Ok, let's begin with the basics, wonder woman is an awesome film. I saw it on opening night with my wife. As a DC comics fan, wonder, woman has become one of their three most iconic characters along with Batman and Superman. She's driving force in their universes. She should be film, doesn't x, job of laying out her origin story and a beautifully balances, the feminist underpinnings of her character. She comes from society, which men are to stay in and is eminently more powerful than any man she comes across in a non the mask. The real world, with obvious femininity, she drew her wand in the films he fights for the innocent she's willing to kill in order to do so. She is far hardcore than Batman, for example, is a feminist for certain. She scoffed at the notion of the secretaries, is sort of modern form slavery. At the same time, she goes out of her way

babies, yes, feminist women, like babies and she falls head over heels for a heroic man. Despite her own statements about men being unnecessary for pleasure early in the film, she touched the notion of marriage, as does he by the end of the film they're, both on board plus she's played by the wonderful gal gadot a two time mother who is pregnant during filming and just happens to be his railing. She also served in the israeli defense force for two years. All of this makes her character unpalatable too hard. Our feminist, who I'm feminism, not on equality of rights, but abortion and man, hating and forced loves western standards. Beauty. Here's Christina Richie it's way quote to me whenever chance wonder they had a being some kind of feminist anti dote to the overabundance of superhero movies made by and for Bros was blown by the prevailing occupation with the titular Heroine sex appeal counter. Each even implies that Chris Pine's character at quasi rapes. Diana because quote.

Or capacity for consent is somewhat blurry her. Never having met a man at all. Here's dude, feminist, even rose at the guardian, called the film feels obligated to give pine his own equally heroic story. Arc men might be unnecessary for pleasure, but there's still a central for big Budget action movie is, it seems, plus one woman fights against the Germans in world war. One. This makes her in in this area of american militarism on Tuesday Josephine Livingstone wrote at the New Republic called wonder. Woman has no use for global history except his grist for american exceptionalism. Oh no, you mustn't teach the young ones about the fact that the United States saved Europe from fascism twice that would be terrible, most feminist seem pretty enthused about the movie overall, it should be said, but The fact that many are not should show how out of touch the radical feminist movement has become. The film is great for teenage girls. Well, it's clearly a fantasy. Nobody, man or woman could rush through bullets of world war. One way one woman does, but it's men who typically do the fighting in warrant rational reasons it does them and it's strong women need not be anti baby or anti male. One of the reasons will be

so big is that it's brand of feminism is taken for granted in the west. Sexism is no longer a major issue in american society, it's hard to imagine anyone seriously objecting to a fantasy female character, fighting baddies, while kissing babies and falling in love with a strong male character in traditional fashion. That's what feminism should be, but not according to the more militant feminist, which is why there so mad for no reason at all, I'm Ben Shapiro. This is the bench shop. Okay, so lots to get to today. We're gonna get to everything. Call me related in just a second, but first I want to say thank you to our friends over at Lance so it's not just for people who are looking for a ride anymore now, they're looking for drivers, because so many people are writing, lift that they actually have a shortage of people who can drive in asking you to join the ride. Sharing company that believes in treating its people better when you drive

right, right, sharing app every trip feels great and with lift you can pick your own hours, you can work when you want there's tipping in the app, so you get paid better when you drive for Lyft, you keep one hundred percent of the tips. Drivers have been paid over one hundred and fifty million dollars in tips since this feature introduced Express' pay means the drivers get paid almost instantly. Instead of waiting for weeks for check to come in the mail and right now Even taking the guesswork out of pick ups they've been a and p device that uses color coding tell passengers find their drivers, you can earn hundreds of millions, hundreds of dollars a week plus tips. If you want to make more money drive more, it's never been easier to give yourself a raise, so go use left. My wife uses I use left, is the only ride, sharing app that we use, and I know the drivers seem happier. The drivers are always very friendly, they're, always really good, and you can be one

Drivers earning really good money to go to lift dot com. Slash appear out today and right now. If you do that the list dot com, Slash Shapiro. Today you get a five hundred dollar new driver bonus right off the bat. It's live: dot com, slash a bureau list, dot com, slash, zero, L Y, F, t dot com, Slash Shapiro's, limited time only terms apply again. You should hear out so that you know that we sent you and also because that means you'll get a five hundred dollar new driver bonus. Okay tons to get to today. With regard to the call me hearing, so I will get to what exactly call me said in the hearing that is relevant and interesting, but first I want to go through the part that actually is most important, and that is the seven page piece of testimony that he released yesterday. So yesterday he releases text of testimony that you want to be admitted into the congressional record. He says

