanity Fair contributing editor, New York Times best-selling author.

00:41:19.000 Then, yesterday, Kurt sent me this wild email.

00:41:22.000 This wild, wild email.

00:41:23.000 And here's what it said.

00:41:24.000 It said,

00:41:25.000 I'm working on an article about you and your relationship with Kyle Kashuv, the kid from Parkland.

00:41:29.000 I'm not going to be using his name for reasons that will become apparent.

00:41:32.000 A few items.

00:41:33.000 One, he's been actively working to trick journalists he believes work for non-Fox television networks into taking any action in something in which his Twitter account was linked.

00:41:41.000 Two, he's been coordinating with some of the trolls involved with these people.

00:41:45.000 Three, he in fact coordinated with the other guy with the podcast who was demanding my respect.

00:41:49.000 He used the same attack on me as the other guy, which was unprovoked. 0.98

00:41:51.000 He used this garbage pushed by conservative media and leftists that I am a fan of tentacle porn. 0.97

00:41:56.000 That's what he actually wrote because about a year ago it turned out that Kurt Eichenwald tweeted out a link accidentally to Tentacle Porn. 0.98

00:42:05.000 I think that was the story.

00:42:08.000 Or he tweeted out a picture of himself and in the background of his computer was a picture of Tentacle Porn.

00:42:12.000 Something like that.

00:42:14.000 And then he said that he was just using it for research purposes or he wanted to show his kids.

00:42:18.000 He was his kids had said something about tentacle porn.

00:42:20.000 He didn't believe that it was real.

00:42:21.000 So he went looking for it.

00:42:23.000 In any case, this became a point of humor against Kurt Eichenwald.

00:42:28.000 And this email that he sent to me about Kyle goes on and on and on and on.

00:42:31.000 I mean, it is a long, long email.

00:42:34.000 And the best part of it was where he says this.

00:42:36.000 So remember, all of this started with Kurt Eichenwald saying that the boycott against Laura Ingraham was justified because Laura Ingraham had been mean to a Parkland survivor.

00:42:44.000 Kyle Cashew is a Parkland survivor.

00:42:47.000 Here is what Kurt Eichenwald wrote in this email to me that he sent to me, this crazy email, quote,

00:42:52.000 I engaged in a DM conversation with Kyle, which was quite disturbing.

00:42:55.000 I consulted a friend of mine who is a psychiatrist, a political conservative since that seems so important to you, and based on what he read, the psychiatrist said the following.

00:43:03.000 One, Kyle is in desperate need of psychiatric help or support.

00:43:06.000 The psychiatrist did not have enough information to assess if the issues he saw in the conversation were the consequence of the shooting, being psychologically unprepared for being thrust into the conservative media as a go-to kid, or if there's an underlying pathology that preceded these events.

00:43:19.000 Two, Kyle is obsessed with you.

00:43:21.000 In fact, our DM conversation with you, which involves a lot of irrational rage, seemed to have been sparked by my asking you to debate.

00:43:28.000 And then he goes on, and finally, at the very end of this email, he asks a series of questions suggesting that I am running Kyle, that I am the nefarious for, that Kyle doesn't have his own opinions, he wasn't conservative before he met me, that Kyle has been getting his cues from me.

00:43:41.000 Now listen, I've openly said on the program that I talk with Kyle.

00:43:45.000 They're like, there's no secret about this.

00:43:46.000 I think Kyle's a good kid.

00:43:47.000 I think he's trying to do the right thing.

00:43:49.000 And I think he deserves support.

00:43:50.000 In the same way that I'm sure that David Hogg talks with a bunch of folks on the left, including Media Matters.

00:43:54.000 There's nothing wrong with that.

00:43:55.000 But the best part of this email is where Kurt says at the very end of it,

00:44:05.000 So, this guy, who purported to be a Vanity Fair contributing editor, he sends me an email accusing Kyle Cash of a Parkland survivor of being psychologically deficient, right, to having a psychiatric problem, and then says at the end of the email that I am harming him and I shouldn't forward the email.

00:44:21.000 So naturally, I did what any rational person would do when you receive a crazy email like this.

00:44:25.000 I immediately posted it on Twitter, the entire text of it.

00:44:27.000 And Vanity Fair responded by sending out a notice that Kurt Eichenwald no longer works for Vanity Fair, that he hasn't worked for Vanity Fair for several years.

00:44:36.000 So Kurt's Twitter biography shrunk yet again, and now he was no longer an MSNBC contributor or a Vanity Fair contributing editor.

00:44:43.000 He actually emailed, I believe it was Brian Stelter at CNN, claiming that, no, he was still a Vanity Fair contributing editor.

00:44:49.000 And Vanity Fair was like,

00:44:50.000 No, you're not, and you haven't written for us since 2014.

00:44:54.000 So all of this is to say, listen, I don't want to pick on a guy when he's down, kick a guy when he's down, but all of this is to say that there are people on the left who do attack Parkland survivors, and the blowback on them does not extend to their venues.

00:45:09.000 It doesn't really extend to their outlets.

00:45:11.000 It's been largely ignored, right?

00:45:12.000 Joan Walsh, as we played yesterday, said some nasty things about Kyle Kashuv.

00:45:17.000 There's been no boycott effort against CNN.

00:45:20.000 When the left wants to boycott something, they're doing it for political purposes.

00:45:22.000 The right usually is better than that, and usually doesn't engage in these kind of boycotts, unless it is a reverse boycott, like they're boycotting Chick-fil-A, and we say, okay, we'll all go shop at Chick-fil-A just to show that we're not going to allow you to boycott institutions we like out of business.