happened between him and President Trump now, in order to understand it's. What you have to understand, first and foremost, is the democratic near to the going into this entire economy. Hearing is that President Trump colluded with Russia during the twenty sixteen election in order to swing the election to himself, and then he fired call me in an attempt to cut it up into it to cover it up. That was the entire narrative. The narrative was that, okay, it wasn't just from acted badly. It wasn't just from obstructed justice about and related matters. It was the trunk was in bed with the Russians and then an order covered up. He fired James Comey in order to obstruct the investigation. That was the case Democrats were making and the reason they were making. This case is because they didn't want it to seem like Hillary Clinton legitimately lost the election. They wanted it to see like Hillary, actually won the election, if not for Trump moving with Putin in concert and therefore he had to move it put in concert. They were colluding together, the election was rigged and then Trump Call me to prevent all of that from coming out that was their narrative. So yesterday James Comi release

the seven page document, and it totally destroys that year it totally destroyed that narrative. So the right is, hang out that it totally destroyed that narrative. On the other hand, it also points out that President Trump is wildly in over his head when it comes to dealing with his own people that he acted really badly with regard to James Comi, the director on a variety of matters in ways that would take us off of we were on the left. It would take us all and I'll explain how we know that in just a second, but first I think it's important to go through the actual document. So we're not going to go through the text of the opening statement that Comey gave on Thursday. So today he was supposed to give it to you actually read it into the record he didn't have to it already, read by everybody in America, so he started in this document by describing his first meeting with then President Elect from every sixth at Trump Tower, at which you personally briefed Trump about Intel,

and community assessment concerning russian interference in the twenty sixteen election. Is this faint Busby dossier that was supposed to have the p tapes in it and all that so called me comes to the White House or rather to Trump Tower, and he tells from about this dossier, says he briefed from on the details himself alone. Out of respect for trumps privacy call me explained he was worried that the briefing might believe might be trying to believe that the FBI was investigating him. He wanted to sure Trump. That Trump was not being personally investigated. Now, as you recall, when Trump fired crummy he had in his letter, they called me and said he was not being personally investigated three times. That was true. Only says that in this document call me told Trump over and over and over again, he was not being personally investigated, so that part is actually true in what Trump had to say. Okay, so this confirms Trump's account then. According to him, he spoke with Trump one on one nine separate times in four months: three in person, six on the phone, the next meeting they call me discuss is indeed

Hell is that January. 27Th dinner, you remember, Trump went on national tv, he said they call me basically came in and begged for his job, and then there were reports that Trump had asked me for a loyalty oath. You wanted to trump Trump wanted coming to pledge. His loyalty to Trump here is Comey's account quote it turned out to be the two of us. She did a small oval table in the center of the Green room, two navy two waited on us. Only entering the room, Sir serve food and drinks. The president began asking me whether I want to stay on as FBI director, which I found strange because he had already me twice in earlier conversations that he hoped stay, and I had assured him that I intended to. He said that lots of people want my job and given the abuse I taken during the previous year, you'd understand if I wanted to walk away My instincts told me that the one on one setting and the pretense that this was artist first discussion about my position, meant the dinner was at least in part. An effort to have me ask for my job and create some sort of patronage relation

This concern me greatly, given the F b I's professionally independent status in the executive branch. Okay. So this is the part where Trump gets into dicey territory, so Jenner twenty seven meters coming and he says to him. It is the job that you have you pay. If that job went away, wouldn't it and call me take that as your base, asked me to do something for you. The president said quote: I need loyalty, I expect loyalty, I didn't move, speak or change my face. Expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed. We simply looked at each other in silence. And then moved on, but he returned to the subject near the end of our dinner. At one point, and why it was so important that the FBI and the Department of Justice be independent of the White House. I said it was a paradox. Throughout history. Some presidents have decided that, because problems come from justice, they you try to hold the apartment. Close. The blurring found boundaries ultimately makes the problem worse near the end of our the present return to the subject of my job. He then said any loyalty, I replied, will always get honesty from Maine. He paused and said: that's what I want honest loyalty. I paused then said you will get that from Maine.

As I wrote in the memo I created immediately after the dinner, it is possible. We understood the phrase- honest loyalty differently, but I decided it wouldn't be productive to push it further. So This is obviously not good for truck right. It looks like there's some sort of quid quid pro quo here. He once called his loyalty in exchange for call me staying on the job. Ok, next meeting call me discuss I'm just going to go through combies testimony and we're going to talk about what it means to me Johnson is February, 14th counterterrorism briefing trump. This is the one where Trump only shoes, everybody out of their own issues, attorney general sessions out of the room issues, rod, Rosenstein out of the room he she's out the NSA, Rogers and she's out at the end, I'm she's out everybody, and then he talks to flip. He talks to call me one on one in here is Colin. These documents are truck repeated that Flynn hadn't done anything wrong on his calls with the Russians, but get misled the vice president. He then said I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go to letting Flynn go he's a good guy. I hope you can let this go. I replied: only

he is a good guy. He said I did not say I would let this go. The president returned briefly to the problem of leaks, goes on and says I mean be prepared and unclassified memo of the conversation about Flynn and discuss the matter with FBI senior leadership. I had understood the president to be requesting that we drop any investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the russian ambassador in December. I did not understand the president to be talking about the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to his campaign. In other words, the democratic narrative that Trump is trying to fire call me or pressure call me to stop investigation altogether, just not true, even according to Komi, that's combies, testimony so cold. He says he wanted to stop talking about Flynn generally. He wanted him to stop investigating Flynn over his russian phone calls in December, but nothing to do with the campaign. So the press is trying to say that again. This is a cover up its obstruction of justice, but the question is what exactly is being obstructed. So if you want to say that there is some sort of

After going on with regard to Flynn and December phone calls, which again there's no underlying evidence that anything wrong happened in those phone calls. But if you want to say that Trump was upset with those in the investigation of those phone calls and use pressuring combing, that seems fair, but the media or not making that. The media were making the far different and more and more brutal cases, basically that President Trump was trying to shut down the entire t of the Trump Russia Investigation by pressuring combing. This means there is still no evidence that Trump cares about quashing an investigation into campaign collusion according To call me, the conversation was not reported to attorney General Jeff sessions come he says, because sessions is about to recuse himself and then he says quote: the investigation moved ahead at full speed. So again, from their pressured call me, but call me, obviously didn't take it sitting down and didn't just stop investigating shortly thereafter. According to Komi yeah sessions to provide barrier between Coniine Trump's and I told the AG and what had happened him being.

To leave all the FBI director of reports to the age remain behind was inappropriate and she never happened. He did not reply I said I did not talk about the General Flynn stuff. Ok, next to me, at a March thirtieth phone call here is his description quote. On the morning of March Thirtieth, the President called me at the FBI. He described the rush investigation as equal clout that was in the here in his ability to act on behalf of the country. He said he had nothing to do with. Russia had not been involved with. In Russia and it always assumed he was being recorded when in Russia he asked what we could do to lift the cloud we are investigating the matter as quickly as we could and they'll be great benefit if we didn't find anything to that are having done the work well, he agreed, but then re emphasize the problems that this was called, that this was causing him now here is the key. So that in and of itself sounds getting ready. Sounds like Trump wants coming, lift the cloud by killing the rush investigation, but that's not what call me goes on to say what call me goes on to say it. Quote, the president went on to say

There were some satellite associates of his. We did something wrong. It would be good to find that out, but that he hadn't done anything wrong and hoped I would find a way to get it out that we will not investigating him. He finished by stressing the cloud that was interfering with his ability to make deals for the country's shop. This has been my theory since May, and I was right all along. My theory since coming was fired was very, very simple. President Trump want to call me come out and publicly say that President Trump himself was not guilty of anything or under investigation. Call me wouldn't do it the reason. The call me said he wouldn't do it is he was afraid that in the course of the bigger investigation, Trump's name would come out and then he would have to correct himself the same what he did with Hillary Clinton back in two thousand and sixteen so better to say nothing right now then, to come out and say: Trump's not under investigation, then come out later and say Trump is under investigation. Ok, that being the case, that means Trump was not firing Comey, because he wanted to me to stop the investigation into Trump. He was firing Comey because he was just mad.

They call me wouldn't come out and say publicly what Comi had already told him privately, which is that Trump was not personally under investigation. Theorize that all the way back on May tenth. That is exactly correct. That is exactly correct. Okay, so again, is this truck behaving? Well, no, it's not from behaving well, okay in the end, but is it also a diss? It doesn't jive with the left's narrative that Trump was colluding with Russia and fire coming to cover it up no So this is not driving anyway, there's no evidence of collusion that entire narrative is destroyed by James Comi, ok, finally, home he turns to phone call that took place on April. 11Th. Here is what he says: quote: Trump replied Loud was getting in the way in the way of his ability to do his job. He said perhaps he would have his people reach out to the acting deputy attorney general. I said that was the way his request should be handle I said the White House should contact the leadership of the Doj. He said he would do that because I have been very loyal to you very well. We had that thing. You know I did not ask him or reply what he meant. By that thing, I said only

The way to handle it was to have the White House counsel call the acting deputy attorney general. Okay again, the conversation about that thing sounds dirty. It sounds like Trump is trying to get something out of call me in exchange for something else right. That is the thing that they have: okay in one of these speculations that trumpet mention Deputy FBI, director, Andrew Mccabe and from pertaining. Even though Maccabi has links to Democrats as sort of a favor to come with me, and then call me treating him nice because he was nice to call me by keep it allowing him to keep his job and keeping the cave in his job. But again there is no actual evidence of collusion between Trump and Russia, and once again there is no evidence that Trump was trying to quash the investigation into Trump. What Trump wanted out of this whole thing was something very simple. He wanted call me to come out publicly and say what he had said privately, which is that Trump was not personally under investigation. That is the entirety of this whole thing. Trump fired him. Because he wouldn't do it. He fired him because he wouldn't do it now. That is the issue with regard to from Russia and that's why the right? Today's shortly in there saying okay, you guys making the case for half a year now about the

russian collusion, and you were saying that Trump is at fault for trying to fire call me as some sort of giant cover up or something. Ok, you say all of that, but then there's no actual evidence of any of that, so call me just destroyed you now here is what the left is. What's left is saying, is we know that Trump basically quasi offered call me it would probably put pressure on him? He he mentioned his job, he's putting pressure on him to to leave the flame investigation, alone, he was doing all of these things, and if Obama had done all this, you would be really really ticked off, they're not wrong about this. Okay, if Obama heads on this would be really ticked off. How do I know because today call me, in his actual testimony said that Loretta Lynch told James Comey didn't want. The Hillary investigation referred to as an investigation. She won two as a matter and call me said that created the appearance of impropriety between Loretta Lynch and Hillary Clinton's

can't pay. It certainly did it right all of us on the right. We're live it about the fact that Loretta Lynch met with Bill Clinton on the tarmac, and they talked about the Hillary investigation. Where I live, and we said this creates and pride does great impropriety, just like a crease in propriety for President Trump to meet with the acting FBI director, James Comey, and tell him he wants a full investigation robbery hopelessly best occasionally drop now. Is that a structure of justice? No, it's not technically obstruction of justice, because again, there is no actual threat to call me that if you don't drop this, I'm gonna do acts. It was not an actual your we'll attempt to get Flynn decided to get cold me to stop investigating Flynn. It was more like. I hope you stop that. So there are two ways to read that right. One is, I really hope you still have. That would be a terrible thing if something bad would happen to your children and the other way to read. That is. I hope you can stop this, because it's really a pain in the butt for me and for Flint two ways to read that again

not impossible to read it in the most innocuous way, but it is a little bit strange if you're, a Democrat you're watching this you're saying okay, Donald Trump is obviously doing dirty things. If you are a republican watching this you're saying it's not so obvious that Trump is doing terrible obstruction of justice things but acting inappropriately for president of the you know, Ok, so I want to talk about what actually got said during the hearing and how the media is going to shift the narrative from its original narrative in just a second. But first I want to say thank you to a rabbit over and over at Mack Weldon Nap Mack Weldon is better and whatever you are wearing right now, map well makes under they make shirts that are naturally and microbial which eliminate odor. They make socks and hoodies and sweatpants. It is the most comfortable stuff you are ever going to wear blue design premium fabrics, simple shopping, yeah, you've got map, welding check their gear very easy to shop there very simple to shop there, and I can tell you yeah, I wear their underwear and the the underwear really hold up. I mean you, you watch other brands, wonder where ten times

sorry, falling apart. I've worn my MAC, Weldon Underwear, just one thousand times at this point and they're pretty much exactly the same as when I bought them. Super duper comfortable, all of their gear looks fantastic. You can wear out, you can wear in it performs well, great for working out its way for going out on a map, well Dan dot com and get twenty percent off. When you use the promo code, Shapiro S H, a p, I, are that Shapiro S H a p I r I'll go to Maxwell, didn't dot com and a c K. W e l t, o and dot com get twenty percent off using the product, and you know let them know that used from a coach peer, obvious. At least they know that we sent you and also so that you can get that twenty percent off best underwear in the world I mean really, it doesn't get better than MAC Weldon, stuff, ok, so here is how that so that that is what call me released in his seven pages, testimony it explodes democrat narratives. The trunk was pressuring call me to drop the truck Russia Investigation and explodes the Democrat narrative, but there is something

deeply nefarious going on with regard to with regard to Trump being under personal investigation. Trump is not under personal investigation. Coming out. He said when he left today. He said he was not. That Trump is was not under little investigation. Now. All of that said here is some of what homie had to say today. So call me came out and he didn't read the seven page statement that had already been entered into into testimony, so instead It is very short statement where he ripped Trump, basically for firing him and here's what he had to say: click thirteen. The administration venture owes to fame me and, more importantly, the FBI, I saying that the organization was in disarray that it it's poorly, led that the work first lost confidence in its leader. Those LA lies, plain and simple: okay, so yeah. There is saying that basically, Trump is a liar and he lies about things all the time is a big big, big fat liar. Okay, so I think, objectively speaking, trunk, there is a lot, but this is

really more about Comey's ego, right. So this is him saying well, he was mean to me. He was mean to the FBI says the FBI is in disarray and that's really terra it's a lie about me. I do my job, the FBI does its job and that's really terrible. This is gonna, be the headline the media goings on to is that is a liar and call me reiterates. The trump is a liar include. Fourteen again, this is all opinion type stuff, but the media, which is now trying to build coming up in some sort of great truth, teller, again they're going to leap on this to say that Trump is just uh higher in total. This is cliff fourteen. I want to go through a number of the meetings that you referenced in your testimony and, let's start with Jan Next meeting in Trump Tower You end up for the series of officials to brief the President on the Russia Investigation my understanding is- has remained afterwards to brief him on again quote some personally sensitive aspects of the information you relate now you said, after that briefing you felt compelled to

document that conversation that you actually started. Bring it soon, as you got into the car now you extensive experience at the Department of Justice and if the FBI, he worked on the presidents of both parties. What was it about that meeting that led you to german, that you needed to start putting down. Written record a combination of things I think the circumstances, the subject matter and the person I was interacting with consensus. First, I was alone with the President of the United States or the President elect soon to be president, the The subject matter. I was talking about matters that touch on the FBI, score responsibility and that relate to the President President Elect personally and the nature of the person, and it's honestly concerned that he might lie about the nature of our meeting, and so I thought it really important to document that comment of things I never experienced before, but it led me to

I got to write it down and I got to write it down in a very detailed way. Okay, so there is tell me explaining that he thought that Trump's big liar, so we have to keep all of the. We have to keep all of these notes and that's his explanation. So the media is jumping on the idea that Comey thought Trump was a liar. Who cares weather coming? Trump was a liar. Thank you, get these notes and then from the the lottery didn't. So the media is jumping on conclusions that looking at the underlying evidence, as you well. I thought Marco Rubio actually asked when the better questions of the hearing. Thus far. He said it's kind of a using that all of this material has leaked about Trump from the intelligence community from the Senate. But there's one piece of information that never leaked about Trump and that is Trump was not under personal investigation, just as Trump said that he was in his Marco Rubio. Making that point, we've learned more from the newspaper, sometimes that we do from our open hearings for sure

you're, a wonder why, of all the things in this investigation, the only thing that's never been leaked is the fact that the president was not personally under investigation, despite the fact that both Democrats and Republicans in the leadership of Congress knew that and I've known that for weeks I don't know I find matters that are brief to the gang of eight are pretty tightly held in my experience. Okay, so again, I think that Rubio making this point, it is the right one. It just demonstrates that when it comes to these leaks yeah comes to media. This is a motivated attempt to destroy President Trump. Ok, I want to talk about how the left is going to pivot off of their original narrative interest. Second the original narrative again- was that it was Trump Russia collusion. They did all of this to say Hillary, of course, that it was Trump Russia Collusion and that's why Hillary lost the election and that's why Trump attempted to fire James Comi was all. Is a coverup combing totally destroyed that entire narrative? He explodes the entire narrative, but he comes out, and he says he thinks Trump is a liar and the bad guy.

Whatever, but we'll talk about how the left is going to pivot, to their new line of accusations, which is a a different line of accusations than the ones they've already made, but for that going to have to go over to daily, wear dot com and sign up eight dollars a month gets you subscription to daily wire dot. Com. That means you get the rest of the show live. It means the would be part of the mail that which will be doing it tomorrow. We are now five days a week to show you a. I also need to get laid in show live. You get to be part of Cleveland's mail back plus. It means that if we're we're, we've got all sorts of great benefits that are coming up for members that are gonna be rolled out. In the next couple of months to stick around for that, if you're an annual subscriber you get a signed copy of this very book, say itself into a book about baseball and me, and my dad there to. My pops and there's me and you can get a free signed copy of, say it so right now, available on Amazon for sale? We can get a free and signed right now between annual subscribers Hoover, dailywire, dot com and sign up as an annual subscriber or if you just want to listen to the show later and go over to Itunes and become a subscriber over there and make sure you leave

But we always appreciate it. We are the largest conservative podcast in the nation, Uhhuh already So the new line of attack from the left is that President Trump may not have loaded with Russia. We made it turns out. We may not have any evidence that Trump colluded with Russia, but he was acting will suspicious, wasn't it, and that is obstruction of justice or Jeffrey Toobin.

CNN legal analyst is making this case that the Trump going to call me and allegedly telling him according to comment that he wanted him that he hoped to seize way clear to drop in the Flint investigation. That's obstruction of justice, obstruction of justice, your students, saying that there is a criminal investigation going on of one of the president's top associates, his former national security adviser, one of the most handful of most important people in the in the government. He gets fired, he's under criminal investigation and the president brings in the FBI director in says. Please stop your investigation. If that is an obstruction of justice. I don't know what is it? Okay if there is an obstruction justice, I don't know what is so. Let me point a couple things out. One call me also said that Loretta Lynch pressured him to downplay the Clinton investigation, if that's not obstruction of justice, and how is this obstruction of Justice- and this demonstrates hip hop resemble sides. Again. We on the right were very angry when Loretta Lynch was pressuring James Comi to do certain things when the Red

and it was interfering with the investigation. We said it's inappropriate for her to even be on a plane with Bill Clinton talking about the investigation, let alone pressure in James Comi to change the name of the investigation from investigation to matter. Right, of course. Right about that is totally totally inappropriate. Does the same thing to call with regard to and suddenly we're all up in arms. No! No! It's a big! Nothing now is obstruction of justice. No, it's not obstruction of justice. Sure- is not necessarily obstruction of justice. This is a point that Alan Dershowitz made the other night. Here's here's, Professor Dershowitz from Harvard LAW School. I had him for a class here. He is explaining that this isn't actually obstruction of justice. President could have told call me you are commanded directed to drop the prosecution against blend. The president has the right to do that. Comey acknowledges that he says in the statement that historically historically presidents have done that to the Justice Department, but in the

few years. We've had a tradition of separation, but that tradition doesn't create crime. Okay. So what he's saying here is technically true from a legal standpoint. Now it is important to mention here that when everybody talks about it's an impeachable offense, an impeachable offense, there is no such thing as an MP. Ok, there are only offenses that the Senate, true, that the house chooses to impeach a pond in the Senate, chooses to convict Appan, you don't actually even have to have committed a crime to be impeached so whenever the deluxe has all he's done, something in each one rises. That's not impeachable in obstruct justice, that's not how it works. Okay, it's a totally some. I think whether somebody ought to be impeached or not, but I don't think it's really subjective that Trump is clearly attempting to put some sort of pressure on call me to kill the Flynn Criminal Investigation Is that a good thing? No! It's really not a good thing. Is it impeachable? I don't really think that it's impeachable per se, although there's a case, but it I again. I think that it's the the difference is not between the weather's

People are not for Trump to say to call me. I hope they drop the Flynn Investigation or what that's pressure or not with its obstruction or not we'll distinction here, is the left's big claim before all of this and now they're pivoting notes, big pivot and left. A big claim. Remember never forget this. The left big claim was that Trump works for Vladimir Putin in order to submit in order to subvert the american election cycle, and then he fired James Comey to cut it off and to destroy the investigation. Not a shred of evidence for any of that, not a shred of evidence for any of that. I think that speaker of the House, Paul Ryan, who I'm generally not a fan of, I think he basically got this right and said that Trump's loyalty oath remarks tacony his talk about the Flynn Investigation, not appropriate, but not what Democrats are claiming it is either is appropriate

for the present astral a question of loyalty for the FBI, director yeah- I know I mean. Obviously I don't think that is. I think the director call in probably get a lot of questions about that tomorrow would be my guess, but I don't think that that's new. I think that that's already been reported on okay and and I think that Brian is pretty much right about this again. The point here, the point here, it's pretty amazing, is that the Democrats were the ones who let trump off the hook. Imagine if that to come in the office and instead and truck comes in office and instead of them, painting trump is some big. Russian baddie goes in the back room and calls let recruitment smoke filled office and and as loudly, and what can I do for you today? you know if they hadn't done that, imagine they just coming off sub. Listen this Trump guy he's a dope and not only his dope, he's going to run roughshod over institutional norms in order to protect his friends is going to run this administration, like a mafia family, closely held business and he's going to pressure people and he's going to try and protect his allies because he can, and then this had

Well, then, they have a pretty strong case when they are a much better case, but because they oversold this because they that would generate Hillary Clinton because they felt the necessity to get over their skis that what happened in the twenty sixteen election cycle instead by comparison, everything talking back here, looks like small potatoes, Trump saying, some stuff and then try getting him getting pairs, but not being just enough to actually reveal it publicly or quit. This is the big question here. Also, if Comi felt like Trump was trying to obstruct justice, why not quit and getting very sick of the James CALL show the I'm the last honest man in Washington. Well, if last minute, honest man in Washington, would you have an obligation to quit if you thought, or at least speak publicly, if you thought the President of the United States was attempting to impact an ongoing federal investigation, when have an obligation to do something about that? The whole thing doesn't wash completely so I think Trump acted well here. No, I think Trump acted like a buffoon, but I don't think there's any checks, and I don't think that's in each of a leader. They acted like a buffet. I also don't think it's impeachable that he acts like his

family business in Russia and runs roughshod over norms again, classifications are ongoing. He's not been successful in halting or holding up any investigation at anytime and in fact he told told me he wanted the investigation into the camp associates in Russia to continue so this washes the way the Democrats are are pushing to make a watch with the media are pushing to make. It watch the Democrats and media going to shift instead they're going to focus in on the fact that Homie said that Trump was dishonest and then they're going to focus in on the fact that that Trump said to call me some things that could be construed as pressuring. Drop investigations, even though Dershowitz says that's not actually illegal and on the right. I think we would be wise to recognize that. How Trump acted here is not appropriate for the President of the United States if Barack Obama had done the same thing, if you had called Loretta Lynch in on the carpet, call call me in on the carpet in twenty sixteen and said: listen if you could see your way clear. I really hope you drop this whole Hillary investigation thing. You know she met former secretary of state

she's a good person. I would. I would hope that you would drop this Do you think that we would have lost our minds? Of course we would have lost their minds. This ad hoc president is supposed to act, of course is not how president is supposed to act, but again, for the last time. The Democrats narrative was not that Trump is acting in ways. Presidents or not. Close to act, their narrative was that he was a manchurian and it sent by Vladimir Putin to subdue to subvert the election of Hillary Clinton. He succeeded and then he fired everybody who could expose that. That's what that's, what the testimony simply does not reveal, and in fact destroys. Ok before we go any further. I want to say thank you to my sponsors over an upside dot com, sell upside bundles, your flights and hotels together for one low, Bundling saves you on money, it's a make sure that that you can get the lowest possible price if you're, a business traveler in upside dot com is the best thing for you. You get that hype, flight and hotel, bundled lowest possible price, not just lost possible price for you in your company. You also still get an Amazon gift card, free Amazon gift card, if you're a frequent business travel.

Is no better way to earn miles, no better way to get cheap travel and inexpensive travel and there's no better way to get Amazon gift card. Supercool use my hey Ben right now it upside dot com you're guaranteed to get at least a two hundred dollars Amazon gift card for your first trip, my name Ben gets least a two hundred dollars Amazon gift card for free. How can you not do that to there's, a big on travel. I travel business all the time we use upside dot com for at the office. I love it that kinda minimum purchase required see the site for complete details again, it's that bundling. That makes it happen This is really cool. They allow you to check out. If you flew into a different airport, if you float a different time or use different hotel, what would the prices look like and they show all the various options, so you can choose the one that best fits your budget and then, of course you get that gift card back. So while your company is saving money, you're actually getting a gift card, which is pretty

Ok, so I want to get some stuff I like, and then some things I hate and then because it's Thursday we're now doing five days a week. I have a new segment that I want to introduce. It is called big concepts. Yeah big concepts were going to go through a big concept and you will learn something. Ok, so Let's do some things I like the first thing that I like is there's this year. Is that I've been watching on Amazon that, with that the the the actor's name is Titus Welliver. He was in a loss to recognize him as the man in black lost, really really good actor. Very subtle, and basically the entire cast from the wider is now here Four is not here for Bosch. It's basically a crime drama Bosch is the central character. He's this he's kind of do Gooding. He would almost be a stereotypical cop character on tv, except that as well. There's really good actor he's the Do Gooding cop who's hemmed in by the system and investigating interesting crimes, while bending the rules every so often

anyway, here is here, is a little bit of the preview for season. One of Bosch. Every murder is the tale of a city, I don't believe, there's a better world in this one. This is the place, and if this is the only one we got, can I buy metric come. I know they love you have anyone would feel like we're. Putting band aids on bullet holes, there's another body as I'll. Take it beyond that right now. I want you in charge of this field trip when trying out there Obviously Bosch is a cop who don't play by the rules, but really good series. Thank you miss all the actors from the wire that pretty much all in this series,

Other things that I like so Jerry Seinfeld. I just thought this was hilarious. Apparently Jerry Seinfeld is doing an interview in the pop star. Kisha came up to him for a hug and you'll see Jerry Seinfeld is not react. Well, it's hard to just sleep when you're tired, because people are tired. Most of the time I love you. So much thanks. No thanks! No thanks a little yeah! No thanks, and the internet goes nuts over that because he stiffs Kisha pretty getting stuff there from Jerry Seinfeld. So thanks bye, ok time for a quick thing, I hate, and then I want to get to a big concept so things I hate: let's do it So Bernie Sanders is a left wing cook. One of the ways that you can tell the media bias is not just by looking at the Americans units by looking at the foreign scene. When you look at the french election, the media spends and in order amount of time. Talking about how awful an evil marine LE pen was because she was this right wing cuckoos associated with Anti Semitism, supposedly they've spent no time talking about Jeremy Corbyn, who is a left wing who is openly anti semitic? He says antisemitic things. Routine basis he associated with Anti semite besides the terrorists.

When the british election, which is being overshadowed by the only thing, but I believe the british election is actually happening today. Bernie Sanders Jeremy Corbyn type, and we ignore this for years about Bernie Sanders that he's not just cookie. When it comes to domestic economic policy on foreign policy, he stands up for all of the worst people on earth. He did that. Yes, on the floor of the senate- here he was talking about a run run, was the it was the victim of an isis Bortac an terror facts are bad, but IRAN, is also a terrorist country to basically have two terrorist entities. Duking it out. Bernie Sanders

because around the ship by terror attack, we should kill the sanctions on them. I have serious concerns about the sanctions on IRAN contained in this bill. As we have heard from former Obama administration officials, including Secretary Kerry, in about sort of Sherman. These measures could undermine the joint comprehensive plan of action. The very important nuclear agreement signed in two thousand and fifteen between the United States, our p, five plus partners and IRAN. But above and beyond that, what is to be aware and cognizant that earlier today, the people of IRAN suffered a horrific terror attack in their capital to run.

In which twelve people were killed and many more were injured. The islamic state has claimed credit for this attack. Yeah. Basically, Bernie Sanders is using the fact there's a terrorist attack at around this time for his preferred policy, which is that he loves IRAN and it is worthwhile noting that the left eighteen sided with islamic terror against the state of Israel. Again, that's why the back Palestinians, and they routinely sided with the the is it. The iranian were. A lot of public against the last and and Bernie Sanders is just another indicator of that: okay, so before we run out of time here, I want to do a new segment that is called big concepts in big concept every week, we're going to take a big concept that you may have heard about.

Want to break it down and explain why it's important so today, we're going to talk about judicial review. Judicial review is the idea that the Supreme Court, the federal courts, have the capacity to review an act of the legislature and determined that it is not in compliance with the constitution and thereby strike it down and say that it is not enforceable and that it is void. This is not in the constitution article three of the constitution, which concerns the courts, does not say anything about the federal court. Early, the Supreme Court having the ability to strike down a piece of legislation in the name of the constitution, the decision in which the court irrigated to itself that responsibility the decision called Marbury versus Madison. I talked briefly on the show before about Marbury versus Madison I've. Never really.

Really why I think it was wrongly decided. So here is the background to Marbury versus Madison decided in one thousand eight hundred and three John Adams, the president in one thousand, eight hundred he's leaving office in one thousand, eight hundred and one just before he leaves his secretary of state is a guy named John Marshall. John Marshall ends up being the Supreme Court Justice who decides Marbury versus Madison, so right before he leaves President Adams appoints a bunch of justices of the peace and commissions for the posts are made out in marshals office four of them were not delivered by the time. Adams leaves office and Jefferson takes. Jefferson then says to his new secretary of state. James Madison hold these things up. I don't like these justices of the peace. Will not deliver in these, so there are a bunch of questions that Marbury versus Madison decides. First of all, good notion that Marshall should have recused himself. He was actually involved with this case right he's directly in his office, the wrecks were sign. They handed over these posts to the people that is at a point in his office. He probably should recuse himself, but

Then he takes up the decision and he says well, once these people have been told once they've been appointed, then the delivery of their appointment is not mean is not is not require, until then appointed to the post, so it's it's not right for Jefferson not to deliver these things. There are two points: the post, the delivery doesn't matter: okay that in and of itself would be ok, but then it goes further and he starts looking at the one thousand. Seven hundred and eighty nine Judiciary act which restricts certain parts of the judiciary and talked about the judiciary can and cannot do and what he finally decides to make a a longer story. Short. We finally decides is that it is the Supreme Court, the gets to decide what is constitutional and what is not. There's nothing in the constitution that says the Supreme Court gets to Do this first of all, there's a good notion that, even if, in article three, it said that the Supreme Court gets to decide whether something is constitutional or not, it wouldn't go to the substance of

law. In other words, they couldn't decide whether a law is constitutional or not. They could just say this law was not passed legally. You didn't follow the procedures laid out in the constitution, so you have to go back and do it again, but there's nothing in article. Three As we don't like this loss over striking it down Alexander Bickel of you it's not a conservative. He wrote back in nineteen sixty two, Marshall, had already beg the question in chief, which was not weather and act repugnant to the constitution could stand, but who should be empowered to decide that the act itself is repugnant? A statute repugnant seats, prostitution is in most instances, not self evident. Rather an issue of policy. Someone must decide so imagine for a second that the Supreme Court weren't, the quote, unquote: final arbiter of the constitution, Justice Jackson said we are not final, because we are infallible. We are infallible because we're final imagine for a second that we actually obeyed the constitution. And the Supreme Court was not the final authority on the constitution. What would happen if Congress passed some unconstitutional law in the spring when we're there to strike it down? Well, the

others we get to speak, but what happens when the Supreme Court decides that something constitutional unconstitutional, actually constitutional, like say, Trump's, executive order on immigration Well, then, there's no way for us to rectify that, because the Supreme Court has the quote. Unquote. Final word is not Something the majority of founders actually thought was a good thing Even John Marshall said that we have to be very careful how we use judicial review, but once you've created this sort of judicial review, it's very hard to keep judges tend to take advantage of the power that they've been given. Jefferson, hey, Jefferson represents, quote you seem to consider the judges as ultimate arbiters, of all constitutional questions, dangerous, documented and one would replace under, which is an old darkie. The constitution has erected no such single tribunal, and that seems to me correct all the talk about judicial review being in it. Just a part and parcel of the american system is actually unique to the american system. It doesn't exist in most other constitutional systems. Even once the written constitution, and so we should be very careful about how it is wielded and we should also consider weather it is time to restore

or boundaries to the jurisdiction, the subject matter, jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of the United States and restrict them back to what they originally were, which is a place where they were supposed to be able to adjudicate procedure. But not substance 'cause. It is dangerous to have nine unelected guys sitting there determining what the constitution says and does not take, as we can have honest debates about all these things and the Supreme Court is wrong, at least as often as as it is right on these sorts of matters. Ok, so we'll be back tomorrow to rehash the entirety of the Komi testimony, because we're now five days a week, Oh, this is the Ben Shapiro show