00:45:36.000 It's amazing what the same left that says you can't target a Parkland shooter, can't target, rather, a Parkland survivor, will say that if it's a Parkland survivor we don't like, that we will actually go have them psychologically evaluated without their knowledge, and then say that you should not tell the person that that happened.

00:45:51.000 It's an amazing thing, and frankly, I think that Kyle has a very solid legal case for defamation against Kurt.

00:45:56.000 So we'll see how all of that goes, but things certainly are crazy.

00:45:59.000 Okay, time for a couple of things I like and then a couple of things that I hate.

00:46:02.000 So,

00:46:04.000 Things that I like.

00:46:05.000 Since it is the middle of Passover, I would be remiss if I did not play some music from the Prince of Egypt.

00:46:09.000 I remember when I first saw this movie, as an Orthodox Jew, I found a couple of things a little irritating about it because it's not exactly biblically accurate in a couple of ways.

00:46:17.000 So, for example, they use the trope that is used, I believe, in the original Ten Commandments as well, that the king of Egypt is the same age as Moses.

00:46:26.000 I don't know.

00:46:50.000 Deliver, Deliver me now

00:47:27.000 Yeah.

00:47:54.000 Alrighty, so go check it out.

00:47:56.000 It's really a great number, and The Prince of Egypt is well worth watching.

00:47:59.000 Okay, time for a very quick thing that I hate.

00:48:06.000 So, Steven Spielberg says it is time for a woman to play Indiana Jones. 0.62

00:48:10.000 Ugh.

00:48:11.000 So here's what he said.

00:48:12.000 He said he knew he would risk fan fury by casting an actress in the role made famous by Harrison Ford, but believes it is time the Explorer took a different form.

00:48:21.000 Make Indiana Jones like a dog or something, I guess.

00:48:23.000 I mean, any different form will work, apparently.

00:48:26.000 In an exclusive interview, Spielberg nodded when asked if this new-look Jones could be female and added, we'd have to change the name from Jones to Joan, and there'd be nothing wrong with that. 0.55

00:48:33.000 He's been a vocal champion of the Time's Up campaign for gender equality in the movie industry.

00:48:38.000 And of course, he was married to the actress Kate Capshaw since 1991.

00:48:43.000 He met her in 1984.

00:48:44.000 She starred in Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

00:48:46.000 She's an awful actress, by the way. 1.00

00:48:47.000 I mean, in Temple of Doom, my goodness. 1.00

00:48:50.000 That's a stinker. 0.99

00:48:51.000 But in any case, he says, my mom was strong. 0.95

00:48:53.000 She had a voice.

00:48:53.000 She had a very strong opinion.

00:48:54.000 Actually, I knew his mom.

00:48:56.000 She used to run a kosher restaurant on Pico Boulevard called Milk and Honey, which is quite good.

00:49:01.000 But he says that he thinks this will be Harrison Ford's last Indiana Jones movie.

00:49:04.000 It would have to be, because Harrison Ford is pushing 80 at this point.

00:49:08.000 He's really getting up there.

00:49:10.000 It's Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Actual Skull is where we are at this point. 0.98

00:49:14.000 But when you have Steven Spielberg saying that we're going to take iconic male characters and then shift them to female, I've said this before, I find it really stupid.

00:49:21.000 One of the things that's great about film, one of the things that's great about art, is that specificity 0.92

00:49:26.000 Is universality.

00:49:27.000 So the more specific a character is, the better the art is, because in specific, we see what we have in common with other people.

00:49:32.000 When you draw a person really well, what you see is what I have in common with that person, and that's universal.

00:49:37.000 If you draw people broadly, so broadly that you can legitimately just take a woman and put in a man's role, then it's not good. 0.56

00:49:43.000 It's not, like, I think this is the reason that the movie Atomic Blonde didn't do well at the box office, is because, basically, Charlize Theron is playing a male role, but she's just a woman.

00:49:53.000 And I guess this is for female equality or some such, but it's okay to have a female action star who's a woman, right? 0.99

00:49:58.000 I mean, Ridley Scott did it with Aliens with Sigourney Weaver, and it works fine, because guess what?

00:50:03.000 Sigourney Weaver plays a woman, and she plays a woman like a woman.

00:50:06.000 And she's a very aggressive woman in that film, obviously. 1.00

00:50:08.000 But she plays it like a woman, and you couldn't put a man in that role and have them read the same lines.

00:50:12.000 The whole point of Indiana Jones is, Indiana Jones is a dude.

00:50:15.000 He's a dude's dude. 0.69

00:50:15.000 And this is the same sort of conversation we've had about a female James Bond. 0.69

00:50:18.000 There should not be a female James Bond. 0.99

00:50:20.000 James Bond is a character with a specific personality that is male in orientation.

00:50:24.000 And the same thing is true with regard to, with regard to Indiana Jones.

00:50:27.000 Don't take iconic characters and just make them women. 0.92

00:50:30.000 Build a new character.

00:50:31.000 If Fjord wants to build a new female character, go for it. 1.00

00:50:33.000 It's all you.

00:50:34.000 But it's irritating to suggest that women and men are exactly the same, and therefore you can just pop a woman in a man's role, and it's totally fine. 0.99

00:50:40.000 No problem whatsoever.

00:50:41.000 Okay.

00:50:42.000 We'll be back here tomorrow with all the latest updates.

00:50:43.000 I'm Ben Shapiro.

00:50:44.000 This is The Ben Shapiro Show.

The Ben Shapiro Show - April 04, 2018

Trouble At YouTube | Ep. 510

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript